University of Groningen
Comprehension and production of verbs in aphasic speakers
Jonkers, Roel
IMPORTANT NOTE: You are advised to consult the publisher's version (publisher's PDF) if you wish to
cite from it. Please check the document version below.
Document Version
Publisher's PDF, also known as Version of record
Publication date:
1998
Link to publication in University of Groningen/UMCG research database
Citation for published version (APA):
Jonkers, R. (1998). Comprehension and production of verbs in aphasic speakers Groningen: s.n.
Copyright
Other than for strictly personal use, it is not permitted to download or to forward/distribute the text or part of it without the consent of the
author(s) and/or copyright holder(s), unless the work is under an open content license (like Creative Commons).
Take-down policy
If you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately
and investigate your claim.
Downloaded from the University of Groningen/UMCG research database (Pure): http://www.rug.nl/research/portal. For technical reasons the
number of authors shown on this cover page is limited to 10 maximum.
Download date: 18-06-2017
Chapter 5
Instrumentality and name relation with a noun
5.1. Introduction
Verbs clearly differ from nouns as far as the grammatical information that
is stored with them is concerned. In the previous chapter, it was shown
that this information plays an important role in the verb processing of
Broca’s aphasics. Verbs, however, also correspond to nouns when other
aspects of the verb are considered. Some obvious similarities between
verbs and nouns can be found with respect to meaning and phonological
form. Types of verbs exist that are explicitly connected to nouns in these
aspects. In the present chapter, the effect of meaning relation with a noun
and name relation with a noun on verb retrieval will be evaluated from the
perspective of the instrumentality of the verb.
Instrumental verbs are verbs referring to actions for which an instrument
(not being a body part) is required in order to perform the action. It is
assumed that this instrument is part of the conceptual representation of the
verb, as is illustrated by the following examples (example 1 is based on the
representation of the verb to clear as given by Jackendoff, 1990)1:
(1)
to clean:
[CAUSE([ ]i,[INCH[NOT BE([SPOTS],[ONd[ ]j])]])]
(2)
to polish:
[[CAUSE([ ]i,[INCH[NOT BE([SPOTS],[ONd[ ]j])]])([BY[instrumentRAG])]
1
In these examples i is the actor, j is the patient or theme; d denotes that a determiner is
necessary
104
Chapter 5
(3)
to mop:
[CAUSE([ ]i,[INCH[NOT BE([SPOTS],[ONd[ ]j])]])([BY[instrumentMOP])]
The difference between the more generic verb to clean and the more
specific verbs to polish and to mop is the presence of an instrument in the
conceptual representation. This part of the conceptual representation is
necessary in order to activate the intended verb.
Instrumentality seems to be a universal aspect of verb representations. For
Bird’s Head Languages Hatam and Sougb (Reesink, to appear) and for
Algonquian Languages, such as Ojibwa (Rhodes, 1980), Kashaya Pomo
(Hinton, 1994), and Maliseet-Passamaquoddy (Leavitt, 1992), for example,
the instrumentality of verbs has also
been described.2 The way
instrumentality is expressed, differs. Hatam and Sougb are morphologically
marked for instrumentality, as is demonstrated by the following examples,
taken from Reesink (to appear):
(4)
Hatam:
di-ba
1s-use
singau
knife
di-bi-digo
nab
1s-INS-cut.up
pig
I use a knife to cut up the pig
(5)
Sougb:
d-eisan
ketmei
d-a-(e)txwa hwej
1s-uses
knife
1s-INS-cut.up
pig
I use a knife to cut up the pig
In Hatam, the instrument is expressed by the morpheme bi, whereas in
Sougb the initial vowel of the verb is changed (-ogot (hit) -> -agot (hit with
instrument). In these languages it is impossible to use a prepositional
phrase in order to express the instrument. The morphological similarities
with respect to instrumentality are remarkable because, although Hatam
2
I would like to thank Ger Reesink and Peter Bakker for drawing my attention to these
articles.
Instrumentality and name relation with a noun
105
and Sougb are typologically very similar, the vocabularies of these
languages differ largely.
