Verb use in aphasic and non-aphasic personal discourse: What is normal?

Verb use in aphasic and non-aphasic personal discourse: What is normal?
复制标题

DOI:
10.1016/j.jneuroling.2013.12.002
复制
发表时间:
2014-03-01
影响因子:
2
通讯作者:
Dipper, Lucy
Dipper, Lucy
中科院分区:
心理学3区
文献类型:
--
作者:
Cruice, Madeline;Pritchard, Madeleine;Dipper, Lucy

文献摘要

被引文献

相似文献

句子和话语分析研究提供了证据,在失语症的动词生产能力受损和完整的基础上,在失语症亚型,失语症和控制扬声器之间的比较。比较是复杂的,由于不同的启发任务和体裁,参与者样本量,失语症亚型,以及在确定流利的方法差异。在这项研究中,我们研究了失语症对说话者谈论他们的生活质量的能力的影响,采用三种分析方法对58名说话者的话语(29名主要是流利的失语症说话者; 29名非失语症说话者)。两组说话者产生了相似的数量,重量和类型的动词,大量重叠的动词标记。关系动词、物质动词和心理动词占主导地位。与非失语者相比,失语者的谓词论元结构得分显著降低,产生的0论元结构、[Aux + 0]结构、1论元结构和1论元结构均显著增加,而1论元结构中含有小句嵌入的成分则显著减少。本研究为失语症患者动词产生的完整性(语义量和类型)和受损性(PAS)提供了证据。两个参与者样本内的异质性挑战了正态性和典型性的假设。(C)2014爱思唯尔有限公司版权所有。
Sentence and discourse analysis research provides evidence of both impaired and intact ability in verb production in aphasia, based on comparisons made within aphasic subtypes, and between aphasic and control speakers. Comparisons are complicated due to variation in elicitation tasks and genre, participant sample size, and aphasia subtype, as well as methodological differences in determining fluency. In this study, we examined the impact of aphasia on speakers' capacity to talk about their quality of life, applying three analytical methods to 58 speakers' discourse (29 predominantly fluent aphasic speakers; 29 non-aphasic speakers). Both speaker groups produced similar quantity, weight, and type of verbs, with substantial overlap in verb tokens. Relational, material and mental verbs were prevalent. Aphasic speakers had significantly lower predicate argument structure scores, and produced significantly more 0 argument structures, more [Aux + 0] constructions, fewer 1 argument structures in general and fewer 1 argument structures with clausal embedding, compared to nonaphasic speakers. This study provides evidence for intact (semantic weight and type) and impaired (PAS) verb production in aphasia. The heterogeneity within both participant samples challenges assumptions of normality and typicality. (C) 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.