I. Classifications of Aphasia II. Laterality III. Varieties of Anomia Ling 411 – 06.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Copyright © 2007 Wolters Kluwer Health | Lippincott Williams & Wilkins Neuroscience: Exploring the Brain, 3e Chapter 20: Language.
Advertisements

Functional Areas of Cerebral Cortex 1
 specific functions on specific to one side of the cortex rather than bilateral.
Interpreting Neurolinguistic Evidence Careless thinking and critical thinking Ling 411 – 21.
Chapter 15 Human Communication.
1 FON 218: Neurolinguistics APHASIA APHASIA Wanda Jakobsen Wanda Jakobsen.
Copyright © 2008 Pearson Allyn & Bacon Inc.1 Chapter 13 Human Communication This multimedia product and its contents are protected under copyright law.
Chapter 13 Language
Types of Aphasia “Classifications are a necessary evil” Antonio Damasio (1998) Ling 411 – 05.
Aphasia A disorder caused by damage to the parts of the brain that control language. It can make it hard to read, or write and to comprehend or produce.
Human Communication.
Jennifer Nazar.  A language disorder produced by brain damage.  Most studies come from those who have aphasias.  Study behaviors associated with the.
Aphasia “Impairment of central language abilities in the speech modality following brain damage.“ In contrast to: peripheral speech problems (dysarthria)
Ch13. Biological Foundations of Language
SPEECH BY JOSHUA BOWER (PEER SUPPORT 2014). What hemisphere of the brain is involved in language? Left (for the majority)
Speech and Language. It is the highest function of the nervous system Involves understanding of spoken & printed words It is the ability to express ideas.
Psycholinguistics Mrs. Asmaa Alfageeh.
Cognitive Process and brain structure
Speech/Language Function BCS 242 Neuropsychology Fall 2004.
Disorders Fluent aphasias [3] Nonfluent aphasias [4] Pure aphasias [1] Watershed.
Language Disorders October 12, Types of Disorders Aphasia: acquired disorder of language due to brain damage Dysarthria: disorder of motor apparatus.
Adult Neurogenic Language and Cognitive-Communicative Disorders Chapter 19
“He speaks fine; he doesn’t need speech therapy! What is speech and language? Presented by: D’Anna Nowack M.S. CCC/SLP.
Physiology of Language
Brain lateralization - vision & sensory/motor systems - that why we learn pathways - language - we’ll learn here - Split Brains.
Language and Aphasia CSE 140 etc.. Outline Review the relationships between lesions and linguistic effects Review of the traditional picture about Broca’s.
Introduction to Neuropsychology Language. Example Exam Questions 1. How have neuropsychological investigations informed our current understanding about.
Language and Brain. Is Language Situated in our Brain? Neurolinguistics is the study of how the brain processes language.
APHASIA. What is it?  “Acquired language dysfunction due to neurological injury or disease”  Most common cause is stroke (about 25-40% of stroke patients.
1 Chapter 19: Higher mental functions Chris Rorden University of South Carolina Norman J. Arnold School of Public Health Department of Communication Sciences.
Brain Lateralization Left Brain vs Right Brain. Corpus callosum Bridge between left and right hemispheres of the brain.
Aphasia and Language-Related Agnosia and Apraxia
Aphasias: Language Disturbances Associated with Brain Injury The Classic View: based on symptoms and associated with particular brain areas The Major Syndromes:
Notes: Exam corrections – due on Thursday, November 12 Last Exam Concrete vs Abstract words.
Lateralization & The Split Brain and Cortical Localization of Language.
APHASIA. What is Aphasia? Aphasia is a total or partial loss of the ability to use words.
Despite adjustments to the Wernicke-Lichtheim model, there remained disorders which could not be explained. Later models (e.g., Heilman’s) have included.
1 Language disorders We can learn a lot by looking at system failure –Which parts are connected to which Examine the relation between listening/speaking.
Speech and Language Test Language.
Psycholinguistics.
I. Classifications of Aphasia II. Laterality III. Varieties of Anomia IV. Reading and Writing Ling 411 – 06.
Last Lecture Dichotic Listening Dichotic Listening The corpus callosum & resource allocation The corpus callosum & resource allocation Handedness Handedness.
Language and the Brain Understanding how language is represented and processed in the brain.
BEKA EDGAR RACHEL FARMER RACHEL MCKELROY SARA RUFFNER Aphasias.
CSD 2230 HUMAN COMMUNICATION DISORDERS Topic 6 Language Disorders Adult Disorders Aphasia and Right Hemisphere Injury.
Outline  1. Brain Structure  2. Module theory: Language and brain  3. Aphasia  4. Summary.
ADULT LANGUAGE DISORDERS Week 1 Jan 13, Text Book LaPointe, L. L. (2005). Aphasia and Related Neurogenic Language Disorders. 3rd edition, Thieme,
Four lobes of the cerebral cortex FRONTAL LOBE OCCIPITAL LOBE TEMPORAL LOBE PARIETAL LOBE.
PhD MD MBBS Faculty of Medicine Al Maarefa Colleges of Science & Technology Faculty of Medicine Al Maarefa Colleges of Science & Technology Lecture – 12:
1.  What is Speech ?  Speech is complex form of communication in which spoken words convey ideas.  When we speak, first we understand. 2.
1 PSYC 3290 Psycholinguistics When the hardware/software fails… (Language Disorders) March 24, 2008.
Brain Damage and Locations of Linguistic Functions Ling 411 – 07.
Types of Aphasia Ling 411 – 05. Simple Functions / Complex Functions: Speaking and Understanding How is simplicity/complexity determined? What about "understanding.
1 Separable Processing of Consonants and Vowels Alfonso Caramazza, Doriana Chialant, Rita Capasso & Gabriele Miceli (Jan. 2000) Nature. Vol 403:
Neurologically Based Communicative Disorders. Disorders Aphasia Apraxia Dysarthria.
Speech and Language. It is the highest function of the nervous system Involves understanding of spoken & printed words It is the ability to express ideas.
Language and the brain Introduction to Linguistics.
Welcome Back Pick up a Packet! UAA, Cody Augdahl, 2005.
Cerebral Cortex 2.
Higher Cortical Functions
Neurological Basis for Speech and Language
Nervous System Physiology
PHYSIOLOGY OF SPEECH Taha Sadig Ahmed.
Function of Brain in Communication (Language)
Language Why language is hard to study
NeuroLinguistics Mam Lubna Umar.
Study of the neural bases of language development and use
Speech and Language.
UNIT 3 THE CONSCIOUS SELF
Presentation transcript:

