Dual Processing of Open- and Closed-Class Words

Biassou, Nadia; Obler, Loraine K.; Nespoulous, Jean–Luc; Dordain, M; Harris, Katherine S.

doi:10.1006/brln.1997.1749

Cited by 21 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…As one example of such an account, some researchers have proposed a dual-route processing system, in which the route for grammatical items is said to be impaired for individuals with agrammatic aphasia, while the route for lexical ones is assumed to be spared (e.g. Biassou, Obler, Nespoulous, Dordain & Harris, 1997;Rosenberg, Zurif, Brownell, Garrett & Bradley, 1985).…”

Section: Agrammatism As a Problem With Grammatical Itemsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The production of grammatical and lexical determiners in Broca’s aphasia

Nielsen

Boye

Bastiaanse

et al. 2019

Language, Cognition and Neuroscience

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The production of grammatical and lexical determiners in Broca's aphasia Determiner production is a testing ground for theories of Broca's aphasia and agrammatic speech. On one type of theory, determiner production is impaired in so far as determiners are grammatical items. On another type of theory, determiner production is impaired because determiners depend on verbs for case-assignment. These two types of theories are mutually compatible, but in recent years, research on determiner production has focused on the second type. In order to test the first type, an experiment was carried out which contrasted the production of Danish grammatical determiners (indefinite articles) and lexical ones (numerals) in 5 speakers diagnosed with Broca's aphasia and 4 nonbrain-damaged controls. The results strongly support the first type of theories: 1) in agrammatic speech, only grammatical determiners were omitted to an extent which differs from omission rates in the speech of the controls; 2) substitutions of grammatical agreement markers were found only in agrammatic speech.

show abstract

Section: Agrammatism As a Problem With Grammatical Itemsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The production of grammatical and lexical determiners in Broca’s aphasia

Nielsen

Boye

Bastiaanse

et al. 2019

Language, Cognition and Neuroscience

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In production, these patients can often haltingly produce content words, but will often have additional difficulty using function words (e.g., Biassou, Obler, Nespoulous, Dordain, & Harris, 1997;Friederici & Schonle, 1980;Gardner & Zurif, 1975). In comprehension, such patients have long been known to have difficulty in understanding low frequency words in sentences (Gahl, 2003;Gahl et al 2003) and low frequency syntactic constructions when world knowledge does not constrain interpretation (Caramazza & Zurif, 1976;Heilman & Scholes, 1976;Caramazza, Berndt, Basili, & Koller, 1981;Bates, Friederici, & Wulfeck, 1987), such as the passive construction (1b) or an object-extracted relative clause (2b):…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A rational inference approach to aphasic language comprehension

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

It has long been observed that, when confronted with an implausible sentence like The ball kicked the girl, individuals with aphasia rely more on plausibility information from world knowledge (such that a girl is likely to kick a ball, but not vice versa) than control non-impaired populations do. We here offer a novel hypothesis to explain this greater reliance on plausibility information for individuals with aphasia. The hypothesis is couched with the rational inference approach to language processing (e.g., Shannon, 1949;Levy et al., 2009;Gibson, Bergen & Piantadosi, 2013; cf. Bates, McDonald, MacWhinney & Appelbaum, 1991). A key idea in this approach is that to derive an interpretation for an input string, individuals combine their priors (about messages that are likely to be communicated) with their knowledge about how messages can get corrupted by noise (due to production or perception errors). We hypothesize that language comprehension in aphasia works in the same way, except with a greater amount of noise, which leads to stronger reliance on syntactic and semantic priors. We evaluated this hypothesis in an act-out task in three groups of participants (individuals with aphasia, older controls, younger controls) on two sets of materials: (a) implausible double-object (DO) / prepositional-phrase object (PO) materials, where a single added or deleted word could lead to a plausible meaning; and (b) implausible active-passive materials, where at least two added or deleted words are needed to arrive at a plausible meaning (Gibson, Bergen & Piantadosi, 2013). We observed that, similar to controls (e.g., Gibson et al., 2013), individuals with aphasia rely on plausibility to a greater extent in the DO/PO than in the active/passive alternation. Critically, however, as predicted, individuals with 3 aphasia rely less on the literal syntax overall than either of the control groups, and use their world knowledge prior (plausibility) in both the active/passive and DO/PO alternations, whereas controls rely on plausibility only in the DO/PO alternation. In addition, older persons and persons with aphasia made more errors on the DO structures (which are less frequent than PO structures) independent of plausibility, thus providing evidence for reliance on a syntactic prior, the more frequent structure.4

show abstract

“…For example, greater dysfluency and longer overall reading time have been observed for function words in Broca's aphasic patients (Biassou, Obler, Nespoulous, Dordain, & Harris, 1997).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%