Some language processing theories propose that, just as for other somatic actions, self-monitoring of language production is achieved through internal modeling. The cerebellum is the proposed center of such internal modeling in motor control, and the right cerebellum has been linked to an increasing number of language functions, including predictive processing during comprehension. Relating these findings, we tested whether the right posterior cerebellum has a causal role for self-monitoring of speech errors. Participants received 1 Hz repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation during 15 min to lobules Crus I and II in the right hemisphere, and, in counterbalanced orders, to the contralateral area in the left cerebellar hemisphere (control) in order to induce a temporary inactivation of one of these zones. Immediately afterwards, they engaged in a speech production task priming the production of speech errors. Language production was impaired after right compared to left hemisphere stimulation, a finding that provides evidence for a causal role of the cerebellum during language production. We interpreted this role in terms of internal modeling of upcoming speech through a verbal working memory process used to prevent errors.

Despite a large amount of psycholinguistic research devoted to the issue of processing differences between a first and a second language, there is no consensus regarding the locus where these emerge or the mechanism behind them. The aim of this article is to briefly examine both the behavioral and neuroscientific evidence in order to critically assess three hypotheses that have been put forward in the literature to explain such differences: the weaker links, executive control, and post-lexical accounts. We conclude that (a) while all stages of processing are likely to be slowed down when speaking in an L2 compared to an L1, the differences seem to originate at a lexical stage; and (b) frequency of use seems to be the variable mainly responsible for these bilingual processing disadvantages.

An event-related functional magnetic resonance imaging study examined how speakers inspect their own speech for errors. Concretely, we sought to assess 1) the role of the temporal cortex in monitoring speech errors, linked with comprehension-based monitoring; 2) the involvement of the cerebellum in internal and external monitoring, linked with forward modeling; and 3) the role of the medial frontal cortex for internal monitoring, linked with conflict-based monitoring. In a word production task priming speech errors, we observed enhanced involvement of the right posterior cerebellum for trials that were correct, but on which participants were more likely to make a word as compared with a nonword error (contrast of internal monitoring). Furthermore, comparing errors to correct utterances (contrast of external monitoring), we observed increased activation of the same cerebellar region, of the superior medial cerebellum, and of regions in temporal and medial frontal cortex. The presence of the cerebellum for both internal and external monitoring indicates the use of forward modeling across the planning and articulation of speech. Dissociations across internal and external monitoring in temporal and medial frontal cortex indicate that monitoring of overt errors is more reliant on vocal feedback control.

In a functional magnetic resonance imaging study, we examined speech error monitoring in a cortico-cerebellar network for two contrasts: (a) correct trials with high versus low articulatory error probability and (b) overtly committed errors versus correct trials. Engagement of the cognitive cerebellar region Crus I in both contrasts suggests that this region is involved in overarching performance monitoring. The activation of cerebellar motor regions (superior medial cerebellum, lobules VI and VIII) indicates the additional presence of a sensorimotor driven implementation of control. The combined pattern of pre-supplementary motor area (active across contrasts) and anterior cingulate cortex (only active in the contrast involving overt errors) activations suggests sensorimotor driven feedback monitoring in the medial frontal cortex, making use of proprioception and auditory feedback through overt errors. Differential temporal and parietal cortex activation across contrasts indicates involvement beyond sensorimotor driven feedback in line with speech production models that link these regions to auditory target processing and internal modeling-like mechanisms. These results highlight the presence of multiple, possibly hierarchically interdependent, mechanisms that support the optimizing of speech production.