Question

One, a sign language user with Broca's aphasia has difficulty producing signs. But the same signer has no difficulty in drawing pictures or picking up an object. Two, a hearing person becomes paralysed in an accident and loses all motor ability, but is able to speak fluently. What conclusions can we draw from these two cases about how language is represented in the brain?

• A. The motor control required for language is independent of general motor skills.
• B. Broca's aphasia causes loss of fluency for signers.
• C. Language localisation in the brain is different for signers and speakers.
• D. The pathways for vocal tract movement and gesturing are the same.

Hint:

Broca's aphasia affects the \textbf{language system specifically}, whether in spoken or sign language, proving that language motor control is distinct from general motor functions.

Answer 1

The Correct Option is A, B

Step 1: Analyze Case One (Signer with Broca's aphasia)
- The signer has difficulty producing signs (language use is disrupted).
- But they can still draw pictures or pick up objects (general motor skills are intact).
- This means the language motor system is separate from general motor control. Step 2: Analyze Case Two (Paralyzed hearing person)
- The person loses all general motor ability, but can still speak fluently.
- This shows that language production is not dependent on overall motor ability. Step 3: Evaluate the Options
(A) Correct → Both cases show that motor control for language is independent of general motor skills.
(B) Correct → Case one shows that Broca's aphasia disrupts fluency in sign language, just as it does in spoken language.
(C) Incorrect → There is no evidence that signers and speakers have different localisation; rather, Broca's area affects both.
(D) Incorrect → The pathways are not the same; otherwise, paralysis would affect speaking as well. Step 4: Final Answer
Hence, the correct conclusions are: (A) and (B). \[ \boxed{\text{Correct Answer: (A), (B)}} \]