Production operations and the use of nonfinite verbs by children with specific language impairment.

Recent evidence from structural priming studies suggests that children with specific language impairment (SLI) are more likely to produce verb morphemes such as auxiliary is when their previous sentence contained an auxiliary than when it did not. The same paradigm was employed in the present study to determine whether failures to include auxiliary is might be due to prior use of nonfinite sentences (e.g., The mouse eating the cheese). Preschoolers with SLI and a group of younger normally developing children were more likely to produce auxiliary is to describe target pictures when the preceding sentence contained auxiliary are than when it contained past tense. Use of is in the target sentence was least likely when the preceding sentence was nonfinite. The implications of these findings for current accounts of SLI and current models of sentence production are discussed.

[1]  Jacob Cohen Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences , 1969, The SAGE Encyclopedia of Research Design.

[2]  J. K. Bock Syntactic persistence in language production , 1986, Cognitive Psychology.

[3]  M L Rice,et al.  Tense over time: the longitudinal course of tense acquisition in children with specific language impairment. , 1998, Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR.

[4]  Kathryn Bock,et al.  Closed-class immanence in sentence production , 1989, Cognition.

[5]  L B Leonard,et al.  Grammatical morphology and the lexicon in children with specific language impairment. , 1999, Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR.

[6]  Andrew Radford,et al.  Syntactic Theory and the Structure of English: Index , 1997 .

[7]  Laurence B. Leonard,et al.  Production Operations Contribute to the Grammatical Morpheme Limitations of Children with Specific Language Impairment , 2000 .

[8]  Michael K. Tanenhaus,et al.  Linguistic Structure in Language Processing , 1988 .

[9]  L B Leonard,et al.  Three accounts of the grammatical morpheme difficulties of English-speaking children with specific language impairment. , 1997, Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR.

[10]  Gary S. Dell,et al.  A Synthesis of Some Recent Work in Sentence Production , 1989 .

[11]  V. Marchman,et al.  Morphological productivity in children with normal language and SLI: a study of the English past tense. , 1999, Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR.

[12]  R. Kail Developmental change in speed of processing during childhood and adolescence. , 1991, Psychological bulletin.

[13]  L B Leonard,et al.  Specific language impairment in Swedish: the status of verb morphology and word order. , 2000, Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR.

[14]  Laurence B. Leonard,et al.  Deficits in finite verb morphology: some assumptions in recent accounts of specific language impairment. , 1998, Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR.

[15]  Laurence B. Leonard,et al.  Children with Specific Language Impairment , 1997 .

[16]  Andrew Radford,et al.  Syntactic Theory and the Structure of English: A Minimalist Approach , 1997 .

[17]  Susan A. Sullivan,et al.  Leiter International Performance Scale–Revised , 1998 .

[18]  K. Bock,et al.  From conceptual roles to structural relations: bridging the syntactic cleft. , 1992 .

[19]  Irving Lorge,et al.  Columbia mental maturity scale , 1954 .

[20]  Alexandra A. Cleland,et al.  Activation of Syntactic Information During Language Production , 2000, Journal of psycholinguistic research.

[21]  K. Wexler,et al.  Verb movement: Finiteness and head movement in early child grammars , 1994 .

[22]  M L Rice,et al.  Specific language impairment as a period of extended optional infinitive. , 1995, Journal of speech and hearing research.

[23]  J. Oetting,et al.  Past-tense marking by children with and without specific language impairment. , 1997, Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR.

[24]  K. Wexler,et al.  Toward tense as a clinical marker of specific language impairment in English-speaking children. , 1996, Journal of speech and hearing research.

[25]  K. Wexler Very early parameter setting and the unique checking constraint: a new explanation of the optional infinitive stage: a new explanation of the optional infinitive stage , 1998 .

[26]  Linda Wheeldon,et al.  Syntactic priming in spoken sentence production – an online study , 2001, Cognition.

[27]  Stephanie Kelter,et al.  Surface form and memory in question answering , 1982, Cognitive Psychology.

[28]  Dawn MacLaughlin,et al.  Proceedings of the 19th annual Boston University Conference on Language Development , 1995 .

[29]  Steven G Lapointe,et al.  A theory of verb form use in the speech of agrammatic aphasics , 1985, Brain and Language.