{"title":"A targeted review of prosodic production in agrammatic aphasia.","authors":"Lauryn Zipse, Jeanne Gallée, Stefanie Shattuck-Hufnagel","doi":"10.1080/09602011.2024.2362243","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>It is unclear whether individuals with agrammatic aphasia have particularly disrupted prosody, or in fact have relatively preserved prosody they can use in a compensatory way. A targeted literature review was undertaken to examine the evidence regarding the capacity of speakers with agrammatic aphasia to produce prosody. The aim was to answer the question, how much prosody can a speaker \"do\" with limited syntax? The literature was systematically searched for articles examining the production of grammatical prosody in people with agrammatism, and yielded 16 studies that were ultimately included in this review. Participant inclusion criteria, spoken language tasks, and analysis procedures vary widely across studies. The evidence indicates that timing aspects of prosody are disrupted in people with agrammatic aphasia, while the use of pitch and amplitude cues is more likely to be preserved in this population. Some, but not all, of these timing differences may be attributable to motor speech programming deficits (AOS) rather than aphasia, as these conditions frequently co-occur. Many of the included studies do not address AOS and its possible role in any observed effects. Finally, the available evidence indicates that even speakers with severe aphasia show a degree of preserved prosody in functional communication.</p>","PeriodicalId":54729,"journal":{"name":"Neuropsychological Rehabilitation","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Neuropsychological Rehabilitation","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09602011.2024.2362243","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"NEUROSCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
It is unclear whether individuals with agrammatic aphasia have particularly disrupted prosody, or in fact have relatively preserved prosody they can use in a compensatory way. A targeted literature review was undertaken to examine the evidence regarding the capacity of speakers with agrammatic aphasia to produce prosody. The aim was to answer the question, how much prosody can a speaker "do" with limited syntax? The literature was systematically searched for articles examining the production of grammatical prosody in people with agrammatism, and yielded 16 studies that were ultimately included in this review. Participant inclusion criteria, spoken language tasks, and analysis procedures vary widely across studies. The evidence indicates that timing aspects of prosody are disrupted in people with agrammatic aphasia, while the use of pitch and amplitude cues is more likely to be preserved in this population. Some, but not all, of these timing differences may be attributable to motor speech programming deficits (AOS) rather than aphasia, as these conditions frequently co-occur. Many of the included studies do not address AOS and its possible role in any observed effects. Finally, the available evidence indicates that even speakers with severe aphasia show a degree of preserved prosody in functional communication.
期刊介绍:
Neuropsychological Rehabilitation publishes human experimental and clinical research related to rehabilitation, recovery of function, and brain plasticity. The journal is aimed at clinicians who wish to inform their practice in the light of the latest scientific research; at researchers in neurorehabilitation; and finally at researchers in cognitive neuroscience and related fields interested in the mechanisms of recovery and rehabilitation. Papers on neuropsychological assessment will be considered, and special topic reviews (2500-5000 words) addressing specific key questions in rehabilitation, recovery and brain plasticity will also be welcomed. The latter will enter a fast-track refereeing process.