Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dzt6s Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T20:38:14.694Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

The comprehension of sentences derived by syntactic movement in Palestinian Arabic speakers with hearing impairment

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 January 2013

NAAMA FRIEDMANN*
Affiliation:
Tel Aviv University
MANAR HADDAD-HANNA
Affiliation:
Tel Aviv University
*
ADDRESS FOR CORRESPONDENCE: Naama Friedmann, Language and Brain Lab, School of Education and Sagol School of Neuroscience, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv 69978, Israel. E-mail: [email protected]

Abstract

Sentence and text comprehension is known to be difficult for orally trained individuals with hearing impairment. This study explored the comprehension of several syntactic structures that are especially difficult for these individuals and may lead them to experience considerable comprehension difficulties. Ten structures derived by wh-movement were tested, some of them for the first time in hearing impairment research: five types of relative clauses, three types of wh-questions, and two types of topicalized structures, compared with two types of simple sentences. Experiment 1 tested subject and object relatives using a sentence–picture matching task. Experiment 2 tested subject questions and object questions using a picture selection task. Experiment 3 tested subject and object relatives using comprehension questions. Experiment 4 tested subject and object relatives and topicalized sentences using a reading and paraphrasing task. The participants were 24 orally trained Palestinian Arabic speaking individuals, 21 of them had mild to profound binaural hearing loss, and 3 had monaural hearing loss. The participants with binaural hearing impairment, who were not sufficiently exposed to language input during the first year of life, failed to understand object relatives, object questions, and topicalization in subject–verb and verb–subject orders in both Palestinian Arabic and Standard Arabic. In some tasks, they even had difficulty understanding subject relatives and subject questions. The monaurally hearing impaired performed similarly to the controls on all tasks.

