Literature DB >> 29969313

The role of language proficiency and linguistic distance in cross-linguistic treatment effects in aphasia.

Peggy S Conner1, Mira Goral1,2,3, Inge Anema4, Katy Borodkin5, Yair Haendler6, Monica Knoph3,7, Carmen Mustelier1, Elizabeth Paluska1, Yana Melnikova8, Mariola Moeyaert9.   

Abstract

Current findings from intervention in bilingual aphasia are inconclusive regarding the extent to which levels of language proficiency and degree of linguistic distance between treated and non-treated languages influence cross-language generalisation and changes in levels of language activation and inhibition following treatment. In this study, we enrolled a 65-year-old multilingual speaker with aphasia and administered treatment in his L1, Dutch. We assessed pre- and post-treatment performance for seven of his languages, five of high proficiency and two of lower proficiency. We asked whether treatment in L1 would generalise to his other languages or increase interference among them. Forty hours of treatment were completed over the course of five weeks. Each language was tested three times at pretreatment and at post-treatment. Testing included measures of narrative production, answering questions, picture description and question generation. Dependent measures examined language efficiency, defined as Correct Information Units (CIUs)/min, as well as language mixing, defined as proportion of code-mixed whole words. We found that our participant's improved efficiency in Dutch was mirrored by parallel improvement in the four languages of high proficiency: English, German, Italian and French. In contrast, in his languages of lower proficiency, Norwegian and Spanish, improved efficiency was limited. An increase in code-mixing was noted in Spanish, but not in Norwegian. We interpret the increased code-mixing in Spanish as indication of heightened inhibition following improvement in a language of close linguistic proximity, Italian. We conclude that an interaction of language proficiency and linguistic similarity affects cross-language generalisation following intervention in multilingual aphasia.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Multilingual; aphasia; cross-linguistic; efficiency; language mixing; treatment generalisation

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29969313      PMCID: PMC6169517          DOI: 10.1080/02699206.2018.1435723

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Linguist Phon        ISSN: 0269-9206            Impact factor:   1.346


  28 in total

1.  Understanding the relationship between language proficiency, language impairment and rehabilitation: Evidence from a case study.

Authors:  Swathi Kiran; Regina Iakupova
Journal:  Clin Linguist Phon       Date:  2011-06-01       Impact factor: 1.346

2.  How do highly proficient bilinguals control their lexicalization process? Inhibitory and language-specific selection mechanisms are both functional.

Authors:  Albert Costa; Mikel Santesteban; Iva Ivanova
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  2006-09       Impact factor: 3.051

3.  Effects of cognate status and language of therapy during intensive semantic naming treatment in a case of severe nonfluent bilingual aphasia.

Authors:  Jacquie Kurland; Marahu Falcon
Journal:  Clin Linguist Phon       Date:  2011-06-01       Impact factor: 1.346

4.  Oral reading for language in aphasia (ORLA): evaluating the efficacy of computer-delivered therapy in chronic nonfluent aphasia.

Authors:  Leora R Cherney
Journal:  Top Stroke Rehabil       Date:  2010 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 2.119

5.  Acquired alexia in multilingual aphasia and computer-assisted treatment in both languages: issues of generalisation and transfer.

Authors:  M Laganaro; M Overton Venet
Journal:  Folia Phoniatr Logop       Date:  2001 May-Jun       Impact factor: 0.849

6.  Oral reading for language in aphasia: impact of aphasia severity on cross-modal outcomes in chronic nonfluent aphasia.

Authors:  Leora R Cherney
Journal:  Semin Speech Lang       Date:  2010-04-08       Impact factor: 1.761

7.  The nature of facilitation and interference in the multilingual language system: insights from treatment in a case of trilingual aphasia.

Authors:  Caitlin Keane; Swathi Kiran
Journal:  Cogn Neuropsychol       Date:  2015       Impact factor: 2.468

8.  Therapy for naming difficulties in bilingual aphasia: which language benefits?

Authors:  Stephen Croft; Jane Marshall; Tim Pring; Matthew Hardwick
Journal:  Int J Lang Commun Disord       Date:  2010-07-26       Impact factor: 3.020

9.  Bilingual aphasia and language control: a follow-up fMRI and intrinsic connectivity study.

Authors:  Jubin Abutalebi; Pasquale Anthony Della Rosa; Marco Tettamanti; David W Green; Stefano F Cappa
Journal:  Brain Lang       Date:  2009 May-Jun       Impact factor: 2.381

10.  Effects of language proficiency and language of the environment on aphasia therapy in a multilingual.

Authors:  Mira Goral; Jason Rosas; Peggy S Conner; Kristen K Maul; Loraine K Obler
Journal:  J Neurolinguistics       Date:  2011-07-02       Impact factor: 1.710

View more
  1 in total

1.  Predicting treatment outcomes for bilinguals with aphasia using computational modeling: Study protocol for the PROCoM randomised controlled trial.

Authors:  Claudia Peñaloza; Maria Dekhtyar; Michael Scimeca; Erin Carpenter; Nishaat Mukadam; Swathi Kiran
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2020-11-18       Impact factor: 2.692

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.