UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

An analysis of syntactic errors in the language of hearing impaired students Pudlas, Kenneth Arthur 1980

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1981_A8 P94.pdf [ 5.94MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0054428.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0054428-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0054428-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0054428-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0054428-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0054428-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0054428-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0054428-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0054428.ris

Full Text

AN IN  THE  ANALYSIS  LANGUAGE  OF  SYNTACTIC  OF HEARING  ERRORS  IMPAIRED  STUDENTS  by KENNETH  Dip. A  ARTHUR  B.Ed., University of Ed. Deaf, University THESIS  SUBMITTED  THE  PUDLAS  British Columbia, 1975 of British Columbia,  IN PARTIAL  REQUIREMENTS MASTER  ^  FULFILMENT  FOR  THE  OF  ARTS  DEGREE  OF  in THE  FACULTY  (Department  We accept to  THE  OF  of  this the  Special  thesis  as  Arthur  conforming standard  OF BRITISH.  October  STUDIES Education)  required  UNIVERSITY  (c^ Kenneth  GRADUATE  COLUMBIA  198 0  Pudlas,  1980  OF  197 6  In p r e s e n t i n g  this  thesis  an advanced degree at the I  Library shall  f u r t h e r agree  for  scholarly  by h i s of  written  thesis  make i t  that permission  for  the requirements  Columbia,  I agree  reference and  f o r e x t e n s i v e copying o f  this  It  i s understood that copying or  for financial  gain s h a l l  Special  University of B r i t i s h  /QfrV- If- f i -  Education  Columbia  fo  that  study. thesis  purposes may be granted by the Head of my Department  2075 Wesbrook P l a c e Vancouver, Canada V6T 1W5  Date  freely available  permission.  Department of  The  fulfilment of  the U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h  representatives.  this  in p a r t i a l  or  publication  not be allowed without my  ABSTRACT  This items  from  study  the  Test  assess,  complementation.  sample  had  greater  in  8  to  19  terms  of  the  the  students'  discussed.  threshold ear.  Students  syntactic  of  responses  deviancles. and  students  They  study  indicated The  implications  90  age  dB  analyzed  correct  any  consistent  proved research  or  in responses  determine  this  the  from  w~as to  results of  in  were than  of  thos which  formed  (HTLl ranged  to  (TSA)  who  levels  rather this  responses  Abilities-  ' responses  errors  pur pose  student  Syntactic The  better  years.  primary  Limitations  of  hearing  The  syntactic  examined  if  inconclusive. are  -  TABLE  i i i -  OF  CONTENTS Pa ge  Abstract  i i  List  of  Tables  List  of Figures  iv v  Acknowledgements CHAPTER  ONE  The  ,  - Introduction.  TWO  Early  Terms  - Review Language  THREE  Teaching  Test  of  the  20 Theory  23 31 31 33  .  36 ,..  Assignment  of  Data  Collection  Test  Format  ,  Error  39  Types  ,  39. 46  ,  49  - Method.  Instrument  CHAPTER  Research....  T.S.A..,,  52  Subjects..,.,,.,,,  Data  and  Instrument  Preparation  FOUR  19  Errors  Complementation Data  ,  Research  - The  Syntactic  14 14  Linguistic  Development  ,  Literature  Teaching  Language  Contemporary  9  of  Language  Early  CHAPTER  I 8  of  Current  CHAPTER  ,  Problem  Definition CHAPTER  vi  , .•  5  ,  55  Analysis  FIVE  57  ^Results  61  Summary CHAPTER  2  68  S~IX - Summary  and  Conclusions  ,.  BIBLIOGRAPHY,  72 78  ,  APPENDIX  A  APPENDIX  £....,  APPENDIX  C - -TSA Revised  ,  , Screens  83  .  87 90  -  LIST  iv  OF  -  TABLES  Table 1  2  3  Page Syntactic Test of Examples Observed Revised Parallel Error  5  Frequency by Error  7  8  9  of in  Distinct Syntactic the Language of Deaf  Version Screen TSA Distractors  4  6  Structures Assessed by Syntactic Ability (TSA)  Types  Identified  Distribution type  the 7 Structures Students .  Distractors  12  and 40  for of  Analysis...... Screen  .  47  Items 58  Percentage Triads in  Scores and Error Class  Chi-Squares 1  for  Percentage Triads in  Scores and Error Class  Chi-Squares II  for  Percentage Triads in  Scores and Error Class  Chi-Squares III  for  Preliminary Table for  Error Analysis Error Classes I,  Summary II, III  64  66  68  86  ^  LIST  OF  V  -5-  FIGURES  Figure. 1  Page A Model of formational  the Levels Grammar ,  of  a  Trans-* 5  -  vi -  ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS'  Throughout on  the advise  and  His~ willingness gratefully  of my  to s-hare  of his  Rogers  note  of  for  thanks  his-  constant  his-  students  thanks  also  their  advise  is also  due  efforts  able  advisor,  to  Dr.  expertise  call  Perry  Leslie.  and  time  is  to Dr, and  to Dr,  to cultivate  Gary  Nix  and  Dr.  help  throughout.  Bryan  Clarke  cognitive  A for  growth  in  . The  constant  I was  acknowledged,  Todd  typed  project  support  Special  who  this  final  the many support  thanks drafts  and  is due of  this  encouragement  my  wife  f  thesis. - thank,  Mary"Lynn, For you.  your  -  I -  CHAPTER  ONE  Introduction  Background  of  the  While areas  there  concerning  concerning ment  the  CMoores,  regarding  the  ing  the  education  one  point  on  which  is  that  Harris  the  deaf  of  acknowledge child  any  to  be  the  given  educational  (1971) surround-  states,  keystone  upon  that, over  of  the and  the  more  and  young  hearing  than  who  other  Kretschmer  language  central  children  language  "The  any  especially  "...the  which  rests."  stating  education  for  "But universal  Kretschmer,  perceive,  of  fundamental  almost  considerably  establishment  a  priority  Strang,  program  disagreement  as  and  child,  the  no  ultimately  concurs,  that  they  the  deaf  deaf  involves but  the  the  be  (p. 17),  instruction, of  must  training  impaired  is  disagree-  communication  controversies  reached  many  to  Silverman  students  have  of  be  S.R.  various  (1971)_  element  child."  (197 8)  language  language  (P.  in  of  deaf  we  education  language  the of  successful vli)~ .  can  learning.  ix)  various  there  in  disagreement  19.71, p.  of  importance  to  from  (Harris,  1978),  reference  disagreement  ranging  efficacy  to facilitate  agreement  apparent  deaf,  terminology  methods  makes  is  the  regarding  tool  Problem  mission  cannot  hear  communication."  (p . vii) .  " Early  Language:  a concern  The  language  of  educators.  ical  perspective  from  before  history  Teaching  the  reviews  of  of  deaf Schmitt  language  16th several  children  century major  has  (1966)  instruction to  the  changes  mid in  long  gives  an  for  the  19 60's.  been histordeaf The  instruction  -  of  and  in  Jerome cian  attitudes  Cardin, and  a  taught  to  to  understand  succlntly  hear  the  that, deaf  proves  by  These  is authors  CI) to  the  by that  within  four  a  cells:  suggest  sentence words the  essentially  length used  but  language  or  language]  appears  upon  deaf sources  failed  to  development.  than  achievement  to  greater  free test  which  language scores,"  subj  date  [1966] is,  that  of  grammar  that,  of  "Another  children's attention as  of  the  samples,  the  average  the  tests  have  of  types  note  ected  studies  the  describe  the  language  terms  certain  hearing  bulk  either  analyses  the  as  of  The  and  That  further  be  framework by  in  all  They  achievement  children's  that,  of  to  be  non—linguistic  detaiIs  number  studies  conventional  language  the  studied. Jfrom  Cb)  (1966).  may  method,  published  such  have  difference  Rosenstein  non-linguistic.  reported  language language  collection  nearly  language  and  studies  controlled  framework,  itself  dimensional  data  further  children's  the and  two  They  proposed  (2)  of  language  or  have  than  manifested  Cooper  linguistic  studies  the  94).  early  (a)  been  rather  Much  either  have  with  instruction  in  or  deaf  and  Schmltt  development  sample  above  on  deaf..  propose  of  60}.  writing,  language  also  free  (p.  of  language  placed  consisting  could  signs.  evolutionary  has  summarized  tentatively  by  overview  of  (p,  evolution  into  acquisition  be  deaf  Research  This research  to  mathemati-  the  speak  through  history  with  Italian  historical  nature."  Language  research  his  beginning  that to  ideas  "The  in  century  reading,  summarizes  revolutionary  in  by  deaf,  theorized  abstract  conclusion  Early  who  -  the  sixteenth  physician  be  for  toward  2  indicators studies  relied have  (~p, 61)1.  placed  upon been  of of other based  -  Studies (1966) their  have  development  In  written  language  use  and  somewhat  different  to  write  more  and  to  English 1960;  are  of  limited  linguistic  Simmons,  in  children 1966, in  about  66).  The  perspective, who  made  linguistic  an  of  1952).  important  investigations  because data  as  have  way  of  to  with  not  what  and seen  work  a  of  and  been deaf  change Chomsky  distinction  performance  non-  Rosenstein,  have the  speech,  1940;  early  decades  because  a  from  Templin,  (Cooper  children  fashion,  Heider,  meaningful  two  largely  1965)  child's  last  deaf  parts  and  the  language  analyses,  display  departures  however,  or  shown  or  general,  useful  test  the  in  in  Pugh,  stereotyped  reported  in  know p.  (1957, a  any  a  1962;  usefulness,  studies  related  in  (Heider  These.results  1916;  to  of  errors  usage  1959;  sentences,  and  numerous  Rousey,  have  distribution  rigidly  exhibit  Myklebust,  simpler  retarded  achievement  analyses  Rosenstein  be  Paterson,  these  sample  and  to  and  and  to  Cooper  children  Pintner  addition  shorter  standard  deaf  -  by  (Goetzlnger  1960;  1946).  to  summarized  reported  Myklebust,  3  between  his/her  linguistic  competence.  Contemporary  Language According  accumulating acquire a  complex  and alike.  Chomsky  (1957,  the  child's  his  linguistic language,  McNeill  children that  rich  children  of  to  that  syntax;  Research  is,  1965)  implicit  an  was  exists  evidence  general ability in  deaf  perspective  in  the  knowledge  linguistic  a  inborn  changed  competence, his  have  grammar The  (1966),  and  capacity  the  develop  and  hearing  offered  by  between  syntactic  rules,  child's  performance.  to  to  distinction of  is  productions The  difficulty  -  for  deaf  they  children  have  1966),  a general  they  matical  lies  must  on  attempt  that  although  to acquire  to  test  and  these  input  information,  of previous  studies  syntax retest  (McNeill,  their  gram-  grammatical  rules  due  aud-  to  their  deficiency.  Limitations  The did  not  previously  assess  children  the  were  not  rules  of English  language.  The  or  on  1957,  1965)  1965)  his  of  generated  once  regularities  of  It speaking" observe  more  linguistic  limited sufficient his/her  and  however,  generative an  infinite of  by  Power  the  information.  (1976)  virtue  1969) of  experiences  adapted a  model  "normal-  their  and,  grammar,  in  some  greater  capacity  his/her  linguistic  1,  that  The  hearing  normal on  grammatical  their deaf  deficit,  auditory which  defin-  and  (p. 142).  through  regarding  structural  grammar.  memory  of  be  presents  to achieve  increase  of  Figure  constraints  their  Chomsky  can  the  rules  obtaining,  hypothesis  (Chomsky,  number  complexity  derived  rules as  studies  grammar,  (Menyuk,  expand  economy  children's  language  language.  suggested  experiences  in  has  contextual  deaf  relevant  more  these  grammar  native  reorganize  and  child,  is  recent  a transformational  children  instances, ition  his  the  deaf  underlying  yield  of  a child  of  the  the  grammar  degrees  , Quigley,  levels  to  tests  on  generative  that  varying  of  Russel  to  theory  proposed  sentences  the  in more  generative  In  from  related  used  of  deviations  to a grammar  begun  Transformational  (1957,  observed  transformational have  achievement  competence  necessarily  Methods  based  mentioned  linguistic  studied.  tests  of  fact  to develop  limited  itory  the  capacity  hypotheses  based  in  4 -  is  reception to  rule  base generation.  -  Phrase  Structure  5 -  Rules  Lexicon Semantic [Deep/.  Structure^-  ^|  Meaning  Rules Transformationa1 Rules  i  \Surface  Figure  Morphological  and  Phonological  Rules  Structure]  1.  >{Production]  A model of the levels grammar (Adapted from Pov/er, 1976 , p . 22) .  of a Russel  transformational , Quigley, and  -  As  a result,  or  transforms  deaf is  this  .  postulated  Recent  thought This  to  performance  be  Linguistic  have  of  19^78). have  the  some  impressive  or  component;  ponent  and  (4)  (Dale,  has  research, the  1974;  and  this Child  Deaf the  last  two of  decades  the  and  of  the  consti-  Kretschmer, linguists  language:  (1)  L2)  syntactic  the  semantic or  or  the  meaning  communicative  Quigley,  com-  of  children's  recent  linguistic  conducted  Behavior  and  Development  Quigley  and  and  Quigley,  and  19.7 6;  1977;  focus  deaf  was  by  Power,  of  research  197 3;  Power,  his  Smith,  Montanelli, Wilbur,  Quigley,  at  and  Wilbur,  19.76; Russel  ,  , and  19.77;  Steinkamp,  the  associates  Montanelli  Steinkamp,  through  Quigley,  Steinkamp  Power,  and  19.7 8. As  a result  C19178) developed The  .  descriptions  primary  Wilbur,  Quigley,  Jones,  1974)  Kretschmer,  pragmatic  Illinois  Quigley,  1976;  of  Quigley,  and  linguistic  descriptions  component  the  for of  Quigley,  and  been  Institute  (Power  in  competence  poor  Wilbur,  in  (3)  syntactic  Much  University  developed  language  component?  the  rules  19.76).  The language  sound  well  the  components  or  component;  and  contemporary  morphophonemic  grammatical  their  lingulsts  four  grammatical  of  (Streng,  these  less  with  of  of  in  root  work  Identified  Be  Smith,  language  From  to  Research  included  tuents  set  deficiency  (Quigley,  The  -  internalized  is  students  6  TSA  seventy  is  the  made  multiple  competence  of  Table  1  gives  which  are  of  up  Test  of  subjects  tested  of  twenty  choice  an  this  items on  Syntactic subtests designed  various  outline,  of  by  TSA.  the  research,  the  Quigley Abilities each to  syntactic syntactic  et  al.  (TSA)_ . containing  assess  the structures,  structures  -  7  -  Table Syntactic Test  of  Syntactic  Structures Abilities  1.  Negation  2. 3.  Conjunction Conjunction Dis junction and  4.  1 Assessed (TSA)  the  (Quigley  et  al.  Alternation  Determiners  5. 6. 7.  Question Formation wh. words Answer Environments Yes/No Questions  8. 9. 10.  Verb Processes Verb Sequences in Conjoined Main Verbs, Linking Verbs, Passive Voice  11. 12. 13. 14.  Pronominalization Possessive Adjectives Reflectives Possessive Pronouns Forward and Backward  15. 16. 17.  Re lativization Comprehension Relative Pronouns and Embedding  18. 19.  Complement That—Complements Infinitives and  20 .  by  Nominalization  ation Gerunds  and  Structures Auxiliaries  Pronominalization  Adverbs  ,  1978)  -  The takes  up  decided as  to  TSA,  ten hours  to produce  T.S.A.  psychometrically  Use  of  the  TSA  One  have  students  loss.  terms  of  held  to be  Clarke  and  1979;  Rogers, there  syntax to  items'  1980;  TSA  errors  and  possible  Problem The  the in  nature the  items  mentation at  which  assessing from  the. same  efficacy  revealed  will  of  Screens  time the  been  detailed syntactic  as  and  of  degrees in  tency  their  , in  yet,  was  syntactic of  Screen.  to  examine  syntactic  Thus  errors  decided, 3,  structure  a research,  however, of  TSA  Chapter  studg,  the  patterns  It was  Two.  19.79.)_.  responses  nature  or  of  Booth,  regarding  error  research  1977;  Horvath,  As  TSA  (Anderson,  Horvath,  and  of  common-  and  the  the  students  One  syntax  analyzed  and  by  of  this  a feasibility Screen  varying  Screens.  consis  the  the  of knowledge  by  of  be  have  regarding  deaf  of  Diagnostic  on  Booth,  TSA  TSA  Rogers,  consistency  of  120  TSA.  data  as measured  possible  language:  reasons the  and  the  Booth,  body  and  purpose  known  development  Clarke,  reported  as  tests,  characteristics  Clarke,  students  the  the  then  Rogers,  been  The:  have  Leslie,  has  students  who  to linguistic  little  deaf  and  related  deaf on  Two  to gather  is a growing  of  authors  Columbia  data  Leslie,  the  containing  from  of demographic  Rogers,  Thus  each  items  Columbia  a number  information,  screening  Two,  and  used  These  1979.; Clarke,  Thus  One  in British  hearing  and  in British  been  valuable  parallel  best  Screens Battery  providing  to administer,  two  Screens  the  ly  while  8 -  for  to use of  comple-  the. study  testing instrument  only  was  the for  error  diagnoses  in a relatively Initially  base  would  analysis  to TSA  outlined  revealed Thus  do  students  the main  respond items  or  responses  the  are  their  three  distractors  Definition  of The  in  subsequent  following  research  groups.  in  to any  analysis  TSA  became: Screen  test  com-  discernable  pattern  distributed  each  As  difficulties.  guestion  randomly on  age  procedural  according  data  a preliminary  to distractors  plementation  the Incorrect  across  however,  several  that  students'  items  A,  sample.  considered of  Screen  in Appendix  the data  large  it was  allow  responses  of  9 -  between  item?  Terms subjects  and  chapters.  test  For  the  instrument sake  of  are clarity  definitions  are  Complements function  ~* are embedded sentences as noun phrases.  deaf  described the  provided: which  - when referring specifically to students in this study the term describes students wii^h hearing threshold levels (HID) of 9..Q. decibels CdB) obtained by calculating the arithmetic mean of the pure tone thresholds in the better ear at frequencies of 500, 1000, and 2000 Hertz (H } using Amerlean National Standards Institute CANS!) crl teria — when used in the literature, the term usually refers to students who are unable to understand speech through the ear alone.  dlstractor ple the hearing all the and  those items included in the choice test which are alternatives correct choice in each item, impaired — a generic term degrees of hearing loss, conditions known as hard deaf.  multito  encompassing including of hearing  syntax  Hy  10 -  - the study of rules order and grouping of sentences.  which words  determine into  syntactic deviancies - the literature that deaf children make syntactic which are unique to deaf students.  purports errors  From  previous  potheses  research  and  hy potheses  the review  from  students  select  analyses,  the  following  on  TSA  not  a  parti-  more  frequently  other  Screen  syntac-  comple-  items.  :X . = 3 3.3%) x  : Deaf  students  who  distractors  make  errors  exhibiting  deviancies (H  will  exhibiting  deviancies  o  errors  deviancy  distractors  mentation (H  make  exhibiting  syntactic  than tic  who  distractors  cular  H^  and  developed:  : Deaf  o  the literature  the preliminary  were H  of  more  : ~X T7  will  certain  frequently  choose syntactic  than  others.  