LB 463-464T 怡萱

Most workers on aphasia were content to consider language in terms of the memory and articulation of words, and they constructed complicated diagrams demonstrating the localization of language.20 Carl Wernicke exemplified the dominating trend of thought in the work on aphasia when he insisted that language must be considered in complete isolation from concept formation and intelligence. The reception and production of language must likewise be considered quite separately. There were undoubtedly many reasons for the reduction to “the simplest hypotheses” in the construction of models for language physiology.21 Wernicke hints at one of them, when he emphasized the difference between the localization advocated by the phrenologists and his own.22 [95]. In 1891 A Critical Study, Towards a Conceptualization of Aphasia was published by Sigmund Freud (1856-1939). It demonstrated that the difference between Gall’s and Wernicke’s concept of localization was not a basic one. Just because,” will and intellect have been recognized as psychological technical terms… (one does not)…know with greater certainty that simple sense images are nothing more than such a technical term.” There is no justification for the assumption that the physiological correlate of a simple psychological element is also simple and localizable [96] Freud out.

大多數失語症的運作者必須考慮語言方面的記憶和表述的話的內容，他們建造複雜的圖表顯示了語言的定位.卡爾韋尼克認為失語症的運作型態是主導思潮，當他堅持認為，語言必須被視為在完全孤立從概念的形成和理解力。語言的容納和生產必須同樣被視為絕對分開運作。毫無疑問，減少許多原因是在於建設語言生理學模式，是“最簡單的假設”。韋尼克暗示其中一項，他強調差異定位所倡導的骨相學和他擁有的 。在1891年的批判性研究下，弗洛伊德出版了（ 1856年至1939年）建立一個失語的概念化。這顯示戈爾和韋尼克之間的區別和定位的概念不是一個基本的面向。只是因為， “意志和智慧已被確認為心理技術術語... ...知道更大的確定性，簡單意義上的圖像只不過是這樣一個技術術語。弗洛伊德指出: ”沒有任何理由假設，是一個簡單的心理因素也是簡單和定位是和生理相關的。

He had touched the weakest spot of the aphasia theories by demonstrating that the so-called physiology of language was no more than a translation of psychological insights into physiological terms. In their attempt to consider the biological basis of language without becoming involved in psychology, the workers on aphasia had introduced their own psychology in physiological terms.23

他曾觸及不充分的失語症的理論表明，所謂的語言生理是只是一個心理的翻譯來洞察生理條件。在他們的企圖考慮生物學基礎的語言並沒有捲入心理學，而失語症的人在術語.23介紹了自己的心理和生理。


If nothing else, the basic importance of the brain for language function had been established by the work done on aphasia. Yet neither the brain nor aphasia was even mentioned in one of the most important books on language, published in 1891 by Georg von der Gabelentz (1840-1893). In speaking of the biological basis of man’s language capacity, he only mentioned the upright posture and man’s unencumbered chest as factors which may have facilitated development of language in the human species. The psychological origin of language was sought in jealousy, boredom, playfulness or other mental and physical needs. Linguistics should not be a natural science, and only man’s ability to order his thoughts could be profitably subjected to the method of scientific psychology. The most important function of language, the expression of connected thoughts and concepts, could only be studied by means of logical analysis and metaphysics [97]. Steinthal’s hope that language would be considered in a broader frame had not been realized in linguistics.

如果沒有其他的功能，大腦語言功能的基本重要性已經由失語症的運作完成建立。然而無論是大腦也不是失語症中，提到的一本最重要的語言書籍，出版於1891年由喬治馮德加貝倫茨（ 1840至1893年） 。在談到生物學基礎上人的語言能力，他只提到了直立的姿勢和人的支配胸部的因素可能有利於人類物種在語言上的發展。心理起源的語言是尋求嫉妒，無聊，遊戲或其他精神和肉體的需要。而語言學不應該是一個自然的科學，只有人有能力去命令腦中想法，這樣可以獲得科學心理的方法。語言最重要的功能，是表達的聯繫思想和概念，這樣僅僅是研究邏輯分析方法和形而上學。施泰因塔爾希望，將語言在更廣泛的範圍內去實現語言學。