Reading...
Play button
Play button
Use LEFT and RIGHT arrow keys to navigate between flashcards;
Use UP and DOWN arrow keys to flip the card;
H to show hint;
A reads text to speech;
190 Cards in this Set
- Front
- Back
|
compound bilinguals
|
l1 and l2 acquired in the same context. the two systems merge. not function as a monolingual in either community
|
|
|
coordinate bilinguals
|
L1 and L2 acquired in separate contexts. each language is complete in it
|
|
|
subordinate bilinguals
|
L2 acquisition based on L1. only one system develops. function as monolingual only in L1. bypical of beginning L2 learners.
|
|
|
late acquisition
|
L2 learned between 3 years and puberty
|
|
|
additive
|
positive social status
|
|
|
subtractive
|
negative social status
|
|
|
"input switch" theory
|
bilinguals can deactivate one language while using the other. experiment - written word in one language does not activate words in the other language with the same meaning.
|
|
|
parallel activation
|
both langauges are activated even when bilinguals are using one langauge.
|
|
|
study for serial activation
|
12 russian/english late bilinguals. eye movements monitored while listening in monolingual situation. they had more looks to interlingual distractor compared to control distractor. evidence that bilingual listeners do not deactivate irrelevant lexicon in a monolingual mode.
|
|
|
bilingual word recognition models.
|
1. langauge selective access, independent lexicons. 2. langauge selective acccess, integrated lexicon. 3. langauge non-selective access, independent lexicon. 4. langauge non selective access, integrated lexicon
|
|
|
orthographic neighborhood effect
|
word identification is sensitive to the number of orthographic neighbors and frequency of such orthographically similar words. ex. tolk, talk. study w/ duch/english bilinguals - target word recognition significantly influenced by the number of orthographic neighbors in the non-target language. evidence for non-selective access to an integrated lexicon.
|
|
|
monolingual langauge mode
|
bilingual speaker adopts langauge of monolingual interlocutor and deactivates other language. the deactivation is rarely complete. sometimes interference occurs. interference may be static --> constant trace of other langauge. dynamic --> use of L2 is disrupted by the activation of L1 items.
|
|
|
bilingual langauge mode
|
use of both langauges in conversations with other bilinguals. bilingual chooses a base language and then intermixes the other langauge when needed. two types of intermixing: code switching - complete shift at sentence level. code mixing -- interjecting single words or phrase of one language when speaking another.
|
|
|
evidence that L1 = L2 area
|
- studies showed activation of same reachions in LH for both langagues for both early and late.
|
|
|
evidence that L1 does not equal L2 area
|
when french/english bilinguals were listening to stories L1 and L2 were activated in different areas
|
|
|
Age of acquisition effects
|
1. similar activation areas in early bilinguals. 2. different activation patterns in broca's area for late bilinguals.
|
|
|
proficiency effects for bilinguals
|
low proficiency late bilinguals show that L1 engages more temporal cortex than L2. high proficiency late bilinguals, on the other hand, showed no difference.
|
|
|
parallel impairment
|
both langaugaes impaired in same manner to same degree
|
|
|
differential impairment
|
one langague impaired more than other
|
|
|
differential aphasia
|
different types of aphasia in different langauges
|
|
|
selective aphasia
|
only one langaue is affected and other is fine
|
|
|
blending
|
use of wrogn language when speaking to monolinguals, may occur at any level of linguistic structure.
|
|
|
parallel recovery
|
languages improve at the same rate and to the same degree, relative to premorbid levels
|
|
|
differential recovery
|
pattern of recovery is different for different langauges
|
|
|
successive recovery
|
one language begins to recover after the other
|
|
|
antagonistic recovery
|
as one lang. recovers the other decays.
