Talk:Psycholinguistics/Language and Music

Feedback

In an attempt to compare the processing of language and music, the paper does raise some interesting points and questions. However, the overall structure would benefit from more focus and more depth. First of all, in general, there should be a focus on music. It is necessary to summarize the article about the processing of music. This summary is necessary before you actually compare music with language. In fact, there is no strong sense of a comparison between music and language.

The part "Breaking it down" it is a collection of points. These points are interesting and provide a nice summary and background for readers. However, some of the points are vague and the overall structure needs to be reworked. There does not seem to be much connection between the points and some of the points may incorrect. For example, in "Production" it is wrong to say everyone is fluent in language and that some cannot play sing or compose music. Individuals within a culture have a range of abilities in both language and music, from almost none to all. Some people cannot speak their native language fluently; everyone can hum, sing or whistle a then—thought some are not particularly good at it. Some people are experts in music or language, such as professional musicians or linguists one can acknowledge that more people can read language than read in music. In "interpretation", the overall point is not clear. Language includes syntax and semantics. Music includes syntax, but what is the analogue (or equivalent) of semantics for music? The analogue of semantics in language is affect in music. The meaning of music is affective self-expression and communication. As with semantics in language, affect in music may be used to inform others of one’s internal state, or used to change the internal states of others.

The "Language" part in the section "Building on the basics" lacks detailed information. What is stated seems fine, but only three areas of brain structures are mentioned. The associations between these brain structures need to be explained. Also since there is a later reference to the use of music in memory, there should be discussion of the structures of memory in language. The “music” part in section of "Building on the basics" lacks information as well. There is no real discussion of the area of the brain responsible for music processing. Saying that it might be the left or right hemisphere provides absolutely no new information. You may want to check with the studies of Peretz for example. If you are going to say that “'language seems more universal, whereas music is more culturally-based”, you are going to need a reference. This is a strong statement, and in fact, there are good arguments for thinking that music is less culturally defined that language.

In the part "Similar systems", you should avoid to use the words such as "similar", "much", and "many". In scientific writing, one needs to accurately describe amounts: which areas, how many areas, what are the similarities, what are the differences. In this section, the discussion mentions that both the left and right hemispheres are involved with music processing. However, it is not clear which areas are involved. One can also wonder why the motor cortex is mentioned, this should be trivially obvious if one is speaking or performing music. We know it is most important for movement, how there some other particular role with music?

The part "Music and Memory" presents an interesting discussion, but seems have no connection with all other sections. How music helps to understand memory is not clearly defined. For example, children who learn music at an early age seem have better memory than children who did not learn music at an early age. Unfortunately, this may not be an effect of music. Children who learn music at an early age may simply imply that enriched environments help memory. This is, the chance to learn music early also implies an enriched environment. Since musical education is associated with parental affluence, more affluent children can get more chances to learn many things, and all of these may help these children develop better memory. Thus, in this section, there needs to be more references to clarify how music actually helps memory.

Overall, the sections seems to be somewhat disconnected with each other and the actually discussion of musical processing within the brain is weak. Additional material specifying the structures of the brain are needed.