Presentation on theme: "Disorders of Syntax and Morphology"— Presentation transcript:
1 Disorders of Syntax and Morphology Ling 411 – 08Disorders of Syntax and MorphologyGoodglass 1993: Chapter 6
2 Major Language Areas Supramarginal gyrus (Goldstein’s area) Angular gyrus(Geschwinds’s area)Wernicke’s areaExner’s areaBroca’s areaSuperior parietal lobule
3 Agrammatism Usually associated with Broca’s aphasia Generally present in Broca’s aphasiaBut other aphasics also have grammatical dysfunctionsParagrammatism – common in Wernicke aphasiaA lot of variation among different patients
4 Agrammatism vs. Paragrammatism Paragrammatism – too much speechNormal or excessive fluencyUse of inappropriate wordsNeologismsNo lack of function words and inflectionsBut not always used appropriatelyCommon in Wernicke’s aphasiaAgrammatism – not enough speechLack of fluencyOmission (NOT deletion!) of function words and inflectionsCommon in Broca’s aphasia
5 Omission vs. Deletion Goodglass (106): Sentences with a deleted main verb (“Joan and I Coffee”) may continue to appear.. . . misuse or deletions of morphology . . .Is he talking about deletion or omission?Deletion implies that it was first there, and then removedOmission – it wasn’t put in at allGoodglass is following a practice that was common among linguists at the time he wrote the book
6 Broca’s Aphasia Damage to frontal lobe Largely intact comprehension Mainly, inferior frontal gyrusLargely intact comprehensionNonfluent, agrammatic speech“Telegraphic speech” –Abundance of content words (e.g., nouns)Lack of function words (e.g. prepositions)Impaired verb processingBates, Chen, Tzeng, Li & Opie, 1991; Damasio & Tranel, 1993; Daniele, Giustolisi, Silveri, Colosimo & Gainotti, 1994; Lamb & Zhang, 2010; Shapiro & Caramazza, 2003
7 Verbal short-term memory deficit (in Broca aphasia) Patients can readily point to individual objects or body parts named by the examinerBut when asked to point to the same items in a specific sequence they often fail at the level of only two or three itemsBenson & Ardila 124How to explain?
8 Subtypes of Broca aphasia Type IA.k.a. little Broca aphasiaMilder defectsLess extensive damageBetter prognosisType IISymptoms worseMore extensive damageThese are not distinct, but variationsTwo spans along a scale
9 Agrammatism: an early observation (1819) Deleuze (1819), referring to a French-speaking patient: The patient “used exclusively the infinitive of verbs and used no pronouns. … She produced absolutely no conjugated verb.”Goodglass 1993: 104
10 Example of agrammatic speech Examiner: Can you tell me about why you came back to the hospital?Patient: yes … eh … Monday … eh … dad … Peter Hogan and dad … hospital.Er … two … er … doctors … and … er … thirty minutes … and ... er … yes … hospital. And … er … Wednesday … Wednesday. Nine o’clock. And … er … Thursday, ten o’clock … doctors … two … two … doctors… and … er … teeth … fine.E: Not exactly your teeth … your g-P: Gum … gum …E: What did they do to them?P: And er … doctor and girl … and er … and er gum …Goodglass 1993: 107
11 Some features of agrammatism Telegraphic speechShort utterancesOmission of grammatical functorsRelative abundance of substantivesVerbs are uncommon, rare in some patientsWhen present, uninflected or –ing formFor French aphasics, infinitive formUse of word order is generally sparedComprehension is impaired for complex sentences
12 Problems in the study of agrammatism Must be distinguished from paragrammatismGrammatical aberrations – even among Broca aphasics – vary from patient to patientLinguistics has not (yet) provided clear answers to important basic questions:What normal grammatical functions areHow they operate
13 SyntaxFirst, we need to dispel the notion that syntax is one capacity, that can be lost (or spared) as a unitSyntax can be understood as a set of constructionsLearned by children (and others) one by oneLike vocabularySome can be lost, others spared, in aphasiaIt is a label of the grammarian for multiple thingsWord order is often spared in Broca’s aphasia while a lot of syntax is lost
14 Stability of word order in agrammatism Agrammatic patients can usually handle word order in both production and comprehensionEvidence (comprehension)passive sentences misconstruedThe horse was kicked by the dogBroca’s aphasic: horse as kickerPassive marker not apprehendedCanonical word order guides the interpretationPossibly aided by conceptual knowledge
15 Reading and writing in agrammatism Agrammatic difficulties are also seen inOral readingWriting to dictationRepetitionBut:Some patients are agrammatic in speech but not in writing (Goodglass 1993: 110)Some can repeat correctlyHow to explain?Menn & Obler (1990) describe some patients who are less agrammatic in oral reading than in spontaneous speech (Goodglass 1993:111)
16 Variation among agrammatics (Goodglass 1993:107) Syntax and morphology (study of agrammatic French aphasics)Some patients have fairly good syntax but defective morphologySome patients have fairly good morphology but defective syntaxBoth types of patients fail to use inflected verb formsGleason et al. observations (1975)Some patients use –s plural marker but not articlesOther patients use articles but not –s plural marker
17 Loss of the use of relational markers in receptive agrammatism (118) E.g. father’s sisterEx: Is “my father’s sister” a man or a woman?Patient answers randomlyUnable to grasp the relational function of –’sCommand given in testing:Ex: Touch the comb with the pencilPatient may touch the pencil with the combPerhaps picks up comb because the word comb comes first in the instructionLocative relations somewhat less fragilein back of/in front of, over/under, before/after
18 Linguistic structure in the cortex: What we learn from agrammatism Agrammatism is generally associated with Broca’s aphasiaTherefore, the grammatical skills lost in Broca’s aphasia must be supported at least in part by eitherBroca’s area, orArea(s) adjacent to Broca’s areaIn other words: There must be something in or near Broca’s area that is essential for correct grammatical productionAnd grammatical comprehension –Receptive agrammatism
19 Receptive processing in Broca’s aphasia? Problem:Broca’s area is in frontal lobeFrontal lobe is supposed to be for motor productionMotor production is top-down processingReceptive functions involve bottom-up processingComprehension involves sensory processingin frontal lobe?Bottom-up (receptive) processing in frontal lobe?
20 Receptive agrammatism in Broca’s aphasia Two avenues to explanation The role of short-term memory, and Broca’s area in short-term memoryMaybe the frontal lobe can have receptive functionTo explore this possibility we must first examine the phenomenon of imagery
21 For perspective, A related problem: Imagery Types of sensory imageryVisualAuditorySomatosensoryCf. Motor imagery
22 Visual Imagery Visual images of people, buildings, etc. What is a visual image?What does it consist of?Is it a little picture?If so, where are the eyes to see it?What is it drawn on?Where is the visual perception system to interpret it?If not, what?
23 Auditory Imagery Auditory images of words, music, etc. We can hear things in our headsWhat is an auditory image?What does it consist of?Sound?There is no air inside the head to vibrateWhat hears it?Little ears inside the head?
24 How Imagery OperatesIt’s unlikely that visual imagery uses some mechanism independent of that for visionTherefore, it must use (some of) the same neural connections used in perceptionFor visual imagery, pathways in the occipital lobeFor auditory imagery, pathways in the temporal lobeFor tactile imagery, pathways in the parietal lobeImagery is activation of some of the same neural pathways that get activated upon receiving input from sense organs
25 Anatomical consequences Consequences of imaging explanationTop-down processing in perceptual areasPerceptual pathways must have parallel pathways of opposite directionWhy are imagined scenes less vivid than those resulting from input to the eyes?
26 Bidirectional Processing Imagery requires top-down processingUsing pathways that typically operate bottom-upTherefore, perceptual pathways must generally be bidirectionalAnatomical evidence supports the hypothesisReciprocal pairs of cortico-cortical axons
27 Bidirectional Connections Most corticocortical connections arebidirectionalAn established finding from neuroanatomyIt’s not because the connecting nervefibers (axons) are themselves bidirectionalIt’s because we find different but roughlyparallel fibers going in opposite directions
28 Bidirectional Processing in Frontal Lobe? Frontal lobe processing: typically top-downBut there is a large amount of uniformity in cortical structureHypothesis: Bottom-up processing also in frontal lobeFrom perceptual (i.e. posterior) areas to locations in frontal lobeWe already have seen evidence: the arcuate fasciculus
29 Bidirectional connections in frontal lobe Would explain how Broca’s area is involved in receptive grammatical processingWould account for the finding that interpretation of prepositions and verbs is a frontal lobe functionFinding from the study of agrammatism
30 Attempts to explain agrammatism Many theories have been proposedCf. Goodglass 1993:111ffSome intriguing ideasLoss of relational use of words (Jakobson, Luria)Difficulty with markers of such relationshipsImpairment of inner speech (Luria)Hence, impairment of auditory working memoryDifficulty with unstressed words (Goodglass, Kean)Substantive words are commonly stressedFunctors are generally unstressed
31 Caution in interpreting Agrammatism may not be just one phenomenonSyntax is not one structure but severalAll agrammatics and probably all Broca’s aphasics are deficient in use of verbsOther phenomena of agrammatism show more variabilityThe problem (or part of the problem) may not be grammar as such:Short-term memory – the inner speech loopPhonology: stressed vs. unstressed words
32 Phonological factors Function words are (in general) unstressed Maybe the difficulty is in production of unstressed wordsIntriguing finding of Goodglass et al.Function wordsMay be produced after a stressed wordBut almost never produced initiallyProduction starts with stressed wordEven with repetitionOpen the door > Open the doorThe door is open > Door is open
33 More evidence on relational markers (119f) Grammatical particles that do not mark relations are exempt from omissionandJapanese clause-final particlesEmphatic yoQuestion marker kaConfirmation-seeking particle neVerbs always have a syntactic implicationI.e. relationship to one or more nounsMenn & Obler: Impairment affecting grammatical elements that mark relationships within the sentence
34 Nouns and Verbs: Back Brain & Front Brain (?) “A Neurolinguistic Universal” –E. BatesVerb deficit in Broca’s aphasiaNoun deficit in Wernicke’s aphasiaSuggests thatVerbs are represented in frontal lobeNouns are represented in or near temporal lobe – angular gyrus and/or supramarginal gyrus) and/or middle temporal gyrusSupports what we derive from the proximity principle
35 Proceed with Caution!We already know that a noun or a verb has a complex cortical representationTherefore it is not in a single locationRather, a functional webSo what are we talking about?The cardinal node of the functional web of a nounThe cardinal node of the functional web of a verb
36 A patient with non-fluent aphasia Patient ROX (McCarthy & Warrington 1985)Impaired production and comprehension of verbsExcellent production and comprehension of nounsHad no difficulty imitating common actionsBut had difficulty in performing same actions in response to verbal commandsE.g., confused open and closeIn action-naming test, sometimes substituted nouns for verbs or omitted verbs:“chairing” for sitting“The man is a sack of potatoes” for a man carrying a sack of potatoes
37 Verb deficit and agrammatism: Why? Syntactic hypothesisVerbs are by their nature syntactically complexNouns are not complex – they can stand aloneSemantic hypothesis – using proximityVerbs represent processes and processes are managed by the frontal lobeNouns represent things, and things are known mainly through perception, which is managed by the occipital, temporal, and parietal lobes
38 Noun-Verb vis-à-vis Speech & Writing (908b) Patient S.J.D.Written naming of verbs defectiveBut oral naming okayNouns okay for both writing and speakingPatient H.W.Oral naming of verbs defectiveBut written naming okayComparable results independently of mode of stimulus – picture naming, reading, writing to dictation(More, next slide..)
39 Inputs: pictures, oral dictation, reading More on H.W. & S.J.D. Noun-Verb vis-à-vis Speech-Writing (Rapp & Caramazza 908-9)Inputs: pictures, oral dictation, readingTasks: (1) speaking, (2) writingExample:There’s a crack in the mirror (crack as n.)Don’t crack the mirror (crack as v.)S.J.D.crack as n. correctly produced, both modalitiescrack as v. correct only in spoken modalityH.W. – the opposite modality effectData from Caramazza & Hillis (1991)
41 Subdivisions of Broca’s area Broca’s area includes two different (but adjacent) Brodmann areasBA 44 – Pars OpercularisBA 45 – Pars Triangularis(Some people also include the Pars orbitalis, just inferior to the pars triangularis)
42 Frontal Operculum Operculum: little cover The part of the frontal lobe that covers (part of) the Sylvian fissure and anterior insulaAdjacent to and inside the anterior portion of Sylvian fissureOpposite it (across Sylvian fissure) in temporal lobe is the temporal operculum
44 Major Language Areas Supramarginal gyrus (Goldstein’s area) Angular gyrus(Geschwinds’s area)Wernicke’s areaBroca’s areaSuperior parietal lobuleBrodmann area 37
45 Left hemi-sphere, showing middle cerebral artery FrontalOperculum
46 A closer look at Broca’s aphasia Broca’s original patientLesion was extensiveNot just Broca’s area but alsoAdjacent areasSubjacent white matterA tradition has followed BrocaBroca’s area held responsible for symptoms of Broca’s aphasiaConfounding factor:Broca’s area is only part of the area of damage with Broca’s aphasia
47 More recent findings Modern imaging methods help Some patients have damage restricted mainly or entirely to just Broca’s areaThey have less severe symptoms that typically associated with Broca’s aphasiaInfluential paper: Alexander et al. 1990Examined Broca patients with different areas of damageCast doubts on importance of Broca’s area in Broca’s aphasia
48 Broca’s area and Broca aphasia Maybe it’s not just Broca’s area damage that is responsible for some of the symptoms of “Broca’s aphasia”Maybe some of them result instead from damage to neighboring areasAlexander et al. (1990) propose distinguishing 3 subtypes
49 Three subtypes in Alexander study Impaired speech initiationSymptom traditionally attributed to transcortical motor aphasiaArea of damage: frontal operculumDisturbed articulatory functionArea of damage: lower primary motor cortexThe classical Broca’s aphasia syndromeMore extensive damage
Your consent to our cookies if you continue to use this website.