Does morphology make the difference? Agrammatic sentence comprehension in German.

This study examines the syntactic comprehension of seven German agrammatic speakers. The German language allows the study of the interaction of syntactic principles and morphological devices in the comprehension process. In addition, due to its relatively free word order, German allows the study of strictly minimal pairs of canonical and non-canonical sentences in addition to the rather controversial active-passive contrast. A central research question was whether the pattern of agrammatic comprehension predicted by the trace deletion hypothesis (TDH, Grodzinsky, 1990, 1995), relatively normal comprehension performance of canonical sentences and chance performance on non-canonical sentences, can be found in a language with richer morphology than English. The generalisability of the TDH-pattern to morphologically rich languages is not obvious, given that case morphology in particular can provide explicit cues to the detection of the agent and patient roles in a sentence. The results of this study indicate that morphology does not make a difference. Furthermore, the group results are in line with the TDH-predictions only for number marked sentences but not for case marked sentences. However, single case analysis reveals different patterns of syntactic comprehension in agrammatic patients, a spectrum that encompasses near-normal comprehension of canonical and non-canonical sentences, overall chance performance, and TDH-like profiles.