Radford-etal2012
| Radford-etal2012 | |
|---|---|
| BibType | ARTICLE |
| Key | Radford-etal2012 |
| Author(s) | Julie Radford, Judy Ireson, Merle Mahon |
| Title | The organization of repair in SSLD classroom discourse: how to expose the trouble-source |
| Editor(s) | |
| Tag(s) | EMCA, classroom discourse, conversation analysis, repair, specific language impairment |
| Publisher | |
| Year | 2012 |
| Language | English |
| City | |
| Month | |
| Journal | Journal of Interactional Research in Communication Disorders |
| Volume | 3 |
| Number | 2 |
| Pages | 171–193 |
| URL | |
| DOI | 10.1558/jircd.v3i2.171 |
| ISBN | |
| Organization | |
| Institution | |
| School | |
| Type | |
| Edition | |
| Series | |
| Howpublished | |
| Book title | |
| Chapter | |
Abstract
As children with specifc speech and language difculties (SSLD) have problems pro- cessing language, they are vulnerable in the classroom since it is primarily an oral en- vironment. Repairs ofer a potentially useful source of information for the language learner but, to beneft from feedback about their errors or misunderstandings, chil- dren must notice the corrective potential in the stream of educational discourse. Re- pair practices (245) with children with SSLD were analysed quantitatively in terms of age and type of activity. Tey were also analysed sequentially, using conversation analysis. Repairs dealing with form (grammatical and phonological) were not imme- diately taken up by the children whereas those concerning meaning (lexical and con- tent) mostly led to self-correction. One explanation is that, during form repair, the adults’ corrective moves are embedded in turns that perform multiple work, so that children attend primarily to meaning. Designs that may be better suited to exposing corrections are discussed, with particular reference to features of prosody.
Notes
