Kolk H H, Friederici A D
Cortex. 1985 Mar;21(1):47-67. doi: 10.1016/s0010-9452(85)80015-0.
15 Broca's aphasics and 14 Wernicke's aphasics, both German and Dutch speaking patients, were presented with a sentence-picture matching task. Both syntactic and semantic distractor pictures were used. Sentences were either reversible or non-reversible, had a topicalized or a non-topicalized word order and contained either of three types of prepositions that were labelled 'syntactic' (case-marking), 'obligatory' (subcategorized) and 'lexical' (locative). Results indicated (a) a significant difference between reversible and non reversible sentences for both Broca's and Wernicke's; (b) no significant differences between these two groups in the differences scores reversible minus non-reversible; (c) an above-chance performance on reversible sentences for both groups. To explain the pattern of differences between the various types of sentences, two schemes of interpretation are presented. The first scheme assumes that both Broca's and Wernicke's have lost basic (but different) syntactic abilities and that they can understand reversible sentences by non-syntactic strategies only. The second scheme assumes that there is no such loss, but that the impairment in Broca's and Wernicke's aphasia is such that the more syntactic analysis is required, the more errors are made. Patients are assumed to approach this task by trying to limit their syntactic analysis to the beginning of the sentence.
15名布罗卡失语症患者和14名韦尼克失语症患者参与了一项句子-图片匹配任务，这些患者均说德语和荷兰语。实验使用了句法干扰图片和语义干扰图片。句子分为可逆句和不可逆句，语序有主题化和非主题化之分，并且包含三种类型的介词中的任意一种，这三种介词分别被标记为“句法的”（格标记）、“ obligatory”（次范畴化）和“词汇的”（方位）。结果表明：（a）布罗卡失语症患者和韦尼克失语症患者在可逆句和不可逆句之间存在显著差异；（b）两组在可逆句减去不可逆句的差异分数上没有显著差异；（c）两组在可逆句上的表现均高于随机水平。为了解释各类句子之间的差异模式，提出了两种解释方案。第一种方案假定布罗卡失语症患者和韦尼克失语症患者都丧失了基本的（但不同的）句法能力，并且他们只能通过非句法策略来理解可逆句。第二种方案假定不存在这种能力丧失，但是布罗卡失语症和韦尼克失语症的损伤在于，需要进行的句法分析越多，犯的错误就越多。假定患者通过尝试将句法分析限制在句子开头来完成这项任务。
