Aphasia and communicative speech therapy

Abstract

Thus far, aphasiological research has focused primarily on a linguistic framework within which language is regarded in terms of a code consisting of vocabulary and grammar. Aphasia has been seen in terms of a linguistic code breakdown, due to brain damage. The relevance of a linguistic classification of the symptoms, however, has also been challenged. In a recent paper, Miceli et al. (1989) have argued that the category of agrammatism can be questioned. Moreover, Kolk and Heeschen (1990) have suggested that agrammatism need not be seen as a result of an underlying impairment only, but also as a result of an adaptation process and, therefore, as a strategic choice. It has also been pointed out that linguistic tests are not particularly good predictors of either the communicative effectiveness of the patient or the probability of recovery (e.g. Klippi 1990a, Silvast 1991, Blomert 1990).