The ability of language-impaired children to maintain coherence by using discourse connectives has so far been assessed by quantitative measures. This study is a first attempt to scrutinize the quality of connective use in specific language impairment (SLI). The authors investigate whether Russian-speaking children reveal sensitivity to the subtle discourse-organizational distinctions between the quasi-synonymous connectives i ‘and’ and a ‘and/but’ in a narrative task. Study 1 compared connective use by 7-year-olds with and without SLI. The results demonstrate that connective frequencies do not differentiate between the two groups, but language-impaired children more often use connectives in a way that violates causal relations in the story. Study 2 assessed connective production by the same SLI participants 16 months later and also tested understanding of causal chains in a follow-up interview. The error rates remained high. These errors were not due to poor understanding of the story, since the language-impaired children answered the causal questions in the follow-up interview as well as their unimpaired peers did.
Accorti GamannossiB.PintoG. (2014). Theory of mind and language of mind in narratives: Developmental trends from kindergarten to primary school. First Language, 34, 262–272.
2.
AkshoomoffN.StilesJ.WulfeckB. (2006). Perceptual organization and visual immediate memory in children with specific language impairment. Journal of International Neuropsychological Society, 12, 465–474.
3.
AltM.PlanteE. (2006). Factors that influence lexical and semantic fast mapping of young children with specific language impairment. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 49, 941–954.
4.
AltM.PlanteE.CreusereM. (2004). Semantic features in fast-mapping: Performance of preschoolers with specific language impairment versus preschoolers with normal language. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 47, 407−420.
AndersonR.LockowitzA. (2009). How do children ascribe gender to nouns? A study of Spanish-speaking children with and without specific language impairment. Clinical Linguistics and Phonetics, 23, 489–506.
AverinaI. S.ShcheblanovaE. I.ZadorinaE. N. (1994). MEDIS: Metodika ekpres-diagnostiki intellektual’nyx sposobnostej [MEDIS: A method for fast diagnostics of intellectual abilities]. Moscow, Russia: IRO.
9.
BaltaxeC. A.D’AngiolaN. (1992). Cohesion in the discourse interaction of autistic, specifically language-impaired, and normal children. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorder, 22, 1–21.
10.
BedoreL. M.LeonardL. B. (2001). Grammatical morphology deficits in Spanish-speaking children with specific language impairment. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 44, 905–924.
11.
BedoreL. M.LeonardL. B. (2005). Verb inflections and noun phrase morphology in the spontaneous speech of Spanish-speaking children with specific language impairment. Applied Psycholinguistics, 26, 195–225.
12.
Befi-LopesD. M.BentoA. C. P.PerissinotoJ. (2008). Narration of stories by children with specific language impairment. Pró-Fono Revista de Atualizacão Científica, 20, 93–98.
13.
Befi-LopesD. M.SilvaC. P. F.BentoA. C. P. (2010). Semantic representation and naming in children with specific language impairment. Pró-Fono Revista de Atualização Científica, 22, 113–118.
14.
BermanR. (1995). Narrative competence and storytelling performance: How children tell stories in different contexts. Journal of Narrative and Life History, 5, 285–313.
15.
BermanR. A.SlobinD. I. (Eds.). (1994). Relating events in narrative: A crosslinguistic developmental study. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
16.
BishopD. V. M. (1994). Grammatical errors in specific language impairment: Competence or performance limitations?Applied Psycholinguistics, 15, 507–550.
17.
BoudreauD.ChapmanR. S. (2000). The relationship between event representation and linguistic skill in narratives of children and adolescents with Down Syndrome. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 43, 1146–1159.
18.
ChaixY.BarryI.DuvignauK. (2012). Semantic approximation in SLI and normal development. Revue Française de Linguistique Appliquée, 17, 65–76.
19.
ColozzoP.WhitelyC. (2014). Keeping track of characters: Factors affecting referential adequacy in children’s narratives. First Language, 34, 155–177.
20.
De JongJ. (1999). Specific language impairment in Dutch: Inflectional morphology and argument structure (Groningen Dissertations in Linguistics 28). Enschede, the Netherlands: Print Partners Ipskamp.
21.
Evers-VermeulJ.SandersT. (2009). The emergence of Dutch connectives: How cumulative cognitive complexity explains the order of acquisition. Journal of Child Language, 36, 829–854.
22.
FotekovaT. A.AkhutinaT. V. (2002). Diagnostika rečevyx narušenij škol’nikov s ispol’zovaniem nejropsixologičeskix metodov [Diagnosis of speech disorders among school-aged children by means of neuropsychological methods]. Moscow, Russia: Arkti.
23.
GagarinaN. (2008). Anaphoric pronominal reference in Russian and German narratives: Bilingual and monolingual settings. Zeitschrift für Slawistik, 53, 326–338.
24.
