Organization of semantic knowledge in the human brain: Toward a resolution in the next millennium
Organization of semantic knowledge in the human brain: Toward a resolution in the next millennium
复制标题
DOI：
10.1006/brcg.1999.1186
复制
发表时间：
2000-02-01
影响因子：
2.5
通讯作者：
Lu, L
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Crosson, B;Cato, MA;Lu, L
在新千年来临之际，技术的进步将使我们对大脑系统如何组织和产生认知有更深入的了解。在这方面，没有什么问题比人类大脑的基础知识结构更有趣了。最近的发现预示着这个古老谜题的答案。例如，虽然我们正常的视觉感知似乎是相对统一的，但研究揭示了处理运动、边缘、颜色和其他各种有助于我们视觉体验的细节的视觉处理器的马赛克（DeYoe等人，1996;Van Essen, Anderson, & Felleman, 1992）。理解和存储语义知识的机制即使不是更复杂，也可能是一样的。研究大脑语义组织的一个窗口是越来越多的关于特定类别命名和语义缺陷的文献。这些研究表明，病变地形可以使一些脑损伤患者无法命名或理解特定语义类别的项目。这些发现表明了一种潜在的知识组织。生物（有时是动物）和非生物是最常见的区别。其他受损的类别包括水果和蔬菜、工具、身体部位或专有名称（见Crosson等人，1997年的简要回顾）。不幸的是，这些文献未能解决导致特定类别缺陷的语义知识的基本结构。事实上，使用非常相似方法的研究得出了截然相反的结论。Caramazza和Shelton（1998）最近报道了生物的类别特定语义缺陷，这种缺陷跨越了视觉和言语模态
On the threshold of the new millennium, technological advances will yield greater understanding of how brain systems organize and produce cognition. In this regard, no question is more intriguing than the underlying structure of knowledge in the human brain. Recent discoveries foretell the solution to this ancient riddle. For example, though our normal visual perception seems relatively unified, studies reveal a mosaic of visual processors dealing with movement, edges, colors, and various other details that contribute to our visual experience (DeYoe et al., 1996; Van Essen, Anderson, & Felleman, 1992). Mechanisms for comprehending and storing semantic knowledge are likely to be equally if not more complex. One window into the brain’s semantic organization is the growing literature on category-specific naming and semantic deficits. These studies indicate that lesion topography can render some brain-damaged patients unable to name or comprehend items from a specific semantic category. Such findings suggest an underlying organization of knowledge. Living things (or sometimes animals) vs nonliving things is the most commonly reported distinction. Other impaired categories have included fruits and vegetables, tools, body parts, or proper names (see Crosson et al., 1997, for a brief review). Unfortunately, this literature has failed to resolve the fundamental structure of semantic knowledge that leads to category-specific deficits. Indeed, studies using very similar methodologies have drawn diametrically opposed conclusions. Caramazza and Shelton (1998) recently reported a category-specific semantic deficit for living things which cut across visual and verbal modal-