scholarly journals Real-Word and Nonword Repetition in Italian-Speaking Children With Specific Language Impairment: A Study of Diagnostic Accuracy

2013 ◽  
Vol 56 (1) ◽  
pp. 323-336 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marco Dispaldro ◽  
Laurence B. Leonard ◽  
Patricia Deevy
Keyword(s):  
Diagnostic Accuracy ◽  
Language Impairment ◽  
Specific Language Impairment ◽  
Nonword Repetition ◽  
Real Word ◽  
Specific Language

scholarly journals Do nonword repetition errors in children with specific language impairment reflect a weakness in an unidentified skill specific to nonword repetition or a deficit in simultaneous processing?

2006 ◽  
Vol 27 (4) ◽  
pp. 569-573 ◽  
Author(s):  
Klara Marton
Keyword(s):  
Language Impairment ◽  
Specific Language Impairment ◽  
Cognitive Abilities ◽  
Alternative Hypothesis ◽  
Nonword Repetition ◽  
Specific Language ◽  
Speech Stimuli ◽  
Simultaneous Processing ◽  
Error Analyses ◽  
Double Deficit

This Commentary supports Gathercole's (2006) proposal on a double deficit in children with specific language impairment (SLI). The author suggests that these children have a limited phonological storage combined with a particular problem of processing novel speech stimuli. According to Gathercole, there are three areas of skill contributing to memory for nonwords: general cognitive abilities, phonological storage, and an unidentified skill specific to nonword repetition. The focus of this Commentary is to examine whether these children's nonword repetition performance is influenced by an unidentified skill or some other processes. An alternative hypothesis is that the nonword repetition errors observed in children with SLI are related to one of their main weaknesses, to their difficulties in simultaneous processing of information. Evidence for this argument comes from our recent studies: from error analyses data and from findings on nonword repetition with stimuli that included meaningful parts (monosyllabic real words).

scholarly journals Are Specific Language Impairment and Dyslexia Distinct Disorders?

2005 ◽  
Vol 48 (6) ◽  
pp. 1378-1396 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hugh W. Catts ◽  
Suzanne M. Adlof ◽  
Tiffany P. Hogan ◽  
Susan Ellis Weismer
Keyword(s):  
Language Impairment ◽  
Phonological Processing ◽  
Specific Language Impairment ◽  
Representative Sample ◽  
Developmental Disorders ◽  
Reading Development ◽  
Language Disorders ◽  
Nonword Repetition ◽  
Typical Development ◽  
Specific Language

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to determine whether specific language impairment (SLI) and dyslexia are distinct developmental disorders. Method: Study 1 investigated the overlap between SLI identified in kindergarten and dyslexia identified in 2nd, 4th, or 8th grades in a representative sample of 527 children. Study 2 examined phonological processing in a subsample of participants, including 21 children with dyslexia only, 43 children with SLI only, 18 children with SLI and dyslexia, and 165 children with typical language/reading development. Measures of phonological awareness and nonword repetition were considered. Results: Study 1 showed limited but statistically significant overlap between SLI and dyslexia. Study 2 found that children with dyslexia or a combination of dyslexia and SLI performed significantly less well on measures of phonological processing than did children with SLI only and those with typical development. Children with SLI only showed only mild deficits in phonological processing compared with typical children. Conclusions: These results support the view that SLI and dyslexia are distinct but potentially comorbid developmental language disorders. A deficit in phonological processing is closely associated with dyslexia but not with SLI when it occurs in the absence of dyslexia.

What do monolingual and bilingual children with and without SLI produce when phonology is too complex?

2018 ◽  
Vol 39 (2) ◽  
pp. 158-176 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laetitia de Almeida ◽  
Sandrine Ferré ◽  
Marie-Anne Barthez ◽  
Christophe dos Santos
Keyword(s):  
Language Impairment ◽  
Specific Language Impairment ◽  
Nonword Repetition ◽  
Bilingual Children ◽  
Typically Developing ◽  
Typically Developing Children ◽  
Specific Language ◽  
Repetition Task

In this study, the authors compare the production of internal codas and branching onsets in four groups of children learning French: monolingual typically-developing children ( n = 12), bilingual typically-developing children ( n = 61), monolingual children with Specific Language Impairment ( n = 17) and bilingual children with Specific Language Impairment ( n = 20). Their elicited productions were collected using a nonword repetition task (LITMUS-NWR-French), containing 71 nonwords with different syllable types. Except for typically-developing monolingual children, all children performed significantly better on branching onsets than on internal codas. Moreover, the repair strategies used in erroneous productions also indicate that children had more difficulties with internal codas: all the cases of metathesis affecting a target internal coda resulted in the production of a branching onset whereas the contrary was not observed. The differences in the rates of target-like production and the patterns of metathesis of these two structures suggest that internal codas are more difficult than branching onsets for children learning French.

scholarly journals Extending the Application of Tense and Agreement Measures: A Reply to Rispoli and Hadley (2018)

2018 ◽  
Vol 61 (6) ◽  
pp. 1460-1461
Author(s):  
Laurence B. Leonard ◽  
Eileen Haebig ◽  
Patricia Deevy ◽  
Barbara Brown
Keyword(s):  
Diagnostic Accuracy ◽  
Language Impairment ◽  
Specific Language Impairment ◽  
Sample Sizes ◽  
Verb Morphology ◽  
Specific Language ◽  
Direct Activation ◽  
Two Measures ◽  
Good Diagnostic Accuracy ◽  
Finite Verb

Purpose In this reply, we respond to comments on our article “Tracking the Growth of Tense and Agreement in Children With Specific Language Impairment: Differences Between Measures of Accuracy, Diversity, and Productivity.” Conclusion The finite verb morphology composite can be disproportionately affected by frequently occurring grammatical forms produced through direct activation. This assumption was one of the reasons we wished to compare this measure to the tense marker total and the tense/agreement productivity score. The latter two measures provide valuable developmental information that is not available from the finite morphology composite. Yet, the finite verb morphology composite shows good diagnostic accuracy and an interpretable pattern of growth and is relatively stable across different sample sizes.

Working Memory Capacity and Language Processes in Children With Specific Language Impairment

2003 ◽  
Vol 46 (5) ◽  
pp. 1138-1153 ◽  
Author(s):  
Klara Marton ◽  
Richard G. Schwartz
Keyword(s):  
Working Memory ◽  
Language Impairment ◽  
Specific Language Impairment ◽  
Sentence Comprehension ◽  
Working Memory Capacity ◽  
Sentence Length ◽  
Phonological Loop ◽  
Nonword Repetition ◽  
Syntactic Complexity ◽  
Specific Language

This study examined the interaction between working memory and language comprehension in children with specific language impairment (SLI), focusing on the function of the central executive component and its interaction with the phonological loop (A. D. Baddeley, 1986) in complex working memory tasks. Thirteen children with SLI and 13 age-matched (age range=7;0 [years;months] to 10;0) children with typical language development participated. The tasks combined traditional nonword repetition tests and sentence comprehension by using sentences that differed in length and syntactic complexity. The children with SLI exhibited larger processing and attentional capacity limitations than their age-matched peers. Increased word length and syntactic complexity resulted in a large performance decrease in nonword repetition in both groups. There were some variations in the error pattern, which may indicate qualitative differences between the 2 groups. The performance of the children with SLI in nonword repetition, across the different tasks, indicated a limitation in simultaneous processing rather than difficulty in encoding and analyzing the phonological structure of the nonwords. Furthermore, syntactic complexity had a greater effect on performance accuracy than did sentence length.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document