Monti Martin M, Parsons Lawrence M, Osherson Daniel N
Cognition and Brain Sciences Unit, Medical Research Council, 15 Chaucer Road, Cambridge CB2 7EF, United Kingdom.
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2009 Jul 28;106(30):12554-9. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0902422106. Epub 2009 Jul 16.
Is human thought fully embedded in language, or do some forms of thought operate independently? To directly address this issue, we focus on inference-making, a central feature of human cognition. In a 3T fMRI study we compare logical inferences relying on sentential connectives (e.g., not, or, if ... then) to linguistic inferences based on syntactic transformation of sentences involving ditransitive verbs (e.g., give, say, take). When contrasted with matched grammaticality judgments, logic inference alone recruited "core" regions of deduction [Brodmann area (BA) 10p and 8m], whereas linguistic inference alone recruited perisylvian regions of linguistic competence, among others (BA 21, 22, 37, 39, 44, and 45 and caudate). In addition, the two inferences commonly recruited a set of general "support" areas in frontoparietal cortex (BA 6, 7, 8, 40, and 47). The results indicate that logical inference is not embedded in natural language and confirm the relative modularity of linguistic processes.
人类的思维是完全嵌入在语言之中，还是某些思维形式独立运作？为了直接解决这个问题，我们聚焦于推理，这是人类认知的一个核心特征。在一项3T功能磁共振成像（fMRI）研究中，我们将依赖句子连接词（如“非”“或”“如果……那么”）的逻辑推理与基于包含双及物动词（如“给”“说”“拿”）的句子进行句法转换的语言推理进行比较。与匹配的语法判断相比，仅逻辑推理就激活了演绎的“核心”区域[布罗德曼区（BA）10p和8m]，而仅语言推理则激活了语言能力的颞叶周围区域等（BA 21、22、37、39、44、45和尾状核）。此外，这两种推理共同激活了一组额叶顶叶皮质的一般“支持”区域（BA 6、7、8、40和47）。结果表明，逻辑推理并非嵌入在自然语言中，并证实了语言过程的相对模块性。
