Background Verbs and sentences are often impaired in individuals with aphasia, and differential impairment patterns are associated with different types of aphasia. With currently available test batteries, however, it is challenging to provide a comprehensive profile of aphasic language impairments because they do not examine syntactically important properties of verbs and sentences. Aims This study presents data derived from the Northwestern Assessment of Verbs and Sentences (NAVS; Thompson, 2011), a new test battery designed to examine syntactic deficits in aphasia. The NAVS includes tests for verb naming and comprehension, and production of verb argument structure in simple active sentences, with each examining the effects of the number and optionality of arguments. The NAVS also tests production and comprehension of canonical and non-canonical sentences. Methods & Procedures A total of 59 aphasic participants (35 agrammatic and 24 anomic) were tested using a set of action pictures. Participants produced verbs or sentences for the production subtests and identified pictures corresponding to auditorily provided verbs or sentences for the comprehension subtests. Outcomes & Results The agrammatic group, compared to the anomic group, performed significantly more poorly on all subtests except verb comprehension, and for both groups comprehension was less impaired than production. On verb naming and argument structure production tests both groups exhibited difficulty with three-argument verbs, affected by the number and optionality of arguments. However, production of sentences using three-argument verbs was more impaired in the agrammatic, compared to the anomic, group. On sentence production and comprehension tests, the agrammatic group showed impairments in all types of non-canonical sentences, whereas the anomic group exhibited difficulty primarily with the most difficult, object relative, structures. Conclusions Results show that verb and sentence deficits seen in individuals with agrammatic aphasia are largely influenced by syntactic complexity; however, individuals with anomic aphasia appear to exhibit these impairments only for the most complex forms of verbs and sentences. The present data indicate that the NAVS is useful for characterising verb and sentence deficits in people with aphasia.

The present study addressed open questions about the nature of sentence production deficits in agrammatic aphasia. In two structural priming experiments, 13 aphasic and 13 age-matched control speakers repeated visually- and auditorily-presented prime sentences, and then used visually-presented word arrays to produce dative sentences. Experiment 1 examined whether agrammatic speakers form structural and thematic representations during sentence production, whereas Experiment 2 tested the lasting effects of structural priming in lags of two and four sentences. Results of Experiment 1 showed that, like unimpaired speakers, the aphasic speakers evinced intact structural priming effects, suggesting that they are able to generate such representations. Unimpaired speakers also evinced reliable thematic priming effects, whereas agrammatic speakers did so in some experimental conditions, suggesting that access to thematic representations may be intact. Results of Experiment 2 showed structural priming effects of comparable magnitude for aphasic and unimpaired speakers. In addition, both groups showed lasting structural priming effects in both lag conditions, consistent with implicit learning accounts. In both experiments, aphasic speakers with more severe language impairments exhibited larger priming effects, consistent with the “inverse preference” prediction of implicit learning accounts. The findings indicate that agrammatic speakers are sensitive to structural priming across levels of representation and that such effects are lasting, suggesting that structural priming may be beneficial for the treatment of sentence production deficits in agrammatism.

Phonological processing deficits are characteristic of both the agrammatic and logopenic subtypes of primary progressive aphasia (PPA-G and PPA-L). However, it is an open question which substages of phonological processing (i.e., phonological word form retrieval, phonological encoding) are impaired in these subtypes of PPA, as well as how phonological processing deficits contribute to anomia. In the present study, participants with PPA-G (n=7), PPA-L (n=7), and unimpaired controls (n=17) named objects as interfering written words (phonologically related/unrelated) were presented at different stimulus onset asynchronies (SOAs) of 0, +100, +300, and +500 ms. Phonological facilitation (PF) effects (faster naming times with phonologically related interfering words) were found for the controls and PPA-L group only at SOA=0 and +100 ms. However, the PPA-G group exhibited protracted PF effects (PF at SOA=0, +100, and +300 ms). These results may reflect deficits in phonological encoding in PPA-G, but not in PPA-L, supporting the neuropsychological reality of this substage of phonological processing and the distinction between these two PPA subtypes.

No abstract