33.3%)  ±  Rationale The syntactic rules of  patterns which  hearing  1964;  and  deaf  points  children  whose  their  and out  language  define linguistic  standard  existence  English,  Power,  and  1976;  not  in a detailed behavior  in  1969; Jones,  Taylor,  descriptions does  of  of grammar  (Menyuk,  Power, that  the rules  children  Steinkamp,  (_19L69.)_  which  from  Quigley,  can  reports  or deviant  differ  Quigley,  Russel,  English  literature  of  that  is,  the  language  Myklebust, 1978;  1969) . the  conform  to  manner  the  deviates  deviant  from  Menyuk  language  of  standard ways the  in norm.  ^ Myklebust  (1964)  only  the  that  whetherorder  emphas izes  deaf  their  to develop  which  the TSA  aspects  of  2,  the  were  taken  found  et  the  in  the  order  and  of  Screens,  TSA  efficacy  of  examine  and on  the  TSA  maximally errors  for  frequently  for  analysis;  ly  in  it  in  study  TSA  al,,  simply  most  difficult on  language  (p.  1978)  deaf  15).  shows  structures  some  which students'  written  of  language  for  press),  decided Screens in  and  to as  the  an  as  reasons:  reading  of  deaf syntactic  (.11  Previous  1917 7;  Rogers  complementation so  items as  providing  was which,  material.  to  be  sufficient items  to provide  complementation structures  to  the  (2) complementation as  the  instrument  language  difficult  so  administration  examine  chosen  shown  thus  (_36 items) (3)  of  Steinkamp,  sufficiently  analysis;  specific remediation  ease  several  had  knowing  effective  was  Power,  to be  students'"  et  their  deviances  syntactic  in procedures.  beyond  his  relative  was  discriminating,  ed  difficult  the  the  CQuigley,  Clarke,  patterns,  in  importance  given  using  for  but  information  in  in  Complementation  structure studies  yields  to develop  syntactic  students.  language,  finds  frequently  not  remedial  syntactic  and  to know  1976),  procedures the  it  CQuigley  TSA  al.,  Given deviances  a child  deviant  to  in  information  appearing  to occur  responses CQuigley  provides  from  distinct  Inferior  effective  1978)  deviances  he  we. need  most  al.,  specific  that  characteristic  syntax  et  -  show  of  CQuigley  Table  may  errors  The  11  one  occur-  enough, of  appeared  the  items more frequent-  -  Examplesof Language  Structural env ironment  Verb  system  Negation  Conjunction  Complementation  Distinct of Deaf  12  -  Tattle  2  Syntactic Students  Description Structure  Structures ('Quigley et  of  -Verb deletion -Be or have dele~^ tion -Bejhave confusion -Incorrect pairing of auxiliary with verb markers -By deletion (passive voice) -Negative outside the sentence -Marking only verb -Conjunction tion —Extra  dele-  for  —Unmarked tive without —NP's is  Question formation  infinito  where whose reguired  —Copying referent  The  the 16)  Example  sentences  cat  the  under  John sick. Jim have  Tom The  in p.  has boy  Beth Jean  The sick.  table. girl  a  ball  pushing the wagon. was pushed the girl  threw catch  the ball it.  and  ate  apple.  first  -Extra to in POSSing complement —Incorrectly inflected infinitive  Relativlzation  Observed al,, 1978,  Joe  bought  For is  to play fun.  John  goes  Bill liked baseball. Jim  the  baseball  to  fishing.  to  wanted  played  go.  I helped the mother was  boy's sick.  of  -Copy ing -Fai lure to s u bj ect-nauxil invers ion -Incorrect  John saw the boy boy kicked the Who  a  boy  Who Who  the TV  gave  who ball. you  a  apply ia r y inversion  baby did watched?  love?  the  ball?  -  Table  2  Description Structure  Structural environment  13  (continued)  Relativization Conjunction  •Object-object deletion  -Object-subject deletion  All types sentences  of  Example  of  -Overgeneralization of contraction  Question formation, Negation  -  -Forced subjectverb—object pattern  rule  I amn't willn ' t  sentences  Bill  tired go.  John chased he scared. (John chased scared the  the  girl  the girl. girl.)  and He  The dog chased the girl had on a red dress. (The dog chased the girl. The girl had on a red dress.) The boy pushed the (The boy was pushed girl .)  girl. by the  —  14 -  CHAPTER Review The help  further  ical  basis  1972,  p.  purpose and  purpose  for 313).  by  then  the  Test  problem  of  of Syntactic  some  Abilities  was  used  an  attempt  (Tuckman,  to f u l f i l l  historical  this  background up  associates CT.S.A.)  to gather  empir-  hypotheses  research  his  is to  to provide  the  will  and  review  and  linguistic  Quigley  which  literature  chapter  recent  by  instrument  the  providing  tracing  Literature  development  This  first  development,  the  the  of  of  define  TWO  the  to  the  (1978),  of  which data  is  the  for  this  study. This tic  errors  as  language. ing  for  the  deaf  two  areas  study one  Thus the  aspect  and  serve  to their  Education naturally  been  European in  century that  of  strongly  in Italy the  deaf  speak  by  writing  signs  (Moores,  the. attitude  's  teach-  language  evolution  of  of  these  Teaching  the  deaf  in North  influenced  the when  could  children  state.  In Europe,  toward  syntac-  Europe  traditions.  attitude  deaf  the  the  Language  in  with  of language  into  to illustrate present  Teaching  into  review  of research  Early  Language  concerned  of research  an historical  deaf  will  is primarily  be  and 1978),  exemplified  by an  deaf  occurred  Jerome  Cardin  taught  This by  has  the much  important in  older advance  the  sixteenth  CI501—1576)  to hear  to understand  America  theorized  by reading,  abstract  was  a radical  the  early  ideas change  Greeks  who  to through from  15  considered and  language  thus-  or  thought  reason  as intuitive the deaf  ([Schmitt,  19.66),  practice  1584)  who began  by associating  words  and later  taught  demic  people Juan  Pablo  advanced  ([Spain;  1579-1620)  by teaching  finger  of sounds,  more  of grammar  natural  language Both  or  manual  Wallls' as  method  Dalgarno  ing a  receptive  the deaf  vocabulary ,  and formal  language  Language was- dominated more  proninent  ([Holland;  and other  chief  proponents  speech language  24), parts  but s t i l l  fingerspelling Instruction,  mother constant  where-  was to  build  use of  finger-  until  (Schmitt,  connect-  19.66).  in the eighteenth approach,  Amman began  by teaching  of speech.  John  Keinicke, "oral"  for expressive a formal  century  Among  were  retained  but  Accord-  of the time  reading  or  19.66).  was deferred  of the German  and speech  connected  approach.  established  figures  reading  and structured  child's  instruction  to  used  natural  by the grammatical  1669—17  nouns  stressed  in their  through  to  sequential  (Schmitt,  grammar  was well  ([England;  1626-1687).  and  and Dalgarno  a more  Wallls  and words  was more, grammatical  favored  included  and moved  logical  and writing  to Dalgarno,  spelling ed  alphabet  spelling  activities  Wallls  These  (England;  but also  century  professional  , John  syllables,  He emphasized  development  aca-  to the deaf.  Bonet  writing.  to teaching  language  Dalgarno  and  of  in the seventeenth  and George  articulation  written  1966) ,  1616-1703), began  1520-  articulation  of educated  Bonet  were  ([Spain,  with,  of a number  in teaching  language  of Cardin  de Leon  thxough  advancement  the interest  learned  of speech,  objects  speech  ('Schmitt,  A major was  by Ponce  and ultimately  subjects  than  The theories  put into  words  rather  Incapable  first  written  -  the  Amman lists  of  one of the  method, and analytical  advocated receptive  16  approach,  to language  Braidwood  and  grammatical their  development.  Baker  also  secret  who  of lived  bution  century  in France  1712  components  of  with  inflections,  word  order  The  recognition  Abbe  was  de 1'Epee developed  consisting  clearly was  a theory  1. Nominative Case  appropriate  in  the  experimenting (Schmitt, who, and  used  cation and  19.66).  Some began  pictures in France  to develop took. care,  including  a controversy German  "oralists",  who  useful  of  and  used  nineteenth between with  oral  connected thoughts  Idioms  The  language  work, of  the  (1742—1822) teaching  device  by f i l l i n g  there  were  approach  four  the French the oral  most  a few  or  language,  natural  educators 19.78); Arnoldl, five and;  manual  language  communi-  In his  in a variety  saw  the  included:  aged  and  the  (_Moores,  educators  elicit  in  19.66) .  was  or natural  century  5. Object of Pr epos it ion  CSchmitt,  students  to Instill  proper  in  Sicard  approach  these  with  to express  the use The  sentences  natural  of  aspect  4. Prep.  century,  a more  in syntax.  a language  the framework  eighteenth, with  French  by Abbe  3. Objective Case  the grammatical  in Germany  Pereire  of  complete  columns:  constructed  parts While  common  numbered  of  signed  step.  of ciphers,  2. Verb  students  proper  upon  contri-  grammatical  were  important  expanded  l"Epee  signs,  as a essential an  de  all  These  tenses  to approximate  of five  Sicard's  and  prominent  L'Epee's  for  language.  of syntax  keep  the development  signs  articles  so as  instruction  who  the French  to  the Abbe  to 1789. was  including  formal  the most  was  Instruction  of signs,  more  tried  (1960}  the eighteenth from  Englishmen,  19661,  to Bender  to language  a system  they  (Schmitt,  two  used  although  According figure  The  reportedly  techniques,  methods  -  of  pupils, ways  expressions. the continuation  "manuallsts" approach,  and becoming  of the the  -  predominant  method  century. deaf  This  in  Europe  century  children  of  all  voiced  of their  approach  social  Watson  a more  ('England; 1832-1889)  teacher  should  not  "inflict  pupils the  it  became approach  and  manner  to  learn  the in  was  recommendations  oral  At  the  Language  the  Hopkins-  founding  the  United  The  American the  went  to  England.  first  4)  natural to  learn  parallel  speech  must  and  be  motiva-  usefulness. Europe  to  a  in  large  International delegates  of was  the  the  early  extent  by  Congress  at  strongly  approach  in  He  School teaching  Braidwood  was  the for  Milan  endorsed  to  language  America  Deaf the  unwilling  during  primarily  by  Instrumental for  the  Connecticut,  methods was  in  school  Hartford, for  deaf  influenced  permanent  Asylum  study  of  18 0 5-187  attempted  in  natural  the  half  the  its  deaf  should  of  ([Germany;  children  seeing  Gallaudet.  States  American  a  but  a  America  century  Thomas  the  in  education  nineteenth  that  the  that  latter  of  Tarra  Instruction,  Teaching The  Hill  influenced  and  the  children  Congress,  and  Tn  Joseph  Guilio  grammar  method"  the  of  communication  development  as  of  and writings  advocate  by  were  understanding"  hearing  language  of  29.1.  suggested  century  1880.  feeble  "mother's  Education twentieth  aware  grammatical  dissenters  his  to  method  formal  ora.li.st,  the  century,  teaching  the  in  Moritz  which,  Hill  the  an  influential  his  in  language. ted  the  nineteenth  language  19.66, p.  most  levels.  stated  Friedrlch  the  economic  Among  acutely  on  (Schmitt, century,  the  be  of  and  with  who  half  extended  the  1765—1829.)  (Italy;  latter  education  natural  instruction.  the  saw  during  disagreement  to  -  in  also  Increasingly supporters  17  and  to  deaf  in  in  1817,  Dumb, known  Deaf. used  in  Gallaudet by  Braidwood  share  his  today initially in  techniques  ,  -  so  Gallaudet  went  to  adopt  the  French  method  de  l'Epee  and  the  Abbee  reports it  that  is  However,  been  thus  symbol  such  1836,  consisted  of  which  were  or  symbol  that  showed  1949)  were  Schmitt  grammatical  There  were,  presented berger  (1879)  adopt  a  the  favour was  Graham  using  student*s  language  more  these  of  devised the  by  Deaf.  the  the  symbol  Included,  Storrs  and  ity  of  was  various  the  era.  The  Barnard  and  in curved-line  represent  or  word  relationconnective,  time."  (Nelson,  century  dominated the  the  time  natural  first  also  America instruction.  arguments  American He  to  advocated  that  situations'.  a natural  activities  Green—  educators  realistic  adopted  being  approach.  approach. in  in  language  same  a more  play  that  as  a  approach,  basis  for  instruction. Toward  several  Bell  likely  90).  language  Alexander  is  by  mid—nineteenth  of  in  methods  attributive,  natural  practise  his  of  to  p.  among  completely  students  popular  straight-line  at  instruction  nature.  developed  approach  reports  century  it  in  and  (1966,  written  influenced  influence,  however,  in  so  intended  (1966)  language  French,  was  by  Schmitt  communication  "substantive,  During the  six  decided  developed  nineteenth  analytic  assertion,  in  the  system,  as  of  characteristic  first  ships  the  the  development was  signs  paucity  since  and  systems  symbols  the  too  subsequently  Sicard.  early  instruction  The  Abbe  by  grammatical  of  the  influenced  language  He  determine  during  -  France.  of  to  used  America. had  because  difficult  methods  to  18  end  systems  "Storrs' Hartford  George  of  Wing  the  nineteenth  were  developed.  symbols" School, of  the  century  devised and  the  Minnesota  Some by  Wing School  of  Richard Symbols for  -  The America  saw  language  by  sentence  Katherine  their  Barry  1926,  Straight  Deaf  teen  (1955), and  and  of  for  the  language  (19.58) order to  an  early  end  II,  containing  entitled and or  "key".  hundreds,  language, of  suggestions.  Buell  Language  the  published  1963),  mid by  Streng  strong  case  points  be  ninePugh  (1955),  for  out  not  for  language In  were  should  books.  language  and  and  the  introduced  nineteen  Outline  and  from  guide  own  method  language  introduced  her  a  visible  In  book  developed  books  a  practice  teaching  makes  gave sample  pattern  (1951,  who  and  language  of System  dissimilar  for  and  use  earlier.  which  programs  I  too  Deaf  and  Books  which  her  the  guides  which  wrote  during  Five  in  (1920-1928)  sentence  Lassman-Rarris  a means  Pratt  series  techniques  Groht  teaching is  century  published  hundreds  to  a  century  the  (1899)  Sicard  another  Children,  teaching  Slate  by  and  1954)  as  such  not  schools  (1934,  and  Fitzgerald  Also  curriculums  development  was  used  yet  various  the  system  Language  described  on  "skeleton"  Jones  Edith  twentieth  's  Croker, widely  the  Barry  or  -  of  devices  introduced  1920's,  In  emphasis  outline  f i t .  that  an  teaching  published  was  beginning  19  natural  that  taught  language in  isolation.  Current  Current techniques  vary  structured  formal  on  more  natural  no  method  by  the. generally  has  Language:  language widely, approach  instruction  methods  and  Some methods  emphasize  a  while  approaches, been  totally  poor  Teaching  others  (Schmitt, successful  language  place 1966). as  performance  more  emphasis Certainly  is  evidenced of  deaf  -  students  on  however,  Schmitt  "The  a  history  proves (p.  to  variety (1966)  of he  of  test is  language  -  instruments,  accurate  in  instruction  evolutionary  Clearly, suggesting  for  rather  the  than  that,  deaf  revolutionary."  94).  Early  This the  research of  uage  published  past  several  gence  this  of  the  century in  deaf  occurred  tic  studies  and  even  to more  pragmatic  the  Much  mid  a  the  present  of  has  first  on  lang-  from  In  in  language.  a  general The  the  and evolution  non—linguist-  focus  into  the resur-  essentially  linguistic  in  The  been  language  on  syntax  semantic  and  deaf  were  a,chievement  Pater  son  C1916)  that  the  average  of  of the  Pugh  (19A6),  bust  (1960)  was,  in  was of one  to  scores  found  retarded  the  of  18  earlier  comprehension  average,  eight  year  and  low  scores  meaning,  and  vocabulary  relation  on  the sysrtem. achieve-  to Pintner  studies old  old  is,  language  deaf  were  Rousey  report  that in  year  in  underlying  students.  reading  Goetzinger  out That  an  up  language.  pointed  nature.  hearing of  children's as  related studies  students  language  deaf  in  not the  (19.66)_ summarized,  of  non—linguistic  surprisingly,  test  Rosenstein  research  Not  of  and  early  the One,  paragraph  deaf. research  there  research  evident  literature.  of  change  studies  gathered  score  studies  '60's,  data  a  little  also  components.  Chapter  ment  the  professional  saw  Cooper to  very  children's'  recent  is  of  however,  in  into  process  saw the  interest  Research  language  decades,  especially which  Language  evolutionary into  half  on  20  lower  hearing (1959)  and reported  subjects than  the  subject. , and  standardized tests.  the  Mykle^reading,  21  In and  addition  Rosenstein  to  (1966)  data  obtained  examined  aspects  of  all  (1950)  found  written of  words  of  average  deaf  same  did  Heider  of  compound  19401  as  reported  distinguish:  (1962) compositions  hearing  the  total  between  subjects number  deaf  of  and  sentences,  were  subjects.  researchers  Myklebust written  rigid  style.  fixed  as  units,  subjects.  deaf  CHeider and  language  of  Language  On  seventeen of  ten  and  and  year  Heider,  Simmons the  (1962)  deaf  samples  showed contained  which  could  be  Simmons  found  little  reporting in  reported  that  the  or  did  hearing  subjects.  also  used  more  adverbs.  Deviant  analyses  distribution hy  deaf  of  The  deaf  subjects  articles,  than  of  the  compositions  determiners,  In  complex  learned varia-  patterning.  speech  Reports  to  scores  (1960)  phrases  syntactic  subjects  with  larger  •  same  the  equated  Heider  a  opposed  of  or  of  as  by  used  scores  Studies parts  subjects  the  that  repeated  deaf  primarily  complexity,  as  stereotyped  in  found  well  relatively  Early  than  but  (1940),  in  hearing  These  nouns,  length  age,  and  Simmons  did  hear ing  tion  , and  less  flexi-  Heider  than  subjects  and  which  speech,  sentences,  year  a  of  complexity,  simple  of  old  of  (1940)  measures  old  was  studies  groups.  proportion and  the samples  and  sentence  not  Studies and  parts  (I960)  subjects  of  Cooper  complexity,  Heider  chronological  written  hearing  by  results,  language  the  , Myklebust  that by  the  from  Studies  Templin  some  productivity,  distribution  correctness.  reported  outline  reporting  bility,  these  ~  and hearing  of and used  simpler  the  hearing more verbs  subjects  Language correctness,  several  early  -  investigators in  reported  written noted  use  verb  of  lack of  misuse  of  subject-verb  words.  One  observed words  by in  was of  found by  (1)  in  per  syntax  1000  (4)  punctuation.  and  almost  half  the  within  that  category  or  the  group  of  errors  caution,  describe  the  each  reported  basis  on  and  of  and  in  category  and  vocabthat  (3)  either  use  of  and of  wrong  The  words largest  omissions.  must  be  Thompson errors  with,  the  error  of  flawed  category  who of  order.  The  His  interpreted failed  were  to  adequately  assigned  to  frequency  omission.  Like  the  lack  parameters.  each  error  would  2916).  type. be,  "A  boy  percentage  found  to  across Thompson's operational  He  does, example  playing."  