Linguistic theory and aphasia: an overview

References

• Abbondanza, M., Passarini, L., Meneghello, F., Laratta, S., Burgio, F., D’Imperio, D., & Semenza, C. (2020). The left periphery in neglect dyslexia. Aphasiology, 34(8), 1101–1110. https://doi.org/10.1080/02687038.2020.1738330
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Adelt, A., Burchert, F., Adani, F., & Nicole, S. (2020). What matters in processing German object relative clauses in aphasia – Timing or morphosyntactic cues? Aphasiology, 34(8), 970–998. https://doi.org/10.1080/02687038.2019.1645290
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Alexiadou, A., & Anagnostopoulou, E. (1998). Parametrizing AGR: Word order, V-movement and EPP-checking. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory, 16(3), 491–539. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1006090432389
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arcara, G., & Bambini, V. (2016). A test for the assessment of pragmatic abilities and cognitive substrates (APACS): Normative data and psychometric properties. Frontiers in Psychology, 7. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00070
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arcara, G., Tonini, E., Muriago, G., Mondin, E., Sgarabottolo, E., Bertagnoni, G., Semenza, C., & Bambini, V. (2020). Pragmatics and figurative language in individuals with traumatic brain injury: Fine-grained assessment and relevance-theoretic considerations. Aphasiology, 34(8), 1070–1110. https://doi.org/10.1080/02687038.2019.1615033
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Avrutin, S. (2000). Comprehension of discourse-linked and non-discourse-linked questions by children and Broca’s aphasics. In Y. Grodzinsky, L. P. Shapiro, & D. Swinney (Eds.), Language and the brain: Representation and processing (pp. 295–313). Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-012304260-6/50017-7
   Google Scholar
• Aziz, M. A., Hassan, M., Razak, R., & Garraffa, M. (2020). Syntactic abilities in Malay adult speakers with aphasia: A study on passive sentences and argument structures. Aphasiology, 34(7), 886–904. https://doi.org/10.1080/02687038.2020.1742283
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ballard, K. J., & Thompson, C. K. (1999). Treatment and generalization of complex sentence structures in agrammatism. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 42(3), 690–707. https://doi.org/10.1044/jslhr.4203.690
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bastiaanse, R., Bamyaci, E., Hsu, C., Lee, J., Yarbay Duman, T., & Thompson, C. K. (2011). Time reference in agrammatic aphasia: A cross-linguistic study. Journal of Neurolinguistics, 24(6), 652–673. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jneuroling.2011.07.001
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bastiaanse, R., Koekkoek, J., & van Zonneveld, R. (2003). Object scrambling in Dutch Broca’s aphasia. Brain and Language, 86(2), 287–299. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0093-934x(02)00545-x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bastiaanse, R., & van Zonneveld, R. (2005). Sentence production with verbs of alternating transitivity in agrammatic Broca’s aphasia. Journal of Neurolinguistics, 18(1), 57–66. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jneuroling.2004.11.006
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bastiaanse, R., & van Zonneveld, R. (2006). Comprehension of passives in Broca’s aphasia. Brain and Language, 96(2), 135–142. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bandl.2005.06.012
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bates, B., & Goodman, J. C. (1997). On the inseparability of grammar and the lexicon: Evidence from acquisition, aphasia and real-time processing. Language and Cognitive Processes, 12(5–6), 507–584. https://doi.org/10.1080/016909697386628
   Google Scholar
• Bencini, G. M. L. (2013). Psycholinguistics. In T. Hoffmann & G. Trousdale (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of construction grammar (pp. 379–396). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780195396683.013.0021
   Google Scholar
• Ben-Shachar, M., Hendler, T., Kahn, I., Ben-Bashat, D., & Grodzinsky, Y. (2003). The neural reality of syntactic transformations: Evidence from functional magnetic resonance imaging. Psychological Sciences, 14(5), 433–440. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9280.01459