Instrumentality
can
be
expressed
morphologically
in
Algonquian
Languages too. In Kashaya Pomo, for example, instrumental prefixes are
used in order to show that an instrument is utilized (Hinton, 1994). The
prefix pha expresses that the action is performed with the end of a long object,
whereas phi or pi stands for with the side of a long object. (6) and (7) are
examples of verbs with both prefixes (examples taken from Hinton, 1994):
(6)
phac’o’
(7)
h
pit aw
to harpoon
to beat with the side of a stick
Indo-European languages like English and Dutch do not verbalize
instrumentality morphologically. In contrast to Hatam, Sougb, and Kashaya
Pomo, a prepositional with-phrase can be used to verbalize the instrument
in these languages, as shown in the following examples.
(8)
The man cleans the mirror with a rag
(9)
The man cleans the floor with a mop
Another way to express instrumentality is to use an instrumental verb.
Examples (10) and (11) have almost the same meaning as (8) and (9).
(10)
The man polishes the mirror
(11)
The man mops the floor
The verbs to polish and to mop differ with respect to the presence of the
instrument in the phonological form of the verb. The verb to mop
incorporates the instrument phonologically, whereas this does not hold for
the verb to polish. Expressing the instrument in a prepositional phrase is
therefore still possible when to polish is used, as in (12), while it is odd
with the verb to mop, as in (13):
(12)
The man polishes the mirror with a rag
106
(13)
Chapter 5
The man mops the floor with a mop
Don (1993) assumes that Dutch verbs which have a phonologically
identical noun, are derived from these nouns. He furthermore states that
verb-forming derivations produce regular verbs. Indeed, of the 40
instrumental verbs used in the present study that are supposed to be
derived from the instruments, all except one are regularly inflected.3
If the instrumental verb is derived from the instrument, then there is an
evident phonological relation between the verb and the corresponding
instrument. The aphasics that participated in the present study showed a
better performance on noun retrieval than on verb retrieval. It is therefore
interesting to enquire, whether a relation in name between a noun and a
verb facilitates verb retrieval.
In an explorative study, Bastiaanse (1991) examined the retrieval of
instrumental verbs in isolation and sentence context. Although she focused
on an effect of name relation within the class of instrumental verbs, also
noninstrumental verbs were investigated. Two Broca’s aphasics and two
anomics were tested. An overview of the scores of the patients on action
naming and sentence construction was already given in chapter 1 (table
1.1.). For convenience, this table is depicted again on the next page.
The four patients showed a comparable performance on instrumental and
noninstrumental verbs in action naming, whereas in sentence construction
noninstrumental verbs were better preserved than instrumental verbs.
Bastiaanse, as mentioned, focused on name relation. The two Broca’s
aphasics and one of the anomics were worse in retrieving instrumental
verbs in isolation if there was a name relation with the instrument than if
no such relation existed. The opposite pattern occurred in sentence context.
The other anomic patient performed equally well on both types of verbs.
An error analysis revealed that the Broca’s aphasics showed a preference
3
It has to be noted, however, that almost all 120 verbs that were used in the present study are
regularly inflected.
Instrumentality and name relation with a noun
107
for verb-noun substitutions and semantic paraphasias, whereas the anomics
only produced semantic paraphasias.
action naming
sentence construction
-I
+I-N
(n=9) (n=6)
+I+N
(n=5)
-I
Broca 1
Broca 2
0.44
0.66
0.50
0.83
0.20
0.40
0.40
0.60
0.20
0.40
0.60
0.60
anomic 1
anomic 2
0.56
0.44
0.67
0.67
0.60
0.00
0.80
0.60
0.60
0.00
0.60
0.20
(n=5)
+I-N
+I+N
(n=5)
(n=5)
Table 5.1.: Proportions of correct answers for the three types of
verbs in action naming and sentence construction by the patients
described by Bastiaanse (1991). (-I: noninstrumental, +I-N: nonname-related instrumental, +I+N: name-related instrumental)
Bastiaanse explained these patterns using Levelt’s model of language
production (Levelt, 1989) by emanating from the underlying deficit in the
Broca’s aphasics and the anomics. The explanations were based on two
assumptions. The first assumption states that a picture of an instrumental
action activates both the verb and the noun (the instrument). The second
assumption is that name-related instrumental verbs and the corresponding
instruments are represented by one and the same lemma in the lexicon.
