Effect of bilingualism on volume of corpus callosum

  • Ehsan Negin Department of Audiology, School of Rehabilitation, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
  • Saeid Farahani Mail Department of Audiology, School of Rehabilitation, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
  • Shohreh Jalaie Biostatistics, School of Rehabilitation, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
  • Samaneh Sadat Barootian Department of Audiology, School of Rehabilitation, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
  • Alireza Pourjavid Department of Audiology, School of Rehabilitation, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
  • Maryam Eatemadi Department of Audiology, School of Rehabilitation, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
  • Milad Kazemiha Department of Anatomy, School of Medicine, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
  • Mojtaba Barzegar Department of Medical Physics, School of Medicine, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
Keywords:
Corpus callosum, bilingualism, neuroplasticity

Abstract

Background and Aim: In spite of the effect of the left hemisphere domination on first langu­age acquisition in human, studies suggest activi­ties and the role of both hemispheres in learning second language. Therefore learning a second language requires more communication between the two hemispheres. Regarding the role of the corpus callosum as the only data-centric inter­face between the two hemispheres, the aim of this study was to evaluate and compare the vol­ume of the corpus callosum in monolingual and bilingual individuals.
Methods: This cross-sectional study was cond­ucted on 24 samples, 16 simultaneous bilinguals (eight Kurdish-Persian, eight Turkish-Persian) and eight monolinguals with age range of 18 to 30 years, all right handed, and in equal numbers in both sexes (female and male), volume of cor­pus callosum determined by MRI. Data was analyzed by parametric and non-parametric sta­tistical tests.
Results: The volume of corpus callosum is sma­ller in monolinguals in comparison with bilin­guals, in which a significant difference was obs­erved (p=0.04).
Conclusion: According to the language data transmission and the rate of processing by the corpus callosum between two hemispheres, it seems for improving the quality of aural reha­bilitation, the findings of present study will be useful before performing programs like auditory training, language learning, and by development of neuroplasticity which is often decoded by sti­mulus that occur in the hemisphere in contrast to the dominant hemisphere.

