2004
DOI: 10.1080/14417040400010140
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Spoken language samples of New Zealand children in conversation and narration

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

7
82
1
1

Year Published

2008
2008
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
3
3
1
1

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 74 publications
(91 citation statements)
references
References 12 publications
7
82
1
1
Order By: Relevance
“…The protocol proved a reliable tool to accurately describe children's strengths and weaknesses in speaking situations relevant to school, family, and social routine. Analyses of the oral narrative language samples (story retelling and personal narrative language samples) contained in the database revealed a clear developmental trend of increasing syntactic complexity, semantic diversity, and verbal productivity with increasing age of the participants (Westerveld et al, 2004). Time 2 and Time 3 utilized the same elicitation techniques but different materials at each assessment to maintain the children's interest in the oral narrative tasks.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The protocol proved a reliable tool to accurately describe children's strengths and weaknesses in speaking situations relevant to school, family, and social routine. Analyses of the oral narrative language samples (story retelling and personal narrative language samples) contained in the database revealed a clear developmental trend of increasing syntactic complexity, semantic diversity, and verbal productivity with increasing age of the participants (Westerveld et al, 2004). Time 2 and Time 3 utilized the same elicitation techniques but different materials at each assessment to maintain the children's interest in the oral narrative tasks.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, most research into oral narrative language abilities of children with language and/or reading impairment has used fictional story (re)tellings (e.g., Feagans & Short, 1984;Fey, Catts, ProctorWilliams, Tomblin, & Zhang, 2004;Paul, Hernandez, Taylor, & Johnson, 1996;Snyder & Downey, 1991), which typically do not yield a sufficient number of utterances for this type of microstructure analysis. Another oral narrative elicitation context that is appropriate for this age group and potentially provides a higher number of utterances is personal narratives (see also Westerveld, Gillon, & Miller, 2004). One study that has investigated personal narrative abilities in school-age children with language impairment found that these children produced personal narratives that were significantly less coherent (on measures of topic maintenance, event sequencing, and explicitness) compared to their typically developing peers (Miranda, McCabe, & Bliss, 1998).…”
Section: Assessment Of Oral Narrative Abilitymentioning
confidence: 97%
“…Myös kerronnan lingvistisessä rakenteessa tapahtuu iänmukaista kehitystä. Lasten kasvaessa kertomusten produktiivisuus lisääntyy, ja erityisesti kehitystä näyttäisi jälleen tapahtuvan ennen kouluikää (Mäkinen, Loukusa, Nieminen ym., 2014;Westerveld, Gillon & Miller, 2004). Justice ym.…”
Section: Tyypillisesti Kehittyneiden Lasten Ja Lasten Joilla On Kielunclassified
“…Tyack and Gottsleben (1986) considered a similar age range using data from play situations and picture stimuli. Westerveld and colleagues examined the production of syntax in children from 4 -11 years, using mean length of utterance in morphemes (MLU-M), as their syntactic measure (see Westerveld, Gillon & Miller, 2004;Westerveld & Vidler, 2016). Berman and Slobin's (1994) detailed analyses of complex syntax in the 'Frog Story' project, included children from 3 to 9 years as well as an adult sample.…”
Section: Methodsological Differencesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Conversational sampling has the advantage of being more natural, but a narrative task is more likely to elicit complex language and full sentences (Southwood & Russell, 2004;Leadholm & Miller, 1992;Wagner et al, 2000;Thordardottir & Ellis Weismer, 2002;Westerveld, Gillon & Miller, 2004). Westerveld et al (2004) investigated the effects of three elicitation contexts on 4 to 7-year-old children's spoken language performance. They found that both story retell and personal event narratives yielded longer more complex sentences (as measured by MLU in morphemes) than a conversational task.…”
Section: Task Effects On Syntactic Complexitymentioning
confidence: 99%