Type
Articles
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2013 

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

REFERENCES

Agbayani, B. (2000). Wh-subjects in English and the vacuous movement hypothesis. Linguistic Inquiry, 31, 703712.Google Scholar
Aoun, J., & Li, Y.-h. A. (2003). Essays on the representational and derivational nature of grammar: The diversity of wh-constructions (Linguistic Inquiry Monograph 40). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Avrutin, S. (2000). Comprehension of Wh-questions by children and Broca's aphasics. In Grodzinsky, Y., Shapiro, L. P., & Swinney, D. A. (Eds.), Language and the brain: Representation and processing (pp. 295312). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Belletti, A., Friedmann, N., Brunato, D., & Rizzi, L. (2012). Does gender make a difference? Comparing the effect of gender on children's comprehension of relative clauses in Hebrew and Italian. Lingua, 122, 10531069.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Benmamoun, E. (1997). Licensing of negative polarity items in Moroccan Arabic. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 15, 263287.Google Scholar
Berent, G. P. (1988). An assessment of syntactic capabilities. In Strong, M. (Ed.), Language learning and deafness (pp. 133161). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Berent, G. P. (1996). Learnability constraints on deaf learners’ acquisition of English wh-questions. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 39, 625643.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Calderon, R., & Naidu, S. (2000). Further support for the benefits of early identification and intervention for children with hearing loss. Volta Review, 100, 5384.Google Scholar
Chomsky, N. (1981). Lectures on government and binding. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
Chomsky, N. (1986). Barriers. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Chomsky, N. (1995). The minimalist program. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Chomsky, N., & Lasnik, H. (1993). The theory of principles and parameters. In Jacobs, J., von Stechow, A., Sternefeld, W., & Vennemann, T. (Eds.), Syntax: An international handbook of contemporary research (pp. 506569). Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clements, C. N., McCloskey, J., Maling, J., & Zaenen, A. (1983). String-vacuous rule application. Linguistic Inquiry, 14, 118.Google Scholar
Correa, L. M. S. (1995). An alternative assessment of children's comprehension of relative clauses. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 24, 183203.Google Scholar
Crawford, J. R., & Howell, D. C. (1998). Comparing an individual's test score against norms derived from small samples. Clinical Neuropsychologist, 12, 482486.Google Scholar
Dahlgren, S.-O. (2010). Word order. In Lutz, E. & de Jong, R. (Eds.), Encyclopedia of Arabic language and linguistics. Retrieved from http://www.brillonline.nl/subscriber/entry?entry=eall_COM-0380Google Scholar
de Villiers, P. A. (1988). Assessing English syntax in hearing-impaired children: Elicited production in pragmatically motivated situations. Journal of the Academy of Rehabilitative Audiology, 21 (Suppl.), 4171.Google Scholar
de Villiers, J., de Villiers, P., & Hoban, E. (1994). The central problem of functional categories in English syntax of oral deaf children. In Tager-Flusberg, H. (Ed.), Constraints on language acquisition: Studies of atypical children (pp. 947). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
de Vincenzi, M. (1991). Syntactic parsing strategies in Italian: The minimal chain principle. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
de Vincenzi, M., Arduino, L. S., Ciccarelli, L., & Job, R. (1999). Parsing strategies in children comprehension of interrogative sentences. In Bagnara, S. (Ed.), Proceedings of the European Conference on Cognitive Science (pp. 301308). Rome: Istituto di Psicologia del CNR.Google Scholar
Delage, H., & Tuller, L. (2007). Language development and mild-to-moderate hearing loss: Does language normalize with age? Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 50, 13001313.Google Scholar
Fassi-Fehri, A. (1993). Issues in the structure of Arabic clauses and words. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
Ferguson, C. A. (1959). Diglossia. Word, 14, 4756.Google Scholar
Friedmann, N. (2002). Question production in agrammatism: The tree pruning hypothesis. Brain and Language, 80, 160187.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Friedmann, N., Aram, D., & Novogrodsky, R. (2011). Definitions as a window to the acquisition of relative clauses. Applied Psycholinguistics, 32, 687710.Google Scholar
Friedmann, N., Belletti, A., & Rizzi, L. (2009). Relativized relatives: Types of intervention in the acquisition of A-bar dependencies. Lingua, 119, 6788.Google Scholar
Friedmann, N., & Costa, J. (2011a). Acquisition of SV and VS order in Hebrew, European Portuguese, Palestinian Arabic, and Spanish. Language Acquisition, 18, 138.Google Scholar
Friedmann, N., & Costa, J. (2011b). Last resort and no resort: Resumptive pronouns in Hebrew and Palestinian Arabic hearing impairment. In Rouveret, A. (Ed.), Resumptive pronouns at the interfaces (Language Faculty and Beyond Series, pp. 223239). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Friedmann, N., & Novogrodsky, R. (2002). BAMBI: Battery for Assessment of Syntactic Abilities in Children [in Hebrew]. Tel Aviv: Tel Aviv University.Google Scholar
Friedmann, N., & Novogrodsky, R. (2004). The acquisition of relative clause comprehension in Hebrew: A study of SLI and normal development. Journal of Child Language, 31, 661681.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Friedmann, N., & Novogrodsky, R. (2007). Is the movement deficit in syntactic SLI related to traces or to thematic role transfer? Brain and Language, 101, 5063.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Friedmann, N., & Novogrodsky, R. (2011). Which questions are most difficult to understand? The comprehension of Wh questions in three subtypes of SLI. Lingua, 120, 367382.Google Scholar
Friedmann, N., Novogrodsky, R., Szterman, R., & Preminger, O. (2008). Resumptive pronouns as last resort when movement is impaired: Relative clauses in hearing impairment. In Armon-Lotem, S., Danon, G., & Rothstein, S. (Eds.), Linguistics today series: Vol. 134. Generative approaches to Hebrew linguistics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Friedmann, N., & Shapiro, L. P. (2003). Agrammatic comprehension of simple active sentences with moved constituents: Hebrew OSV and OVS structures. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 46, 288297.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Friedmann, N., & Szterman, R. (2006). Syntactic movement in orally-trained children with hearing impairment. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 11, 5675.Google Scholar
Friedmann, N., & Szterman, R. (2011). The comprehension and production of wh questions in children with hearing impairment. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 16, 212235.Google Scholar
Geers, A. E., & Moog, J. S. (1978). Syntactic maturity of spontaneous speech and elicited imitation of hearing-impaired children. Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, 43, 380391.Google Scholar
Geis, J. E. (1973). Creative errors in the writing of deaf children. Ohio State University Working Papers in Linguistics, 15, 5566.Google Scholar
Grodzinsky, Y. (2000). The neurology of syntax: Language use without Broca's area. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 23, 171.Google Scholar
Günzberg-Kerbel, N., Shvimer, L., & Friedmann, N. (2008). “Take the hen that the cow kissed the hen”: The acquisition of comprehension and production of various relative clauses in Hebrew [in Hebrew]. Language and Brain, 7, 2343.Google Scholar
Haddad-Hanna, M. (2008). The comprehension and production of sentences with and without syntactic movement in Arabic speakers with hearing impairment. Unpublished master's thesis, Tel Aviv University.Google Scholar
Haddad-Hanna, M., & Friedmann, N. (in press). On the comprehension and production of sentences with syntactic movement [in Hebrew]. In Most, T. & Ringwald, D. (Eds.), Topics in rehabilitation and education of children with hearing impairment. Tel Aviv: Mofet.Google Scholar
Hickok, G., & Avrutin, S. (1996). Comprehension of Wh-question in two Broca's aphasics. Brain and Language, 52, 314327.Google Scholar
Hulsey, S., & Sauerland, U. (2006). Sorting out relative clauses. Natural Language Semantics, 14, 111137.Google Scholar
Kayne, R. (1994). The antisymmetry of syntax. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Kidd, E., & Bavin, E. L. (2002). English-speaking children's understanding of relative clauses: Evidence for universal-cognitive and language-specific constraints on development. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 31, 599617.Google Scholar
Levy, H., & Friedmann, N. (2009). Treatment of syntactic movement in syntactic SLI: A case study. First Language, 29, 1550.Google Scholar
Maamouri, M. (1998). Language education and human development: Arabic diglossia and its impact on the quality of education in the Arab region. Paper presented at the World Bank Mediterranean Development Forum.Google Scholar
Mayberry, R. I., & Lock, E. (2003). Age constraints on first versus second language acquisition: Evidence for linguistic plasticity and epigenesis. Brain and Language, 87, 369384.Google Scholar
McKee, C., McDaniel, D., & Snedeker, J. (1998). Relative children say. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 27, 573596.Google Scholar
Mohammad, A. M. (2000). Word order, agreement, and pronominalization in Standard and Palestinian Arabic. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Most, T. (2006). Assessment of school functioning among Israeli Arab children with hearing loss in the primary grades. American Annals of the Deaf, 151, 327335.Google Scholar
Nave, M., Szterman, R., & Friedmann, N. (2009). Comprehension and production of Wh questions by Hebrew-speaking children with hearing impairment: Another evidence for the difficulty in syntactic movement. Language and Brain, 9, 129.Google Scholar
Novogrodsky, R., & Friedmann, N. (2006). The production of relative clauses in SLI: A window to the nature of the impairment. Advances in Speech–Language Pathology, 8, 364375.Google Scholar
Ouhalla, J. (1994). Verb movement and word order in Arabic. In Lightfoot, D. & Hornstein, N. (Eds.), Verb movement (pp. 4172). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Power, D. J., & Quigley, S. P. (1973). Deaf children acquisition of the passive voice. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 16, 511.Google Scholar
Quigley, S. P., Smith, N. L., & Wilbur, R. B. (1974). Comprehension of relativized sentences by deaf students. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 17, 325341.Google Scholar
Quigley, S. P., Wilbur, R. B., & Montanelli, D. S. (1974). Question formation in the language of deaf students. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 17, 699713.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Roth, P. F. (1984). Accelerating language learning in young children. Journal of Child Language, 11, 89107.Google Scholar
Rouveret, A. (2008). Phasal agreement and reconstruction. In Freidin, R., Otero, C. P., & Zubizarreta, M. L. (Eds.), Foundational issues in linguistic theory: Essays in honor of Jean-Roger Vergnaud (pp. 167195). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Saiegh-Haddad, E. (2003). Linguistic distance and initial reading acquisition: The case of Arabic diglossia. Applied Psycholinguistics, 24, 431451.Google Scholar
Saiegh-Haddad, E., Levin, I., & Hende, N. (2011). The linguistic affiliation constraint and phoneme recognition in diglossic Arabic. Journal of Child Language, 38, 297315.Google Scholar
Schmitt, P. J. (1968). Deaf children's comprehension and production of sentence transformations and verb tenses. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Illinois at Urbana–Champaign.Google Scholar
Sheldon, A. (1974). The role of parallel function in the acquisition of relative clauses in English. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 13, 272281.Google Scholar
Shlonsky, U. (1997). Clause structure and word order in Hebrew and Arabic. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Szterman, R., & Friedmann, N. (2003). The deficit in comprehension of movement-derived sentences in children with hearing impairment [in Hebrew]. Lir'ot et Hakolot, 2, 2029.Google Scholar
Szterman, R., & Friedmann, N. (2007). How do children with hearing impairment produce and understand relative clauses? [in Hebrew]. Journal of Language, Speech, and Hearing Disorders, 28, 5871.Google Scholar
Szterman, R., & Friedmann, N. (2010, July). Relative clause reading in hearing impairment in a heterophonic homograph reading task: Evidence for different profiles of syntactic impairment. Paper presented at the 9th Language and Brain Conference, Tel Aviv University.Google Scholar
Tavakolian, S. L. (1981). The conjoined-clause analysis of relative clauses. In Tavakolian, S. L. (Ed.), Language acquisition and linguistic theory (pp. 167187). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Vergnaud, J.-R. (1974). French relative clauses. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, MIT.Google Scholar
Volpato, F. (2010). The acquisition of relative clauses and phi-features: Evidence from hearing and hearing-impaired populations. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Università Ca’ Foscari Venezia.Google Scholar
Volpato, F., & Adani, F. (2009). The subject/object relative clause asymmetry in Italian hearing-impaired children: Evidence from a comprehension task. Paper presented at the 35th Incontro di Grammatica Generativa, Siena.Google Scholar
Yoshinaga-Itano, C. (2003). From screening to early identification and intervention: Discovering predictors to successful outcomes for children with significant hearing loss. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 8, 1130.Google Scholar
Yoshinaga-Itano, C., & Apuzzo, M. L. (1998a). Identification of hearing loss after age 18 months is not early enough. American Annals of the Deaf, 143, 380387.Google Scholar
Yoshinaga-Itano, C., & Apuzzo, M. L. (1998b). The development of deaf and hard of hearing children identified early through the high-risk registry. American Annals of the Deaf, 143, 416424.Google Scholar