2009
DOI: 10.1016/j.jneuroling.2008.10.002
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Thematic roles in Alzheimer's disease: Hierarchy violations in psychological predicates

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
16
0

Year Published

2013
2013
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
5
4

Relationship

5
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 40 publications
(17 citation statements)
references
References 58 publications
1
16
0
Order By: Relevance
“…As shown in the lower section of Figures 7 and 8, linking the nominative argument to the undergoer macrorole requires either that the prominence scale is reconsidered (Figure 7) or that the assignment of an actor macrorole is bypassed. Prior studies have shown that ObjExp psych verbs lead to greater processing difficulty than verbs in which the nominative argument was assigned the "actor" macrorole according to several metrics, such as increased reading times, (Brennan & Pylkkännen, 2010;Cupples, 2002;Gennari & MacDonald, 2009), and decreased comprehension accuracy in patients with Alzheimer's disease (Manouilidou, de Almeida, Schwartz, & Nair, 2009) and aphasia (Beretta & Campbell, 2001;Piñango, 2006;Thompson & Lee, 2009). Results from studies that used ERPs (Bornkessel et al, 2003) and neuroimaging techniques (Bornkessel et al, 2005) also found differential brain activity after the presentation of sentences with each type of verb.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As shown in the lower section of Figures 7 and 8, linking the nominative argument to the undergoer macrorole requires either that the prominence scale is reconsidered (Figure 7) or that the assignment of an actor macrorole is bypassed. Prior studies have shown that ObjExp psych verbs lead to greater processing difficulty than verbs in which the nominative argument was assigned the "actor" macrorole according to several metrics, such as increased reading times, (Brennan & Pylkkännen, 2010;Cupples, 2002;Gennari & MacDonald, 2009), and decreased comprehension accuracy in patients with Alzheimer's disease (Manouilidou, de Almeida, Schwartz, & Nair, 2009) and aphasia (Beretta & Campbell, 2001;Piñango, 2006;Thompson & Lee, 2009). Results from studies that used ERPs (Bornkessel et al, 2003) and neuroimaging techniques (Bornkessel et al, 2005) also found differential brain activity after the presentation of sentences with each type of verb.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Degraded semantic memory, for example, is likely to be the source of category-specific deficits of single-word comprehension (Harciarek & Kertesz, 2009; but see Diesfeldt, 1989), of impaired verb naming (Kim & Thompson, 2004), or of impaired interpretation of thematic roles even in irreversible sentences (e.g., Manouilidou, de Almeida, Schwartz, & Nair, 2009;Price & Grossman, 2005). Moreover, it has been suggested that pAD patients' poor performance on explicit semantic tasks is due to a partially degraded semantic network in combination with deficient explicit retrieval (Rogers & Friedman, 2008).…”
Section: Please Scroll Down For Articlementioning
confidence: 99%
“…We predicted that the same effect would not be found in the case of the perception/psychological class because, contrary to causatives, the Experiencers (“agents”) of perception/psychological verbs are the very entities that supposedly undergo a “change of state” (or that experience an object). Dissociations between agentives and Experiencer verbs have been found in Alzheimer’s and aphasia patients (Piñango, 2006; Manouilidou et al, 2009), and the relative difficulty of Experiencer verbs has been attributed to their non-canonical thematic structure (no Agent role). Thus, the predicted difference between verbs in these two conditions ( Theme that undergoes a change of state by the Agent ; and Theme that causes a change of state in the Experiencer ) should have contributed to enhance the differences in eye-movement behavior, if thematic roles were constraining referents in the visual context.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%