The management of cohesion in written narratives in students with specific language impairment: Differences between childhood and adolescence.

The goal of this study was to investigate the management of cohesion by children and adolescents with specific language impairment (SLI) when writing a narrative in a communicative situation. Twelve children with SLI (from 7 to 11 years old) and 12 adolescents with SLI (from 12 to 18 years old) were chronological age-matched with 24 typically developing (TD) children and 24 TD adolescents. All participants attended mainstream classes: children in elementary schools and adolescents in middle and high schools. Analyses of cohesion focused on both density and diversity of connectives, punctuation marks and anaphors. Results attested that children with SLI were greatly impaired in their management of written cohesion and used specific forms previously observed in narrative speech such as left dislocations. By contrast, and not expected, the management of written cohesion by adolescents with SLI was close to that of their TD peers. The communicative writing situation we set up, which engaged participants to take into account the addressee, also made possible for adolescents with SLI to manage cohesion in writing.

Lexical spelling in children and adolescents with specific language impairment: variations with the writing situation.

The goal of this study was to compare the lexical spelling performance of children and adolescents with specific language impairment (SLI) in two contrasting writing situations: a dictation of isolated words (a classic evaluative situation) and a narrative of a personal event (a communicative situation). Twenty-four children with SLI and 48 typically developing children participated in the study, split into two age groups: 7-11 and 12-18 years of age. Although participants with SLI made more spelling errors per word than typically developing participants of the same chronological age, there was a smaller difference between the two groups in the narratives than in the dictations. Two of the findings are particularly noteworthy: (1) Between 12 and 18 years of age, in communicative narration, the number of spelling errors of the SLI group was not different from that of the typically developing group. (2) In communicative narration, the participants with SLI did not make specific spelling errors (phonologically unacceptable), contrary to what was shown in the dictation. From an educational perspective or that of a remediation program, it must be stressed that the communicative narration provides children-and especially adolescents-with SLI an opportunity to demonstrate their improved lexical spelling abilities. Furthermore, the results encourage long-term lexical spelling education, as adolescents with SLI continue to show improvement between 12 and 18 years of age.

Severe traumatic brain injury, frontal lesions, and social aspects of language use: a study of French-speaking adults.

UNLABELLED: The purpose of this study was to gain insight into the social (pragmatic) aspects of language use by French-speaking individuals with frontal lesions following a severe traumatic brain injury. Eleven participants with traumatic brain injury performed tasks in three areas of communication: production (interview situation), comprehension (direct requests, conventional indirect requests, and hints), and metapragmatic knowledge. The results of the patients pointed out some strengths (turn-taking in production, and request comprehension, including hints and the speaker's intention) and some weaknesses (topic maintenance in production and metapragmatic knowledge). The patients' good comprehension of requests and their difficulty expressing metapragmatic knowledge suggest that they differ from controls in how they "explain the world": their knowledge of the event sequence was not based on verbally expressible knowledge about the relationship between the structural characteristics of a request utterance and those of its social production context. The pragmatic skills of persons with traumatic brain injury seem to vary across tasks: these individuals have specific strengths and weaknesses in different domains. In addition, marked interindividual differences were noted among the patients: three of them had only one weak point, topic maintenance. These interindividual differences were not systematically linked to performance on executive function tests, but lesion unilaterality (right or left) seems to help preserve patients' pragmatic and metapragmatic skills. The discussion stresses the need to take each patient's strengths and weaknesses into account in designing remediation programs. LEARNING OUTCOMES: As a result of this activity, the reader will be able to explain the social/pragmatic aspects of language in typical and atypical participants with TBI. As a result of this activity, the reader will be able to identify social/pragmatic weaknesses and strengths.

Understanding expressive speech acts: the role of prosody and situational context in French-speaking 5- to 9-year-olds.

PURPOSE: This study was aimed at determining the role of prosody and situational context in children's understanding of expressive utterances. Which one of these 2 cues will help children grasp the speaker's intention? Do children exhibit a "contextual bias" whereby they ignore prosody, such as the "lexical bias" found in other studies (M. Friend & J. Bryant, 2000)? METHOD: In the first experiment, a group of 5- to 9-year-old children and a group of adults performed a computerized judgment task. They had to determine the speaker's intention on the basis of an utterance produced with a particular prosody (positive or negative) in a particular situational context (positive or negative). In the second experiment, the same prosodic utterances were presented to 5- to 9-year-old children without a situational context. RESULTS: The 5- and 7-year-old children relied primarily on situational context, in contrast to adults, who relied on prosody. The 9-year-olds relied on both cues (Experiment 1). When prosody was the sole cue (Experiment 2), all children relied on this cue to infer the speaker's intention. CONCLUSIONS: The results are discussed and integrated into a larger conceptual framework that includes research on lexical bias and sarcasm.

Electronic mail, a new written-language register: a study with French-speaking adolescents.

The aim of this study was to determine the extent to which the linguistic forms used by adolescents in electronic mail (e-mail) differ from those used in standard written language. The study was conducted in French, a language with a deep orthography that has strict, addressee-dependent rules for using second person personal pronouns (unfamiliar and familiar forms). Data were collected from 80 adolescents ages 12 to 15 in a natural situation where they had to introduce themselves by e-mail to two addressees (peer/teacher). Participants were divided into two groups (skilled/unskilled in computer-mediated communication). Their emails contained a large number of orthographic deviations (the most frequent being neographic forms). Participants skilled in computer-mediated communication (CMC) deviated more than unskilled ones did. The number of orthographic deviations was not linked to the participants' standard writing ability. The personal-pronoun data clearly showed that adolescents used the familiar form of 'you' (tu) to address the peer and the unfamiliar form (vous) to address the teacher. We conclude that, for adolescents, e-mail constitutes a distinct written-language register. Nevertheless, the e-mail register seems to follow the pragmatic rules of standard spoken and written interaction.

Repetition as ratification: how parents and children place information in common ground.

Repetition is used for a range of functions in conversation. In this study, we examined all the repetitions used in spontaneous conversations by 41 French adult-child dyads, with children aged 2 ; 3 and 3 ; 6, to test the hypotheses that adults repeat to establish that they have understood, and that children repeat to ratify what adults have said. Analysis of 978 exchanges containing repetitions showed that adults use them to check on intentions and to correct errors, while children use them to ratify what the adult said. With younger children, adults combine their repeats with new information. Children then re-repeat the form originally targeted by the adult. With older children, adults check on intentions but less frequently, and only occasionally check on forms. Older children also re-repeat in the third turn but, like adults, add further information. For both adults and children, repeats signal attention to the other's utterances, and place the information repeated in common ground.