Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-l7hp2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T06:51:48.690Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Exploring the impact of higher level linguistic representations on nonword repetition performance

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 September 2006

Heather K. J. van der Lely  and
Nichola Gallon
Heather K. J. van der Lely
Affiliation:
University College London
Nichola Gallon
Affiliation:
University College London
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Gathercole's (2006) comprehensive and interesting Keynote Article on the nature of the relations between nonword repetition and word learning highlights the complex number of interacting factors that affect this relation through development. In this Commentary we focus on the impact of higher level cognition, particularly linguistic representations on lower level functions such as attention and processing, as well as higher level functions such as memory. In addition, we note the importance of distinguishing children with specific language impairment (SLI) who do and do not have phonological deficit when testing for memory impairments. We argue that further detailed investigations are warranted at the linguistic levels of cognitive processing alongside memory tasks that tap different components of language and nonlinguistic memory. Such studies would help tease apart the complex, and probably bidirectional relations between attention, memory, and linguistic representations. Moreover, we propose that this investigative strategy crucially needs to take a longitudinal developmental perspective if we are to understand the developmental trajectory.

Type
Commentaries
Information
Applied Psycholinguistics , Volume 27 , Issue 4 , October 2006 , pp. 591 - 594
Copyright
© 2006 Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Archibald L., & Gathercole S. E. 2006. What's so special about nonword repetition in specific language impairment. Manuscript submitted for publication.
Gallon N., Harris J., & van der Lely H. K. J. 2006. Non-word repetition: An investigation of phonological complexity in children with grammatical SLI. Manuscript submitted for publication.
Gathercole S. E. 2006. Nonword repetition and word learning: The nature of the relationship [Keynote]. Applied Psycholinguistics, 27, 513– 543.Google Scholar
Harris J. 1994. English sound structure. Oxford: Blackwell.
Marshall C. R., Ebbels S., Harris J., & van der Lely H. K. J. 2002. Investigating the impact of prosodic complexity on the speech of children with specific language impairment. University College London Working Papers in Linguistics, 14, 43– 68.Google Scholar
Näätänen R., Lehtokoski A., Lennes M., Cheour M., Huotilainen M., Iivonen A. et al., 1997. Language-specific phoneme representations revealed by electric and magnetic brain responses. Nature, 385, 432– 434.Google Scholar
Pulvermuller F., Shtyrov Y., Kujala T., & Näätänen R. 2004. Word-specific cortical activity as revealed by the mismatch negativity. Psychophysiology, 41, 106– 112.Google Scholar
van der Lely H. K. J. 2005. Domain-specific cognitive systems: Insight from grammatical specific language impairment. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 9, 53– 59.Google Scholar
van der Lely H. K. J., & Harris J. 1999. The Test of Phonological Structure (TOPhS). Unpublished manuscript, University College London, Centre for Developmental Language Disorders and Cognitive Neuroscience.
van der Lely H. K. J., & Howard D. 1993. Specifically language impaired children: Linguistic impairment or short term memory deficit? Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 37, 1193– 1207.Google Scholar