|
|
|
selective recovery
|
only one lang. recovers
|
|
|
treatment in bilingual aphasia
|
1. treating one lang often improves performance in other languages. 2. many studies find that the treated language may improve more than the untreated one 3. training the less dominant lang MAY be nore beneficial in facilitated crosslinguistic generalization than training more proficient lang in an unbalanced bilingual
|
|
|
subcategorization
|
the phrasal categories which must co-occur with a verb in a sentence ex. NP V, NP V NP, NP V NP PP
|
|
|
intransitive
|
NP V - the woman slept
|
|
|
transitive
|
NP V NP - the woman fixed the computer
|
|
|
dative
|
NP V NP PP/NP - the woman put the book on the shelf
|
|
|
thematic roles
|
agent, experiencer, theme, goal, instrument
|
|
|
grammatical roles __ equal thematic roles
|
do not. alana gave the flapjack to nolan. alana - agent, flapjack - theme, nolan - goal. alana - subject, flapjack - direct object, to nolan - PP
|
|
|
argument structure
|
the set of participants entailed by a verb. up to three arguments. agent
(x), theme(y), goal(z) |
|
|
one artument verbs
|
1. intransitive - john sleeps (external argument) 2. unaccusative - the snow melts (internal argument)
|
|
|
two argument verbs
|
1. transitive - john fixed the car 2. psych verbs (experiencer verbs) - the children admired the clown.
|
|
|
dative verbs
|
alternating and non-alternating: 1. john put the book on the table. 2. john sent the letter to his mother - john sent his mother the letter.
|
|
|
cross modal lexical decision
|
Subjects had to perform a complex secondary
task both in the immediate vicinity of the verb and also at a point well past the verb while listening to sentences for meaning. Reaction times to this secondary task show that both normal controls and agrammatic Broca’s aphasic subjects activate multiple argument structure possibilities for a verb in the vicinity of the verb, yet at a point downstream from the verb such effects disappear. REACtion times to 3 argument verbs are slower than reaction times to two argument verbs. |
|
|
john fixed the car in the garage
|
in the garage is an adjunct. for processing. argument is less time than adjunct in that one study.
|
|
|
all thematic possiblities are ____ when a verb is encountered
|
activated
|
|
|
there is ___ activation for 2 argument verbs
|
more
|
|
|
noncanonical is _____ than cononical
|
harder
|
|
|
wh- movement
|
who did the girl chase___?
|
|
|
NP movement
|
the boy was chased ____ by the girl. filler = the boy . gap =___
|
|
|
Which doctor did the supervisor ^1 call ^2 to ....?
|
normals: RT faster for related words at point 2 ---brocas: no RT difference between points 1 and 2
|
|
|
global (syntactic) ambiguity
|
1. visiting relatives can be a pain 2. the lady hit the man with a book.
|
|
|
local (temporary) ambiguity - garden path sentences
|
The horse raced past the barn fell
|
|
|
sentence parsing strategies (garden path model)
|
syntactic analysis precedes semantic analysis. minimal attachment - attach incoming unit to the phrase being constructed, using the fewest possible nodes.... Late closure - incoming material is added to the clause or phrase currently being processed. add to curent phrase, don't close it.
|
|
|
prefer ___ and ____ structures
|
simple and recent
|
|
|
garden path model
|
minimal attachment and late closure
|
|
|
does sentence length increase comprehension difficulty?
|
no
|
|
|
_______ affects processing more than length
|
syntax
|
|
|
working memory in sentence comp. right branching and center imbedding
|
1. the horse kicked the dog (that chased the cat) 2. the cat (that chased the dog) kicked the horse. center imbedding are harder. distance between filler and gap.
|
|
|
sentence matching task
|
you can show that people assign structure to sentences and assign meaning based on that structure, even if there is no structure at all. 1. grammatical and meaningful 2. grammatical and nonsense 3. ungrammatical but meaning can be extracted 4. ungrammatical nonsense
|
|
|
non-syntactic processing
|
irrecversible sentences easier than reversible. 1. the man ate the cake. 2. the cake was eaten by the man 3. the man was eaten by the cake XXX
|
|
|
slow rise time
|
system slow to "turn on". miss initial portion of incoming message. use of carrier phrases help. longer utterances better than shorter
|
|
|
noise build up
|
progressive fatigue of input system. respond to initial input, but fade out over time. use of frequent pauses help
|
|
|
retention deficit
|
limitation in the amount of information that the system can process. performance deteriorates at the same point in all messages. use of chunking helps
|
|
|
intermittent auditory imperception
|
- system fades in and out randomly. there is no easy way to combat this.