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ben-Shachar, M., Palti, D., & Grodzinsky, Y. (2004). Neural correlates of syntactic movement: Converging evidence from two fMRI experiments. NeuroImage, 21(4), 1320–1336. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2003.11.027
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bornkessel, I., Zysset, S., Friederici, A. D., von Cramon, D. Y., & Schlesewsky, M. (2005). Who did what to whom? The neural basis of argument hierarchies during language comprehension. NeuroImage, 26(1), 221–233. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2005.01.032
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boye, K., & Bastiaanse, R. (2018). Grammatical versus lexical words in theory and aphasia: Integrating linguistics and neurolinguistics. Glossa: A Journal of General Linguistics, 3(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.5334/gjgl.436
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boye, K., & Harder, P. (2012). A usage-based theory of grammatical status and grammaticalization. Language, 88(1), 1–44. https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2012.0020
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Burchert, F., Hanne, S., & Vasishth, S. (2013). Sentence comprehension disorders in aphasia: The concept of chance performance revisited. Aphasiology, 27(1), 112–125. https://doi.org/10.1080/02687038.2012.730603
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Burchert, F., Swoboda-Moll, M., & de Bleser, R. (2005). The left periphery in agrammatic clausal representations: Evidence from German. Journal of Neurolinguistics, 18(1), 67–88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jneuroling.2004.11.007
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Byng, S. (1988). Sentence processing deficits: Theory and therapy. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 5(6), 629–676. https://doi.org/10.1080/02643298808253277
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Byng, S., Nickels, L., & Black, M. (1994). Replicating therapy for mapping deficits in agrammatism: Remapping the deficit. Aphasiology, 8(4), 315–341. https://doi.org/10.1080/02687039408248663
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Caplan, D., & Hildebrandt. (1988). Disorders of syntactic comprehension. The MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Caplan, D., Vijayan, S., Kuperberg, G., West, C., Waters, G., Greve, D., & Dale, A. M. (2002). Vascular responses to syntactic processing: Event-related fMRI study of relative clauses. Human Brain Mapping, 15(1), 26–38. https://doi.org/10.1002/hbm.1059
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Caramazza, A., & Zurif, E. B. (1976). Dissociation of algorithmic and heuristic processes in language comprehension: Evidence from aphasia. Brain and Language, 3(4), 572–582. https://doi.org/10.1016/0093-934X(76)90048-1
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chiou, M. (2014). What is the ‘future’ of Greek? Towards a pragmatic analysis. Research in Language, 12(4), 355–375. https://doi.org/10.1515/rela-2015-0004
   Google Scholar
• Chiou, M. (2017). The pragmatics of future tense in Greek. In T. Georgakopoulos, T.-S. Pavlidou, M. Pechlivanos, A. Alexiadou, J. Androutsopoulos, A. Kalokairinos, S. Skopeteas, & K. Stathi (Eds.), Proceedings of the 12th international conference on greek linguistics (ICGL), Vol. 1 (pp. 257–267). Berlin: Edition Romiosini/CeMoG.
   Google Scholar
• Chomsky, N. (1981). Lectures on government and binding. Foris.
   Google Scholar
• Chomsky, N. (1991). Some notes on the economy of derivation and representation. In R. Friedin (Ed.), Principles and parameters in comparative grammar (pp. 417–454). The MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Chomsky, N. (1993). A minimalist program for linguistic theory. In K. Hale & S. J. Keyser (Eds.), The view from building 20 (pp. 1–52). The MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Chomsky, N. (1995). The minimalist program. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Chomsky, N. (1995a). The minimalist program. The MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Chomsky, N. (1995b). Bare phrase structure. In G. Webelhuth (Ed.), Government and binding and the minimalist program (pp. 383–420). Blackwell.
