Lexical errors in narrative discourse of a bilingual subcortical aphasic- ISBA 10
-
Upload
sonal-chitnis -
Category
Health & Medicine
-
view
1.241 -
download
6
description
Transcript of Lexical errors in narrative discourse of a bilingual subcortical aphasic- ISBA 10
![Page 1: Lexical errors in narrative discourse of a bilingual subcortical aphasic- ISBA 10](https://reader031.fdocuments.net/reader031/viewer/2022020101/555225b7b4c9054c668b4ca4/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Lexical Errors in Narrative Discourse of A Bilingual Subcortical
Aphasic
Sudheer Bhan *, Sonal V Chitnis**
Hyderabad Central University, India*, Yashoda Hospitals, Hyderabad, India**.
ABSTRACT
Subcortical Aphasia is defined as a language disorder associated with damage to
subcortical brain structures such as basal ganglia, thalamus, and deep white matter pathways.
It is predominantly seen in ischemic strokes patients. Clinical picture of subcortical aphasia is
of great interest to researchers as it varies according to lesion site and is also difficult to
categorize into fluent or nonfluent categories due to its typical speech & language features.
Many studies have focused light on role of subcortical structures in language processing.
Present study analyses lexical errors in narrative discourse of a bilingual (Telugu-English)
speaking subcortical aphasic, following an acute subcortical ischemic stroke. She was
assessed on Western Aphasia Battery (Kertesz 1985, translated Telugu version) and
Addenbrooke’s Cognition examination revised (ACE-R 2007-Telugu version). Results
showed frequent semantic and phonemic paraphasias. Patient reflected a typical subcortical
aphasic syndrome presenting both fluent and nonfluent characteristics of aphasia. In naming
verbs of motion, patient had dynamic misnaming. Empty speech, circumlocution,groping
behavior, semantic confusion, and neologism were also observed.
![Page 2: Lexical errors in narrative discourse of a bilingual subcortical aphasic- ISBA 10](https://reader031.fdocuments.net/reader031/viewer/2022020101/555225b7b4c9054c668b4ca4/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
Lexical Errors in Narrative Discourse of A Bilingual Subcortical Aphasic
INTRODUCTION
Bilingualism or the alternate use of two or more languages is an integral part of
globalization and social mobility. Mcnamara(1967a) proposes a minimal competence in one
or more of the four language skills ,i.e. listening ,comprehension, speaking ,reading ,writing
in a language other than mother tongue. Whether Bilinguals two languages are organized
partly in common areas and partly in specific and separate areas of the brain is not
completely proved. However, some studies have found that bilinguals have areas where
stimulation could interrupt naming in a first language ,a second language or both (Ojemann
and Whitaker,1978) This lends support to the view that each language is processed by
partially overlapping areas.
Paradis(1994) postulated that the mother tongue or L1 and L2 of a bilingual may
rely upon different memory systems. Mother tongue relies upon implicit memory or
procedural memory, which is related to automatic processes, completed within nominal
awareness, whereas L2 depends upon explicit memory or declarative memory, which
involves controlled processes carried out at conscious level. While, implicit memory heavily
relies on subcortical structures like the basal ganglia , the cerebellum as well as left frontal
lobe. Explicit memory relies mainly on widely distributed cortical network (including
bilateral temporal lobe structures). As these memory systems employ different cerebral
pathways, Bilingual’s L1 or L2 may be selectively affected by different pathologies. This
results in different types of recovery patterns in Aphasics.
Aphasia has been classically considered a consequence of cortical lesions. However,
neuroimaging techniques in monolinguals and bilinguals have revealed that aphasia may also
![Page 3: Lexical errors in narrative discourse of a bilingual subcortical aphasic- ISBA 10](https://reader031.fdocuments.net/reader031/viewer/2022020101/555225b7b4c9054c668b4ca4/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
occur after lesions confined to Thalamus, the Basal ganglia or paraventricular white matter.
Such aphasias are known as subcortical aphasia. While, subcortical aphasia in monolinguals
is well known, only few cases of bilingual subcortical aphasia have been reported. Hence,
present study on Lexical errors in Narrative Discourse in Bilingual Aphasic in Indian Context
is relevant.
