35J.Nerosci..January1.1997.170)353-36 Figure 3 L44 32 L20 5x10- 5x104 5x105 5x10-3■ 5x104 5x105 Figure 4A Figure 4B L32 ted (p reliable.in that essentially the same result was obtained from two Wernicke's area.and the connections between these areas as the smaller,matched samples reliable, in that essentially the same result was obtained from two smaller, matched samples. This “language map” differs in important respects from the classical model of language localization, which views Broca’s area, Wernicke’s area, and the connections between these areas as the primary or core language system. In the following paragraphs, we very briefly discuss points of agreement among the FMRI data, lesion data, and previous functional imaging studies, which indi￾Figure 3. Top. Language areas identified in a 26-year-old male subject. Activated areas in the left hemisphere include STS and MTG (L56), ITG (L56-44), fusiform gyrus (L44), angular gyrus (L56-32), IFG (L56-44), rostral and caudal middle frontal gyrus (L44-32), superior frontal gyrus (L20-8), anterior cingulate (L8), and perisplenial cortex/precuneus (L8). The right posterior cerebellum is activated, as are small foci in right dorsal prefrontal cortex and right angular gyrus. Figure 4. Bottom. Reproducibility of FMRI language activations. Areas activated by the semantic decision task at a p , 0.0001 level are displayed in red for subgroup 1 (A) and subgroup 2 (B). Background images were obtained by merging anatomical data within each group. The activation patterns are qualitatively very similar in the two groups and are strongly correlated (r 5 0.86). 358 J. Neurosci., January 1, 1997, 17(1):353–362 Binder et al. • FMRI of Language Areas