Search

Eighty-eight aphasic patients with the four standard syndromes as well as two control groups, 10 right-sided brain damaged patients and 10 patients without brain damage were examined for ideomotor apraxia by means of 200 tasks. The tasks required oral, arm, leg and bimanual movements, both on verbal command and on imitation. The limb movements were half meaningful, half meaningless. Performances were evaluated according to five response categories: correct, fragmentary, augmentative, perseveratory, other errors. The aim of the investigation was to ascertain whether there are apractic syndromes which are either related to the aphasic syndromes or are characterized by certain types of errors or by manifestation on certain parts of the body. The findings were negative in all three respects. The meaning of these findings for the organization of praxis and language is discussed. The performances of the control groups were consistently higher than those of the aphasic patients.

The signs and symptoms of motor apraxia are described both for ideomotor and ideational apraxia. Typical errors are described. For ideomotor apraxia a list of tasks is given. The many conceptual and psychometric problems that still await an answer are briefly discussed.

A patient is described whose neuropsychological deficit corresponded to the notion of "optic aphasia" or, better, optic anomia. The functional deficit was undirectional, i.e. there was a severe impairment in the naming of visually presented stimuli without impairment in the comprehension of the corresponding names. The splenial disconnection was demonstrated by intact cross modal matching within the right hemisphere as well as preserved left-handed tactile naming, which is processed via mid-callosal pathways. The psychological interpretation is discussed in terms of visual and tactile semantics, considering also the presumably diffuse cerebral organization of semantic fields.