Talk:Echolalia

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

WikiProject Medicine This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at the doctor's mess.
Stub This page has been rated as stub-Class on the quality assessment scale
??? This page has not yet received a rating on the importance assessment scale.

Contents

[edit] older entries

What if it's semivoluntary? What's the cause? lysdexia 21:22, 30 Oct 2004 (UTC)

What about echoing one's own words? What is that called? I used to do that as a child: I would quietly repeat a sentence I myself had just uttered, about 1 second later. I never knew why I did it, it was simply compelling. I stopped about when I was 13 or 14. Kasreyn

People say that, if they listen carefully, they will hear me whisper, to myself, what I have spoken immediately earlier. One opinion regarding this singular subject stated that it was done for better memory, and had to do with my somewhat pronounced ability to discuss things logically. Ñ

[edit] Knowing your lines == genius intellect?

"Because it can involve the recitation of entire scripts, delayed echolalia is often thought to denote evidence of near-genius intellect."

Huh? Recitation of major portions of a feature film script isn't any harder than recitation of one's part when performing on stage. Heck, I used to be able to recite Honey, I Shrunk the Kids. Memorizing your lines doesn't take a genius; it just takes dedication. Or is dedication itself considered a pathology? --Damian Yerrick 03:10, 6 May 2005 (UTC)

Well, the line itself is a bit superfluous, but being able to recite an entire script without conscious effort, after hearing it only once is quite a bit more difficult than memorizing a script through repeated viewings or rehearsals.

It is only difficult for people with regular brain function, because memorising things in this detail quitely rightly doesn't warrant permanent adaptation/specialisation, as it's benefits are outweighed by what is lost in the diversion of resources. For people with 'photographic' memory, it's no more a feat than urination. I would also suggest it doesn't fall under the category of genius. Genius implies a great breadth and depth of intellectual prowess in the general, or in the specific incredible manipulation of input and/or extraordinary creativity in output. Mere reproduction, no matter how flawless, does not express this. Newsmare 11:11, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
Duhh... what he said!!  :P Well put. -Kasreyn

[edit] The researchers have determined...

"The researchers have determined..." Uhm, which researchers exactly? I suspect this may have been copied (and edited) from elsewhere where it referred to people mentioned earlier. Maybe it should just say "Researchers", but then the reader still doesn't know which researchers the article is referring too. This should be fixed. (See Wikipedia:Avoid weasel words) Retodon8 14:06, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Mimicry or appropriation?

Does echolalia manifest itself as a parrot's mimic of the actual SOUND of the words in question or merely a recitation of the words themselves, in the speaker's own voice? Or both?24.165.210.213 07:02, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] tunes getting stuck in one's head

What's the difference between say, repeating a song that is stuck in one's head? For example, several times I've heard a song only once only to have to suddenly realise halfway in the day it was still playing, with a real urge to express it. Is the difference perhaps, is that I have the social control not to express the sentiment in public? John Riemann Soong 11:22, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Removed for discussion

The first part is wrong, and the second part explains why the first part is wrong, but the entire section is unsourced and not written in encyclopedic tone, so I removed the whole thing until someone can fix it, based on a reliable source.

--yo man i wrote the second part i know my linguistics shit ive read lots of books and many girls whom i have later banged have told me i am a linguistic genius and lots of my profs. think im really smart as well. i quit college in my last semester because my ex girlfriend beat me up that doesnt mean im not smart. so credit me, ben powers, as the source and who cares about your silly 'encyclopedic tone' argument. you are wrong for depriving people of my information. plus one awesome girl i know who also quit my college was named robin. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.233.180.127 (talk • contribs) 07:23, 28 January 2007 UTC

haha that guy who wrote unsigned is a dummy i clearly wrote my name in the paragraph and my name is my signature on a computer. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.233.180.127 (talk • contribs) 18:47, 28 January 2007

[edit] Immediate Echolalia

Immediate echolalia appears to tap into the person's short-term memory for auditory input. This is defined as the repetition of a word or phrase just spoken by another person. Knowing the person very well would appear to be the key to understanding their specific intentions. For example; staff: "Johnny, say hello to your mom." Johnny: "Hello to your mom."

That example was not really echolalia. It is just an example of Johnny being silly and taking the command literally. True echolalia is if someone says "Wow, look at that pretty robin redbreast" and then the next person says "pretty robin redbreast" as soon as the first person finishes talking. He is not trying to be silly, rather he has a psychological condition which makes it mentally pleasurable for him to repeat the phrase "pretty robin redbreast" as soon as he hears someone else say it at that particular time. This is echolalia.

[edit] needs to be reworded?

The first sentence is taken directly from the cited source ...
"Echolalia is the repetition or echoing of verbal utterances made by another person. "
N1ugl 04:22, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Yes, that should be fixed (it was here before I started working on the article). I'll find a way to fix it. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 04:23, 12 April 2007 (UTC)