The pattern found in the Broca’s aphasics can be carried back to their
impairment in grammatical encoding. The fact that name-related verbs and
nouns only have one lemma is confusing for the Broca’s aphasics. The
disturbed grammatical encoder cannot choose between the verb and the
noun, leading to verb-noun substitutions. For non-name-related verbs two
lemmas are activated and no confusion arises. Activation of the wrong
lemma leads to semantic paraphasias.
In sentence construction, patients used a cue. They often produced a
sentence frame like ’he is V-ing’. This led to more correct reactions than on
108
Chapter 5
naming because if a noun was filled in at the place of the verb, the answer
is still correct. For non-name-related verbs, such a cue did not work,
making these verbs more difficult.
The anomic patient that showed an effect of verb type, was supposed to
suffer from a problem in retrieving the correct phonological form of the
verb. Anomics are able to choose between the verb and the noun when the
lemma of the name-related verb is to be retrieved (almost no verb-noun
substitutions occurred), but for these verbs, the verb and the instrument
share the lemma. If non-name related verbs are concerned, both the lemma
of the verb and the noun are activated. Coactivation of the lemma of the
instrument makes the verb form easier to retrieve because this lemma can
be used as a semantic cue. If this cue does not work, or if the wrong
instrument is activated, semantic paraphasias will occur. At sentence level,
coactivation of the instrument and sentence processing seems to require
too much energy, leading to a worse performance on these non-namerelated instrumental verbs in sentence context than in isolation.
Bastiaanse’s study was explorative, as only two Broca’s and two anomic
aphasics were tested. Furthermore, the number of items that was used was
rather small. Nevertheless, it may be concluded from her study that the
existence of a name relation between an instrumental verb and its
instrument may play a role in the two Broca’s aphasics and one of the
anomics. Name relation had a negative effect on verb retrieval in isolation
and a positive effect on verb retrieval in sentence context. Although
Bastiaanse did not consider the effect of instrumentality as such, the scores
for the noninstrumental verbs reveal that this factor had no effect on verb
retrieval at the word level, whereas at the sentence level noninstrumental
verbs were better preserved than instrumental verbs in all aphasics.
It is therefore hypothesized, based on the results of Bastiaanse (1991), that
in the present study in both types of aphasics verb retrieval will be
influenced by instrumentality at the sentence level in such a way that
instrumental verbs will be more difficult than noninstrumental verbs.
Furthermore, name-relation will play a negative role in verb finding at the
word level, whereas it will affect the scores positively at the sentence level.
Instrumentality and name relation with a noun
109
5.2. The effect of instrumentality and name relation with a noun on
action
naming
Methods
Three types of verbs were distinguished with respect to instrumentality and
name relation with a noun. A MANOVA analysis will be performed to
consider an overall effect of verb type. If an effect of verb type is found, a
post hoc analysis will be performed. To account for the effect of
instrumentality, noninstrumental verbs (like to stroke) will be compared to
instrumental verbs that are not related in name to the instrument (like to
grind). The latter verbs will be denoted to as instrumental verbs, if only the
factor instrumentality is accounted for.
The effect of name relation with a noun is considered by comparing
instrumental verbs that are not related in name with an instrument and
instrumental verbs that do have a name relation with the instrument (like
to saw). These verbs will be referred to as non-name-related verbs and namerelated verbs, if name relation is evaluated.
Individual subject scores with respect to the effect of instrumentality and
name relation with a noun are given in Appendix III.
Outliers
An outlier-analysis was done according to the method described in chapter
2. One Broca’s aphasic was excluded from the study on the basis of this
analysis. For the results, the data of 14 Broca’s aphasics and 17 anomics
was included.
Results
Group scores with respect to the factors instrumentality and name relation
with a noun are given in table 5.2. The scores are graphically depicted in
figure 5.1.
