Lexical retrieval after Arabic aphasia: Syntactic access and predictors of spoken naming

Abstract

Research into anomia has been carried out in English and many Indo-European languages extensively, but not in Arabic. Previous studies have investigated predictors of successful lexical retrieval after anomia, and access to syntax during lexical retrieval. The aim of the current study is to examine impaired lexical retrieval in Arabic at two levels: predictors of lexical retrieval, and access to syntax during lexical retrieval, via checking whether syntactic cueing (using the definite article /əl-/ 'the' prior to nouns) facilitates noun retrieval in Arabic aphasia, with regard to naming speed and accuracy, and establishing the determinants of aphasic noun retrieval in Arabic. Three participants with anomia following CVA named 186 pictures from a published Arabic database in two conditions: bare noun condition, and determiner + noun condition. Participants' accuracy and reaction times were compared in both conditions. Furthermore, a multiple regression analysis was carried out to test the effect of psycholinguistic variables (visual complexity, name agreement, age of acquisition, imageability and other intrinsic variables) on successful lexical retrieval to determine predictors of Arabic noun retrieval after anomia. The production of the determiner + noun in picture naming facilitated spoken naming in all three participants. Nouns produced with the determiner were produced faster and more accurately than their counterparts produced without the determiner. The two participants with agrammatism produced morpho-syntactic errors in the bare noun condition, but not in the determiner + noun condition, suggesting that the determiner sets up a noun phrase frame with a slot for the noun to be filled, resulting in responses that are faster and more accurate. Age of acquisition and imageability were the only two variables that had influence across the participants. These results have theoretical and clinical implications for lexical retrieval models.

Imageability, familiarity, and age of acquisition ratings for Arabic abstract nouns, abstract verbs and adjectives

“…Data from atypical Arabic lexical processing is scarce. Only one study on Arabic lexical retrieval following aphasia reported that age of acquisition and imageability were the only two significant predictors of successful lexical retrieval in three patients (Khwaileh, Body, and Herbert, 2017). The results reported in these studies give the current database more warrant and need in the Arabic-speaking context, as researchers into typical and atypical language processing would need to control for key psycholinguistic factors.…”

A linguistically-driven response categorisation protocol for Arabic nouns and verbs: clinical and research applications

“…Studies investigating Arabic-speaking participants with brain damage have also provided further evidence that the root-pattern view is a feasible framework on which clinical and research tools can be based (e.g. Béland & Mimouni, 2001;Idrissi & Kehayia, 2004;Idrissi et al, 2002;Khwaileh, 2011;Khwaileh et al, 2015Khwaileh et al, , 2017Mimouni et al, 1998Mimouni et al, , 1997. The processing evidence in support of the root-pattern framework has been prevailing from clinical and neuropsychological data.…”

“…Most of the research on Arabic processing (Albustanji, 2009;Béland & Mimouni, 2001;Idrissi & Kehayia, 2004;Idrissi et al, 2002;Khwaileh, 2011;Khwaileh et al, 2014Khwaileh et al, , 2015Khwaileh, Mustafawi, Howard, & Herbert, 2016;Khwaileh et al, 2017;Khwaileh, Mustafawi, Herbert, & Howard, 2018;Khwaileh, Mustafawi, Howard, & Herbert, 2019;Mimouni et al, 1998Mimouni et al, , 1997 lack use of standardized material and response categorisation protocols for error analysis. The aim of this paper is to develop a linguistically informed and data-driven response categorisation protocol for language breakdown of the Arabic language.…”

“…The study consisted of two phases: phase one included the first cycle of developing the error categories informed by previous literature. The first cycle of error categories selection was based on studies reporting error analysis from Arabic patients with aphasia (Albustanji, 2009;Béland & Mimouni, 2001;Idrissi & Kehayia, 2004;Idrissi et al, 2002;Khwaileh, 2011;Khwaileh et al, 2015Khwaileh et al, , 2017Mimouni et al, 1998Mimouni et al, , 1997. The abovementioned studies used a qualitative approach and reported their errors in details.…”

“…Previous studies on Arabic typical and atypical language processing (e.g. Albustanji, 2009;Béland & Mimouni, 2001;Idrissi & Kehayia, 2004;Idrissi, Prunet, & Béland, 2002;Khwaileh, 2011;Khwaileh, Body, & Herbert, 2015, 2017Khwaileh, Body, & Herbert., 2014;Mimouni, Kehayia, & Jarema, 1998, 1997 made use of error categories that are idiosyncratic in nature. Furthermore, some error categories (e.g.…”