Language Psychology


Summary and Evaluation

Article 1

The article Phonological Factors in Auditory Comprehension inAphasia evaluates the procedure of phonological processing inaphasia. The authors aim at determining if Wernicke’s aphasicscomprise a selective disorder through discrimination of minimalphonemic contrasts when compared to different aphasic groups. Thearticle discusses the extreme to which the impairment is attributedto the understanding problems of persons with aphasia. In addition,the article determines whether there are different kinds ofphonological processing that is selectively impaired in aphasia.Blumstein, Baker and Goodlass (1977) note that in all cases ofaphasia, sick persons demonstrate some kind of language understandingdeficit. Though it is apparent that language understanding is foundedon the assimilation of numerous linguistic as well as psychologicaldimensions, investigators have endeavored to validate thecontribution of the auditory understanding dimensions. The author’sstudy in investigating if the understanding deficit of Wernickeaphasics might result in a selective deficit during phonemic hearingdepicts that dimensions like vocabulary, semantics, syntax as well asinformation redundancy are possible to impair selectively in aphasia.

The article is effective in explaining the phonological aspects thatimpede auditory comprehension in aphasia. Blumstein, Baker andGoodlass (1977) explain that the relevance of phonological perceptionin language understanding is apparent. When there is improperperception of the phonological state of a phrase or the manner inwhich the word is uttered results in wrong perception, thecontribution to syntactic of semantic message content could beerroneous. The outcomes of the research propose that theunderstanding shortfall of Wernicke’s aphasics is not attributed tothe absence of phonemic hearing. This is because the Wernickeaphasics, the study groups comprising extreme understanding deficit,is the most unimpaired in phoneme discrimination. Additionally,though the correlation evaluation amid language understanding, aswell as phoneme discrimination depicts a positive sequence, it isattributed to a basic anchoring impact of Broca’s aphasics, havingminimal impairment in phoneme discrimination, in addition to languagediscrimination. The Wernicke aphasic is the mere subgroup for which asuggestive association is observed amid impairment of understandingand phoneme discrimination level. This results in the conclusion thatthe extreme of temporal lobe harm, made apparent by their level ofunderstanding comprises a particular impact on phonemediscrimination. The study outcome largely depicts that a disturbancein phonemic hearing is not restricted to temporal lobe sick persons,rather is apparent in differing levels in all aphasic groupsexperimented.

The authors suppose that subtle disparities in phonologicalprocessing could prevail amid the aphasic groups. Specifically, theposterior aphasics like Residual aphasics or Wernicke, had notablymore complexity in the discrimination of place differences whencompared to voice differences. Contrary, the anterior aphasics, MixedAnteriors and Broca depict no disparity in performance amid the twophonetic groups. The extreme hardship apparent for the posterioraphasics by place discrimination versus voice differentiations mightbe because of disparities in the acoustic cue nature for the diversegroups of speech sounds. The observation of place differences relieson the extraction of acoustic data as the extreme, speed anddirection of fast altering formant changes, as well as the conversionof the information to the invariant phonetic or linguisticdemonstrate a relationship. Contrary, the phonetic dimensions thatsignal voice are founded largely on timing associations amid thecommencement of voicing in relation to consonant release, in additionto the extreme of the restrain of the initial formant relative togreater formants.

Blumstein, Baker and Goodlass (1977) argue that the aphasics’performance during the processing of different phonological dimensionlike phoneme order, as well as syllable system demonstrates theintricacy apparent in all aphasics. Significant is that the relativeintricacy of the discriminations parallels that available for phonemediscrimination. Specifically, the Wernicke aphasic works well inphoneme order discrimination as well as syllable system when comparedto Mixed Anterior aphasic. This means that though the incapability touse phonological data completely might result in a problem inunderstanding, it does not appear to expound on the largerunderstanding deficit of Wernicke’s aphasic. The article supposesthat the understanding problems of Wernicke’s aphasia might bebecause of an incapability to employ phonological features in alinguistically significant manner.

Article 2

The article, Phonology Comprehension Deficits in Persons withAphasia, intends to come up with an experiment of phonologyunderstanding of the Hindi language. The intention of the studyinvolves carrying out a relative assessment of phonologyunderstanding amid neuro-typical grownups and individuals havingaphasia with regard to auditory, as well as orthographic methods.Kumar and Goswami (2012) demonstrate that there is an apparentdisparity amid the average scores across neuro-characteristicgrownups and individuals having aphasia on all modality tasks. Thearticle concludes that individuals having aphasia find it hard toidentify tasks than in performing discrimination task. Thedifficulties arise for the understanding of actual and nonsensesyllables. People having aphasia are more probable to makecomprehension mistakes for consonants, specifically when theincentive difference by a sole phonetic feature contrary to whencontrasted by more than two features. The author’s research alsoconcludes that the influence of perceptual performance is controlledby the position of phonetic where contrast is apparent. Additionalperceptual mistakes happen for consonants. Sequence of real wordsunderstanding as well as that for non-words is the same amidindividuals having aphasia, which is in line with the observationthat the organizational properties of sound language system remainsin place. The same phonological sequences of phrases misperceptionsand non-phrases demonstrate that the similar processing apparatusemployed in acoustic system mapping to phonological system.

