What goes wrong during passive sentence production in agrammatic aphasia

An eyetracking study

Soojin Cho*, Cynthia K Thompson

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

21 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: Production of passive sentences is often impaired in agrammatic aphasia and has been attributed both to an underlying structural impairment (e.g., Schwartz, Saffran, Fink, Myers, & Martin, 1994) and to a morphological deficit (e.g., Caplan & Hanna, 1998; Faroqi-Shah & Thompson, 2003). However, the nature of the deficit in passive sentence production is not clear due to methodological issues present in previous studies. Aims: This study examined active and passive sentence production in nine agrammatic aphasic speakers under conditions of structural priming using eyetracking to test whether structural impairments occur independently of morphological impairments and whether the underlying nature of error types is reflected in on-line measures, i.e., eye movements and speech onset latencies. Methods & Procedures: Nine participants viewed and listened to a prime sentence in either active or passive voice, and then repeated it aloud. Next, a target picture appeared on the computer monitor and participants were instructed to describe it using the primed sentence structure. Outcomes & Results: Participants made substantial errors in sentence structure, i.e., passives with role reversals (RRs) and actives-for-passives, but few errors in passive morphology. Longer gaze durations to the first-produced noun for passives with RRs as compared to correct passives were found before and during speech. For actives-for-passives, however, this pattern was found during speech, but not before speech. Conclusions: The deficit in passive sentence production does not solely arise from a morphological deficit, rather it stems, at least in part, from a structural level impairment. The underlying nature of passives with RRs is qualitatively different from that of actives for-passives, which cannot be clearly differentiated with off-line testing methodology.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1576-1592
Number of pages17
JournalAphasiology
Volume24
Issue number12
DOIs
StatePublished - Dec 1 2010

Fingerprint

Aphasia
speech disorder
deficit
Eye Movements
Passive Sentences
Impairment
Agrammatic Aphasia
Sentence Production
present
methodology

Keywords

  • Agrammatism
  • Eyetracking
  • Passive sentence
  • Sentence production deficit
  • Structural priming

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Otorhinolaryngology
  • Language and Linguistics
  • Developmental and Educational Psychology
  • Linguistics and Language
  • Neurology
  • Clinical Neurology
  • LPN and LVN

Cite this

@article{3825ed7a12b24d56973546c87983d3f2,
title = "What goes wrong during passive sentence production in agrammatic aphasia: An eyetracking study",
abstract = "Background: Production of passive sentences is often impaired in agrammatic aphasia and has been attributed both to an underlying structural impairment (e.g., Schwartz, Saffran, Fink, Myers, & Martin, 1994) and to a morphological deficit (e.g., Caplan & Hanna, 1998; Faroqi-Shah & Thompson, 2003). However, the nature of the deficit in passive sentence production is not clear due to methodological issues present in previous studies. Aims: This study examined active and passive sentence production in nine agrammatic aphasic speakers under conditions of structural priming using eyetracking to test whether structural impairments occur independently of morphological impairments and whether the underlying nature of error types is reflected in on-line measures, i.e., eye movements and speech onset latencies. Methods & Procedures: Nine participants viewed and listened to a prime sentence in either active or passive voice, and then repeated it aloud. Next, a target picture appeared on the computer monitor and participants were instructed to describe it using the primed sentence structure. Outcomes & Results: Participants made substantial errors in sentence structure, i.e., passives with role reversals (RRs) and actives-for-passives, but few errors in passive morphology. Longer gaze durations to the first-produced noun for passives with RRs as compared to correct passives were found before and during speech. For actives-for-passives, however, this pattern was found during speech, but not before speech. Conclusions: The deficit in passive sentence production does not solely arise from a morphological deficit, rather it stems, at least in part, from a structural level impairment. The underlying nature of passives with RRs is qualitatively different from that of actives for-passives, which cannot be clearly differentiated with off-line testing methodology.",
keywords = "Agrammatism, Eyetracking, Passive sentence, Sentence production deficit, Structural priming",
author = "Soojin Cho and Thompson, {Cynthia K}",
year = "2010",
month = "12",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1080/02687031003714442",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "24",
pages = "1576--1592",
journal = "Aphasiology",
issn = "0268-7038",
publisher = "Psychology Press Ltd",
number = "12",

}

What goes wrong during passive sentence production in agrammatic aphasia : An eyetracking study. / Cho, Soojin; Thompson, Cynthia K.