|
|
|
factors affecting sentence comprehension in aphasia
|
- word meaning knowledge - grammatical category - length - speech rate - context
|
|
|
rate and redundancy
|
1. the apple is good (normal rate) 2. the apple is good (slow rate) 3. the apple is good to eat (enhanced context, normal rate) ----- comp best in 2 and 3
|
|
|
factors affecting sentence comp.
|
stress and intonation, and semantic reversibility --- reversibles are more difficult!!! 1. the girl kissed the boy. 2. the boy kicked the ball
|
|
|
passives are easier if they are ____
|
non-reversible
|
|
|
caramazza and zurif results
|
1. broca's and conduction aphasic patients cannot use syntactic information. they rely on non-syntactic strategies.
|
|
|
active, passive, s cleft, o cleft
|
actives are easier than passives, s cleft easier than o cleft
|
|
|
subject cleft
|
it was the elephant that hit the monkey
|
|
|
o cleft
|
it was the elephant that the monkey hit
|
|
|
arguments and thematic roles on complexity
|
1. the fewer number of arguments, thematic roles is easier 2. the fewer number of main berbs the easier.
|
|
|
caramazza and surif postulate that there will be similar patterns in comp and production because phrase structure rules are "broken" but...
|
counter evidence. individ patients show deficits in comp OR production
|
|
|
trace deletion hypothesis
|
- selective sentence comprehension deficit. - traces are underspcified in the s structure. syntactic knowledge for movement is MISSING. but this probably isn't right
|
|
|
(selective) syntactic accounts
|
counter evidence for trace deletion. 1. the girl was kissed ____ by the boy. 2. the girl was kissed ____ .................. TDH predicts at chance performance on full passives 1, below chance performance on truncated passives(2). BUT there is equivalent performance - patients were just as good/bad for both.
|
|
|
Slowed processing account
|
- proposes disorder of temporal synchrony. aphasic individs assign the same structure to sentences as controls but do so slowly.
|
|
|
counter evidence to slowed processing acount - eyetracking wh questions
|
who did the boy kiss __ at school? there was a strong preference to look at the person who got kissed at the gap site for both aphasic and control participants. correct fast processing of wh movement! only difference between groups was after gap - competition from distractor (agent) for aphasics.
|
|
|
mappind deficit hypothisis
|
proposed deficit in mapping thematic roles onto the syntax. grammaticality judgement unimpaired. syntactic representations intact
|
|
|
argument linking hypotheiss
|
proposed deficit in coordinating semantic and syntactic linking - syntactic structure is intact, but patients have difficulty assigning an interpretation to the structure.
|
|
|
counter evidence for the last 2
|
broca's aphasic patients exhibited intact judgements for argument - structure violations, but impaired judgements for sentences with movement. 1. it seems likely that john will win (movement) 2. the boy put the book (violation)
|
|
|
working memory limitations
|
positive correlation between memory span and comp. of complex sentences in both normal and aphasic patietns. low memory = poor comp.
|
|
|
grammatical incoding levels
|
1. message 2. functional processing 3. positional processing 4. phonological encoding
|
|
|
what happens at the message level
|
macroplanning - deciding what to say .... microplanning - propositional form of message
|
|
|
what happens at the functional level
|
1. lemma activation - lexical selection of open class items. information associated with lemmas is accessed. 1. syntactic information - word class and subcat phrame 2. function assignment - grammatical roles, thematic roles
|
|
|
what happens at the positional level?