   Google Scholar
• Chomsky, N. (2000). Minimalist inquiries: The framework. In R. Martin, D. Michaels, & J. Uriagereka (Eds.), Step by step (pp. 89–155). The MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Chomsky, N. (2001). Derivation by phase. In K. Kenstowicz (Ed.), Ken Hale: A life in language (pp. 1–52). The MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Cinque, G. (1990). Types of A´-dependencies. The MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Clahsen, H., & Ali, M. (2009). Formal features in aphasia: Tense, agreement, and mood in English agrammatism. Journal of Neurolinguistics, 22(5), 436–450. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jneuroling.2009.02.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dickey, M. W., Milman, L. H., & Thompson, C. K. (2008). Judgment of functional morphology in agrammatic aphasia. Journal of Neurolinguistics, 21(1), 35–65. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jneuroling.2007.08.001
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Drai, D., & Grodzinsky, Y. (2006). A new empirical angle on the variability debate: Quantitative neurosyntactic analyses of a large data set from Broca’s Aphasia. Brain and Language, 96(2), 117–128. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bandl.2004.10.016
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Druks, J. (2017). Contemporary and emergent theories of agrammatism: A neurolinguistic approach. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315752044
   Google Scholar
• Elman, R. J. (2011). Social and life participation approaches to aphasia interventions. In L. LaPointe (Ed.), Aphasia and related neurogenic language disorders (pp. 171–184). Thieme Medical Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• Fodor, J. D., & Inoue, A. (2000). Syntactic features in reanalysis: Positive and negative symptoms. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 29, 25–36. doi: 10.1023/A:1005168206061
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Friedmann, N. (2002). Question production in agrammatism: The tree pruning hypothesis. Brain and Language, 80(2), 160–187. https://doi.org/10.1006/brln.2001.2587
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Friedmann, N., Belletti, A., & Rizzi, L. (2009). Relativized relatives: Types of intervention in the acquisition of A-bar dependencies. Lingua, 119(1), 67–88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2008.09.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Friedmann, N., & Grodzinsky, Y. (1997). Tense and Agreement in agrammatic production: Pruning the syntactic tree. Brain and Language, 56(3), 397–425. https://doi.org/10.1006/brln.1997.1795
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Friedmann, N., Rizzi, L., & Belletti, A. (2017). No case for case in locality: Case does not help interpretation when intervention blocks A-bar chains. Glossa: A Journal of General Linguistics, 2(1), 33. 1–18. https://doi.org/10.5334/gjgl.165
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fyndanis, V., Arcara, G., Christidou, P., & Caplan, D. (2018). Morphosyntactic production and verbal working memory: Evidence from Greek aphasia and healthy aging. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 61(5), 1171–1187. https://doi.org/10.1044/2018_JSLHR-L-17-0103
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fyndanis, V., Arfani, D., Varlokosta, S., Burgio, F., Maculan, A., Miceli, G., Arcara, G., Palla, F., Cagnin, A., Papageorgiou, S., & Semenza, C. (2018). Morphosyntactic production in Greek- and Italian-speaking individuals with probable Alzheimer’s disease: Evidence from subject-verb agreement, tense/time reference, and mood. Aphasiology, 32(1), 61–87. https://doi.org/10.1080/02687038.2017.1358352
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fyndanis, V., Varlokosta, S., & Tsapkini, K. (2010). Exploring wh-questions in agrammatism: Evidence from Greek. Journal of Neurolinguistics, 23(6), 644–662. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jneuroling.2010.06.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fyndanis, V., Varlokosta, S., & Tsapkini, K. (2012). Agrammatic production: Interpretable features and selective impairment in verb inflection. Lingua, 122(10), 1134–1147. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2012.05.004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gahl, S., & Menn, L. (2016). Usage-based approaches to aphasia. Aphasiology, 30(11), 1361–1377. https://doi.org/10.1080/02687038.2016.1140120
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Garraffa, M., & Grillo, N. (2008). Canonicity effects as grammatical phenomena. Journal of Neurolinguistics, 21(2), 177–197. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jneuroling.2007.09.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goldberg, A. E., & Bencini, G. M. L. (2005). Support from processing for a constructional approach to grammar. In A. E. Tyler, M. Takada, Y. Kim, & D. Marinova (Eds.), Language in use: Cognitive and discourse perspectives on language and language learning (pp. 3–18). Georgetown University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Grillo, N. (2008). Generalized minimality: Syntactic underspecification in Broca’s aphasia. Utrecht [LOT dissertation]: University of Utrecht.