of  deaf  substitution,  be all  committed ages  study, definition  however, of  to  involving:  words,  of  An  categories  errors  essential error  similar the  made  greatest  by  used  computing  subjects omission  word  error  (i960)  Thompson  hearing  addition,  p.  of:  reported  involved  which  number  classification.  those  of  words  words.  since  the  categories  (3)  the  of  compositions  were  interesting,  Myklebust  is  words,  however,  studies  four  errors  he  deaf.  counted  into  unnecessary  extrinsic  the  Thompson  most  of  written  clauses,  of  although  use of  the  fell  necessary  addition  results, with  errors  sequences errors  reported  in  (2)  words,  improper  the  Thompson  case,  incorrect  characteristic  children's  words  Fusfeld  incorrect  and  earliest  and  of  of  was  English  article,  compositions  (1936).  standard  students.  definite  (1962)  the  ulary,  ommission  the  most  deaf  Thompson  errors  the  written of  deaf  agreement,  Simmons  the  from  substitution  of  One errors  by of  forms,  -  deviations  compositions  (1955)  22  an  give [is]  ([Myklebust,  was  the  Myklebust's of examples omission 1964,  23  Limitations  Cooper summary adults They  of  research  point  to  point  directed  out to  implicitly deaf  and  the  language.  in  it  language  is  rules  his/her  acceptable  be  consciously  apply  will  produce  important  for  linguistics  in  stated,  in  language ative, ship  state  the the  fact,  that  grammar between  that  Man  as  his  p.  9).  1978,  Chomsky's step since  the  language  Chomsky's  long  is  Research  with  delineat-  linguistic  work  competence  is in  primarily the  field  It of  a  study  of  perhaps has  theories  the  proven  were  of gener-  more  evolution  been  theory  ('Kretschmer  is  of  has  transformational  contribution in  not  implicitly  and  decades.  the  It  may  to  enunciation  known  and  rules  credited  interest  revolutionized  revolutionary research,  his  standard  competence.  is  several  that  sentences  between  renewed past  child's  from  ability  His  important  deaf  Theory  1965)  known  of  English  understand  difference  description  Kretschmer,  the  performance,  responsible  the  linguistic  (1957,  are  are  language  Linguistic  Chomsky  linguistic  and  a person's  Contemporary  and  but  been  described  rules  deviate  These  applied, to  merely  standard  also  rules  not  comprehension  that  and  research.  have  language  language  from  children  that  studies  have  their  deaf of  and  extent  deviate  determines  the  what but  English.  them  ing  of  the  of  early  These  productions  or  what  these  child,  to  (_1966) in  language  productions  written  Research  limitations  issue  children's  that  into  that  Previous  Rosenstein  several  the by  of  -  of based  relationand apt to  to be  a  language in  part  -  on  the  and  work  of  linguists  earlier  light  transformational linguistic the  become  have  language  Instruction  done  these  appreciably  of  suggested  semantics,  syntax,  One,  message,  semantics, sidered  In  and  and  to  language deaf  children's  certain  improve as  atomistic the  efficacy  evidenced  scores  of  by  have  the  not  improved  to  the  theory  is  in  order.  can  be  described  language  Kretschmer  and  in  That  is,  the  and  phonology.  discuss  the  (Kretschmer  the  communicative  ing  of  used  major  pragmatics:  was as  or  comprehension  to  communicate  will  shape  concepts  speech  Kretschmer,  context  syntax,  are  acts,  informational  constraints  As  .  and  Intent  Five  presupposition,  conversational  role  is  an  and  1978)  production  language  study,  pragmatics,  Kretschmer,  concerns  intent  present  including:  phonology  and  utilization,  of  on  dimensions,  Pragmatics  a  Reports  background  four  sentences.  non—linguistic  linguistic  of  of  between performance,  performance  Chapter  communicative  generative  time.  recent  Streng,  of  distinction  techniques  poor  consisting  1978;  his  measured  further  in  theory  linguistic  earlier  little  over As  outline  and  as  features  that  and  apparent.  performance  fact  Chomsky's  competence  studies poor  of  of  psychologists,  1970).  grammar  deficiencies  -  philosophers,  (Lyons, In  24  consentence  organization  (Kretschmer  and  ,  Kretschmer,  1917 8) . Semantics least  two  levels  and;  words  are  1978). or That use  Semantic  syntactic is, is  or in  language:  meaningful intent  structures the  governed  meaning  of  by  the  said  to  sentences  (Kretschmer determines are  choice  is  which intended  and  for  syntactic meaning  on  are  which  sleeted  exist  at  meaningful, Kretschmer,  language a  sentence.  arrangement the  forms  speaker  to  -  wishes  to  convey  19.78The must  (Streng,  meaning  also  message  be to  of  that  are  to  phonology  sounds  they  sounds  are  and  at  the  has  changed  will  made  be  current  recent  Phrase  said  of to  several phonological  and  to  the  how  they  to  speech  language,  and;  rhythm  and  at  meaningful and  the  and  early  to  strings  as  which,  the  or 1978).  study  of  sentences  and base  are  postulated  that  structure  level  Syntactic thus  Kretschmer  between  speaker  Kretschmer,  level.  and  the  theory  following (1978)  syntactic  the a  distinction  theory  and  Theory (1957)  structure  structure  generation  of  theory.  Syntactic  deep  light  of  enables  by  years,  Kretschmer  syntactic  between  system  are  indicate  refer  languages  rules  here  which  sounds  syntax  processes  Chomsky  were  syntax  particular  in  of  (1978) in  refer  transformational  of  Early  the  Kretschmer,  syntactic  example  or  aspects  sounds  speech  words- Into  and in  four  distinctions of  of  and  principles  there  raw  (19.57 , 19.65) defined  constructed  meaning  speech.  (Streng,  Chomsky  sentence  distinctions,  distinctions of  the  considered  the  part  Knowledge  the  be  to  are  patterns  sentences  intended  Kretschmer  phonological  suprasegmental  arrange  Kretschmer,  the  speech  phonetic  refer  as  of  actual  and  concepts:  produced;  stress  the  should  distinctions  within  the  another  Kretschmer  Important  and  conveyed.  refers  produced.  word  with  Phonology, language,  Kretschmer,  each  consistent  be  25  and  rules, basic be  originally  present  surface  those  sentence in  postulated structure  rules patterns  deep  which, or  structure,  a in  allowed kernel  distinction language. for  the  sentences, Through  -  application  of  kernel  sentences  ulated  the  kernel  sentences.  Chomsky to  to  the  tions  would  be  grammatical  or  generate  basic  have  himself  Current  Syntactic  a  (Chomsky, now  base  used patterns  early  assump-  including  has  added  explain to  1973).  a  feature  the  to  structure  three  constructs  explain  deep  transformation rule,  for  that  sentence  differs  somewhat all  entire one  are:  and  cation  time  modes  (or  of  rewrite  rules  have  been  altered  to  (_NP)  to  be  for  written more  as  to  transform-  sentence.  tree  NP  Once  for +  the  lexical speaker  their Kretschmer, to  be This  which  proposed  kernel  sentences.  and  the  appli-  syntactic example,  sentence,  rules  said  structure.  diagrams) current  now  and  thought  from  grammars  which  is  theory  allow, a  Is  and  deep  derived  insertion  determine  the  in  complete  Lexical  frame  earlier  were  sentence  (Kretschmer  within  from  a  constituents  sentence  sentences  branching  of  to  noun  These be  are  phrase changes  written. thought  items has  theory a  are  decided  —  transformation  surface  The  theory  structure underlying  at  a  to  insertion  the  encoded  in  were  linguists  structure  base  The  applied  These  structure  lexicon  19.78)_.  allow  by  rule.  ordering  The  -  linguistic  surface  represent  that  considered  syntactic  theory  rule deep  by  The to  syntactic  structure,  ational  or  Theory  Langacker,  postulated  post-  types  which  complex  1973).  from  to  operations  rules,  (1972)  sentence were  (Francis,  1965;  structure  basic  by  rewrite  Streng  sentences.  insertion  sentence  five  challenged  Current  in  of  produced,  more  kernel  been  lexicon  structure  be  of  -  Transformations  Chomsky  the  phrase  existence  produce  from  these  26  to  be  included upon  the  27  message frame use  he or  is  syntax,  upon  ization  by  the  above  errors  of  of  a  proposed  sentences ations  to  were on  defined  by  as  bring  deep  syntactic  three  within  local  another or  Reasons  addition, These  the  selection  errors  (1978)  .  These  restrictions; violations to  theory  the  gramma-  as  transformational  speaker  goes  surface,  still  through Contemporary  transformational substitution,  lexically  are  operations in  and carried transformations,  based  Transformational error  operare  generalized  of  origin-  complex  transformations  and  source  that  confines  categories:  19.65) .  potential  which  determined  marker  held  omission,  transformations,  (_N. Chomsky,  into  and  tense  the  however,  out  subcategor-  Transformations  to  change.  lexical  through  structure  word-border  include:  transformation-  Kretschmer  (1957)  that  to  constraints  are  generative  steps  operations  These  sentence.  sentences.  theory,  constraints  subcategorization  a past  generated  those  have  structures  restrictions;  Chomsky  kernel  of and  Transformational ally  and  types  of  of  may  restrictions.  selectional  subject  he  (1978)  features,  inserted  Kretschmer  application  use.  strict  correctly  primary by  words,  features,  deep  sentence  words  Kretschmer  The  violations  violations  tical  and  mentioned  are:  as  be  or  their  inherent  may  appropriate  appropriate  dictate  features.  mentioned  such  which  the  items,  Kretschmer  Three are  of  selectional  restriction  by  range  features,  items  and  Lexical  features,  lexical  convey  the  them  described  contextual  al  to  restricted.  imposed as  wishes  sentence  transformations are production  reception.  for Of  the the  Study four  of  Syntax  dimensions  of  language  described  ^  earlier  (pragmatics,  syntax)  the  study.  In  students, (as  opposed  have  been  has  syntax  stated,  of  by  languages  deaf  students,  construct  and  current  for  language  learning  by  in  Quigley,  and  to  syntax  deaf  of  Power  because,  syntactic  Wilbur,  1974),  in  transformational  of  syntax,  deaf  syntax  is  and  x i i ) . As  Kretschmer  (1978)  of  English  tional  and  syntax case  lead  lies  have  (1957) and in  parti-  the  syntax  in  which  they  is  hoped  that  to  more  more  effective  efficient  of  Quigley, of  major  promise  as  delineated  work in  Kretschmer,  grounded by they  in  the  and teachers  the  fine  be  area  for  the  modern will  and  innovative  its  well  for  Smith  place  unless  that  difficulty  taken  as  research  demonstrated  has  stated,  Russell,  their  great  part  children's by  restricted  Streng,  grammarians,  deaf  delineated  has  major  (p.  expressing  ing  studying  area  grammar  are  study  it  example,  teachers."  the  Chomsky  manner  are who  an  for the  the  students. for  therein  children  the  that  principles  consequently  and  deaf  by  "...research  (see,  on  constructed  will  (1976)  structure  students  Thus  reasons  terms  of  are  research  Further  as  sentences,  and  such and  And,  is,  interpret  teaching  emphasis  is  study  11) .  language  language  the  that  linguistic  studies  syntactic  receiving  sentences  (p.  deaf  linguistic  the  language  sentence.  which  of  proposed.  of  is  this  investigations)  for  be  the  of  language  students'  reasons  unit is  the  subject  recent  of  nature  information  the  and  non-linguistic  may  linguistic  processes  is  most  earlier  syntax The  cular  not  Several of  basic  if  phonology,  of  investigations  abilities. study  syntax,  investigations  to  -  semantics,  latter,  many,  28  of points  transformahandicapped  in  -  guiding (p.  the  establishment  of  Language Much  deaf  students  samples.  language  in  their  pupils  it  sample  of  the  has  the  These  either  a  from  freely  and  analyses  and  structural  igators  as  (Chomsky,  although  freely  studies,  careful  can  a  over  tion those  on  necessity between problems  useful  of  stimulus  related  to  prevalent  that, for  descriptive  and  responses  the  dynamics  of  and  Quigley,  1977)  language  samples of  researchers  language  form  has  deaf  techniques  poor  invest-  found  language  language,  establishing  classical  grammar  are  into  of  more  were  data  oral  problems  the  research  Recently,  (Steinkamp  written  The  , have  studying  of  writing.  1965)  written  of primarily  generative  on  may samples.  gathered  earlier.  insight  they  language  which  manipulation  clearer  focusing  models  produced  Focusing  the  reflected  1957,  acquisition  advantage  data  or  involved  written  written were  transformational  theories  language  the  Kretschmer,  have  task ted  of  described  and  paper  samples  these  unambiguous  samples  which  teaching  using  give  data  study  relatively  and  of  language  for  (Kretschmer  studies  of  chosen  language  produced  involving  written  subj ect—genera  used  time,  using  static,  pencil from  research  is  researcher  Early  the  a  written  gathered  children  done  language  specific  deaf  language  been  provides  for  1978).  have  Samples  Written  because  By  of  -  30) .  Types:  at  29  an  students. preclude  for or  .  function  differentiaand  phonology.  Summary Thus  review  of  the  literature  indicates  that  -  research  into  language  primarlly  non-linguistic  atomistic  features  current a  the  primarily,  research,  it  be  descriptions  expand  upon  wise  study  by  teaching  be (1978) as  and  showing  how  present  state.  syntactic  attempt  language  and  a  rationale  and  for  for  the  development  on  in  has  Kretschmer theory  and  the  pragmatic  chapter  of  the of  evolved  study  of  next of  syntactic  complementation  language students,  to  syntax  the  its and  framework  chapter the  to present  deaf  within  The  analyzing  of  semantic  made  research  the  language  "Syntactic  involving  presented  of  and  perspective  were  the  39).  historical  theory.  to  caution  background  for  concentrating  Screen.  and  Reasons  linguistic  description  been  to  revealed, Due  the  to  research  linguistic  as  that,  (p,  has  an  framework  heed  write  to  studies  theory  adjunct  context  errors  current  an  of  language  language.  language."  providing  's  children  to  from  studies  linguistic  who  evolved  grammatical  written  may  the  has  children  deaf  of  of An  of  nature  viewed  deaf  generative  their  Kretschmer  should  TSA  deaf based  syntax  in  evolutionary  a  of  transformational  describe  the  -  quantitative  linguistically  using  and  of  30  of  contains  test  instrument  error  patterns  Items  on  the  -  31  -  CHAPTER The The the In  addition  of  a  provided,  of  the  Development  of Of  the  the  has  1968  and  197 6,  conducted of  the  was  a  program  language  the  mainly  previous  are  presented  Structures Wilbur,  in  his  were  used  to  collectively  of  of test  the  Language  manner.  This  research  Abilities  and  sentence—correction  197  71.  used:  detailed  of  pro-  the  research  Syntactic  Children  CQuigley, 1976),  research,  number  of  Quigley  of  tasks  which,  structures tasks  version  (_TSA) .  Two  (Steinkamp  in  became of basic  sentence—completion tasks  in  formulations,  syntactic  series  research,  transformational-  Steinkamp,  a  spec if ic  were  of  original  elicit  the  Deaf  structure  This  entitled  and  constructed  Syntactic format  of  the  as  youth.  conclusions  Power,  known  associates  syntactic  theoretical  report  conducting  the  and  his Between  his  19.57, 19.651 a s  and  final  associates  controlled  Test  The  Montanellli, In  and  a  on  and  1978), of  theory  (Chomsky,  findings in  Quigley  number  the  most  transformational  by  children  by  chapter.  major  a  (~TSA) the  specific  research  deaf  grammar  cedures,  a  of  influenced  generative  of  is and  Abilities  Kretschmer, and  contents. errors  studies,  conducted  Quigley  its  procedures  Syntactic  CKretschmer,and  describe  described.  of  been  and  gathering  linguistic  rules:  associates  of  to  complementation  are  recent  is  instrument  data  Test  exploration  date  chapter  of  analysis  comprehensive to  test  the  for  Tnstrument  this  description  Finally,  preparations  Test  purpose  development  THREE  the types tasks  and  Quigley,  -  The and  pilot  that  research  tested.  70  items  reliabilities the of  pilot 70  choice  each,  and  ization,  and  was  normative  TSA  is  diagnostic  battery  structures  of  inalization,  relativizatlon,  alization.  Thus  which  frequently  al.,  that  it  with  a  which and  was  p.  of The  10  of The  hours.  ment provide  of  total Thus,  a  student's  a  profile  test,  tests correct nominal-  of  TSA  TSA  is  being for  also  of  syn-  conjunction, pronomand  of  nomin-  the  structures  and  are  of (Quigley  normative led  in conditions  the  target  established  on  its  the  major  production  control  sample  is tests  the  English and  a  processes,  most  population the  individual  sample  tests.  Screen  Diagnostic  Battery  assessing  test  administration a  general  knowledge strengths  of and  com-  mentioned  time  relatively  1400  and  structures  provide  his  contains  recognition  syntactic  of  the  individual  verb  nine  to  by  and  negation,  under  TSA -  referenced  standard  The  items the  twentieth  includes  in  norms  the  choice  prehension above.  TSA  2).  TSA  of  19  complementation,  sub—samples  Development  results  one  nine  comprehension  in  selected  obtain  containing  20  cover  stratified  resulted  multiple  The  standardized  random  The  assessed  formation,  the  its  1978,  to  produced  domain  English:  guestion  et  revised  reguired  .96.  item  English.  determiners,  for  a  domain  of  importance  and  A  both  The  standard  occur  was  Included.  of  tactic  TSA  statistically  be  distractors.  test.  the  analysis  each  syntax the  .94  data  later  The  would  with  three  of  determined  between  testing  Items  was  subtest  of  -  version  It  per  32  is  about  quick  assess-  syntax  and  weaknesses  on  33  individual  structures:  constructed  CQuigley The  parallel  with  respect  the  197 8,  Test  has  the  Diagnostic  was  the  this  study made  choice  of  of  by  Test  of  will  be  made  from  the  here  to  is  in  She  under stand  them Earlier  language  of  errors  points  a  states in  on  An  attempt  basis  for be  for  choosing studied,  out  that  ",,.differcan  tests  be involving  complex  ".,.the  interpreting  nature."  nature  of  these  various  they  children  do  the  constructions  aspects  which  that  their  structures  that  out  syntactic  by  relatively  knowledge out  of  comprehension  bringing  points  to  study  items  reasons  syntactic  by  linguistic  type  empirical  structure  readily  further  important  21  and  this  specifically,  revealed  an  of  '• s mistakes  implicit Cp.  the  of  Screen.  