Correction and turn completion as collaborative repair strategies in conversations following Wernicke’s aphasia

Abstract

This study explores repair practices deployed by the interlocutor of a speaker with Wernicke's aphasia, their relationship to types of aphasic difficulty, and how mutual understanding and the progression of talk is maintained. A 75 year-old woman with Wernicke's aphasia of 16 months duration and her friend video recorded 36 minutes of conversation at home. Using conversation analytic methods two patterns of other-repair by the non-aphasic interlocutor were identified. The first practice was turn completion, which occurred in the context of selfinitiated word search by the person with aphasia. The second was correction in the context of trouble with reference to person or place, manifested as an erroneous word, mis-selection of a gendered pronoun, or use of a pronoun where a person's name was expected. This correction was mainly overt, completed via a short side sequence dealing with the repair, although a few examples were embedded, where a word or phrase was replaced with a corrected form without overtly drawing attention to the correction. None of the examples included an account for the error. Unlike in typical talk, the person with aphasia did not repeat or use the corrected form in subsequent talk. For this dyad, correction and completion function as interactionally acceptable collaborative repair strategies, maintaining progressivity and a focus on topic development rather than on repair itself. There is no evidence that other-correction is dispreferred, which accords with recent findings for typical interaction but differs from other studies of aphasic talk. Correction should not be dismissed out of hand as a negative interactional practice when talking to someone with Wernicke's aphasia.

Collaborative storytelling with a person with aphasia

“…The present study aims to identify practices that further a PWA's agency by analyzing the organization of collaborative storytelling in a multiparty face-toface interaction. It contributes to conversation analytic research on how PWAs and their interlocutors may handle and overcome challenges associated with aphasia in interaction (e.g., Barnes and Ferguson, 2012;Bauer, 2009;Beeke, Capindale, and Cockayne, 2020;Laakso and Godt, 2016;Lind, 2005).…”

What Happens to Topics and Conversations When People With Aphasia Have Time to Repair Their Speaking Turns? A Systematic, Functional Investigation

“…Within aphasiology, a growing body of conversation-based research explores how the actions of conversational partners without aphasia may influence various aspects of interactions. The ways in which interlocutors can foster or inhibit the resolution of communication breakdowns (Barnes & Ferguson, 2012;Beeke et al, 2020;Goodwin, 2006;Laakso, 2003;, SLP behaviors that encourage clients to pursue topics which foreground their status as disabled people (Horton, 2007) and the methods clinicians use during conversation to encourage compliance with treatment planning decisions (Isaksen, 2018;Simmons-Mackie & Damico, 1999) have all been addressed in past work. Studies of conversation groups for people with aphasia, facilitators (who usually do not have aphasia) can engage in behaviors that either promote participation by all group members (Archer et al, 2020;Simmons-Mackie & Damico, 2009;Simmons-Mackie et al, 2007) or discourage active engagement (Lee & Azios, 2020;Simmons-Mackie & Damico, 2009).…”