IDEATIONAL APRAXIA

处理实践的理论模型将行动计划 分为两个主要组成部分：一个执行概念系统和一个 生产系统。 我们将概念性失用症定义为 一种大脑受损的病人已经失去了概念的障碍 与工具使用相关的知识，而不一定是性能 知识 我们认为，这种概念混乱可能发生在 3个不同的层次：1. 大脑受损的病人可能无法 将工具或仪器与一个或多个物体相关联， 通常会受到该工具的影响。 例如患者 可能无法将锤子与钉子（工具对象）相关联 关系知识）。 2. 病人可能会失去知识， 给定工具执行的机械动作类型，或 完成一个动作（工具）需要什么类型的机械动作 动作关系知识）。 例如，当给一个锤子， 应该磅而不是扭曲。 3. 最后，患者可能会失败 理解问题的机械本质， 工具可能提供的机械优势（机械知识）。 在这项资助中，我们计划研究这些潜在的概念， 偏侧性脑损伤患者的疾病。 虽然 工具对象知识、工具动作知识和 机械知识可以被分散地或双边地表示， 我们人类的大部分知识 是单方面或不对称的。 我们 因此，我想了解有关工具使用的概念是否也 不对称或单侧呈现。 De Renzi等人 认为概念性失用症与语言有关， 理解障碍 我们计划的研究将试图了解 这些概念障碍是否与语言有关 理解障碍 我们还想知道， 实践的概念系统是相关的，或者可以独立于 实践生产系统的紊乱。 最后，我们希望 了解与之相关的解剖病变的性质， 这些行为执行障碍

Theoretical models that deal with praxis divide the action plan into two major components: an executive-conceptual system and a production system. We define ideational apraxia as a conceptual disorder where a brain damaged patient has lost conceptual knowledge related to tool use and not necessarily performance knowledge. We propose that this conceptual disorder may occur at 3 different levels: 1. a brain damaged patient may not be able to associate a tool or instrument with the object or objects that usually receive the action of that tool. For example, a patient may not be able to associate a hammer with a nail (tool object relationship knowledge). 2. A patient may have lost knowledge as to what type of mechanical action is performed by a given tool or what type of mechanical action is needed to complete an act (tool action relationship knowledge). For example, when given a hammer, one should pound rather than twist. 3. Lastly, a patient may fail to understand the mechanical nature of problems as well as the mechanical advantages that tool may afford (mechanical knowledge). In this grant, we plan to study these potential conceptual disorders in patients with lateralized brain damage. Although it is possible that tool-object knowledge, tool action knowledge and mechanical knowledge may be diffusely or bilaterally represented, it has been well established that in man much of our knowledge about the world is represented unilaterally or asymmetrically. We therefore want to learn if the concepts about tool use are also asymmetrically or unilaterally presented. De Renzi, et al. suggested that ideational apraxia is associated with language comprehension disorders. Our planned studies will attempt to learn if these conceptual disorders are or are not related to language comprehension disorders. We also want to learn if disorders of the praxis conceptual system are related or can occur independently of disorders in the praxis production systems. Lastly, we want to learn the nature of the anatomic lesions that are associated with these praxis executive disorders.