provide  command  constructions  children  the  structures  complementation  (19 69)  selected  She  of  Diagnostic  subject  and as  Chomsky  most  2)  nature  errors  revealed  Cp.  120  More  Abilities  as  the  are  and  syntactic  the  f  in  syntactic  in  which  Errors  students  Syntactic  C.  forms  contains  students,  the  deaf  complementation  ences  deaf  distractors  the  studying  earlier  examined  errors  5).  form  same  was  Battery.  stated  syntax  Test  difficulty,  Syntactic  As  p,  two  content,  items  assesses  - Screening  al.,  Each  best  and  TSA  to  power.  psychometrically Battery,  et  Screening  discriminating  as  the  of do  not  the possess."  fail  to  wrongly, studies have  been  (Jusfeld,  19.55; Myklebust,  Thompson,  19.361.  As  of  deaf  reported  outlined  children's by  various  19.60; Simmons, in  written  Chapter  researchers  19:62; Two,  however,  -~ 34  these  early  studies  deviations More  to  recent and  recent  linguistic  done  the  by  lexical  errors, into his  and  competence  described  and  errors  selection  but  the  syntax  of  associates  .  bulk the  of  deaf  (Kretschmer  and  1378), research  Steinkamp  summarized  (1977)  syntactic  had  five  structures  children.  These  difficulty,  (2)  were,  have  Quigley  the  linguistic  research  The  to  relate  transformational  Kretschmer,  and  not  subjects'  studies  errors  was  did  -  how  acquisition  established  rules,  and  (5)  of  their  of  rate  of  in  of  deaf  (1)  order  regard  of  syntactic stages  possibly  comparison  Power,  questions  language  developmental  (4)  Quigley,  concerned:  well  rules,  to  main  the  questions  (3). possible  structure  In  by  rules  for  syntactic  distinct  syntactic  understanding  occurrance  of  in  syntactic  reading  material. The kamp,  1977)  found  structures  for  identical. better  researchers  They  subjects hearing  all  the  but  sion  and  that  deaf  and  hearing  that  deaf  generated authors subjects  subject's  showed  that  knowledge  appearance  reading  of  of  found  there  was  specif  those  The often in a  ic  various  but  not  the  oldest  the  rules  of  to  have  mastered  Another  conclu-  develop  similar-  research a  showed  number  English. gap  of  rule-  Finally,  the  between  syntactic in  become  most  had  large  structures  the  even  structures  not  of  but  structures.  language  Stein-  structures  reported  children.  structures  similar  mastery  syntactic  and of  syntactic  were  difficult  was  was  increases,  have  students  Power,  difficulty  hearing  age  not  most  of  that  as  drawn in  order  report  did  whereas  the  deaf  established  deaf  ly  the  ('Quigley,  the  structures a  widely  used  series. The  results  of  immediate  concern  to  this  and  -  study  are  those  which  point  distinct  syntactic  structures-,  question  addressed  by  quote the a  from  Quigley,  value  large  in gap  showing  the  as  specific  tests  standard  English)  found  within for  evidenced  in  many  and  except deaf  hearing  or  deaf  their  made  these  errors.  in  his that  it  language  learning  do,  is,  that  1977).  By  teachers will  perhaps the  student  was  than  the  An  the  presence  comprehension structures  language  Two,  of  the  previous  English  syntax  the  of carried  evidence that  same for  students' develop to  manner  and  counting  why  the  students' by  is  teaching generalize  useful approach  hearing  generalizations syntactic  Quigley  more  students that  students  deaf out  which deaf  generally  interesting, to  investigations  studies  have  them  as  searching  examining  can  enable  by  the  Information  evidence in  structures  greater  in  though  provide  provides  of  syntactic  in  with  English  associates  rule  studies,  The  with  authors  development.  categorizing  These useful  The  development  be  (both  Chapter  by  difficulties and  in  errors  the  7 9).  the  little  of  general  appeared  outlined  to  deaf  (from  difficulty  distinct  problems  provided  rate  this  Cp.  frequency.  of  in  the on  in  is  but  for  use...".  seem  the  childrens'  described  are  78),  there  deviant  they  certain  never  showing  performances  order  p.  children,  problems  language  subjects." As  of  to  subjects'  rarely  in  particular  in  To  (1977,  similarities  for  of  not  certain  associates.  hearing  children  ion  his  of research  Steinkamp  their  the  and  production)  that  by  except  Important  fourth  and  the  by  hearing  differences,  the  and  "...the  structures and  existence  structures  that,  deaf  the  and  deaf  and  to  "...lie  where  children  had  data,  precisely  -  Quigley  Power  between  35  students (Wilbur,  deviances, strategies the  correct  which rule  -  rather  than  the  Power,  1976)  .  The items  on  the  consistent  deviant  one  present TSA  syntactic  -  (Russell,  study  Screen  complementation  36  focused  to  on  examine A  presented  and  complementation  the  deviancies.  is  Quigley,  poss i b l i t y  rationale  of  for  choosing  below.  Complementation Complementation processes and of  in  English,  the  relativization. all  grammars,  complex  sentences  sentences  and  referred  Involve irritates  C's)  as  Thus, and  form  to  as  sentence  "for"  be  simple and  Montanelli,  either  gerundive,  its  as,  contains  ending,  this  type  they  form  smoking  of  the  "It  irritates  possessive of  two  morpheme  complement  is  complement.  complements. as  because  and  the  complements  "Bryan's  complex  smokes."  a POSS—ing  to  Gerundive  such  the  "for—to"  complete  Infinitives  complements form  wife would  wants more  for  me  usually  are  because  contains  these  the morphemes.  to be  take  out  written  the  garbage.  with  the  deleted. That—compiements.  refer  more  Wilbur may  of  example: My  The  is  it  Infinitival  For  feature  generation  complements  "Bryan  "ing"  in  a major  or  (Quigley,  POSS—ing  which  an  complement  two  recursive pronominallzation  the  processes  because  referred  to of  one  possessive  me.",  referred  often  refers  complements.  sentences:  me,"  is  three  clausal.  to  the  simple  Recursiveness it  Gerundive are  the  being  into  or  of  others  Complementation  infinitival  one  consisting  joined  19.76) .  is  to  clausal  complements  Transformational as  "that—complements".  grammarians This  -  is  due  two  to  the  simple  love  my  that  I  cally  use  of  the  sentences  wife." love  to  my  acceptable  as  the  wife."  "She  some  delete  "that"  knows  complex  In  to  -  complementizer  such form  37  it."  "I  "She  it  "that"  join  and  sentence,  instances  the  to  from  knows  is  grammati-  the  complex  sentence. Complementation transformational Thus  it  is  Results  the  case  Quigley  in  which  has  was  the been  likely  to  chosen  shown  be  for  complex  their  more  that difficult  tion  (55%  correct),  The  authors  deaf  verb  the  students and  children,  of  the  to this  to  1979; examines complementation,  structure  errors  to  as  that,  well.  and analyse  and  pronominalization  (58%  correct),  p.  aforementioned  (1977)  (60%  (54%  correct).  and  partly surface  on  generative processes  would of  the  complementa-  recursive  because  of  assessed,  were  the  shown  summary  "Transformational  partly  19.7 7,  a  Steinkamp  complementation  impose  been  In  structures  that  involved  to  have  relativization  Complementation some  this  proven  al.,  difficult  subject-verb-object  Steinkamp,  study  Power  and  and  tend  this  structures  system  predict  transformations from  a  syntactic  stated  relativization  et  sufficient  structures  would  have  children,  difficult  the  the  for  be  Quigley,  correct),  grammar  to  syntactic and  of  deaf  find  study.  research,  report  of  complex.  difficult  Clarke  Since  contain  Other to  1979;  syntax  would  studies  to  relatively  relatively  various  1978).  according  are  students  structure  of  al.,  theory  deaf  (Anderson,  et  errors  thus  that  syntactic  master. be  generative likely  particular  transformations  be  the  difficult  number  because  of  order  which  sentences."  of  (Quigley,  of departure deaf Power  77). was  chosen  structures,  for  study  which  over also  prove  -  difficult  for  appeared  more  Smith, and  deaf  Dudas  al.,  1966)  series  used  consisted  primers)  for  (for-to one  1976)  and  per  hearing  to  grade reader  but  hundred  at  existence  of  Wilbur  and  Montanelli  gathered  using  examined  errors  a  extra  version  including:  for-to  "for";  infinitival  POSS-ing  inflected  that  these  error  types  age,  with  students  ' scores  Quigley,  Power,  phrase  tendency  connect  have  already  "to"  in  gerund,  for  pattern  tVP).  per Noun  appear  until through times  on  the Other  been  POSS-ing incorrectly  patterns  the  in  sentences with  place  of  extra gerunds,  found  significantly with  Steinkamp  subjects  sentences, noun  (1977)  to and phrase  errors,  report  impose a  a  related (NP) some  include:  extra  complement,  infinitive  in  infinitive,  with age.  mentioned,  inflected  an  They  improving  complement  They  complement  interracted  nearest  data  TSA.  infinitives.  deaf  studies.  analyzed  of  used  and  in  various  complements  complements  incorrectly  to  four  twenty-one  (1976)  research  and;  ency  fourth  in  Quigley,  verb-object  the  reported  been  strong  not  least  of reader.  did  error  has  a  structures  rate  grade  some  complementation  "to";  three  Errors  The  an  The  sentences.  Complementation  with  in  appeared  (McKee  students.  the  sixth  complements  reader,  series  Complement at  the  Wilbur  (including  sixth.  in  Quigley,  reading  texts  sentences  grade one  deaf  and  material.  in  a  eleven  reportedly  reading  analyzed  up  that  it  (reported  appeared  or  fourth  the  POSS-ing)  complements  sixth  of  grades  hundred  the  by  -  because  in  Quigley  Montanelli,  et  students,  frequently and  38  subject— tend-  and of  verb which  for, place  extra of  unmarked  -  infinitive  without  "to"  39  (Quigley  Data  Assignment  of As  et  al.,  of  syntactic  and  Error a  students authors  which  (Quigley  difficult,  the  deviancies  appearing  TSA  Quigley  et  concerning the  TSA  to  directly step  in  type  was  a  of  TSA  the  is  et  of  One  of  test  in  errors  as  given  specific 15).  In  information assessed  are  from  a  by  taken first error  Screen  items  the  the  syntactic  the  Guide.  with  for  on items  the  which  Table  items  corresponding  Battery,  most  Interpretation,  items  Battery  the  finds  (p.  errors  complementation  Two,  child on  into  items  provided  test besides  Battery,  distractors  the  and  of  Diagnostic  the  The  TSA.  Screen  TSA  match  Diagnostic  types  the  the  deaf  diagnostic  types  Diagnostic  summary  forms  provide  examples  students  that  a  and  assigning  information  state  Administration  items  corresponding  1978)  language  possible  to  correct.  his  the  from  being  syntax  TSA  deaf  information  in  (1978)  Since  research  of  Quigley  the  previous  yields  al.  various  in by  al.,  aspects  Guide  1976b) .  research,  produced  as  et  which  previous  distractors  in  accepted  revealing  the  as  deviancies  had  al.,  Preparation  of  used  deviancies  et  Types  result  (1978)  -  3  the  gives Screen  from  the  and  the  description  of  in  the  TSA  (Quigley  Guide  the  al . , 197 8) .  1978)  has  first  tests  The  TSA  (commercial  two  subtests  assessing  infinitives  and  that-complements  in  questions.  each  Thus  version,  both of  et  complementation.  gerunds,  recognition the  Quigley  108  the  (36  items  The  second  and  al.,  tests  comprehension x  3  distractors)  -  40  -  Table Revised Class Screen One Item  Screen I Errors Form Distractor  Distractors  and  - Infinitives TSA  3 Parallel  and  TSA  Distractors  Gerunds  Diagnostic Battery  Item  1  Error  Distractor  21  C  38  C  -incorrectly  inflected  infinitive  46  C  55  C  -incorrectly  inflected  infinitive  48  D  23  D  -"to"  4 9.  C  9  C  -incorrectly  50  A  8  C  -"to"  52  A  5  B  —incorrectly  53  D  43  D  -"to"  54  B  21  B  —incorrectly  inflected  infinitive  Form  TSA  21  D  66  D  -incorrectly  inflected  infinitive  48  B  2  B  -"to"  49  A  52  A  -incorrectly  50  D  70  D  -"to"  52  D  16  D  -incorrectly  inflected  infinitive  54  D  32  D  -incorrectly  inflected  infinitive  Screen Two  in  in  in  POSS-ing inflected POSS-ing inflected POSS-ing  complement infinitive complement infinitive complement  Diagnostic Battery  in  in  POSS-ing inflected POSS-ing  complement infinitive complement  Table Cla,ss  II:  Screen One Ttem  That  Form  Distractor  Screen Two  Form  :3 5 38 43 45 51  Class Screen One 95 96 98 100 105 Screen Two 95 96 98 1 00 108  Complement TSA  Item  A  III  That  Form  C D Form  B D  TSA  41  (continuedI  Errors  ~~  Recognition  Diagnostic Battery Distract  35 13 4 14 6  35 38 43 45 51  3  or  A  Error  ^That-deleted  Diagnostic Battery  2 5 1 7 33  A  —That^deleted  Complement  —  Comprehension  TSA 50 57 68 67 55 TSA 44 41 43 54 48  subject  subject  Diagnostic Battery  C  -Surface  -reading  -order  D  -Surface  -reading  -order  B  -Surface  —reading  —order  D  —Surface  —reading  -order  Diagnostic Battery  complement  -  complementation type of  In  distractors  one  of  three  complementation  with As  to  assign  error et  the  classified  keeping  the  grouping  be  of  the on  al . C19.78) in  analysis  of  each  of  the  Infinitives of  distractors  tested and in  by  "to" this  error nature  involved  read.) while the  and  an they  others park  gether  the  were  to  type  were, assigned  six. to  a  second  step  a  Thus type  based  of  errors on  distractors  to  boys  the  some are  as  Insertion were  group  infinitive  together  all  in  purportedly  example,  (The  they  Quigley  this  according For  "for"  an  grammatical  remainder  grouped  and  to  Inflected The  possible  by  were  classified  play,I  not  Within  deletion  a  TSA,  distractors.  errors  error.  "ing"  involved  for as  of  was  are  provided  gerunds.  verb), were  study  distractors  The  (incorrectly  class  it  involved  of  type  distractors  the  unclassified  types  + POSS-ing  specific tors  TSA  on  3,  Guide,  and  two the  Table  therefore,  this  items  information  TSA  the  which  in  complementation  the  to  error  gerunds recognition comprehension  within  of  in  the  errors,  — —  analysis  seen  an  assessed:  groups  error  based  classifying  three  to  corresponding  being  for  can  all  type  classes  assigned  infinitives and that complements That complements  Thus  in  -  was  item  I II ITT  were  42  (I  distrac-  good  type ran  five to  classified in  similar  to-  error ity  at  class of  T  surface  structure. That error  class  to  a  type  in  this-  "that"  all based  class  insertions,  complement—recognition. distractors on  similar  involved deletions,  deletion,  were  type  verb and ten,  surface  Within once  again  this assigned  structure.  agreement,  Errors incorrect  substitutions.  Errors  are  assessed  purportedly  of by  -  the  TSA  (Quigley  et al. ,  That purportedly an  CQuigley  type  impose in  1978).  verb  "Billy  knew  the truck  might  respond  with,  essence,  all  III  that  smashed  of this  labelled  of  lifting  information  a sentence. the  surface  back  the  relies  assessed  structure  tical  the Screen  of that  complements,  by distractors  distractors similarity 17 and 18.  into  The  not  of  transform sentence  features,  but  structure  the S—R—O  whereas  class  to  derive  compre-  strategy  is  the syntactic Thus  S—V—O  S-R-O  refers  pattern refers  to  to the  gramma-  distractor. III,  two main  of error  strategy  structure  assessing  (S-V-O).  of the  Within  items  in which  strategy  features  class  sentence.  Within  apparent  in  to the  does  on the surface  of the  dis-  category.  component  subject—verb-object  the  types  the surface  the student  type  two  of a complementized  solely,  meaning  hension  is,  structure  to its base  rather  is  That  In  of this  refers  from  student  the truck.".  "other"  Surface—reading-order  the to  a  In addition,  as an  with  contain  did not f i t in any of the six  and were  is, sentence,  in response  III were  type.  That  CNP)  they  error,  students  order.  the car.",  knew  in class  of an  deaf  phrases  example  "Billy  errors  variations  tractors  two noun  For  was  a complementized  (VP) and assume  information.  class  type  research,  from  error  (S-R-O)  this  CS-V-O)  to connect  phrase  required  or  In making  information tend  this  strategy  13 in the present  gathering  The  the TSA within  a subject-verb-object  students a  by  surface-reading-order et al.,  labeled  1978),  complement-comprehension.  assessed  imposed  43 -  types  two main  it is possible  groups  because  to of  classify  the  basic  13, 15 and 16 and of types groups  correspond  to type  14, 13  -  (S-R-O) 14  with  (order  tions and  .  types  reversal) These  B  15  (14,  with  two  17,  discussion  main  18)  A  being  is  order  or,  responses  the  object  in  to  type  as  deriva-  (13,  15,  purpose  strategy  Quigley  16)  of  Guide  group  A. B. C. D.  The  difference  initial as  with  final  the in  A  errors.  sense  all  the  could  be  in  O—V—S  the  would  a deviant  stu-  surface the  high  S-R-O seem  rule  in  which  an  a  as  that  measuring  had  NP,  distractors  Certainly  answer  subject  considered  of  in  the  an  group  noun  to the  lang-  S-R-O  dispropor-  responses,  Several,  clarify.  items  cited  correspond Two  the  resulting  items  sentBoth  sentence  (1978)  correct  to  would  9.8,  of  on  major  with  those  such  correct  S-R-O  the  form  al.  appear  1973).  strategy  Also,  a  serve  Screen  One  of  number  The  the  Wolff,  sentence.  et  students.  may  and  items  rearranged  existence  high  TSA  the  distractors,  produced  examples  order  CO),  broadest  stimulus  13 by  tionately  CS—V-O)  begin  of  test  one  the  type  deaf  Screen  A  children  surface-reading-order  of  of  from  added  deaf  begin  B  the  specified  B  the  complement!zed  Thus,  uage  105  18  pattern,  responses  image  the  that  1978;  S-V—O  the  fact  a  of  the  A  a  a mirror  support  in  and  renamed  for  1976,  comprehension  structure  as  B have  respond  score  and  are  shown  al.,  group  in  assessing dents  et  from  whereas  the  17  groups  has  group  (NP)  which  in  types  derivations,  subject-verb-object  and  that  phrase (S)  a  (Quigley  groups  as  here.  impose  ences  16  -  respectively  Research to  and  44  items  by  to 98  Quigley  Screen B  and  One 105  D.  et items  al.  (1978)  98  An  C  and  example  be: man  learned  a box  fell  The man learned the girl. The girl fell on a box. The man learned a box, A box fell on the girl.  on  the  girl.  -  Distractor  C in  tested  for  tractors any  this  of  this  type  Several  a similar  structure  The  stimulus  man  learned  NP l  l  correct NP S  1  this  +  VP  +  V  than employ  A box  S  VP  +  2  distractor  V  +  2  V  2  O  A is made  albeit  the incorrect  a  of S-R-O  the stimulus  does  girl.  the final,  particular  and  NP of  Clark,  Distractor  to  connects  the  with  the  final  A in  this  item  16.  or mirror the  pattern,  conform  case  sentence  example,  distractor  S—R-0  complementized  becomes  is similar 1977)  it does  in this  sentence,  the object, of error  which  type  to a S-V-0  Also  the stimulus  of error this  conform  object.  as a reversal  type  2  °2  strategy  NP + VP of  actually  of:  4  distractor  wherein  NP . 4  NP  l  classified  girl.  up of:  V  In  the  °2  the  VP  an example  accord-  or  4  I  initial  on  up  NP  +  learned  this  up,  2  is made  +  made  structure  NP „. 2  2  3  surface  deep  fell  3  NP.  the  of:  NP  +  l  CClark  +  structure  1  explicit,  S  +  1  example  NP , I  This  grammar,  surface  man  Is  dis-  frequently  Is actually  °1  V  NP of  and  component  NP „ 2  1  type  which  , however,  more  to its  something.  VP I  is  more  distractors  sentence  The  Thus  or  13 error)  chosen  be reduced  to transformational  S  were  the example  ing  The  (Type  other  make  will  parts.  In  the di s tract  strategy. To  The  -  was  a S—R—O strategy  other.  S  case  45  the  error  B is (type  sentence,  subject  of  the  to the given—new  as described  14)  by Kretschmer  which response.  contract and  -  Kretschmer  (1978).  student in  appears  the  "the and  to  response  girl"  the  in  begins  stimulus  the  It  of  their was  should  to  phrase  of  strategy,  the in  the  last  the  the  B.  information  example  above,  stimulus  Thus,  sentence  the  information  a  a  list as  be  noted  with  the  an  error  disfrom  the  regardless  of  based the  the  been  the  similarities  distractors  the  a  by  groupings  in  other  more by  structure of  the  while  caused  The  surface  complexity  distractors  on  some  error. on  identifiable  substitution  have  was  of  based  or  for  study  Thus  In  may  types  assigned  existence  omission  error  error  were that  type  transformational were  the  deviancies.  simple  however,  of  they  structures.  the  complex  type,  similarity,  possible  cause  of  error.  Data  Collection The  administered teacher  of  use  used  the  in  same  gesture  in was  and  The  means  of  examples  communication to  examples  language, order  to on  each  ensure  often  were  in  tests.  student.  variously  given  however,  no  assistance  Clarke,  in  press)  .  was  innormally Thus using  graphics  subjects Once  instructed  were  the  were trained  giving  as  spelling, that  a  were  student  with  finger  the  most  administrators  instruction  reguired  begun,  S c r e e n i n g Tests  personnel,  deaf.  and sign  Abilities  school  classroom  speech,  ('Rogers  the  and  instructions  what  syntactic by  structions  was  is,  classes  surface  distractors  to  That  "given"  gives  syntactic  assigned  the  the  concerned  patterns  error  4  three  study.  primarily  of  match  a  sentence.  within  were  or  such  distractor  with  Table  the  connect  final  phrase  tractor  employing  choice.  is  first  In  4 6" -  and  understood the to  actual be  testing  provided  -  47  -  Table Error Class  I  Types  - Infinitives  Identified and  *2 .  inflected verb  3.  -"to"  4.  -infinitive/gerund substitution  5.  -"ing"  -  deletion  6.  -"for"  -  insertion  Class Type  II  (sub-  deletion  - That  Analysis  Examples  •incorrectly infinitive •"to" + ing stitution)  *1 .  for  Gerunds  Description  Type  4  Complement  -  David watched the elephant ate, Tom watched the men worked. David watched the elephant to eating. Tom watched the elephant to eating. The children ran home eat. The teacher told me where sit. Tom watched the men to work. I showed the l i t t l e boy how jumping. The boys are good at read. The man was good at spell. I ran to the park for to play. The girls went for to fish. Recognition Examples  Description  7.  -verb + ing agreement)  (verb  8.  •for/that insertion)  9.  -to/that (to  *10 .  •"that"  11 ,  -that/it  substitution  12 .  -so/that  substitution  sub  (for  substitution insertion) deletion  John knowing that the lady loved ice-cream. Susan hearing that Jim helped the lady. John knew for the lady. The man said for David won the game. The man said to David won the John knew to the lady loved ice-cream. The baby was asleep surprised father. That was sad the cows were hungry. So the girl dropped the ball surprised the boy. So the baby was asleep surprised father.  game  -  Table Class  III  - That  Type *13.  (continued) -  Comprehension Examples  Description Reading  14.  Order (Mirror)  Reversal  15.  NP  16.  (NP + VP)  17.  final  18.  (final NP + VP) i n i t i a l NP  *Indicates et al.,  4  complement  Surface  19.  48 -  +  (final  NP  Order  VP  =  NP)  - final  +  NP  initial +  Other  error 197 8) .  type  specified  S.  John knew the car hit the policeman. R. John knew the car. S. The teacher learned that Tom chased Sally. R. Sally chased Tom. S. The teacher learned that Tom chased Sally. R. The teacher chased Sally. S. The boy knows that the woman loves children. R. The boy knows children. S. It scared Linda that the dogs hurt the boy. R. The boy scared Linda. S. That Billy was chasing birds surprised Billy. R. Mary surprised Billy. S. It scared Linda that the dogs hurt the boy. R. Linda scared the dogs. [May be: "Linda (is) scared (of) the dogs."] by  the  T.S.A.  (Quigley  -  The eight  calendar  order  was  subjects days  were  order  effects.  Test  the  in  two  within  March  testing  each  assigned  1978  in  dates.  school  order  with Test  district  to  and  avoid  possible  Format  the  data  availability  (Quigley  used  by in  format were  al., the  the  of  items,  1978), test  permission  was  authors  to  print  Certain  the  test  instrument  were  in the  such  a  prior of  to  the  sought  the  TSA  from  test  and  booklets  or  David David David David  0 Comprehension  but  these  That the surprised A B C D  to  one the the the the  13 have are  three preceded  elephant ate Father.  the booklets  answers  Form)  120  format. were  presented  items.  Recognition  correct  choice:  elephant elephant elephant elephant  eat. to eat. ate. to eating.  Q distractors  and  by  stimulus  the  a  flower  The elephant ate the flower. The elephant ate father. Father surprised the elephant. The flowers surprised Father. A  to  contained  choice  each  in  The  allow  booklet  and watched watched watched watched  also  made.  comprehension  S  items  choice,  sentence. Example:  on  distractors A B C D  changes  a multiple  (n=18  recognition  as  Each  in  items  three  manner  booklet.  presented  Example:  correct  edition  booklets.  each  have  commercial  test  Complementation  items  completed  The  in  either  the  was  study.  designed  marked  collection  of  et  granted  as  -  tested  between  randomly  Since  be  were  counterbalanced  students  49  one  -  Recognition from  tions  items  comprehension  preceded  by specific  or to  Example  more  examples  those  will  kinds  one  You  choose  Example A B C D  of  the You  Tom Tom Tom Tom  finished finished finished finished  is  You In  the  mark this  Read  Mark If  the  Example  Is  right.  m H Tom  finished  eating.  sentences. carefully.  sentence. with  an  X  in  your  booklet,  guess.  comprehension; These what  Example;  The the  What  is  more  know,  decide  A B C D  sentences.  to eating. eating, to ate. eat.  answer  for  You  Instruc-  one:  s  right  careful.  You  B,  are  not  of  an X  right  do  a set  were  sentence.  choose  sentences  the  you  Be  book  of  sentence:  B with  the  Choose  right  guestions  recognition:  right  3,  separately  guestions.  sentences  Q B,  of  groups the  of  and  for  read  Only  presented  Both, kinds  instructions  You  -  were  items.  one  50  does choose  Dad The The Dad  the. right  are  the  different  sentences  tell  boy who talked black, horse. the  kinds  sentence  sentences.  us.  to Dad tell  of  rode  us?  one:  rode the black horse. boy talked to Dad, boy talked to the black horse. talked to the black horse.  sentence:  The  boy  talked  to  Dad.  -  B  is  marked  with,  51  an  -  X  like  0  this.  Q  0  Summary The  linguistic  associates  research,  and  his  The  research,  version  and  the  TSA  yielded  Information  have  abilities  a  revised  of  the  syntactic  The  present of  syntactic study  instrument  the  and  version  present  sequent  led  as chapters  results  of  to  a  it  was will  the  on  the  TSA  description used deal  were with  analyses.  data  of  the  data  using  description  analyzed  presented.  of  students.  gathered  the  TSA.  syntactic  A  was  Quigley  the  deaf  Screen,  which  by  versions  the of  used  of  revised  deviancies study  out  development  subsequent  structure and  the  carried  in  final  the.  test The  analyses  suband  52  -  -  CHAPTER  FOUR  Me thod  The the do  method deaf  students by  larger  study  press)  and  frequent This  and  on this  reference  the TSA  and  the  Clarke  of a  and  Rogers  of  data previous (in thus,  to that  research. the  subjects  the data Finally  procedures  analyses  The  part  instrument,  as  certain  (in press)  procedures.  analysis these  were  descriptions  preparation  describe guestion:  of  Screen?  be made  test  to  rules  choice  by Clarke  will  the study,  of  syntactic  guestion  by Rogers  is  the research  consistent  contains  results  chapter  deviant  as reported  the data  Five  their  chapter  data  of  have  to examine  this  to examine  of distractors  used  of  of  followed  evidenced types  purpose  collection, an  outline  is presented.  are  presented  this  study  The  in  Chapter  .  Subjects The of  a larger  earlier  subjects  sample  Booth,  1973  in and  students  had  Stanford  Rogers  et al.,  (Rogers  1978),  Abilities and  guess ing Special  (TSA) Screening in  impaired  197 8,  tested  press).  subsample in the  In March,  (SAT-HI)  were  Clarke,  identified  Leslie,  Test,  Students  a  (Clarke,  above  Achievement  Impaired  Syntactic  1977). scored  been  were  of hearing  Columbia  Horvath,  who  had  survey  British  hearing  Two  which  demographic  students  of  level  those on  Edition  (reported on  Rogers,  for by  the Test Forms  the  One  of and  Students to the  syntactic  selected  structure  following  the  Of  this  -  for  were  the  studies  selected  related  according  to  criteria:  1.  Average or better academic as indicated by their ability above chance level on the priate level of the SAT-HI;  2.  Age, rounded to the nearest number (as of December 31, between 7 and 19;  3.  A hearing loss~ sensori-neural  4.  Known to personal  5,  In need of special educational treatment because of hearing impairment.  Altogether, of  53  505  TSA  number,  known to have component;  were  Test  129  whole 191771  a  have been fitted with hearing aid, and/or;  students  Screening  achievement to score age-appro—  had  tested  (Rogers the  with  and  a  both  Clarke,  following  forms in  press).  audiometric  characteristic: 6.  This the  group  Hearing threshold level (HTL) of 90 decibels (dB) obtained by calculating the arithmetic mean of the pure tone air conduction thresholds in the better ear at frequencies of 5001, 1000, and 2000 Hertz (Hz), using American National Standards Institute (ANSI) cri teria ,  of  sample  129  for  profoundly  the  present  Students chosen The ized  for  TSA with  students  study  (Quigley a with  with for et  large the  deaf study  these  the al.,  population following  s±udents  served  ,  characteristics  were  following  reasons:  1978)  initially  was of  as  hearing  (1)1 standard-  impaired  characteristics:  -  Thus  1.  Sensori~neural hearing impairment not less than an average of 90 dB (ISO) in the better ear at 500, 1000, and 2000 Hz.;  of  2.  Hearing age of  the  3.  I.Q. of at least 80 on the scale of the WISC or WAIS, or comparable test;  4.  No apparent to hearing corrected  students  were  characteristics sample for  by  choosing  the  et  129  to  examine  syntactic  to  make  since  errors  of  the  made  by  children  deaf  (Jones  Steinkamp,  and  shown severity  the  purpose  chosen  of  for  , Quigley,  loss  has  used  to refer  precluded  normal  (Myklebust,  1964,  deaf  as  (usually  understanding with  p.  "one 70  of the  hearing this  whose  hearing  ISO speech of  or  loss  study most  greater)  a hearing  Finally,  the  Power, Power,  term and  19.7 6;  1977).  is  likely  errors uses  The  whose  hearing  of  language."  (1978)  through  was  (3)  acquisition Moores  use  syntactic  and  "those  that  press;  students  Wilbur,  to  was  in  Quigley,  4),  dB  study  hearing  1977;  rationale  syntactic  Russel  had  second  study)  1977;  is  A  of  the  who  normative  that  Impaired  Quigley,  performance some  addition than  the  this  regarding  with  before  study  Rogers,  1979;  deaf  or  of  Quigley,  term  without  (2)  and  and  the  of  as  literature  Steinkamp  person  those  errors,  were  much  this  al.;  had  decreased and  for  subjects  1978)  increased,  extent  et  ([Clarke  al.,  performance  to  Quigley  present  disabilities in impairment other visual defects.  selected  research  Quigley  impairment two years;  similar  used  previous  54 -  defines  a  disabled that the  ear  aid."  to  an  precludes alone, (p.  5),  -  and  he  defines  IV,  as  90  in  the  dB  examining  acquisition, extreme find  highest  beyond  the  effects  of  best  strategy  case  of  'pure'  a satisfactory  bound (p.  to  help  Wolff  t  solve  of (1973)  is  to  to  that  on  language  consider  the  deafness; this  less  level  suggests loss  complete  the  deafness,  hearing  solution  us  -  level  and  "the or  55  if  problem  severe  we  can  this  is  problems."  154) . The  were  those  most  likely  similar  whose  students  14  -16  chosen  for  the  loss  was  profound,  hearing  to make  to  of  students  syntactic  errors,  and  sample.  The  the  TSA  normative  by  age  was:  (n = 35);  17  study,  8-10  (n =  +  (n = 12);  therefore, who  who  were were  distribution 11  - 13  (n =  56);  26).  Instrument The revised  test  version  (TSA)  (Quigley  Two.  The  Chapter  of et  the al.,  development  Test  of  1978) of  used  the  in  the  study  Syntactic  Screen TSA  a  Ability  Forms  was  was  One  and  described  in  Three. The  Screen  The  instrument  syntactic  include:  items from  items  chosen  assessed  by  the  Negation Conjunction Determiners Question Formation Verb Processes Pronominalization Relativization Compiementation Nominalization  chosen  items  structures  the  for larger  for  the  the  Screen  TSA  are  the  Diagnostic  present  study  most  discriminating  Battery. were  The  those  which  Screen assess  complementation. A presented  in  rationale Chapter  for Three.  choosing It  complementation should  be  noted  was  -  here  that  the  obtained  scores  earlier  Forms  correct, 47.8%  The for  Clarke  (in the  in  similar  study.  Screen and  students  to  correct,  were:  to  discriminating.  chosen  over  some  because  it  appeared  reading  materials  al  reason  that  it  for was  sufficient Screen  Form)  Rogers,  in on  punched  press;  and  crepancies  item  were  with  as  was  the  common  children.  An was  which  addition-  the  fact  appeared  (18  times  with on  each  at  studies  Clarke,  the  press)  University had  the  in  two and  and  data  for  key  (Clarke  each  research an  British  coded  demographic  and  were  of  been  file  (Clarke  subject  assistants.  error  count  of  was Dis-  less  than  obtained. study 129  inclusion  in  the  study.  research  was  type  in  earlier  and  by  the  error  so  analysis.  resulting  for  for  Thus  structures  Screens  responses  this  to  the  resolved  was  necessary  correct.  difficult  deaf  the  verified  to  55%  Complementation  allow  file  The  For  Rogers  difficult  frequently  Rogers  merged  percent  42.9%  structures  from  computer The  by  Analysis  al. , 1977).  data  to  data  independently  the  as  both  complementation  complementation  on  the  reported  sufficiently  with  the  for  Columbia.  one  of  so  across as  sample  in  correct,  other  more  choosing  The  et  the  frequency  Preparation  stored  of  were  used  one  reported  relativization  items  maximally  Columbia  pronominalization  53%  complementation be  those  sample  system  and  British  averaged  B.C.  press)  -  the  scores  the  verb  56  rather  new  students  examine  re—score  a  file who  Since possible the  items  than  for  was  met  the  the  the  intent  error so  created criteria of  correct  for  the  patterns  that  containing  percentage option  present it  was scores were  -  obtained. a  This  score  the  value  type  re-scoring of  being  one  analysis  (0).  This  procedure  error  types scoring  for  all  key  is  The involved  merging  Two.  This  items  analyzed.  had  was  repeated  for  effect  That  is,  a  total  108  was  in  Chapter  dlstribution presenting  each  Data  doubling  on  each  by  108  19  One  there  analyzed.  18  student  's  (36  items  of  type  5 gives  of  were  Each  error  and  number  each  complementation  zero  analysis  Form  Form  an  of the  data  distractors  to  that  items.  the  merging  on  B.  Screen  Table  error  of  of  the  as  the  des-  frequency  distractors  re-  type.  Analysis The  of  the  each  for  of  assigned  Three.  of  from  to be  was  value  Appendix step  of  it  complementation in  and  - 108)  distractors  36  scores  x 3 distractors  cribed  the  assigning  distractors a score  preparatory  the  were  other  if  assigned  of  by  a distractor  All  items,  there  to  accomplished  were  the  complementation score  (1)  presented  next  -  was  analyzed.  particular  The  57  the  data  described  procedures  are in  procedures  was- an items  item  for  carried Test  out  is  of  in  using  the  Package especially scores  for  chosen  use  the  in  initial A.  obtained  the  data  of  the  each  Form  One  distractor.  percentage for  were  step  Screen  Analysis  program  first  each  the  analysis  The  results  using  the  below.  analysis  both  in  In Appendix  Five  described  on  scores  described  Chapter  The  used  and The  analyses 18  Two item of  (LERTAP)  (Nelson, oriented  subtest  items,  study.  complementation to  obtain  analysis  Laboratory  subtest  procedure  percentage was  Education  Research  1974). and and  so  This yields  it  was  -  58  Table  -  5  Frequency Distribution Items by Error  Type  Screen  Infinitives  and  Complement  7 8 9 10 11 12 That 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Totals  Screen  Two  Screen  Total  Gerunds  n= 6 8 3 5 2 0  1 2 3 4 5 6 That  One  of Type.  n= 5 7 3 5 2 0  N= 11 15 6 10 4 2  3 4 3 3 1  6 8 6 6 2 2  Recognition 3 4 3 3 1 1  Complement  1 Comprehension  3 2 3 3 1 1 2  2 3 4 2 2 2 0  5 5 7 5 3 3 2  54  54  108  of  Type  -  The centage  scores  using  with  for  LERTAP  of one  of  error  distractors The  percentage ed  by  the  subtracting  correct  number used  of  as  the new  percentage The  scored  for  was:  was  each  were  gave most  error  type.  of  the  remaining  item  size each  the  These  subjects  test  who  from  that  error  type  ft  total was  on  calculated.  and  all  subjects  k =  subjects i tern  n  =  number  of subjects  who made  i  =  number cular  of subjects distractor  who  who  test  correctly  score  n.  Item.  j  by  answered  chose  the  an  error  a  parti-  of those individuals who: an error and, (2) chose a distractor.  This  indication  chosen  where  (129)  the percentage  accurate  then  which  were  = X%  percentage CI) made particular  obtain-  chose  the  item  mean  were  difference  for  on a different  that  in-  N =  frequently  being score  x 100  a more  on  type  i/n  item  calculated  ever,  an  for  error  N - k =  X =  Thus  and  a  this  calculating  The resulting  scores  procedure  involved  each  sample  out,  containing  (n = 11)  In  zero.  on each  subjects.  