2004
DOI: 10.1017/s0142716404001225
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Dative prepositions in children with specific language impairment

Abstract: The purpose of this study was to evaluate children with specific language impairment (SLI) and their proficiency with the use of prepositions. Ten children with SLI were compared to 10 younger, normally developing children matched for mean length of utterance and 10 children matched for age. Each child was asked to produce 24 sentences containing locative (in, on) and dative (to) prepositions. Responses were coded for omission or word selection errors for the target prepositions. It was hypothesized that child… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

3
33
2
3

Year Published

2006
2006
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 24 publications
(41 citation statements)
references
References 15 publications
3
33
2
3
Order By: Relevance
“…The FUNC score was calculated using the number of pronouns, possessives, relatives, conjunctions, prepositions, and determiners that were accurately repeated. Specific difficulties in this area are in line with previous studies, revealing omissions of obligatory relative markers (Schuele & Dykes, 2005), causal connectives (Donaldson et al, 2007), clitic pronouns (Hamann et al, 2003;Jakubowicz, Nash, Rigaut, & Gerard, 1998), and prepositions (Grela, Rashiti, & Soares, 2004). Finally, results showed very frequent verb inflection errors in children with SLI, with no child performing better than À1.22 SD under the expected norms.…”
Section: Optimal Cut-off Levelssupporting
confidence: 89%
“…The FUNC score was calculated using the number of pronouns, possessives, relatives, conjunctions, prepositions, and determiners that were accurately repeated. Specific difficulties in this area are in line with previous studies, revealing omissions of obligatory relative markers (Schuele & Dykes, 2005), causal connectives (Donaldson et al, 2007), clitic pronouns (Hamann et al, 2003;Jakubowicz, Nash, Rigaut, & Gerard, 1998), and prepositions (Grela, Rashiti, & Soares, 2004). Finally, results showed very frequent verb inflection errors in children with SLI, with no child performing better than À1.22 SD under the expected norms.…”
Section: Optimal Cut-off Levelssupporting
confidence: 89%
“…By late preschool age, monolingual and bilingual children have demonstrated higher levels of performance on most prepositions than what was observed in the current dataset (Armon-Lotem, 2014; Armon-Lotem et al , 2008; Grela et al , 2004). This was unexpected, given that the children in this dataset were classified as having typical language skills.…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 46%
“…Locative prepositions such as in and on appear earliest in acquisition around age 27–30 months (Brown, 1973). Under , back , front , beside , and between develop between 3;0 and 5;0 (Brown, 1973; Connor & Chapman, 1985; Grela, Rashati & Soares, 2004; Washington & Naremore, 1978). Locative prepositions are typically followed by the development of the dative prepositions to and for , and verb particle constructions such as dressing up (Tomasello, 1987; Wanska, 1984; Watkins & Rice, 1991).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…These words are articles, prepositions, conjunctions and pronouns. These words have mainly syntactical functions, acting as connecting elements between phrases and have low semantic load on their own (Grela et al, 2004).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%