Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-mkpzs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-22T18:07:56.514Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Evaluation of macrolinguistic aspects of the oral discourse in patients with Alzheimer’s disease

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 December 2018

Juliana Onofre de Lira ,
Thaís Soares Cianciarullo Minett ,
Paulo Henrique Ferreira Bertolucci  and
Karin Zazo Ortiz
Juliana Onofre de Lira*
Affiliation:
Faculty of Ceilindia, University of Brasilia, Brasilia, Brazil
Thaís Soares Cianciarullo Minett
Affiliation:
Department of Radiology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
Paulo Henrique Ferreira Bertolucci
Affiliation:
Sector of Behavioural Neurology, Department of Neurology and Neurosurgery, São Paulo Federal University, São Paulo, Brazil
Karin Zazo Ortiz
Affiliation:
Department of Speech Therapy, São Paulo Federal University, São Paulo, Brazil
*
Correspondence should be addressed to: Juliana Onofre de Lira, Centro Metropolitano, University of Brasília, Rua Itapura de Miranda, 45/82, Santos – SP 11055-090, Brazil. Phone: +55 11 99533-6237. Email: [email protected].
Get access

Abstract

Introduction:

Alzheimer’s disease (AD) is a degenerative syndrome that impairs cognitive functioning, including speech and language. Discourse can be used to analyze language processing, which is organized into microlinguistic and macrolinguistic dimensions.

Objectives:

To identify the occurrence of changes in the macrolinguistic dimension of oral discourse in AD patients. Design: This was developed as a cross-sectional study. Setting: Outpatient clinic of the Behavioural Neurology Division of São Paulo Federal University.

Participants:

121 elderly patients, with ≥ 4 years of education, divided into AD and comparison groups.

Measurements:

The subjects were asked to create a narrative based on seven figures that made up a story. The macrolinguistic aspects of the narratives were analyzed.

Results:

The performance of the AD group was inferior to that of the comparison group on content-related, no-content-related complete and incomplete propositions as well as macropropositions, main information units, appropriated local and global coherence, cohesive devices and all subtypes, cohesive errors and some of their subtypes. Global coherence, macropropositions and ellipsis subtype of cohesive devices were the variables that best differentiated the groups.

Conclusions:

Changes were observed in most aspects of the macrolinguistic dimension of oral discourse in patients with AD.

