Researchers and practitioners in the fields of reading and language are well informed about the importance of phonological awareness in beginning reading. The purpose of this special issue of Learning Disabilities Research & Practice is to present recent research that extends the search for language and reading connections beyond the realm of phonological awareness. Many children with language impairment (LI) identified before formal schooling experience persistent difficulty in learning to read. Two interrelated issues are prerequisite for understanding the developmental course of events that might link language and reading (dis)ability in these children. One is an appreciation of exactly what is meant by LI, while the second concerns how LI should be explained. In this introductory article, we explore the complexities of these two issues, in particular the controversy between the domain–specific perspective and the domain–general perspective on the nature of specific LI (SLI). Consistent with these perspectives, future studies on possible language–reading links will need to measure language and related processes in greater breadth and depth, over time, and within a variety of experiential contexts. The five articles in this issue represent a critical first step in this direction.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BatesE. (1997). Origins of language disorders: A comparative approach. Developmental Neuropsychology, 13, 447–476.
2.
BatesE. A. (2004). Explaining and interpreting deficits in language development across clinical groups: Where do we go from here?Brain and Language, 88, 248–253.
3.
BatesE., & DickF. (2002). Language, gesture, and the developing brain. Developmental Psychobiology, 40, 293–310.
4.
BatesE., ThalD., FinlayB., & ClancyB. (2003). Early language development and its neural correlates. In RapinI. & SegalowitzS. (Eds.), Handbook of neuropsychology (vol. 8, Pt. 2 pp. 2–62). Amsterdam : Elsevier.
5.
BatesE. A., VicariS., & TraunerD. (1999). Neural mediation of language development: Perspectives from lesion studies of infants and children. In Tager–FlusbergH. (Ed.), Neurodevelopmental disorders (pp. 533–581). Cambridge, MA : MIT Press.
6.
BishopD. V. M. (2002). Pragmatic language impairment: A correlate of SLI, a distinct subgroup, or part of the autistic continuum? In BishopD. V. M. & LeonardL. B. L. (Eds.), Speech and language impairments in children: Causes, characteristics, intervention and outcome (pp. 99–113). Philadelphia : Psychology Press.
7.
CattsH. W., FeyM. E., TomblinJ. B., & ZhangX. (2002). A longitudinal investigation of reading outcomes in children with language impairments. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 45, 1142–1157.
8.
CharestM. J., & LeonardL. B. (2004). Predicting tense: Fine verb morphology and subject pronouns in the speech of typically–developing children and children with specific language impairment. Journal of Child Language, 31, 231–246.
9.
ChomskyN. (1967). The formal nature of language. In LennebergE. H. (Ed.), The biological foundations of language. New York : Wiley.
10.
DickF., WulfeckB., Krupa–KwiatkowskiM., & BatesE. (2004). The development of complex sentence interpretation in typically developing children compared with specific language impairments or early unilateral lesions. Developmental Science, 7, 360–377.
11.
ElmanJ. L. (1999). The emergence of language: A conspiracy theory. In MacWhinneyB. (Ed.), The emergence of language (pp. 1–27). Mahwah, NJ : Erlbaum.
12.
EngelhardtH. T., & WildesI. K. (1995). Health and disease: Philosophical perspectives. In ReichW. (Ed.), Encyclopedia of bioethics (pp. 1101–1106). New York : Macmillan.
13.
FeyM. E., CattsH. C., Proctor–WilliamsK., TomblinJ. B., & ZhangX. (2004). Oral and written story composition skills of children with language impairment. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 47, 1301–1318.
14.
FodorJ. (1983). The modularity of mind. Cambridge, MA : MIT Press.
15.
FrithU., & FrithC. D. (2003). Development and neurophysiology of mentalizing. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London: Biological Sciences, 358, 459–473.
16.
HauserM. D., ChomskyN., & FitchW. T. (2002). The faculty of language: Where is it, who has it, and how did it evolve?Science, 298, 1569–1579.
17.
JoanisseM. F., & SeidenbergM. S. (1998). Specific language impairment: A deficit in grammar of processing?Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 2, 240–247.
18.
KamhiA. G., & CattsH. W. (2005). Language and reading: Convergences and divergences. In CattsH. W. & KamhiA. G. (Eds.), Language and reading disabilities (2nd ed., pp. 1–25). Boston : Pearson.
19.
Karmiloff–SmithA. (1998). Development itself is the key to understanding developmental disorders. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 2, 389–398.
20.
Karmiloff–SmithA. (2005). Bate's emergentist theory and its relevance to understanding geneotype/phenotype relations. In TomaselloM. & SlobinD. I. (Eds.), Beyond nature– nurture: Essays in honor of Elizabeth Bates (pp. 219–260). Mahwah, NJ : Erlbaum.
21.
LennebergE. H. (1964). Language disorders in children. Harvard Educational Review, 34, 152–177.
22.
LeonardC. M., EckertM. A., & BishopD. V. M. (2005). The neurobiology of developmental disorders. Cortex, 41, 277–281.