|
1. phrase structure building - creation of sentence phrame 2. free and bound morphemes accessed 3. case assignment - "I" vs "me" 4. phonological form of items accessed
|
|
|
errors suggesting functional level processing
|
1. semantic errors. she served cauliflower --> she served broccoli. 2. blending errors "a my offered coffee" a man (or guy) offered coffee - two lexical items blended together, sugessts flawed lexical selection
|
|
|
errors suggesting positional level processing
|
1. non-reversal word order errors - "did you stay up late very last night?" - words erroneously placed within the sentence frame. 2. stranding errors 3. lexeme errors
|
|
|
stranding errors
|
they were turking talkish - misattachment of grammatical morphemes to open class items. adjacent content words often affected - evidence that inflectional morphemes are features of the sentece frame.
|
|
|
lexeme ererors
|
he picked up the penstil
|
|
|
non-reversal word order errors
|
he is planting the garden in the flowers.
|
|
|
role reversal errors
|
the pupil gave her an A+ --> she gave the pupil an A+ -- functional or positional???/ 1. erroneous function assignment and or/ misordering of elements in the sentence form.
|
|
|
signs of agrammatism
|
1. reduced rate 2. grammatically ill-formed sentences 3. word order errors - misordering of arguments in a sentence string 4. reduced syntactic complexity
|
|
|
functional category errors for aphasics
|
1. omission of function words (auxiliaries, determiners, prepositions, complementizer) 2. omission or substitution of bound morphemes - verb inflection particularly vulnerable
|
|
|
open class deficit patterns in aphasics
|
1. reduced production of verbs - hierarchy of verb difficulty based on argument structure
|
|
|
production of verbs by type for aphasics
|
easiest to hardest. 1. intransitive 2. transitive 3. dative
|
|
|
PrAD subjects
|
have no verb argument structure hierarchy. semantically simple verbs are easier than complex verbs
|
|
|
unergatives and unaccusatives for aphasics
|
unergative is easier than unaccusative for aphasics because unaccusative has movement. 1. the man (agent) sleeps 2. the snowman (theme) melts Ti
|
|
|
argument structure complexity hypothesis
|
verbs with complex argument structure are more difficult for agrammatic aphasic individuals to produce as compared to those with less complex argument structure entries 1. when the number of arguments increases, production difficulty increases. 2. when argument structure triggers movement operations, difficulty increases
|
|
|
other production patterns of agrammatic aphasics
|
1. produce primarily agents and themes 2. produce few goals 3. adjuncts are more difficult than arguments
|
|
|
economy of effort theory of agrammatism
|
1. focused on motoric restraints 2. over-reliance on content words considered conscious attempt to maximize the amount of information with the fewest words 3. redundant elements deleted from sentences 4. however there is contrary evidence - patients produced less information overall (problem not just with economy)
|
|
|
adaptation theory of agrammatism
|
1. output reflects conscious or unconscious adaptation to damage 2. idea is that patitent uses simplest productions (little or nothing to do with language structure)
|
|
|
tree pruning hypothesis for agrammatism
|
- everything above the line in the tree is impaired. everything below line in tree is intact "Tree Pruning Hypothesis, according to which the highest nodes of the syntactic tree, which are required for Wh questions in Hebrew, Arabic, and English and for yes/no questions in English, are impaired or inaccessible in agrammatism."
|
|
|
paragrammatism
|
sentence production deficit associated with fluent aphasia. 1. semantically empty speech 2. substitution of grammatical morphemes 3. phonological and neologistic paraphasias
|
|
|
theories of paragrammatism
|
1. poor comprehension/ reduced feedback 2. reduced inhibition
|
|
|
there was a shift in focus of healthcare in the 20th century from
|
from cure to functional management of the condition
|
|
|
development of the ICIDH ( international classification of impairments, disabilities and handicap)
|
need to measure the consequences of health conditions -- classification of diablements which groups consequences associated with health conditions.
