Current views on the neurobiological underpinnings of language are discussed that deviate in a number of ways from the classical Wernicke-Lichtheim-Geschwind model. More areas than Broca's and Wernicke's region are involved in language. Moreover, a division along the axis of language production and language comprehension does not seem to be warranted. Instead, for central aspects of language processing neural infrastructure is shared between production and comprehension. Three different accounts of the role of Broca's area in language are discussed. Arguments are presented in favor of a dynamic network view, in which the functionality of a region is co-determined by the network of regions in which it is embedded at particular moments in time. Finally, core regions of language processing need to interact with other networks (e.g. the attentional networks and the ToM network) to establish full functionality of language and communication.
IntroductionOur capacity for language is deeply rooted in our biological make-up. We all share the capacity to acquire language within the first few years of life, without any formalized teaching programme. Despite its complexity we master our native language well before we can lace our shoes or perform simple calculations. This is all based on the universal availability of a language-ready brain. At the same time, few other cognitive systems in humans show as much variability as language. Language comes in very different surface forms, at most levels of organization. The more than 6000 different languages still in existence today vary widely in their sound repertoires, their grammatical structures, or the meaning that the lexical items code for. In addition to the variability in the world's languages, there is individual variation in language skills. Some people command only a limited vocabulary and simple sentence structures, whereas others are polyglots speaking multiple languages fluently, or can do simultaneous translation between languages. This variability is underpinned by differences at the genetic level and in the cultural trajectories that have shaped the linguistic phenotypes. Despite all these differences, they are variations on a theme. The theme is the neurobiological infrastructure that is largely shared among members of our species.Although human language skills presumably have their precursors in the communication and cognitive systems of other species (cf. [1 ]), the architecture of our language system sets us apart from other species and is uniquely human. It is characterized by a tripartite architecture [2 ] that enables us to map sound onto meaning (in listening) or meaning onto sound (in speaking). Next to sound and meaning, there is syntax, which enables the well-formed grouping of words into longer utterances. At a very general level, for all three information types (sound, syntax, meaning), one can make a distinction between two crucial components. The one relates to the common assumption that the basic building blocks of linguistic knowledge get encoded...