I. Classifications of Aphasia II. Laterality III. Varieties of Anomia Ling 411 – 06

Classifications “Classifications are a necessary evil” Antonio Damasio (1998)

Problems of classification  Different aphasics almost never share the same set of symptoms (Benson&Ardila 111) Variations “are so plentiful as to be the rule” (B&A 117) A single type of aphasia may have distinctly different loci of pathology (B&A 117)  Conduction aphasia (117) Parietal lobe Arcuate fasciculus Insula(?)  Transcortical motor aphasia (118)  Differing interpretations of sets of symptoms  Different approaches to classification

Wide variation in classification schemes  Influential ones in history of aphasiology: Wernicke-Lichtheim 1881, 1885 Head 1926 Goldstein 1948 Luria 1966 Benson 1979 Benson & Ardila 1996 Damasio 1998  But.. All recognize just a small number of basic syndromes Most of the variation in classification schemes is just terminological (Benson&Ardila 120)

Damasio’s Classification (1998:34ff)  Wernicke’s aphasia  Broca’s aphasia  Conduction aphasia  Transcortical sensory aphasia  Transcortical motor aphasia  Global aphasia  Anomic aphasia  Alexia  Pure word deafness  Atypical aphasias

The 1996 Benson & Ardila Classification (B&A: 119) Broca AphasiaWernicke Aphasia Conduction Aphasia Extrasylvian Motor Aphasia Extrasylvian Sensory Aphasia Pre-Rolandic Post-Rolandic Peri- Sylvian Extra- Sylvian Not included in above scheme: (1) Problems with reading & writing (2) Anomic aphasia (3) Global aphasia

Features of the 1996 B&A Classification (B&A: 119)  Based on two anatomical dichotomies: Pre- vs post-Rolandic Perisylvian vs. extrasylvian  For every type, two subtypes But the two subtypes can be just two ends of a continuous scale, not distinct subtypes  Alternatives to usual terms: “Extrasylvian” instead of “transcortical” “Broca” instead of “Broca’s” ‘Wernicke” instead of “Wernicke’s”

A major anatomical-functional dichotomy: Front (anterior) vs. Back (posterior)  Front Action and planning of action Process oriented  Back Perception Perceptual integration Object oriented

Damasio vis-à-vis Benson & Ardila Damasio  Wernicke’s aphasia  Broca’s aphasia  Conduction aphasia  Transcortical sensory aph.  Transcortical motor aph.  Global aphasia  Anomic aphasia  Alexia Benson & Ardila  Wernicke aphasia  Broca aphasia  Conduction aphasia  Extrasylvian sensory aph.  Extrasylvian motor aph.  Global aphasia  Anomic aphasia  Wernicke II or Posterior extrasylvian

