Object vs. action naming: A double dissociation?

Mätzig, Simone; Druks, Judit

doi:10.1016/j.bandl.2006.06.120

Cited by 6 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Thus, although the presence of selective impairment for verbs/actions in these patients is consistent with strong and weak embodiment views; the anatomical data do not provide support for strong embodiment. It is the case, in fact, that the selective deficit can be easily accounted for in terms of differences in processing demands between nouns/objects and verbs/actions (Schnur et al, 2009;Vigliocco et al, 2006;Maetzig et al, 2009). Cotelli et al (2006) primarily in frontal regions and the basal ganglia).…”

Section: Patient Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Coming of age: A review of embodiment and the neuroscience of semantics

Meteyard

Cuadrado

Bahrami

et al. 2012

Cortex

628

502

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Over the last decade, there has been an increasing body of work that explores whether sensory and motor information is a necessary part of semantic representation and processing. This is the embodiment hypothesis. This paper presents a theoretical review of this work that is intended to be useful for researchers in the neurosciences and neuropsychology. Beginning with a historical perspective, relevant theories are placed on a continuum from strongly embodied to completely unembodied representations. Predictions are derived and neuroscientific and neuropsychological evidence that could support different theories is reviewed; finally, criticisms of embodiment are discussed. We conclude that strongly embodied and completely disembodied theories are not supported, and that the remaining theories agree that semantic representation involves some form of convergence zones (Damasio, 1989) and the activation of modal content. For the future, research must carefully define the boundaries of semantic processing and tackle the representation of abstract entities.

show abstract

Section: Patient Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Verbs are generally more abstract and more complex to process than nouns due to their semantic, syntactic and morphological characteristics (e.g. Schnur et al, 2009;Vigliocco et al, 2006;Maetzig et al, 2009).…”

Section: Patient Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Coming of age: A review of embodiment and the neuroscience of semantics

Meteyard

Cuadrado

Bahrami

et al. 2012

Cortex

628

502

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These two word classes can also be differentially affected by brain damage (Hillis, Wityk, Barker, & Caramazza, 2002b; Miceli, Silveri, Villa, & Caramazza, 1984). Noun naming deficits are often associated with posterior and anterior temporal lesions, whereas verb naming deficits are associated with frontal or subcortical lesions (Caramazza, & Hillis, 1991; Damasio, & Tranel, 1993; Mätzig, & Druks, 2006). …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Action versus animal naming fluency in subcortical dementia, frontal dementias, and Alzheimer's disease

et al. 2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Accumulating evidence indicates action naming may rely more on frontal-subcortical circuits, and noun naming may rely more on temporal cortex. Therefore, noun versus action fluency might distinguish frontal and subcortical dementias from cortical dementias primarily affecting temporal and/or parietal cortex such as Alzheimer’s disease (AD). We hypothesized patients with subcortical dementia, e.g., normal pressure hydrocephalus (NPH) and patients with dementias predominantly affecting frontal cortex, e.g., behavioral variant frontotemporal dementia (bv-FTD) and progressive nonfluent aphasia (PNFA) have more difficulty on action fluency versus noun fluency (e.g., animal naming). Patients with AD, who have temporo parietal cortical dysfunction, should have more difficulty on noun versus verb fluency. A total of 234 participants, including healthy controls (n = 20) and patients diagnosed with NPH (n =144), AD (n = 33), bv-FTD (n = 22) or PNFA (n = 15) were administered animal fluency, action fluency, and letter fluency tasks, and the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE, to control for dementia severity). NPH and bv-FTD/PNFA patients had significantly higher MMSE scores and animal fluency than AD patients (after adjusting for age), but their action fluency tended to be lower than in AD. Only NPH and bvFTD/PNFA patients showed significantly lower action verb than animal fluency. Results provide novel evidence that action naming relies more on frontal-subcortical circuits while noun naming relies more on temporoparietal cortex, indicating action verb fluency may be more sensitive than noun fluency, particularly for detecting frontal-subcortical dysfunction.

show abstract

“…It has been suggested that individuals with nonfluent aphasia, who often present with agrammatism, may experience increased difficulty with verb retrieval compared to speakers with fluent aphasia (Barde et al, 2006;Kim et al, 2019). Others, however, have questioned if verb retrieval deficits can be predicted by aphasia type Mätzig & Druks, 2006). From a structural perspective, verbs are essential for sentence construction and the syntactic framework and semantic content necessary to form a grammatically correct sentence is determined by the verb (Caley et al, 2017;Edwards & Tucker, 2006;McRae et al, 2005).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Though anomia can impact retrieval of words from any lexical class, noun retrieval deficits have, historically, received much attention. Evidence suggests, however, that verb retrieval deficits may be more common in PWA (Berndt et al, 2002; Mätzig & Druks, 2006) and may be a more accurate indicator of overall language abilities (Kim et al, 2019; Rofes et al, 2015). Confrontation naming tests are often used to test for the presence of and make judgements about the severity of anomia and many, but not all, focus exclusively on noun naming.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Exploring Patterns of Verb Type Use During Conversation by Adults With and Without Chronic Aphasia

Akers,

Boyle,

Ghanim

et al. 2024

Topics in Language Disorders

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Previous studies have used semantic verb categories to compare how speakers with and without aphasia use verb types during narrative monologue discourse tasks. In this study, we explore the types of verbs used by speakers with and without aphasia during conversation. Using previously collected conversational discourse samples produced by 23 adults with chronic aphasia and their familiar partners, we classified verb types by semantic category. Semantic verb type use did not differ by aphasia type (fluent vs. nonfluent) when controlling for severity. Distribution across verb types was similar for participants with and without aphasia. Conversation partners produced significantly more mental, verbal, and behavioral verbs than speakers with aphasia but there was not a significant difference in the use of material or relational verbs. Participants with and without aphasia rely on material and relational verbs to construct conversational discourse. Determining if a speaker with aphasia uses a variety of semantic verb types may be useful when setting conversation-based goals for dyads living with aphasia and suggestions for clinical practice are provided.

show abstract

Object vs. action naming: A double dissociation?

Cited by 6 publications

References 7 publications

Coming of age: A review of embodiment and the neuroscience of semantics

Coming of age: A review of embodiment and the neuroscience of semantics

Action versus animal naming fluency in subcortical dementia, frontal dementias, and Alzheimer's disease

Exploring Patterns of Verb Type Use During Conversation by Adults With and Without Chronic Aphasia

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About