Abstract
Agrammatism as a phenomenon of neuropsychological relevance has been recently attacked-from conceptual and empirical angles. This article examines the facts, as they emerge from three recent experimental studies that have concluded that agrammatism does not exist (Miceli et al., 1989; Martin et al., 1989, Badecker et al., in press), and draws the opposite conclusion: that agrammatism is of interest to students of language and that patients belonging in this clinical category also reveal uniform patterns of aberrant behavior that are of great linguistic and psycholinguistic relevance.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 555-564 |
Number of pages | 10 |
Journal | Brain and Language |
Volume | 41 |
Issue number | 4 |
DOIs | |
State | Published - Nov 1991 |
Externally published | Yes |
Bibliographical note
Funding Information:The preparation of this paper was supported by NIH Grant DC-00081 and by grants from the Israel Institute for Psychobiology, the Bat Sheva de Rothschild Fund for Science and Technology, the Basic Research Foundation of the Israeli Academy of Science, and the U.S.-Israel Binational Science Foundation Grant 89-00173/l. I thank Nachshon Meiran and Daniel Roth for their comments. Special thanks to Orit Gvirtzman for introducing me to David Bohm’s book. Address all correspondence to Yosef Grodzinsky, Department of Psychology, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv 69978, Israel.