HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal My Folders Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Leonard, L. B. Articles by Camarata, M. N. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Leonard, L. B. Articles by Camarata, M. N. Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Tense and Agreement Morphemes in the Speech of Children With Specific Language Impairment During Intervention: Phase 2

Stephen M. Camarata
Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN

Monika Pawowska
Barbara Brown
Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN

Mary N. Camarata
Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN

Contact author: Laurence B. Leonard, Audiology and Speech Sciences, Heavilon Hall, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN 47907. E-mail: xdxl{at}purdue.edu

PURPOSE: The goals of this investigation were to determine whether treatment assists children with specific language impairment (SLI) in the use of grammatical morphemes that mark tense and agreement and whether treatment gains influence the children's use of other, untreated morphemes.

METHOD: Twenty-five children with SLI participated in 96 intervention sessions designed to facilitate the children's use of third-person singular -s or auxiliary is/are/was.

RESULTS: The children showed significantly larger gains on the target forms than on control forms (e.g., past tense -ed) that were monitored but not included in intervention. Along with possible treatment-related generalization across morpheme types, there was also evidence of one morpheme type influencing another when neither was the target of intervention.

CONCLUSIONS: Although the results provide clear evidence for intervention effects, it appeared as if maturational factors also played a role. The findings are discussed in terms of their implications for treatment and for characterizing development in SLI.

KEY WORDS: language intervention, specific language impairment, grammatical morphemes

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Facebook    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				M. Rispoli, P. A. Hadley, and J. K. Holt The Growth of Tense Productivity J Speech Lang Hear Res, August 1, 2009; 52(4): 930 - 944. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				L. H. Finestack and M. E. Fey Evaluation of a Deductive Procedure to Teach Grammatical Inflections to Children With Language Impairment Am J Speech Lang Pathol, August 1, 2009; 18(3): 289 - 302. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				S. Camarata, K. E. Nelson, H. Gillum, and M. Camarata Incidental receptive language growth associated with expressive grammar intervention in SLI First Language, February 1, 2009; 29(1): 51 - 63. [Abstract] [PDF]

				L. B. Leonard, S. M. Camarata, M. Pawlowska, B. Brown, and M. N. Camarata The Acquisition of Tense and Agreement Morphemes by Children With Specific Language Impairment During Intervention: Phase 3 J Speech Lang Hear Res, February 1, 2008; 51(1): 120 - 125. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]