GagarinaN. (2012a). Discourse cohesion in the elicited narratives of early Russian-German sequential bilinguals. In BraunmüllerK.GabrielC. (Eds.), Multilingual individuals and multilingual societies (pp. 101–119). Amsterdam, the Netherlands: John Benjamins.
25.
GagarinaN. (2012b). Elicited narratives of monolingual Russian-speaking preschoolers: A comparison of typically developing children and children with language disorders. In SzucsichL.GagarinaN.GorishnevaE.LeszkowiczJ. (Eds.), Linguistische Beiträge zur Slavistik. XIX. JungslavistInnen Treffen in Berlin, 16.-18. Dezember 2010 (Specimina Philologiae Slavicae 171, pp. 71−90). München, Germany: Otto Sagner.
26.
GagarinaN.VoeikovaM.GruzincevS. (2003). New version of morphological coding for the speech production of Russian children. In KostaP.BlaszczakJ.FrazekJ.GeistL.ZygisM. (Eds.), Investigations into formal Slavic linguistics: Contributions of the Fourth European Conference on Formal Description of Slavic Languages (pp. 243–258). Frankfurt am Main, Germany: Peter Lang.
27.
GivónT. (1992). The grammar of referential coherence as mental processing instructions. Linguistics, 30, 5–56.
28.
GonsalezD. O.CáceresM. A.Bento-GazA. C. P.Befi-LopesD. M. (2012). The complexity of narrative interferes in the use of conjunctions in children with specific language impairment. Jornal da Sociedade Brasileira de Fonoaudiologia, 24, 152–156.
29.
GrayS. (2005). Word learning by pre-schoolers with specific language impairment: Effect of phonological or semantic cues. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 48, 1452–1467.
30.
GülzowI.GagarinaN. (2007). Noun phrases, pronouns and anaphoric reference in young children narratives. In BittnerD.GagarinaN. (Eds.), Intersentential pronominal reference in child and adult language (ZAS Papers in Linguistics, pp. 203–223). Berlin, Germany: ZAS.
31.
HallidayM. A. K.HasanR. (1976). Cohesion in English. London, UK: Longman.
32.
HickmannM. (2003). Children’s discourse: Person, space, and time across languages. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
33.
JacobsonP.LivertD. (2010). English past tense use as a clinical marker in older bilingual children with language impairment. Clinical Linguistics and Phonetics, 24, 101–121.
34.
JasinskajaE.ZeevatH. (2008). Explaining additive, adversative and contrast marking in Russian and English. Revue de Sémantique et Pragmatique, 24, 65–91.
35.
KnjazevJ. P. (2007). Ontogenez značenij obuslovlennosti [Ontogeny of causal meanings]. In CejtlinS. N. (Ed.), Semantičeskie kategorii v detskoj reči [Semantic categories in child speech] (pp. 339–358). St. Petersburg, Russia: Nestor-Istoriâ.
36.
KreidlinG. E.PaduchevaE. V. (1974). Značenie i sintaksičeskie svojstva soûza A [Meaning and syntactic properties of the conjunction a]. Naučno-Tehničeskaâ Informaciâ, 2, 31–37.
37.
LeonardL. B. (1998). Children with specific language impairment. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
38.
LeonardL. B.DeevyP. (2004). Lexical deficits in specific language impairment. In VerhoevenL.Van BalkomH. (Eds.), Classification of developmental language disorders: Theoretical issues and clinical implications (pp. 209–233). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
39.
LeonardL. B.DromiE. (1994). The use of Hebrew verb morphology by children with specific language impairment and children developing language normally. First Language, 14, 283–304.
40.
LeonardL. B.SalamehE. -K.HanssonK. (2001). Noun-phrase morphology in Swedish-speaking children with specific language impairment. Applied Psycholinguistics, 22, 619–639.
41.
LilesB. Z. (1985a). Cohesion in the narratives of normal and language disordered children. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 28, 123–133.
42.
LilesB. Z. (1985b). Production and comprehension of narrative discourse in normal and language disordered children. Journal of Communication Disorders, 18, 409–427.
43.
LilesB. Z. (1987). Episode organization and cohesive conjunctives in narratives of children with and without language disorder. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 30, 185–196.
44.
LilesB. Z.DuffyR. J.MerrittD. D.PurcellS. L. (1995). Measurement of narrative discourse ability in children with language disorders. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 38, 415–425.
45.
MacWhinneyB. (2000). The CHILDES project: Tools for analyzing talk. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
46.
MakW.TribushininaE.AndreiushinaE. (2013). Semantics of connectives guides referential expectations in discourse: An eye-tracking study of Dutch and Russian. Discourse Processes, 50, 1–20.
47.
MäkinenL.LoukusaS.NieminenL.LeinonenE.KunnariS. (2014). The development of narrative productivity, syntactic complexity, referential cohesion and event content in four- to eight-year-old Finnish children. First Language, 34, 24–42.
48.