|
|
|
disablement covers three dimentions
|
1. impairment -- body structures or function, impairment of the brain or brain structures 2. disabilities -- problems in daily life activities, communication 3. handicap -- affects participation in society
|
|
|
goals of assessment
|
1. etiologic goals - presence or absence of aphasia 2. cognitive, linguistic and pragmatic goals - strengths and weaknesses 3. treatment goals - determination of candidacy for and prognosis in treatment
|
|
|
scope of the assessment process
|
before, during and after rehab process. testing that is RELIABLE, SENSITIVE, VALID
|
|
|
validity
|
1. content validity - does test measure all of the behaviors that it should measure 2. construct validity - does test relate to other measures of the same construct? 3. sensitivity - does it accurately predict whether a patient is aphasic?
|
|
|
reliability
|
test-retest reliability
|
|
|
general procedures in assessment
|
1. case history 2. initial impressions 3. neuropsychological assessment 4. aphasia tests 4. diagnostic decisions
|
|
|
bedside evaluations
|
1. swiftly evaluate language abilities before a more thorough examinatino. they are NOT designed to replace longer evals.
|
|
|
ALPS (aphasia language performance scales)
|
1. 20-30 minutes 2. examiner can use objects in pockets and patient's room 3. 10 items of increasing difficulty in 4 modalities
|
|
|
why standard testing?
|
to measure progress reliably
|
|
|
how many comprehensive aphasia tests in canada and US?
|
Five 1. MTDDA 2. PICA 3. WAB 4. BDAE 5. ADP
|
|
|
MTDDA (minnesota test for differential diagnosis of aphasia)
|
1. oldest and most comprehensive 2. based on aphasia as a unidimentional multimodal impairment 3. all modalities tested and rating in each 4. aphasia type assigned by impairment pattern (simple aphasia, aphasia with visual involvement etc. ) 5. provides prognostic capabilities. 6. normative data on small sample size. 7. 4-6 hours
|
|
|
PICA (Porch Index of Communicative Ability)
|
1. highly standardized test 2. verbal, gestural, and writing subtests 3. 40 hours or training for scoring 4. strong reliability and standardization but doesn't reflect natural communication abilities. takes 1 hour
|
|
|
which tests diagnose aphasia syndromes?
|
1. BDAE 2. WAB 3. ADP
|
|
|
BDAE (Boston Diagnostic Aphasia Examination)
|
1. provide comprehensive range of communicative abilities and classifies aphasia type 2. four sections focusing on lang modality 3. classification of aphasia into syndromes according to symptoms 4. normative data 5. lack of summary scores makes difficult to compare with other tests
|
|
|
WAB (Western Aphasia Bettery)
|
1. classifies aphasia subtypes and rates severity 2. tests auditory comp, spoken expression, reading and writing 3. aphasia quotient, lang q, performance q, cortical q
|
|
|
WAB picture vs. BDAE picture
|
WAB picture elicited more enumeration than BDAE picture and information was produced at a slower rate in response to WAB pic.
|
|
|
ADP (Aphasia Diagnostic Profiles)
|
1. nine subtests (speaking, listening, reading, writing, gestural) 2. id aphasia type, severity profile, id patient's strongest response modality - helps guide therapy, error profiles, behavioral profile 2. 40-45 minutes.
|
|
|
areas of supplemental testing
|
1. lexical-semantic processes (production, comp) 2. morphological and syntactic processes 3. discourse level 4. reading comp 5. narrative sample
|
|
|
boston naming test
|
detects mild word finding impairments. confrontation naming. analyzes error types. 1. can pick up perceverations, visual perception problems 2. does not consider semantic class, grammatical class, word frequency 3. does not test verbs 4. doesn't have good info on how to administer
|
|
|
TAWF (test of adolescent and adult word finding)
|
well standardized. has naming of nouns and verbs
|
|
|
An object and action naming battery
|
1. tests both nouns and verbs 2. items controlled for length, frequenncy, age of acquisition, visual complexity 3. not well standardized 4. not controlled for verb type
|
|
|
Pyramids and Palm Trees
|
To determine if patient has semantic or modality specific impairment. 3 pictures (pyramids, pine tree, or palm tree). no normative data
|
|
|
The token test
|
Tests deficits in auditory comprehension. length and complex syntax. can detect mild comprehension impairments. can detect changes in comp over time. does NOT consider shape and color deficit. the revised one is too lengthy
|
|
|
Psycholinguistic assessment of language performance (PALPA)
|
1. based on ellis and young model 2. auditory processing, picture and word semantics, reading and spelling 3. NOT well standardized 3. not controlled for semantic class or grammatical class
|
|
|
Northwestern Naming Battery
|
based on ellis and young model of processing. does NOT test reading and writing. Nouns and verb naming. nouns by semantic category, verbs by argument structure. tests word comp, repitition, semantic association. 40 min.
