MIT CogNet, The Brain Sciences ConnectionFrom the MIT Press, Link to Online Catalog
SPARC Communities
Subscriber : Stanford University Libraries » LOG IN

space

Powered By Google 
Advanced Search

 

A Double Dissociation Within Language: Evidence from Aphasia

 T. Love, D. Swinney, G. Hickok and M.T. Ullman
  
 

Abstract:
Background : Are the words and rules of language subserved by distinct mechanisms (Pinker, 1991) or a common mechanism (Elman et al., 1996)? On a dual-mechanism view, regular past tense forms ( look-looked ) are computed by the application of an - ed -suffixing rule, whereas irregular forms ( dig-dug ) are dependent upon memory. On a single-mechanism view, both past tense types are retrieved from associative memory. Neurological double dissociations between regulars and irregulars would strengthen the dual-mechanism case. Patients with temporal lobe damage (posterior aphasia, amnesia, Alzheimer's disease) are worse at generating irregular than regular past tense forms; those with frontal/basal-ganglia lesions (anterior aphasia, Parkinson's disease) show the opposite pattern (Ullman et al., 1997; Ullman & Corkin, 1997).

Motivation & Method : Can these findings be replicated with a different task and a new population of aphasic patients? We asked 6 Broca's aphasics (all with left anterior lesions) and 5 Wernicke's aphasics (3 with left posterior lesions, 2 with unlocalized left lesions) to read out loud 17 regular and 17 irregular past tense forms matched pairwise for stem and past tense frequencies and for final consonant structure (e.g., slipped-swept ).

Results : The Broca's aphasics had more difficulty reading regular (mean 30% correct) than irregular (44%) forms. The Wernicke's aphasics showed the opposite pattern (61% vs. 55%). The interaction between Irregular/Regular Verb and Posterior/Anterior Aphasia was statistically significant by item (p < .05), and approached significance by subject (p = .08).

Conclusions : The results dissociate the reading of regular and irregular past tense forms, and are consistent with the dual-mechanism hypothesis that the mental lexicon is part of a temporal lobe declarative memory system for facts and events, whereas grammatical rules are processed by a frontal/basal ganglia procedural system for motor and cognitive skills (Ullman et al., 1997). Grant support: Army DAMD17-93-V-3018 and NIH DC00494

 
 


© 2010 The MIT Press
MIT Logo