The human language system, including its inferior frontal component in ‘Broca’s area’, does not support music perception

Abstract

Language and music are two human-unique capacities whose relationship remains debated. Some argue for overlap in processing mechanisms, especially for structure processing, but others fail to find overlap. Using fMRI, we examined the responses of language brain regions to diverse music stimuli, and also probed the musical abilities of individuals with severe aphasia. Across four experiments, we obtained a clear answer: music does not recruit nor requires the language system. The language regions′ responses to music are generally low and never exceed responses elicited by non-music auditory conditions, like animal sounds. Further, the language regions are not sensitive to music structure: they show low responses to both intact and scrambled music, and to melodies with vs. without structural violations. Finally, individuals with aphasia who cannot judge sentence grammaticality perform well on melody well-formedness judgments. Thus the mechanisms that process structure in language do not appear to support music processing.

Envelope reconstruction of speech and music highlights stronger tracking of speech at low frequencies

“…Recent studies also found that parietal weighting was increased for tracking phoneme and word surprisal [54] as well as semantic tracking of speech for native speakers but not non-native speakers [55]. The parietal weighting could be indicative of language-specific processing in the posterior temporal lobe [56] which was recently shown to be absent when listening to music [57], but because the activations are broad and without source localization it is difficult to identify the location definitively. Still, there is some evidence that low-frequency tracking of speech may be produced by a domain-general mechanism [58].…”

Moving beyond domain-specific vs. domain-general options in cognitive neuroscience

“…The results of neuroimaging and neuropsychological studies emphasize the difference between language, music, and action. For example, there are aphasic patients who show preserved ability for music processing (Chen et al, 2021;Slevc, Faroqi-Shah, Saxena, & Okada, 2016). There is a fronto-temporal core language network for 'highlevel' linguistic processing including syntactic processing which is not sensitive to music processing (Chen et al, 2021;Fedorenko, Behr, & Kanwisher, 2011).…”

“…For example, there are aphasic patients who show preserved ability for music processing (Chen et al, 2021;Slevc, Faroqi-Shah, Saxena, & Okada, 2016). There is a fronto-temporal core language network for 'highlevel' linguistic processing including syntactic processing which is not sensitive to music processing (Chen et al, 2021;Fedorenko, Behr, & Kanwisher, 2011). The fronto-temporal network of language is left-lateralized, while that of music is right lateralized (Friederici, 2019).…”

“…Similarly, language engages the anterior portion of the left BA44, while action is associated with the posterior portion (Papitto, Friederici, & Zaccarella, 2020). music, and action based on differences in the activation profiles as well as the lack of exact overlap between language, music, and action areas / circuits in the brain (Chen et al, 2021;Fedorenko & Blank, 2020;Fedorenko & Varley, 2016;Zaccarella, Papitto, & Friederici, 2021).…”

“…Moreover, there is at least one study providing evidence for shared neural resources for language and music syntactic processing without introducing any violation (Chiang et al, 2018). Another possible explanation for domain-commonality is that both domains at issue deal with pitch and rhythm processing (Chen et al, 2021). Indeed, prosodic structure parallels musical structure (Heffner & Slevc, 2015;Lerdahl & Jackendoff, 1983).…”