Front-Back dichotomy and aphasia: Alternative terms/emphases  Fluent  Receptive*  Sensory  Posterior  Non-fluent  Expressive*  Motor  Anterior *But:(1) Very few aphasic patients are completely free of receptive difficulties (2) Virtually no aphasic is entirely without expressive problems (B&A 112)

Damasio’s Categories as Anterior vs Posterior Aphasias (Or: Pre-Rolandic vs Post-Rolandic)  Broca’s aphasia  Transcortical motor aphasia  Wernicke’s aphasia  Conduction aphasia  Transcortical sensory aphasia  Alexia  Pure word deafness Others: Global Aphasia: Both anterior and posterior Anomic aphasia: Can be either or both Atypical aphasias Anterior Posterior

Extra-Sylvian Aphasic Syndromes According to Benson & Ardila  “Extra-Sylvian” (a.k.a. “Transcortical”)  Extrasylvian motor aphasia Type I Type II  Extrasylvian sensory aphasia  Sometimes just called ‘anomic aphasia’ Type I Type II

Extra-Sylvian Aphasic Syndromes  In all perisylvian syndromes, repetition is faulty  In all extra-sylvian aphasic syndromes, repetition is intact (why?)  “Aphasia without repetition disturbance almost invariably indicates pathology outside the perisylvian region” (B&A 1996:146)

Extrasylvian motor aphasia  Nonfluent output Delayed initiation Terse, poorly elaborated utterances Incomplete sentences Verbal paraphasia  Good comprehension  Good repetition

Extrasylvian motor aphasia, Type I  Left dorsolateral prefrontal damage Anterior and superior to Broca’s area  Non-fluent output, but repetition good  Articulation is normal  Difficulty following commands Understand command but do not respond  Damage anterior and superior to Broca’s area (Brodmann areas 45, 46, and/or part of area 9) (B&A 1996:152)Brodmann areas

Extrasylvian motor aphasia, Type II  Damage to supplementary motor area Occlusion of left anterior cerebral artery  Non-fluent output, but good repetition  Difficulty initiating speech  Perhaps a purely motor disorder that does not involve basic language functions (in which case it isn’t really a type of aphasia)

Supplementary motor area Superior parietal lobule Supplementary motor area Important in initiating action (not just speech)

Extrasylvian sensory aphasia  Speech is fluent  Good repetition  Comprehension is impaired  Naming is impaired  Paraphasia is frequent, even verbose Semantic substitutions Neologisms  Echolalia (patients repeat words of examiner)  Pointing is impaired  Two subtypes

Extrasylvian sensory aphasia, Type I  Damage to temporal-parietal-occipital junction area I.e., lower angular gyrus and upper area 37area 37  Fluent spontaneous output  Poor comprehension  Naming strongly impaired  Semantic paraphasia

Extrasylvian sensory aphasia, Type II  Damage to upper angular gyrus  Fluent output  Variable ability to comprehend speech  Naming strongly impaired  Few semantic paraphasias  Repetition excellent  Many circumlocutions

Comparing Extra-Sensory Aphasia, Types 1 and 2  Damage to TPO junction area  Fluent spontaneous output  Poor comprehension  Naming strongly impaired  Semantic paraphasia  Repetition good  Damage to upper angular gyrus  Fluent output  Variable ability to comprehend speech  Naming strongly impaired  Few semantic paraphasias  Repetition excellent  Many circumlocutions Type 1 Type 2

Laterality

Cerebral dominance for language  Linguistic abilities are subserved by the left hemisphere in about 97% of people 99% of right-handed people A majority of left-handers  But this is just a first approximation

More refined look  Some information is bilaterally represented Highly entrenched items Initial consonants of high-frequency words (?) Some people have more bilateral representation than others Women and left-handers tend to have more bilateral representation than men and righties  Pitch, intonation, and other prosodic features subserved by RH  Semantic information is in both LH and RH But different aspects of semantic information  Metaphor, irony, sarcasm, pragmatic features, inferencing, subserved by RH

The Role of RH in semantics  Conceptual information, even for a single item, is complex Therefore, widely distributed A network Occupies both hemispheres  RH information is more connotative LH information more exact

Left dominance for language in left-handers  Wada test (Milner 1975), on left-handers 69% aphasic after injection of left brain 18% aphasic after injection of right brain 13% aphasic after injection on each side Goodglass 1993:57

Right dominance for language in right-handers  Crossed aphasia: Term for right-handers who suffer aphasia after RH injury  Incidence of crossed aphasia is estimated at 1% Goodglass 1993:58

The genetics of laterality  Matings of left-handed parents produce no more than about 50% left-handed offspring  Annett’s theory (1985) A single right-shift gene (rs+) If rs++, right-handed (LH dominant) If rs+-, right handed (LH dominant) If rs-- (right-shift gene absent)..  Can go either way  Depends on environment, experience  50% probability of becoming left-handed

Left hemisphere vs. right hemisphere  Left hemisphere Analytical thinking Digital Heightened contrast Proof  Right Hemisphere Holistic thinking Analog Fuzzy boundaries Hunches, intuition Question: What anatomical differences are responsible?

