Elsevier

Brain and Language

Volume 41, Issue 2, August 1991, Pages 184-202
Brain and Language

Regular article
The classifier problem in Chinese aphasia

https://doi.org/10.1016/0093-934X(91)90152-QGet rights and content

Abstract

In recent years, research on the relationship between brain organization and language processing has benefited tremendously from cross-linguistic comparisons of language disorders among different types of aphasic patients. Results from these cross-linguistic studies have shown that the same aphasic syndromes often look very different from one language to another, suggesting that language-specific knowledge is largely preserved in Broca's and Wernicke's aphasics. In this paper, Chinese aphasic patients were examined with respect to their (in) ability to use classifiers in a noun phrase. The Chinese language, in addition to its lack of verb conjugation and an absence of noun declension, is exceptional in yet another respect: articles, numerals, and other such modifiers cannot directly precede their associated nouns, there has to be an intervening morpheme called a classifier. The appropriate usage of nominal classifiers is considered to be one of the most difficult aspects of Chinese grammar. Our examination of Chinese aphasic patients revealed two essential points. First, Chinese aphasic patients experience difficulty in the production of nominal classifiers, committing a significant number of errors of omission and/or substitution. Second, two different kinds of substitution errors are observed in Broca's and Wernicke's patients, and the detailed analysis of the difference demands a rethinking of the distinction between agrammatism and paragrammatism. The result adds to a growing body of evidence suggesting that grammar is impaired in fluent as well as nonfluent aphasia.

References (40)

  • S. Smith

    Production of grammatical morphology in Serbo-Croatian-speaking patients

  • E. Bates et al.

    Crosslinguistic studies of aphasia

  • E. Bates et al.

    Comparative aphasiology: A cross-linguistic approach to language breakdown

    Aphasiology

    (1989)
    E. Bates et al.

    Comparative aphasiology: A cross-linguistic approach to language breakdown

    Aphasiology

    (1989)
  • S. Blumstein et al.

    Semantic processing in aphasia: Evidence from an auditory lexical decision task

    Brain and Language

    (1982)
  • A. Caramazza et al.

    Dissociation of algorithmic and heuristic processes in language comprehension: Evidence from aphasia

    Brain and Language

    (1976)
  • J. Gandour et al.

    The acquisition of numeral classifiers in Thai

    Linguistics

    (1984)
  • J. Gleason et al.

    Narrative strategies of aphasic and normal speaking subjects

    Journal of Speech and Hearing Research

    (1980)
  • H. Goodglass

    Studies on the grammar of aphasics

  • H. Goodglass

    Agrammatism

  • H. Goodglass et al.

    Boston Diagnostic Aphasia Examination

    (1983)
  • Cited by (36)

    • Classifiers in Mandarin Chinese: Behavioral and electrophysiological evidence regarding their representation and processing

      2021, Brain and Language
      Citation Excerpt :

      The choice of classifiers therefore has a lexico-syntactic nature defined by ambiguous patterns that are flexible to cater for various factors. The major influence of semantic category on classifier assignment has already been attested, with implications that classifiers and nouns undergo similar semantic constraints (Bi et al., 2010; Chen & Wang, 2003), even though the relationship is in many cases opaque (Tzeng, Chen, & Hung, 1991). Nevertheless, even though the use of a classifier preceding a noun depends to a great extent on semantic properties, it is the noun itself in the context that has a dominant effect on the choice of classifiers (Shao, 1993).

    • Classifiers in non-European languages and semantic impairments in western neurological patients have a common cognitive structure

      2020, Lingua
      Citation Excerpt :

      Another limitation we face is that all of the neuropsychological studies have taken place within the academic and medical systems of Western societies (Europe and North America), while neuropsychological data from classifier language speaking populations that could have provided complementary information on the distribution of categories in semantic deficits are still lacking. Nevertheless, a few studies on language impairments like aphasia (Thai: Gandour et al., 1984, 1985; Chinese: Tzeng et al., 1991) constitute an exception from the general situation that studies on neuropsychological data from linguistic societies where the target classifiers are present (e.g., for animate things) is lacking. We are aware of but did not include these aphasia studies since they followed testing procedures different from the main stock of category-specific impaired patients.

    • Lesion-aphasia discordance in acute stroke among Bengali-speaking patients: Frequency, pattern, and effect on aphasia recovery

      2019, Journal of Neurolinguistics
      Citation Excerpt :

      The study of possible lesion localization for a given aphasic phenotype may also provide clues about the cerebral language representation in the study population. It has already been established that language representation in the brain may be variable across different languages (e.g., Tzeng, Chen, & Hung, 1991). In a recent article by Bohra et al. (2015), it was observed that the majority (65%) of the patients did not show any conformity between the location of the brain lesion and the type of aphasia according to ‘traditional localizationist model’.

    • An elephant needs a head but a horse does not: An ERP study of classifier-noun agreement in Mandarin

      2019, Journal of Neurolinguistics
      Citation Excerpt :

      Thus, the purpose of the current study was to examine whether Mandarin classifiers can play a grammatical role in relation to their accompanying nouns. To this end, our study took a different approach in designing classifier-noun pairing: instead of adopting apparent semantic clash, we used two frequently found mistakes in young children and aphasic patients (e.g. Tzeng, Chen, & Hung, 1991; Uchida & Imai, 1999): the omission of classifiers and the inappropriate use of the general classifier “GE” (個). The omission mistake ignores the required presence of a classifier and thus is a clear grammatical violation, while the incongruity in the inappropriate use of GE is not as apparent.

    View all citing articles on Scopus

    This research was supported in part by a grant to Daisy L. Hung and Ovid Tzeng from the CCK Cultural Foundation and the National Science Council of the Republic of China and in part by a grant from PHS-NIDCD No. R01-DC00216-07 to Elizabeth Bates.

    View full text