Syntactic loss versus processing deficit: an assessment of two theories of agrammatism and syntactic comprehension deficits.

This research evaluated Grodzinsky's (1984, 1986a) syntactic loss and Kolk and van Grunsven's (1985) working memory impairment explanations of syntactic comprehension deficits in agrammatic aphasics. Four aphasic patients were evaluated who showed different patterns of impairment on morphological and structural aspects of production. The comprehension tasks compared performance on full and truncated passive sentences. The syntactic loss hypothesis predicted worse performance on truncated than full passives, while the working memory deficit hypothesis predicted the reverse. Neither hypothesis was supported, as the patients performed at a similar level on both types of passives. In addition, there was little relation between the patients' production indices and their comprehension level. The results argue against any global theory of agrammatism that attempts to attribute all agrammatic speech and co-occurring syntactic comprehension deficits to the same source.