Corpus Callosum (revealed by excision of top of right hemisphere) Corpus Callosum

Separated right and left hemispheres  Cutting corpus callosum separates them  Isolated RH: Limited one-word reading comprehension  Some grasp of meanings  But unable to make judgments about sound  Isolated LH: Awareness of both sound and meaning

Varieties of anomia: Semantic categories

Anomic aphasia  Perhaps part of a continuum with extrasylvian sensory aphasia  Comprehension is good in many cases Unlike extrasylvian sensory aphasia  Production and repetition are good  Cannot be reliably localized Many different areas of damage can result in naming difficulty  But different semantic categories may be impaired with different areas of damage Maybe not a true syndrome: Benson&Ardila

2 Cases of Rapp & Caramazza (1995)  E.S.T. (901b) – Left temporal damage “Meaning spared, couldn’t say the word”: R&C  J.G. (902a) – Left posterior temporal-parietal Meaning spared, couldn’t spell the word correctly, but phonological recognition okay Cf. Rapp & Caramazza, Disorders of lexical processing and the lexicon (1995)

Patient E.S.T. (Rapp&Caramazza 1995: 901b )  Left temporal damage  Shown picture of a snowman Unable to name it “It’s cold, it’s a ma… cold … frozen.”  Shown picture of a stool “stop, step … seat, small seat, round seat, sit on the…”  Shown written form ‘steak’ “I’m going to eat something … it’s beef … you can have a [së] … different … costs more …”  What can we conclude?

Assessment of E.S.T. by Rapp & Caramazza  Responses of E.S.T. indicate awareness of the meanings ( SNOWMAN, STOOL, STEAK )  Therefore, “meaning is spared” (acc. To R&C)

Warning: Proceed with caution  The assumption of Rapp&Caramazza is easy to make I.e., that meaning (conceptual information) is spared  But there’s more to this than meets the eye!  As we have seen, complex functions are not localized Only simple functions have locations  Conceptual information, even for a single word Is complex, has many components Therefore, is widely distributed  We only have evidence that some of the conceptual information is spared

Patient E.S.T. – a closer look  Left temporal damage  Picture of a snowman “It’s cold, it’s a ma… cold … frozen.”  Picture of a stool “stop, step … seat, small seat, round seat, sit on the…”  Written form ‘steak’ “I’m going to eat something … it’s beef … you can have a [së] … different … costs more …”  These are not definitions  This is connotative information Vague semantic notions about the meanings

Compare patient J.G. (902a)  Damage: Left posterior temporal-parietal  Meaning spared, couldn’t spell the word correctly, but phonological recognition okay digit:  D-I-D-G-E-T  “A number” thief:  T-H-E-F-E  “A person who takes things”  These are actual definitions

Don’t forget this – (repeating)  Some information is bilaterally represented Highly entrenched items Initial consonants of high-frequency words (?) Some people have more bilateral representation than others Women and left-handers tend to have more bilateral representation than men and righties  Pitch, intonation, and other prosodic features subserved by RH  Semantic information is in both LH and RH But different aspects of semantic information  Metaphor, irony, sarcasm, pragmatic features, inferencing, subserved by RH

(Repeating:) The Role of RH in semantics  Conceptual information, even for a single item, is widely distributed A network Occupies both hemispheres  RH information is more connotative LH information more exact

Connotative information in RH  Tests on patients with isolated RH resulting from callosotomy  RH has information about (many) nouns and verbs Not as many as in LH  Semantic information differently organized in RH  Zaidel (1990): “… the right hemisphere is characteristically connotative rather than denotative …. The arcs [of the semantic network] connect more distant concepts … and the organizing semantic relationships are more loosely associative and dependent on experience” (125) Baynes & Eliason, The visual lexicon: its access and organization is commissurotomy patients (1998)

Semantic information: E.S.T. and J.G.  Patient J.G. – real definitions digit: “A number” thief: “A person who takes things”  Patient E.S.T. – connotative information snowman: “It’s cold, it’s a ma… cold … frozen.” stool: “ … seat, small seat, round seat, sit on the…” steak: “I’m going to eat something … it’s beef … you can have a [së] … different … costs more …”

Conclusion about E.S.T.  RH semantic information is intact  LH semantic information is wiped out  Phonological information is spared in both hemispheres  Question: Why can’t the RH semantic information be conveyed to LH phonology?

Corpus Callosum (revealed by excision of top of right hemisphere) Corpus Callosum

end