Keywords

Alzheimer’s diseasediscourselanguage
Type
Original Research Article
Information
International Psychogeriatrics , Volume 31 , Issue 9: Issue Theme: Self-Esteem, Resilience, and Emotional Intelligence , September 2019 , pp. 1343 - 1353
Copyright
© International Psychogeriatric Association 2018 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Ahmed, S., De Jager, C. A., Haigh, A. M. and Garrard, P. (2013). Semantic processing in connected speech at a uniformly early stage of autopsy-confirmed Alzheimer’s disease. Neuropsychology, 27, 79–85. doi: 10.1037/a0031288.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boschi, V., Catricalà, E., Consonni, M., Chesi, C., Moro, A. and Cappa, S. F. (2017). Connected speech in neurodegenerative language disorders: a review. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 1–21. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00269.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brandão, L., Lima, T. M., Pimenta-Parente, M. A. M. and Peña-Casanova, J. (2013). Discourse coherence and its relation with cognition in Alzheimer’s disease. Psicologia em Pesquisa, 7, 99–107. doi: 10.5327/Z1982-12472013000100011.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brucki, S. M., Nitrini, R., Caramelli, P., Bertolucci, P. H. F. and Okamoto, I. H. (2003). Sugestões para o uso do mini-exame do estado mental no Brasil. Arquivos de Neuropsiquiatria, 61, 777–781. doi: 10.1590/S0004-282X2003000500014.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bschor, T., Kuhl, K. P. and Reischies, F. M. (2001). Spontaneous speech of patients with dementia of the Alzheimer type and mild cognitive impairment. International Psychogeriatrics, 13, 289–298. doi: 10.1017/S1041610201007682.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cardebat, D., Demonet, J. and Doyon, B. (1993). Narrative discourse in dementia. In: Joanette, Y. and Brownell, H. H. (eds.), Narrative Discourse in Neurologically Impaired and Normal Aging Adults (pp. 317–322). San Diego: Singular Publishing Group.Google Scholar
Cosentino, E., Adornetti, I. and Ferretti, F. (2013). Processing narrative coherence: towards a top-down model of discourse workshop on computational models of narrative. Open Access Series in Informatics, 32, 61–75.Google Scholar
Croisile, B. et al. (1996). Comparative study of oral and written picture description in patients with Alzheimer’s disease. Brain and Language, 53, 1–19. doi: 10.1006/brln.1996.0033.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dijkstra, K., Bourgeois, M. S., Allen, R. S. and Burgio, L. D. (2004). Conversational coherence: discourse analysis of older adults with and without dementia. Journal of Neurolinguistics, 17, 263–283. doi: 10.1016/S0911-6044(03)00048-4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Drummond, C. et al. (2015). Deficits in narrative discourse elicited by visual stimuli are already present in patients with mild cognitive impairment. Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience, 7, 96. doi: 10.3389/fnagi.2015.00096.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Duong, A. and Ska, B. (2001). Production of narratives: picture sequence facilitates organizational but not conceptual processing in less educated subjects. Brain and Cognition, 46, 121–124. doi: 10.1016/S0278-2626(01)80047-6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Duong, A., Tardif, A. and Ska, B. (2003). Discourse about discourse: what is it and how does it progress in Alzheimer’s disease? Brain and Cognition, 53, 177–180. doi: 10.1016/S0278-2626(03)00104-0.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ehrlich, J. S., Obler, L. K. and Clark, L. (1997). Ideational and semantic contributions to narrative production in adults with dementia of the Alzheimer’s type. Journal of Communication Disorders, 30, 79–99. doi: 10.1016/0021-9924(95)00053-4.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fraser, K. C., Meltzer, J. A. and Rudzicz, F. (2016). Linguistic features identify Alzheimer’s disease in narrative speech. Journal of Alzheimer’s Disease, 49, 407–422. doi: 10.3233/JAD-150520.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Giles, E., Patterson, K. and Hodges, J. R. (1996). Performance on the Boston Cookie Theft picture description task in patients with early dementia of the Alzheimer’s type: missing information. Aphasiology, 10, 395–408. doi: 10.1080/02687039608248419.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Glosser, G. and Deser, T. (1991). Patterns of discourse production among neurological patients with fluent language disorders. Brain and Language, 40, 67–88. doi: 10.1016/0093-934X(91)90117-J.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Halliday, M. A. K. and Hasan, R. (1976). Cohesion in Spoken and Written English. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Kintsch, W. and Van Dijk, T. A. (1978). Toward a model of text comprehension and production. Psychological Review, 85, 363–394. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.85.5.363.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Labov, W. and Waletzky, J. W. (1967). Narrative analysis: oral versions of personal experience. In: Helm, J. (ed.), Essays on the Verbal and Visual Arts. Seattle: University of Washington.Google Scholar