the  an incorrectly  the number  answer  to assign  assessing  one  for  time  the percentage  scored  step  one.  carried  of  per-  types,  were  distractors  distractors  third  score  each  all  were  error  to obtain  (those  were  the  in step  analyses  changing  example,  infinitive)  into  obtained  to those  1 errors  flected type  only  For  type  key  regrouping  distractor  19 separate  measured. for  each  involved  scores  the response  score  step  the percentage  effect,  97  second  59 -  those  for  error  procedure, of which students  types howerrors  who  made  -  The overall Thisin  mean  three  the  type.  score  summing  of all  dividing  that  involved  percentage,  was- done, hy  step  and  fourth-step  60 -  for  calculating each  total  error  the percentage  the distractors by  The procedure  the  the type.  score within  number  obtained each  type  of distractors  of  was:  n X~, . 3  = I x . ,/n i«» iJ X  =  the percentage score each dlstractor  j  =  the error groups  1  '  N  The overall type. occuring results' Five.  mean  data  two of  =  were  percentage  The next  the number representing  then  was times  in any are  CI - 19) or  of  in  by  presented  terms by  item  error  within  distractors error type  each  obtained item  for  items  examined  scores  analyses  type  the individual each group  analysis  or more  these  where  each, for  class. in  of  the error  triads The Chapter  -  61 -  CHAPTER  FIVE  Results  This analysis A  procedures  decision and  the  three  of  the  the  containsfor of  of  further and  the present  Item  hypothesis various  I n addition,  is  study..  The  discussion  of  for  study,  report-  types  within the  as a research  future  chapter.  (H' ) is  error  guestions, this  the  instrument,  discussed  in  light  subsequent  chapter  the results, and  Implications  the  limitations  study.  Analysis In  who  Screen  secondary  teaching  the  of  the preceding  is presented,  the TSA  results  in  the null of  classes of  the results  described  a discussion  efficacy  of  contains  regarding  ed,  one  chapter  did  three  not  each  of  choose  the  distractors.  randomly,  equal  making  an error  correct the  Cone  of  on any  reliably  greater  that  an error  type  third one  or  was  might  chosen be  each  33.3%  more  frequently if  chosen distractor  of  subjects  percentages  than  expected  of  were  for  Any  students  a choice  the number  item).  less  had  distractors  score  3 3.3%  than  if  items,  answer  percentage  were  frequently  complementation  Thus  the mean  should  the  which  would  they  indicate or  less  were  chosen  randomly. One fication  factor  which  difficult  were  juxtaposed  type  1 distractors  types  2 and  were  juxtaposed  on with  made  error  the Screen  was  unequal were  4; in  other  with  the  fact  frequency.  competing instances,  types  pattern  2 and  For  in various type 3, and;  1  identithat  items  example, items  with  distractors in s t i l l  another  -  instance,  types  Thus- it of  was  the  1,  not  mean  by  test  a  of two  each  the  expected  of  several  or  more  may  not  the  omitted  of be  1,  items, to 33.3  test  one  item.  For  if  This  to-  was  any  calculated  differences  total  made  is,  was  example,  occurred  occurred  neither  thus  3  of  from  significant. the  that  performed. triads  chi—square  that  answer, and  a  was  and  To  expected  when  2,  the  item.  only  were  subjects  item  and  were  Gerund  type type type type type  1 2 3 4 5  type  6 —  this  class  within  more  than  are  identified  and  3) , Group  the  excluded  across  some  because  in  an  error  student from  and  5)i.  (Class  gerund  I,  nor may  the  items  types  have  cal-  distractors  as:  "for" of  a  1-6)  had  — incorrectly Inflected — "to" + "ing" verb - "to" deletion — infinitive/gerund — "ing" deletion  for B  Errors and  identified  Within  4,  that  are by  the  analysis  type  100%,  Infinitive  2,  from  .  Infinitive  which  deviations  types  item  from  than  noted  equal  correct  the  culations  juxtaposed.  presented  distractor  more  items  instances  chose  error  are  performed  in  value  does  were  Interpret  the  which  error  those  It rows  of  each  were  distractors  for  reliably  chi—square  occurred  in  types  differences  chi—squares  gether  to  scores for  scores  distractors if  6 error  scores  significant  percentage These  the  scores  for  -  chance.  Thus percentage  and  possible  overall  expected  2,  62  substitution  errors,  single  three item.  discussion  (types  1,  as 2,  and  infinitive (substitution) substitution (see  groups  Chapter of  These  triad  Group  A  4)_, and  triads  occurred  groupings  (types Group  Three).  1, C  2, (types  -  Group incorrectly played  inflected  verb 3,  were  juxtaposed  sented  those  on  1,  were  made  more  One  of  the  and  another  at  were  .05),  tested  consisted  of  showed  error  eat.),  frequently  in  the  were  items  in  four  Group  In  the  1,  the  triad  of  of  five  and  C.  A  the  three  However,  the one  Group  chosen  dis-  the  three the  errors  which error  type.  distractors those  with  David  Table in  an  watched  were  (p < .05)  third  df  mean  the  same  4,  items.  significant  juxtaposition  expected  4  .05  differences of  2,  items.  since  (eg.,  type  the  2 in  the  types  was  two  type  When  errors  the  chosen  most  6 shows  that  two  of  these  B.  Group times  favor  pre-  3  p <  of  across  significance  substitution  to  scores  means  help.)  6,  five  frequently  significant  in  B.  infinitive/gerund elephant  for  consistently Group  the  fun  Table  at one  and  are  type  significant in  is  in  the  an  eating.),  triads  of  to  plus  It  shown  four  least  Thus  items  As  liked  to  (eg..  However,  the  home  assessing  "to"  juxtaposed,  In  p <. .10.  not  individual not  3 were  He a  These  A,  was  3 was  ran  deletion  Group  and  with  items.  differences  (p<  types  five  those  (eg.,  those  frequently  type  tractor  2,  "to"  6 as 2,  distractors,  children  a  in  types  items,  The  Table  -  infinitives  with  when  1  type  (eg.,  type  were  Type  baseball.),  "ing"  A  A.  63  were  triad of  cases  the  significant  difference  was  instance  and  which  types  occurred  2,  4,  differences at  the  favor  and  5  from ,05  significant in  three  in of  type  errors.  the  level. favor 5 in  of the  other.  That  Complement-Recognition The  types  of  Errors syntactic  (Class deviancies  II,  types  found  7-12) in  -  64  Tahle  Percentage in  Group  A  ;  Scores Error  and Class  -  6  Chi—Squares I (Types  for 1—6)  Triads  1  2  22.8 30.2 3 9.6 31 . a 27 ,1  3 0,4 23 .4 43 . 7 25.3 32 , 9  1  2  4  N  37 . 7 12,3 25 . 8 27 .4 34 . 8  44 ,3 57 . 9 4 0.3 45,2 34. 8  18 .0 28,1 32.3 27 . 4 30 . 3  61 57 62 62 66  2  4  5  30.0 46,8 29 . 2  3 6.7 37 .9 18 . 8  33 . 3 13,9 50 . 0  Type  3  2  N  Item 21 48 48 21 48  (Screen (Screen (Screen (Screen (Screen  Group  B  ;  One) One) One) Two) Two)  Type  46. 7 44 . 4 16 ,7 43 . 7 - 40 , 0  92 63 48 87 70  6. 98* 4 . 21 6, 10* 4 . 64** 1 . 15  X  2  Item 46 52 54 52 54  (Screen (Screen (Screen (Screen (Screen  Group  C  :  One) One) One) Two) Two)  Type  N  6. 86* 18 . 40* 1 . 98 3 , 93 0 , 27 2  Item 50 53 50  N * **  :(Screen (Screen (Screen  One) One) Two)  = number of each item = p < .05 = p < ,10  subjects  who  incorrectly  60 79 48  answered  40 13 . 80* 7 .29*  ^  the  distractors  items  were  for identified  type type type type type type Within edly  this  of  by  the  deletion  of  (eg.,  deaf  quently  in  triad.  This  As  can  be  of  seen  7 was  least  in  they  were  error  7,  and  two  more  of  at  of  type  the  of  10,  "that" father.). fre-  the  7,  9  type of  six  times.  Screen the  7 errors items  on  were One  items,  others  were  two  chosen Screen  were in  8,  chi—squares  On  chi—squares  in  most  than  significant  occur  occurred  the  .10.  three  to  type  total  frequently  two  always  two  purport-  surprised  was a  is  said  error  which  errors  which  is  asleep  occurred  in  not  test  as:  type  is  was  of  whereas  some  and  triad  Table  chosen  frequently while  The  ,05  times,  Thus  which  class  at  three  TSA  grouping  significant type  the  baby  A.  this  Three  errors,  students  That  Group  Chapter  recognition  - verb + ing (verb agreement) — for/that substitution — to/that substitution - "that" deletion - that/it substitution — so/that substitution  class  language  -  complement  in  7 8 9 10 11 12  assessed  the  that  65  Two.  significant,  favor  of  the  same  type.  with  Group  B.  10  C"that"  types  substitution)  in  scores  of  the  scores  for  chi—square  10  8 and  rejected who items, than  and  it  made  was  was  "that"  expected  12  both  12. at  On the  types  concluded on  that  (so  In both  for  the  low  items  the  the  Thus hypothesis deaf  complement  chance.  high  very  null  that  that  the  ,0.5 level.  deletion by  juxtaposed  cases,  resulted  error  errors  made  In  type  of  appeared and  errors  grouping  was  quently  type  errors  items.  significant  this  nition  two  type  8  deletion)  was  for  students  Type  errors This-  recogmore  fre-  result  -  66  Table  Percentage in  Group  A  :  Type  -  7  Scores and Chi-Squares Error Class II [Types  N  9  8  7  for 7-12)  Triads  X  2  Item 35 38 43 35 38 43  Group  (Screen (Screen (Screen (Screen (Screen (Screen  One) One) One) Two) Two ) Two)  B :  Type  (Screen (Screen  One) Two)  45.0 31 . 8 46. 2 19.2 18 .5 43 . 9  10 .0 30. 0 19.2 34 . 6 29.6 21 .1  42.5 38 . 6 32.7 46.2 49 .1 35.1  40 44 52 52 54 57  9 . 18* . 545 5 . 71** 5 . 7 3** 7 .82* 4 . 53  10  12  N  X  79.2 7 3.9  14 , 6 14 .6  96 96  8  2  Item 51 51 N * **  = number of i tern = p < . 05 = p < .10  4.2 11 . 2 subjects  who  incorrectly  answered  95, 2* 58 . 6* each  -  supports  the  "that" and et  deletion  common al.,  That  literature  in,  the  In diagnostic of  structure  (Menyuk, of the  Three:  type type type type type type type the  assessed  type  Type could not  review  student's  contained  is  language  students  Errors  (Class  13 14 15 16 17 18 19  TSA of  an  19. was not  — — -  the  13,  The  be  to,  (Quigley  of  had as  III,  was  types  noted  obtained  Screen  errors  that  from  certain items  an syntactic  which  assess  distractors  described  13-19)  which in  Chapter  surface reading order (SRO) order reversal (mirror) NP + (final VP + NP) (NP + VP) + final NP final NP + i n i t i a l clause (final NP + VP) + Initial NP other errors, and deaf  Imposed  the  which  type  which  reportedly  students  is  purportedly  occurs  (Quigley  et  frequently  al.,  surface-reading—order  a category  be  best  it  comprehension  following  language  could  complementation  of  by  literature  created  otherwise  to  classified,  1978),  strategy.  contain  two  items  such  it  and  as  one  triad  which was  analyzed. this  error  class  more  than  once.  The  errors  that  triad  were  types  14,  Table  specific  deaf  of  1969).  class  In  scores  incorrect  deviancy  of  Comprehension  the  comprehension  the  a syntactic  information  analysis  In  reports  1978).  Complement  Within  which  to be  -  67  and 8.  chi-squares  for  only which  15,  and  these  were 16. triads  occurred  juxtaposed The are  in  percentage presented  in  -  68  -  Table  Percentage for Triads  8  Scores and Chi-Squares in Error Class III 2  Type  14  15  16  33.3 4.4  28.2 26.7  35.9 64.4  N  Item 95 100  (Screen (Screen  N  Two) Two)  =  number of i tern = p < .05  *  subjects  Within committed of  with  the  two  score  obtained of  errors  types  the  because  types,  It  nificant  or  due  of  triads  can  type  type  14  the  case  of  the  unequal  to  on 16  was  be  seen  with  the  null  The  primary  frequency  in  Table  Screen  the  it  the  effect.  this  hypothesis  was  error  observed score  error sig-  is  students  may  Thus  this  not  the  group  of  for  this high  at  previous  expected  one  On  was  the  which  on  8.  Two,  in  each  were  juxtaposition  the rule  context  errors  Again  determined from  16  distractor  error.  syntactic  merely  be 100  the  difference  a deviant  type  .13 23.80*  answered  greater  number  cannot  to  triad,  as  by  as  incorrectly  significantly  item,  expense of  this  items,  particular  who  38 43  due employ pair  rejected.  Summary  determine tractors than  if of  expected  purpose  profoundly various  deaf  syntactic  frequency.  of  this  students error  The  results  study  was  selected types  with  presented  to disgreater above  -  reveal  an  uneven  Indication and  that,  students,  students  may  frequently the  the  some  others.  capable  this  at  least  That  one  particular by  operating  results  of  of  more  alone,  according  to  sample  and  some  more that  in  of  That in  linguistic revealed  students frequently thus  this  students  reliably made  a  than  was  appeared  rule,  occurrance,  generation. deaf  was  items,  error  chance  the  capable  as  of  suggest  rule  are  items  distractors  profoundly  is,  group  type  expected  the study  generation.  These  linguistic  that  in  type  some  of  frequency  error  in  to be  number  for  students of  suggest  sample  rule on  select  deaf  appears  a sufficient  controlling  than  are  results  given  -  There  and  profoundly  study  pattern.  69  to  at  least  on  of  this  study  be those  items. Another to  test  the  provide  of  of  deaf  by  and; those  the  TSA.  errors  types were  mentation  items.  itive  gerund  and  complement  in  the  to 1 and type items  and  was type  this  al.  13  2 were  and  tests  "to"  complements,  et  certain  10  of  In  Quigley  10  (197 8)  the  presence  t  2,  the  complements  strategy  specific  recognition  al.,  that—deleted  1,  items,  in  purportedly  for—to  to by  Types  et  was  to  deviancies  deviancies  marki.ng;  complements;  to  Screen  deviancies  Included:  referred  TSA  Quigley  These  tense  errors  the  syntactic  surface—reading—order  correspond These  using  specific  Incorrect POSS-ing  purposes  students.  complementation  with in  of on  to several  measured  the  efficacy  information  language refer  of  study, (1978)  respectively. kinds found  of in  found  in  13  was  compleinfinthat found  -  in  that  complement  were  type  analyzed,  expected  were of  showed  chosen  the  be  Distractors errors  in  Identified more  squares  for  triads  significant  of  as  other that  and  tests  performed. results  the  The of  Russell  of  the. language  same of  of  frequency  results  language  an  of  Screen individual  since  those  to  individual may  be  student's errors  seem  although  comprehension  syntactic  any  therefore  not the  al. ,  1978;  reported  virtue  of  provide  in  support  of  chosen this  support  in the with  some These  the  ability in  That  the is,  Information error assessed  fact  study.  deviancies  students.  purportedly  were  than  which  were  to  chi-  deviancies  by  these  to  errors,  et  1976)  subjects  deaf  able  13  to  syntactic  identify  errors  were  students,  also  10  (Quigley  items  The  regularly  seem  the  the  overall  appear  Power,  by  in  assessing  deviancies  would  Screen  not  of were  complements.  studies  deaf  reported  other  type  caution  scores.  (1978)  type  chi-  so  al.  any  four  and  another  frequently  specific  these  the  the  of  et  would  and  in  10,  significance  results  than  results,  type  items  did of  , Quigley,  degree  test  previous  existence  that  in  larger  these  And,  more  complements  triads,  analysis  that  .05).  correct  types  item  containing  ('p <  accepted  frequently  than  of  error  distractors  more  Quigley  triads  for  2  mixed  frequently  recognition  type  error by  testing  scores  interpreting  labelled  selected  all  whereas  revealed  exercised  the  those  significantly  Individual  however,  within  of  significantly  items.  squares, must  were  score,  items.  that  none  1 distractors  the  -  comprehension  Results which  70  for profile,  by  the  TSA  -  (Quigley  et  frequency  of  the  some  An  adjunct  of  feasability  not  for  that  be  students using  TSA  deaf of  of  some of  Screen  be discussed  of  the  the  as  ability in of  a  errors  study, used  the  the question  students.  this  effectively  of  deviancies  syntactic  of  will  significant  question  was  the  because  ranee  with  specific  purpose  juxtapositioning ations  to the  of profoundly  can  occur  deaf  results  made  items.  to analyze  the  were  to assess  of  instrument  from  1978)  in  Screen  language  sample  al.,  71 -  research  in a  large  the  appear,  TSA  Screen  as a research  instrument  the infrequency  error  various further  the  It would  that  types types.  the  of  and  the  unequal  These  in Chapter  limitSix.  -  72  -  CHAPTER  Summary  The the  methods  study.  used  In  future  purpose  tions  of  the  education  of  chapter  is  to  obtained  in  the  the  presented  present  are  this  some  are  Conclusions  results  addition,  research  and  of  and  SIX  also  present  possibilities  in  study.  summarize  light  The  for  of  the  limita-  implications  for  discussed,  Summary In mentation  this  test  research,  items  of  the  the  responses  TSA  Screen  to by  compleseverely  + hearing The  impaired  students  responses than  correct  set  of  to  that  choice an  rules  to of  age in  to deaf  a  of  the  based of  the  on  a  rather  in  and  of  a  did  the  error  existence  was  have  which  this  syntactic It  fact  rules  certain  of  made  pattern.  usage,  Student  purposes  students  albeit  of  19. years. errors  the  did  examined.  not consistent  type  these  would deviant  syntax.  complementation Screen  if  were  to of  of  English  of  8  terms  students  distractors  indication  from  consistent  rules,  standard  students  One  Distractors  the  HTL)  determine  syntactic  conform  in  analyzed  according  theorized  dB  responses.  was  errors  be  ranged were  research  (90  (incorrect  Items were  the  on  classified  both  Form  into  surface—structure  distractors.  Error  I  choices  an  One  and  error  of Two  were  of  category  syntactic types  all  similarity grouped  within  -  three of  classes,  corresponding  complementation  tives and  and that  ation  of  gerunds,  frequently null  within  certain  nificantly  were type, types  for  the  be  or  vidual  test  Limitations  of This  secondary  some  errors  instrument  form  but  the study  of to  students cast  study . doubt  syntactic  this  in  TSA  Difficulties  the various  the  it  by Thus  was generation  to  indi-  could  not  several was  in  areas. to  of  determine  as  a  a  large  encountered efficacy  same  rule  Screen  errors  clear  triad.  study  research  the  the  the  conclusion  limited  syntactic  No  ' responses  Study  sig-  since  the  of  Present  on  .  affected  the  that  made  be  in  types.  using  reveal  of  up  all  of  types  favor  to  made  this  was  error  however,  in  the types.  