Language mixing in people with aphasia: A cross-linguistic analysis using the 4M model

Language mixing (LM) is common among individuals who speak two or more languages. LM in healthy multilingual individuals has been studied extensively, often by applying the Matrix Language Frame (MLF) and the 4M model, both developed by Myers-Scotton and colleagues. Our study examined LM in multilingual people with aphasia (PWA), to determine: (1) frequency of LM in the first-acquired language (L1) and later-acquired languages (L2/L3); (2) whether the 4M model accounts for LM patterns; and (3) how language-specific characteristics affect LM. Narratives produced by 18 multilingual PWA (English-Hebrew; English-Spanish, English-Hebrew-Spanish and Russian-Hebrew speakers) with and without agrammatism were analyzed using the 4M model. More LM was observed in L2 contexts compared to L1 in participants with agrammatism, yet in participants without agrammatism no differences were found between L1 and L2. The patterns of LM in target and non-target languages were similar across L1 and L2: content morphemes were more likely to be embedded into the matrix language, aligning with previous research on healthy multilingual controls. Differences were found between the types of LM across the four studied languages. Our findings indicate that multilingual PWA mix languages in a typical manner, similar to neurotypical multilingual individuals, aligning with the predictions of the 4M model. Furthermore, in multilingual PWA, as in healthy multilingual people, differences in LM across languages are related to the morphological richness of the matrix language and the congruency of the languages involved in LM. Clinically, based on our results, LM can be encouraged as a communication aid.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Brain and Language
Published
2025-07-24
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bandl.2025.105616
Citations
2
Primary Topic
Neurobiology of Language and Bilingualism
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
2.86
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Language mixing in people with aphasia: A cross-linguistic analysis using the 4M model

Aviva Lerman, Natalia Meir, Michal Ben‐Shachar, Mira Goral et al.
2 citations
Brain and Language
Neurobiology of Language and Bilingualism
2.86
article

Language mixing in people with aphasia: A cross-linguistic analysis using the 4M model

Aviva Lerman, Natalia Meir, Michal Ben‐Shachar, Mira Goral, Alina Bihovsky
article en
2 citations

Abstract

Language mixing (LM) is common among individuals who speak two or more languages. LM in healthy multilingual individuals has been studied extensively, often by applying the Matrix Language Frame (MLF) and the 4M model, both developed by Myers-Scotton and colleagues. Our study examined LM in multilingual people with aphasia (PWA), to determine: (1) frequency of LM in the first-acquired language (L1) and later-acquired languages (L2/L3); (2) whether the 4M model accounts for LM patterns; and (3) how language-specific characteristics affect LM. Narratives produced by 18 multilingual PWA (English-Hebrew; English-Spanish, English-Hebrew-Spanish and Russian-Hebrew speakers) with and without agrammatism were analyzed using the 4M model. More LM was observed in L2 contexts compared to L1 in participants with agrammatism, yet in participants without agrammatism no differences were found between L1 and L2. The patterns of LM in target and non-target languages were similar across L1 and L2: content morphemes were more likely to be embedded into the matrix language, aligning with previous research on healthy multilingual controls. Differences were found between the types of LM across the four studied languages. Our findings indicate that multilingual PWA mix languages in a typical manner, similar to neurotypical multilingual individuals, aligning with the predictions of the 4M model. Furthermore, in multilingual PWA, as in healthy multilingual people, differences in LM across languages are related to the morphological richness of the matrix language and the congruency of the languages involved in LM. Clinically, based on our results, LM can be encouraged as a communication aid.

Brain and LanguageVol. 269
The Graduate Center, CUNY (US), Bar-Ilan University (IL), Lehman College (US), City University of New York (US), Sheba Medical Center (IL), Herzog Hospital (IL), Jerusalem Multidisciplinary College (IL)
Reduced inequalities
Openalex Percentile: Top 9%
Neurobiology of Language and Bilingualism
2.86
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.