The production of relative clauses in syntactic SLI: A window to the nature of the impairment

By Rama Novogrodsky, Naama Friedmann. 2006

168 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Cognitive Neuroscience, Developmental and Educational Psychology

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/77f28edd670498becb9ebf57c25a16b43dd29806

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Cognitive Neuroscience

1. Naama Friedmann
2. Rama Novogrodsky
3. Dominique Brunato
4. A. Belletti
5. Luigi Rizzi
6. T. Marinis

In Developmental and Educational Psychology

1. Naama Friedmann
2. Rama Novogrodsky
3. A. Belletti
4. Luigi Rizzi
5. Dominique Brunato
6. T. Marinis

Citations in the corpus

• Which questions are most difficult to understand?: The comprehension of Wh questions in three subtypes of SLI (2011, methodology): “The production of relative clauses was assessed using two elicitation tasks: a picture description task and a preference task (Bambi ZIBUV and Bambi ADIF, for detailed method and results see Friedmann and Szterman, 2006; Novogrodsky and Friedmann, 2006).”
• Does gender make a difference? Comparing the effect of gender on children's comprehension of relative clauses in Hebrew and Italian (2012, background): “…avoided even by Italian adults in elicited production experiments (Belletti, in press; Belletti and Contemori, 2010), whereas Hebrew speakers choose to produce relatives quite early (Friedmann et al., 2011; Fattal et al., 2011; Friedmann and Lavi, 2006; Novogrodsky and Friedmann, 2006).”
• Grammatical Abilities of Greek-Speaking Children with Autism (2014, background): “The sentence-repetition task consisted of subject and object relative clauses, structures that are difficult for children with SLI (e.g., Novogrodsky & Friedmann 2006).”