In: Aphasiology, Vol. 24, No. 12, 01.12.2010, p. 1576-1592.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - What goes wrong during passive sentence production in agrammatic aphasia

T2 - An eyetracking study

AU - Cho, Soojin

AU - Thompson, Cynthia K

PY - 2010/12/1

Y1 - 2010/12/1

N2 - Background: Production of passive sentences is often impaired in agrammatic aphasia and has been attributed both to an underlying structural impairment (e.g., Schwartz, Saffran, Fink, Myers, & Martin, 1994) and to a morphological deficit (e.g., Caplan & Hanna, 1998; Faroqi-Shah & Thompson, 2003). However, the nature of the deficit in passive sentence production is not clear due to methodological issues present in previous studies. Aims: This study examined active and passive sentence production in nine agrammatic aphasic speakers under conditions of structural priming using eyetracking to test whether structural impairments occur independently of morphological impairments and whether the underlying nature of error types is reflected in on-line measures, i.e., eye movements and speech onset latencies. Methods & Procedures: Nine participants viewed and listened to a prime sentence in either active or passive voice, and then repeated it aloud. Next, a target picture appeared on the computer monitor and participants were instructed to describe it using the primed sentence structure. Outcomes & Results: Participants made substantial errors in sentence structure, i.e., passives with role reversals (RRs) and actives-for-passives, but few errors in passive morphology. Longer gaze durations to the first-produced noun for passives with RRs as compared to correct passives were found before and during speech. For actives-for-passives, however, this pattern was found during speech, but not before speech. Conclusions: The deficit in passive sentence production does not solely arise from a morphological deficit, rather it stems, at least in part, from a structural level impairment. The underlying nature of passives with RRs is qualitatively different from that of actives for-passives, which cannot be clearly differentiated with off-line testing methodology.

AB - Background: Production of passive sentences is often impaired in agrammatic aphasia and has been attributed both to an underlying structural impairment (e.g., Schwartz, Saffran, Fink, Myers, & Martin, 1994) and to a morphological deficit (e.g., Caplan & Hanna, 1998; Faroqi-Shah & Thompson, 2003). However, the nature of the deficit in passive sentence production is not clear due to methodological issues present in previous studies. Aims: This study examined active and passive sentence production in nine agrammatic aphasic speakers under conditions of structural priming using eyetracking to test whether structural impairments occur independently of morphological impairments and whether the underlying nature of error types is reflected in on-line measures, i.e., eye movements and speech onset latencies. Methods & Procedures: Nine participants viewed and listened to a prime sentence in either active or passive voice, and then repeated it aloud. Next, a target picture appeared on the computer monitor and participants were instructed to describe it using the primed sentence structure. Outcomes & Results: Participants made substantial errors in sentence structure, i.e., passives with role reversals (RRs) and actives-for-passives, but few errors in passive morphology. Longer gaze durations to the first-produced noun for passives with RRs as compared to correct passives were found before and during speech. For actives-for-passives, however, this pattern was found during speech, but not before speech. Conclusions: The deficit in passive sentence production does not solely arise from a morphological deficit, rather it stems, at least in part, from a structural level impairment. The underlying nature of passives with RRs is qualitatively different from that of actives for-passives, which cannot be clearly differentiated with off-line testing methodology.

KW - Agrammatism

KW - Eyetracking

KW - Passive sentence

KW - Sentence production deficit

KW - Structural priming

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=78649463981&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=78649463981&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1080/02687031003714442

DO - 10.1080/02687031003714442

M3 - Article

VL - 24

SP - 1576

EP - 1592

JO - Aphasiology

JF - Aphasiology

SN - 0268-7038

IS - 12

ER -