A MANOVA for repeated measurements was executed to measure the
effect of verb type within the different subject groups. The anomics’
performance in action naming was significantly influenced by the type of
verb (F(2,32)=21.03, p<0.001). No effect of verb type was found in the
110
Chapter 5
Broca’s aphasics and the controls (Broca’s aphasics: F(2,26)=1.31, p>0.05;
controls: F(2,28)=1.95, p>0.05).
Instrumentality
noninstrumental
BROCA’S APHASICS (N=14)
mean (range)
s.d.
ANOMICS (N=17)
mean (range)
p<0.001
s.d.
instrumental
6.8 (2-16)
4.0
7.4 (3-15)
3.7
7.2 (1-14)
10.0 (3-18)
4.1
4.0
17.8 (15-20)
1.5
18.2 (16-20)
1.2
statistics
n.s.
CONTROLS (N=15)
mean (range)
s.d.
n.s.
Name relation with a noun
non-name-related
name-related
statistics
BROCA’S APHASICS (N=14)
mean (range)
s.d.
7.4 (3-15)
3.7
7.9 (3-16)
4.2
10.0 (3-18)
10.5 (4-18)
4.0
4.7
n.s.
ANOMICS (N=17)
mean (range)
p>0.05
s.d.
CONTROLS (N=15)
Table 5.2.: Mean, range, and standard deviation (s.d.) of the action
naming scores with respect to instrumentality and name relation with a
noun. (n.s.: no overall effect of verb type: MANOVA: p>0.05)
Instrumentality and name relation with a noun
111
Two post hoc analyses were performed on the results in action naming for
the anomics in order to evaluate, respectively, the roles of instrumentality
and name
Figure 5.1.: The subjects’ performance on the factors instrumentality
and name relation with a noun at the word level (inst. = instrumental)
relation with a noun. Instrumental verbs were significantly better preserved
than noninstrumental verbs (t(16)=5.33, p<0.001). No differences were
found between the instrumental verbs with or without a name relation to
the instrument (t(16)=0.86, p>0.05).
5.3. The effect of instrumentality and name relation with a noun on
sentence construction
112
Chapter 5
The scores of the different subject groups are given in table 5.3. considering
the effect of instrumentality and name relation on verb retrieval in sentence
context. A graphical representation of these scores is presented in figure
5.2.
Instrumentality and name relation with a noun
113
Instrumentality
noninstrumental
instrumental
statistics
BROCA’S APHASICS (N=14)
mean (range)
s.d.
8.6 (2-15)
3.5
7.9 (2-14)
3.8
n.s.
ANOMICS (N=17)
mean (range)
s.d.
9.8 (2-17)
4.7
9.8 (3-16)
4.4
n.s.
17.7 (15-20)
1.6
17.9 (15-20)
1.4
n.s.
CONTROLS (N=15)
mean (range)
s.d.
Name relation with a noun
non-name-related
name-related
BROCA’S APHASICS (N=14)
mean (range)
s.d.
7.9 (2-14)
3.8
7.9 (1-13)
3.4
n.s.
ANOMICS (N=17)
mean (range)
s.d.
9.8 (3-16)
4.4
10.2 (4-17)
4.6
n.s.
17.9 (15-20)
1.4
17.9 (15-20)
1.5
n.s.
CONTROLS (N=15)
mean (range)
s.d.
Table 5.3.: Mean, range, and standard deviation (s.d.) of the sentence
construction scores with respect to instrumentality and name relation
with a noun. (n.s.: no overall effect of verb type: MANOVA: p>0.05)
A MANOVA for repeated measurements was performed to measure the
effect of verb type within the subject groups. No effect of verb type was
found in the three groups (Broca’s aphasics: F(2,26)=0.86, p>0.05; anomics:
F(2,32)=0.27, p>0.05; controls: F(2,28)=1.42, p>0.05).
114
Chapter 5
Figure 5.2.: The subjects’ performance on the factors instrumentality
and name relation at the sentence level (inst. = instrumental)
5.4. Action and object naming: the effect of verb type
The non-name related and name-related instruments that belonged to the
instrumental verbs which were tested in action naming, were used as the
target
in object naming. In this section, it will be investigated how these
instruments relate to the instrumental verbs, by comparing the scores for
action and object naming with respect to instrumentality and name relation
with a noun.
