Cognitive performance influences the quality of life and survival of people with glioma. Thus, a detailed neuropsychological and language evaluation is essential. In this work, we tested if an analysis of errors in naming can indicate semantic and/or phonological impairments in 87 awake brain surgery patients. Secondly, we explored how language and cognition change after brain tumour resection. Finally, we checked if low-tumour grade had a protective effect on cognition. Our results indicated that naming errors can be useful to monitor semantic and phonological processing, as their number correlated with scores on tasks developed by our team for testing these domains. Secondly, we showed that – although an analysis at a whole group level indicates a decline in language functions – significantly more individual patients improve or remain stable when compared to the ones who declined. Finally, we observed that having LGG, when compared with HGG, favours patients’ outcome after surgery, most probably due to brain plasticity mechanisms. We provide new evidence of the importance of applying a broader neuropsychological assessment and an analysis of naming errors in patients with glioma. Our approach may potentially ensure better detection of cognitive deficits and contribute to better postoperative outcomes. Our study also shows that an individualized approach in post-surgical follow-ups can reveal reassuring results showing that significantly more patients remain stable or improve and can be a promising avenue for similar reports. Finally, the study captures that plasticity mechanisms may act as protective in LGG versus HGG after surgery.