Specific Language and Speech Disorder: Purifying the Concept

1998 ◽  
pp. 181-206
Author(s):  
Tom A. Van Yperen
Keyword(s):  
Speech Disorder ◽  
Specific Language

Systematic Modification of Parental Input to Train Language Symbols

1981 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 4-12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Barbara Culatta ◽  
Donna Horn
Keyword(s):  
Language Learning ◽  
Meaningful Use ◽  
Hearing Impaired ◽  
Specific Language ◽  
Parental Input ◽  
Language Exposure ◽  
Therapy Sessions ◽  
Impaired Children ◽  
Hearing Impaired Children ◽  
At Home

This study attempted to maximize environmental language learning for four hearing-impaired children. The children's mothers were systematically trained to present specific language symbols to their children at home. An increase in meaningful use of these words was observed during therapy sessions. In addition, as the mothers began to generalize the language exposure strategies, an increase was observed in the children's use of words not specifically identified by the clinician as targets.

Eliciting Verbs From Children With Specific Language Impairment

1996 ◽  
Vol 5 (4) ◽  
pp. 17-30 ◽  
Author(s):  
Diane Frome Loeb ◽  
Clifton Pye ◽  
Sean Redmond ◽  
Lori Zobel Richardson
Keyword(s):  
Young Children ◽  
Language Impairment ◽  
Specific Language Impairment ◽  
Syntactic Complexity ◽  
Specific Language ◽  
Lexical Skills

The focus of assessment and intervention is often aimed at increasing the lexical skills of young children with language impairment. Frequently, the use of nouns is the center of the lexical assessment. As a result, the production of verbs is not fully evaluated or integrated into treatment in a way that accounts for their semantic and syntactic complexity. This paper presents a probe for eliciting verbs from children, describes its effectiveness, and discusses the utility of and problems associated with developing such a probe.

Deficits in Explicit Language Problem Solving Rather Than in Implicit Learning in Specific Language Impairment: Evidence From Learning an Artificial Morphological Rule

2019 ◽  
Vol 62 (10) ◽  
pp. 3790-3807 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sara Ferman ◽  
Liat Kishon-Rabin ◽  
Hila Ganot-Budaga ◽  
Avi Karni
Keyword(s):  
Language Learning ◽  
Language Impairment ◽  
Specific Language Impairment ◽  
Explicit Knowledge ◽  
Procedural Memory ◽  
Procedural Learning ◽  
Specific Language ◽  
Language Problems ◽  
Morphological Rule ◽  
Semantic Distinction

Purpose The purpose of this study was to delineate differences between children with specific language impairment (SLI), typical age–matched (TAM) children, and typical younger (TY) children in learning and mastering an undisclosed artificial morphological rule (AMR) through exposure and usage. Method Twenty-six participants (eight 10-year-old children with SLI, 8 TAM children, and ten 8-year-old TY children) were trained to master an AMR across multiple training sessions. The AMR required a phonological transformation of verbs depending on a semantic distinction: whether the preceding noun was animate or inanimate. All participants practiced the application of the AMR to repeated and new (generalization) items, via judgment and production tasks. Results The children with SLI derived significantly less benefit from practice than their peers in learning most aspects of the AMR, even exhibiting smaller gains compared to the TY group in some aspects. Children with SLI benefited less than TAM and even TY children from training to judge and produce repeated items of the AMR. Nevertheless, despite a significant disadvantage in baseline performance, the rate at which they mastered the task-specific phonological regularities was as robust as that of their peers. On the other hand, like 8-year-olds, only half of the SLI group succeeded in uncovering the nature of the AMR and, consequently, in generalizing it to new items. Conclusions Children with SLI were able to learn language aspects that rely on implicit, procedural learning, but experienced difficulties in learning aspects that relied on the explicit uncovering of the semantic principle of the AMR. The results suggest that some of the difficulties experienced by children with SLI when learning a complex language regularity cannot be accounted for by a broad, language-related, procedural memory disability. Rather, a deficit—perhaps a developmental delay in the ability to recruit and solve language problems and establish explicit knowledge regarding a language task—can better explain their difficulties in language learning.

A View of the Lexical–Grammatical Link in Young Latinos With Specific Language Impairment Using Language-Specific and Conceptual Measures

2019 ◽  
Vol 62 (6) ◽  
pp. 1775-1786 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lucía I. Méndez ◽  
Gabriela Simon-Cereijido
Keyword(s):  
Low Income ◽  
Language Impairment ◽  
Specific Language Impairment ◽  
L2 Acquisition ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Specific Language ◽  
Vocabulary Skills ◽  
In The Beginning ◽  
Study Participants ◽  
L1 And L2

Purpose This study investigated the nature of the association of lexical–grammatical abilities within and across languages in Latino dual language learners (DLLs) with specific language impairment (SLI) using language-specific and bilingual measures. Method Seventy-four Spanish/English–speaking preschoolers with SLI from preschools serving low-income households participated in the study. Participants had stronger skills in Spanish (first language [L1]) and were in the initial stages of learning English (second language [L2]). The children's lexical, semantic, and grammar abilities were assessed using normative and researcher-developed tools in English and Spanish. Hierarchical linear regressions of cross-sectional data were conducted using measures of sentence repetition tasks, language-specific vocabulary, and conceptual bilingual lexical and semantic abilities in Spanish and English. Results Results indicate that language-specific vocabulary abilities support the development of grammar in L1 and L2 in this population. L1 vocabulary also contributes to L2 grammar above and beyond the contribution of L2 vocabulary skills. However, the cross-linguistic association between vocabulary in L2 and grammar skills in the stronger or more proficient language (L1) is not observed. In addition, conceptual vocabulary significantly supported grammar in L2, whereas bilingual semantic skills supported L1 grammar. Conclusions Our findings reveal that the same language-specific vocabulary abilities drive grammar development in L1 and L2 in DLLs with SLI. In the early stages of L2 acquisition, vocabulary skills in L1 also seem to contribute to grammar skills in L2 in this population. Thus, it is critical to support vocabulary development in both L1 and L2 in DLLs with SLI, particularly in the beginning stages of L2 acquisition. Clinical and educational implications are discussed.

Testing the Significance of the Agreement Among Observers

1968 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 5-17 ◽  
Author(s):  
Martin A. Young ◽  
Tom D. Downs
Keyword(s):  
Rating Scale ◽  
Intraclass Correlation ◽  
Speech Disorder ◽  
Interquartile Range ◽  
Speech Pathology ◽  
Observer Ratings

Ratings by observers are often used in speech pathology to measure complex speech dimensions; this seems reasonable since a speech “disorder” represents the product of an observer’s evaluation and a speaker’s performance. An index of the validity of these evaluations may be estimated by the amount of agreement among the observers. In this paper, the semi-interquartile range and the intraclass correlation are discussed as possible indices of agreement, and another index is suggested, based on the range of observer ratings. Under the assumption that the distribution of ratings is uniform when ratings are randomly assigned, that is, the observers show no agreement, tables were constructed to indicate the probability of any range for selected numbers of observers and rating scale categories. Some applications for this index concern the training of observers, estimating the number of observers needed, and the construction of master scales.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document