Breen K, Warrington E K
National Hospital for Neurology and Neurosurgery, London.
Cortex. 1994 Jun;30(2):231-45. doi: 10.1016/s0010-9452(13)80195-5.
We describe our investigations of the word retrieval abilities of a patient (NOR) with a very severe anomia. NOR had the greatest difficulty naming even very common objects to confrontation yet his word comprehension, word repetition and reading skills were intact. We documented the efficacy of different types of cues for name retrieval. Phonological and semantic cues were either ineffective or had a minor effect. By contrast a sentence frame even a low probability sentence frame (e.g. I went to the shop to buy a ...?) had a very significant facilitatory effect for object naming. In a series of experiments we explored the basis of this facilitation. It was shown that neither a picture frame, an associated verb, nor a syntactically correct but semantically meaningless sentence frame were effective cues. Our findings challenge the orthodox linear models of object naming. We interpret our observations in the context of Luria's distinction between nominative and propositional language. It is suggested that there may be two 'routes' to name retrieval, one that utilises a nominative system and an alternative one that utilises an on-line language processor that constructs propositional speech. It is the integrity of this latter system that could account for the facilitation of naming by a sentence frame in NOR, and also for the frequently observed phenomenon of the preservation of fluent speech in patients with a grave anomia.
我们描述了对一名患有非常严重命名性失语症患者（NOR）的词汇提取能力的研究。NOR即使面对非常常见的物体也极难说出其名称，然而他的词汇理解、词汇重复和阅读技能却是完好的。我们记录了不同类型线索对名称提取的有效性。语音和语义线索要么无效，要么只有轻微影响。相比之下，一个句子框架，即使是一个可能性较低的句子框架（例如“我去商店买了一个……？”）对物体命名也有非常显著的促进作用。在一系列实验中，我们探究了这种促进作用的基础。结果表明，无论是一个图片框架、一个相关动词，还是一个句法正确但语义无意义的句子框架都不是有效的线索。我们的研究结果对正统的物体命名线性模型提出了挑战。我们在卢里亚对命名性语言和命题性语言的区分背景下解释我们的观察结果。有人提出，可能存在两条名称提取的“途径”，一条利用命名性系统，另一条利用构建命题性言语的在线语言处理器。正是后一个系统的完整性可以解释句子框架对NOR命名的促进作用，也可以解释在患有严重命名性失语症的患者中经常观察到的流利言语保留现象。
