Grammatical morphemes have little inherent meaning but provide the syntactic cues necessary to structure language (the, -ing). Twenty-four good beginning readers and 24 poor readers from 12 suburban schools were tested on three measures of grammatical morpheme use: sentence recall, speech production, and language comprehension. The two groups did not differ in sentence recall. Good readers produced more correct grammatical morphemes than poor readers, but the difference disappeared when IQ effects were partialized. More grammatical morphemes were comprehended by good readers than poor readers, even when IQ was controlled.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Brittain, M.M., Inflectional performance and early reading achievement. Reading Research Quarterly, 1970, 6, No. 1, 34-48.
2.
Brown, R., A First Language. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1973.
3.
Fitzgerald, E., Straight Language for the Deaf. Washington, D.C. : The Volta Bureau, 1966.
4.
Leonard, L., What is deviant language?Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders , 1972, 37, 264-279.
5.
Menyuk, P., Generative grammar and studying the language of the exceptional child . Paper presented at the 44th Annual Convention of the Council of Exceptional Children, Toronto, April 1966.
6.
Menyuk, P., Looney, P., An elaboration of relationship among components of the grammar in language disorder. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research , 1972, 15, 395-409.
7.
Newfield, M., Schlanger, B., The acquisition of English morphology by normal and educable mentally retarded children. Journal of Speech and Research, 1968, 11, 693-706.
8.
Richie, D.J., Aten, J.L., Auditory retention of nonverbal and verbal sequential stimuli in children with reading disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities , 1976, 9, 312-318.
9.
Semel, E., Wiig, E., Comprehension of syntactic structures and critical verbal elements by children with learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities , 1975, 8, 53-58.
10.
Steiner, R., Wiener, M., Cromer, W., Comprehension and syntactic responses in good and poor readers. Journal of Educational Psychology, 1971, 62, 506-513.
11.
Weinstein, R., Rabinovitch, M.S., Sentence structure and retention in good and poor readers. Journal of Educational Psychology, 1971, 62, 25-30.
