Such compensation mechanism is consistent across species. The paper clearly states that there is not “specialness” in connectivity (in fact, I think, that speech center for complex language doesn’t exist at all. Like conscienceless, complex language is just a emergent property of the cortex).
[ Seems like the paper’s findings are consistent with the Mountcastle’s Common Cortical Algorithm (CCA) hypothesis ]
Um, how I answer depends on what you might be trying to say.
Broca’s and Wernicke’s areas are a thing, with well defined functions and with damage producing well known and stereotyped speech deficits.
The fiber tracks joining areas constrain “what” is processed by the cortical algorithm, with speech functions being located roughly on both ends of the Arcuate_fasciculus.
Even within an area there are variations in the cortical structure that can be observed with staining and relatively low power microscopes. This is how Brodmann was able to make his maps:
Since that time many lines or research have confirmed that these areas have well defined functions.
So - the areas do have functions defined by connectivity, and evolution has tuned the local cortical structures to process the information that is presented by this connectivity.
Of course, these areas intervene in the understanding and generation of language, but they are not finalists. If we assume that language processing is pipelined, those zones are just one more “stage” (as, for example, could be the auditory cortex). It is evident that if the auditory cortex is damaged, we will not be able to understand speech.
What makes us different from other mammals is the large volume of our PFC. Basically we are able to “predict” more complex sequences (including complex language). Just that.
