This article explores the relationship between automatic and involuntary language in the work of Samuel Beckett and late nineteenth-century neurological conceptions of language that emerged from aphasiology. Using the work of John Hughlings Jackson alongside contemporary neuroscientific research, we explore the significance of the lexical and affective symmetries between Beckett’s compulsive and profoundly embodied language and aphasic speech automatisms. The interdisciplinary work in this article explores the paradox of how and why Beckett was able to search out a longed-for language (...) of feeling that might disarticulate the classical bond between the language, intention, rationality and the human, in forms of expression that seem automatic and “readymade”. (shrink)

Current work in the evolution of language and communication is emphasising a close relationship between the evolution of speech, language and gestural action. This paper briefly explores some evolutionary implications of a range of closely related impairments of speech, language and gesture arising from left frontal brain lesions. I discuss aphasic lexical speech automatisms and their resolution with some recovery into agrammatism with apraxia of speech, an impairment of speech planning and programming. I focus attention on the most common forms (...) of LSAs, expletives and the pronoun+modal/aux subtype, and propose that further research into these phenomena can contribute to the debate. I briefly discuss recent studies of progressively degenerating neurological conditions resulting in progressive patterns of cognitive impairments that promises to provide insight into the evolutionary relationships between speech, language and gesture. (shrink)

Holistically ignited Hebbian models are fundamentally different from the serially organized connectionist implementations of language. This may be important for the recovery of language after injury, because connectionist models have provided useful insights into recovery of some cognitive functions. I ask whether cell assembly modelling can make an important contribution and whether the apparent incompatibility with successful connectionist modelling is a problem.

What do the relationships observed in the occurrence of various limb, facial, and speech apraxias following left hemisphere damage mean for Corballis's theory? What does the right hemisphere's role in nonpropositional and automatic speech production tell us about the coevolution of right hand preference and speech; how could the possibility that the right hemisphere may be “dominant” for some aspects of speech be accommodated by his theory?