Production of Korean Idiomatic Utterances Following Left- and Right-Hemisphere Damage: Acoustic Studies

Yang, Seung Yun; Sidtis, Diana Van Lancker

doi:10.1044/2015_jslhr-l-15-0109

Cited by 20 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 85 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In stark contrast, persons with right hemisphere (RH) damage produced significantly lower proportions of words in formulaic expressions (Van Lancker Sidtis & Postman, 2006). Similar results were obtained for Korean expressions produced by Korean-speaking persons with unilateral brain damage following stroke, using listeners’ ratings as measures (Yang & Van Lancker Sidtis, 2016). In a study of repetition phenomena in spontaneous speech, persons with RH damage repeated fewer FEs than their LH damaged counterparts (Wolf, Van Lancker Sidtis, & Sidtis, 2012).…”

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 72%

Cortical-subcortical production of formulaic language: A review of linguistic, brain disorder, and functional imaging studies leading to a production model

Sidtis

2018

Brain and Cognition

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Formulaic language forms about one-fourth of everyday talk. Formulaic (fixed expressions) and novel (grammatical language) differ in important characteristics. The features of idioms, slang, expletives, proverbs, aphorisms, conversational speech formulas, and other fixed expressions include ranges of length, flexible cohesion, memory storage, nonliteral and situation meaning, and affective content. Neurolinguistic observations in persons with focal brain damage or progressive neurological disease suggest that producing formulaic expressions can be achieved by interactions between the right hemisphere and subcortical structures. The known functional characteristics of these structures form a compatible substrate for production of formulaic expressions. Functional imaging using a performance-based analysis supported a right hemisphere involvement in producing conversational speech formulas, while indicating that the pause fillers, uh and um, engage the left hemisphere and function like lexical items. Together these findings support a dual-process model of language, whereby formulaic and grammatical language are modulated by different cerebral structures.

show abstract

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 72%

Cortical-subcortical production of formulaic language: A review of linguistic, brain disorder, and functional imaging studies leading to a production model

Sidtis

2018

Brain and Cognition

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Numerous studies point consistently to this conclusion. Evidence from surveys (Gibbs, 1980;Hallin & Van Lancker Sidtis, 2014;Reuterskiöld & Van Lancker Sidtis, 2013;Van Lancker Sidtis, Kougentakis, Cameron, Falconer, & Sidtis, 2012;Van Lancker Sidtis & Rallon, 2004;Yang, Ahn, & Van Lancker Sidtis, 2014) confirms that people know formulaic expressions in their shape and meaning and can identify them as such, distinguishing them from (matched) novel expressions. Early studies revealed differences in pronunciation and perception between matched novel and formulaic exemplars (Lieberman, 1963;Van Lancker, Canter, & Terbeek, 1981).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Formulaic Language in Parkinson's Disease and Alzheimer's Disease: Complementary Effects of Subcortical and Cortical Dysfunction

