Abstract
Publisher Summary This chapter presents the difference between agrammatism and pargrammatism. Throughout the 123 years of systematic aphasiological research, there have been two remarkably constant methodological features characterizing this research, which survived the last 10–15 years of a more psycholinguistically and experimentally oriented approach to aphasia. The first is an unshakeable belief in the strength of the so-called spontaneous speech of the patients and the second is a strong dependence on terms and notions that get their meaning only as members of a dichotomy. The raison d’etre of agrammatism and of almost every theory about it is that it can be contrasted with the other type of aphasic spontaneous speech.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