|
|
|
The Verb and sentence test (VAST)
|
tests verbs (comp, production, morphology) sentences (comp, grammaticality judgements, sentence production). not well standardized.
|
|
|
NAVI
|
assessment of verbal morphology - distinguishes regular and irregular verbs. analyze error patterns.
|
|
|
Philadelphia comprehension battery for aphasia (PCBA)
|
tests lexical AND syntactic comp. not standardized.
|
|
|
Northwestern assessment of verbs and sentences
|
1. test verb by type, test sentence by type, 2. verb comp, verb naming, argument structure production, sentence priming, sentence comp
|
|
|
The Reporter's test
|
examiner touches/moves tokens and asks subject to tell what he/she did
|
|
|
Story completion test
|
"my friend comes in, I want him to sit down, so I say to him: what?" Seven structures tested, consideres complexity of structures tested. no standardization
|
|
|
Analysis of aphasic langague samples
|
indepth method developed explicitly for coding aphasic lang samples. uses cinderella story as basis. does not consider verbs by type. does not consider sentence type or complexity
|
|
|
Northwestern narrative language sample analysis
|
uses cinderella story as basis . important clinical outcome measures. open class - closed class ratio. noun - verb ratio. complex-simple sentence ratio. proportion of verb with correct argument structure.
|
|
|
Discourse Comprehension Test (DCT)
|
examines comprehension of test. does not consider syntactic complexity in stories. all use simple sentence structure. good - reliability and validity, evaluates slow rise time and noise buildup.
|
|
|
The reading comprehension battery for aphasia
|
single word comp, functional reading, synonyms, sentence comp, paragraph reading. minimal validity and reliability. can do well based on general knowledge. real words vs. nonwords not addressed!!
|
|
|
functional assessment
|
1. measurement of activities/ limitations 2. mreasures basic communication 3. estimates ability to communicate in the natural environment 4. quick anad easy to administer
|
|
|
communicative effectiveness index
|
rated by caregivers. social needs, life skills, basic needs, health threts. strong reliability
|
|
|
ASHA functional assessment of communication skills (FACS)
|
focuses on evaluating the disability rather than the impairment. social communication, communication of basic needs, reading writing, daily planning. well standardized. 20 min.
|
|
|
Communicative abilities of daily living (CALD2)
|
first direct measure of communicative disability. examines production, comp, comp of cues from environment, use.
|
|
|
ASHA quality of communication life scale
|
aphasic individuals' own perspective. impact on relationships, interactions, social, work activities.
|
|
|
objectives of aphasia treatment
|
1. restoration - improve access, restore "normal" language processing, recruits neural tissue that is predisposed to support language 2. compensation - alternative methods - recruit neuroal tissue outside of language system 3. both approaches - facilitate functional use of language
|
|
|
efficacy
|
1. does treatment work? does one treatment work better than another? in what ways does treatment alter behavior?
|
|
|
when should you begin treatment?
|
1. begin after chronic aphasic impairment becomes evident - but there might be adverse psychological reaction to intensive therapy during acute stage 2. begin as soon as the patient is able to take notice of what is going on and is able to cooperate - might be most effective when brain is adjusting to spont. recov.
|
|
|
treated individuals improved ____ than untreated individuals
|
more
|
|
|
improvement was greatest when treatment was begun in the ____ stage
|
acute
|
|
|
_______ treatment, greater improvement
|
more intense. 2 hrs a week should be minimum
|
|
|
does time post onset make a difference in chronic patients?