The results of action and object naming of the Broca’s aphasics and the
anomics considering the different types of verbs are given in table 5.4. The
Instrumentality and name relation with a noun
115
scores of the Broca’s aphasics are graphically depicted in figure 5.3., those
of the anomics in figure 5.4.
116
Chapter 5
Noninstrumental verbs
action naming
statistics
BROCA’S APHASICS (N=14)
mean (range)
p<0.001
s.d.
object naming
6.8 (2-16)
11.8 (6-19)
4.0
3.2
7.2 (1-14)
15.1 (4-20)
4.1
3.9
ANOMICS (N=17)
mean (range)
p<0.001
s.d.
Non-name-related instrumental verbs
action naming
BROCA’S APHASICS (N=14)
mean (range)
p<0.001
s.d.
ANOMICS (N=17)
mean (range)
p<0.01
s.d.
object naming
7.4 (3-15)
11.4 (8-19)
3.7
3.7
10.0 (3-18)
13.1 (5-18)
4.0
3.9
statistics
Name-related instrumental verbs
action naming
BROCA’S APHASICS (N=14)
mean (range)
p<0.01
7.9 (3-16)
object naming
statistics
12.0 (7-18)
Table 5.4.: Mean, range, and standard deviation (s.d.) of the action
and object naming scores with respect to instrumentality and name
relation with a noun
The three types of verbs were more difficult to retrieve than the nouns that
were matched to these verbs for the Broca’s aphasics (noninstrumental verbs:
Instrumentality and name relation with a noun
117
t(13)=8.06, p<0.001; non-name-related instrumental verbs: t(13)=4.66, p<0.001;
name-related instrumental verbs: t(13)=3.89, p<0.01).
Figure 5.3.: The Broca’s aphasics’ performance on action and object
naming regarding instrumentality and name relation with a noun (inst.
= instrumental)
Action and object naming scores did not differ significantly in the anomics
as far as the difference between instrumental verbs and the name-related
instruments that belong to these verbs was concerned (t(16)=2.10, p>0.05).
The other two types of verbs were more problematic to retrieve than the
corresponding nouns (noninstrumental verbs: t(16)=11.57, p<0.001; non-namerelated instrumental verbs: t(16)=3.79, p<0.01).
118
Chapter 5
Figure 5.4.: The anomics’ performance on action and object naming
regarding instrumentality and name relation with a noun (inst. =
instrumental)
It must be noted that the comparable performance for verbs and nouns
with respect to the instrumental verbs and the name-related instruments in
the anomics is not only due to a higher score for these verbs as compared
to the other types of verbs, but also to a lower score for these instruments
as compared to the other nouns. It may be concluded, however, that in the
anomics, as far as instrumental verbs and the name-related instruments are
concerned, action and object naming was equally difficult.
Instrumentality and name relation with a noun
119
5.5. Summary
No effect of verb type was found in action naming and sentence
construction with respect to instrumentality and name relation with a noun in
the Broca’s aphasics and in the controls. Furthermore, these aspects of the
verb did not play a role in the difference between the action and object
naming scores in the Broca’s aphasics. The three types of verbs that were
tested were more difficult to retrieve than the corresponding nouns.
Table 5.5. gives a summary of the results of the anomics that were
presented in this chapter.
instrumentality
action naming
instrumental verbs > noninstrumental verbs
sentence construction
instrumental verbs = noninstrumental verbs
name relation with a noun
action naming
non-name-related verbs = name-related verbs
sentence construction
non-name-related verbs = name-related verbs
action naming - object naming
noninstrumental verbs:
action naming < object naming
non-name-related instrumental verbs: action naming < object naming
name-related instrumental verbs:
action naming = object naming
Table 5.5.: Summary of the performance in action naming, sentence
construction and object naming with respect to the factors
instrumentality and name relation with a noun in the anomics
120
Verb
Chapter 5
retrieval
in
the
anomics
was
influenced
by
instrumentality.
Instrumental verbs were better retrieved than noninstrumental verbs. This
difference was, however, only found at the word level.