References

1. DE Groot AMB. Language and cognition in bilinguals and multilingual. 1st ed. New York: Psychology press; 2011.
2. Obler L. Right hemisphere participation in second language acquisition. In: Diller KC, editor. Individual differences and universals in language learning aptitude. 1st ed. Newbury House; 1981. p. 53-64.
3. Chee MW, Tan EW, Thiel T. Mandarin and English single word processing studied with functional magnetic resonance imaging. J Neurosci. 1999;19(8):3050-6.
4. Hasegawa M, Carpenter PA, Just MA. An fMRI study of bilingual sentence comprehension and workload. Neuroimage. 2002;15(3):647-60.
5. Hernandez AE, Dapretto M, Mazziotta J, Bookheimer S. Language switching and language representation in Spanish-English bilinguals: an fMRI study. Neuroimage. 2001;14(2):510-20.
6. Illes J, Francis WS, Desmond JE, Gabrieli JD, Glover GH, Poldrack R, et al. Convergent cortical representation of semantic processing in bilinguals. Brain Lang. 1999;70(3):347-63.
7. Keller TA, Carpenter PA, Just MA. The neural bases of sentence comprehension: a fMRI examination of syntactic and lexical processing. Cereb Cortex. 2001;11(3):223-37.
8. Kim KH, Relkin NR, Lee KM, Hirsch J. Distinct cortical areas associated with native and second languages. Nature. 1997;388(6638):171-4.
9. Simos PG, Castillo EM, Fletcher JM, Francis DJ, Maestu F, Breier JI, et al. Mapping of receptive language cortex in bilingual volunteers by using magnetic source imaging. J Neurosurg. 2001;95(1):76-81.
10. Dehaene S, Dupoux E, Mehler J, Cohen L, Paulesu E, Perani D, et al. Anatomical variability in the cortical representation of first and second language. Neuroreport. 1997;8(17):3809-15.
11. Gomez-Tortosa E, Martin EM, Gaviria M, Charbel F, Ausman JI. Selective deficit of one language in a bilingual patient following surgery in the left perisylvian area. Brain Lang. 1995;48(3):320-5.
12. Paulesu E, McCrory E, Fazio F, Menoncello L, Brunswick N, Cappa SF, et al. A cultural effect on brain function. Nat Neurosci. 2000;3(1):91-6.
13. Perani D, Dehaene S, Grassi F, Cohen L, Cappa SF, Dupoux E, et al. Brain processing of native and foreign languages. Neuroreport. 1996;7(15-17):2439-44.
14. Rodriguez-Fornells A, Rotte M, Heinze HJ, Nösselt T, Münte TF. Brain potential and functional MRI evidence for how to handle two languages with one brain. Nature. 2002;415(6875):1026-9.
15. Aboitiz F, Scheibel AB, Fisher RS, Zaidel E. Fiber composition of the human corpus callosum. Brain Res. 1992;598(1-2):143-53.
16. Nolte J. The human brain: an introduction to its functional anatomy. 4th ed. St. Louis: Mosby-Year Book, Inc; 1998.
17. Tomasch J. Size, distribution, and number of fibres in the human Corpus Callosum. ‎Anat Rec. 1954;119(1):119–35.
18. Witelson SF. Hand and sex differences in the isthmus and genu of the human corpus callosum. A postmortem morphological study. Brain. 1989;112 (Pt 3):799-835.
19. Patricia E. Cowell, size differences in the callosum: analysis beyond the main effects. In: Zaidel E, Lacoboni M, editors. The parallel brain- the cognitive neuroscience of corpus callosum. 1st ed. Massachusetts: MIT Press; 2003. p. 64-9.
20. Benavidez DA, Fletcher JM, Hannay HJ, Bland ST, Caudle SE, Mendelsohn DB, et al. Corpus callosum damage and interhemispheric transfer of information following closed head injury in children. Cortex. 1999;35(3):315-36.
21. Egaas B, Courchesne E, Saitoh O. Reduced size of corpus callosum in autism. Arch Neurol. 1995;52(8):794-801.
22. Gean-Marton AD, Vezina LG, Marton KI, Stimac GK, Peyster RG, Taveras JM, et al. Abnormal corpus callosum: a sensitive and specific indicator of multiple sclerosis. Radiology. 1991;180(1):215-21.
23. Jacobsen LK, Giedd JN, Rajapakse JC, Hamburger SD, Vaituzis AC, Frazier JA, et al. Quantitative magnetic resonance imaging of the corpus callosum in childhood onset schizophrenia. Psychiatry Res. 1997;68(2-3):77-86.
24. Peterson BS, Leckman JF, Duncan JS, Wetzles R, Riddle MA, Hardin MT, et al. Corpus callosum morphology from magnetic resonance images in Tourette's syndrome. Psychiatry Res. 1994;55(2):85-99.
25. Hynd GW, Hall J, Novey ES, Eliopulos D, Black K, Gonzalez JJ, et al. Dyslexia and corpus callosum morphology. Arch Neurol. 1995;52(1):32-8.
26. Hynd GW, Semrud-Clikeman M, Lorys AR, Novey ES, Eliopulos D, Lyytinen H. Corpus callosum morphology in attention deficit-hyperactivity disorder: morphometric analysis of MRI. J Learn Disabil. 1991;24(3):141-6.
27. Njiokiktjien C, de Sonneville L, Vaal J. Callosal size in children with learning disabilities. Behav Brain Res. 1994;64(1-2):213-8.
28. Coggins PE, Kennedy TJ, Armstrong TA. Bilingual corpus callosum variability. Brain Lang. 2004;89(1):69-75.
29. Innocenti GM, Frost DO. Effects of visual experience on the maturation of the efferent system to the corpus callosum. Nature. 1979;280(5719):231-4.
30. Juraska JM, Kopcik JR. Sex and environmental influences on the size and ultrastructure of the rat corpus callosum. Brain Res. 1988;450(1-2):1-8.
31. Schlaug G. The brain of musicians. A model for functional and structural adaptation. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2001;930:281-99.
32. Schlaug G, Jäncke L, Huang Y, Staiger JF, Steinmetz H. Increased corpus callosum size in musicians. Neuropsychologia. 1995;33(8):1047-55.
33. Castro-Caldas A, Miranda PC, Carmo I, Reis A, Leote F, Ribeiro C, et al. Influence of learning to read and write on the morphology of the corpus callosum. Eur J Neurol. 1999;6(1):23-8.
34. Dimond SJ, Scammell RE, Brouwers EY, Weeks R. Functions of the centre section (trunk) of the corpus callosum in man. Brain. 1977;100(3):543-62.
35. Albert ML, Obler LK. The bilingual brain: neuropsychological and neurolinguistic aspects of bilingualism. 1st ed. New York: Academic Press; 1978.
36. Musálek M. Development of test batteries for diagnostics of motor laterality manifestation: link between cerebellar dominance and hand performance. 2nd ed. Prague: Karolinum Press; 2014.
37. Vaid J, Lambert WE. Differential cerebral involvement in the cognitive functioning of bilinguals. Brain Lang. 1979;8(1):92-110.
38. Sussman HM, Franklin P, Simon T. Bilingual speech: bilateral control? Brain Lang. 1982;15(1):125-42.
39. Barton MI, Goodglass H, Shai A. Differential recognition of tachistoscopically presented English and Hebrew words in right and left visual fields. Percept Mot Skills. 1965;21(2):431-7.
40. Tzeng OJ, Hung DL, Cotton B, Wang WS. Visual lateralisation effect in reading Chinese characters. Nature. 1979;282(5738):499-501.
41. Hamers JF, Blanc MHA. Bilinguality and bilingualism. 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2000.
42. Silverberg R, Bentin S, Gaziel T, Obler LK, Albert ML. Shift of visual field preference for English words in native Hebrew speakers. Brain Lang. 1979;8(2):184-90.
43. Vaid J. Bilingualism and brain lateralization. In: Segalowitz SJ, editor. Language functions and brain organization. New York: Academic Press; 1983. p. 315-39.
Published
2016-08-03
How to Cite
1.
Negin E, Farahani S, Jalaie S, Barootian SS, Pourjavid A, Eatemadi M, Kazemiha M, Barzegar M. Effect of bilingualism on volume of corpus callosum. Aud Vestib Res. 25(2):127-134.
Section
Research Article(s)