We have located links that may give you full text access.
Assessing Syntactic Deficits in Chinese Broca's aphasia using the Northwestern Assessment of Verbs and Sentences-Chinese (NAVS-C).
Aphasiology 2016
BACKGROUND: English-speaking patients with Broca's aphasia and agrammatism evince difficulty with complex grammatical structures, including verbs and sentences. A few studies have found similar patterns among Chinese-speaking patients with broca's aphasia, despite structural differences between these two languages. However, no studies have explicitly examined verb properties, including the number and optionality of arguments (participant roles) selected by the verb, and only a few studies have examined sentence deficits among Chinese patients. In addition, there are no test batteries presently available to assess syntactically important properties of verbs and sentences in Chinese patients.
AIMS: This study used a Chinese version of the Northwestern Assessment of Verbs and Sentences (NAVS; Thompson, 2011), originally developed for English speakers with aphasia, to examine the verb and sentence deficit patterns among Chinese speakers with aphasia. As in the original NAVS, the Chinese version (NAVS-C) assessed verbs by the number and optionality of arguments as well as sentence canonicity, in the both production and comprehension.
METHODS AND PROCEDURES: Fifteen Chinese patients with Broca's aphasia and fifteen age-matched healthy normal controls participated in this study. All NAVS-C tests were administered, in which participants were asked either to produce or identify verbs and sentences coinciding with action pictures.
OUTCOMES & RESULTS: Despite grammatical differences between Chinese and English, the impairment caused by structural complexity of verbs and sentences was replicated in Chinese-speaking patients using the NAVS-C. Verbs with more arguments were significantly more impaired than those with fewer arguments and verbs with optional arguments were significantly more impaired than those with obligatory arguments. One deviation from English-speaking patients, however, is that the Chinese-speaking patients exhibited greater difficulty with subject relative clauses than with object relative clauses because the former, rather than the latter, involve non-canonical order in Chinese. Similar to English-speaking patients, Chinese patients exhibited more difficulty with object extracted wh-questions than with subject extracted wh-questions. Suggesting that wh-movement in Logical Form may also cause processing difficulty. Moreover, Chinese-speaking patients exhibited similar performance in both production and comprehension, indicating the deficits in both modalities.
CONCLUSIONS: The number and optionality of verb arguments as well as canonicity of the Agent-Theme order in sentences impacts Chinese-speaking individuals with aphasia as it does in the case of English-speaking patients. These findings indicate that the NAVS-C is a useful tool for detailing deficit patterns associated with syntactic processing in patients with aphasia cross-linguistically.
AIMS: This study used a Chinese version of the Northwestern Assessment of Verbs and Sentences (NAVS; Thompson, 2011), originally developed for English speakers with aphasia, to examine the verb and sentence deficit patterns among Chinese speakers with aphasia. As in the original NAVS, the Chinese version (NAVS-C) assessed verbs by the number and optionality of arguments as well as sentence canonicity, in the both production and comprehension.
METHODS AND PROCEDURES: Fifteen Chinese patients with Broca's aphasia and fifteen age-matched healthy normal controls participated in this study. All NAVS-C tests were administered, in which participants were asked either to produce or identify verbs and sentences coinciding with action pictures.
OUTCOMES & RESULTS: Despite grammatical differences between Chinese and English, the impairment caused by structural complexity of verbs and sentences was replicated in Chinese-speaking patients using the NAVS-C. Verbs with more arguments were significantly more impaired than those with fewer arguments and verbs with optional arguments were significantly more impaired than those with obligatory arguments. One deviation from English-speaking patients, however, is that the Chinese-speaking patients exhibited greater difficulty with subject relative clauses than with object relative clauses because the former, rather than the latter, involve non-canonical order in Chinese. Similar to English-speaking patients, Chinese patients exhibited more difficulty with object extracted wh-questions than with subject extracted wh-questions. Suggesting that wh-movement in Logical Form may also cause processing difficulty. Moreover, Chinese-speaking patients exhibited similar performance in both production and comprehension, indicating the deficits in both modalities.
CONCLUSIONS: The number and optionality of verb arguments as well as canonicity of the Agent-Theme order in sentences impacts Chinese-speaking individuals with aphasia as it does in the case of English-speaking patients. These findings indicate that the NAVS-C is a useful tool for detailing deficit patterns associated with syntactic processing in patients with aphasia cross-linguistically.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Challenges in Septic Shock: From New Hemodynamics to Blood Purification Therapies.Journal of Personalized Medicine 2024 Februrary 4
Molecular Targets of Novel Therapeutics for Diabetic Kidney Disease: A New Era of Nephroprotection.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 April 4
Perioperative echocardiographic strain analysis: what anesthesiologists should know.Canadian Journal of Anaesthesia 2024 April 11
The 'Ten Commandments' for the 2023 European Society of Cardiology guidelines for the management of endocarditis.European Heart Journal 2024 April 18
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app