Symbol Vocabulary and the Focus of Conversations

1992 ◽  
Vol 35 (6) ◽  
pp. 1333-1343 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lauren B. Adamson ◽  
Mary Ann Romski ◽  
Kim Deffebach ◽  
Rose A. Sevcik

Communication devices designed to augment the language development of individuals with severe cognitive disabilities and little or no functional speech typically contain primarily nouns because they seem easiest to acquire and evaluate. In this study, the effect of a more diverse vocabulary was assessed. Systematic observations of the use of computerized speech-output devices by 12 youth with moderate or severe mental retardation and severe spoken language disability and by their partners were made over a 2-year period. Social-regulative symbols (e.g., "please," "I’m finished") were used as soon as they were introduced, and their availability expanded the focus of conversations both at home and at school. Implications for conceptualizing variation in early language use and for the design of language intervention programs are discussed.

1989 ◽  
Vol 54 (3) ◽  
pp. 366-373 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mary Ann Romski ◽  
Rose A. Sevcik ◽  
Rebecca Reumann ◽  
James L. Pate

This study characterizes the communicative patterns of youngsters with moderate or severe mental retardation and severe spoken language impairments who are not independent speakers with conversational partners at home and at school. Nine subjects were observed during six 1-hr mealtime sampling periods in both settings for a total of 12 hr. Live continuous observations were made, employing a coding scheme designed to record occurrences of the subjects' communicative behaviors. Findings are discussed with respect to the modes and functions of the youngsters' communications with home and school conversational partners.


2018 ◽  
Vol 72 ◽  
pp. 64-76 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sarah Nelson ◽  
Andrea McDuffie ◽  
Amy Banasik ◽  
Robyn Tempero Feigles ◽  
Angela John Thurman ◽  
...  

2009 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 65-68 ◽  
Author(s):  
Judy Montgomery

Abstract As increasing numbers of speech language pathologists (SLPs) have embraced their burgeoning roles in written as well as spoken language intervention, they have recognized that there is much to be gained from the research in reading. While some SLPs reportedly fear they will “morph” into reading teachers, many more are confidently aware that SLPs who work with adult clients routinely use reading as one of their rehabilitation modalities. Reading functions as both a tool to reach language in adults, and as a measure of successful therapy. This advanced cognitive skill can serve the same purpose for children. Language is the foundational support to reading. Consequently spoken language problems are often predictors of reading and writing challenges that may be ahead for the student (Juel & Deffes, 2004; Moats, 2001; Wallach, 2004). A targeted review of reading research may assist the SLP to appreciate the language/reading interface.


2020 ◽  
Vol 0 (0) ◽  
Author(s):  
Andreas Krogull ◽  
Gijsbert Rutten

AbstractHistorical metalinguistic discourse is known to often prescribe linguistic variants that are not very frequent in actual language use, and to proscribe frequent variants. Infrequent variants that are promoted through prescription can be innovations, but they can also be conservative forms that have already largely vanished from the spoken language and are now also disappearing in writing. An extreme case in point is the genitive case in Dutch. This has been in decline in usage from at least the thirteenth century onwards, gradually giving way to analytical alternatives such as prepositional phrases. In the grammatical tradition, however, a preference for the genitive case was maintained for centuries. When ‘standard’ Dutch is officially codified in 1805 in the context of a national language policy, the genitive case is again strongly preferred, still aiming to ‘revive’ the synthetic forms. The striking discrepancy between metalinguistic discourse on the one hand, and developments in language use on the other, make the genitive case in Dutch an interesting case for historical sociolinguistics. In this paper, we tackle various issues raised by the research literature, such as the importance of genre differences as well as variation within particular genres, through a detailed corpus-based analysis of the influence of prescription on language practices in eighteenth- and nineteenth-century Dutch.


2007 ◽  
Vol 82 (3) ◽  
pp. 239-241
Author(s):  
Anna Lauda-Świeciak ◽  
Olga Haus ◽  
Danuta Kurylak ◽  
Ewa Duszeńko ◽  
Krystyna Soszyńska

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document