Comparison of Lexical and Grammatical Cohesion Devices in Individuals with Broca’s Aphasia and Typical Individuals

Yousef  Hazrati

Authors

Yousef Hazrati Assistant Professor, Department of Linguistics, Payame Noor University, Tehran, Iran Author https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2715-8169

Keywords:

Broca’s aphasia, lexical cohesion, grammatical cohesion, Halliday and Hasan’s cohesion theory

Abstract

Purpose: This study aimed to compare the use of lexical and grammatical cohesion devices in individuals with Broca’s aphasia and typical individuals to identify specific discourse cohesion deficits associated with Broca’s aphasia.

Methodology: This study employed a comparative research design using a descriptive-analytical approach. The participants included five individuals diagnosed with Broca’s aphasia and five typical individuals matched for age, gender, and educational level. Speech samples were collected using a storytelling task, and the transcribed texts were analyzed for cohesion devices, including repetition, discourse markers, antonymy, reference, collocation, conjunctive elements, hyponymy, synonymy, and ellipsis. Data analysis was conducted using frequency distribution tables, chi-square tests for statistical significance, and qualitative discourse analysis to examine patterns of cohesion use in both groups.

Findings: The results indicated significant differences in the use of cohesion devices between the two groups (p < 0.05). Individuals with Broca’s aphasia relied predominantly on repetition (34.50%) and ellipsis (33.33%) as primary cohesion strategies, whereas typical individuals demonstrated a more balanced use of cohesion devices, including reference (9.68%), conjunctions (9.27%), and hyponymy (5.91%). The chi-square test confirmed significant reductions in the use of complex cohesion devices in individuals with Broca’s aphasia, particularly in reference, conjunctions, and lexical diversity. These findings align with previous studies on agrammatism and lexical access deficits in Broca’s aphasia.

Conclusion: The findings suggest that Broca’s aphasia predominantly affects grammatical cohesion, while lexical cohesion is preserved but simplified. The reliance on simpler cohesion devices highlights the need for targeted speech-language therapy to improve discourse coherence. Future research should explore interventions that enhance syntactic complexity and lexical diversity in individuals with Broca’s aphasia.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Arianpour, M. (2007). Investigating language disorders in Broca’s aphasia patients. Iranian Neuropsychology Symposium,

Aslanyan, A. A. (2023). The Implementation of Speech Therapy Services and Speech Disorders Assessment in Regional Psycho-Pedagogical Support Centers. Armenian Journal of Special Education. https://doi.org/10.24234/se.v6i1.302

Bear, M. F., Connors, B. W., & Paradiso, M. A. (2020). Neuroscience: Exploring the brain. Wolters Kluwer. https://books.google.com/books/about/Neuroscience.html?id=vVz4oAEACAAJ

Berndt, R. S., Haendiges, A. N., Mitchum, C. C., & Sandson, J. (1997). Verb retrieval in aphasia. 1. Characterizing single word impairments. Brain and Language, 56(1), 68-106. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1006/brln.1997.1827

Berndt, R. S., Mitchum, C. C., & Haendiges, A. N. (1996). Comprehension of reversible sentences in “agrammatism”: A meta-analysis. Cognition, 58(3), 289-308. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0277(95)00682-6

Gonzalez, L., Carter, S., & Wilson, N. (2023). Advances in Play-Based Therapy for Speech Disorders. International Journal of Developmental Psychology, 48(2), 132-144.

Goodglass, H., Kaplan, E., & Barresi, B. (2001). The assessment of aphasia and related disorders. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/nlmcatalog?cmd=PureSearch&term=100937996%5Bnlmid%5D

Halliday, M. A. K., & Hasan, R. (1976). Cohesion in English. Longman. https://www.academia.edu/23141930/Cohesion_in_English_Halliday_and_Hasan

Iqbal, M. M. (2024). Self-Image and Self-Esteem in Children With Dyslexia. The Mind-Journal of Psychology, 2(1), 30-42. https://doi.org/10.36755/themind.v2i1.98

Kagan, A. (2007). Aphasia and lexical retrieval: A comparison of Broca’s aphasia and normal speakers. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 50(2), 341-352. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1044/1092-4388(2007/024)

Kertesz, A. (2006). Western Aphasia Battery-Revised. Pearson. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1037/t15168-000

Kiran, S., & Thompson, C. K. (2003). The role of semantic complexity in treatment of naming deficits: Training semantic categories in fluent aphasia by controlling exemplar typicality. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 46(3), 608-622. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1044/1092-4388(2003/049)

Muhtar, M. A. (2023). Lexical and Grammatical Cohesion in the Short Story Rembulan Dalam Cappucino by Seno Gumira Ajidarma and Its Implications for Learning in Junior High Schools. 1300-1323. https://doi.org/10.2991/978-2-38476-086-2_108

Mumby, K., & Roddam, H. (2020). Aphasia and Spirituality: The Feasibility of Assessment and Intervention Using WELLHEAD and SHALOM. Aphasiology, 35(7), 925-949. https://doi.org/10.1080/02687038.2020.1752907

Priestley, J. (2012). Lexical diversity in Broca’s aphasia: A comparative study. Aphasiology, 26(3-4), 456-473. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/02687038.2011.619516

Purves, D., Augustine, G. J., & Fitzpatrick, D. (2018). Neuroscience. Sinauer Associates. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK10799/

Saffran, E. M., Berndt, R. S., & Schwartz, M. F. (1989). The quantitative analysis of agrammatic production: Procedure and data. Brain and Language, 37(3), 440-479. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/0093-934X(89)90030-8

Strong, C. J., & Shaver, J. P. (1991). Stability and cohesion in spoken narratives of language-impaired and normally developing school-aged children. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 34(1), 95-111. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1044/jshr.3401.95

Thompson, C. K. (2001). Treatment of underlying forms: A linguistic-specific approach for sentence production deficits in agrammatic aphasia. In R. Chapey (Ed.), Language intervention strategies in aphasia and related neurogenic communication disorders (pp. 605-628). Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. https://pubs.asha.org/doi/abs/10.1044/nnsld11.3.24

Thompson, C. K., & Shapiro, L. P. (2007). Complexity in treatment of syntactic deficits. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 16(1), 30-42. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1044/1058-0360(2007/004)

Yousefian. (2014). Investigating and comparing referential cohesive devices in the speech of right hemisphere stroke patients and healthy individuals based on the Halliday and Hasan model (1976). The Second National Conference on Applied Research in English Language Studies,

Yule, G. (2020). The study of language. Cambridge University Press. https://www.cambridge.org/highereducation/books/the-study-of-language/433B949839A5A6F915EC185657564B16

Zuppardo, L., Serrano, F., Pirrone, C., & Rodriguez-Fuentes, A. (2023). More Than Words: Anxiety, Self-Esteem, and Behavioral Problems in Children and Adolescents With Dyslexia. Learning Disability Quarterly, 46(2), 77-91. https://doi.org/10.1177/07319487211041103