Keywords: speech production; model; fMRI; Broca’s area; premotor cortex; motor cortex; speech acquisition; sensorimotor learning; neural transmission delays This paper describes a neural model of speech acquisition and production that accounts for a wide range of acoustic, kinematic, and neuroimaging data concerning the control of speech movements. The model is a neural network whose components correspond to regions of the cerebral cortex and cerebellum, including premotor, motor, auditory, and somatosensory cortical areas. Computer simulations of the model verify its ability to account for compensation to lip and jaw perturbations during speech. Specific anatomical locations of the model’s components are estimated, and these estimates are used to simulate fMRI experiments of simple syllable production. 1 1

T he issue of what goes wrong with the speech production skills of people who stutter (PWS) has been approached from a number of theoretical perspectives. One dimension along which to characterize these theories is in terms of whether production processes are considered to be autonomous from perceptual processes or whether there is an essential link between perception and production (see Howell, 1996; Howell & Harvey, 1983, for full descriptions of these alternatives). In autonomous models, no information from perception is used in production. Linking perception to production could, potentially, assist production. For instance, the perceptual system could be responsible for ascertaining whether the speaker has made an error. When an error is detected in production, speech could then be

Abstract. This is foremost a methodological contribution. It focuses on the foundation of anticipation and the pertinent implications that anticipation has on learning (theory and experiments). By definition, anticipation does not exhaust all the forms through which the future affects human activity. Accordingly, guessing, expectation, prediction, forecast, and planning will be defined in counter-distinction to anticipation. The background against which these distinctions are made is explicit in the operational thesis advanced: Anticipation and reaction can be considered only in their unity. The interrelation of anticipation and reaction corresponds to the integrated nature of the physical and the living. Finally, an agent architecture for a hybrid control mechanism is suggested as a possible implementation. Context and Reference Einstein [1] observed that, “No problem can be solved from the same consciousness that created it. We must learn to see the world anew. ” As my own work in anticipatory computing evolved, I have constantly faced attitudes varying between skepticism and sheer enmity from outside the small community of researchers dedicated to the study of anticipation. Every example of anticipation my colleagues or I advanced was whittled down to the reactive explanations of the deterministic causeand-effect sequence, that is, to a particular form of causality. Even the reviewers of this paper could not agree among themselves on a line of argument that in the final analysis suggests that there is more to causality than what the Cartesian rationality that we learned in school and have practiced since then preaches. (A good source of information on this topic is

iv ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to acknowledge my network of family, friends, and teachers, who managed to confuse and amaze me by becoming my teachers, family, and friends.

Psychology “... she encased the substance of the brain, which she had made soft and fluid, with a hard earthen casing. She had decided to employ a soft and transparent material in creating the brain, so that the images of things might impress themselves more easily upon it. Then, dividing the whole cavity of the skull into three chambers, she assigned these to the three functions of the soul. In the frontal chamber provision was made for imagination to receive the shapes of things, and transmit all that it beheld to reason. Memory’s chamber was set at the very back of the head, lest, dwelling at the threshold of perception, she should be troubled by a continual invasion of images. Reason dwelt between these two, to impose its firm judgment on the workings of the others. She also set the organs of sensory perception close about the palace of the head, that judging intellect might maintain close contact with the messenger senses. [...] Sound emerges from the windpipe and stirs the still air. Once aroused, the agitation spreads, until the last wave of motion slackens, having attained its limit and been drawn out to its full extent. Air provides the substance, and

continuous-distracter free recall, sensory-motor imitation, chunking, sequence learning, prefrontal cortex, parietal cortex, position coding, rank order cells, cerebral cortex, laminar computing * Authors are listed in alphabetical order. 1