1. Language-Mixing in Multilingual Aphasia Helps Functional Communication Avanthi Paplikar 1 and Loraine K. Obler 1 1 The Graduate Center of the City University of New York Introduction In India, where most individuals are multilingual, language-mixing is not uncommon in daily life. A case study has suggested that language-mixing improves communication in multilinguals with aphasia (Sebastian, Dalvi & Obler, 2012). Research Questions 1. Do trilingual speakers mix more than bilingual speakers with Broca’s aphasia? 2. Does language mixing facilitate functional-communication in a group of bilingual and trilingual speakers with Broca's aphasia? Method Participants Eight participants with Broca's aphasia were tested, four bilingual Kannada-English speakers and four trilingual Kannada-English-Hindi speakers. The two groups did not differ in age (p = 1.000), education (p = 0.343), or severity (p = 0.486) as measured via the WAB Aphasia-Quotient (AQ). Bilingual SpeakersTrilingual Speakers PatientAge (years) GenderEducationAQPatientAge (years) GenderEducationAQ 1 70M1555.2244M1555.5 5 28M1454.7379M1454.6 6 51M1656428M1743.2 7 48M1351.7852F1747.6 Procedure We administered: WAB: All the eight sub-tests of the WAB were administered. ASHA-FACS: Two speech language pathologists (SLPs) spent 12 hours with each participant observing daily interactions over the course of two days which mostly occurred at each participant’s home, while further observations included trips to temples, meditation centers, walks, etc. The participants were rated on the two rating-scales: a 7-point Scale of Communication Independence (SCID) and a 5-point Scale of Qualitative Dimensions of Communication (SQDC). Scale of Language-Mixing (SLM): A 5-point rating scale (0 – No Mixing; 4 – Much Mixing) was added to the WAB and ASHA-FACS tests to record participants’ language-mixing during standardized testing and daily activities respectively. Scoring Standard scoring was used on each of these tests, with the exception that responses on the WAB, administered in Kannada, were scored no matter what language they were in. For the purposes of this study, language-mixing meant including one or more words from a given language after a different one had been used. For each oral and written ASHA-FACS item (16/43 items), and for five production subtests of the WAB, the language-mixing was scored by each SLP independently. The inter-rater reliability was high. Results Non-parametric tests (Spearman’s correlation test and the Mann Whitney U Test) were used for analysis. 1.There was no significant difference between the trilingual and the bilingual group in the amount of language-mixing during functional communication or WAB testing. 2.There was a significant correlation between the 5-point rating scale of functional communication (SQDC) and the SLM, a 5-point rating scale of language mixing. Higher functional communication skills were associated with increased language mixing in the combined groups of bilingual and multilingual speakers with aphasia; increased language mixing did not link to better performance on the WAB. Conclusions 1.Having access to three languages rather than two does not result in proportionately more mixing among trilinguals than bilinguals. 2.It appears that multilingual patients with aphasia successfully mix languages in daily life to compensate for their aphasia; but manage to avoid doing so during standardized-testing. References Frattali, C. M., Thompson, C. K., Holland, A. L., Wohl, C. B., & Ferketic, M. M. (1995). ASHA: Functional assessment of communication skills for adults. Rockville, MD: American Speech-Language-Hearing-Association. Sebastian, D., Dalvi., & Obler, L. K. (2012). Language deficits, recovery patterns and effective intervention in a multilingual 16 years post-TBI. In M. Gitterman, M. Goral, and L. K. Obler (Eds.), Aspects of Multilingual Aphasia. Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters. Acknowledgements We would like to thank Pragathi Eshwar, who helped with data collection, CUNY Graduate Center for financial support to conduct the study, members of the Neurolinguistics Lab, our study participants and their families. Contact Information Avanthi Paplikar apaplikar@gc.cuny.edu Language Mixing during Functional Communication Language Mixing during WAB Testing Between Group Analysis (Bilingual & Trilingual) U = 4.000 p = 0.243 U = 1.000 p = 0.137 WAB Scores AQ ScoreLQ ScoreCQ Score Language Mixing during WAB Testing rho = -.381 p =.352 rho = -.307 p =.460 rho = -.442 p =.273 Functional Communication Scores SCIDSQDC Language Mixing during Functional Communication (SLM) rho =.193 p =.647 rho =.727* p =.041