Right-Hemisphere Pragmatic Disorders

Blake, Margaret Lehman

doi:10.1007/978-3-319-47489-2_10

Cited by 16 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 109 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Nowadays, few authors have attempted to manipulate the cognitive processes involved in the comprehension of non-literal language directly within the tasks created (Honan et al, 2015). Otherwise, the characteristic heterogeneity of brain-injured populations has rarely been considered in the analyses (Blake, 2017) Therefore, the present study aimed to further explore the underlying mechanisms of irony understanding disorders -context processing, ToM, and EF -in ABI patients. To this end, we designed a written irony task, which directly manipulated, within the task, (1) the context (presence or absence of contextual markers inducing irony) and (2) the EF demand (low or high).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Differential impairments in irony comprehension in brain-damaged individuals: Insight from contextual processing, theory of mind, and executive functions.

Cordonier¹,

Fossard²,

Champagne-Lavau³

2020

Neuropsychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: The comprehension of irony can be affected after brain injuries. The cognitive mechanisms accounting for such disorders remain yet unclear. The heterogeneity of cognitive profiles of brain-damaged individuals and the use of independent tests to measure the links between these mechanisms and the comprehension of irony might contribute to this lack of clarity. The present study aimed to further explore the underlying mechanisms of irony understanding disorders (i.e., context processing, executive functions (EF), and theory of mind (ToM)) in patients with brain lesions. Method: We used a paradigm manipulating these mechanisms within an irony task to identify different patterns of pragmatic performance associated with cognitive profiles. We administered this task and standard neuropsychological tests assessing EF, and ToM to thirty acquired brain injured (ABI) and thirty healthy control (HC) participants. Results: A cluster analysis revealed that two-thirds of the ABI participants (3 subgroups out of 4) presented atypical pragmatic and neuropsychological patterns. The most severe disturbances in understanding irony, characterized by insensitivity to the context, were associated with a joint impairment on ToM and EF in one subgroup. In the two other context-sensitive subgroups, an isolated deficit in EF co-occurred with difficulties dealing with literal or ironic statements when the EF demand of the irony task was increased. However, the effect of this EF demand could be negated by the presence of markers helping the comprehension of irony. Conclusions: These results have important clinical implications for the evaluation and therapy of pragmatic disorders in ABI individuals.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Nowadays, few authors have attempted to manipulate the cognitive processes involved in the comprehension of nonliteral language directly within the tasks created (Honan et al, 2015). Otherwise, the characteristic heterogeneity of brain-injured populations has rarely been considered in the analyses (Blake, 2017).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Differential impairments in irony comprehension in brain-damaged individuals: Insight from contextual processing, theory of mind, and executive functions.

Cordonier¹,

Fossard²,

Champagne-Lavau³

2020

Neuropsychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Damage to the non-language-dominant hemisphere (usually the right), on the other hand, is not directly linked to any lexical or syntactic deficits, but results in impaired prosody (for a review, see and pragmatic skills (for a review, see Blake, 2017), as well as difficulties in language comprehension and production at the discourse level (Akhutina, 2009;Tompkins et al, 1997). Spared grammar and vocabulary do not assure coherent speech.…”

Section: Discourse In Aphasia and Right Hemisphere Damagementioning

confidence: 99%

Storytelling in speakers with and without brain damage: A macrolinguistic approach

Bergelson¹,

Mariya²,

Yulia³

et al. 2021

RJCS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Narrative discourse is investigated in clinical and healthy populations. This study explored the discourse strategies used to tell stories, comparing the patterns of people with left- and right-hemisphere brain damage, as well as healthy speakers. We analyzed picture-elicited discourses by four people with aphasia, two people with right hemisphere damage, and four healthy speakers. We examined their microlinguistic properties, as well as macrolinguistic features, such as the discourse production type of utterances and patterns of story component usage. We identified two storytelling strategies used by the speakers: a narrative strategy marked by a prevalence of narrative discourse production type utterances and scarce use of evaluation clauses, and a quasi-narrative strategy with the opposite pattern. These strategies were used by both healthy speakers and participants with brain damage

show abstract

“…Algunos autores llegaron a considerar que ambas áreas se podían distinguir por sus objetivos y metodologías, a pesar de que "el objeto de estudio lo constituye en cualquier caso la naturaleza neuropsicológica unitaria y conjunta del lenguaje" (Fernández, 1992: 367). En este sentido, se ha subrayado que la principal diferencia es el enfoque desde el cual se aborda el objeto de estudio: la neurolingüística se centra en investigar las bases neurológicas y fi siológicas que intervienen durante la producción y comprensión del lenguaje; por ejemplo, a partir de investigaciones recientes (Kemmerer, 2015;Blake, 2017), se ha refi nado la descripción del papel que desempeñan las distintas estructuras cerebrales durante el procesamiento del lenguaje, lo que ha permitido superar las explicaciones clásicas sobre la lateralización de las funciones.…”

Section: ¿Cuáles Son Las Fronteras Entre Psicolingüística Y Neurolingüística?unclassified

Lingüística clínica en México, ¿por qué y para qué?

Escamilla

2020

ELA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Esta nota presenta un panorama histórico del desarrollo de la lingüística clínica (LC) en México. En un primer momento, se establece la distinción entre psicolingüística, neurolingüística y LC, ya que dichos términos tienden a utilizarse de manera indistinta. Posteriormente, se realiza un recorrido histórico sobre las investigaciones que sentaron las bases de la LC, partiendo de la década de los 70 del siglo pasado. También, se subrayan las principales dificultades a las que se ha enfrentado esta disciplina, mismas que han afectado su desarrollo. Finalmente, se destaca la necesidad de consolidar esta línea de investigación —como parte de la lingüística aplicada— sobre todo, por su posible contribución a la optimización de la práctica clínica de terapeutas del lenguaje y, en consecuencia, al mejoramiento de la calidad de vida de pacientes con alguna alteración del lenguaje, así como la de sus familiares.

show abstract

Right-Hemisphere Pragmatic Disorders

Cited by 16 publications

References 109 publications

Differential impairments in irony comprehension in brain-damaged individuals: Insight from contextual processing, theory of mind, and executive functions.

Differential impairments in irony comprehension in brain-damaged individuals: Insight from contextual processing, theory of mind, and executive functions.

Storytelling in speakers with and without brain damage: A macrolinguistic approach

Lingüística clínica en México, ¿por qué y para qué?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About