Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-sxzjt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-18T05:38:26.828Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Functional categories related to verb inflection are not differentially impaired in Greek aphasia

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 January 2015

ATHANASSIOS PROTOPAPAS ,
SPYRIDOULA CHEIMARIOU ,
ALEXANDRA ECONOMOU ,
MARIA KAKAVOULIA  and
SPYRIDOULA VARLOKOSTA
ATHANASSIOS PROTOPAPAS*
Affiliation:
Department of Philosophy & History of Science, University of Athens, Greece
SPYRIDOULA CHEIMARIOU
Affiliation:
Graduate Program in Basic and Applied Cognitive Science, University of Athens, Greece
ALEXANDRA ECONOMOU
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, University of Athens, Greece
MARIA KAKAVOULIA
Affiliation:
Department of Media, Communication, and Culture, Panteion University, Athens, Greece
SPYRIDOULA VARLOKOSTA
Affiliation:
Department of Linguistics, Faculty of Philology, University of Athens, Greece
*
†Address for correspondence: Athanassios Protopapas, MITHE, Ano Ilissia University Campus, 15771 Zografos, Greece; tel: +30 210 727 5540; fax: +30 210 727 5530; e-mail: aprotopapas@phs.uoa.gr
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Previous research in Greek aphasia has indicated that functional categories related to verb inflection are differentially impacted, with Aspect most severely affected, Agreement least affected, and Tense occupying an intermediate position. However, research materials were not controlled for overall length or position of the verb within the sentence, confounding functional category with processing load. Using balanced materials, here we tested ten persons with aphasia and ten matched control participants on grammaticality judgment and sentence completion in three functional categories (agreement, tense, and aspect) using ten verbs spanning a range of familiarity. Production results indicated no difference in errors of either lexeme or inflectional morpheme selection. In grammaticality judgment acceptance of incorrect sentences was lower for Agreement but this pattern was mirrored in the control group as well. The results provide no basis to support a specific linguistic deficit in the representation of functional categories in Greek persons with aphasia.

Keywords

aphasiaGreekfunctional categoriesverbprocessing
Type
Research Article
Information
Language and Cognition , Volume 8 , Issue 1 , March 2016 , pp. 124 - 141
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © UK Cognitive Linguistics Association 2015 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

references

Barr, D. J., Levy, R., Scheepers, C., & Tily, H. J. (2013). Random effects structure for confirmatory hypothesis testing: keep it maximal. Journal of Memory and Language, 68, 255–278.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bastiaanse, R., Bouma, G., & Post, W. (2009). Linguistic complexity and frequency in agrammatic speech production. Brain & Language, 109, 18–28.Google Scholar
Bastiaanse, R., & Grodzinsky, Y. (2000). Grammatical disorders in aphasia: a neurolinguistic perspective. London: Whurr.Google Scholar
Bastiaanse, R., & Thompson, C. K. (2012). Perspectives on agrammatism. New York: Psychology Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bates, D., Maechler, M., & Bolker, B. (2011). lme4: linear mixed-effects models using S4 classes. R package version 0.999375-42, online <http://CRAN.R-project.org/package=lme4>..>Google Scholar
Beretta, A. (2008). Disorders of syntax. In Stemmer, B. & Whitaker, H. A. (Eds.), Handbook of the neuroscience of language (pp. 155–163). New York: Elsevier.Google Scholar
Burchert, F., Swoboda-Moll, M., & De Bleser, R. (2005). Tense and Agreement dissociations in German agrammatic speakers: Underspecification vs. Hierarchy. Brain and Language, 94, 188–199.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Clahsen, H., & Ali, M. (2009). Formal features in aphasia: Tense, Agreement, and Mood in English agrammatism. Journal of Neurolinguistics, 22, 436–450.Google Scholar
Dick, F., Bates, E., Wulfeck, B., Utman, J. A., Dronkers, N., & Gernsbacher, M. A. (2001). Language deficits, localization, and grammar: evidence for a distributive model of language breakdown in aphasic patients and neurologically intact individuals. Psychological Review, 108, 759–788.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dickey, M. W., Milman, L. H., & Thompson, C. K. (2008). Judgment of functional morphology in agrammatic Broca’s aphasia. Journal of Neurolinguistics, 21, 35–65.Google Scholar
Dixon, P. (2008). Models of accuracy in repeated-measures designs. Journal of Memory and Language, 59, 447–456.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Faroqi-Shah, Y., & Thompson, C. K. (2004). Semantic, lexical, and phonological influences on the production of verb inflections in agrammatic aphasia. Brain and Language, 89, 484–498.Google Scholar
Friedmann, N., & Grodzinsky, Y. (1997). Tense and agreement in agrammatic production: pruning the syntactic tree. Brain & Language, 56, 71–90.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fyndanis, V., Varlokosta, S., & Tsapkini, K. (2012). Agrammatic production: interpretable features and selective impairment in verb inflection. Lingua, 122, 1134–1147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goodglass, H., & Kaplan, E. (1983). The assessment of aphasia and related disorders. Philadelphia: Lea & Febiger.Google Scholar
Goodglass, H., Kaplan, E., & Barresi, B. (2001). The assessment of aphasia and related disorders (3rd ed.). Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott, Williams & Wilkins.Google Scholar
Holton, D., Mackridge, P., & Philippaki-Warburton, I. (1997). Greek: a comprehensive grammar of the modern language. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Kean, M. L. (1977). The linguistic interpretation of aphasic syndromes: agrammatism in Broca’s aphasia, an example. Cognition, 5, 9–46.Google Scholar
Kean, M. L. (Ed.) (1979). Agrammatism: A phonological deficit? Cognition, 7, 69–84.Google Scholar
Kok, P., van Doorn, A., & Kolk, H. (2007). Inflection and computational load in agrammatic speech. Brain and Language, 102, 273–283.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Menn, L., & Obler, L. (1989). Agrammatic aphasia: a cross-language narrative sourcebook. Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Nanousi, V., Masterson, J., Druks, J. & Atkinson, M. (2006). Interpretable vs. uninterpretable features: evidence from six Greek-speaking agrammatic patients. Journal of Neurolinguistics, 19, 209–238.Google Scholar
R Development Core Team (2011). R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria, online <http://www.R-project.org/>..>Google Scholar
Ralli, A. (1988). Eléments de la Morphologie du Grec Moderne: La Structure de la Verbe. Unpublished PhD dissertation, University of Montreal.Google Scholar
Shallice, T., & Buiatti, T. (2011). Types of case series–the anatomically based approach: commentary on M. F. Shwartz & G. S. Dell: Case series investigations in cognitive neuropsychology. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 28, 500–514.Google Scholar
Tsapkini, K., Jarema, G., & Kehayia, E. (2002). Regularity revisited: evidence from lexical access of verbs and nouns in Greek. Brain and Language, 81, 103–119.Google Scholar
Tsapkini, K., Vlahou, C. H., & Potagas, C. (2009/2010). Adaptation and validation of standardized aphasia tests in different languages: lessons from the Boston Diagnostic Aphasia Examination–Short Form in Greek. Behavioural Neurology, 22, 111–119.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Varlokosta, S., Valeonti, N., Kakavoulia, M., Lazaridou, M., Economou, A., & Protopapas, A. (2006). The breakdown of functional categories in Greek aphasia: evidence from agreement, tense, and aspect. Aphasiology, 20, 723–743.Google Scholar
Wenzlaff, M., & Clahsen, H. (2004). Tense and agreement in German agrammatism. Brain & Language, 89, 57–68.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed