University of Geneva, Switzerland.
J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2012 Oct;55(5):S1535-43. doi: 10.1044/1092-4388(2012/11-0316).
One reason why the diagnosis of apraxia of speech (AOS) and its underlying impairment are often debated may lie in the fact that most patients do not display pure patterns of AOS. Mixed patterns are clearly acknowledged at other levels of impairment (e.g., lexical-semantic and lexical-phonological), and they have contributed to debate about the degree of interaction between encoding levels; by contrast, mixed impairments and mechanisms of interaction are less acknowledged at the levels of phonological and phonetic processes. Here, the author aims at bringing together empirical evidence in favor of an interaction between phonological and phonetic encoding and of the predominance of mixed patterns of impairment over pure phonetic impairment.
The author reviews empirical results from acoustic and psycholinguistic studies, both with healthy speakers and speakers with brain damage, favoring independent phonological and phonetic encoding and separable impairments as well as recent research pointing to an interaction between phonological and phonetic encoding processes and overlapping patterns of impairments.
Acknowledging interaction between phonological and phonetic processing has clear consequences on the definition of patterns of impairment. In particular, phonetic errors have not necessarily a phonetic origin, and most patterns of impairment are bound to display both phonological and phonetic features.
言语失用症(AOS)的诊断及其潜在障碍经常受到争议的原因之一可能在于,大多数患者并未表现出纯粹的言语失用症模式。混合模式在其他损伤水平(例如词汇语义和词汇语音)中得到了明确承认,并且它们促成了关于编码水平之间相互作用程度的争论;相比之下,在语音和语音过程水平上,混合损伤和相互作用机制则较少得到承认。在这里,作者旨在汇集支持语音和语音编码之间相互作用以及混合损伤模式优于纯语音损伤模式的实证证据。
作者回顾了来自声学和心理语言学研究的实证结果,这些研究涉及健康说话者和脑损伤说话者,支持独立的语音和语音编码以及可分离的损伤,以及最近的研究指出语音和语音编码过程之间的相互作用以及重叠的损伤模式。
承认语音和语音处理之间的相互作用对损伤模式的定义有明显的影响。特别是,语音错误不一定具有语音起源,并且大多数损伤模式都必然具有语音和语音特征。