PRAGMATICS: “Use of Language in Social Contexts"
Pragmatics refers to the sociolinguistic system that focuses on the use of language in communication that can be expressed physically or verbally (Mercer & Pullen, 2005). It is the study of how speakers organize what they want to say in accordance with who they are talking to, where, when and under what circumstances (Yule,1996). It is simply about knowing when to say what to whom and how much (Norris, 1995).
Clues for a delay in pragmatics
Delay in pragmatics becomes evident when students do not use functions expected in their age level (Mercer & Pullen, 2005). Here are some problems that can signal the delay in pragmatics interrupting the speaker, talking at the wrong time, speaking too loudly for the context, failing to take turns when conversing, difficulty staying on a topic during discussion, inappropriate facial expressions and body posture, immature speech, difficulty interpreting verbal and nonverbal communication cues (Mercer & Pullen, 2005 Bender, 2004 Wiig, 1992 Bos & Vaughn, 2004). However, such clues can be mistaken for different conditions. In fact, there is a debate on pragmatics regarding whether it stands under LD or Autistic Spectrum Disorders.
Assessment of Pragmatics
Assessment and measurement of this phenomenon is done through creation of social situations in which students with LD have to communicate in some way. Studies of semantics and syntax, on the other hand, use more quantitative measurement systems such as test scores (Bender, 2004). Conclusions regarding the pragmatic abilities of students with LD must be based upon analyses of natural conversations between LD students and other individuals with reference to the whole context (Dudley-Marling, 1985). Not only the oral language of the child but also the written language, can give information about the child’s social skills. In order to present a strong argument in writing, students need to engage in social perspective taking in order to develop an awareness of what people know, value and believe (Nippold, Ward-Lonergan, & Fanning, 2005). The principles of spoken language with respect to pragmatics carry onto written language (ex: initiating a topic sentence, maintaining the idea within a paragraph, summarizing an idea in final sentences) (Brice, 2004).
Intervention in Pragmatics
- Collaboration amongst parties in child’s life is the most important element in the intervention process (Roberts, 2000). The family, teachers, school and other support personnel should be working together as a part of a network system (Lundie, 2000).
Be aware of the recommendations of the speech therapists, work closely with them (Bender, 2004).
Teachers should be knowledgeable about the cultural and social backgrounds of their students before diagnosing any student. Different cultures vary on the notion of pragmatics.
Conversation Analysis: Make a 10 minute recording of a casual conversation between two people across various contexts and situations. Watch the tape with the student and analyze the discussion dynamics, such as the power relationships between the speakers, and the social factors
Telephone conversations: This can be especially helpful in early childhood or elementary years. The students can have a chance to practice turn-taking, greeting, asking questions, seeking information, initiating a conversation and finalizing a dialogue (Brice, 2004).
Scenarios and Questions: Students might be given statements or situations from everyday life. After hearing the statement, they would be asked to answer some questions regarding the statement. Ex: The student may be introduced to a rumor such as “Sarah told me that the Smith family wants to buy a new house". The following questions may be focusing on the reasons why the Smith Family might be wishing to move. They may be asked about the type of house that the Smiths want to move in. Through presenting such scenarios and questions, the students are asked to make assumptions, and make inferences about cause and effect relationships (Wiig, 1992). Pictured scenarios can be used especially in early ages (Tough, 1976).
Interviews: The students may be asked to conduct and report interviews with various people from the community, such as the local doctor, bus driver, librarian etc (Vogel, 1992). Students can choose whom they might want to interview with. The aim of this activity is to let the student guide his learning process and practice using strategies of communication with real-life people.
Class discussion or debate: The teacher or the speech-language pathologist can present a relevant topic such as “Should high school students be allowed to use cell phones in schools?". Different students can take turns presenting different sides of the argument. Visual cues and constant adult supervision are necessary for supporting the students’ total understanding of all sides of the argument. Audio-taping the class interaction and analyzing it in the future together with the students can be an additional method which may have effective results. Following this class discussion, the students can be encouraged to write an essay on the topic (Nippold, Ward-Lonergan, & Fanning,2005).
Reciprocal Teaching: Palinscar and Brown (1984) describe a teaching and instruction process that is largely used in reading comprehension. However, due to the nature of the strategy, it can be applied to social skills and language intervention. This model provides opportunity for every child to be the “knower", lead discussions, and ask reading comprehension questions.
Role-playing: The student could role-play as a school personnel, and provide directions to a student about how to find the library in the school. This exercise of role-playing and learning about giving information can be helpful for learning directions, and taking sequential action (Brice, 2004)
Using Self-Talk and Parallel-Talk: As the teacher, describe what you and others are doing or thinking. This strategy can be helpful in connecting use of language to activities and people (Bos & Vaughn, 2004).
REFERENCES
Bender, W. N. (2004). Personality and social characteristics of students with learning disabilities. In Learning Disabilities: Characteristics, identification, and teaching strategies (5th ed., pp. 106-135), Montreal, QC: Pearson Education Canada.
Bos, C.S., & Vaughn, S. (2004). Strategies for teaching students with learning and behavioral problems. Boston: Pearson and AB.
Brice, R. G. (2004). Connecting oral and written language through applied writing strategies. Intervention in School and Clinic. 40,1, 38-47.
Dudley-Marling, C. (1985). The pragmatic skills of learning disabled children: a review. Journal of Learning Disabilities,18, 4, 193-199.
Felson-Ducham, J. (1995). Supporting language learning in everyday life. San Diego, California: Singular Publishing Group, Inc.
Lundie, J. (2000). Systems for establishing and maintaining a service. In G. Mackay & C. Anderson (Eds.) Teaching children with pragmatic difficulties of communication classroom approaches (pp. 103-114). London: David Fulton Publishers.
Mercer, C. D. & Pullen, P. C. (2005). Students with learning disabilities. 6th Edition. New Jersey: Pearson Prentice Hall.
Nippold, M. A., Ward-Lonergan J. M., & Fanning, J. L. (2005). Persuasive writing in children, adolescents and adults: a study of semantic, syntactic, and pragmatic development. Language, Speech and Hearing Services in Schools.36, 125-138.
Norris, J. (1995). Expanding language norms for school-aged children and adolescents: is it pragmatic? Language, Speech and Hearing Services in Schools. 26, 342-352.
Palinscar, A.S., & Brown, A. L. (1984). Reciprocal teaching of comprehension fostering and comprehension monitoring activities. Cognition and Instruction, 1,2, 117-175.
Pearl, R. & Donahue, M. L. (2004) Peer Relationships and Learning Disabilities. In B. Wong (Ed.) Learning about Learning Disabilities. 3rd Edition. San Diego, London: Elsevier Academic Press.
Roberts, L. (2000). The school as an integrated support system for pupils with pragmatic difficulties. In G. Mackay & C. Anderson (Eds.) Teaching children with pragmatic difficulties of communication classroom approaches (pp. 83-103). London: David Fulton Publishers.
Tough, J. (1976). Listening to children talking: a guide to the appraisal of children’s use of language. Great Britain: Robert MacLehose and Company.
Wiig, E. (1992). Linguistic transitions in children and adolescents with language learning disabilities: characteristics and training. In S. A.,Vogel. (Ed.) Educational alternatives for students with disabilities. (pp. 43-67). New York: Springer-Verlag.
Yule, G. (1996). Pragmatics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
|
