A thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of - Queen Margaret University

Table 5.5
Characteristics of error types unique to the aphasic participants
Error type
Examples
Within-session interference * target and response one = HAMEKIN
(mainly perseveration)
next target – FEETOKEL, response = FEETAKIN
* target and response on = [vˆnt®øk],
next target – [zÁdøp], response = [zÁd®øp]
Reading aloud errors
(but could spell correctly)
* correct written form LUNDRIL, reading target –
[l√nd®\l], reading response = [l√ndû®ˆ˜]
* correct written form ZOODOP, reading target -
[zÁdøp], response = [zÁd®øp]
Spelling difficulties
(but could say correctly)
Semantic errors
(familiar word options were
fruit, meat, vegetables or meat)
Phonemic errors
(familiar words)
Lexicalisation of words spoken
and reading
* target and correct spoken recall [wa˜gø®],
written spelling = WANDOR
* target and correct spoken recall [fÁta®g],
written spelling = FURAGE
responses included, tomatoes, bananas, cheese and
crabmeat.
Skills and habitat / food
* target [p´nta®], response = [p´nt\gøn]
* target [l√d®\l], response = [l√nd\n]
* target [ßø®paˆn], response = [ßø®laˆn]
Inability to inhibit words
* target [sneˆtl], response = [sneˆl]
* target [f¨ta®g], response = [f√tbøl]
As the population of aphasia is generally agreed to be heterogeneous a case
series presenting each individual’s ability to learn the new vocabulary as well as
individual profiles of participants are presented below to determine whether the
factors accounting for the variability in performance could be identified.
144