Memory and Aging Center, University of California at San Francisco, San Francisco, California, USA.
Department of Neurology, Dyslexia Center, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, California, USA.
Alzheimers Dement. 2024 Apr;20(4):2353-2363. doi: 10.1002/alz.13701. Epub 2024 Jan 29.
Clinical understanding of primary progressive aphasia (PPA) has been primarily derived from Indo-European languages. Generalizing certain linguistic findings across languages is unfitting due to contrasting linguistic structures. While PPA patients showed noun classes impairments, Chinese languages lack noun classes. Instead, Chinese languages are classifier language, and how PPA patients manipulate classifiers is unknown.
We included 74 native Chinese speakers (22 controls, 52 PPA). For classifier production task, participants were asked to produce the classifiers of high-frequency items. In a classifier recognition task, participants were asked to choose the correct classifier.
Both semantic variant (sv) PPA and logopenic variant (lv) PPA scored significantly lower in classifier production task. In classifier recognition task, lvPPA patients outperformed svPPA patients. The classifier production scores were correlated to cortical volume over left temporal and visual association cortices.
This study highlights noun classifiers as linguistic markers to discriminate PPA syndromes in Chinese speakers.
Noun classifier processing varies in the different primary progressive aphasia (PPA) variants. Specifically, semantic variant PPA (svPPA) and logopenic variant PPA (lvPPA) patients showed significantly lower ability in producing specific classifiers. Compared to lvPPA, svPPA patients were less able to choose the accurate classifiers when presented with choices. In svPPA, classifier production score was positively correlated with gray matter volume over bilateral temporal and left visual association cortices in svPPA. Conversely, classifier production performance was correlated with volumetric changes over left ventral temporal and bilateral frontal regions in lvPPA. Comparable performance of mass and count classifier were noted in Chinese PPA patients, suggesting a common cognitive process between mass and count classifiers in Chinese languages.
原发性进行性失语症（PPA）的临床认识主要源自印欧语系。由于语言结构的差异，将某些语言发现推广到其他语言是不合适的。虽然 PPA 患者表现出名词类别障碍，但汉语缺乏名词类别。相反，汉语是分类语言，PPA 患者如何处理分类器尚不清楚。
我们纳入了 74 名母语为汉语的参与者（22 名对照组，52 名 PPA 患者）。在分类器生成任务中，要求参与者生成高频物品的分类器。在分类器识别任务中，要求参与者选择正确的分类器。
语义变异型（sv）PPA 和失语法变异型（lv）PPA 在分类器生成任务中的得分均显著降低。在分类器识别任务中，lvPPA 患者的表现优于 svPPA 患者。分类器生成得分与左颞叶和视觉联合皮质的皮质体积相关。
本研究强调名词分类器是区分汉语使用者 PPA 综合征的语言标志物。
名词分类器处理在不同的原发性进行性失语症（PPA）变体中存在差异。具体而言，语义变异型 PPA（svPPA）和失语法变异型 PPA（lvPPA）患者在生成特定分类器方面的能力明显较低。与 lvPPA 相比，当呈现选择时，svPPA 患者选择准确分类器的能力较低。在 svPPA 中，分类器生成得分与 svPPA 双侧颞叶和左侧视觉联合皮质的灰质体积呈正相关。相反，在 lvPPA 中，分类器生成表现与左腹侧颞叶和双侧额叶区域的体积变化相关。在汉语 PPA 患者中，质量和计数分类器的表现相当，这表明汉语中质量和计数分类器之间存在共同的认知过程。