Name relation with a noun did not play a role in action naming and sentence
construction. No differences were found between name-related and nonname-related instrumental verbs. This factor, however, did affect the scores
of the anomics, when action and object naming were compared. They
showed comparable results for instrumental verbs and the corresponding
name-related instruments. A better performance for object naming than for
action naming was found for the other two types of verbs.
5.6. Discussion
The present chapter focused on the effect of instrumentality and name
relation with a noun on verb retrieval. In the introduction, it was
hypothesized, based on the results of Bastiaanse (1991), that the first factor
would play a role in verb retrieval at the sentence level and not at the
word level in Broca’s aphasics and anomics. The second factor would have
a negative effect on action naming and a positive effect on sentence
construction in both types of aphasics. The hypotheses on the influence of
both factors, however, were not supported by the data in the present
study. Only instrumentality affected verb retrieval, but merely in the
anomics and at the word level
In this section, it will be discussed why instrumentality played a role in
verb retrieval of the anomics and not of the Broca’s aphasics. Additionally,
it will be considered why this factor only had an effect at the word level in
the anomics.
Bastiaanse (1991) made the assumption that a picture of an instrumental
action activates both the verb and the noun. This means that an effect of
instrumentality might be retraced to the visual representation of an action.
Instrumentality and name relation with a noun
121
There is an indication that this may not be the case, namely the absence of
an effect of instrumentality in both the controls and the Broca’s aphasics.
The two Broca’s aphasics presented by Bastiaanse profited from the
coactivation of a non-name-related instrument in naming instrumental
actions. If the Broca’s aphasics in the present study would have profited
from the coactivation of a noun, they would have shown a comparable
better performance for instrumental than for noninstrumental verbs. This
was not the case.
This still leaves the possibility open that only the anomics profited from
the visual information (e.g. the depiction of the instrument) in a picture.
Nevertheless, it has to be questioned if the depiction of the instrument is a
visual artefact. Instruments are assumed to be part of the conceptual
representation of the verb, as was described in the introduction. Therefore,
it is argued that an effect of instrumentality is not (only) due to the
depiction of an instrument in the picture.
Action naming
Anomics suffer from a lexical retrieval deficit, by definition. According to
Bastiaanse (1991), this deficit has to be assumed in the retrieval of
phonological forms from the lexicon (see also Jonkers, 1993; Jonkers, 1995
and Bastiaanse et al., 1996b). In terms of Levelt’s (1989) model, this means
that anomics are able to activate the lemma that corresponds to the
conceptual representation of a verb, but that they are unable to find the
correct phonological form that belongs to the verb.
The grammatical encoder of the anomics is supposed to work properly.
The retrieval of the lemmas of verbs is also undisturbed. Activation of the
phonological form corresponding to the lemma is, however, difficult for
the anomics. Instrumental verbs are better preserved than noninstrumental
verbs. It is argued that this is due to the coactivation of the instrument
during lemma retrieval.
The conceptual representation of an instrumental verb contains the
instrument. It is assumed that when lemma retrieval for the instrumental
verb starts, the lemma of the instrument is activated as well. If a sentence
122
Chapter 5
has to be produced, this is even necessary because based on the conceptual
representation, different sentences can be made. In example (14), the
conceptual representation of a sentence is given in which it is expressed
that someone is polishing a mirror:
(14)
to polish:
[[CAUSE([MAN]i,[INCH[NOT BE([SPOTS],[ONd[MIRROR]j])]])
([BY [instrumentRAG])]
The grammatical encoder has to decide whether (15) or (16) is processed
on the basis of this conceptual information.
(15)
the man polishes the mirror
(16)
the man cleans the mirror with a rag
This means that based on the conceptual representation of (14) at least the
lemmas of to polish, to clean, and a rag are activated. It is assumed that in
action naming these lemmas are coactivated. This is also concluded from
the errors that are produced by the anomics in action naming. Semantic
paraphasias (like to clean instead of to polish) and circumlocutions (like
cleaning with a rag instead of to polish) were produced mostly.