others  in  of  error  were  than  students  purpose  feasability  various  seemed  of  because  did  samp led  clear  frequency  observed  across  test  times  which  items,  a  more  rather  generalized  the  examin-  more  of  but  influenced  (Infini-  occurred  triads  consistently  some  types  distractors  the  not  that  equal  established  errors  the  types  frequently  students  have  research  of  triads  of  concluded  deaf  Screen  performed  differences  the  of  be of  two  could  significant  the  not  more  pattern  A  the  However, of  analysis  occurred  be  on  to  others.  juxtaposition  which  may  three  The  error  hypothesis  level  error  certain  could  unequal  triads  the  complement-recognition,  responses  than  occurrence  Item  to  that  student that  the  guestions  -  complement-comprehension).  revealed  of  73  using  research  in  sample the the  -  Screen  for  related  such,  might  Screen  items  tures.  The  these  errors  syntactic  error  types.  would  again  few  In so  of each  A that  the  with  equal  it  second  various  of mean an  was  that  not  the  two  items  the  larger  average was  type  reasoned  istic  of particular  correct  syntactic  ohserved,  to  the  thereby  of  only  for  the  of,  ages, rules age  occur  than could  compariFor  example,  items,  any  reliability  type  the outset was  errors  certain  jux-  in  those  generalizeable,  age  at which,  possibly  fact  evenly  two  error  or  student  If  not  not  in  with  syntactic  that  items  too  the  types.  at  It  prior  error  asked  the  of  statistical  question  encl.ng  ly  were  items-,  whether  of  groups,  did  of  was  was  they  indicative  of  new  number  was  errors  to report score  most  into  problem  population A  research  of  occurred  possible  would  type.  across  type  across  it  smaller  prohibited  scores  items  limitation  and  fact  error  and  original  types  This  consistent  total  into  major  struc-  complementation  TSA  error  frequency  taposed.  when  the  TSA  to classify  the  subdivided  This  syntactic  all  other  doing,  recreating  examples  son  the  test  including  the  not  of  type. by  therefore,  of  be  in  instrument-  number  environments  necessary,  distractors  thereby  different  are  the  error  test found  of  small  remedied  however,  been  the  been  which  other  One  of each  have  distractors,  the  was  representative  problem  have  a purpose.  limitations  Items-  74 -  to,  of  this  a factor made  errors-  influ-h  by  students.  were  ins truetion  characterof  be. Initiated the Incorrect  Improving  the  the immediate-  rule  was  students'  -  syntactic ment,  competence. the  type  analytical Al  were  proceed  as  tically  reliable  Implications  not  to  test  one  of  study  of  such  the  drawn.  for  Future  TSA  Items. as  was  allow  analysis  items  x  the  of  was  because  the  contained  its  data  two  a  statisas  a  a  the  large  sample.  of  the  TSA  each  Diagof  made  distrac-  the on  TSA  42Q  would  (140  distractors.  This  the  present  for  the  subjects  up  108  Screen,  available  Thus,  future  portion  having  in  129  instrument  for  responses  undertaken  for  form,  research  subtests  = -420)  responses  as  than  with  base  not  no  present  domains  student  not  could  suggestions  rather  case  the  (see  age  complementation  contains Thus,  analyses  instru-  of  required  of  the  3 distractors  procedure  in  or  The  TSA  complexity  Thus  used  use  test  Study  Screen,  to  the  regarding  deviancies  Battery.  tors  the  efficiently  be  larger  the  of  envisioned.  implications  would  70  and  that  be  syntactic  nostic the  be  nature  conelusion  The  -  procedures  initially  could  could  data,  statistical  Appendix  factor  of  The  75  study Screen  who  met  the  + criteria HTLl,  for  inclusion  whereas  who  were  1/3  of  the  tested  those  in  number  the of  on  the  TSA  tested  on  the  Another  area  control  for  of  type. occurred  If  all with  of  the  equal  90  dB  subjects was  less  than  Screen.  TSA  the  number  domains  future  reconstructing  Lie.  elligible  for  Involve  the  study  Screen  examples  errors frequency,  research  of  Included and  so  as  each in  if  would  the  they  to error test were  -  juxtaposed could  be  If  these  of  the  S  an  a  mean  of  scores  was  to  in  a  student 's  a  profile  such  a  of  more revised  several  items  time  Screen  the  some for  of deaf  of  other these  hearing  syntactic  A,  the age  with  control inclusion  insights independent different  In  might  the  be  variable  on  be  5)_ .  spent  the  of administer-  might in  syntactic Although  be  study  as  as  threshold  to  HTL'-s consistently  difficult  still  make  outlined  in  a variable  considered  as  at  90  control  make  considered dB  as  a  criteria  significant  examining  determine  with  a  levels +  Some by  be  them.  considered  obtained  as  in  study  may  in  study.  Such  domains.  not  set  individ-  require  deviancies  and  provide  administration  students  levels  variable  of  and  future  may  which  and  p.  would  preliminary  hearing  syntax  TSA  errors  was  purpose  complementation.  the  threshold  variable  for  than  structures  In Appendix  for  of  weaknesses  would the  Such  efficiency  al , , 1978,  possible  students,  sy stematic  as- a  area  examination  structures  of  which  assessment  of  in  Scheffe's  of  prohibitive  as  subtests  (using  original  and  spent  comparison  consistently,  the  required  be  Another  types  quick  be  instrument.  simple  made  knowledge  would  Screen  indication  its  et  the  research  Increase  CQuigley  number or  are  strengths  however,  much  an  fulfilling  structures  large  also  his  a  error  a relatively  of  task,  the  any)_  general  l  times-,  as  provide  (if  provide  of  -  controlled,  of  I would  would  Screen  ing  were  errors  the  a  used  factors-  revision  ual  number  efficiently  procedure  types  equal  76  if the  HTL  as  students same  an with  kind  or  -  nu.mh.er of  syntactic  in  studies-  future  error  x  method be  syntactic  include:  error  x age  as  or  Ivimey  (19.76) might  Signed  variables  errors.  consider  be  of  error  x  a factor  age? Communication  English)  should  future  analysis  researchers, that  variance  x H.TL.  in  Some  -  Analysis  might  ASL,  considered  ology  errors.  H~TL; and, (oral,  77  also of  including  communication  method-  Influencing  syntactic  development,  Implications  for One  concerns' be  educational  the .fact  responding  that  is,  Results-  to  Quigley,  the  and  syntactic are  capable  rule  they  must  correct impaired examine syntactic  to  rules  of also of  19.76) are that can  be  learning be  syntax. would  deaf  students  rather  well  language than  deviant  the  the  terms  individual  if  or  advised in  poor  since  learning of  (Russell, It  1  Incorrect of  randomly.  area  reliable.  Educators be  than  more  an  to frequently,  this  Improved,  study  appear  more  rather in  capable  students'  patterns  rule,  this  did  types  research  therefore,  therefore, their  some  of  students  error  previous  performance  they  deaf  certain  Power,  appear,  implication  that  according of  would  Education  hearing to of errors.  -  73 -  BIBLIOGRAPHY Anderson,  Barry,  J.L, Syntactic abilities: The use of the TSA screening test with selected sub-populations of hearing impaired students. Unpublished M.A. thesis, University of British Columbia, 1979. K.  Blackwell,  Buell,  The Five—Slate System: A system language teaching. Philadelphia: Co. , 1899.  of objective Sherman and  P., Engen, E,, Fischgrund, J,, and Zarcadoolas, C. Sentences and other systems: A language and learning curriculum for hearIng—impaired children. Washington, D.C.: The Alexander Graham Bell Association for the Deaf, Inc., 1978 , E.  Outline Revised; Bureau,  of language for deaf Book II. Washington, 1934, 1954.  children, D.C.:  Book I, The volta  Charrow,  V,R. Deaf English: An investigation of the written English competence of deaf adolescents. Psychology and Education Series. Institute for Mathematical Studies in the Social Sciences. Stanford University. Technical report No. 236, September 30, 1974.  Chomsky,  C. 5  Chomsky,  N. Syntactic 19 57, 197 5.  Chomsky,  N. Aspects Ma.: MIT  The acquisition of syntax in children to 10. Cambridge, Ma.: MIT Press, structures.  of the Press,  The  theory 1965.  of  Hague:  syntax.  from 1969. Mouton,  Cambridge,  Clarke,  B.R., Leslie, P.T., Rogers, W.T., Booth, J.A., and Horvath, A. Selected characteristics of hear ing impaired school age students; British Columbia 1976-1977 . Vancouver, B.C.: The University of British Columbia, 1977.  Clarke,  B.R. and Rogers, W.T. abilities in hearing of Speech and Hearing  Correlates Impaired Research,  of students. (in  syntactic Journal press).  Clarke,  B.R., Rogers, W.T., and Booth, J.A. Use of the screening forms of the test of syntactic abilities with hearing impaired students in British Columbia: A progress report. B.C. Journal of Special Education, 1979, 3, 1, 3-26.  Conrad,  R.  Cooper,  Dale,  child: Language and London: Harper &  R.L. and Rosenstein, J. Language acquisition deaf children. The Volta Review, 1966, 45-56.  Croker,  Dale,  The deaf school cognitive function. Ltd., 1979.  G., Jones, M., and Pratt, M. Language and d r i l l s . Books I, II, III, IV. Bermont: The Bermont Printing Company, 1922, 1928. D.M.C. Language development in hearing children. Springfield, Charles C. Thomas, Publisher, P.S.  Language New York:  Fitzerald,  development: Holt Rinehart  deaf  and  stories Brattleboro 1920,  1974.  the deaf. Company,  Francis,  W. Approaches to grammar. In Current Trends in Linguistics, 122-144. Mouton, The Hague.  Fusfeld,  I. The deaf.  academic program of Volta Review, 1955,  of 68,  partially Illinois:  Structure and and Winston,  E. Straight language for Staunton, Va.: The McClure 1929.  Row  function 1976.  Inc.,  T. Sebeok (ed.) , 1973, 10,  schools for 57, 63-70.  the  Goetzinger,  C. and Rousey, C. Educational of deaf children. American Annals 1959, 104, 221-231.  achievement of the Deaf,  Groht,  Natural language for ton, D.C.: Alexander for the Deaf, 19.58.  ,  M.  deaf children Graham Bell  WashingAssociation  Harris,  G.  Language for the preschool deaf child. New York: Grune & Stratton, 1951 , 1963, 19.71.  Heider,  F.K, and Heider, G.M. A comparison of sentence structure of deaf and hearing children. Psychological Monograph, 1940, 1, 4 2-103.  -  Hirsh,  I,  Ivlmey,  G.  Jones,  Kirk,  Teaching and G.A, Cambridge,  B,  _  the deaf child Miller (Eds.I, Ma.: The MIT  The written An exploration Disorders in  Experimental sciences. Publishing  procedures California: 1968.  R. 1976,  Kretschmer,  R. and Kretschmer, L. Language and intervention with the hearing Baltimore: University Park Press,  Lenneberg,  E, New  Lyons,  Chomsky. Co. Ltd.,  J.  McNeill,  P,  , D,  Myklebust,  Nelson,  The  Biological York; John  Glasgow: 1977.  Educating the and practices. Company, 1978.  William  deaf: Boston:  H. The psychology of deprivation, learning, York: Grune & Stratton, to New  Volta  Review,  development Impaired. 1978. New  York:  foundations of language. Wiley S Sons-, Inc., 19.67.  Sentences children use. The MIT Press, 19691.  L.R. Guide Dunedin, 19.7 4 .  the social Brooks/Cole  and its structure. Jovanovich, 1973.  D, The capacity for language The Volta Review, 1966, 68,  Menyuk,  Moores  acquisition. 60-67.  , R, Language Earcourt Brace  deaf child: Journal of II, 103-120.  for  Kretschmer,  Langacker  Smith language.  A study of complementation in deaf and hearing students. of the Deaf, 1979 , 1 , 23-24.  design Belmont, Company,  Language 78, 4,  to speak. In F. The genesis of Press, 1966.  syntax of an English in method. - British Communication, 19:7 6,  and Quigley, S. the language of American Annals-  R.  8Q  Collins  1,  Sons  and  acquisition. 17-3 3.  Cambridge,  Psychology, Houghton  Ma:  principles, Mifflin  deafness: Sensory and adjustment. New 1964.  LERTAP use and Zealand.University  interpretation. of Otago,  -81Plntner,  Power,  Pugh,  R., and Paterson, D, language ability of gical Review, 1916, D.  G.  and Quigley, S. passive voice. Research, 1973, Summaries abilities Amer ican 349 .  A measurement deaf children. 23, 413-436.  of  the Psycholo-  Deaf childrens acquisition of Journal of Speech and Hearing 16, 5-11.  from appraisal of acoustically Annals of the  D., and of deaf 73-84.  of the silent reading handicapped children, Deaf, 1946, 91 , 3 31-  Quigley,  S., Power, structure 1977, 79,  Steinkamp, children.  M. The  The Volta  Quigley,  S., Smith, N., and Wilbur, R. Comprehension of relativized sentences of deaf students. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 197 4, 17, 325-341.  Quigley,  S., Steinkamp, M,, Power, D,, and B. Test of syntactic abilities: administration and interpretation. Oregon: Dormac, Inc., 1978,  A  language Review,  Jones, guide to Beaverton,  Quigley,  S., Wilbur, R., and Montanelli structures in the language of Journal of Speech and Hearing 19, 3, 448-4 57 , Ca)Z  D. Complement deaf students. Research, 19.76,  Quigley,  S., Wilbur, R., Montanelli, D., Power, D., and Steinkamp, M. Syntactic structures in the language of deaf children. Urbana, Illinois: Institute for Child Behavior and Development, 197 6, Chi.  Rogers,  W.T., and Clarke, B.R. Psychometric istics of the Test of Syntactic Screening Test. Educational and Measur ement, (In press).  characterAbilities Psychological  Russel,  W,, Quigley, S., and Power, D. Linguistics and deaf children: Transformational syntax and its applications. Washington, D.C.: Alexander Graham Bell Association for the Deaf,,Inc., 1976.  82  Schmitt,  P. Language instruction Volta Review, 1966, 68,  Simmons,  A. A comparison of the type—token ratio of spoken and written language of deaf and hearing children. The Volta Review, 1962, 64, 417-4 21.  Stark,  R.,  Steinkamp,  Ed. Sensory capabilities children. Baltimore: 1974. M. and Quigley, written language. 78, 10-18.  A.  speech and Stratton,  Streng,  A,, Kretschmer, R., and learning and deafness: classroom management. Stratton, 1978.  deaf.  hearing. 1972.  deaf Review,  New  L.  Templin,  impaired Press,  children's 1976,  York:  Kretschmer, L. Language Theory, application and New York: Grune &  E. Evaluation of written language students. The Volta Review, 1966, 679-685 and 775-776.  Taylor,  The  of hearing — University Park  Assessing The Volta  Streng,  Stuckless,  Syntax, Grune and  S.  for the 7 3-94.  of 68,  deaf  A language analysis of the writing of deaf children. Unpublished doctoral dissertation , State University of Florida, 1969.  M, A comparison of the spelling achievement of normal and defective hearing subjects. Journal of Educational Psychology, 1948, 39, 337-346.  Thompson,  W. An analysis of errors in written tion by deaf children. American Annals Deaf, 1936, 81, 95-99.  Wilbur,  R.  Wilbur,  R., Montanelli, D., and Quigley, S. Pronomin— allzation in the language of deaf students. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 1976, 19, 120-140.  Wolff,  J,  An explanation of deaf children's with certain syntactic structures of The Volta Review, 1977, 79, 85-92.  composiof the  Language, Brain and Methuen & Co, Ltd.,  hearing. 1973.  London?  difficulty English.  ~ 8-3-  Appendix Preliminary  Chapter base  of  Five,  It  that  their  for  analysis  a  age  second  ing  the  ing  procedure  of  Two  of had  that  variance  by  been:  do  11-13,  deviant  the  Thus  deaf  and  data  age.  14-16,  distractors,  and  students  and  17+)  thereby  syntactic  indicate  rules  specific  group?  The and  set  of  Chapter  considered  (8-10,  types  have  both  initially  groups  different they  In  guestions  age  Analysis  was  earlier  different  Data  mentioned  allow  the  choose  to  was  would  one of  As  A  preliminary  steps  raw  analyses  outlined  data  in  (percentage  was  followed  Chapter  the  Five.  scores),  first  After  however,  obtain-  the  follow-  followed:  3.  An arcsin transformation data to enable comparisons error types to be carried  of  the raw between out.  4.  Analysis Ca) (b) Cc)  5.  Contrasts between error types: usring Scheffe s S. procedure, to determine significant differences between error type frequency rank order CKirk, 19.68, p. 90)  of variance (ANOVA). by age of subjects by error type age x type  1  Examination  of  however, are,  reveal  therefore,  the ed  data several  not  the  the  rank  age  scores  classes  arcsin order.  was  for  by  of  That  different  procedures,  Inconsistencies  the  and  rank—order  transformation  each  these  the  results-  reported.  Examination after  produced  of  is, the than  scores  revealed  the  rank  error the  a  order types  order  and  difference  of  the  within after  before  the  in  mean  the  three Scheffe  percent-  ^  procedure  on  first  class  using  mean  ever,  results  the arcslned of errors  4 had  Identical  whereas  the  types score in  had  2/4,  initial  order  example  for  the  occured for  5 using  now  7—12  types  5.  is,  most  frequently,  types  2 and but,  the remaining  and  How-  S—Method  That  to 1,  the  error  and  the mean  changed  types  In  4, 2, 6, 1, 3,  5, 6,  order  3,  For  4  error  percentage  3, 13  5, 6. — 19  Changes  were  observed,  in  transcribing  It  was: concluded,  problem and  lay  of  the data  or  interpreting  in  the  the manner  the keying  zero  CO I  could  item  the  or  being  be  that  on  in  contains  a zero  4 in  puter  as having  procedures between  that  the In  analysis  involved  subjects  all  those  0. .  not  of  either  that test  error  analysis.  were  type For  1, row 1  for  item  21,  However,  also  read  by  Thus- when  the  rows the  com-  analytical  impossible  choose  used  a score  the  that  the  arranged.  B, column  it was  added  were  choice.  column  did  which  particular  particular  applied  order  were  contain  correct  correct  analyses  not  of  who  of  with,  that  indicated  the  source  were  for  errors  output.  as: meaning  a score  students  the  data  in Appendix  same  were  chose  did  which  1 was  2 and  the raw  that  the Key  A or  that  of procedures  choice  any  the data  interpreted  the item  example,  to reveal  of a distractor  correct  tabulated  choice  type  in which  is,  was  failed  therefore,  That  they  and  of  order was  3,  rank  had  Check  it  data.  transformation  1,  6, 1,  the rank, order  also  arcsln  scores  been  the  f  scores  after were;  raw  the. rank  percentage  comparison  8,4 ^  to error  discriminate type  because  answer.  to overcome to  the  study.  excluding who  this  scored  from one  problem,  additional  The first  additional  the  total  hundred  number percent  of correct  -  for  that  analysis Table made to  particular are  the  least next.  homogeneous were age  x type.  the  only,  in  number  one  error  varied  Therefore,  and  particular  should sample  subjects  analyses be  used  error  were  No the  of  (n)  one  samples  on  only  results Examination  from  types.  therefore, Subsequent  9. of  the  error  The  Table  the  across  -  type.  that  undertaken,  items to  presented  9 shows at  error  8S  no  further subject  were  this  of who type longer analyses  variable  carried  considered in  this  out  of on  applicable study.  _ 8,6 _ Table  Error Error  9  Analyses  Class  I  Summary  (Types  1—6)  Table C_N  ltems-16)  1  2  3  4  5  6  N  11  15  6  10  4  2  48  *k  13  13  26  14  27  50  143  *n  116  116  103  115  102  79  631  'k  1  ~X  16 .46  20 . 63  16, 83  21 .13  1 6 . 9,1  25. 31  S  16,19  17 ,30  18 . 7 6  11 ,9.3  15 .57  26 . 