What can errors tell us about specific language impairment deficits? Semantic and morphological cuing in a sentence completion task

Novogrodsky, Rama; Kreiser, Varda

doi:10.3109/02699206.2015.1051239

Cited by 18 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 33 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Importantly, the present study indicates that theoretical explanations of SLI should also be able to account for deficits in nominal morphology and, potentially, problems in nominal morphology could function as an additional clinical marker for SLI. Our results on nominal morphosyntax in Dutch SLI are corroborated by Rice & Oetting (1993), who find problems with plural morphology on nouns in English-speaking children with SLI, and by Novogrodsky & Kreiser's (2015) who argue that Hebrew-speaking children with SLI have incomplete morphological knowledge of nouns.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 81%

“…Children with SLI do not form a homogeneous group: the disorder can affect different subdomains of language and these effects can be of varying severity (Leonard 2014;Novogrodsky 2015). One area that is typically influenced by the impairment is morphosyntax and the ability to comprehend and produce grammatical morphemes.…”

Section: Specific Language Impairmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For example, Rice & Oetting (1993) investigated spontaneous language samples of 81 5-year-old English-speaking children with SLI and found that they produced the plural inflection in obligatory contexts less often as compared to a control group of 92 MLU-matched TD children, suggesting difficulties in the area of nominal morphosyntax. Furthermore, in a sentence completion study by Novogrodsky & Kreiser (2015), 15 Hebrew-speaking children with SLI (aged 8-14) were compared to a group of language-matched and a group of age-matched controls on their ability to complete sentences with the morphologically correct noun. Although the results show no differences between the SLI group and the language-matched TD group, the SLI group performed more poorly than the age-matched TD group.…”

Section: Specific Language Impairmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

The mass-count distinction in Dutch-speaking children with specific language impairment

Witteloostuijn

Schaeffer

2018

Glossa: A Journal of General Linguistics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study reports experimental data on the acquisition of the mass-count distinction by Dutch-speaking children with specific language impairment (SLI). While verbal morphosyntax is known to be impaired in SLI, nominal morphosyntax has received less attention. The mass-count distinction provides an interesting test ground: count can have a plural morpheme: bal-en ('balls'), but mass cannot: *deeg-en ('doughs'). Flexible nouns can easily occur in either mass or count syntax (pizza/pizza-s). Finally, object-mass nouns (e.g. furniture) are syntactically mass, but quantify over individuals, and are hypothesized to have a lexical [+individual] feature (Bale & Barner 2004). Typically developing (TD) Dutch-acquiring children become sensitive to the mass-count distinction around age 6 (van Witteloostuijn 2013).Hypothesizing that the primary impairment of SLI is in morphosyntax, and not in lexical-semantics, we predict that Dutch-speaking children with SLI older than 6 have most problems with the interpretation of flexible nouns (relying solely on morphosyntax), some problems interpreting classical count and mass nouns (supported by convention/world knowledge), and least problems interpreting object-mass nouns (relying solely on their lexical [+individual] feature).Quantity judgments based on count and mass nouns were collected from 28 Dutch children with SLI aged between 6 and 14 years old and 28 individually age-matched TD children. Confirming our predictions, the children with SLI scored significantly lower than their TD controls on flexible nouns, and, albeit to a lesser extent, on classical nouns. This underscores the (nominal) morphological deficit in SLI. In contrast, no difference between groups was found on object-mass nouns.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 81%

Section: Specific Language Impairmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Specific Language Impairmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The mass-count distinction in Dutch-speaking children with specific language impairment

Witteloostuijn

Schaeffer

2018

Glossa: A Journal of General Linguistics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…, McGregor , Friedmann et al . , Novogrodsky and Kreiser ). Because these explanations emphasize the (low) availability of existing representations (Friedmann et al .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…), or across levels of the linguistic system (Biran et al . , Novogrodsky and Kreiser ). Such explanations put the emphasis on the (low) availability of existing representations (Friedmann et al .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The joint effects of bilingualism, DLD and item frequency on children's lexical‐retrieval performance

Degani

Kreiser

Novogrodsky

2019

Intl J Lang & Comm Disor

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Bilingual children and children diagnosed with developmental language disorder (DLD) are characterized by reduced lexical‐retrieval abilities. Few studies examined their joint contribution and the mechanisms underlying these effects in the lexical domain. Aims To explore the joint effects of bilingualism and DLD by adopting a four‐group comparison in which the difference between bi‐ and monolingual children with DLD is directly compared with that of bi‐ and monolingual children with typical language development (TLD). In addition, to examine the mechanisms underlying the effects of bilingualism and DLD on children's lexical‐retrieval abilities, we tested how item's characteristics (frequency of use) modulate the effects of bilingualism and DLD. Methods & Procedures Fifty‐eight children (aged 9–14 years) participated in the current study. They were either Hebrew monolingual or Hebrew–English bilinguals and were either diagnosed with DLD or had TLD. Children completed a Hebrew picture‐naming task and verbal short‐term memory tests. The influence of participants’ characteristics, including bilingualism, DLD and verbal short‐term memory, as well as item's characteristics (frequency of use) were tested. Outcomes & Results Accuracy analysis revealed that bilingual children scored lower than monolingual children and that children with DLD scored lower than children with TLD. Critically, the two factors interacted such that their joint presence resulted in less‐than‐additive effects. Specifically, although bilingual children with DLD performed worse than all other groups, they performed better than expected under an additive model. Interestingly, monolingual children with DLD performed similarly to bilingual children with TLD. Increased verbal short‐term memory was associated with better performance across the four groups. Finally, bilingualism and DLD interacted with item frequency, such that being bilingual, having DLD, or both, resulted in increased sensitivity to item frequency manifested in exceptionally lower performance on low‐frequency items. Conclusions & Implications The findings suggest that the strength of linguistic representations contribute to the effects of bilingualism and DLD. Further, the presence of bilingualism in the context of DLD does not exaggerate the impact of DLD. Clinically, this suggests that differences between bi‐ and monolingual children with DLD must be considered in reference to the gap in lexical‐retrieval performance observed between bi‐ and monolingual children with TLD. Finally, because monolingual children with DLD and bilingual children with TLD performed similarly, sensitive diagnostic tools and intervention programmes should be adopted to allow correct identification and treatment of bilingual children with DLD.

show abstract

Children with Hearing Impairment in a Diglossic Context – The Case of Palestinian-Arabic Speaking Children

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

What can errors tell us about specific language impairment deficits? Semantic and morphological cuing in a sentence completion task

Cited by 18 publications

References 33 publications

The mass-count distinction in Dutch-speaking children with specific language impairment

The mass-count distinction in Dutch-speaking children with specific language impairment

The joint effects of bilingualism, DLD and item frequency on children's lexical‐retrieval performance

Children with Hearing Impairment in a Diglossic Context – The Case of Palestinian-Arabic Speaking Children

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About