Management of cohesion in the written productions of monolingual Persian-speaking students with specific language disorder

authors:

avatar Maryam Taffaroji-Yeganeh , * , avatar Elahe Kamri

Koomesh: Vol.24, issue 5; 620-629
published online: December 02, 2022
article type: Research Article
received: April 08, 2022
accepted: July 02, 2022

how to cite: Taffaroji-Yeganeh M, Kamri E. Management of cohesion in the written productions of monolingual Persian-speaking students with specific language disorder. koomesh. 2022;24(5):e152773. 

Abstract

Introduction: Students with specific language impairment (SLI) have many difficulties in producing coherent written texts The goal of this study was to investigate and compare the management of cohesion in the written production of individuals with SLI and their normal peers in terms of density and diversity of connectives, the density of punctuation marks (periods and commas) and density and diversity of anaphors. Materials and Methods: 24 students with SLI as an experimental group and 24 normal developing students as a control group was asked to write stories about contentious situations situated at school. Then, their written productions were transcribed and analyzed linguistically based on the density and the diversity of three cohesive devices: connectives, punctuation marks, and anaphors. Results: The findings of the study showed that in the SLI group, the density (P=0.005), and the diversity of (P=0.005), and in the normally developing group the diversity of connectives (P=0.02) have significantly increased with increasing age.  The density (P=0.03) of the connectives used by the SLI group and their diversity (P=0.02) was significantly lower than the density and the diversity of those used by the normal developing students. In the normally developing group, the density of comma increased significantly with increasing age (P=0.001). The density of commas used by normal developing students was significantly higher than the density of that in SLI students. The density of anaphors was significantly increased with increasing age in the SLI group (P=0.001). In contrast, the diversity of anaphors significantly increased with increasing age (P=0.02) in the normally developing group. The differences between the SLI group and the normal developing students were significant only in children (P=0.01). Conclusion: The results of the study showed that children with SLI have difficulties in the management of cohesion in the written texts.

References

  • 1.

    Leonard LB. Children with specific language impairment (2nd ed.). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press; 2014.##https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/9152.001.0001.

  • 2.

    Apotheloz D. Aspects cognitifs des procdures de la cohsion textuelle [Cognitive aspects of textual cohesion]. Duisburg: L.A.U.D; 1989.

  • 3.

    Favart M, Passerault JM. Aspects textuels du fonctionnement et du dveloppement des connecteurs: Approche en production [Textual aspects of functioning and development of connectives: Approach in language production]. L Anne Psycho 1999; 99: 149-173.##https://doi.org/10.3406/psy.1999.28552.

  • 4.

    Passerault JM. La ponctuation: Recherches en psychologie du langage [Punctuation: Research in Psychology of language]. Pratiques 1991; 70: 5-106.##https://doi.org/10.3406/prati.1991.1638.

  • 5.

    Reichler-Beguelin MJ. Rutter, Anaphore, cataphore et mmoire discursive [Anaphor: Cataphor and discursive memory]. Pratiques 1988; 57: 15-43.##https://doi.org/10.3406/prati.1988.1470.

  • 6.

    Favart M, Passerault JM. Evolution du rle fonctionnel des connecteurs et de la planification du rcit crit chez les enfants de 7 11 ans [Changes in functional role of connectives and of planning in children from 7 to 11]. Rev De Phon Appl 199; 198-212 [115-116-117].

  • 7.

    Favart M, Passerault JM. Aspects fonctionnels du point et de la virgule dans l'volution de la planification du rcit crit [Functional aspects of full stops and commas in changes of planning of written narratives]. Enf 2000; 2: 187-205.##https://doi.org/10.3406/enfan.2000.3176.

  • 8.

    Fayol M. On acquiring punctuation: A study of written French. In J. Costermans, & M. Fayol (Eds.), Processing inter clausal relationships: Studies in the production and comprehension of Text. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; 1997.

  • 9.

    Schneuwly B. Le langage crit chez l'enfant [The written language of children]. Paris: Delachaux & Niestl 1988.

  • 10.

    Decol-Mercier N, Akinci MA. Le fonctionnement des anaphores dans les textes oraux et crits en franc ais d'enfants bilingues et monolingues [The functioning of anaphors in oral and written texts of monolingual and bilingual children]. In 2me Congrs Mondial de Linguistique Franc aise. Paris: EDP Sciences 2010; 102.##https://doi.org/10.1051/cmlf/2010090.

  • 11.

    Lambert M. Cohsion et connexit dans des rcits d'enfants et d'apprenants polonophones du franc ais [Cohesion and convexity in the written narratives of children and of Polish learners of French]. Marges Ling 2003; 5: 106-121.

  • 12.

    Dockrell JE, Lindsay G, Connelly V, Mackie C. Constraints in the production of written texts in children with specific language impairments. Except Child 2007; 73: 147-164.##https://doi.org/10.1177/001440290707300202.

  • 13.

    Dockrell JE, Lindsay G. Meeting the needs of children with specific speech and language difficulties. Eur J Special Needs Educ 2000; 15: 24-41.##https://doi.org/10.1080/088562500361682.

  • 14.

    Hilaire-Debove G, Roch D. La conduite de rcit chez l'enfant dysphasique [Narratives in children with dysphasia]. Les Entretiens De Bichat 2012; 179-195.

  • 15.

    Bernard-Barrot C, Ghard S. Le rcit oral: Comparaison d'enfants prsentant une dysphasie et d'enfants sans troubles du langage oral. Mesureslinguistiques et narratives [Oral narratives: Comparison of children with dysphasia and of children without language difficulties. Linguistic and narrative measures]. Lyon France: Mmoire d'orthophonie; 2003.

  • 16.

    Kamari E. Investigation of cohesion in the oral narratives of normal monolingual persian-speaking children. J Res Linguis 2017; 8: 49-68. (Persian).

  • 17.

    Mohammadi M, Sadollahi A, Ghorbani R. Prevalence of specific language impairment in 5 year-old children of an Iranian. Koomesh 2014; 15: 182-190. (Persian).

  • 18.

    Favarta M, Potockia Brocb AL, Qumarta P, Bernicota J, Olivea Th. The management of cohesion in written narratives in students with specic language impairment: Differences between childhood and adolescence. Res Dev Disabil 2016; 59: 318-327.

  • 19.

    Abedi M, Sadeghi A, Rabiee M. Wechsler intelligence scale for children 4 / Translation, adaptation and standardization. Nevesht Public 2009; 1-4. (Persian).

  • 20.

    Hasanzadeh S, Minaie A. Test of language development (TOLD P: 3) compliance andstandardization in Farsi. Tehran Instit Educ Studi 2010; 92-93. (Persian).

  • 21.

    Dockrell JE, Lindsay G, Connelly V. The impact of specific language impairments on adolescents' written texts. Except Chil 2009; 75: 427-446.##https://doi.org/10.1177/001440290907500403.

  • 22.

    Katsos N, Roqueta CA, Clemente Estevan RA, Cummins C. Are children with specific language impairment competent with the pragmatics and logic of quantification? Cognition 2011; 19: 43-57.

  • 23.

    Broc L, Bernicot J, Olive T, Favart M, Qumart P, Reilly J, et al. Lexical spelling in children and adolescents with Specific Language Impairment: Variations in different writing situations. Res in Dev Dis 2013; 34: 3253-3266.

  • 24.

    McCutchen D. Domain knowledge and linguistic knowledge in the development of writing ability. J Mem Language 1986; 25: 431-444.##https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-596X(86)90036-7.