Language

Neuroscience has branched intomultiple subfields, among them neurolinguistics, thanks largely to the advent of increasingly sophisticated noninvasive brain imaging techniques such as functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI). Neurolinguistics holds out the possibility of offering [End Page 192] more conclusive answers to questions about which linguists have so far only been able to speculate, as it renders the ephemeral nature of language processing comparatively concrete and tangible. Language talent and brain activity (LTBA) represents a useful contribution to the literature in that it provides focused investigation into a specific aspect of second language (L2) acquisition— what its authors refer to as language talent—as well as broad literature reviews covering both the century-long history of research into language functions in the brain, and more recent work on bilingualism in the brain.

As stated in the preface and first two chapters, the contributors are interested in finding explanations for the particular talents that some L2 learners display in achieving native-like or nearnative L2 pronunciation. Matthias Jilka, in ‘Talent and proficiency in language’ (1–16), suggests that ‘talent’ is inborn while ‘proficiency’ is acquired, making the distinction clear. However, in a homogeneous population such as the one they study (Germans who have learned English in school from around age ten), if one examines them as young adults, the relatively high proficiency of some—at least with respect to their approximation to native-like English—may be taken to reflect innate talents (and indeed in later chapters, some authors use the two terms interchangeably). This is what makes LTBA a pioneering work: so far, few neurolinguists have explored why it is that some seem to pick up languages and accents more readily than others.

The title of this volume does require some clarification. First, the reader should not expect to find a series of reports on investigations into the connection between brain activity and language talent. Instead, LTBA has an unusual format: its thirteen chapters reflect somewhat disparate components of a single sizable project, for which a team based largely at the University of Tübingen and at Universität Stuttgart collected a pool of German first language (L1) learners of English, administering to them a comprehensive set of tests and classifying them along a continuum of talent in their ability to produce native-like English. Seven chapters report on data from substudies of the larger project and draw their subjects from the same pool of participants, although not all contributors make that clear. Following are brief summaries of the contributions directly related to the core study.

Another chapter by Jilka, ‘Assessment of phonetic ability’ (17–66), introduces the overall objective of the project, which, as stated above, is to conduct a multifaceted examination of L2 pronunciation talent. Jilka presents information on the 117 participants in the study: 102 German L1 speakers and fifteen English L1 controls. The former group is comprised of about fifty percent college-age students and fifty percent members of the wider community. Participants were selected based on a self-assessment of their proficiency in L2 pronunciation, as reported in an online questionnaire. This chapter also includes a description of the various tasks employed to evaluate both nonverbal and verbal talent in production and perception at segmental and suprasegmental levels of speech, some of which are standardized tests, such as the Modern Language Aptitude Test (MLAT) or the Raven Advanced Progressive Matrices Test. Jilka does not mention, however, any brain imaging studies conducted on the participants in the core study.

Giuseppina Rota and Susanne Maria Reiterer, in ‘Cognitive aspects of pronunciation talent’ (67–96), discuss empathic skills, mental flexibility, working memory, and intelligence. While verbal and nonverbal IQ, as measured by Raven’s Progressive Matrices, do not predict L2 pronunciation talent by the authors’ measures among the sixty participants they report on here, nonverbal IQ does correlate with what they term the ‘overall’ score on the...