   Google Scholar
• Grillo, N. (2009). Generalized Minimality: Feature impoverishment and comprehension deficits in agrammatism. Lingua, 119(10), 1426–1443. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2008.04.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grodzinsky, Y. (1986). Language deficit and the theory of syntax. Brain and Language, 27(1), 135–159. https://doi.org/10.1016/0093-934X(86)90009-X
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grodzinsky, Y. (1990). Theoretical perspectives on language deficits. The MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Grodzinsky, Y. (1995). A restrictive theory of agrammatic comprehension. Brain and Language, 51(1), 26–51. https://doi.org/10.1006/brln.1995.1039
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grodzinsky, Y., & Friederici, A. D. (2006). Neuroimaging of syntax and syntactic processing. Current Opinion in Neurobiology, 16(2), 240–246. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conb.2006.03.007
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grodzinsky, Y., Pierce, A., & Marakovitz, S. (1991). Neuropsychological reasons for a transformational analysis of verbal passive. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory, 9(3), 431–453. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00135354
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hagiwara, H. (1995). The breakdown of functional categories and the economy of derivation. Brain and Language, 50(1), 92–116. https://doi.org/10.1006/brln.1995.1041
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Halle, M., & Marantz, A. (1993). Distributed morphology and the pieces of inflection. In K. Hale & S. J. Keyser (Eds.), The view from building 20: Essays in honor of Sylvian Bromberger (pp. 111–176). The MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hanne, S., Sekerina, I. A., Vasishth, S., Burchert, F., & De Bleser, R. (2011). Chance in agrammatic sentence comprehension: What does it really mean? Evidence from eye movements of German agrammatic aphasic patients. Aphasiology, 25(2), 221–244. https://doi.org/10.1080/02687038.2010.489256
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harley, H., & Noyer, R. (1999). State-of-the-article: Distributed morphology. Glot International, 4(4), 3–9.
   Google Scholar
• Hartsuiker, R. J., Kolk, H. H. J., & Huinck, P. (1999). Agrammatic production of subject-verb agreement: The effect of conceptual number. Brain and Language, 69(2), 119–160. https://doi.org/10.1006/brln.1999.2059
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hickok, G., & Avrutin, S. (1995). Representation, referentiality, and processing in agrammatic comprehension: Two case studies. Brain and Language, 50(1), 10–26. https://doi.org/10.1006/brln.1995.1038
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hickok, G., & Avrutin, S. (1996). Comprehension of wh-questions in two Broca’s aphasics. Brain and Language, 52(2), 314–327. https://doi.org/10.1006/brln.1996.0014
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ishkhanyan, B., Sahraoui, H., Harder, P., Mogensen, J., & Boye, K. (2017). Grammatical and lexical pronoun dissociation in French speakers with agrammatic aphasia: A usage-based account and REF-based hypothesis. Journal of Neurolinguistics, 44, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jneuroling.2017.02.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jakobson, R. (1956). Two aspects of language and two types of aphasic disturbances. In R. Jakobson & M. Halle (Eds.), Fundamentals of language (pp. 53–82). Mouton & Co.
   Google Scholar
• Kapatsinsky, V. (2014). What is grammar like? A usage-based constructionist perspective. Linguistic Issues in Language Technology, 11(1), 1–41.
   Google Scholar
• Kljajevic, V., & Murasugi, K. (2010). The role of morphology in the comprehension of wh-dependencies in Croatian aphasic speakers. Aphasiology, 24(11), 1354–1376. https://doi.org/10.1080/02687030903515347
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kok, P., van Doorn, A., & Kolk, H. (2007). Inflection and computational load in agrammatic speech. Brain and Language, 102(3), 273–283. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bandl.2007.03.001
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Levinson, C. S. (2000). Presumptive meanings: The theory of generalized conversational implicature. The MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Marshall, J. (1995). The mapping hypothesis and aphasia therapy. Aphasiology, 9(6), 517–539. https://doi.org/10.1080/02687039508248712
