ACCESS TO ARGUMENT STRUCTURE IN AGRAMMATISM

访问语法中的论证结构

• 批准号: 3461887
• 负责人: JUDY ANNE SHEPARD-KEGL
• 金额: $ 10.64万
• 依托单位: RUTGERS THE STATE UNIV OF NJ NEWARK
• 依托单位国家: 美国
• 财政年份: 1992
• 资助国家: 美国
• 起止时间: 1992-09-30 至 1997-08-31
• 项目状态: 已结题
• 来源: https://reporter.nih.gov/project-details/3461887
• 关键词: aphasia; attention; brain injury; computer human interaction; eye movements; human subject; language; language disorders; neural information processing; neuropsychological tests; neuropsychology; psycholinguistics; reading; semantics; short term memory; speech; stimulus /response; videotape /videodisc; visual tracking; vocabulary

We propose to account for what masquerade as preserved syntactic abilities by patients commonly characterized as "agrammatic" (literally without grammar) and to highlight those aspects of their linguistic behavior that warrant special attention in developing successful diagnostic tools and therapies that can maximize their communicative abilities. Observations of spared syntactic abilities preserved in agrammatics might seem to disconfirm linguistic theories that assume autonomy between the syntax and the lexicon. When language breakdown fails to pattern along lines predicted by a grammatical theory, one is led to assume that the theory has nothing to contribute to our knowledge of language breakdown and its remediations. Furthermore, we might also be forced to conclude that data from aphasia make no contribution to the development or refinement of linguistic theory. Fortunately, the premise that data from agrammatics is incompatible with linguistic theory is false since such a conclusion would offer little hope for the development of fine grained diagnostic tools or linguistically informed remediation methods. We argue that the spared "syntactic abilities" that have been attributed to agrammatics, making this label somewhat of an oyxmoron, are actually spared lexical abilities. Recent linguistic and psycholinguistic research, including our own, indicates that the lexical representation of verbs includes enough information about the type and number of arguments (noun phrases or sentential complements, as well as any other obligatory lexical material such as particles, measure complements, and associated idiomatic material) required by individual verbs to be equivalent to the phrase structure representation of its verb phrase in the absence of the effects of any movement rules required by the syntax. Crucially, in our view the structural configuration that characterizes the grammatical relations among the elements within a sentence is not part of the syntax, but is part of the lexicon. In fact, it is part of the lexical representation of a verb. Agrammatics retain and can use this lexical information. What they cannot do is unravel the effects of syntactic operations on this basic configuration. They only exhibit what has been interpreted as syntactic comprehension in those sentences where they can decode information on the basis of lexical knowledge. From the lexical entry of a verb, we can predict which sentences will be problematic. Specifically, we will use our research on argument structure and verb class organization to better characterize the sentence production and comprehension abilities of agrammatic speakers with a view toward contributing to the development therapies that can utilize the phrase structure information present in lexical entries to facilitate the production and processing of certain syntactic constructions while indicating those constructions that are likely to be less accessible. To verify that we have identified the appropriate and the specific grammatical deficit underlying agrammatic linguistic behavior, we propose to conduct an extensive series of sentence production and comprehension experiments, testing their on-line performance as well as their performance on more traditional secondary tasks. Agrammatics are a logical starting point for this type of study both because their pattern of language breakdown is compatible with the enriched theory of the lexicon we espouse and also because we have access to a large body of preexisting production data we can use as a testing ground for our model. However, we intend to extend our scope to include a representative range of aphasic subjects because we believe our model makes specific and verifiable predictions about systematic and distinct patterns of sparing and loss in other population of aphasics.

我们建议解释什么伪装成保留的句法能力 通常被描述为“语法不通”的患者（字面上没有 语法），并强调他们的语言行为的那些方面， 在开发成功的诊断工具方面值得特别注意， 能最大限度地提高他们沟通能力的疗法。 语法学中保留下来的多余句法能力的观察可能 似乎不证实语言理论，假设自治之间的 语法和词汇。 当语言崩溃未能沿着模式 一个语法理论预测的行，一个是导致假设， 理论对我们的语言崩溃知识没有任何贡献， 其补救措施。 此外，我们还可能被迫得出结论， 来自失语症的数据对发展或完善 语言学理论 幸运的是，来自语法学的数据是 与语言学理论不相容是错误的，因为这样的结论 为开发细粒度诊断工具提供了很少的希望， 语言上知情的补救方法。 我们认为，保留下来的“句法能力”，已被归因于 语法，使这个标签有点oyxmoron，实际上是幸免于难 词汇能力 最近的语言学和心理语言学研究， 包括我们自己的，表明动词的词汇表征 包括有关参数（名词）的类型和数量的足够信息 短语或间接补语，以及任何其他强制性词汇 材料，如粒子，测量补充，和相关的惯用法 材料）由单个动词要求与短语等价 动词短语的结构表征 语法要求的任何移动规则。 关键是，我们认为， 语法结构：表征语法关系的结构配置， 句子中的成分不是句法的一部分，而是 词典 事实上，它是动词词汇表征的一部分。 无语法学保留并可以使用这些词汇信息。 他们不能做的 我们要做的就是解开句法操作对这个基本的 配置. 他们只展示了被解释为句法的东西 在这些句子中，他们可以解码关于 词汇知识的基础。 从动词的词条中，我们可以 预测哪些句子会有问题。 具体来说，我们将利用我们对论元结构和动词类的研究 组织，以更好地描述句子的产生， 语法型说话者的理解能力， 有助于开发可以利用这一短语的疗法， 结构化词条中的信息，以便于 某些句法结构的产生和处理， 表示那些可能不太容易接近的建筑。 到 验证我们已经确定了适当的和具体的语法 缺乏潜在的语法语言行为，我们建议进行一个 大量的句子生成和理解实验， 测试他们的在线性能，以及他们的性能在更多 传统的次要任务。 语法学是这类研究的逻辑起点， 因为他们的语言崩溃模式与丰富的 我们拥护的词汇理论，也因为我们有机会获得大量的 我们可以使用大量预先存在的生产数据作为我们的测试场 模型 但是，我们打算扩大我们的范围，包括一个代表 一系列失语症受试者，因为我们相信我们的模型使具体的， 关于系统的和不同的稀疏模式的可验证的预测 和其他失语症患者的损失。