{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.017137261302431858, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.491525423728813, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Tool use and language share syntactic processes and neural patterns in the basal ganglia

Description Common basis for language and tool use Tool use and language are hallmarks of human evolution. Because of the similarity between the motor processes for tool use and those supporting language, it has been hypothesized that syntax and tool use may share brain resources. Using functional magnetic resonance imaging and multivariate pattern analysis, Thibault et al. found that small portions of the basal ganglia in the human brain act as common neural substrates for both tool use and syntax in language. In a behavioral experiment, they showed that learning a novel task that involves the use of a tool also improves performance in a complex language task. These results further support the hypothesis of a coevolution of tool use and language. —PRS Syntactic processes in the basal ganglia subserve both tool use and language such that training one ability boosts the other. INTRODUCTION Tool use is a hallmark of human evolution. Beyond its sensorimotor components, the complexity of which has been extensively investigated, tool use affects cognition from a different perspective. Indeed, tool use requires integrating an external object as a body part and embedding its functional structure in the motor program. This adds a hierarchical level into the motor plan of manual actions, subtly modifying the relationship between interdependent subcomponents. Embedded structures also exist in language, and syntax is the cognitive function handling these linguistic hierarchies. One example is center-embedded object-relative clauses: “The poet [that the scientist admires] reads the paper.” Accordingly, researchers have advanced a role for syntax in action and the existence of similarities between the processes underlying tool use and language, so that shared neural resources for a common cognitive function could be at stake. RATIONALE We first tested the existence of shared neural substrates for tool use and syntax in language. Second, we tested the prediction that training one ability should affect performance in the other. In a first experiment, we measured participants’ brain activity with functional magnetic resonance imaging during tool use or, as a control, manual actions. In separate runs, the same participants performed a linguistic task on complex syntactic structures. We looked for common activations between tool use and the linguistic task, predicting similar patterns of activity if they rely on common neural resources. In further behavioral experiments, we tested whether motor training with the tool selectively improves syntactic performance in language and if syntactic training in language, in turn, selectively improves motor performance with the tool. RESULTS Tool-use planning and complex syntax processing (i.e., object relatives) elicited neural activity anatomically colocalized within the basal ganglia. A control experiment ruled out verbal working memory and manual (i.e., without a tool) control processes as an underlying component of this overlap. Multivariate analyses revealed similar spatial distributions of neural patterns prompted by tool-use planning and object-relative processing. This agrees with the recruitment of the same neural resources by both abilities and with the existence of a supramodal syntactic function. The shared neurofunctional resources were moreover reflected behaviorally by cross-domain learning transfer. Indeed, tool-use training significantly improved linguistic performance with complex syntactic structures. No learning transfer was observed on language syntactic abilities if participants trained without the tool. The reverse was also true: Syntactic training with complex sentences improved motor performance with the tool more than motor performance in a task without the tool and matched for sensorimotor difficulty. No learning transfer was observed on tool use if participants trained with simpler syntactic structures in language. CONCLUSION These findings reveal the existence of a supramodal syntactic function that is shared between language and motor processes. As a consequence, training tool-use abilities improves linguistic syntax and, reciprocally, training linguistic syntax abilities improves tool use. The neural mechanisms allowing for boosting performance in one domain by training syntax in the other may involve priming processes through preactivation of common neural resources, as well as short-term plasticity within the shared network. Our findings point to the basal ganglia as the neural site of supramodal syntax that handles embedded structures in either domain and also support longstanding theories of the coevolution of tool use and language in humans. Tool use and language share syntactic processes. Functional magnetic resonance imaging revealed that tool use and syntax in language elicit similar patterns of brain activation within the basal ganglia. This indicates common neural resources for the two abilities. Indeed, learning transfer occurs across the two domains: Tool-use motor training improves syntactic processing in language and, reciprocally, linguistic training with syntactic structures improves tool use. Does tool use share syntactic processes with language? Acting with a tool is thought to add a hierarchical level into the motor plan. In the linguistic domain, syntax is the cognitive function handling interdependent elements. Using functional magnetic resonance imaging, we detected common neurofunctional substrates in the basal ganglia subserving both tool use and syntax in language. The two abilities elicited similar patterns of neural activity, indicating the existence of shared functional resources. Manual actions and verbal working memory did not contribute to this common network. Consistent with the existence of shared neural resources, we observed bidirectional behavioral enhancement of tool use and syntactic skills in language so that training one function improves performance in the other. This reveals supramodal syntactic processes for tool use and language.