Robinson Gail A, Butterworth Brian, Cipolotti Lisa
*Neuropsychology Research Unit, School of Psychology, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia †Department of Neuropsychology, National Hospital for Neurology and Neurosurgery, Queen Square, London, United Kingdom ‡Institute of Cognitive Neuroscience, University College, London, United Kingdom §Department of Psychology, University of Palermo, Palermo, Italy.
Cogn Behav Neurol. 2015 Dec;28(4):229-41. doi: 10.1097/WNN.0000000000000080.
To study whether pressure of speech in jargon aphasia arises out of disturbances to core language or executive processes, or at the intersection of conceptual preparation.
Conceptual preparation mechanisms for speech have not been well studied. Several mechanisms have been proposed for jargon aphasia, a fluent, well-articulated, logorrheic propositional speech that is almost incomprehensible.
We studied the vast quantity of jargon speech produced by patient J.A., who had suffered an infarct after the clipping of a middle cerebral artery aneurysm. We gave J.A. baseline cognitive tests and experimental word- and sentence-generation tasks that we had designed for patients with dynamic aphasia, a severely reduced but otherwise fairly normal propositional speech thought to result from deficits in conceptual preparation.
J.A. had cognitive dysfunction, including executive difficulties, and a language profile characterized by poor repetition and naming in the context of relatively intact single-word comprehension. J.A.'s spontaneous speech was fluent but jargon. He had no difficulty generating sentences; in contrast to dynamic aphasia, his sentences were largely meaningless and not significantly affected by stimulus constraint level.
This patient with jargon aphasia highlights that voluminous speech output can arise from disturbances of both language and executive functions. Our previous studies have identified three conceptual preparation mechanisms for speech: generation of novel thoughts, their sequencing, and selection. This study raises the possibility that a "brake" to stop message generation may be a fourth conceptual preparation mechanism behind the pressure of speech characteristic of jargon aphasia.
研究行话性失语症中言语压力是否源于核心语言或执行过程的紊乱，抑或是概念准备交叉处的问题。
言语的概念准备机制尚未得到充分研究。针对行话性失语症已提出了几种机制，行话性失语症是一种流利、发音清晰、多语症性的命题性言语，但几乎难以理解。
我们研究了患者J.A.产生的大量行话言语，该患者在大脑中动脉动脉瘤夹闭术后发生了梗死。我们对J.A.进行了基线认知测试以及我们为动态失语症患者设计的实验性单词和句子生成任务，动态失语症是一种严重减少但其他方面相当正常的命题性言语，被认为是由概念准备缺陷导致的。
J.A.存在认知功能障碍，包括执行困难，其语言特征为在单字理解相对完整的情况下，复述和命名能力较差。J.A.的自发言语流利但为行话。他生成句子没有困难；与动态失语症不同，他的句子大多毫无意义，且不受刺激约束水平的显著影响。
这位行话性失语症患者表明，大量的言语输出可能源于语言和执行功能的紊乱。我们之前的研究已经确定了言语的三种概念准备机制：新思想的产生、其排序和选择。本研究提出了一种可能性，即阻止信息生成的“刹车”可能是行话性失语症言语压力背后的第四种概念准备机制。