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Martínez-Ferreiro, S., Bastiaanse, R., & Boye, K. (2020). Functional and usage-based approaches to aphasia: The grammatical-lexical distinction and the role of frequency. Aphasiology, 34(8), 927–942. https://doi.org/10.1080/02687038.2019.1615335
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Martínez-Ferreiro, S., Ishkhanyan, B., Rosell-Clarí, V., & Boye, K. (2019). Prepositions and pronouns in connected discourse of individuals with aphasia. Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics, 33(6), 497–517. https://doi.org/10.1080/02699206.2018.1551935
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Martini, K., Belletti, A., Centorrino, S., & Garraffa, M. (2020). Syntactic complexity in the presence of an intervener: The case of an Italian speaker with anomia. Aphasiology, 34(8), 1016–1042. https://doi.org/10.1080/02687038.2019.1686744
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maviş, İ., Arslan, S., & Aydin, Ö. (2020). Comprehension of word order in Turkish aphasia. Aphasiology, 34(8), 999–1015. https://doi.org/10.1080/02687038.2019.1622646
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nanousi, V., Masterson, J., Druks, J., & Atkinson, M. (2006). Interpretable vs. uninterpretable features: Evidence from six Greek-speaking agrammatic patients. Journal of Neurolinguistics, 19(3), 209–238. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jneuroling.2005.11.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nerantzini, M., Papakyritsis, I., & Varlokosta, S. (2020). Time reference and tense marking in Greek agrammatism: Evidence from narratives and a sentence production priming task. Aphasiology, 34(8), 1043–1069. https://doi.org/10.1080/02687038.2019.1693028
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nielsen, S. R., Boye, K., Bastiaanse, R., & Lange, V. M. (2019). The production of grammatical and lexical determiners in Broca’s aphasia. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 34(8), 1027–1040. https://doi.org/10.1080/23273798.2019.1616104
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peristeri, E., Tsimpli, I. M., Dardiotis, E., & Tsapkini, K. (2020). Effects of executive attention on sentence processing in aphasia. Aphasiology, 34(8), 943–969. https://doi.org/10.1080/02687038.2019.1622647
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pesetsky, D. (1987). Wh-in-situ: Movement and unselective binding. In E. J. Reuland & A. G. B. Ter Meulen (Eds.), The representation of (in)definiteness (pp. 98–129). The MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Philippaki-Warburton, I. (1987). The theory of empty categories and the pro-drop parameter in Modern Greek. Journal of Linguistics, 23(2), 289–318. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022226700011282
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pollock, J. Y. (1989). Verb movement, universal grammar and the structure of IP. Linguistic Inquiry, 20(3), 365–424. http://www.jstor.org/stable/4178634 .
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rizzi, L. (1990). Relativized minimality. The MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Rizzi, L. (2004). Locality and left periphery. In A. Belletti (Ed.), Structures and beyond: The cartography of syntactic structures (pp. 223–251). Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Rochon, E., Laird, L., Bose, A., & Scofield, J. (2005). Mapping therapy for sentence production impairments in nonfluent aphasia. Neuropsychological Rehabilitation, 15(1), 1–36. https://doi.org/10.1080/09602010343000327
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Röder, B., Stock, O., Neville, H., Bien, S., & Rösler, F. (2002). Brain activation modulated by the comprehension of normal and pseudo-word sentences of different processing demands: A functional magnetic resonance imaging study. NeuroImage, 15(4), 1003–1014. https://doi.org/10.1006/nimg.2001.1026
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schwartz, M. F., Linebarger, M. C., Saffran, E. M., & Pate, D. S. (1987). Syntactic transparency and sentence interpretation in aphasia. Language and Cognitive Processes, 2(2), 85–113. https://doi.org/10.1080/01690968708406352
   Google Scholar
• Schwartz, M. F., Saffran, E. M., Fink, R. B., Myers, J. L., & Martin, N. (1994). Mapping therapy: A treatment programme for agrammatism. Aphasiology, 8(1), 19–54. https://doi.org/10.1080/02687039408248639
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sperber, D., & Wilson, D. (2008). A deflationary account of metaphors. In R. W. Gibbs (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of metaphor and thought (pp. 84–105). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139028370.007
   Google Scholar
• Sperber, D., & Wilson, D. (1995). Relevance: Communication and cognition (2nd ed.). Oxford.
