88,256 research outputs found

    Communicative Intent in Late-Talking Toddlers

    Get PDF
    This research investigated communicative intent in 31 toddlers who were slow to talk and 32 normally developing toddlers matched on SES, age, and nonverbal cognitive ability. Communicative intent was studied during free play, both with the mother and with an unfamiliar examiner. Late talkers had lower rates of communication, initiation, and joint attention, but when total communicativeness was controlled for, they were just as likely to initiate, respond, and maintain joint attention as were their peers. As expected, the late talkers relied more on nonword vocalization, gestures, and gesture/oral combinations than their normally developing peers. Children in both groups initiated much more with the examiner (who was instructed to be passive) than with their mothers. Finally, regression analysis suggested that intake expressive language delay severity was the best predictor of age 3 MLU and IPSyn language outcome in the late talkers. However, after expressive delay severity was accounted for, late talkers who were more interested in initiating communication and sustaining joint attention had worse outcomes than late talkers whose communicative drive was weaker, suggesting that they had a more severe underlying language dysfunction

    Listening skills instruction: practical tips for processing aural input

    Full text link
    Two listening challenges faced by English L2 learners are (1) successfully identifying words in continuous speech and (2) understanding a speaker’s intended meaning. Listening is a skill L2 learners report wanting to improve, yet teaching practices often fail to advance learner knowledge and control of listening processes. Instructors can benefit from empirically-supported recommendations to help learners parse continuous speech, and discern speaker intent. This Teaching Tip shares two 3-part strategies to facilitate processing utterance content and interpreting message meaning. The practical tips presented here are consistent with a return in the larger TESOL field to a true communicative approach, relying on authentic materials and real communicative contexts rather than mere mimicry of connected speech features or particular intonation contours.Published versio

    Defining turn taking in intervention for young children with autism: A review of the literature

    Get PDF
    Turn taking is a form of preverbal, dyadic, reciprocal communication that may support key areas of development, such as language and joint attention, and may serve different functions depending on each communicative partner’s intent. As such, it has been incorporated in interventions targeting various outcomes in young children with autism. However, there is inconsistency in how researchers define turn taking and explorations on how turn taking is defined across these interventions have not yet been reported in the current literature. Therefore, the purpose of this review was to investigate how turn taking is operationally defined based on communicative intent in the current literature on interventions for young children with autism and to explore additional intervention content to provide fuller context to how turn taking has been promoted. A search was conducted across databases to identify intervention studies for young children with autism that incorporated an embedded turn-taking component. Peer-reviewed articles were then coded based on turn-taking communicative intent, and additional intervention content was categorized. Findings across 14 studies indicate variability among turn-taking definitions both in communicative function and form. The results also reveal that turn taking has been promoted through different intervention approaches that incorporate diverse agents, settings, and methodology. Researchers and practitioners should consider specificity and clarity when defining turn taking to most optimally meet the developmental needs of young children with autism in future interventions

    Incorporating Augmentative and Alternative Communication Usage In Functional Therapy For Autism Spectrum Disorder: A Case Study

    Get PDF
    Current research discusses the communicative limitations of individuals with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD). This study examined the influence of communicative devices on improving an individual with ASD’s functional communicative abilities. This study incorporated a qualitative research methodology, which included a modified ethnographic interview and several hours of clinical observation. This data was then cyclically reviewed for patterns. By incorporating various Augmentative and Alternative Communication (AAC) devices into therapy and daily life, the participant was able to produce longer utterances and clarify his communicative intent and messages. This research adds to the literature by describing the importance of AAC systems in enhancing the functional communication of individuals with ASD

    Electrophysiological and kinematic correlates of communicative intent in the planning and production of pointing gestures and speech

    Get PDF
    Acknowledgements We thank Albert Russel for assistance in setting up the experiments, and Charlotte Paulisse for help in data collection.Peer reviewedPublisher PD

    Can Turn-Taking Highlight the Nature of Non-Verbal Behavior: A Case Study

    Get PDF
    The present research explores non-verbal behavior that accompanies the management of turns in naturally occurring conversations. To analyze turn management, we implemented the ISO 24617-2 multidimensional dialog act annotation scheme. The classification of the communicative intent of non-verbal behavior was performed with the annotation scheme for spontaneous authentic communication called the EVA annotation scheme. Both dialog acts and non-verbal communicative intent were observed according to their underlying nature and information exchange channel. Both concepts were divided into foreground and background expressions. We hypothesize that turn management dialog acts, being a background expression, co-occur with communication regulators, a class of non-verbal communicative intent, which are also of background nature. Our case analysis confirms this hypothesis. Furthermore, it reveals that another group of non-verbal communicative intent, the deictics, also often accompany turn management dialog acts. As deictics can be both foreground and background expressions, the premise that background non-verbal communicative intent is interlinked with background dialog acts is upheld. And when deictics were perceived as part of the foreground they co-occurred with foreground dialog acts. Therefore, dialog acts and non-verbal communicative intent share the same underlying nature, which implies a duality of the two concepts

    Classifying types of gesture and inferring intent

    Get PDF
    In order to infer intent from gesture, a rudimentary classification of types of gestures into five main classes is introduced. The classification is intended as a basis for incorporating the understanding of gesture into human-robot interaction (HRI). Some requirements for the operational classification of gesture by a robot interacting with humans are also suggested

    Triadic to Trinitarian: Kevin J. Vanhoozer’s Application of J.L. Austin’s Speech Act Theory

    Get PDF
    The basis for Christian theology, the Bible, has come under considerable attack by decontructionalists in their attempt to disregard authorial intent and to prove that understanding the meaning of an author\u27s words is an impossible task. Kevin J. Vanhoozer is an evangelical scholar who has done much in defense of authorial intent and has found fertile philosophical ground in Speech Act theory. This essay looks at Vanhoozer’s use of J.L. Austin’s variety of Speech Act theory to determine if Vanhoozer uses Austin correctly, then turns to Vanhoozer’s bibliological use of Austin whereby he analogically applies Austin’s Triadic formula of a speech act to the Trinitarian formula of the inspiration and interpretation of Scripture

    Who Cares How Congress Really Works?

    Get PDF
    Legislative intent is a fiction. Courts and scholars accept this, by and large. As this Article shows, however, both are confused as to why legislative intent is a fiction and as to what this fiction entails. This Article first argues that the standard explanation—that Congress is a “they,” not an “it”—rests on an unduly simple conception of shared agency. Drawing from contemporary scholarship in the philosophy of action, it contends that Congress has no collective intention, not because of difficulties in aggregating the intentions of individual members, but rather because Congress lacks the sort of delegatory structure that one finds in, for example, a corporation. Second, this Article argues that—contrary to a recent, influential wave of scholarship—the fictional nature of legislative intent leaves interpreters of legislation with little reason to care about the fine details of legislative process. It is a platitude that legislative text must be interpreted in “context.” Context, however, consists of information salient to author and audience alike. This basic insight from the philosophy of language necessitates what this Article calls the “conversation” model of interpretation. Legislation is written by legislators for those tasked with administering the law—for example, courts and agencies—and those on whom the law operates—for example, citizens. Almost any interpreter thus occupies the position of conversational participant, reading legislative text in a context consisting of information salient both to members of Congress and to citizens (as well as agencies, courts, etc.). The conversation model displaces what this Article calls the “eavesdropping” model of interpretation—the prevailing paradigm among both courts and scholars. When asking what sources of information an interpreter should consider, courts and scholars have reliably privileged the epistemic position of members of Congress. The result is that legislation is erroneously treated as having been written by legislators exclusively for other legislators. This tendency is plainest in recent scholarship urging greater attention to legislative process—the nuances of which are of high salience to legislators but plainly not to citizens
    • …