Person who is unable to speak

Sorry, that was my fault when I slightly side-tracked to other terms which might be considered pejorative in this day and age. They were just similar examples to deaf and dumb or mute. JamesM said:. Since the accident, my grandfather has been mute. Since the accident, my grandfather has been a mute. Is this because you are a mute? Har har. I'd agree that "lost the ability to speak" is probably a safer bet and possibly more politically correct but either of your examples, adjective or noun, sounded fine to me.

Possibly continental differences. I definitely wouldn't just call people "dumb" though. If you don't have a problem with mute, Loob, then it might be "has become a? I'd go with "has become speech-impaired" and "speech-impaired person" or "person suffering from speech-impairment.

I guess we are talking about two different levels of usage then. It would still be perfectly correct for a doctor, for example, to write in his notes that "A is mute" and this would be more likely than him writing A is dumb, which is almost inconceivable , but it might be unlikely that lay people refer to someone who cannot speak as either "mute" or as "a mute".

It would still be perfectly correct for a doctor, for example, to write in his notes that "A is mute" I'm a slavish to political correctness, I'm afraid. To satisfy JamesM's reservations about "speech impaired", how about "speech deprived", in the case of total loss or impairment of speech? Or, "He has total speech impairment"? I would probably use "mute" as well.

To me, "speech impairment" seems too broad. Like JamesM, an "impairment" could be anything from a slight studdering problem like another word for "impedement" to a total lack of ability to form sounds.

However, there is no confusion as to the meaning of "mute". There is also "aphasia, the lack of ability to speak, and "aphonic", the adverb for such a sentence as "Joe has become aphonic, since the explosion.

He suffers from aphasia. With apologies in advance they might, if they weren't dumb Perhaps, but if something is too complicated and overformalised even adults may have problems I guess. I was about to ask about something esle and probably I should have. Is aphasia, and any of its derivatives for that matter a word that would naturally come up in a conversation between laymen about a person who's mute or that would be used in the evening news aired on TV? Eigenfunction Senior Member England - English.

I would say that aphasia is a medical term that hasn't made its way into common English usage. Given that it is also not strictly speaking the right word to simply describe a person who cannot speak for whatever reason, I wouldn't use it in this case.

Personally, I wouldn't use dumb because it has for a long time had negative connotations, but mute as far as I'm concerned has no such connotations and is the right word to use. What about vocally challenged?

It sounds like a bad singer. As much as I've enjoyed this thread, it seems to me there is a word that works perfectly, has had the same meaning for very long time, and is unambiguous: mute. I guess we're trying to change it to be more politically correct. To me, this seems like a no-win situation because the PC terms change every few years or so.

BAS24 said:. This si where we came in! So back to square one. In my experience, politically correct terms usually last a few weeks before becoming either an innuendo of some kind or more insulting than the terms they were supposed to soften. This is especially true if schoolchildren or satirists are involved.

Eigenfunction said:. I'm afraid I couldn't quite be bothered to read the whole thread it's late and I'm tired, and over-emotional so this is probably repetition: the word I'd use is mute , Audio.

I say leave aphasia to the neuropathologically-minded, and speech-impaired to those who cannot bring themselves to call a metallo-xyloid excavatory implement a spade. I'm familiar with the term aphasia from studying linguistics, but I'm fairly sure that it's not widely understood. But if we want a single adjective then I'd definitely go for mute. Lauren x. Aphonic refers to a person who has no physical voice perhaps temporarily , but could possibly speak in a whisper. I would generally say mute except where it might seem to say something else, such as "dumbfounded" or "silenced".

In that case, I would say "unable to speak". I bow to the majority verdict, audio - go with "mute". It's still not a word I could use - not out of political correctness, but because I can't make it "fit". I revert to El escoces's really important point: in some contexts, and used by some people, certain words are fine. In other contexts, and used by other people, they're not. It's funny how much more difficult this word is than either "blind" or "deaf".

But to repeat: I bow to the majority verdict. I totally agree with you that in the sentence given, mute sounds strange. For me the problem is that, because it's not politically correct now, mute is seen far more often with a figurative meaning than with its literal one, so when you see it you have to work out what exactly is meant.

This could be sometimes using the wrong sounds in a word, choosing the wrong word, or putting words together incorrectly. Although aphasia affects a person's ability to communicate, it doesn't affect their intelligence. Aphasia can occur by itself or alongside other disorders, such as visual difficulties, mobility problems, limb weakness, and problems with memory or thinking skills.

Aphasia is often classified as "expressive" or "receptive", depending on whether there are difficulties with understanding or expressing language, or both. But most people with aphasia have some trouble with their speaking, and will have a mixture of problems with writing, reading and perhaps listening. Symptoms can range widely from getting a few words mixed up to having difficulty with all forms of communication.

Some people are unaware that their speech makes no sense and get frustrated when others don't understand them. Aphasia is caused by damage to parts of the brain responsible for understanding and producing language. Aphasia can affect people of all ages, but it's most common in people over the age of This is because strokes and progressive neurological conditions tend to affect older adults. Aphasia is usually diagnosed after tests carried out by a clinician — either a speech and language therapist or a doctor.

They can also help arrange treatment if necessary. These tests often involve simple exercises, such as asking a person to name objects in the room, repeat words and sentences, and read and write. This aims to help restore some of your ability to communicate, as well as help you develop alternative ways of communicating, if necessary.

You may receive speech and language therapy on an individual basis or in a group, depending on your needs and the service provided. An increasing number of computer-based applications are available to support people with aphasia. But it's important to start using these with the assistance of a speech and language therapist. How successful treatment is differs from person to person.

Most people with aphasia make some degree of recovery, and some recover fully. If the aphasia is caused by a one-off event, like a stroke, most patients recover to some degree with therapy.

There's no evidence to suggest that recovery stops at a specific time after stroke.