Leonard Laurence B, Camarata Stephen M, Pawlowska Monika, Brown Barbara, Camarata Mary N
Speech, Language, and Hearing Sciences, Heavilon Hall, 500 Oval Drive, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN 47907, USA.
J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2008 Feb;51(1):120-5. doi: 10.1044/1092-4388(2008/008).
The goals of this investigation were to determine whether gains in the use of tense and agreement morphemes by children with specific language impairment (SLI) during a 96-session intervention period would still be evident 1 month following treatment and whether these treatment effects would be greater than those seen in children with SLI receiving otherwise similar treatment that did not emphasize tense and agreement morphemes.
Thirty-three children with SLI (age 3;0 to 4;8 [years;months]) served as participants. The children participated in 1 of 3 treatment conditions. The conditions emphasized 3rd person singular -s, auxiliary is/are/was, or general language stimulation. The children's use of 3rd person singular -s, auxiliary is/are/was, and past tense -ed was assessed through probes administered throughout treatment and 1 month later.
The children in the conditions that targeted 3rd person singular -s and auxiliary is/are/was showed significant gains on their respective target morphemes, and these gains were maintained 1 month later. These gains were significantly greater than the gains seen on the same morphemes by the children receiving general language stimulation. For most children, use of the target morphemes did not approach mastery levels by the end of the study.
Intervention that emphasizes morphemes that mark both tense and agreement can be relatively successful, with gains still apparent at least 1 month following intervention.
本调查的目的是确定患有特定语言障碍(SLI)的儿童在为期96节的干预期内,其在时态和一致语素使用方面的进步在治疗后1个月是否仍然明显,以及这些治疗效果是否会比接受其他类似但未强调时态和一致语素治疗的SLI儿童更显著。
33名患有SLI的儿童(年龄3岁0个月至4岁8个月)作为参与者。这些儿童参与了3种治疗条件中的一种。这些条件分别强调第三人称单数-s、助动词is/are/was或一般语言刺激。通过在整个治疗过程及1个月后进行的探测,评估儿童对第三人称单数-s、助动词is/are/was和过去式-ed的使用情况。
针对第三人称单数-s和助动词is/are/was的治疗条件下的儿童,在各自的目标语素上有显著进步,且这些进步在1个月后得以保持。这些进步明显大于接受一般语言刺激的儿童在相同语素上的进步。对于大多数儿童而言,在研究结束时目标语素的使用未达到掌握水平。
强调标记时态和一致的语素的干预可能相对成功,干预后至少1个月仍能明显看到进步。