PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 11424056

[Why do the aphasic patients produce semantic errors?].

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: One of the most striking and surprising symptoms of the aphasic patients is the production of semantic errors. This kind of errors, which consists of replacing a word by another with a different but similar meaning, may appear when speaking, as it happens when a patient say dog in reference to a cat (semantic paraphasia), when reading as it happens when a patient reads dog where is writing cat (semantic paralexia), as well as in repetition or in writing. DEVELOPMENT: Some patients make these errors only in a specific linguistic modality (deep dyslexic patients make semantic errors in reading, deep dysphasic patients in repetition, etc.), but some patients make semantic errors in several modalities or even in all of them. Why these differences and what are the causes of these errors? Nowadays, models of linguistic processing built up from experiments with normal subjects provide us an answer to most of the above questions. From these models, by using appropriate tasks, it is possible to examine the reasons because of a patient makes certain errors. In fact, the results in different tasks help us to locate the deficit of each patient more than errors per se. It has been shown that sometimes the same type of error (e.g. a semantic paraphasia) can be caused by different processes in different patients. In this paper we will try to analyze which are the cognitive processes underlying semantic errors in each of the linguistic activities, when such processes are altered by injury, as well as to determine the best procedures to know what mechanisms are generating semantic errors in each aphasic patient.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

F Cuetos-Vega. [Why do the aphasic patients produce semantic errors?].. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/11424056/

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Delayed cerebral vasospasm secondary to bacterial meningitis after lumbosacral spinal surgery: case report.

OBJECTIVE: Delayed cerebral vasospasm is an under-recognized complication of meningitis. This case report is important because it is the first to definitively associate vasospasm with meningitis using catheter angiography. Furthermore, it is the first to correlate the time course of delayed cerebral vasospasm with meningitis. CLINICAL PRESENTATION: We present a patient who developed a partial expressive aphasia 9 days after developing meningitis, consistent with cerebral vasospasm, after lumbosacral spinal surgery. INTERVENTION: Vasospasm was confirmed by angiography and transcranial Doppler sonography, and symptoms responded to hypervolemia, hypertension, and hemodilution therapy. CONCLUSION: If a patient develops neurological symptoms consistent with a timeline of delayed cerebral vasospasm in the setting of meningitis, angiographic evaluation and appropriate therapy should be pursued.

Aphasia↗

Stimulating language: insights from TMS.

Fifteen years ago, Pascual-Leone and colleagues used transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) to investigate speech production in pre-surgical epilepsy patients and in doing so, introduced a novel tool into language research. TMS can be used to non-invasively stimulate a specific cortical region and transiently disrupt information processing. These 'virtual lesion' studies offer not only the ability to explore causal relations between brain regions and language functions absent in functional neuroimaging, but also spatial and temporal precision not typically available in patient studies. For instance, TMS has been used to demonstrate functionally distinct sub-regions of the left inferior frontal gyrus; to clarify the relationship between pre-morbid language organization and susceptibility to unilateral lesions and to investigate the contribution of both left and right hemisphere language areas in recovery from aphasia. When TMS is used as a measure of functional connectivity, it demonstrates a close link between action words and motor programmes; it suggests a potential evolutionary link between hand gestures and language and it suggests a role in speech perception for the motor system underlying speech production. In combination with functional neuroimaging, it can elucidate the circuits responsible for this involvement. Finally, TMS may even be useful for enhancing recovery in aphasic patients. In other words, TMS has already become an important tool for studying language at both the cognitive and neural levels, and it is clear that further developments in TMS methodology are likely to result in even greater opportunities for language research.

Aphasia↗

Language rehabilitation in chronic aphasia and time postonset: a review of single-subject data.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: This article is a comprehensive review of aphasia treatment studies for the purpose of investigating the relationship between time postonset of aphasia and response to treatment for aphasia in chronic patients at >/=1 year after symptom onset. METHODS: Studies that demonstrated treatment response (defined as a measurable change in task performance compared with a control task performance) through the use of single-subject design methodologies on measures of verbal output or auditory comprehension were selected. Individual subject data were extracted from the 23 studies that met criteria identifying the subjects as those who received direct continuous therapy for spoken language deficits and whose changes in response to therapy were measurable. Percent of maximum possible change was used as a measurement of outcome. RESULTS: Nonparametric correlation statistics (Spearman rho) and comparisons of group means (Kruskal-Wallis) were used to compare the relationship between time postonset and improvement. Time postonset at which treatment was initiated did not correlate with response to treatment. No significant differences in response to treatment were found between groups of patients according to times postonset. CONCLUSIONS: Time postonset is not related to response to treatment for aphasia in patients >1 year postonset of aphasia.

Aphasia↗