Literature DB >> 8741981

Training wh-question production in agrammatic aphasia: analysis of argument and adjunct movement.

C K Thompson1, L P Shapiro, M E Tait, B J Jacobs, S L Schneider.   

Abstract

The present research utilized aspects of the Principles and Parameters Approach (P&PA; Chomsky, 1991, 1993) in linguistic theory as well as findings from the psycholinguistic literature as a basis for examining sentence production in aphasic individuals. We examined the production of particular wh-movement constructions--wh-questions requiring movement of an argument noun phrase (i.e., who and what questions) and those which require adjunct movement (i.e., when and where questions). Using a single-subject experimental treatment paradigm, subjects were sequentially trained to produce these wh-questions and, throughout training, generalization to untrained wh-questions relying on similar wh-movement processes was tested. As well, the influence of training on aspects of narrative and conversational discourse was examined. Seven agrammatic aphasic subjects who evinced difficulty producing (and comprehending) "complex" sentences (e.g., passives, object relative clauses, wh-questions)--sentences that involve movement of noun phrases (NPs) out of their canonical positions, leaving behind a "trace" of that movement or "gap"--participated in the study. Subjects were trained to produce wh-questions by taking them through a series of steps emphasizing the lexical and syntactic properties (e.g., thematic role assignment, movement processes, and proper selection of wh-morpheme) of declarative sentence counterparts of target sentences. Results revealed improved sentence production abilities in all subjects under study in both constrained sentence production and, importantly, in discourse tasks. The argument/adjunct distinction was observed in the sentence production recovery patterns noted in six of the seven subjects. Three of the subjects evinced correct argument movement across trained and untrained question structures when wh-questions relying on argument movement were trained; similarly, for these subjects, training structures relying of adjunct movement resulted in improved adjunct movement. Three of the remaining four subjects who required additional treatment to alleviate their wh-morpheme selection deficits, too showed covariance between argument and adjunct movement structures with each type of movement emerging across structures in temporal sequence. We discuss these data in terms of the operations necessary to produce wh-questions, the importance of considering linguistic and psycholinguistic data when designing treatment programs for language disordered patients, and the contribution that detailed recovery data can make both to understanding the nature of sentence production deficits and to issues regarding normal sentence production.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1996        PMID: 8741981     DOI: 10.1006/brln.1996.0009

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Brain Lang        ISSN: 0093-934X            Impact factor:   2.381


  12 in total

1.  Agrammatism and the psychological reality of the syntactic tree.

Authors:  N Friedmann
Journal:  J Psycholinguist Res       Date:  2001-01

2.  Cross-modal generalization effects of training noncanonical sentence comprehension and production in agrammatic aphasia.

Authors:  B J Jacobs; C K Thompson
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  2000-02       Impact factor: 2.297

3.  The role of syntactic complexity in treatment of sentence deficits in agrammatic aphasia: the complexity account of treatment efficacy (CATE).

Authors:  Cynthia K Thompson; Lewis P Shapiro; Swathi Kiran; Jana Sobecks
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  2003-06       Impact factor: 2.297

4.  Agrammatic comprehension of simple active sentences with moved constituents: Hebrew OSV and OVS structures.

Authors:  Naama Friedmann; Lewis P Shapiro
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  2003-04       Impact factor: 2.297

5.  Treatment of sound errors in aphasia and apraxia of speech: Effects of phonological complexity.

Authors:  E Maas; J Barlow; D Robin; L Shapiro
Journal:  Aphasiology       Date:  2010-08-31       Impact factor: 2.773

6.  Evaluating Treatment and Generalization Patterns of Two Theoretically Motivated Sentence Comprehension Therapies.

Authors:  Carrie A Des Roches; Sofia Vallila-Rohter; Sarah Villard; Yorghos Tripodis; David Caplan; Swathi Kiran
Journal:  Am J Speech Lang Pathol       Date:  2016-12-01       Impact factor: 2.408

7.  Complexity in treatment of syntactic deficits.

Authors:  Cynthia K Thompson; Lewis P Shapiro
Journal:  Am J Speech Lang Pathol       Date:  2007-02       Impact factor: 2.408

8.  How left inferior frontal cortex participates in syntactic processing: Evidence from aphasia.

Authors:  Tracy Love; David Swinney; Matthew Walenski; Edgar Zurif
Journal:  Brain Lang       Date:  2007-12-26       Impact factor: 2.381

9.  Treating agrammatic aphasia within a linguistic framework: Treatment of Underlying Forms.

Authors:  Cynthia K Thompson; Lewis P Shapiro
Journal:  Aphasiology       Date:  2005-11       Impact factor: 2.773

10.  Can tDCS enhance item-specific effects and generalization after linguistically motivated aphasia therapy for verbs?

Authors:  Vânia de Aguiar; Roelien Bastiaanse; Rita Capasso; Marialuisa Gandolfi; Nicola Smania; Giorgio Rossi; Gabriele Miceli
Journal:  Front Behav Neurosci       Date:  2015-07-30       Impact factor: 3.558

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.