Grasp
Grasp
复制标题
DOI：
10.1080/08998280.2000.11927702
复制
发表时间：
2000-10
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
在为这篇文章寻找一个简短而尖锐的标题时，我在抓住和抓住之间摇摆不定。在查阅多兰德博士的字典时，我惊讶地发现抓地力的主要定义是“法语，流行性感冒”。因此，我选择了grasp，尽管它并没有出现在好医生的字典里。尽管人手的骨骼和肌肉元素在许多物种中非常接近，但赞美我们自己的人手及其能力是人类的一个非常自然的弱点。事实上，人类文明史上充满了对手的专门研究。加伦（公元129-199年）在他的《论手部》一书中，用了很大一部分时间来研究手部的解剖学和生理学。几个世纪以来，神秘的属性一直归咎于手，许多容易上当受骗的人已经通过手相师的声明指导他们的生活。查尔斯·贝尔爵士（Sir Charles Bell）在他引人入胜的第四篇布里奇沃特论文（160年前写的）的第一章中断言，手中有一个“贯穿所有生命自然的普遍计划，它在世界最早的条件下盛行，在对这些主题最全面的研究中，我们到处都看到了未来的设计”。世纪后半叶，约翰·R.纳皮耶是一位杰出的人类学家兼内科医生。他的著作《手》（Hands）于1980年首次出版，现在已经是第三版，推荐给对手的进化、功能和行为方面感兴趣的非专业人士。非人类灵长类动物的手和我们的手之间最好的比较和区别在于手能够抓住东西的方式。蜥蜴的抓握力很强，也很安全，但由于拇指发育不全，它的功能范围仍然很小。它充其量是一种“力量握法”，但它不具备人手的“精确握法”，在灵活性上达到了出色的精细化。然而，这并不意味着人类的手已经失去了更原始的力量抓握能力或灵长类足手的任何其他运动。从本质上讲，我们的手的解剖结构与大猩猩的手没有什么不同，除了拇指的相对性。随着时间的推移，一只强手仍然很强，但获得了更复杂的能力。猴子基本上是四足动物，而人类完全是两足动物。我们的直立行走让一切都不同了。在上个世纪，许多发现使我们了解了手的起源和它们的能力。把握
BUMC PROCEEDINGS 2000;13:343–348 In seeking a short, sharp title for this essay, I vacillated between grip and grasp. When consulting Dr. Dorland’s Dictionary, I was surprised to find the primary definition of grip was “French, grippe influenza.” I therefore chose grasp, even though it does not appear in the good doctor’s dictionary. Despite the fact that the skeletal and muscular elements of the human hand are very nearly matched in many species, praise of our own human hand and its abilities is a very natural human weakness. In fact, the history of human civilization is replete with special studies of the hand. Galen (AD 129–199) devoted a large part of his De Usu Partium to the anatomy and physiology of the hand. Throughout the centuries, mystical properties have been imputed to the hand, and many gullible people have had their lives directed by the pronouncements of palmists. Sir Charles Bell, in the first chapter of his fascinating fourth Bridgewater treatise—written >160 years ago—asserted that there is in the hand “a universal plan extending through all animated nature and which has prevailed in the earliest condition of the world, and that on the most comprehensive study of those subjects, we everywhere behold prospective design” (1). In the second half of the 20th century, the writings of John R. Napier, an anthropologist-physician, are preeminent. His book Hands, first published in 1980 and now in its third edition, is the book to be recommended to nonspecialists interested in the evolutionary, functional, and behavioral aspects of the hand. The best comparison and differentiation between nonhuman primates’ hands and our own lies in the manner in which the hand is able to grasp something. The anthropoids’ grip is strong and secure, but its range of function will remain small because of its less developed thumb. It is at best a “power grip,” but it does not have the “precision grip” of the human hand, which has achieved excellent refinement in prehensility. This, however, does not mean that the human hand has lost the more primitive ability of the power grip or any other movement of the primate foot-hand. Essentially, the anatomical structure of our hand is no different from that in a gorilla, with the exception of the opposability of the thumb. What has changed is that over time, a strong hand remained strong but acquired more intricate capabilities. Monkeys are basically quadrupedal; man is fully bipedal. Our upright walk makes all the difference. During the last century, many discoveries have led to the understanding of the origins of our hands and their capabilities. Grasp