A clinical appraisal of the pragmatic aspects of language.

A descriptive taxonomy, the pragmatic protocol, was developed for this study. The protocol consists of 30 pragmatic parameters of language. The purpose of the study was to test the utility of the tool to evaluate a range of pragmatic aspects of language in a sample of conversational speech from subjects in six groups. Among the disordered subjects, four distinct profiles emerged that separated the diagnostic groups. Individual differences in the way pragmatic deficits were distributed within a diagnostic category were also identified. The authors stress that the assessment of pragmatics should encompass a range of parameters that includes aspects of linguistic structure as well as those aspects of communication that have to do with principles governing language use. We offer our data as an early look at the way in which pragmatic deficits stratify across disordered populations.

[1]  B. Brinton,et al.  Development of conversational repair strategies in response to requests for clarification. , 1986, Journal of speech and hearing research.

[2]  B. Brinton,et al.  Development of topic manipulation skills in discourse. , 1984, Journal of speech and hearing research.

[3]  F. P. Roth,et al.  Assessing the pragmatic abilities of children: Part 1. Organizational framework and assessment parameters. , 1984, The Journal of speech and hearing disorders.

[4]  T. Gallagher,et al.  Gaze and proximity as turn regulators within three-party and two-party child conversations. , 1982, Journal of speech and hearing research.

[5]  Lars-Gunnar Andersson,et al.  Logic in linguistics , 1982 .

[6]  R. Clair,et al.  Developmental Kinesics, the Emerging Paradigm , 1982 .

[7]  L. Bloom,et al.  Language development and language disorders , 1979 .

[8]  T. Gallagher,et al.  Revision behaviors in the speech of normal children developing language. , 1977, Journal of speech and hearing research.

[9]  Lois Bloom,et al.  Adult-child discourse: Developmental interaction between information processing and linguistic knowledge , 1976, Cognitive Psychology.

[10]  H. Grice.  Logic and conversation , 1975 .

[11]  E. Keenan,et al.  Coherency in children's discourse , 1975 .

[12]  E. Schegloff,et al.  A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking for conversation , 1974 .

[13]  R. Lakoff.  Language in Context. , 1972 .

[14]  D. Fox.  The Research Process in Education , 1970 .

[15]  A. Koller,et al.  Speech Acts: An Essay in the Philosophy of Language , 1969 .

[16]  C. Prutting,et al.  Appraisal of communicative competence in head injured adults , 1984 .

[17]  A. Holland.  Aphasia With and Without Adjectives - Remarks on the Problems of Classifying Aphasic Patients , 1983 .

[18]  P. Ekman,et al.  Handbook of methods in nonverbal behavior research , 1982 .

[19]  Lawrence D. Shriberg,et al.  Natural process analysis (NPA) : a procedure for phonological analysis of continuous speech samples , 1980 .

[20]  E. Bates.  The Emergence Of Symbols , 1979 .

[21]  V. Dijk,et al.  Pragmatics of language and literature , 1978 .

[22]  Susan Ervin-Tripp,et al.  Wait for Me, Roller Skate! , 1977 .

[23]  Michael Halliday,et al.  Cohesion in English , 1976 .

[24]  R. Gelman,et al.  The development of communication skills: modifications in the speech of young children as a function of listener. , 1973, Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development.

[25]  J. Austin.  How to do things with words , 1962 .