   Google Scholar
• Spyropoulos, V., & Revithiadou, A. (2009). Subject chains in Greek and PF processing. Proceedings of the 2007 workshop in Greek Syntax and Semantics at MIT. MIT Working Papers in Linguistics, 57, 293–309. http://web.mit.edu/~mitwpl/pre2010site/catalog.html
   Google Scholar
• Stromswold, K., Caplan, D., Alpert, N., & Rauch, S. (1996). Localization of syntactic comprehension by positron emission tomography. Brain and Language, 52(3), 452–473. https://doi.org/10.1006/brln.1996.0024
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Terzi, A., & Nanousi, V. (2018). Intervention effects in the relative clauses of agrammatics: The role of gender and case. Glossa: A Journal of General Linguistics, 3(1), 17. 1–23. https://doi.org/10.5334/gjgl.274
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thompson, C. K., Ballard, K. J., & Shapiro, L. P. (1998). The role of syntactic complexity in training wh-movement structures in agrammatic aphasia: Optimal order for promoting generalization. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society, 4(6), 661–674. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1355617798466141
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thompson, C. K., Fix, S., & Gitelman, D. (2002). Selective impairment of morphosyntactic production in a neurological patient. Journal of Neurolinguistics, 15(3–5), 189–207. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0911-6044(01)00038-0
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thompson, C. K., Shapiro, L., Kiran, S., & Sobecks, J. (2003). The role of syntactic complexity in treatment of sentence deficits in agrammatic aphasia: The complexity account of treatment efficacy (CATE). Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 46(3), 591–607. https://doi.org/10.1044/1092-4388(2003/047)
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thompson, C. K., & Shapiro, L. P. (2005). Treating agrammatic aphasia within a linguistic framework: Treatment of Underlying Forms. Aphasiology, 19(10–11), 1021–1036. https://doi.org/10.1080/02687030544000227
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thompson, C. K., Shapiro, L. P., & Roberts, M. (1993). Treatment of sentence production deficits in aphasia: A linguistic-specific approach to wh-interrogative training and generalization. Aphasiology, 7(1), 111–133. https://doi.org/10.1080/02687039308249501
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thompson, C. K., Shapiro, L. P., Tait, M. E., Jacobs, B. J., & Schneider, S. L. (1996). Training Wh-question production in agrammatic aphasia: Analysis of argument and adjunct movement. Brain and Language, 52(1), 175–228. https://doi.org/10.1006/brln.1996.0009
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tsimpli, I. M., & Dimitrakopoulou, M. (2007). The Interpretability Hypothesis: Evidence from wh-interrogatives in second language acquisition. Second Language Research, 23(2), 215–242. https://doi.org/10.1177/0267658307076546
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van der Meulen, I., Bastiaanse, R., & Rooryck, J. (2005). Wh-questions in agrammatism: A movement deficit? Stem-, Spraak- En Taalpathologie, 13(1), 24–36.
   Google Scholar
• Varlokosta, S., Nerantzini, M., Papadopoulou, D., Bastiaanse, R., & Beretta, A. (2014). Minimality effects in agrammatic comprehension: The role of lexical restriction and feature impoverishment. Lingua, 148, 80–94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2014.05.013
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Varlokosta, S., Valeonti, N., Kakavoulia, M., Lazaridou, M., Economou, A., & Protopapas, A. (2006). The breakdown of functional categories in Greek aphasia: Evidence from agreement, tense, and aspect. Aphasiology, 20(8), 723–743. https://doi.org/10.1080/02687030500513703
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vega Moreno, R. E. (2007). Creativity and convention: The pragmatics of everyday figurative speech. John Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Wang, H., Yoshida, M., & Thompson, C. K. (2014). Parallel functional category deficits in clauses and nominal phrases: The case of English agrammatism. Journal of Neurolinguistics, 27(1), 75–102. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jneuroling.2013.09.001
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wenzlaff, M., & Clahsen, H. (2004). Tense and agreement in German agrammatism. Brain and Language, 89(1), 57–68. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0093-934X(03)00298-0
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wenzlaff, M., & Clahsen, H. (2005). Finiteness and verb-second in German agrammatism. Brain and Language, 92(1), 33–44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bandl.2004.05.006
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yarbay Duman, T., & Bastiaanse, R. (2009). Time reference through verb inflection in Turkish agrammatic aphasia. Brain and Language, 108(1), 30–39. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bandl.2008.09.009
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zagona, K. (2003). Tense and anaphora: Is there a tense-specific theory of coreference? In A. Barss (Ed.), Anaphora: A reference guide (pp. 140–171). Blackwell Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Zagona, K. (2013). Tense, aspect, and modality. In M. Den Dikken (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of generative syntax (pp. 746–792). Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar