Uncommon Understanding: Development and Disorders of Language Comprehension in Children. By D. V. M. Bishop (Hove, UK: Psychology Press, 1997). Pp. 277. Pbk, £16.50. ISBN 0-86377-260-9.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
CaramazzaA. (1984). The logic of neuropsychological research and the problem of patient classification in aphasia. Brain and Language, 21, 9–20.
2.
CaramazzaA. (1986). On drawing inferences about the structure of normal cognitive systems from the analysis of patterns of impaired performance: the case for single-patient studies. Brain and Cognition, 5, 41–66.
3.
ChomskyN. (1976). Reflections on Language (London: Temple Smith).
4.
ChomskyN. (1981). Lectures on Government and Binding (Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Foris).
5.
ClahsenH. (1989). The grammatical characterization of developmental dysphasia. Linguistics, 27, 897–920.
6.
CragoM. B.AllenS. E. M. (1996). Building the case for impairment in linguistic representation. in RiceM. L. (ed.) Toward a Genetics of Language (Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum), 261–90.
7.
EllisA. W. (1987). Intimations of modularity, or the modelarity of mind: doing cognitive neuropsychology without syndromes. in ColtheartM.SartoriG.JobR. (eds), The Cognitive Neuropsychology of Language (Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum), 397–408.
8.
FodorJ. A. (1983). The Modularity of Mind (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press).
9.
FriedmannN.GrodzinskyY. (1997). Tense and agreement in agrammatic production: pruning the syntactic tree. Brain and Language, 56, 397–425.
10.
GoadH.RabellatiC. (1994). Pluralization in familial language impairment. in MatthewsJ. (ed.). Linguistic Aspects of Familial Language Impairment. McGill Working Papers in Linguistics, 10, 24–40.
11.
GopnikM. (1990). Feature-blind grammar and dysphasia. Nature, 344, 715.
12.
GopnikM. (1994). Impairments of syntactic tense in a familial language disorder. in MatthewsJ. (ed.). Linguistic Aspects of Familial Language Impairment. McGill Working Papers in Linguistics, 10, 67–80.
13.
GrodzinskyY. (1986). Cognitive deficits, their proper description and its theoretical relevance. Brain and Language, 27, 178–91.
14.
GrodzinskyY. (1995). Trace deletion. Theta-roles and cognitive strategies. Brain and Language, 51, 469–97.
15.
HaarmannH. J.KolkH. H. J. (1994). On-line sensitivity to subject-verb agreement violations in Broca's aphasics: the role of syntactic complexity and time. Brain and Language, 46, 493–516.
16.
HagiwaraH. (1993). The breakdown of Japanese passives and theta-role assignment principle by Broca's aphasics. Brain and Language45, 318–39.
17.
HagiwaraH. (1995). The breakdown of functional categories and the economy of derivation. Brain and Language, 50, 92–116.
18.
Karmiloff-SmithA. (1992). Beyond Modularity: a Developmental Perspective on Cognitive Science (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press).
19.
Karmiloff-SmithA.GrantJ.BerthoudI.DaviesM.HowlinP.UdwinO. (1997). Language and Williams syndrome: how intact is ‘intact’?Child Development, 68, 246–62.
20.
KeglJ. (1995). Levels of representation and units of access relevant to agrammatism. Brain and Language, 50, 151–200.
21.
KolkH. (1995). A time-based approach to agrammatic production. Brain and Language, 50, 282–303.
22.
LeonardL. B. (1998). Language learnability and specific language impairment in children. Applied Psycholinguistics, 10, 179–202.
23.
LeonardL. B. (1996). Characterizing specific language impairment: a crosslinguistic perspective. in RiceM. L. (ed.). Toward a Genetics of Language (Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum), 243–56.
24.
LevyY. (1996). Modularity of language reconsidered. Brain and Language, 55, 240–63.
25.
LevyY.Karmiloff-SmithA. (in preparation). Morphology in Hebrew speaking children with Williams Syndrome.
26.
LevyY.TennebaumA.OrnoyA. (submitted). Spontaneous speech in children with specific neurological syndromes.
27.
LinbargerM. C. (1995). Agrammatism as evidence about grammar. Brain and Language, 50, 52–91.
28.
Marseln-WilsonW.TylerL. K. (1987). Against modularity. in GarfieldJ. L. (ed.), Modularity in Knowledge Representation and Natural-language Understanding (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press).
29.
McCloskeyM.CaramazzaA. (1988). Theory and methodology in cognitive neuropsychology: a response to our critics. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 5, 583–623.
30.
MervisC. B.MorrisC. A.BertrandJ.RobinsonB. F.(In press). Williams syndrome: findings from an integrated program of research. In Tager-FlusberH. (ed.). Neurodevelopmental Disorders: Contribution for a New Framework from the Cognitive Neurosciences (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press).
31.
PlautD. C. (1996). Relearning after damage to connectionist networks: toward a theory of rehabilitation. Brain and Language, 52, 25–82.
32.
PlautD. C.ShalliceT. (1994). Connectionist Modelling in Cognitive Neuropsychology: a Case Study (Hove, UK: Lawrence Erlbaum).
33.
RadfordA. (1990). Syntactic Theory and the Acquisition of English Syntax: the Nature of Early Child Grammars of English (Oxford, UK: Basil Blackwell).
34.
RapinI.AllenD. (1987). Developmental dysphasia and autism in pre-school children: characteristics and subtypes. Proceedings of the first international symposium on specific speech and language disorders in children (London: Association for All Speech Impaired Children).
35.
SaddyJ. D. (1995). Variables and events in the syntax of agrammatic speech. Brain and Language, 50, 135–50.
36.
SeidenbergM. S. (1992). Dyslexia in a computational model of word recognition in reading. in GoughP. B.EhriL. C. (eds), Reading Acquisition (Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum), 243–73.
37.
SeidenbergM. S. (1993). Connectionist models and cognitive theory. Psychological Science, 4, 228–35.
38.
van der LelyH. K. J. (1994). Canonical linking rules: forward vs. reverse linking in normally developing and specifically impaired children. Cognition, 51, 29–72.
39.
van der LelyH. K. J. (1996) Specifically language impaired and normally developing children: verbal passive vs. adjectival passive sentence interpretation. Lingua, 98, 243–72.
40.
van der LelyH. K. J.StollwerckL. (1997). Binding theory and grammatical specific language impairment in children. Cognition, 62, 245–90.
