Grammatical and lexical pronoun dissociation in French speakers with agrammatic aphasia: A usage-based account and REF-based hypothesis

Ishkhanyan, Byurakn; Sahraoui, Halima; Harder, Peter; Mogensen, Jesper; Boye, Kasper

doi:10.1016/j.jneuroling.2017.02.001

Cited by 61 publications

(26 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…We would like to end the discussion by briefly relating this study to other neurolinguistic studies that support or can be interpreted as supporting the functional theory. One study is similar to the present one in that it makes a distinction, based on the functional theory in Boye & Harder (2012), between grammatical and lexical items within a closed class of words, but it differs in that it confronts this distinction only with agrammatic and not with fluent aphasic speech data: in a study of pronoun production in French agrammatic speech associated with Broca's aphasia, Ishkhanyan et al (2017) made a distinction between grammatical pronouns (e.g. je, me) and lexical pronouns (e.g.…”

Section: Additional Neurolinguistic Support For the Functional Theorymentioning

confidence: 68%

“…As mentioned, Boye & Harder (2012: 21) suggest that the English preposition of is grammatical, whereas off is lexical (see Friederici 1982 andBennis et al 1983 for distinct but related ideas). Similarly, as discussed in Ishkhanyan et al (2017), French pronouns like me ('me') are grammatical, while pronouns like moi ('me') are lexical. It goes for both prepositions and pronouns that they are traditionally considered as homogenous word classes, and as mentioned earlier members of the same word class are traditionally considered grammatical or lexical en bloc.…”

Section: Diagnostic Criteria For Distinguishing Between Grammatical Amentioning

confidence: 78%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Grammatical versus lexical words in theory and aphasia: Integrating linguistics and neurolinguistics

Boye

Bastiaanse

2018

Glossa: A Journal of General Linguistics

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The distinction between grammatical and lexical words is standardly dealt with in terms of a semantic distinction between function and content words or in terms of distributional distinctions between closed and open classes. This paper argues that such distinctions fall short in several respects, and that the grammar-lexicon distinction applies even within the same word class. The argument is based on a recent functional and usage-based theory of the grammar-lexicon distinction (Boye & Harder 2012) and on the assumption that aphasic speech data represent the ideal testing ground for theories and claims about this contrast. A theoretically-based distinction between grammatical and lexical instances of Dutch modal verb forms and the verb form hebben was confronted with agrammatic and fluent aphasic speech. A dissociation between the two aphasia types was predicted and confirmed.

show abstract

Section: Additional Neurolinguistic Support For the Functional Theorymentioning

confidence: 68%

Section: Diagnostic Criteria For Distinguishing Between Grammatical Amentioning

confidence: 78%

Grammatical versus lexical words in theory and aphasia: Integrating linguistics and neurolinguistics

Boye

Bastiaanse

2018

Glossa: A Journal of General Linguistics

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A usage-based linguistic theory adopted by several recent studies on aphasia (e.g., Boye & Bastiaanse, 2018;Ishkhanyan et al, 2017;Martínez-Ferreiro et al, 2019;Nielsen et al, 2019) has been developed by Boye and Harder (2012). In particular, Boye and Harder proposed a functional theory of grammatical status, which provided a theoretical anchor for the grammar-lexicon contrast.…”

Section: Linguistic Usage-based Theories and Aphasia Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

Linguistic theory and aphasia: an overview

Garraffa

Fyndanis

2020

Aphasiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Aphasia research has been informed by linguistic theory to a great extent. Conversely, linguistic theory has also been informed by data from people with aphasia, albeit to a lesser extent. Aims: This overview to the Special Issue of Aphasiology entitled "Aphasia and linguistic theory: What we have captured so far" presents a narrative review that aims to illustrate the contribution of linguistic theory to aphasia research, and also includes a section that presents the articles making up the special issue. The narrative review, which is not exhaustive, highlights influential theoretical frameworks and linguistic constructs that have been central to accounts of language impairment in aphasia. Main Contribution: The overview illustrates the contribution of linguistic theory to aphasiology and paves the way for the development of a unified approach to aphasia, which will incorporate insights not only from theoretical linguistics, but also from other complementary fields, such as psycholinguistics, cognitive (neuro) psychology, and neuroscience of language.

show abstract

“…As an illustrative example, it can be mentioned that while the interpretation of a linguistic message or the production of a spoken sentence will be mediated by an AS, an AM may mediate grammar (e.g. [37]). Grammar will obviously lend important aspects to practically every linguistic-oriented ASs-but grammar in itself is never a surface phenomenon.…”

Section: The Reorganization Of Elementary Functions Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reorganization of the connectivity between elementary functions as a common mechanism of phenomenal consciousness and working memory: from functions to strategies

Mogensen

Overgaard

2018

Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the present communication, phenomenal consciousness, access consciousness and the closely related concept of working memory are presented in the context of a neurocognitive model-the REF (reorganization of elementary functions) framework. The REF framework is based on connectionist networks within which the 'units' are advanced processing modules called elementary functions (EFs). In this framework, the focus is on dynamically changeable 'strategies'-based on reorganizations of the connectivity between EFs-rather than on the more traditional 'cognitive functions'. The background for the REF framework and especially how the neural correlate of consciousness is understood within these models is summarized. According to the REF framework, phenomenal consciousness cannot 'overflow' availability of information for action. Phenomenal consciousness may, however, overflow working memory because working memory in the present context is seen as a surface phenomenon reflecting underlying dynamic strategies-influenced by both experience and situational factors.This article is part of the theme issue 'Perceptual consciousness and cognitive access'.

show abstract

Grammatical and lexical pronoun dissociation in French speakers with agrammatic aphasia: A usage-based account and REF-based hypothesis

Cited by 61 publications

References 24 publications

Grammatical versus lexical words in theory and aphasia: Integrating linguistics and neurolinguistics

Grammatical versus lexical words in theory and aphasia: Integrating linguistics and neurolinguistics

Linguistic theory and aphasia: an overview

Reorganization of the connectivity between elementary functions as a common mechanism of phenomenal consciousness and working memory: from functions to strategies

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About