Coactivation of the instrument is strengthened by the depiction of the
instrument in the picture. This coactivation plays its role if the
phonological form belonging to a lemma has to be retrieved. According to
the spreading activation theory (Dell, 1986), after a lemma has reached its
threshold in order to start activating the phonological form, it deactivates,
while other coactivated lemmas remain active. These coactivated lemmas
may activate the target lemma again. It is supposed that in the anomics,
the lemma of the verb deactivates too quickly in order to completely
activate the phonological form that corresponds to this lemma. If the
lemma of an instrumental verb is activated, the lemma of the instrument is
coactivated and this lemma helps to activate the lemma of the verb again,
creating a greater chance of finding the complete phonological form of the
verb. For noninstrumental verbs, like to descend, coactivation of a depicted
Instrumentality and name relation with a noun
123
object (mountain) could also occur, but this is not helpful in the retrieval of
the verb, because the link between to descend and mountain is less clear
(you may descend a mountain, ski from a mountain, climb a mountain, etc.).
Coactivation of a noun that is less closely linked to the verb may, in cases
where the patients are unable to find the correct verb form, lead to
semantic paraphasias, such as to climb for to descend. Also, for the
instrumental
verbs
semantic
paraphasias
and
circumlocutions
are
produced, when the anomic is still unable to completely activate the form
of the target verb. These errors were already discussed above.
Sentence construction
The effect of instrumentality, found at the word level in anomia,
disappeared at the sentence level. This is mainly due to the fact that
noninstrumental verbs are better preserved at the sentence than at the
word level. For the instrumental verbs, comparable scores are found in
action naming and sentence construction. The fact that noninstrumental
verbs are better preserved at the sentence level indicates that retrieval of
the complete phonological verb form within a sentence context is easier for
the anomics than retrieval in isolation. This may be explained by the fact
that during sentence construction, the lemma of the verb has to stay active
in order to use the necessary syntactic information. If the lemma is active
longer, the chance that the complete phonological form can be found is
greater.
This assumption on verb form retrieval in sentence context does not
explain
why
instrumental
verbs
received
comparable
scores
to
noninstrumental verbs at the sentence level. It was argued that the
instrument is part of the conceptual representation of the verb. Also at the
sentence level coactivation of the instrument takes place and this should
lead to a better performance for these verbs.
The following responses that were given by the anomics show that the
instrument is not only coactivated, but that is also lexicalized:
124
(17)
Chapter 5
de man knipt de stof: dit is een persoon die een grote schaar
hanteert
the man cuts the cloth: this is a person who handles big scissors
(18)
de man maait het gras: ...de zeis hij eh is met de zeis bezig
the man mows the gras: ...the scythe he er is busy with the scythe
Coactivation of the instrument did not result in the correct response in
these examples. The reactions that were given, however, are reasonable
reactions to the pictures that were presented to the patients. It is argued
that in these cases the anomics were unable to find the correct verb form.
As the lemma of the instrument was available, they tried to produce a
sentence with a comparable sense at an early stage, not waiting until the
verb form would be available. This means that either coactivation of an
instrument helps to find the phonological form of the verb, or it leads to
the activation of the phonological form of the instrument itself and the
production of a sentence in which this instrument is used. If this was done
at the word level, it had resulted in a circumlocution.
In conclusion, it is suggested that at the sentence level, a verb lemma is
active for a longer time, because the lemma information has to be used in
sentence construction and therefore the verb form may be easier to
retrieve. The performance for instrumental verbs is not better than for
noninstrumental verbs, although this might be expected from the results in
action naming, because the coactivation of an instrument may interfere
with the retrieval of the verb form, in particular when a sentence can be
produced with a comparable meaning as the target sentence, in which only
the instrument is used.
Broca’s aphasics did not profit from the coactivation of an instrument,
neither at the word nor at the sentence level, although the instruments
were better preserved in these patients than the corresponding verbs. In
chapter 4, it was suggested that the Broca’s aphasics had problems in the
grammatical encoding of lemma information, because of their syntactic
Instrumentality and name relation with a noun
125
deficit. As instrumentality is not a syntactic factor, it is not surprising that
this factor did not play a role in the Broca’s aphasics. The Broca’s aphasics
do not have apparent problems in activating the phonological form of a
verb. When the correct lemma of the verb is retrieved then the
corresponding phonological form can also be found, making coactivation of
the instrument of less use in these patients.
