Dissociations in aphasia: A case report

Assal, G; Buttet, J; Jolivet, Remi

doi:10.1016/0093-934x(81)90092-4

Cited by 53 publications

(26 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In addition, there have also been cases of single individuals who exhibit a double dissociation of grammatical category by modality. A number of these have exhibited difficulty with open class vocabulary in spoken production and closed class vocabulary in written production (Assal, Buttet, & Jolivet, 1981;Bub & Kertesz, 1982;Coslett, Gonzales-Rothi & Heilman, 1984;Lecours & Rouillon, 1976;Lhermitte & Derouesne, 1974;Patterson & Shewell, 1987;Rapp, Benzing & Caramazza, 1997). In addition, Rapp et al (2002) reported a single individual with a double dissociation of nouns/verbs by modality, such that he had better performance with nouns vs. verbs in the written modality and the reverse pattern in the spoken modality.…”

Section: Evidence Concerning the Category-specific Organization Of Prmentioning

confidence: 99%

Deafness for the meanings of number words

et al. 2008

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We describe the performance of an aphasic individual who showed a selective impairment affecting his comprehension of auditorily presented number words and not other word categories. His difficulty in number word comprehension was restricted to the auditory modality, given that with visual stimuli (written words, Arabic numerals and pictures) his comprehension of number and non-number words was intact. While there have been previous reports of selective difficulty or sparing of number words at the semantic and post-semantic levels, this is the first reported case of a pre-semantic deficit that is specific to the category of number words. This constitutes evidence that lexical semantic distinctions are respected by modality-specific neural mechanisms responsible for providing access to the meanings of words.

show abstract

Section: Evidence Concerning the Category-specific Organization Of Prmentioning

confidence: 99%

Deafness for the meanings of number words

et al. 2008

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The first report of such patients was by Assal and colleagues (Assal et al 1976) and has been followed by several others in the same decade (Assal et al 1981;Landis et al 1982;Van Lancker & Canter 1982;Van Lancker & Kreiman 1987;Van Lancker et al 1988. Then, all interest in phonagnosia seems to have vanished (but see Peretz et al 1994;Neuner & Schweinberger 2000) probably due to the lack of a standardized battery of voice discrimination and recognition, forcing interested researchers to devise their own tests.…”

Section: (C) Functional Lateralization In Processing Cvsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Voice processing in human and non-human primates

Belin

2006

Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B

137

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Humans share with non-human primates a number of voice perception abilities of crucial importance in social interactions, such as the ability to identify a conspecific individual from its vocalizations. Speech perception is likely to have evolved in our ancestors on the basis of pre-existing neural mechanisms involved in extracting behaviourally relevant information from conspecific vocalizations (CVs). Studying the neural bases of voice perception in primates thus not only has the potential to shed light on cerebral mechanisms that may be-unlike those involved in speech perception-directly homologous between species, but also has direct implications for our understanding of how speech appeared in humans. In this comparative review, we focus on behavioural and neurobiological evidence relative to two issues central to voice perception in human and non-human primates: (i) are CVs 'special', i.e. are they analysed using dedicated cerebral mechanisms not used for other sound categories, and (ii) to what extent and using what neural mechanisms do primates identify conspecific individuals from their vocalizations?

show abstract

“…For example, cases in which difficulties in oral responding result from motor difficulties affecting the articulators would be irrelevant. Anumber of cases exhibiting superior written vs. spoken naming with intact articulatory abilities have, in fact, been reported across a number of languages (Assal, Buttet, & Jolivet, 1981;Basso et al, 1978;Bub & Kertesz, 1982;Caramazza, Berndt, & Basili, 1983;Caramazza & Hillis, 1990;Coslett, Gonzalez-Rothi, & Heilman, 1984;Ellis, Miller, & Sin, 1983; Friederici, Schoenle, & Goodglass, 1981; Grashey, 1885;Hier & Mohr, 1977;Lecours & Rouillon, 1976;Leischner, 1969;Levine, Calvanio, & Popovics, 1982;Lhermitte & Dér ouesné, 1974;Lichtheim, 1885;Mohr, Sidman, Stoddart, Leicester, & Morton, 1980;Mohr, Pessin, Finkelstein, Funkenstein, Duncan, &Davis, 1978;Nickels, 1992;Patterson & Shewell, 1987;Rapp & Caramazza, 1997;Semenza, Cipolotti, & Denes, 1992). However, although it is obviously necessary to rule out a peripheral articulatory source of the spoken errors, the finding of intact articulation is also insufficient.…”

Section: Establishing the Locus Of Impairment: Lexical Vs Post-lexicalmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…There are anumberof individuals whoexhibit fluent, well-articulated speech characterised by neologisms and phonemic errors in the context of relatively spared written performance (Assal et al, 1981;Caramazza et al, 1983;Coslett et al, 1984;Ellis et al, 1983;Lhermitte & Dér ouesné, 1974;Patterson & Shewell, 1987;Rapp & Caramazza, in press;Semenza et al, 1992). For example, one of the individuals described by Lhermitte and Déro uesné (1974) was 74% correct in written production but only 8% correct in oral production.…”

Section: Phonemic Errors and Spoken Neologisms + Relatively Good Writmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Autonomy of Lexical Orthography

Rapp¹,

Benzing

Caramazza

1997

Cognitive Neuropsychology

154

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Do we need to access the spoken form of a word in order to retrieve the word's spelling or in order to understand the meaning of its written form? In this paper we focus on the relationship between lexical phonology and orthography specifically in production and we present the case of a neurologically impaired individual who is often unable to provide the correct spoken name of an object although he may be able to write its name correctly. We argue that this evidence is seriously problematic for the hypothesis of obligatory phonological mediation and conclude that orthographic lexical forms can indeed be independently accessed for production without the mediating role of phonology.

show abstract

Dissociations in aphasia: A case report

Cited by 53 publications

References 12 publications

Deafness for the meanings of number words

Deafness for the meanings of number words

Voice processing in human and non-human primates

The Autonomy of Lexical Orthography

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About