Question:
The reason modern linguists refer to the brain (or part of it) as thelanguage organ is that a person with malfunctioning mouth and vocalcords who is unable to make the sounds of spoken language isnevertheless capable of other forms of language with the appropriatecharacteristics, such as syntax, for example sign language or readingand writing, yet a person with intact and properly functioning mouthand vocal cords but damage to the language centres of the brain isincapable of language.This is an experimentally established fact about which there is nocontroversy among the scientists in the area.

Is it right??? What's your opinions???

Answer: If you are going to call that language center an organ, there is indeedcontroversy.And, while you have the gist correct it is more complex. For example,there is receptive and expressive language--one can work fine while theother doesn't. Does the person then have "language?" A person can havenonfluent aphasia in which case speech content lacks the typicalconventions of language. The individual can usually communicate theirthoughts albeit with effort. Do they have language?

If you are interested, Mesulum and Geshwind have a good chapter on theaphasias in Mesulum's first edition of "Principles of BehavioralNeurology."