Lai, Y. (2014). Discourse features of Chinese-speaking seniors with and without Alzheimer’s disease. Language and Linguistics, 15, 411–434. doi: 10.1177/1606822X14520665.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Le Boeuf, C. (1976). Raconte: 55 historiettes en images. Paris: L’Ecole.Google Scholar
Lira, J. O., Ortiz, K. Z., Campanha, A. C., Bertolucci, P. H. F. and Minett, T. S. C. (2011). Microlinguistic aspects of the oral narrative in patients with Alzheimer’s disease. International Psychogeriatrics, 23, 404–412. doi: 10.1017/S1041610210001092.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
March, E. G., Wales, R. and Pattison, P. (2006). The uses of nouns and deixis in discourse production in Alzheimer’s disease. Journal of Neurolinguistics, 19, 311–340. doi: 10.1016/j.jneuroling.2006.01.001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marini, A., Andreeta, S., Del Tin, S. and Carlomagno, S. (2011). A multi-level approach to the analysis of narrative language in aphasia. Aphasiology, 25, 1372–1392. doi: 10.1080/02687038.2011.584690.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mckhann, G. M. et al. (2011). The diagnosis of dementia due to Alzheimer’s disease: recommendations from the National Institute on Aging-Alzheimer’s Association workgroups on diagnostic guidelines for Alzheimer’s disease. Alzheimer’s & Dementia, 7, 263–269. doi: 10.1016/j.jalz.2011.03.005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mentis, M. and Prutting, C. A. (1987). Cohesion in the discourse of normal and head-injured adults. Journal of Speech, Language and Hearing Research, 30, 88–98. doi: 10.1044/jshr.3001.88.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Miššíková, G. (2017). Coherence in literary discourse. In: Olga Dontcheva-Navratilova, O., Jančaříková, R., Miššíková, G. and Povolná, R. (eds.), Coherence and Cohesion in English Discourse (pp. 79–102). Prague: Brno.Google Scholar
Moreaud, O., David, D., Charnallet, A. and Pellat, J. (2001). Are semantic errors actually semantic?: evidence from Alzheimer’s disease. Brain and Language, 77, 176–186. doi: 10.1006/brln.2000.2427.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Murray, L. L. (2010). Distinguishing clinical depression from early Alzheimer’s disease in elderly people: can narrative analysis help? Aphasiology, 24, 928–939. doi: 10.1080/02687030903422460.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nespoulous, J. L. (1980). De deux comportements verbaux de base: référentiel et modalisateur. De leur dissociation dans le discours aphasique. Cahiers de Psychologie, 23, 195–210.Google Scholar
Nicholas, L. E. and Brookshire, R. H. (1993). A system for quantifying the informativeness and efficiency of the connected speech of adults with aphasia. Journal of Speech, Language and Hearing Research, 36, 338–350. doi: 10.1044/jshr.3602.338.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Olness, G. S., Matteson, S. E. and Stewart, C. T. (2010) “Let me tell you the point”: how speakers with aphasia assign prominence to information in narratives. Aphasiology, 24, 697–708. doi: 10.1080/02687030903438524.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ripich, D. N. and Terrell, B. Y. (1988). Patterns of discourse cohesion and coherence in Alzheimer’s disease. Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, 53, 8–15. doi: 10.1044/jshd.5301.08.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sajjadi, S. A., Patterson, K., Tomek, M. and Nestor, P. J. (2012). Abnormalities of connected speech in semantic dementia vs Alzheimer’s disease. Aphasiology, 26, 847–866. doi: 10.1080/02687038.2012.654933.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schultz, R., Siviero, M. and Bertolucci, P. H. F. (2001). The cognitive subscale of the “Alzheimer’s Disease Assessment Scale” in a Brazilian sample. Brazilian Journal of Medical and Biological Research, 34, 1295–1302. doi: 10.1590/S0100-879X2001001000009.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ska, B. and Duong, A. (2005). Communication, discours et démence. Psychologie & NeuroPsychiatrie du Vieillissement, 3, 125–133.Google Scholar
Toledo, C. M., Aluísio, S. A., Dos Santos, L. B., Brucki, S. M. D., Trés, E. S., De Oliveira, M. O. and Mansur, L. L. (2018). Analysis of macrolinguistic aspects of narratives from individuals with Alzheimer’s disease, mild cognitive impairment, and no cognitive impairment. Alzheimer’s & Dementia: Diagnosis, Assessment & Disease Monitoring, 10, 31–40. doi: 10.1016/j.dadm.2017.08.005.Google ScholarPubMed
Van Dijk, T. A. (1985). Handbook of Discourse Analysis. Londres: Academic.Google Scholar
Van Dijk, T. A. (1995). On macrostructures, mental models and other inventions: a brief personal history of the Kintsch-van Dijk theory. In: Weaver, C. A., Mannes, S. and Fletcher, C. R. (eds.), Discourse Comprehension: Essays in Honor of Walter Kintsch (pp. 383–410). Nova York: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar