Picture Sequence Description Language Mixing in Discourse in Bilinguals with Aphasia Avanthi Paplikar1, Mira Goral1, 2, 3, 4, Martin Gitterman1, 4 and Loraine K. Obler1, 2, 3 1. The Graduate Center of the City University of New York; 2. Language in the Aging Brain Lab, VA Boston Healthcare System; 3. Boston University School of Medicine; 4. Lehman College, City University of New York Introduction There is substantial literature reporting differences in connected language production in aphasia depending on the elicitation tasks, including differences in narrative length, sentence complexity and usage of nouns (e.g., Goral, 2012; Olness, 2006). Little is known about the relationship between language mixing in bilingual aphasia and the type of task used to elicit the narrative. In India, language mixing is not uncommon in bilingual and multilingual individuals. That is, when communication is framed in any one language, bilingual or multilingual speakers mix in various units from another language, such as words or morphemes, for effective communication (Bhat & Chengappa, 2003; Sebastian, Dalvi & Obler, 2012). For bilingual and multilingual individuals with aphasia, there are studies reporting use of at least two languages when patients are asked to speak in only one language (Aglioti & Fabbro, 1993; Fabbro, Skrap, & Aglioti, 2000), but the extent to which bilinguals with aphasia mix their languages inappropriately is still under debate. Participant responses were orthographically transcribed from the recordings by the examiner. Each word in the transcript was coded as Kannada, English, or Hindi. Results Averages of number of words in each language in Picture Sequence Description and Personal Narratives. K: Kannada; E: English; H: Hindi The Mann-Whitney U test showed no significant difference in the number of language-mixed words between the two discourse tasks; the base-language word usage was also not significantly different between the two discourse tasks. Mixing was greatest in the non-monolingual condition, suggesting that individuals with aphasia are able to modify their mixing appropriately for the listener. Conditions Picture Sequence Description Personal Narratives Kannada Monolingual K: 28.8 E: 7.8 K: 20.4 E: 7.2 English Monolingual K: 2.06 E: 48.8 K: 7.6 E: 34.13 Kannada-English Bilingual K: 25.13 E: 19.5 H: 0.46 K: 27.7 E: 13.7 Research Questions Does the amount of language mixing in bilingual individuals with non-fluent aphasia differ in two different types of discourse: personal narratives and picture sequence description? Do bilingual individuals with non-fluent aphasia modify their language usage based on the monolingual or bilingual status of the listener? Method Language Proficiency: Average self-ratings on comprehension, spoken language, reading and writing in first, second and/or third languages of the aphasia participants on a 5-point rating scale pre-morbidly. L1: First Language; L2: Second Language; and L3: Third Language Procedure: The participants were given a battery of discourse tasks and a test of language impairment (Western Aphasia Battery-WAB). WAB DISCOURSE TASKS Language Proficiency Pre-Stroke Post-Stroke Participants Age (years) /Sex Education (years) L1 L2 L3 1 53/M 13 5 4.75 - 4.25 2 29/M 3.75 3.5 3 49/M 12 4.5 4 67/M 16 3.25 62/M Conclusion The literature suggests that people with aphasia show differences in narrative length, sentence complexity, and usage of nouns depending on the elicitation task (e.g., Goral, 2010; Olness, 2006). However, our data suggest that the amount of language mixing does not vary in different discourse elicitation tasks. Despite their aphasia, all participants remained sensitive to the situation and modified their language mixing pragmatically appropriately, although not flawlessly. References Aglioti, S., & Fabbro, F. (1993). Paradoxical selective recovery in a bilingual aphasic following subcortical lesions. NeuroReport, 4, 1359-1362. Bhat, S., & Chengappa, S. (2005). Code switching in normal and aphasic Kannada-English bilinguals. Proceedings of the 4th International Symposium on Bilingualism. 306-316. Fabbro, F., Skrap, M., & Aglioti, S. (2000). Pathological switching between languages after frontal lesions in a bilingual patient. Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery & Psychiatry. 68, 650-652. Goral, M. (2012). Cross-language treatment effects in multilingual aphasia. In M. Gitterman, M. Goral, and L.K.Obler (Eds.), Aspects of Multilingual Aphasia. Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters, 106 – 121. Olness, G.S. (2006). Genre, verb, and coherence in picture elicited discourse of adults with aphasia. Aphasiology, 20 (2/3/4), 175-187. Sebastian, D., Dalvi. U., & 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 122-138. Spontaneous Speech (Information Content and Fluency) In both Kannada & English Auditory Comprehension Repetition Naming Personal Narratives Happy Incident Trip/Vacation Sad Incident Condition A-Kannada Only Condition B-English Only Condition C-Language Mixed Picture Sequence Description Bilingual Aphasia Test (BAT) Picture Sequence Husband-Wife Fight Sequence Cycle-Car Sequence Acknowledgments We would like to thank members of the Neurolinguistics Lab, CUNY Graduate Center, our study participants and their families. Contact Information Avanthi Paplikar Email: avanthi.niranjan@gmail.com