DI-UMONS : Dépôt institutionnel de l’université de Mons

Recherche transversale
Rechercher
(titres de publication, de périodique et noms de colloque inclus)
2018-05-01 - Article/Dans un journal avec peer-review - Anglais - 42 page(s) (Soumise)

Verhaegen Clémence , Delvaux Véronique , Fagniart Sophie , Huet Kathy , Piccaluga Myriam , Harmegnies Bernard , "The distinction between phonological and phonetic paraphasias in aphasia: An acoustic study of the speech productions of six aphasic patients" in Aphasiology

  • Edition : Psychology Press (UK)
  • Codes CREF : Phonétique (DI5312), Logopédie (DI3355), Psycholinguistique (DI421B), Phonologie (DI5311)
  • Unités de recherche UMONS : Métrologie et Sciences du langage (P362)
  • Instituts UMONS : Institut de recherche en sciences et technologies du langage (Langage)

Abstract(s) :

(Anglais) Background: The distinction between phonological and phonetic deficits in aphasia is deeply rooted in the literature. The major argument in favor of this distinction is the presence of two different types of errors in aphasic patients: phonological and phonetic paraphasias, related to phonological or phonetic impairment, respectively. However, the distinction between these errors remains debated and subject to perceptual biases related to the fact that these analyses are often made “by ear”. Objective acoustic analyses of patients’ productions have been conducted but the results remain rare, especially in French, and controversial. Aims: The aim of this study is to contribute to a more precise comparative description of phonological and phonetic paraphasias in aphasia. The originality of the present study lies in the fact that we have used tools and techniques issued from both language neuropsychology and acoustic phonetics, and that we put them in relation in our analyses. Methods: We conducted a multiple-case study on six native French-speaking aphasic patients. We analysed the patients pattern of impairments in classic language tasks (a picture naming task and two repetition tasks) that we put in relation with the results in a non-word repetition task, in which we conducted acoustic analyses of the Voice Onset Time (VOT) of stop consonants. Results: The results show mixed impairment in the aphasic patients and error patterns that differ from the classic hypothesis presented in the literature. Indeed, all patients presented more variable VOT values than the control participants and shorter VOT values for voiced stops, as well as effects of length and/or articulatory complexity in the picture naming and repetition tasks; which is typically associated with phonetic impairment. Moreover, many patients also showed changes of places and manners of articulation, which could be interpreted as phonological impairment. Conclusions: The results in our study highlight the importance of incorporating acoustic analyses in order to characterize language disorders. They also indicate the presence of highly variable and mainly “mixed” phonological-phonetic patient profiles, which questions the standard dichotomy between phonological and phonetic disorders and led us consider language word production models that include a single phonological/phonetic level of processing or strong interactions between phonological and phonetic stages.


Mots-clés :
  • (Anglais) phonetic errors
  • (Anglais) voice onset time
  • (Anglais) aphasia
  • (Anglais) acoustic analysis
  • (Anglais) phonological errors