|
no sig differences in response to treatemnt were found between groups of patients according to times postonset.
|
|
|
treatment for anomia
|
effect on treatment for anomia depends more on number of treated items than on number of repititions per item.
|
|
|
intense therapy over a _____ amount of time has strongest improvement
|
short. (total length of tx inversely correlated to improvement. total number of hours sig correlated with improvement.)
|
|
|
single subject controlled experimental design requirements.
|
1. definition of variables. 2. description of study participants 3. reliability of measurement 4. internal validity
|
|
|
_________ is the ultimate goal of treatment
|
generalization
|
|
|
stimulus generalization
|
stim can change
|
|
|
response generalization
|
response generalizes to other things
|
|
|
what items should be trained
|
start bid. the complexity account of treatment efficacy (CATE) training complex structures results in generalization to less complex structures when untreated structures encompass processes relevant to treated ones.
|
|
|
principles of aphasia treatment
|
focus intervention on patient deficits. use WHO framework - impairment goals, functional goals 2. use adult-like materials 3. start big 4. involve family and members of rehab team
|
|
|
training object clefts...
|
generalized to untrained who questions
|
|
|
training who questions
|
did not generalize to untrained object clefts.
|
|
|
object clefts are ____ difficult than wh-questions
|
more
|
|
|
behavioral approach
|
premise: language is lost. treatment uses basic behavioral principles. task decomposition, gradually increasing difficulty level, controlled environment. modeling, shaping, stimulus fading, reinforcement
|
|
|
Stimulus fading
|
1. here is a violin. say violin 2. here is a violin - what is it? 3. what is it? its a v- 4. what is it?
|
|
|
critique of behvioral approach
|
1. emphasis on HOW to train not WHAT to train. 2. view aphasia as a loss of language 3. principles can be used regardless of theory 4. reorganization 5. impairment level 6. stimulus generalization
|
|
|
Stimulation approach
|
language is not lost, problem with access to language. goal is to stimulate disrupted processes to act maximally. treatment - intensive auditory stimulation. 2. emphasis on stimulus (rate length, loudness) 3. every stim should elicit a response 4. elicit as many responses as possible 5. provide cues rather than correction for failed response 6. gradually increase complexity.
|
|
|
critique of stimulation approach
|
emphasis on HOW not WHAT to train. approach is vague. research does not support it. (no difference in naming regardless of repitition condition) Restoration, training impairment, stim generalizatoin
|
|
|
Helm Elicited Language Program for Syntax Stimulation (HELPSS)
|
1. sentence presented in story format, patient produces repitition 2. patient completes story using target sentence, no model. premise: agrammatism is a disorder of retrieval . intense stimulation for improved production - goes from easy to difficult.
|
|
|
Critique of HELPSS
|
heigherarchy does not go from syntactically easy to difficult. successful for improving trained sentence types but no generalization across sentences.
|
|
|
cognitive neuropsychological approach
|
premise: interacting language models, can be fractionated. treatment focuses on improving the language processing system. use model to guide what to train. use what is known about normal langauge processing to guide treatemnt itself. (semantic class, typicality, levels of production).
|
|
|
model-driven tratment of sentence deficits: mapping therapy
|
train patient to "map" semantics onto a sentence. train thematic roles. uses active written sentences. "susan drinks the soda" - patient dientifies verb, subject, object.
|
|
|
critique of cognitive neuropsychological approach
|
emphasis on WHAT to train but not WHAT stimuli to train. does not address HOW to treat. data availabe to support approach.
|
|
|
verb as core
|
train everything about verb. who, what, wehn why, etc.
|
|
|
verb argument structure training
|
emphasis placed on verb selection. based on argument structure, complexity considered. examines generalization. predicted across verb types. from more to less complex verbs. put words in order of agent action theme goal.
|
|
|
treatment of underlying forms TUF
|
focused on complex sentence comprehension and production. linguistically controlled for verb and sentence type. predicts generalization to linguistically related structures . subject raising --> passives.