Name relation with a noun
No effect of name relation with a noun was found in the present study either
for the Broca’s aphasics, or for the anomics on the retrieval of instrumental
verbs. For the Broca’s aphasics this was not unexpected because name
relation with a noun plays a role in form retrieval and, as was argued
above, Broca’s aphasics are able to retrieve verb forms. The anomics,
however, were supposed to have problems in retrieving the complete
phonological form of the verb. Coactivation of the lemma of an instrument
is helpful for the anomics in order to find the correct verb form.
Consequently, it could be claimed that coactivation of name-related
instruments would even be of more help, because not only the lemma, but
also the form of these instruments is activated. It is, nevertheless, clear
from the results that coactivation of a name-related instrument is not
additionally helpful when compared to the non-name-related instruments
for the anomics.
Jonkers and Bastiaanse (1996a) described ten anomics, whose data was also
discussed in the present study. They found an overall effect of
instrumentality, but it was unclear at that time whether it was
instrumentality, name relation with a noun or a combination of these factors
which made verb retrieval easier.
It is evident from the present study that at least instrumentality is a relevant
factor. The role of name relation with a noun as such is less clear because the
scores are influenced by instrumentality. It is obvious that the name-related
instrumental verbs are better preserved than the noninstrumental verbs,
but this could be due to the instrumentality as such and not to the name
relation with a noun.
126
Chapter 5
There is, however, one patient in the group of anomics who revealed an
effect of name relation with a noun on action naming, whereas
instrumentality did not play a role in his performance. This patient, FL, is
described in Jonkers and Bastiaanse (1998). This case description
demonstrates that at least in some anomics name relation with a noun is an
aspect which deserves specific attention.
Name relation with a noun played a role in the performance of the anomics
when action and object naming were compared. Although the anomics
were worse in action than in object naming overall, this did not hold
where naming of instrumental verbs and their name-related instruments
was concerned. The implications of this result with respect to other studies
that have been conducted on action and object naming will be given in
chapter 6. Below it will be discussed why these comparable scores for
instrumental verbs and the name- related instruments may have been
found and why only the anomics and not the Broca’s aphasics revealed
this pattern.
It was claimed in the introduction, following Don (1993), that instrumental
verbs which are phonologically identical to the name of the instrument, are
derived from the name of the instrument. This means that in these cases
the verb and the noun share the phonological word form: only one form
has to be retrieved for either the verb or the noun. The phonological form
fiets (bike) for example, can be used to produce fietsen (to bike) or fiets (a
bike).
Bastiaanse (1991) assumed that instrumental verbs and the corresponding
name-related instruments share a lemma. Here it is suggested that these
verbs and nouns share the phonological form and not the lemma. At
lemma level, name relation with a noun does not play a role, and there is no
reason why an action and an object, although they are semantically related,
should have only one lemma.
This is of interest when the verb finding problems of the aphasics are
taken into account. The Broca’s aphasics have problems in processing
lemma information. Name relation with a noun does not play a role at
lemma level and therefore no differences are expected between action and
Instrumentality and name relation with a noun
127
object naming for name-related and non-name-related words. The anomics
have problems in retrieving the complete verb form. One group of nouns,
the name-related instruments, share the phonological form with a group of
verbs, the name-related instrumental verbs. Therefore, comparable scores
are expected for these verbs and nouns in action and object naming, which
is confirmed by the data.
Future research on the effect of name relation with a noun could reveal more
on this topic. It would be interesting to find out whether (noninstrumental) verbs that correspond in name to nouns, not being
instruments (like butter - to butter) are easier to retrieve than verbs without
such a name relation with a noun. Apart from these verbs, for which there
is still a semantic relation between the noun and the verb, it is also worth
studying verbs for which only a name relation and no semantic relation
with a noun exists (e.g. to book - a book). The results of such a study will
reveal more on the effect of name relation with a noun as such.