Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research Vol.50 1330-1349 October 2007. doi:10.1044/1092-4388(2007/093)
© American Speech-Language-Hearing Association
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrowCustom Print
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow My Folders
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Ebbels, S. H.
Right arrow Articles by Dockrell, J. E.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Ebbels, S. H.
Right arrow Articles by Dockrell, J. E.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Delicious   Add to Digg   Add to Facebook   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Intervention for Verb Argument Structure in Children With Persistent SLI: A Randomized Control Trial

Susan H. Ebbels
Moor House School, Surrey, United Kingdom, and University College London, United Kingdom

Heather K. J. van der Lely
University College London, United Kingdom

Julie E. Dockrell
Institute of Education, London, United Kingdom

Contact author: Susan Ebbels, Moor House School, Mill Lane, Hurst Green, Oxted, Surrey RH8 9AQ, United Kingdom. E-mail: ebbelss{at}moorhouseschool.co.uk.

Purpose: The authors aimed to establish whether 2 theoretically motivated interventions could improve use of verb argument structure in pupils with persistent specific language impairment (SLI).

Method: Twenty-seven pupils with SLI (ages 11;0–16;1) participated in this randomized controlled trial with "blind" assessment. Participants were randomly assigned to 1 of 3 therapy groups: syntactic–semantic, semantic, and control. All pupils received 9 weekly half-hour individual therapy sessions. They were assessed on a specifically designed video test pretherapy, posttherapy, and at follow-up.

Results: Pupils receiving the syntactic–semantic and semantic therapies made significant progress (d > 1.0), which was maintained at follow-up and generalized to control verbs. Both therapies improved linking of arguments to syntax, and the syntactic–semantic therapy tended to increase use of optional arguments. Pupils receiving the control therapy made no progress.

Conclusion: Both methods of argument structure therapy were effective. Comparisons of their effectiveness in specific areas led to the hypotheses that the pupils' initial difficulties with linking resulted from ill-defined semantic representations, whereas their limited use of arguments may have resulted from syntactic difficulties. When therapy is theoretically grounded, it can inform theories, be time limited, and be effective for older children with SLI.

KEY WORDS: language disorders, school-aged children, intervention, verb argument structure


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Delicious Delicious   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Facebook Facebook   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 LSHSSHome page
G. H. Poll
Increasing the Odds: Applying Emergentist Theory in Language Intervention
Lang Speech Hear Serv Sch, October 1, 2011; 42(4): 580 - 591.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 AJSLPHome page
E. J. Hester and R. Stevens-Ratchford
Health Literacy and the Role of the Speech-Language Pathologist
Am J Speech Lang Pathol, May 1, 2009; 18(2): 180 - 191.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]