Doody R S
Baylor College of Medicine, Department of Neurology, Houston, TX 77030.
Brain Lang. 1993 Apr;44(3):327-48. doi: 10.1006/brln.1993.1021.
Part 1 of this series explored various historical writings about aphasia in order to understand the current scope of the field and the prevailing neuroanatomical model. This paper will examine the contexts from which key aphasiologists mentioned in Part 1 wrote, with particular attention to influential language theories from outside neurology. Some biases of the Standard Average European languages used by these authors have shaped aphasia theories indirectly and will also be discussed. This analysis reveals an historical shift in the subject matter of aphasiology, from speech behaviors to "language," defined quite broadly. This shift in subject has serious implications for attempts to localize language in the brain.
本系列的第一部分探讨了关于失语症的各种历史文献，以便了解该领域的当前范围和流行的神经解剖学模型。本文将审视第一部分中提到的关键失语症学家写作的背景，特别关注神经学之外有影响力的语言理论。这些作者所使用的标准欧洲平均语言的一些偏见间接塑造了失语症理论，这一点也将得到讨论。这一分析揭示了失语症学主题的历史性转变，从言语行为转向定义相当宽泛的“语言”。这一主题的转变对在大脑中定位语言的尝试具有严重影响。
