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 Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Ebbels, S. H. Articles by Dockrell, J. E. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Ebbels, S. H. Articles by Dockrell, J. E.

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

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