Atypical representations of praxis and language were studied in two forms and combinations: bilateral organization, and right lateralization, independently for each function; when the atypically represented praxis dissociates from typically lateralized language; and when both praxis and language have atypical forms. Direct differences between bilateral and right-lateralized representations were either marginal (for praxis), or nonexistent (for language). Because atypical organization of praxis

more »

... s over twice as frequent as language in its atypical form, sample size might be an issue only for the latter (as atypical organization of language is very rare). Group averages in their dissociations, and associations in atypical forms, revealed the expected representations of the two functions. These outcomes indicate that merging the two atypical representations of praxis, or language, into one atypical group can reveal the critical aspects of their atypicality, including subcortical contributions, without seriously impeding correct interpretation of the essential underlying neural mechanisms.