The role of the anterior temporal lobes in cognition and language has been much debated in the literature over the last few years. Most prevailing theories argue for an important role of the anterior temporal lobe as a semantic hub or a place for the representation of unique entities such as proper names of peoples and places. Lately, a few studies have investigated the role of the most anterior part of the left anterior temporal lobe, the left temporal pole in particular, and argued that the left anterior temporal pole is the area responsible for mapping meaning on to sound through evidence from tasks such as object naming. However, another recent study indicates that bilateral anterior temporal damage is required to cause a clinically significant semantic impairment. In the present study, we tested these hypotheses by evaluating patients with acute stroke before reorganization of structure–function relationships. We compared a group of 20 patients with acute stroke with anterior temporal pole damage to a group of 28 without anterior temporal pole damage matched for infarct volume. We calculated the average percent error in auditory comprehension and naming tasks as a function of infarct volume using a non-parametric regression method. We found that infarct volume was the only predictive variable in the production of semantic errors in both auditory comprehension and object naming tasks. This finding favours the hypothesis that left unilateral anterior temporal pole lesions, even acutely, are unlikely to cause significant deficits in mapping meaning to sound by themselves, although they contribute to networks underlying both naming and comprehension of objects. Therefore, the anterior temporal lobe may be a semantic hub for object meaning, but its role must be represented bilaterally and perhaps redundantly.

Background Primary progressive aphasia (PPA) is a neurodegenerative disease that primarily affects language functions and often begins in the fifth or sixth decade of life. The devastating effects on work and family life call for the investigation of treatment alternatives. In this article, we present new data indicating that neuromodulatory treatment, using transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) combined with a spelling intervention, shows some promise for maintaining or even improving language, at least temporarily, in PPA. Aims The main aim of the present article is to determine whether tDCS plus spelling intervention is more effective than spelling intervention alone in treating written language in PPA. We also asked whether the effects of tDCS are sustained longer than the effects of spelling intervention alone. Methods & Procedures We present data from six PPA participants who underwent anodal tDCS or sham plus spelling intervention in a within-subject crossover design. Each stimulation condition lasted 3 weeks or a total of 15 sessions with a 2-month interval in between. Participants were evaluated on treatment tasks as well as on other language and cognitive tasks at 2-week and 2-month follow-up intervals after each stimulation condition. Outcomes & Results All participants showed improvement in spelling (with sham or tDCS). There was no difference in the treated items between the two conditions. There was, however, consistent and significant improvement for untrained items only in the tDCS plus spelling intervention condition. Furthermore, the improvement lasted longer in the tDCS plus spelling intervention condition compared to sham plus spelling intervention condition. Conclusions Neuromodulation with tDCS offers promise as a means of augmenting language therapy to improve written language function at least temporarily in PPA. The consistent finding of generalisation of treatment benefits to untreated items and the superior sustainability of treatment effects with tDCS justifies further investigations. However, the small sample size still requires caution in interpretation. Present interventions need to be optimised, and particular challenges, such as ways to account for the variable effect of degeneration in each individual, are discussed.

We report on an investigation of the cognitive functions of an individual with a resection of the left fusiform gyrus. This individual and a group of control participants underwent testing to examine the question of whether or not there are neural substrates within the left fusiform gyrus that are dedicated to orthographic processing. We evaluated the modality specificity (written vs. spoken language) and the category specificity (written language vs. other visual categories) of this individual's impairments. The results clearly reveal deficits affecting lexical processes in both reading and spelling. Specifically, we find disruption of normal, rapid access to meaning from print in reading and of accurate retrieval of the spellings of words from their meaning in writing. These deficits stand in striking contrast with intact processing of spoken language and categories of visual stimuli such as line drawings of objects and faces. The modality and category specificity of the deficits provide clear evidence of neural substrates within the left mid-fusiform gyrus that are specialized and necessary for normal orthographic processing.