When We Imagine Speaking, the Brain Still Follows the Rhythm of Speech: Motor–Auditory Delay of the Mu Rhythm
When We Imagine Speaking, the Brain Still Follows the Rhythm of Speech: Motor–Auditory Delay of the Mu Rhythm
The study by Mantegna, Poeppel, and Orpella (2026) explores a fascinating aspect of the neuroscience of language: what happens in the brain when we imagine speaking, even when no sound is produced. Using neurophysiological measurements of the Mu rhythm, an oscillatory pattern associated with the sensorimotor system, the authors investigated how motor and auditory areas interact during imagined speech.
The main finding is striking: the temporal delay between motor and auditory activity observed during imagined speech mirrors the same timing pattern found in overt speech production. In other words, the brain preserves the temporal structure of speech even when speech occurs only in the mental domain.
This result suggests that imagining speech is not merely thinking in words, but involves activating sensorimotor circuits that preserve the natural rhythm of speech production.
Motor–Auditory Delay of the Mu Rhythm
What the Study Demonstrates
During speech production, there is a precise coupling between:
Motor regions, responsible for planning and executing articulation
Auditory regions, responsible for monitoring and predicting the sound of one's own speech
The study shows that this dynamic also occurs during imagined speech, maintaining a characteristic temporal delay between motor and auditory activity.
This delay can be observed through the behavior of the Mu rhythm, a neural oscillation associated with motor control and sensorimotor integration.
The results indicate that:
the brain internally simulates speech production
motor and auditory areas maintain the same timing observed in overt speech
imagined speech involves embodied mechanisms of sensory prediction
These findings reinforce the idea that language is deeply grounded in the body’s sensorimotor systems.
A Decolonial Neuroscience Perspective
From the perspective of Decolonial Neuroscience, this study helps challenge the reductionist view of language as a purely symbolic or abstract process.
For a long time, cognitive models described language as the manipulation of internal representations detached from the body. However, the findings of Mantegna and colleagues suggest that even verbal thought engages motor and sensory circuits that simulate bodily action.
This aligns closely with the concept of the Damasian Mind, in which the mind emerges from the continuous interaction between interoception, proprioception, and action in the world.
Thinking in words is therefore not merely accessing semantic meanings. It also involves activating bodily patterns of action that shape the structure of thought.
APUS and the Body-Territory of Language
The conceptual avatar that best interprets this study is APUS, representing the idea of extended proprioception and body-territory.
When we imagine speaking, the brain activates temporal patterns corresponding to the real movements of speech. This means that the bodily territory of language remains active even without overt movement.
Language is therefore not located solely in abstract cognition. It exists as a potential field of bodily action.
From this perspective, imagining speech can be understood as internally traversing the sensorimotor territory of language.
Connection with Tensional Selves and Zones 1, 2, and 3
This study can also be interpreted through the concept of Tensional Selves, which describe the functional states the organism maintains to act or think in the world.
During imagined speech:
Zone 1
Language is used functionally to plan actions or organize thoughts.
Zone 2
Verbal imagination may become a space of creativity and critical reorganization, where ideas emerge fluidly.
Zone 3
When rigid narratives dominate internal dialogue, inner speech may become repetitive and restrictive, limiting critical thinking.
The fact that imagined speech preserves the temporal structure of overt speech suggests that internal language has a bodily foundation that can support both creative thinking and rigid narrative loops.
DREX Citizen and the Metabolism of Social Language
Language is also a deeply social phenomenon. Much of our inner speech reflects internalized dialogues with culture, society, and the communities to which we belong.
Within the concept of DREX Citizen, social belonging can be understood through a biological analogy. Just as cells require stable energy to maintain their functions, societies require minimum metabolic security to sustain healthy communication and critical thinking.
Contexts of extreme material insecurity often generate defensive and polarized narratives, which may capture internal language processes.
By contrast, environments of stability and belonging tend to foster more creative and cooperative forms of thought and communication, bringing individuals closer to Zone 2 states of cognitive openness.
New Questions for BrainLatam
Does imagined speech show different neural patterns in cooperative social contexts compared to individual tasks?
Do physiological states measured by HRV or respiration influence the temporal dynamics of imagined speech?
Could EEG or fNIRS differentiate between creative imagined speech and repetitive inner dialogue?
Do children display the same motor–auditory synchronization during imagined speech?
Does musical or rhythmic training influence the neural timing of imagined speech?
Possible Experimental Designs
A promising direction would be to combine EEG and fNIRS to investigate the dynamics of imagined speech during creative and cooperative tasks.
Another interesting design would involve hyperscanning, allowing researchers to examine how the internal language processes of two individuals align during collaborative activities.
It would also be valuable to explore verbal imagination tasks combined with rhythmic or musical stimulation, investigating whether motor–auditory coupling becomes stronger when language interacts with rhythm.
BrainLatam Conclusion
The study by Mantegna and colleagues reveals an important principle: even when speech occurs only in imagination, the brain preserves the embodied rhythm of speaking.
This finding reinforces the idea that language and thought are not purely abstract processes. They emerge from embodied circuits connecting perception, action, and sensory prediction.
From a Decolonial Neuroscience perspective, understanding human language requires examining not only words and meanings, but also the body that sustains the rhythm and possibility of speech.
Reference
Mantegna, F., Poeppel, D., & Orpella, J. (2026).
Motor–auditory delay of the Mu rhythm in imagined speech mirrors the timing of overt speech.
Scientific Reports.
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-026-37421-1
