Thompson Cynthia K, Lee Miseon
Aphasia and Neurolinguistics Research Laboratory, Northwestern University, 2240 Campus Drive, Evanston, IL 60208-3540, USA.
J Neurolinguistics. 2009 Jul;22(4):354-369. doi: 10.1016/j.jneuroling.2008.11.003.
This study examined the factors that affect agrammatic sentence production by testing eight agrammatic aphasic participants' comprehension and production of active and passive sentences using two types of English psych verbs, those with an Experiencer-marked subject (Subject-Experiencer (SubExp)) and those with an Experiencer-marked object (Object-Experiencer (ObjExp)). The Argument Structure Complexity Hypothesis (ASCH, [J. Neuroling. 16 (2003) 151]) posits that the verb (and sentence) production difficulties observed in agrammatic aphasia can be attributed, at least in part, to the argument structure properties of verbs, with verbs that are marked for more complex argument structure (in terms of the number and type of arguments) presenting greater difficulty than those with less complex argument structure entries. Based on previous linguistic analyses of psych verbs, ObjExp psych verbs are more complex than SubjExp verbs. Therefore, we predicted that the former would present greater production (but not comprehension) difficulty than the latter. Results showed above chance comprehension of all sentence types, with the exception of SubjExp passive constructions, in which the subject position is occupied by a non-Experiencer argument. In active sentence production, ObjExp verbs were more impaired than SubjExp verbs. However, the opposite pattern was noted for passive sentence production. While all participants had difficulty producing passive sentences of both types, they showed better performance on ObjExp verbs, as compared to SubjExp verbs, in which the Experiencer is in the subject position. Further, agrammatic aphasic speakers showed a preference for producing actives for SubjExp verbs and passives for ObjExp verbs, indicating that the thematic role requirements of selected verbs (e.g., Experiencer, Theme) influence production patterns, as they do in normal speakers. These data, as well as the error patterns seen in our patients, support the ASCH and suggest that sentence production, disrupted in agrammatic aphasia, is impaired to a greater extent when the argument structure properties of the verb increase in complexity.
本研究通过使用两种类型的英语心理动词(即主语为经历者标记的动词(主语-经历者(SubExp))和宾语为经历者标记的动词(宾语-经历者(ObjExp)))来测试8名语法缺失性失语症参与者对主动句和被动句的理解与产出,以此探究影响语法缺失性句子产出的因素。论元结构复杂性假说(ASCH,[《神经语言学杂志》16 (2003) 151])认为,语法缺失性失语症中观察到的动词(和句子)产出困难至少部分可归因于动词的论元结构属性,论元结构更复杂(就论元的数量和类型而言)的动词比论元结构较简单的动词呈现出更大的困难。基于先前对心理动词的语言学分析,ObjExp心理动词比SubjExp动词更复杂。因此,我们预测前者在产出(而非理解)方面会比后者呈现出更大的困难。结果显示,除了SubjExp被动结构(其主语位置由非经历者论元占据)外,所有句子类型的理解正确率均高于随机水平。在主动句产出中,ObjExp动词比SubjExp动词受损更严重。然而,被动句产出呈现出相反的模式。虽然所有参与者在产出两种类型的被动句时都有困难,但与经历者处于主语位置的SubjExp动词相比,他们在ObjExp动词上表现更好。此外,语法缺失性失语症患者表现出一种偏好,即SubjExp动词产出主动句,ObjExp动词产出被动句,这表明所选动词的题元角色要求(如经历者、主题)会影响产出模式,正常说话者也是如此。这些数据以及我们在患者中看到的错误模式支持了ASCH,并表明在语法缺失性失语症中受到干扰的句子产出,在动词的论元结构属性复杂性增加时会受到更大程度的损害。