Every language teacher knows that learning a language requires significant mental effort. While some understand that this mental work can also change brain functions and structure, fewer people know the individuals responsible for this understanding. This credit belongs, in large part, to a group known as the troika, a Russian term for a triad, consisting of L. S. Vygotsky, A. R. Luria, and A. N. Leontiev. Vygotsky introduced the concept of “inner speech,” Leontiev developed the idea of “inner programming,” and Luria contributed to the field by studying language disorders, particularly aphasias, and pioneering the field of “aphasiology.”
The troika laid the groundwork for psycholinguistics by proposing that higher mental functions – like attention, memory, and learning operate systematically. This means that such functions are dynamically organized (they involve a set of diverse structures that are engaged in different ways according to the task) and localized (the structures that each function requires operate within a set of canonical networks). Based on these principles, models of speech generation and comprehension have emerged. These models are based on hierarchical processing, that is, they consider that natural body functions and structures like the brain and the speech organs are necessary for symbolic activities, like speech, and participation, like dialogues, to ensue. In other words, there is a mental process (like understanding words in a dialogue) that gets into motion once structures, mainly located in the temporal lobe of the brain, are able to process the speech. This would be a primary processing step carried out by brain regions that are chiefly concerned with speech. Then follows another process, in a secondary stance, that engages brain resources in different areas which associate the basic information (from speech processing) to other characteristics, like how, where and when the dialogue is taking place. Lastly, comes a third processing stance, responsible for integrating the speech stimuli that got associated with other features with meaning, logic and adequacy. This last step of the hierarchical process takes place in the frontal cortex and is highly symbolic.
Vygotsky, who was a pioneer in this area, suggested that verbal thinking occurs within a cultural context, which creates a motivation to think. Such a process ensues because being immersed in a social context brings forth the need to make meaning of things that are heard and said. In this dialogical process, the values, beliefs and strategies that subserve what one needs to acquire and develop to become a community member – in other words, their cognitive development – takes place in collaborative exchanges. By making an effort to understand and be understood in a sociocultural context, children start to develop their inner speech, which then accesses a semantic layer in the brain and is expressed as outer speech. Vygotsky believed that verbal thinking does not progress in a step-by-step manner, but rather evolves as development occurs. As thoughts turn into words, there is a functional development process involved, which includes the intention to create meaningful and grammatically correct expressions, i.e., inner programming. This process is closely connected with other aspects of communication, such as speech and semantics, showing the deep intertwining of development and language.
In conceptualizing the formation of higher mental functions, the notion that there would be a global rearrangement in behavior follows. As inner speech gives rise to outer speech, memorization of basic forms of communication within a certain context gets entrained. This is a crucial characteristic of the work that Leontiev further elaborated on the concept of memory. His contribution lies in integrating the development of higher mental functions, like memory, into a historical perspective by taking account of developmental processes – inherent to the natural development of a human being – to the ontological process that happens when immersed in a sociocultural context over time. With Leontiev the work of tying higher mental functions to a common historical origin was laid clear.
Taken the troika’s contributions in tandem, they set the path for delineating how a child’s speech evolves from motor and verbal behavior to referential speech and then to demonstrative speech as the child interacts in a social setting surrounded by older individuals, leading the child to differentiate themself from others and express their needs clearly. From this point on, speech becomes a self-regulatory process rather than just a means of making meaning of what others say. By emphasizing the importance of speech, Vygotsky encouraged Luria and Leontiev to delve into the study of speech as a tool for organizing behavior.
Behavior is the result of biological and cultural processes. The first are seen as natural in a child and change quantitatively as the child develops. This becomes clear when we consider how a child progresses from imitating sound to producing words, phrases and sentences. The second type of behavior changes qualitatively as the child becomes more involved in their social and historical context. This happens when we see how a child is able to converse with others. By using more or less words, being able to extend a dialogue to get to meaningful exchanges, children get to adjust their repertoire and assume different roles in their settings. Thus, next time you witness behavior in class—either through speech or misbehavior—consider how quantity and quality may have influenced it, positively or negatively.
More at:
Vygotsky-Luria-Leontiev’s School of Psycholinguistics
The Role of Inner Speech in the Construction of an Utterance
The Making of Mind : A Personal Account of Soviet Psychology
Mirela C. C. Ramacciotti is presently engaged as an external lecturer on the topic of Mind, Brain, and Education at the Graduate Level Course with the Psychology Department at the University of São Paulo. She holds a PhD in Neuroscience and Behavior and another in Human Communication Disorders.