Sidtis

Choi

Alken

et al. 2015

J Speech Lang Hear Res

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: The production of formulaic expressions (conversational speech formulas, pause fillers, idioms, and other fixed expressions) is excessive in the left hemisphere and deficient in the right hemisphere and in subcortical stroke. Speakers with Alzheimer's disease (AD), having functional basal ganglia, reveal abnormally high proportions of formulaic language. Persons with Parkinson's disease (PD), having dysfunctional basal ganglia, were predicted to show impoverished formulaic expressions in contrast to speakers with AD. This study compared participants with PD, participants with AD, and healthy control (HC) participants on protocols probing production and comprehension of formulaic expressions. Method: Spontaneous speech samples were recorded from 16 individuals with PD, 12 individuals with AD, and 18 HC speakers. Structured tests were then administered as probes of comprehension. Results: The PD group had lower proportions of formulaic expressions compared with the AD and HC groups. Comprehension testing yielded opposite contrasts: participants with PD showed significantly higher performance compared with participants with AD and did not differ from HC participants. Conclusions: The finding that PD produced lower proportions of formulaic expressions compared with AD and HC supports the view that subcortical nuclei modulate the production of formulaic expressions. Contrasting results on formal testing of comprehension, whereby participants with AD performed significantly worse than participants with PD and HC participants, indicate differential effects on procedural and declarative knowledge associated with these neurological conditions. C linical descriptions of formulaic language in aphasic speech have flourished for more than 150 years under a wide variety of terms. Formulaic language, in its modern conception, consists of fixed, unitary expressions known to a language community with their characteristic form, meaning, and usage conditions. Typical examples are conversational speech formulas ("You betcha," "You've got to be kidding," and "Say what?"), expletives ("heck"), idioms ("as the crow flies," "That's the way the cookie crumbles"), proverbs ("When it rains, it pours"), and other conventionalized expressions ("all things being equal," "in the meantime," and "the long and the short of it is"; Altenberg, 1998;Biber, 2009;Kuiper, 2004;Wray, 2002). These expressions share the features of fixed or canonical form; conventionalized, often nonliteral meaning; and specific relations to discourse context.As reviewed in Van Lancker (1973, 1975, 1994, formulaic language has its venerable beginnings in observations by J. Hughlings Jackson (1874aJackson ( /1932Jackson ( , 1874bJackson ( /1932, who labeled the preserved expressions seen in adults with language disability following left-brain damage automatic or nonpropositional speech. Examples cited by Hughlings Jackson include phrases belonging classically to the conception of formulaic expressions: "Take care," "That's a lie," "Good bye," "Oh dear," and "Bles...

show abstract

“…Indeed, when they are not averaged together with less formulaic words, there is evidence that formulaic language processing might have a more distributed pattern than is suggested by popular neurobiological models of language. That is, since the 19th century, it has been known that the ability to produce formulaic speech is often preserved in aphasia, even with severe language impairment and damage to most and sometimes all of 'the language network' (as in global aphasia) [45][46][47][48][49][50][51][52][53][54] .…”

Section: Formulaic Languagementioning

confidence: 99%

“…It has been proposed that formulaic language production is supported by right hemisphere and subcortical interactions 45 . This conclusion was based on research showing that formulaic expressions are more common in left compared to right hemispheric damage [51][52][53][54] (though see 49,133 ). It was additionally based on results suggesting that individuals with Alzheimer's disease produce more formulaic language than people with basal ganglia strokes 54,134 and Parkinson's disease 66,74 .…”

Section: Productionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reorganization of the neurobiology of language after sentence overlearning

Skipper

Aliko

Brown

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There is a widespread assumption that there are a static set of ‘language regions’ in the brain. Yet, people still regularly produce familiar ‘formulaic’ expressions when those regions are severely damaged. This suggests that the neurobiology of language varies with the extent of word sequence learning and might not be fixed. We test the hypothesis that perceiving sentences is mostly supported by sensorimotor regions involved in speech production and not ‘language regions’ after overlearning. Twelve participants underwent two sessions of behavioural testing and functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), separated by 15 days. During this period, they repeated two sentences 30 times each, twice a day. In both fMRI sessions, participants ‘passively’ listened to those two sentences and novel sentences. Lastly, they spoke novel sentences. Behavioural results confirm that participants overlearned sentences. Correspondingly, there was an increase or recruitment of sensorimotor regions involved in sentence production and a reduction in activity or inactivity for overlearned sentences in regions involved in listening to novel sentences. The global network organization of the brain changed by ∼45%, mostly through lost connectivity. Thus, there was a profound reorganization of the neurobiology of speech perception after overlearning towards sensorimotor regions not considered in most contemporary models and away from the ‘language regions’ posited by those models. These same sensorimotor regions are generally preserved in aphasia and Alzheimer’s disease, perhaps explaining residual abilities with formulaic language. These and other results warrant reconsidering static neurobiological models of language.

show abstract

Production of Korean Idiomatic Utterances Following Left- and Right-Hemisphere Damage: Acoustic Studies

Cited by 20 publications

References 85 publications

Cortical-subcortical production of formulaic language: A review of linguistic, brain disorder, and functional imaging studies leading to a production model

Cortical-subcortical production of formulaic language: A review of linguistic, brain disorder, and functional imaging studies leading to a production model

Formulaic Language in Parkinson's Disease and Alzheimer's Disease: Complementary Effects of Subcortical and Cortical Dysfunction

Reorganization of the neurobiology of language after sentence overlearning

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About