The Grammar of the Modules
Researchers from the Max Planck Institute for Human Cognitive and Brain Sciences in Leipzig have discovered that two areas in the human brain are responsible for different types of language processing requirements. They found that simple language structures are processed in an area that is phylogenetically older, and which apes also possess. Complicated structures, by contrast, activate processes in a comparatively younger area which only exists in… humans. … (Brain Researchers Discover…)
-------
The distinction here can be understood (at least in English) as the difference between simple and complex sentences. Simple sentences: “The boy kicked the ball. The ball hit the window.” Complex sentence: “The ball that the boy kicked hit the window.”
People who have tried to get computers to interpret or translate language will recognize the distinction as important to processing requirements. Educators will recognize the distinction as easily seen in language development. Writers (at least some) will recognize the distinction as an element of style that affects reading difficulty. (A few writers may even think of Strunk & White at this point.)
With the evidence that complex expressions require additional processing by another brain module, we can understand why complex sentence structures deserve such recognition. There are probably other variations in writing style that relate to specific brain modules (though maybe not as big and obvious as Broca’s area). Processing of passive voice, subjunctive mood, and abstract terms are good candidates.
Eventually, I will include, in my blog about homework, a series about “brain-based communication.” One thing I notice about complex writing style is the deviation from narrative form. Human culture certainly evolved with narrative (storytelling) as a major element. I think we can assume that there are brain modules (not necessarily localized) that handle the recording and retelling of experiences. I wonder if we are demanding more processing from the reader when we deviate from narrative form.
Perhaps we should pay more attention to the role of narrative form in communication. I don’t mean the Discovery Channel, Animal planet, or the news media. They understand and use the narrative form extensively. I mean the people (like me) who write about “the role of narrative form in communication” when they could say “what storytelling tells.” An example of what storytelling tells is the myth: “A myth is not a female moth.”
When we find out more about the relationship between language structure and the processing load on the brain modules, we may be better prepared to relate writing style to our communication objectives. Match the grammar of the language to the grammar of the modules.
-------
The distinction here can be understood (at least in English) as the difference between simple and complex sentences. Simple sentences: “The boy kicked the ball. The ball hit the window.” Complex sentence: “The ball that the boy kicked hit the window.”
People who have tried to get computers to interpret or translate language will recognize the distinction as important to processing requirements. Educators will recognize the distinction as easily seen in language development. Writers (at least some) will recognize the distinction as an element of style that affects reading difficulty. (A few writers may even think of Strunk & White at this point.)
With the evidence that complex expressions require additional processing by another brain module, we can understand why complex sentence structures deserve such recognition. There are probably other variations in writing style that relate to specific brain modules (though maybe not as big and obvious as Broca’s area). Processing of passive voice, subjunctive mood, and abstract terms are good candidates.
Eventually, I will include, in my blog about homework, a series about “brain-based communication.” One thing I notice about complex writing style is the deviation from narrative form. Human culture certainly evolved with narrative (storytelling) as a major element. I think we can assume that there are brain modules (not necessarily localized) that handle the recording and retelling of experiences. I wonder if we are demanding more processing from the reader when we deviate from narrative form.
Perhaps we should pay more attention to the role of narrative form in communication. I don’t mean the Discovery Channel, Animal planet, or the news media. They understand and use the narrative form extensively. I mean the people (like me) who write about “the role of narrative form in communication” when they could say “what storytelling tells.” An example of what storytelling tells is the myth: “A myth is not a female moth.”
When we find out more about the relationship between language structure and the processing load on the brain modules, we may be better prepared to relate writing style to our communication objectives. Match the grammar of the language to the grammar of the modules.
posted by Selby Evans at 1:00 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home