The history of written language disorders: Reexamining Pitres’ case (1884) of pure agraphia

Lorch, Marjorie Perlman; Barrière, Isabelle

doi:10.1016/s0093-934x(02)00595-3

Cited by 15 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Louis-Victor Marcé (1828-64) provided clinical case descriptions of patients with dissociated patterns of spoken and writing language disorders in 1856. The first description of a case of pure agraphia is from Albert Pitres (1848Pitres ( -1928 (Pitres, 1884;Lorch and Barriere, 2003). The localization of a writing center is commonly ascribed to Exner (1881), but actually he did not have proper empirical basis for that and only speculated about this possible localization (Roux et al, 2010).…”

Section: Acquired Reading and Writing Disordersmentioning

confidence: 99%

Neurolinguistics, History of

Eling

2015

International Encyclopedia of the Social &Amp; Behavioral Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Acquired Reading and Writing Disordersmentioning

confidence: 99%

Neurolinguistics, History of

Eling

2015

International Encyclopedia of the Social &Amp; Behavioral Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…It is instructive to compare syndromes of the classical approach with disorders identified in Russian speakers in the past 100 years. Pure agraphia is a disorder of writing that occurs due to abnormal functioning of the brain and is not accompanied by other disorders of mental function as in many neurological disorders [12,30,31,52]. Apraxic agraphia is not a specific writing dysfunction and is always accompanied by apraxia.…”

Section: The Classical Approachmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cognitive Structure of Writing Disorders in Russian: What Would Luria Say?

Elena

Skvortsov

Ulicheva

et al. 2012

Behavioural Neurology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Acquired disorders of writing in the Russian language have been reported for more than a century. The study of these disorders reflects the history of Russian neuropsychology and is dominated by the syndrome approach most notably by the writings of Luria. Indeed, our understanding of acquired dysgraphia in Russian speakers is conceptualized according to the classical approach in Modern Russia. In this review, we describe the classical approach and compare it to the cognitive neuropsychological models of writing disorders that are developed to explain dysgraphia in English and in other Western European languages. We argue that the basic theoretical assumptions of the two approaches – cognitive and classical or syndrome approach – share similarities. It is therefore proposed that identification of acquired cases of dysgraphia in Russian could potentially benefit from taking the cognitive neuropsychological perspective. We also conclude that adopting elements of the syndrome approach would substantially enrich the understanding of acquired dysgraphia since these offer an insight into processes not described in the cognitive neuropsychological approach.

show abstract

“…The rejection of the independence of writing Lorch and Barrière (2003) emphasize the singular fate of pure agraphia in the history of aphasiology: robust clinical case reports have met the scepticism of clinicians throughout the 19th and 20th centuries. In this section we focus on the views of Dejerine (1849Dejerine ( -1917 with regard to his localizationist views and his position with respect to that of his master Charcot. In 1891, Dejerine wrote ''the question of agraphia is the most controversial in the study of aphasia'' (p. 11).…”

Section: Premature Thoughts On the Dissociation Between Speech And Wrmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The handwriting ofGairdner's (1866b) patient.Premature writings 101Downloaded by [Fondren Library, Rice University ] at 00:00 19 November 2014 of pure agraphia (see below) (seeLorch and Barrière, 2003 for a consideration of pure agraphia).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Premature Thoughts on Writing Disorders

Barrière

Lorch

2004

Neurocase

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Three papers appeared in the 19 th century describing the dissociation between speech and writing: Marcé (1856), Ogle (1867) and Pitres (1884). An account of the convincing evidence of dissociations put forward in these papers is presented. Three explanations are proposed as to the reason why the observations reported by these authors were overlooked or rejected by their contemporaries, namely: a) in the first half of the century it seems that very little knowledge of the processes underlying writing (as opposed to speech) was available, b) the debates focussed on the independence of speech versus motor control and language versus the intellect, c) parallelisms between phylogeny, ontogeny and aphasia impeded the application of the principle of double dissociations, including the dissociations between speech and writing. It is argued that this phenomenon in the history of aphasia is best captured by the concept of prematurity in scientific discovery proposed by Stent (1972Stent ( , 2003.

show abstract

The history of written language disorders: Reexamining Pitres’ case (1884) of pure agraphia

Cited by 15 publications

References 22 publications

Neurolinguistics, History of

Neurolinguistics, History of

Cognitive Structure of Writing Disorders in Russian: What Would Luria Say?

Premature Thoughts on Writing Disorders

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About