23.
LeonardL. B. (1998). Children with specific language impairment. Cambridge, MA : MIT Press.
24.
MackieC., & DockrellJ. E. (2004). The nature of written language deficits in children with SLI. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 47, 1469–1483.
25.
MillerJ., & FletcherP. (2005). Developmental theory and language disorders. In FletcherP. & MillerF. (Eds.), Developmental theory and language disorders (pp. 1–9). Amsterdam : John Benjamins.
26.
MuterV., HulmeC., SnowlingM. J., & StevensonJ. (2004). Phonemes, rimes, vocabulary and grammatical skills as foundations of early reading reading development: Evidence from a longitudinal study. Developmental Psychology, 40, 665–681.
27.
PinkerS., & JackendoffR. (2004). The faculty of language: What's so special about it?Cognition, 95, 201–230.
28.
National Center for Education Statistics. (2005, November). The nation's report card: Reading 2005 Retrieved November 1, 2005 from http://nces.ed.gov
29.
NewburyD. F., BishopD. V. M., & MonacoA. P. (2005). Genetic influences on language impairment and phonological short–term memory. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 9, 528–534.
30.
ReillyJ., LoshM., BellugiU., & WulfeckB. (2004). “Frog, where are you?” Narratives in children with specific language impairment, early focal brain injury, and Williams syndrome. Brain and Language, 88, 229–247.
31.
RiceM. L. (2002). Grammatical symptoms of specific language impairment. In BishopD. V. M. & LeonardL. B. L. (Eds.), Speech and language impairments in children: Causes, characteristics, intervention and outcome (pp. 17–33). Philadelphia : Psychology Press.
32.
RiceM. L. (2003). A unified model of specific and general language delay: Grammatical tense as a clinical marker of unexpected variation. In LevyY. & SchaefferJ. (Eds.), Language competence across populations: Towards a definition of specific language impairment (pp. 209–231). Mahwah, NJ : Erlbaum.
33.
ScottC. M. (2004). Syntactic contributions to literacy learning. In StoneC. A., SillimanE. R., EhrenB. J., & ApelK. (Eds.), Handbook of language and literacy: Development and disorders (pp. 340–362). New York : Guilford Press.
34.
SillimanE. R., BahrR. H., & PetersM. L. (2006). Spelling patterns in preadolescents with atypical language skills: Phonological, morphological, and orthographic factors. Developmental Neuropsychology, 29, 93–123.
35.
ThalD. J., ReillyJ., SeibertL., JeffriesR., & FensonJ. (2004). Language development in children at risk for language impairment: Cross–population comparisons. Brain and Language, 88, 167–179.
36.
ThomasM., & Karmiloff–SmithA. (2005). Can developmental disorders reveal the component parts of the human language faculty?Language Learning and Development, 1, 65–92.
37.
TomblinJ. B., & PandichJ. (1999). Lessons from children with specific language impairment. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 3, 283–285.
38.
TomblinJ. B., RecordsN. L., BuckwalterP., ZhangX., SmithE., & O'BrienM. (1997). Prevalence of specific language impairment in kindergarten children. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 40, 1245–1260.
39.
United States Department of Education, Office of Special Education Programs. (2002, September). Twenty–fourth annual report of Congress on the implementation of the Individuals with Disabilities Act. Retrieved September 23, 2003 from http://www.ed.gov/about/reports/annual/osep/2002/index.html
40.
Van Der LelyH. K. J. (1997a). Language and cognitive development in a grammatical SLI boy: Modularity and innateness. Journal of Neurolinguistics, 10, 75–107.
41.
Van Der LelyH. K. J. (1997b). Narrative dicourse in grammatical specific language impaired children: A modular language deficit?Journal of Child Language, 24, 221–236.
42.
Van Der LelyH. K. J. (2003). Do heterogeneous deficits require heterogeneous theories? SLI subgroups and the RDDR hypothesis. In LevyY. & SchaefferJ. (Eds.), Language competence across populations: Towards a definition of specific language impairment (pp. 111–133). Mahwah, NJ : Erlbaum.
43.
Van Der LelyH. K. J. (2005). Domain–specific cognitive systems: Insight from grammatical–SLI. Trends in Cognitive Science, 9, 53–59.
44.
Van Der LelyH. K. J., RosenS., & McClellandA. (1998). Evidence for a grammar–specific deficit in children. Current Biology, 8, 1253–1258.
45.
VellutinoF. R., FletcherJ. M., SnowlingM. J., & ScanlonD. M. (2004). Specific reading disability (dyslexia): What have we learned in the past four decades. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 45, 2–40.
46.
WindsorJ., ScottC. M., & StreetC. K. (2000). Verb and noun morphology in the spoken and written language of children with language learning disabilities. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 43, 1322–1336.
47.
WulfeckB., BatesE., Krupa–KwiatkowskiM., & SaltzmanD. (2004). Grammatical sensitivity in children with early focal brain injury and children with specific language impairment. Brain and Language, 88, 215–228.
