Vol.64

• No.1
• No.2
• No.3
• No.4
• No.5
• No.6
• No.7
• No.8
• No.9
• No.10
• No.11
• No.12
• Supplement

Vol.63

• No.1
• No.2
• No.3
• No.4
• No.5
• No.6
• No.7
• No.8
• No.9
• No.10
• No.11
• No.12
• Supplement

Vol.62

• No.1
• No.2
• No.3
• No.4
• No.5
• No.6
• No.7
• No.8
• No.9
• No.10
• No.11
• No.12
• Supplement

Vol.61

• No.1
• No.2
• No.3
• No.4
• No.5
• No.6
• No.7
• No.8
• No.9
• No.10
• No.11
• No.12
• Supplement

Vol.60

• No.1
• No.2
• No.3
• No.4
• No.5
• No.6
• No.7
• No.8
• No.9
• No.10
• No.11
• No.12
• Supplement

Vol.59

• No.1
• No.2
• No.3
• No.4
• No.5
• No.6
• No.7
• No.8
• No.9
• No.10
• No.11
• No.12
• Supplement

Vol.58

• No.1
• No.2
• No.3
• No.4
• No.5
• No.6
• No.7
• No.8
• No.9
• No.10
• No.11
• No.12
• Supplement

Vol.57

• No.1
• No.2
• No.3
• No.4
• No.5
• No.6
• No.7
• No.8
• No.9
• No.10
• No.11
• No.12
• Supplement

Vol.56

• No.1
• No.2
• No.3
• No.4
• No.5
• No.6
• No.7
• No.8
• No.9
• No.10
• No.11
• No.12
• Supplement

Vol.55

• No.1
• No.2
• No.3
• No.4
• No.5
• No.6
• No.7
• No.8
• No.9
• No.10
• No.11
• No.12
• Supplement

Vol.54

• No.1
• No.2
• No.3
• No.4
• No.5
• No.6
• No.7
• No.8
• No.9
• No.10
• No.11
• No.12
• Supplement

Vol.53

• No.1
• No.2
• No.3
• No.4
• No.5
• No.6
• No.7
• No.8
• No.9
• No.10
• No.11
• No.12

Vol.52

• No.1
• No.2
• No.3
• No.4
• No.5
• No.6
• No.7
• No.8
• No.9
• No.10
• No.11
• No.12

Vol.51

• No.1
• No.2
• No.3
• No.4
• No.5
• No.6
• No.7
• No.8
• No.9
• No.10
• No.11
• No.12

Vol.50

• No.1
• No.2
• No.3
• No.4
• No.5
• No.6
• No.7
• No.8
• No.9
• No.10
• No.11
• No.12

Vol.49

• No.1
• No.2/3
• No.4
• No.5
• No.6
• No.7
• No.8
• No.9
• No.10
• No.11
• No.12

Vol.48

• No.1
• No.2
• No.3
• No.4
• No.5
• No.6
• No.7
• No.8
• No.9
• No.10
• No.11
• No.12

• Vol.47 to 1
  (Members Only)

• HOME
• Vol.61 No.5
• CLINICA NEUROL, 61: 297−304, 2021
• Vol.61 No.5 contents

Case Report

A case of conduction aphasia with specific jargon utterance

Takeharu Tsuboi, S.T.¹⁾²⁾, Hiroshi Tatsumi, S.T., Ph.D.³⁾, Masahiko Yamamoto, M.D., Ph.D.³⁾, Yoshiya Toyosima, S.T., Ph.D.¹⁾, Taiji Katayama, M.D.⁴⁾ and Kazuo Hadano, M.D., Ph.D.⁵⁾

¹⁾ National Hospital Organization Higashi Nagoya National Hospital Rehabilitation Department
²⁾ Graduate School of Psychological and Physical Science, Aichi Gakuin University
³⁾ Department of Health Science, Aichi Gakuin University
⁴⁾ National Hospital Organization Higashi Nagoya National Hospital Neurology
⁵⁾ Holy Cross’s Welfare Group

We report a patient with bilateral hemispheric lesions caused by two episodes of cerebral infarction who exhibited conduction aphasia with unique jargon. The patient was an 84-year-old, right-handed man. Beginning after the second episode of cerebral infarction (defined as the time of symptom onset), neologistic jargon and an iterative pattern of phonemic variation became prominent, whereas phonological paraphasia and conduite d'approche were observed in the patient's overall speech. Therefore, the aphasia was characterized by the combination of conduction aphasia and neologistic jargon. At 27 months after symptom onset, the neologisms and iterative pattern of phonemic variation had disappeared, but a wide variety of phonological paraphasia and conduite d'approche persisted, clarifying the pathological features of the conduction aphasia experienced by this patient. The conduction theory (Kertesz et al., 1970) provides a convincing explanation for the mechanism of the onset of neologisms in the present case. Thus, we propose the existence of a symptomatic relationship between neologisms and phonological paraphasia.
Supplementary data
Method for calculating the index of phonemic similarity.
Full Text of this Article in Japanese PDF (5506K) 　　　　 Full Text of this Article in English HTML

(CLINICA NEUROL, 61: 297−304, 2021)
key words: conduction aphasia, neologistic jargon aphasia, conduite d’approche, iterative pattern of phonemic variation, conduction theory

(Received: 17-Apr-20)