Blumstein, Baker and Goodlass (1975) make it apparent that personshaving aphasia are unable to understand phonology. The research is anendeavor at investigating the phonology understanding in peoplehaving aphasia and neuro-typical persons using orthographic as wellas auditory modes. The outcomes of the study demonstrate thatunderstanding of syllable identification as well as syllablediscrimination appears better placed in orthographic mode compared tothe auditory mode for individuals having aphasia. Syllableidentification understanding seemed better compared to syllablediscrimination in the two modalities of people with aphasia.Contrary, neuro-typical grownups performance is perfect in thetwo-modality tasks. Thus, general results depict that brain damagemay result in phonology challenge understanding in auditory as wellas orthographic modes in people that have aphasia. Blumstein, Bakerand Goodlass (1975) is convincing through the support ofunderstanding problems in phonological level for people with aphasia.

The authors depict that on phonologically the diverse aphasic kindsdemonstrate understanding problems to variable extremes. This impliesthe site as well as the extreme of lesion having an influence onlanguage region lacks a major impact on understanding. The articleincorporates performances from Wernicke and Broca’s aphasics, whichare the same quantitatively, but have qualitative disparities. Thepoor performance noted in persons that have aphasia on phonologyunderstanding of the Hindi language for individuals with aphasia testcould derive from the employment of a single mode. Important is thecontribution that the performance of people with aphasia enhance whenthe linguistic stimuli becomes presented in verbal as well as graphicmodalities, instead of when using the verbal modality on its own. Thepeople having Broca’s aphasica as well depict proof ofself-assessment conducts, which are not apparent among persons havingWernicke’s aphasics. Blumstein, Baker and Goodlass (1975) arguethat Broca’s aphasics demonstrates a slowed as well as incorrectreaction in addition to showing development with reduced presentationstimuli rate. Developments observed in individuals having aphasiawith less than normal levels are also apparent in different studies,which make the argument strong.

In conclusion, the article is effective in demonstrating how personshaving aphasia have phonology understanding shortfalls. The authorsnote that aphasia has a major influence on people’s life, alteringdaily communicative conditions to a struggle to comprehend, inaddition to others understanding. Developments in the communicativecapability in everyday life of individuals having aphasia are themajor objective of aphasia therapy. The therapy becomes effectivefollowing thorough evaluation and determination of baseline therapy.However, it is reliant on the kind and extreme of aphasia. For peoplehaving well-known linguistic-level problems, evaluation needs to beconducted on the major linguistic prowess, which is the processing ofsyntactic, semantic as well as phonological. Blumstein, Baker andGoodlass (1975) research is convincing is depicting how aphasia islinked with problems in auditory understanding of tasks, which causesthem to make phonological mistakes.

Article 3

In Semantic Feature Representations for Normal and AphasicLanguage, Zurif, Caramazza and Galvin (1974), argue that thegrouping of nouns for aphasic as well as non-neurological sickpersons depends on meaning resemblance. The authors aim atdetermining how memory is organized for persons with aphasia. Theword grouping acts as an input matric for hierarchical groups as wellas multidimensional scaling evaluations. The developing systemsdemonstrate that, whereas the normal grown up has various levels forarranging their lexicon, the grownups aphasic’s lexicon may becategorized as a collection of partial entries, which are united toaffective in addition to situational information. The outcomes alsodemonstrate that the representations of semantic feature arising fromsimilarity of significance judgments are of significance in theresearch of issues that have an impact on precise languageperformance. The authors aim at determining if the issue entrenchedin an aphasic syndrome may be linked to the arrangement of lexicalstorage.

Zurif, Caramazza and Galvin (1974) attempt to acquire leverage onthe matter via assessment of several of the systems fundamental toverbal ideas in the diverse aphasias, in addition to via comparisonwith the underlying employment of normal idiom. A built inperformance quantifier is apparent, which acts as the corollary,against which to assess the significance of the assessments andcomparisons. The disparity amid an aphasic sick person’s and normalindividual’s capability of finding words to communicate. Theassessment of subjective lexical arrangement is founded on a triadiccomparison process. Every subject is presented with three phrases ata go, and in every case, is supposed to select two phrases they feelare the same in meaning. The employment of the process entails thepresumption that the phrases to be collected are abstractly differentto the subject. The presumption becomes hard when handling an aphasicpopulation, thus mandating the need for special care to depict thatthe aphasic sick individuals comprehend the connotations of thephrases employed, despite the inability to produce the words easilyin continuing speech.

For the subjects to select just two phrases in triadic diversitythey apparently fail to consider a number of their differentiatingaspects whereas attending to different ones. Through the reasoning,the process might be employed in inferring the aspects that arefundamental to subjective lexical arrangement. However, the processis directed via the consideration of items selection as well as theircomponential system. The aspects of meaning do not require anypredefined status in any specific linguistic hypothesis. The onlyrequirement is plausibility, which might be derived as economicallyas probable from a knowhow of the associations available amid lexicalitems. Zurif, Caramazza and Galvin (1974) research becomes effectivebecause of their exploration of subjective lexical arrangement, wherethe endeavor has been creating a disparity amid overall and residualsemantic aspects.

Through the employment of a group of twelve real nouns that allowthe creation of at minimum two diverse, as well as equally restrictedsemantic domains. One domain is created through clustering of thephrases on the foundation of overall semantic components presumed intheir definitions. The second domain derives from grouping thephrases on the foundation of components, which fit in thesignificance residuum classification. The research has achieved itsobjective of exhibiting as well as comparing the organizationalaspects of long-term lexical memory in the diverse states of aphasia,in addition to normal language application. Important is theconclusion that individual with aphasia face challenges when asked toidentify words as compared to normal persons. This derives from theirlack of comprehension of vocabulary. The inability to differentiatevocabulary or semantic, means that the individuals are unable tocomprehend and differentiate phrases.

Integration of Articles

The connection of the articles derives from their studies indemonstrating aphasia as a condition, which has an effect on thebrain resulting in effective language use challenges. Based on theconclusive research of the articles, it is apparent that persons whomake mistakes in the phrases they employ, at times utilizing theincorrect sound in a phrase, selecting the wrong phrase of groupingwords inappropriately. Aphasia additionally has a negative impact oncommunicating and writing in the similar manner (Wilshire &ampMcCarthy, 1996). Most individuals that have the condition havedifficulties in comprehending phrases and sentences that have beenread or heard. Important is the finding that aphasia is eitherreceptive or expressive. The grouping depends on if there existhardships in the comprehension or expression of language. Indicatorsdiffer from the mixing of phrases or deficits in communication, likereading, uttering names, writing or speech comprehension (Benson&amp Ardila, 1996).

The authors use Wernicke and Broca’s aphasics in explaining theproblems people with aphasia have in understanding phonology.Blumstein, Baker and Goodlass (1977) conclude that the understandingshortfall of Wernicke’s aphasics does not derive from phonemichearing loss. Additionally, is the view that though the correlationassessment amid language understanding and phoneme discriminationdepicts a positive occurrence, it is because of an enhancing impactof Broca’s aphasics that were minimally impaired in understandinglanguage as well as phoneme discrimination. According to Kumar andGoswami (2012), there exists a quantitative similarity in Broca andWernicke’s aphasics. However, there aphasics differ qualitatively.Further is the conclusion that the individual having Broca’saphasica depicts proof of self-assessment conducts, which are notapparent in persons having Wernicke’s aphasics. Broca’s aphasicsdemonstrate a slow and imprecise reaction, in addition to developmentwith slower level of stimuli presentation. Zurif, Caramazza andGalvin (1974) use Broca and Wernicke’s aphasia in subjectselection. The anterior individuals with aphasia are categorizedunder Broca. The group is characterized by many pauses whencommunicating, minimal lengths of words in addition to agrammatism.Understanding for language that is spoken is rather intact, thoughand the capability of object naming or body sections is spared,though naming takes effort. The posterior subjects fit in thecategory of Wernicke’s aphasia. An important trait is that theindividuals have eloquent, yet empty speech where indefinite nounssuch as someone or thing becomes substituted for the nouns expected.Understanding is impaired in the similar way as for namingcapability.

In conclusion, the articles consent that aphasia slows phonologicalcomprehension. When compared to normal persons, those with theillness face numerous communication problems. Results from thestudies conducted by the authors depict that dimensions likesemantics, vocabulary and syntax become selectively impaired becauseof aphasia. Persons with aphasia lack phonological awareness, whichis crucial for language understanding, which explains their improperperceiving of phrases (Nadeau,2000).


Benson, D. F., &amp Ardila, A.(1996).&nbspAphasia:A clinical perspective.New York: Oxford UniversityPress.

Blumstein, S. E., Baker, E., &amp Goodglass, H. (1977). Phonologicalfactors in auditory comprehension in aphasia. Neuropsychologia,15, 19-30.

Kumar, S., &amp Goswami, S. P. (2012). Phonology comprehensiondeficits in persons with aphasia. Language in India, 12(2),643-658.

Nadeau, S. E. (2000).&nbspAphasiaand language: Theory to practice.New York: Guilford Press.

Wilshire, C. E., &amp McCarthy, R. (1996). Experimentalinvestigation of an impairment in phonological encoding. CognitiveNeuropsychology, 13, 1059–1098.

Zurif, E. B., Caramazza, A., &amp Galvin, J. (1974). Semanticfeature representations for normal and aphasic language. Brainand Language, 1, 167-187.