Subcortical aphasia due to Thalamic lesions is known as thalamic aphasia. This
Syndrome shares some features with Transcortical sensory and tanscortical motor aphasia. A
relatively fluent output with semantic paraphasias and word finding deficits, intact repetition
abilities and spared auditory comprehension are the main features of Thalamic aphasia.
Subcortical aphasia following basal ganglia damage is often characterized by expressive
and Lexico-semantic impairment generally consisting of nonfluent output with semantic and
verbal paraphasias. It is caused by hemorrhages and infarctions. However, pure Subcortical
Aphasias have been rarely reported. Most of the Subcortical Aphasias result from subcortical
as well as cortical region network(e.g. disruption of fronto-Thalamic network). But, lesions
in cortical regions are not usually visible in case of subcortical Aphasia through neuro-
imaging techniques. Present Subject had a left basalganglionic infarct with C.V.A.
The subcortical aphasias can be classified into 3 types:-
1) Aphasia with white matter pathway damage
2) Straiatocapsular aphasia
3) Thalamic aphasia.
Subcortical aphasics might show specific fluent or nonfluent feature. Anterior
subcortical aphasias evolve into motor aphasia, whereas posterior lesions evolve into fluent
aphasias. (Nasar et al., 1982) Repetitions are relatively preserved in subcortical aphasics
(Andrew 2003) Initiation of speech is main problem in subcortical aphasia. Fabbro et al.,
![Page 4: Lexical errors in narrative discourse of a bilingual subcortical aphasic- ISBA 10](https://reader031.fdocuments.net/reader031/viewer/2022020101/555225b7b4c9054c668b4ca4/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
(2001) have reported that lesion in loop of caudate nucleus, globus pallidus, anterior nuclei
anterior with cingulam cause difficulty in initiation of speech.
The introduction of advanced neuroradiological investigation methods for lesion
localization in vivo, including computed tomography and more recently magnetic resonance
imaging (MRI), SPECT, PET have led to an increasing number of reports in the literature of
aphasia following apparently purely subcortical lesions involving the striato-capsular region
and/or thalamus. Consequently, in recent years, there has been growing acceptance of a role
for subcortical structures such as the globus pallidus and thalamus in language processing.
Many lesional studies have reported language disorders following damage of the basal
ganglia in the dominant hemisphere, in particular
speech apraxia and dysarthria after lesion of
the lentiform nucleus and speech perseveration after caudate lesions. Most of these injuries,
especially stroke, involve not only the striatum, but also the surrounding areas such as the
capsulo-thalamic structures. Subcortical aphasia is also evident in patients with Parkinson’s
disease, Huntington’s disease, etc.
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
Alexander (1987) studied 19 subcortical aphasics. He observed that lesions in the
putamen or head of caudate nucleus did not produce language disturbances. They just caused
mild word finding difficulty. Lesions in posterior putamen resulted in hypophonia. Lesion
in caudate nucleus, putamen and anterior limb of internal capsule resulted in anterior
subcortical aphasia. Lesion in white matter of periventricular region or genu of the internal
capsule resulted in dysarthria. Fluent aphasia, neologism, impaired comprehension were
found when there was lesion in basal ganglia converging on the temporal isthemus. Lesions
in insula, internal capsule resulted in fluent aphasia, mild word finding difficulty and
phonemic paraphasia.
Longworth C E. et al (2001) studied the rule governed language use among
subcortical aphasics with Parkinson’s disease and Huntigton’s disease. He reported small
number of repetition, substitution and regularization errors (dug-digged). Mild Parkinson’s
![Page 5: Lexical errors in narrative discourse of a bilingual subcortical aphasic- ISBA 10](https://reader031.fdocuments.net/reader031/viewer/2022020101/555225b7b4c9054c668b4ca4/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
disease patients made relatively few errors - stached – satched- where phonology of the verb
was distorted. Moderate Parkinson’s disease patients had correctly inflected phonological
distortion and lexical intrusion errors for novel words. Mild Huntington’s disease had only
over application of the - ed inflections. Moderate Huntington’s disease group made relatively
few regularization errors and no multiply suffixed errors in their first responses. Results
concluded that subcortical aphasics with basal ganglia dysfunction have intact automatic
processing of syntax in language comprehension into the morpho-syntactic domain.
Metter et al., (1988) focused on subcortical aphasia and role of basal ganglia in
language. Their evidence was derived from CT scan, PET studies on stroke patients.
Interesting findings were that fluency deficits were associated with basal ganglia, thalamus,
internal capsule with deficits in phrase length, variety of grammatical constructions, as well
as presence of jargon, word finding difficulty and circumlocution.
Demeurisse.G (1995) studied the contribution of functional imaging techniques in
subcortical aphasia. He found that sufficient cortical dysfunction gives rise to language
disorders. He also reported evidence of Hypophonia ( loss of volume), reduced verbal output,
jargon speech and phonological disorders.
Mega, Michel et al. (1997) studied 14 patients with aphasia after subcortical lesions
and controlled for duration, general anatomic site of lesions (capsulostriatal only), and
etiology. They found the clinical profiles of the patients were quite similar, varying in
severity in rough proportion to lesion size and varying in quality in proportion to anterior
paraventricular extent. Large lesions were associated with impaired "executive" and
"generative" language functions.
Gurd, J.M. and Bannford, J.M. (1997) studied the cognitive impairment in two
women subcortical aphasics. Both had circumscribed infarcts to the basal ganglia and
internal capsule. The lesion in case 1 extended into the head of the caudate nucleus, whereas
in case 2, it did not. Cognitive recovery was more rapid and complete in the second case,
despite persistent impairment of the right hand. Both cases showed reduced blood flow in the
left basal ganglia and fronto temporal regions at 6 months post onset.
![Page 6: Lexical errors in narrative discourse of a bilingual subcortical aphasic- ISBA 10](https://reader031.fdocuments.net/reader031/viewer/2022020101/555225b7b4c9054c668b4ca4/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
Nadeu, Stephen E & Crosson, B. (1997) in their review of earlier studies found no
aphasia in 17 cases with dominant hemisphere straito capsuler infarction. They came across
almost all patterns of language impairment in 33 reported cases of straito capsular infarction.
It provides strong evidence against a major direct role of the basal ganglia in language and
against disconnection or diachisis as mechanism of non thalamic subcortical aphasia. They
also found that cases of C.V.A leading to straito capsular infarction strongly suggest that
associated linguistic deficits are predominantly related to sustained cortical hypoperfusion
and infarction not visible on structural imaging studies. Thalamic disconnection due to
straito-capsular infarcts with extension to the temporal stem and putamenal hemorrhages may
also contribute to language deficits in some cases. Disruption in attention gating in the
pulvinar and lateral posterior nuclei resulting from such lesions may impair selection of
specific neuronal networks in the projection field of these nuclei that serve as the substance
for lexical semantic function.
Demonet, Jean Fracois et al( 1991) assessed regional cerebral blood flow( r CBF) in
14 subcortical aphasics and 23 normal volunteers. In the subcortical aphasic group, the
severity aphasia score was correlated with rCBF ratios in three left cortical regions and in a
right posterior temporal region. Phonological disorders were associated with a hypoperfusion
in both left and right posterior temporal regions. The rCBF in these homologous regions were
highly correlated and this correlation was more marked in the subcortical patient group than
in the normal group. The study proposes that compensatory neural machanisms in these
interconnected homologous areas account for preserved comprehension capacities in many
cases of subcortical aphasia, especially the thalamic cases.
Aglioti, S et al (1996) reported neuropsychological and neurolinguistic features of a
bilingual subcortical aphasia involving the left basal ganglia. A linguistic deficit in mother
tongue production has been observed in spontaneous speech and in cross-language
translational tasks which require automatized motor and cognitive performance respectively.
She had more difficulties while translating into her second language. The study reflects the
role of basal ganglia in automatized motor and cognitive performance.
![Page 7: Lexical errors in narrative discourse of a bilingual subcortical aphasic- ISBA 10](https://reader031.fdocuments.net/reader031/viewer/2022020101/555225b7b4c9054c668b4ca4/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
RELEVANCE OF STUDY
Since there are very few studies carried out on subcortical aphasia in India in general
and in Telugu language in particular. Hence present study – a single case study will shed
more light on lexical errors in subcortical aphasia in Telugu-English biligual at narrative
discourse level.
OBJECTIVES OF STUDY
To study the lexical error patterns in the narrative discourse of Telugu-English
subcortical aphasic.
METHODOLOGY:-
Subject - M, a 67 yr old is a right handed Telugu English bilingual woman. She was
found unconscious in bathroom following cerebro-vascular stroke. She was shifted to NIMS
hospitals, Hyderabad . Neurological examination revealed disorientation, loss of speech and
complete right sided hemiplegia with facial deviation. M had always been healthy,. She was
a social worker with graduate level education . She was proficient in both Telugu and
English languages. She had no H/o diabetes, hypertension, CVA. She regained her
consciousness after 2 hrs in hospital. During hospitalization, the patient manifested
hypersomnia, disorientation in time and space, mental slowness and loss of speech and
memory. She was severely nonfluent and could answer in just yes or no.
MRI revealed left basalganglionic infarct with CVA.
EEG showed generalized slowing of electrical activity.
After 4 days, patient became stable, oriented and thus discharged. Later she was
shifted to Nursing Home, Hyderabad for further rehabilitative measures. Memory, speech
![Page 8: Lexical errors in narrative discourse of a bilingual subcortical aphasic- ISBA 10](https://reader031.fdocuments.net/reader031/viewer/2022020101/555225b7b4c9054c668b4ca4/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
and language deficits were still persistent. She had good comprehension, but verbal
expression was impaired. She was referred for speech therapy after 15days post stroke .
Speech and language evaluation findings 15 days post stroke :
WAB (Western Aphasia Battery): -
Spontaneous speech- 6/20
(Information Content-3, fluency-3- low volume jargon, mumbling, empty speech and certain
times automatic sentences e.g. “what’s that, don’t know”
Comprehension-58/60
Repitition-74/100
Naming-14/100
Speech was hypophonic. Max phonation duration was 4 sec. AMR (alternate motor rate)-
5syllables per second .SMR (Sequential motor rate)-2sec. Perseverations and phoneme
reversal pattern were predominantly observed in her speech.
ACE-R (Addenbrooke’s cognition examination) revealed impaired attention, concentration,
impaired working memory with short term memory deficits, very poor verbal fluency.
Reading was relatively preserved .
Orientation:- 4/10
Registration: - 3/3
Memory recall:- 0/3
Attention & concentration: - 1/5
![Page 9: Lexical errors in narrative discourse of a bilingual subcortical aphasic- ISBA 10](https://reader031.fdocuments.net/reader031/viewer/2022020101/555225b7b4c9054c668b4ca4/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
Anterograde memory: - 2/7
Retrograde memory: - 2/4
Verbal fluency:- Letter fluency- 1/7
Fluency for generating names of animals:- 1/7
3stage command:- 2/3
Reading: - 1/1
Writing: - 0/1
Language: - Naming: 4/12
Comprehension:- 4/4
Repetition: - 2/2
Reading: - ½
Visuospatial skills: clock = 2
Pentagon= 1
Visuoperceptual skills: 4/4
Delayed recall: 0/7
Recognition:- 2/7
MMSE~ 14/30
ACE-R ~36/10
![Page 10: Lexical errors in narrative discourse of a bilingual subcortical aphasic- ISBA 10](https://reader031.fdocuments.net/reader031/viewer/2022020101/555225b7b4c9054c668b4ca4/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Following are the error patterns seen in the language of Bilingual (Telugu + English)
subcortical Aphasic
Phonemic paraphasias
1./Pasapu/ - /parapu/
(“turmeric”)
2. /tala/ - / talapu/
‘head’ ‘lock’
3. /bred/ - /bed/
‘bread’
4. Ceyi – teyi
‘hand’
5. WƆts – WƆk
‘watch’
6. Kʌtʌpa – kʌdʌpʌ
7. Pustakam – u: stakam
‘book’
![Page 11: Lexical errors in narrative discourse of a bilingual subcortical aphasic- ISBA 10](https://reader031.fdocuments.net/reader031/viewer/2022020101/555225b7b4c9054c668b4ca4/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
8. /Pilichkuntaru/ – /tilichikuntaru/
‘to inhale/ blow the air’
9./ kostunaru/ or /kʌt cestunaru/ – /kotcestunaru/
10. /gontu/ – /ghantamu/
‘throat’
11. /aratipandu/ – / atripandu/
‘banana’
M had several phonemic paraphasics in her speech. She substituted one phoneme for another
[1, 2, 5, 6, 8], deleted initial phonemes in a word [7], deleted one of the phonemes from a
consonant cluster [7], added an extra syllable to the target stimulus [2, 10]. Metathesis too
was seen in two instances [11]. In (10), she wanted to say Kʌnthamu; another name for
gontu, but due to articulatory difficulty, she produced ‘ghantamu”, She also blended the form
for verb ‘cut’ (koyi) in telugu with same form in English. Hence, came out with a word
kotcestunaru [9]
Neologisms
Neologisms are totally new words produced by an aphasic in response to a target stimulus.
They are not part of her native language
13. /table/- /ye sak sak/
14 . /ball/– dishti pandu ( semantic neologism)
15. /boy/ - / misen/
16. /Addʌm/ —/denti pula/
![Page 12: Lexical errors in narrative discourse of a bilingual subcortical aphasic- ISBA 10](https://reader031.fdocuments.net/reader031/viewer/2022020101/555225b7b4c9054c668b4ca4/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
‘Mirror’
When asked to describe a picture based on Boston diagnostic aphasia examination,
she named a boy standing on a stool and trying to reach sweet box on upper shelf as misen.
She named /dishti pandu/ for ball( 14) and /ye sak sak/ for table [15] a clear example of
neologism. For /addʌm/, she named denlipula, again a neologism.(16). Later she came with
target word- table as ‘pable’ an instance of phonemic paraphasia.
Semantic paraphasias
17./ iddaru pillalu/ (two children) — /rendu pillalu/ (two children)
(animate) (inanimate)
18./ ba:tu/ (duck) --- /pilla:/ (child)
19./addʌm/ (mirror)—/pennu/ (pen)
20. /ten nunchi/---/ ten nundi/
21. /yellow/—/blu ‘blue’/
M named /rendu/ ‘two’ instead of/ iddaru/ ‘two’ however, in telugu language, iddaru ‘two’ is
used for animate objects like children, whereas /rendu/ is used only for inanimate beings
,this reflects that M is not able to differentiate between animate and inanimate terms (17)
similarly, she uttered nundi ‘from this (place)’ in place of nunci ‘from this (numeral etc). It
again reflects that she is not able to differentiate these two case relations, referring to place
and thing [20] .In (19) & (21), M named semantically unrelated paraphasia for the target
stimulus.
M named pilla( ‘child’) for batu( ‘duck’) probably, she was referring to young one of a duck,
but could not name it. However, when investigator provided a phonemic cue |d| in English,
she was able to name duck.
![Page 13: Lexical errors in narrative discourse of a bilingual subcortical aphasic- ISBA 10](https://reader031.fdocuments.net/reader031/viewer/2022020101/555225b7b4c9054c668b4ca4/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
Dynamic misnaming
(22) gali patam egrestunnadu – gali (air) ….. ‘gali patam cestunadu’
‘(He) is flying a kite’ ‘is doing a kite’
(23) gali pilichkuntadu – gali tilicukuntadu
‘He is blowing the air’ ‘air + phonemic paraphasia
(balloon)
(24) palu pongya:i – palu khinda padipoindi
‘The milk spilt’ ‘The milk fell down’
M named first air with phonemic error in verb naming and then ‘is doing kite’ instead of
flying kite(. ) .Here, she has uttered a general verb for a specific one [22]. Similar phenomena
was seen in (23). In (24) she simplified the verb-spilling with falling down.
Empty Speech
(26) ekkada untaru miru – umm, edo untanu
“where do you live” “umm, I am somewhere”
(27) abba:yi emi chestunnadu – edo padipotuna:ru khinda
“what is the boy doing” “something is falling down”
(28) ekkad emi jaragutondi – adi adi
“What is happening here” “that that”
![Page 14: Lexical errors in narrative discourse of a bilingual subcortical aphasic- ISBA 10](https://reader031.fdocuments.net/reader031/viewer/2022020101/555225b7b4c9054c668b4ca4/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
(29) aavida emi cestundi – edo ra:stundi, va:l amma edo
postundi
� ‘what is she doing’ ‘something (she is) applying, something she’s
Pouring ‘
When shown a B.D.A.E picture, where a boy is likely to fall down from a stool, M named
edo ‘something’ is falling down instead of evaro ‘someone’ [animate] is falling down. This
indicates that she is not able to differentiate lexemes for animate and inanimate terms (27). In
(26), instead of naming the place, where she exists, M uttered empty speech expression –e:do
‘somewhere’. In (29), where M was shown a picture revealing “a mother giving bath to a
child”, M just said that mother is applying something to the child and pouring something, but
could not name actual verb ‘bathing’ and object – soap. A similar empty speech phenomenon
was also observed in (28).
Groping behaviour
(30) Wal ekkada unnaru – pa ……… ba …. intlo unnaru
‘where do they live’
…a…………. Amerika [after priming( phonemic cue)]
(31) ivala emi tinna:ru miru – beds n a: ….. ba
‘what did you eat today’ - beds n … a: …ba
(32) din emi antaru – --------- okka … cinna illu
‘What do you call that’ – ‘one …… small house’
![Page 15: Lexical errors in narrative discourse of a bilingual subcortical aphasic- ISBA 10](https://reader031.fdocuments.net/reader031/viewer/2022020101/555225b7b4c9054c668b4ca4/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
When investigator asked M about her children, she had severe word finding difficulty. After
great struggle, she said – ‘they are in the house’, whereas the reality is that ‘they (children)
reside in U.S.A (Amerika). However, when investigator prompted her with a phonemic cue –
a.a.., she finally named amerika [30]. She could not name completely her breakfast stuff and
had to grope about a lot. Finally, she named half way [31]. Similar behavior was seen in (32)
too. Groping behaviour is a universal phenomenon across all subcortical aphasics in their
speech. It reflects their severe word finding difficulty.
Irrelevant jargon
(33) Kichan lo unnaru, vastu tisko pote tisko potunnaru, chesko pote chesko potunnaru….
“she is in the kitchen. Having taken a thing, takes it away, having done ,doing it….”. In this
instance, M uttered a sentence, which was not relevant to the context.
Semantic confusion
(34) gajulu ekkada veskuntaru – kaluki – cetaki
‘where do you put on bangles’ ‘to feet – to hands”
(35) gajulu – golsu
‘bangles’ ‘necklace’
Instance (34) reveals that M was not able to name ‘arms’ for wearing bangles. Instead, she
named both – hands and feet., which indicates severe semantic confusion. Similarly, she
could not differentiate bangles and necklace and named later for former [35]
Circumlocution
(35) em custunaru - bel pamp undi
‘What do you see (in the picture)’ ‘There is a pump, (for filling air) in the bel’
![Page 16: Lexical errors in narrative discourse of a bilingual subcortical aphasic- ISBA 10](https://reader031.fdocuments.net/reader031/viewer/2022020101/555225b7b4c9054c668b4ca4/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
When shown a picture, where a boy is blowing balloons, she named that there is a pump for
filling air in the balloon and named bel for baloon. Pump was not shown in the picture.
Probably, she was trying to provide function of pump for a balloon and thus circumlocuting.
(36) kurgajalu kostaru , dintoti – metiki, ceyidani ki
‘With what you cut the vegetables’ ‘ it is the one, with which we do {meti-neologism}
When asked to name with what we cut vegetables, she uttered is it the one, with which we
cut – meti.. In this instance, she named ‘doing’ instead of ‘cutting’ – a general verb for a
specific one. It is an example of dynamic misnaming. At the same time, she was unable to
name target stimulus katti ‘knife’ and provided a neologism in its place.
Repetition
(37) rayatu polani duntunadu – polani duntunadu
“The farmer is ploughing the field” “ploughing the field”
(38) atanu tiragi ravandam ledu – tiragi ravadam ledu
‘He did not return back’ ‘did not return back’
(39) merisevi anni bangaram kadu – merisevi bangaram kadu
“all that glitters is not gold” “glitters is not gold”
(40) indradhanasu - indra dhanu
M could not repeat four syllable words, as reflected in (40). She also deleted the subject,
while repeating longer sentences [37, 38, 39]. In another instance, she repeated debbai
moodu ‘seventy three’ as lekbai mudu” neologism + three”.. Hence, she produced a
neologism.
![Page 17: Lexical errors in narrative discourse of a bilingual subcortical aphasic- ISBA 10](https://reader031.fdocuments.net/reader031/viewer/2022020101/555225b7b4c9054c668b4ca4/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY:
Since present study is a single case study based on limited narrative discourse, it doesn’t
reveal all linguistic impairments in subcortical aphasics. In future, a further study based on
several subjects and larger data can focus on the language impairment in subcortical
aphasics at a larger level. As in presented case, functional MRI, SPECT could not be done, so
mechanism of Diaschisis and cortical hypoperfusion remains questionable. Further studies
based on neuroradiological aspects will make these mechanisms clear.
CONCLUSION:-
Semantic and phonemic paraphasias were frequently observed in present study. The patient is
a typical subcortical aphasic, reflecting both nonfluent and fluent characteristics of aphasia.
In naming verbs of motion, patient had dynamic misnaming. Patient’s speech also shows
empty speech, circumlocutions, and semantic confusion. These are reflective of word finding
difficulty in her speech. The patient deleted initial subject of the sentence, while repeating
longer sentences.
![Page 18: Lexical errors in narrative discourse of a bilingual subcortical aphasic- ISBA 10](https://reader031.fdocuments.net/reader031/viewer/2022020101/555225b7b4c9054c668b4ca4/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
REFERANCES
Agliotti, S. (1997). The role of thalamus and basal ganglia in human cognition. Journal of
neurolinguistics, 10, (4), 255-265.
Alexander, M.P.et al. Aphasia after left hemispheric intracerebral hammorhage . Neurology
1980.30,1193 – 1202
Lorenzen B.& Murray L.(2008) The Bilingual Aphasia: A Theoretical and Clinical
Review,American journal of Speech & Language Pathology,(17) , 299–317
Choi, J Y. (2007) Subcortical Aphasia after Striatocapsular infarction: Quantitative analysis
of Brain perfusion SPECT using statistical parametric mapping and a statistical probabilistic
Anatomic mapping. Journal of Nuclear Medicine. (48), 2,194-200.
Demeurisse, G. (1997). Contribution of functional imaging techniques: the study of
subcortical aphasia. Journal of neurolinguistics, 10, (4), 301-311.
Fabbro, F., et al. (1997). Language disorders in Bilingual patients after thalamic lesions.
Journal of neurolinguistics,10, (4), 347-367.
Gurd, J.M., and Bamford, J.M. (1997). Striatocapsular Aphasia: contrasting cases. Journal of
neurolinguistics, 10, (4), 325-346.
Longworth, C.E., et al. (2007). The basal ganglia and rule governed language rules: evidence
from vascular and degenerative conditions. Brain, 128(30), 584-596.
Mega, M. S. and Alexander, M .P. (1994). Subcortical aphasia : The core profile of
capsulostriatal infarction . Journal of Neurology, 44, 1824-1847.
Metter et al, (1988). Subcortical structures in Aphasia. An analysis based on
fleurodeoxyglucose, positron emission tomography. Archives of Neurology, 45, 1229-1234.
![Page 19: Lexical errors in narrative discourse of a bilingual subcortical aphasic- ISBA 10](https://reader031.fdocuments.net/reader031/viewer/2022020101/555225b7b4c9054c668b4ca4/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
Nadeau, S. E, Rothi L.J.G., Chapter 4: Rehabilitation of Subcortical Aphasia. Language
intervention strategies in Aphasia and related Neurogenic Communication Disorders. 4th
edition .Edited by- R. Chapey, pp: 457-514.
Nadeu, S and Crosson, B. (1997). Subcortical Aphasia. Brain and language, 58, 355-402.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
We thank sincerely Dr A. Suvarna, Associate Professor, NIMS Hospital, Hyderabad, for
providing subject and also for her kind support and guidance.
We also thank Dr Jaydip Ray Choudhary, HOD Neurology, Yashoda Hospitals,Somajiguda,
Hyderabad for his valuable suggestions and inspiration.