MarshallC. R.Van der LelyH. K. J. (2007). Derivational morphology in children with Grammatical-Specific Language Impairment. Clinical Linguistics and Phonetics, 21, 71–91.
49.
McGregorK. K. (1997). The nature of word-finding errors of preschoolers with and without word-finding deficits. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 40, 1232–1244.
50.
McGregorK. K.AppelA. (2002). On the relation between mental representation and naming in a child with specific language impairment. Clinical Linguistics and Phonetics, 16(1), 1–20.
51.
MirandaA. E.McCabeA.BlissL. S. (1998). Jumping around and leaving things out: A profile of the narrative abilities of children with specific language impairment. Applied Psycholinguistics, 19, 647–656.
52.
NashM.DonaldsonM. L. (2005). Word learning in children with vocabulary deficits. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 48, 439–458.
53.
NorburyC. F.GemmelT.PaulR. (2014). Pragmatic abilities in narrative production: A cross-disorder comparison. Journal of Child Language, 41, 485–510
54.
OrgassaA. (2009). Specific language impairment in a bilingual context: The acquisition of Dutch inflection by Turkish-Dutch learners. Utrecht, the Netherlands: LOT.
55.
PetersonC.McCabeA. (1983). Developmental psycholinguistics: Three ways of looking at a child’s narrative. New York, NY: Plenum Press.
56.
PetersonC.McCabeA. (1987). The connective ‘and’: Do older children use it less as they learn other connectives?Journal of Child Language, 14, 375–382.
57.
PizzioliF.SchelstraeteM. -A. (2013). Real-time sentence processing in children with specific language impairment: The contribution of lexicosemantic, syntactic, and world-knowledge information. Applied Psycholinguistics, 34, 181–210.
58.
PoliteE. J. (2011). The contribution of part-word phonological factors to the production of regular noun plural –s by children with and without specific language impairment. First Language, 31, 425–441.
59.
PoliteE. J.LeonardL. B. (2006). Finite verb morphology and phonological length in the speech of children with specific language impairment. Clinical Linguistics and Phonetics, 20, 751–760.
60.
PurcellS. L.LilesB. Z. (1992). Cohesion repairs in the narratives of normal-language and language-disordered school-age children. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 35, 354–362.
61.
RavidD.LevieR.Avivi Ben-ZviG. (2003). The role of language typology in linguistic development: Implications for the study of language disorders. In LevyY.SchaefferJ. (Eds.), Language competence across populations: Toward a definition of SLI (pp. 183−207). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
62.
RiceM. L.BodeJ. V. (1993). GAPS in the verb lexicons of children with specific language impairment. First Language, 13, 113–131.
63.
RobertsS. S.LeonardL. B. (1997). Grammatical deficits in German and English: A crosslinguistic study of children with specific language impairment. First Language, 17, 131–150.
64.
SandersT.SpoorenW. (2007). Discourse and text structure. In GeeraertsD.CuykensH. (Eds.), Handbook of cognitive linguistics (pp. 916–941). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
65.
SandersT. J.Pander MaatH. (2006). Cohesion and coherence. In BrownK. (Ed.), Encyclopedia of language and linguistics (Vol. 2, pp. 591−595). Amsterdam, the Netherlands: Elsevier.
66.
SandersT. J.SpoorenW. P. M.NoordmanL. G. (1992). Toward a taxonomy of coherence relations. Discourse Processes, 15, 1–35.
67.
ShengL.McGregorK. K. (2010). Lexical-semantic organization in children with specific language impairment. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 53, 146–159.
68.
SpoorenW.SandersT. (2008). The acquisition order of coherence relations: On cognitive complexity in discourse. Journal of Pragmatics, 40, 2003–2026.
69.
StrongC. J.ShaverJ. P. (1991). Stability of cohesion in the spoken narratives of language-impaired and normally-developing school-aged children. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 34, 95–111.
70.
TribushininaE.DubinkinaE. (2012). Adjective production by Russian-speaking children with specific language impairment. Clinical Linguistics and Phonetics, 26, 554–571.
71.
TribushininaE.GillisS.De MaeyerS. (2013). Infrequent word classes in the speech of two- to seven-year-old children with cochlear implants and their normally hearing peers: A longitudinal study of adjective use. Journal of Pediatric Otorhinolaryngology, 77, 356–361.
72.
TribushininaE.ValchevaE.GagarinaN. (in press) Acquisition of additive connectives by Russian-German bilinguals: A usage-based approach. In Evers-VermeulJ.RasierL.TribushininaE. (Eds.), Usage-based approaches to language acquisition and language teaching. Berlin, Germany: Mouton.
73.
TsaiW.ChangC. (2008). ‘But I first. and then he kept picking’: Narrative skill in Mandarin-speaking children with language impairment. Narrative Inquiry, 18, 349–377.
74.
Van VeenR.Evers-VermeulJ.SandersT.Van den BerghH. (2009). Parental input and connective acquisition: A growth-curve analysis. First Language, 29, 266–288.
