1 / 20

Models of Language

Models of Language. Language and Cognition Colombo 2011. Principals of Cognitive Models. A means of conceptualising the stages involved in a mental activity

helki
Download Presentation

Models of Language

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Models of Language Language and Cognition Colombo 2011

  2. Principals of Cognitive Models • A means of conceptualising the stages involved in a mental activity • Examines components involved in processing information and the interconnections between them (“box and arrow”) or how information flows between centres via pathways • The boxes and arrows represent a function which can be independently impaired • Not yet able to link aphasic symptoms to discrete anatomical structures

  3. Principals of Cognitive Models • Provide a framework for assessment and treatment • Different models consider different aspects e.g. single words (Ellis and Young 1988) and sentence processing (Garrett 1984). • Different models share common features, e.g. all have distinct semantic and phonological levels • We will be focusing on one lexical model widely applied in SLT

  4. Assumptions • Using this modelling make several assumptions: • Functional modularity – modules/boxes can operate independently of other components • Anatomical modularity – modules represent different parts of the brain. Lesions can affect selected modules only, leaving others unimpaired • Universality – all people have the same fundamental language system (though we might not agree on the system) • Subtractivity - brain damage can only remove elements from the system, not add them

  5. N.B: • Lesions in the brain vary from person to person dependent on: • The precise location of the damage • Which white matter fibre tracts are damaged • Therefore identical patterns of deficit in any two people unlikely. • Helpful to look at which boxes/arrows are damaged/intact to help explain pattern of performance. • Still attempting to relate to brain structures (Hillis 2001)

  6. PALPA Psycholinguistic Assessments of Language Processing in Aphasia Introduction

  7. Mouse mouse print Abstract Letter Identification m s o e u “yes, these are letters” Visual Input Lexicon “yes, this is a word” Mouse = N Semantic System “yes, this word means something” Phonological Output Lexicon “this word is pronounced /maUs/” “mouse” speech

  8. Blik blik print Abstract Letter Identification b c l ik “yes, these are letters” Visual Input Lexicon “no, this is not a word” Semantic System Phonological Output Lexicon • This doesn’t fit with the facts… • So there must be another way to read written words speech

  9. Blik blik print Abstract Letter Identification Visual Input Lexicon Grapheme to Phoneme Conversion b=/b/ , l=/l/, i=/I/, k=/k/ Semantic System • The lexical route cannot read nonwords at all • The nonlexical route cannot read irregular spelling-sound correspondences • We need (at least) both of these routes to be able to read both real and pseudo words Phonological Output Lexicon “blik” speech

  10. What about naming an object or a picture?

  11. print pictures, seen objects Abstract Letter Identification Visual Input Lexicon Visual Object Recognition System Grapheme to Phoneme Conversion Semantic System Phonological Output Lexicon speech

  12. What about recognizing or repeating speech that you hear?

  13. print pictures, seen objects speech Auditory Phonological Analysis Abstract Letter Identification “yes, I hear speech sounds” Phonological Input Lexicon Visual Input Lexicon Visual Object Recognition System Grapheme to Phoneme Conversion “yes, that’s a word” Semantic System Phonological Output Lexicon speech

  14. What about being able to repeat a word you never heard before – or a pseudoword?

  15. print pictures, seen objects speech Auditory Phonological Analysis Abstract Letter Identification Phonological Input Lexicon Visual Input Lexicon Visual Object Recognition System Grapheme to Phoneme Conversion Acoustic to Phonological Conversion Semantic System Phonological Output Lexicon speech

  16. What about people who do not understand what they hear, or what they read, but can still say it?

  17. print pictures, seen objects speech Auditory Phonological Analysis Abstract Letter Identification Phonological Input Lexicon Visual Input Lexicon Visual Object Recognition System Grapheme to Phoneme Conversion Acoustic to Phonological Conversion Semantic System Phonological Output Lexicon speech

  18. What about written output?

  19. print pictures, seen objects speech Auditory Phonological Analysis Abstract Letter Identification Phonological Input Lexicon Visual Input Lexicon Visual Object Recognition System Grapheme to Phoneme Conversion Acoustic to Phonological Conversion Semantic System Phonological Output Lexicon Orthographic Output Lexicon Sound to letter rules speech writing

  20. The final product….. • Kay, Lesser & Coltheart, 1996 • PALPA model • Assessments for each box and arrow – evaluating effects of different inputs and outputs on a damaged language system • NOT intended to be used in its entirety • Remains the only psycholinguistically motivated tool for language assessment

More Related