Activities to Elicit Specific Language Functions: Varying the Factors of a Speech Event Does Influence the Appropriate Language

1983 ◽  
Vol 39 (4) ◽  
pp. 847-858 ◽  
Author(s):  
Claire F. Staab
Keyword(s):  
Specific Language ◽  
Language Functions ◽  
Speech Event

Language Functions Elicited by Meaningful Activities

1983 ◽  
Vol 14 (3) ◽  
pp. 164-170 ◽  
Author(s):  
Claire F. Staab
Keyword(s):  
School Setting ◽  
The Self ◽  
Classroom Setting ◽  
Language Function ◽  
Classroom Situation ◽  
Research Project ◽  
Specific Language ◽  
Language Functions ◽  
School Settings ◽  
Significant Concentration

If children are to be considered competent language users within the school setting, they must meet the demands of the classroom situation in terms of language function. Five language functions normally required in school settings were delineated as follows: relating socially to others while stating personal needs; directing the actions of the self and others; giving information; reasoning, judging, and predicting; and imagining and projecting into nonclassroom situations. Meaningful activities were designed to elicit each of the five language functions, and a research project was undertaken to determine whether or not a particular activity could elicit a significant concentration of a specific language function. Results indicated that the specifically designed activity clearly tended to elicit the desired language function. The article describes the language functions as well as the activities, and presents suggestions for implementing the activities in both the clinic and classroom setting.

scholarly journals PERFORMING LANGUAGE FUNCTIONS IN GERMAN LEGISLATIVE TEXTS

2019 ◽  
pp. 505
Author(s):  
Elena Yurevna Balashova ◽  
Olga Vladimirovna Nagoga ◽  
Elena Anatolyevna Makshantseva
Keyword(s):  
Functional Analysis ◽  
Legal Language ◽  
Specific Language ◽  
Pragmatic Theory ◽  
Methodological Basis ◽  
Language Functions ◽  
Message Communication ◽  
The Law ◽  
Linguistic Means

The article deals with the functions of legislative texts in German, describes the models of language functions in the context of pragmatic theory, and distinguishes basic, communicative, and specific pragmatic functions of the legal language. The aim of the study is to identify the specific functions of the language and to analyze the peculiarities of their manifestation in the texts of laws in German. The taxonomical and pragmatic methods along with the method of functional analysis were used to create the methodological basis for identifying the specific features of these functions in the texts of laws. As a result of the research, specific language functions were revealed - the functions of nomination, message, communication and influence in German legislative texts. The authors came to the conclusion that the functions of message and influence are more brightly demonstrated in the texts and they are implemented in the text of the law with the help of multilevel linguistic means and their combinations.

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.

A Comparison of Four Adolescent Language Tests

1987 ◽  
Vol 18 (3) ◽  
pp. 250-266 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. Jane Lieberman ◽  
Ann Marie C. Heffron ◽  
Stephanie J. West ◽  
Edward C. Hutchinson ◽  
Thomas W. Swem
Keyword(s):  
Test Performance ◽  
Sixth Grade ◽  
Significant Discrepancy ◽  
Language Impaired ◽  
Language Functions ◽  
Language Tests ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Sixth Grade Students ◽  
Overall Performance ◽  
Selection Of

Four recently developed adolescent language tests, the Fullerton Test for Adolescents (FLTA), the Test of Adolescent Language (TOAL), the Clinical Evaluation of Language Functions (CELF), and the Screening Test of Adolescent Language (STAL), were compared to determine: (a) whether they measured the same language skills (content) in the same way (procedures); and (b) whether students performed similarly on each of the tests. First, respective manuals were reviewed to compare selection of subtest content areas and subtest procedures. Then, each of the tests was administered according to standardized procedures to 30 unselected sixth-grade students. Despite apparent differences in test content and procedures, there was no significant difference in students' performance on three of the four tests, and correlations among test performance were moderate to high. A comparison of the pass/fail rates for overall performance on the tests, however, revealed a significant discrepancy between the proportions of students identified in need of further evaluation on the STAL (20%) and the proportion diagnosed as language impaired on the three diagnostic tests (60-73%). Clinical implications are discussed.

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.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document