Discourse production in aphasia: a current review of theoretical and methodological challenges

Abstract

Background: Discourse abilities play an important role in the assessment, classification, and therapy outcome evaluation of people with aphasia. Discourse production in aphasia has been studied quite extensively in the last 15 years. Nevertheless, many questions still do not have definitive answers.

Aims: The aim of this review is to present the current situation in the research on a number of crucial aspects of discourse production in aphasia, focusing on methodological progress and related challenges. This review continues the discussion of the core themes in the field, aiming to render it as up-to-date as possible.

Main Contribution: The review focuses on a number of unexplored theoretical issues, specifically, the interface between micro- and macrolinguistic abilities, and the relationship between linguistic competence and communicative success in aphasia. The emphasis on theoretical challenges, along with the thorough discussion of methodological problems in the field, makes this review a starting point and a comprehensive information source for researchers planning to address language production in people with aphasia.

Conclusion: Although the picture is not yet complete, recent advancements lead to a better understanding of the processes involved in aphasic discourse production. Different approaches provide insights into the complex multifaceted nature of discourse-level phenomena; however, methodological issues, including low comparability, substantially slow down the progress in the field.

KEYWORDS:

• Discourse production
• aphasia

Acknowledgements

We would like to express our gratitude to Leigh Fernandez for her critical opinion and suggestions on the earlier version of this review. We want to acknowledge Erasmus Mundus International Doctorate for Experimental Approaches to Language and Brain (IDEALAB).

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Additional information

Funding

The first author’s research was supported by Erasmus Mundus International Doctorate for Experimental Approaches to Language and Brain (IDEALAB) under grant number 2012-1713, Framework Partnership Agreement number 2012-0025.