|
|
|
wh movement and np movement?
|
Results showed generalization patterns constrained to type of movement; training wh-movement structures resulted in generalized production of untrained Wh-movement structures without influencing production of NP-movement structures. Similarly, training of NP-movement structures resulted in generalization only to other sentence types also relying on NP-movement. Aspects of sentence production in narrative contexts also was improved with treatment. These data indicate that movement to an argument (A) position as in NP-movement is distinct from movement to a non-argument (A-bar) position, required in Wh-movement. That is, the site where movement terminates in the s-structure of noncanonical sentences --i.e., the 'head of the chain' -- influences sentence production. These findings show that linguistic properties of sentences influence sentence production breakdown and recovery in aphasia and provide a method for lawful predictions.
|
|
|
gap-filling in aphasia. the girl put on a shirt that her mother picked ___ for her. the girl put on a shirt that her mother fried ____ for her. pressed a button when sentence began to sound odd.
|
listened to sentences and pressed a button
when the sentences ‘‘stopped making sense.’’ Critical sentences contained an anomaly in object relative clauses or conjoined clauses. Results showed that both young normals and aphasic participants were able to reject anomalous sentences of both types. In addition, both groups showed evidence of filler-gap resolution on-line. Importantly, however, there was evidence of a treatment effect for the aphasic patients: those who received treatment showed better performance than those who had not. Treated patients were more successful than the untreated patients in detecting the anomaly in filler-gap conditions, rejecting the anomalous filler-gap sentences reliably more often than the non-anomalous ones, like the young normals.These results indicate that individuals with agrammatic aphasia appear to retain some gap-filling capacity and that treatment can improve their ability to make use of this capacity. |
|
|
Treatment of underlying forms functional categories (TUF funcat)
|
complimentizers (if, whether, that) are higher up on the gree than morphology (tense, agreemnet) . the further up the tree the more impaired.
|
|
|
generalization predicted by tree pruning
|
if you train further up the tree it generalizes down the tree.
|
|
|
C, T or AGR
|
C T or AGR may be underspecified. underspecified nodes cannot project higher. everything above line is impaired.
|
|
|
CP, TP, AgrP
|
CP, complimentizer - if that whether. TP tense phrase - tense Agreement - /s/ - it goes in that order from most complex down.
|
|
|
verb inflection treatment
|
thematic role training, grammatical encoding - past, tense/agreement marking, grammatical sentence production. complimentizer treatment They see that the boy is painting the mother. results - improved on complimentizers, verb inflection, all grammatical morphemes.
|
|
|
cognitive approach
|
premise - language is mediated by other cognitive processes, attention, memory, resource allocation. treatment focuses on attention, memory, problem solving.
|
|
|
right hemisphere mediation
|
premise - minor hemisphere has linguistic, visual spacial, affective prosodic , music ability. treatment - use right brain abilities to mediate communication. approaches - MIT.
|
|
|
critique of MIT
|
little data, method not replicable. no reliability.
|
|
|
pragmatic/ functional approach
|
premis - communication in real life situations should be the focus of treatment. goal - living with aphasia. treatment - improved communication by emphasizing pragmatic funtion of langauge. functional goals.
|
|
|
promoting aphasics communication effectiveness
|
emphasis on communication exchange. exchange new information. uses barrier tasks. focus on content, not form of message
|
|
|
response elaboration training
|
goal - increase length and information content of responses. patients encouraged to elaborate on what they are reminded of when responding to stimuli. produces, increased number of content words per picture. increases variety of responses to same stimulus. moderate generalization.
|
|
|
amerind-sign
|
based on native american hand talk. developed to aid communication among native american indian tribes. iconic signs. -- highly transparent signs, no grammar. easily learned and highly recognizable.
|
|
|
gesture training effects
|
gesture alone - no change in verbal production. gesture plus verbal - improves both gestural and verbal output.
|
|
|
life participation approach
|
consumer driven. focused on immediate and long term life goals. focus on re-engagement in life.
|