64  X Error  Class  II  (Types  7 -12)  (n  items = 10)  7  8  9  10  11  12  6  8  6  +  4  2  2  *k  37  6  37  7  48  14  149  *n  92  92  122  81  115  625  'k  1  123  N  +  ~X  18.29  8.84  22 . 28  44 .46  27 . 77  12 . 17  S  15.89  12 .80  17 . 7 6  24 . 41  27 .58  24 .71  X  Error  Class  III  (Types  12-19)  (n  28  items=10)  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  *k  5  5  7  5  3  3  2  *k  25  33  37  31  39  46  71  96  96  98  90  83  58  *n  104  ~X  21.92  12 .71  12 .11  15.31  12.96  24. 09  31 . 03  S  14 .7 4  12.22  12.05  16 .83  17 .90  16 .77  19 .43  *k  -  number  of  *k  -  number  of  *n  -  number type  +  -  two item  distractors subjects  of subjects (129-k=n)  distractors and scores  not  making  making  at  any  errors  least  of same type occured were combined.  one  of  this  error  of  together  in  type this one  N 30  87  Appendix  B  Assignment of Scores for Item Analysis for Error Types 1—6 infinitives' and Gerunds Screen Screen it em 21  ^ 46  48  49  50  52  53  54  Type  1  A B C D  0  A B C D  A B C D  3  0  4 0  5 0 1  6 Q  1  0  0  Two 2  3  Q 0  1  Q 1  0  4  5  6  0  0  0 1  0  0  1 0  1 0  0  0  0  0  0  0  1 I  1 I  1  1  1  0  0 1 0  1 0  0  1 0  0 0  0  0  0  0  0  0  1 0  0  0  0  0  0  0  0  1 0  0  0  1 0  1  1 I  0 I  1  1 0  0  0  1 0  0 0  0  1  A B C D  1 0  A B C D  0  A B C D  2  Screen  I  A B C D A B C D  One  0 1  0  0  0  1 1  0  0 1  0  0  0 1  0  0 0 1_  I 0  0  1 0  0  0  0 1  1  I 1  0  0  0  1 0  1 1 0  0 1  0  0  0  0 1  0  0  0  1 0  0 1  0  0  0  J  Appendix  88 (continuedI  B  Assignment of Scores for Tern Analysis for Error Types 7—12 Infinitives and Gerunds Screen Screen Item 35  38  43  45  51  Type A B C D A B C D A B C D A B C D A B C D  7  1 8  Screen 9  10  11  12  7  0  1 0  0  0 1  8  9  0  1 0  0  0  0 1  1 0 1  0  10  1 0  0  0  12  0  0  0  0  0  1 0  0  0  0  1 0  0  0  0  0  1 1  1 0 1  0  1 0  0  0  0  0  0  0  0 1  0  0  0 1  0  0  0  0  0  0 1  :.i  1 1  1  1  1 1 0  11  1  1 0 1  2  1 0  0  0  0  0  1 0  0  0  0  0  1 0  Append!x Error  Types  Screen Screen Item 9.5  Type  13  98  705  Complement  Comprehension Screen  15  16  17  18  19  13  0  0  0  15  17  18  19  0  0  0  0  0  0  1  0  0  0  0  1 0  16  1  0  1  0  0  0  0  0  1 1  1  0  0 1  1  0  1 0  0  1  1  1 I 0  0  0  0  1 0  A  0  0  0  0  0  0  1 0  0  0 1  0  0  0  0  0  0  0  0 1  0  0  0  0  I 1  A B C D  0  Two  14  1 0  A  B C D  )_  One  14  0 I  A B C D  B C D 100  13—19. That  (continued  A  B C D 96  B  0  0  ~  0  -  0  0  -  0  0  0  ~  0  1  0  "" 1  :  '  0  0  :  0  1 1  1  1 -  1 1  0  0  w  -  APPENDIX  C  TSA  SCREENING  FORM 1  FORM 2  TEST  DO NOT COPY LEAVES 91-167 -  91 -  TEST OF SYNTACTIC ABILITIES  SCREENING TEST FORM 1  DO NOT COPY — 1  U n i v e r s i t y o f I l l i n o i s a t Urbana-Champaign  Experimental E d i t i o n NOT FOR PUBLICATION OR REPRODUCTION IN ANY FORM S p e c i a l p e r m i s s i o n granted by Dr. Stephen Q u i g l e y f o r e x c l u s i v e use i n the Demographic Study o f H e a r i n g Impaired Students i n B r i t i s h Columbia, Canada.  © 1971 BY THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS  TEST OF SYNTACTIC ABILITIES SCREENING TEST FORM 1  Name:  Date of B i r t h :  School:  School D i s t r i c t :  Date of T e s t :  -  You  w i l l read groups of sentences.  is right.  Example 1.  A.  [AI  You  choose the r i g h t  You  choose  The  flower i s not  B.  The  flower i s no  C.  The  flower not  D.  The  flower i s y e l l o w  sentence:  i s marked w i t h an  -  Only one  of the  sentence.  one:  A.  i s the r i g h t  93  X  yellow. yellow.  i s yellow.  The  like  no.  f l o w e r i s not  this:  yellow.  sentences  -  Example 2.  94  -  You choose one:  A.  The g i r l  B.  The g i r l w i l l h e l p i n g the teacher  C.  The g i r l w i l l  D.  The g i r l  C. i s the r i g h t  You mark  ["cl  help the t e a c h e r  tomorrow.  help the t e a c h e r  helped  the teacher  tomorrow.  tomorrow.  tomorrow.  sentence: The g i r l w i l l h e l p the teacher  w i t h an  X  tomorrow  95  -  Example 3 .  -  You choose one:  A.  Tom f i n i s h e d  to e a t i n g .  B.  Tom f i n i s h e d  eating.  C.  Tom f i n i s h e d  to a t e .  D.  Tom f i n i s h e d e a t .  B. i s the r i g h t  sentence: Tom f i n i s h e d  eating.  You mar  In t h i s book a r e more sentences. Read the sentences Choose the r i g h t  carefully.  sentence.  Mark the r i g h t answer w i t h an X I f you do not know,  i n your b o o k l e t .  guess.  S T O P  -  9JS -  A.  The puppies aren't i n the box.  B.  Not the puppies are i n the box.  C.  The puppies are no in the box.  D.  The puppies no aren't in the box.  [B]  A]  A.  We stopped boat.  B.  We stopped an boat.  C.  We stopped the boat,  D.  We stopped a the boat.  3. A .  Who gave you a ball?  B.  Gave you a b a l l who?  C.  Who Jim gave you a ball?  D.  Who you gave a ball?  4. A.  [c]  [|j  LD  E  G O [c]  [D]  H[A]  GO  [C]  [D]  0  0  The laughter of the g i r l surprise the man.  B.  The laughter the g i r l surprised the man.  C.  The laughter to the g i r l surprised the man.  D.  The laughter of the g i r l surprised the man.  A.  Not Mother was at home,  B.  Mother was at home no.  C.  Mother wasn't at home.  D.  Mother was no at home. 0  S  -  8.  97  -  A.  The boys not a r e f e e d i n g  B.  The boys a r e n ' t  C.  The boys a r e f e e d i n g  D.  The boys no a r e f e e d i n g  A.  I didn't  B.  Not  C.  I not d i d go.  D.  I not go.  A.  B i l l y colored  a picture.  An p i c t u r e was r e d .  B.  B i l l y colored  a picture.  A p i c t u r e was r e d .  C.  B i l l y colored  a picture.  The p i c t u r e was r e d .  D.  B i l l y colored  a picture.  P i c t u r e was r e d .  A.  Baby k i t t e n s can't see.  B.  Baby k i t t e n s not see.  C.  Baby k i t t e n s not can see.  D.  Baby k i t t e n s can no see.  feeding  the animals. the a n i m a l s .  the animals n o t . the a n i m a l s .  go.  I d i d go.  LH  10.  A.  We  fed an cows.  B.  We f e d the cows.  C.  We f e d a cows.  D.  We f e d the a cows. H  LH  H]  11.  A.  The k i t e was i n sky.  B.  The k i t e was i n the sky.  C.  The k i t e was i n a the sky.  D.  The k i t e was i n a sky.  98  -  fA  12.  A.  I w i l l f i n i s h e d the work a f t e r l u n c h .  B.  I f i n i s h e s the work a f t e r l u n c h .  C.  I w i l l f i n i s h i n g the work a f t e r l u n c h .  D.  I will  f i n i s h t h e work a f t e r  lunch. A  13.  A.  The g i r l s not walk i n the r a i n .  B.  The g i r l s would walk i n the r a i n no.  C.  The g i r l s wouldn't walk i n the r a i n .  D.  The g i r l s not would walk i n the r a i n . A  14.  A.  Tom saw a b i g b l a c k dog.  B.  Tom saw an b i g b l a c k dog.  C.  Tom saw b i g a b l a c k dog.  D.  Tom saw a b i g b l a c k dogs. A  15.  A.  Not the dog has seen the f o o d .  B.  The dog not has seen the food.  C.  The dog hasn't  D.  The dog d i d has not seen the food.  seen the food.  A  -  16.  99 -  A.  A b i g c a r went up t h e h i l l .  B.  B i g a c a r went up the h i l l .  C.  An b i g c a r went up the h i l l .  D.  A b i g c a r s went up the h i l l . LU  17.  18.  19.  20.  A.  The g r a s s does l o o k no green.  B.  The g r a s s does not l o o k  green.  C.  Not the grass does l o o k  green.  D.  The g r a s s not l o o k  A.  The dog has a b l a c k t a i l .  B.  The dog has b l a c k a t a i l .  C.  The dog has a b l a c k t a i l s .  D.  The dog has an b l a c k  A.  Father was going a home.  B.  Father was going an home.  C.  Father was going home.  D.  Father was going the home.  A.  The boys a t e a the meat.  B.  The boys a t e the meat.  C.  The boys a t e the an meat,  D.  The boys a t e a meat.  green.  tail.  [Dl  21.  22.  100 -  A.  David watched  the elephant e a t .  B.  David watched  the elephant to e a t .  C.  David watched  the e l e p h a n t a t e .  D.  David watched  the e l e p h a n t to e a t i n g .  A.  D i d Mother make a cake?  B.  Do Mother make a cake?  C.  Mother make a cake?  D.  D i d Mother can make a cake? LH  23.  A.  The boy t o s c h o o l l a s t  Monday.  B.  The boy walks t o s c h o o l l a s t  C.  The boy i s walked to s c h o o l l a s t  D.  The boy walked t o s c h o o l l a s t  Monday. Monday.  Monday. lA  24.  A.  Mary heard to the r o a r o f the l i o n .  B.  Mary h e a r i n g the r o a r o f the l i o n .  C.  Mary heard the r o a r o f the l i o n .  D.  Mary heard the r o a r the l i o n . LA  25.  A.  I a t e orange.  B.  I a t e a orange.  C.  I a t e an orange.  D.  I a t e an the orange.  H3  LH  -  26.  101 -  6.  A.  The  c r a s h of t h e t r a i n  scare the people.  B.  The  c r a s h to the t r a i n  scared t h e people.  C.  The  c r a s h the t r a i n  D.  The  c r a s h of the t r a i n  scared  t h e people.  scared t h e people. A  27.  28.  A.  The  girls  some o f brought  flowers.  B.  Some o f t h e g i r l s brought  flowers.  C.  Some the g i r l s brought  D.  Some o f the g i r l brought  A.  When you p l a n t t h e f l o w e r s ?  B.  Did you p l a n t t h e f l o w e r s when?  C.  When you p l a n t e d t h e f l o w e r s ?  D.  When d i d you p l a n t t h e f l o w e r s ?  flowers. flowers.  D  29.  30.  A.  The c h i l d r e n have some o f money.  B.  The c h i l d r e n have an money.  C.  The c h i l d r e n have some money.  D.  The c h i l d r e n have a money.  A.  What d i d John see?  B.  What d i d John saw?  C.  What John see?  D.  What John d i d see? LU  102  31.  32.  -  A.  Cathy wanted some o f h e l p .  B.  Cathy wanted some a h e l p .  C.  Cathy wanted an h e l p .  D.  Cathy wanted some h e l p .  A.  Anne knew the d r i v e r the c a r .  B.  Anne knew the d r i v e r o f the c a r .  C.  Anne knew to the d r i v e r o f the c a r .  D.  Anne knowing the d r i v e r o f the c a r . LU  33.  A.  The g i r l s c o l o r i n g p i c t u r e s .  B.  The g i r l s a r e c o l o r p i c t u r e s .  C.  The g i r l s a r e c o l o r e d p i c t u r e s .  D.  The g i r l s a r e c o l o r i n g p i c t u r e s .  H  GO  LH  GD  A  34.  35.  A.  The growth to the g i r l  s u r p r i s e d her mother.  B.  The growth o f the g i r l  s u r p r i s e d her mother.  C.  The growth o f the g i r l  s u r p r i s e her mother.  D.  The growth the g i r l  A.  John knew f o r the l a d y l o v e d i c e cream.  B.  John knew to the l a d y l o v e d  C.  John knew t h a t the l a d y l o v e d i c e cream.  D.  John knowing t h a t the l a d y loved i c e cream.  s u r p r i s e d her mother.  i c e cream.  A]  QE  -  36.  103  -  A.  The c r y i n g o f the k i t t e n was sad,  B.  The c r y i n g  the k i t t e n was sad.  C.  The c r y i n g  to the k i t t e n was sad.  D.  The c r y i n g o f the k i t t e n sad.  8.  A]  37.  A.  Bill  heard to the screaming o f the g i r l .  B.  Bill  h e a r i n g the screaming o f the g i r l .  C.  B i l l beard the screaming the g i r l .  D.  Bill  [|]  [c]  [F  U  HD  LI]  heard the screaming o f the g i r l .  lA  38.  39.  40.  A.  Mother knows f o r Anne opened the window.  B.  Mother knows to Anne opened the window.  C.  Mother knows t h a t Anne opened the window.  D.  Mother knowing that Anne opened t h e window.  A.  The b u i l d i n g o f the house  B.  The b u i l d i n g o f t h e house was slow.  C.  The b u i l d i n g t o the house was slow.  D.  The b u i l d i n g  slow.  the house was slow.  A.  Could Anne r i d e the horse?  B.  Could Anne rode the horse?  C.  Did Anne c o u l d  D.  Am Anne could  r i d e the horse? r i d e the horse?  S  E  E  41.  104  -  A.  John watched the f i x i n g o f the c a r .  B.  John watched  C.  John watching the f i x i n g o f the c a r .  D.  John watched to the f i x i n g o f the c a r .  the f i x i n g  the c a r .  0  42.  A.  F i v e the c h i l d r e n went home.  B.  The c h i l d r e n f i v e of went home.  C.  F i v e o f c h i l d r e n went home.  D.  F i v e of the c h i l d r e n went home.  LH  D  43.  44.  A.  Father knew f o r Bob caught a f i s h .  B.  F a t h e r knew to Bob caught a f i s h .  C.  Father knew Bob caught a f i s h .  D.  F a t h e r knowing that Bob caught a f i s h .  A.  The s e l l i n g the c a r was d i f f i c u l t .  B.  The s e l l i n g to the c a r was d i f f i c u l t ,  C.  The s e l l i n g o f the c a r d i f f i c u l t .  D.  The s e l l i n g o f the c a r was d i f f i c u l t .  LH  45.  A.  I t was sad t h a t  the cows were hungry.  B.  The cows were hungry was sad.  C.  That was sad the cows were hungry.  D.  The cows were hungry was sad.  46.  47.  10.  105 -  A.  The c h i l d r e n r a n home t o e a t .  B.  The c h i l d r e n r a n home e a t .  C.  The c h i l d r e n r a n home t o a t e .  D.  The c h i l d r e n r a n home t o e a t i n g .  A.  Can you can run?  B.  Can you run?  C.  Do you can run?  D.  Are you can run? LU  48.  49.  A.  The man saw Tom to walked.  B.  The man saw Tom to walk.  C.  The man saw Tom walking.  D.  The man saw Tom to walking.  A.  I showed the l i t t l e  B.  I showed the  l i t t l e boy how jumping.  C.  I showed the  little  D.  I showed the  l i t t l e boy how t o jumping.  boy how t o jump.  boy how to jumped.  U  50.  A.  The boys a r e good a t to r e a d i n g .  B.  The boys a r e good a t to read.  C.  The boys a r e good a t reading.'  D.  The boys a r e good a t r e a d .  LU  51.  52.  106  A.  The g i r l dropped the b a l l  B.  So the g i r l  surprised  C.  For the g i r l dropped the b a l l  D.  That the g i r l dropped t h e b a l l  A.  I t i s f u n to h e l p e d .  B.  I t i s f u n to h e l p .  C.  I t i s fun help.  D.  I t i s fun to helping.  dropped the b a l l  11.  the boy.  surprised  the boy.  s u r p r i s e d t h e boy. surprised  Al  53.  54.  A.  Dad went shopping.  B.  Dad went to shopped.  C.  Dad went  D.  Dad went t o shopping.  A.  Dad f o r g o t make the f i r e .  B.  Dad f o r g o t  to made the f i r e .  C.  Dad f o r g o t  to make the f i r e .  D.  Dad f o r g o t t o making the f i r e .  shop.  the boy.  00  E  LU  -  Be c a r e f u l .  107  These a r e d i f f e r e n t  -  k i n d s of  You choose che r i g h t word to make a good  Example:  sentences. sentence.  Tom brought the f l o w e r s to Anne.  They a r e  You choose one:  A.  their  B.  our  C.  hers  D.  mine  JG  C. i s the r i g h t word:  Tom brought the f l o w e r s to Anne.  |~C~1  X  i s marked w i t h an  like  this:  0  QL  They a r e h e r s .  -  55.  108  wanted to h e l p ,  Because A.  they  B.  the  C.  their  D.  them  -  13.  the c h i l d r e n washed the windows.  children  LH  56.  Bill  s a i d , "She  A.  himself  B.  sheself  C.  her  D.  herself  LH  made the cake by  LH  LH  57.  The  k i t t e n i s p l a y i n g and  A.  sleep  B. C. D.  58.  is  the mother c a t  sleeping  sleeping was  sleep  F a t h e r bought the puppies f o r A.  theirs  B.  yours  C.  hers  D.  mine  II  me.  The  animals  are  14.  - 1 Q9 59.  .j.  Mother made the d r e s s e s f o r u s . A.  ours  B.  their  C.  your  D.  mine  They a r e  H]  60.  61.  the  Next Saturday you A.  w i l l made  B.  w i l l make  C.  will  D.  make  f i r e and the boys w i l l  the  We cooked l u n c h and Susan A.  washing  B.  are wash  C.  wash  D.  washed  We f e d the baby A.  but  B.  with  C.  either  D.  or  cook d i n n e r ,  making  dishes,  A  62.  LD  she  cried,  B  C  Dl  63.  110  -  Bob s a i d , " I w i l l c u t the meat by A.  myself  B.  himself  C.  yourself  D.  meself 0  64.  Father made a f i r e ,  The dog burned  A. i t  65.  B.  itself  C.  themselves  D.  him  We knew the c h i l d r e n A.  when  B.  wher e  C.  whose  D.  who  bought  the f l o w e r s .  0  66.  The g i r l s A.  him  B.  his  C.  her  D.  their  pushed  Bill.  They hurt  arm.  We moved to a farm. A. B.  The c h i l d r e n  liked  their it  C.  theirs  D.  yours  Since the boys were s i c k , Susan took food A.  her  B.  the boys  C.  themselves  D.  them  You  found  A.  what  B.  where  C.  when  D.  which  I will A.  both  B.  neither  C.  but  D.  either  Dad  wanted.  walk or r i d e the b i c y c l e .  -  71.  I wanted the puppy A.  whose  B.  where  C.  that  D.  when  112  17.  -  had a white  tail.  A] 72.  mother brought the eggs, Joe made l u n c h .  When A.  LU  him  B. h i s C.  Joe's  D.  he  E LI David nor Susan a t e supper.  73.  74,  A.  Either  B.  But  C.  Both  D.  Neither  Tom knew _ A.  what  B.  whose  C.  where  D.  which  the boy l i v e d ,  no  LU  Susan rode the horse A.  whose  B.  when  C.  where  D.  which  jumped the  Dad came home Mary took the c a r A.  When  B.  Who se  C.  Who  D.  Where  You saw a bunny A.  where  B.  that  C.  who  D.  whose  t a i l was  black.  114  Be c a r e f u l .  These a r e d i f f e r e n t  You choose another  k i n d s o f sentences.  r i g h t way o f s a y i n g the sentences.  Example: The g i r l s made l u n c h .  The boys washed the d i s h e s .  You choose one:  A.  The g i r l s made l u n c h and the boys washed the d i s h e s .  B.  The g i r l s . m a d e  C.  The g i r l s and boys made l u n c h .  D.  The g i r l s made l u n c h and washed the d i s h e s .  A. i s the r i g h t  sentence:  A~| i s marked w i t h an  X  l u n c h the boys washed the d i s h e s .  The g i r l s made l u n c h and the boys washed the d i s h e s ,  like  this:  -  78.  Tom opened the window.  115  -  Mother c a l l e d  20.  the boys.  A.  Tom opened the window Mother c a l l e d  the boys.  B.  Tom opened the window and the boys.  C.  Tom opened the window and Mother c a l l e d  D.  Tom and Mother c a l l e d  the boys.  the boys.  0 79.  Mother went to the farm.  Dad went to the farm.  A.  Mother went to the farm and Dad.  B.  Mother and Dad went to the farm.  C.  Mother went to the farm Dad went to the farm.  D.  Mother Dad went to the farm. fAl  80.  81.  E  Tom bought a h a t .  Tom bought a c o a t .  A.  Tom bought a hat bought a c o a t .  B.  Tom bought a hat Tom bought a coat.  C.  Tom bought a hat a c o a t .  D.  Tom bought a hat and a c o a t .  We worked i n s c h o o l .  We played  i n school.  A.  We worked i n s c h o o l we played  B.  We worked and played  C.  We worked we played  D.  We worked i n s c h o o l played  i n school.  i n school. i n school. i n school.  f¥  d  21, 82.  The g i r l s bought an o l d c a r .  116  -  The boys washed  A.  The g i r l s bought an o l d c a r the boys washed  B.  The g i r l s bought an o l d c a r and the boys washed  C.  The g i r l s bought washed  D.  The g i r l s  Dad k i s s e d  bought an o l d c a r and  the baby.  85.  the c a r .  the boys washed.  LU  The baby laughed.  A.  Dad k i s s e d  the baby the baby laughed.  B.  Dad k i s s e d  the baby and the baby laughed  C.  Dad k i s s e d  the baby laughed.  D.  Dad k i s s e d  the baby and laughed.  FA  84.  the c a r .  the c a r .  H  83.  the c a r .  The b a l l h i t Mary. A.  Mary h i t by the b a l l .  B.  Mary h i t the b a l l .  C.  Mary was h i t by the b a l l ,  D.  Mary was h i t the b a l l .  The horses got f e d by the g i r l s . A.  The h o r s e s f e d the g i r l s .  B.  The g i r l s f e d the h o r s e s .  C.  The horses f e d by the g i r l s .  D.  The g i r l s got f e d by the horses,  LU  LU  LU  22. 86.  117  -  The man was watched by a policeman. A.  The man was watch by a policeman.  B.  A policeman was watched by the man.  C.  The man watched a policeman.  D.  A policeman watched  the man.  A]  87.  Bob t a l k e d w i t h the g i r l .  The g i r l ' s  horse jumped  A.  Bob t a l k e d w i t h the g i r l h o r s e jumped  B.  Bob t a l k e d w i t h the g i r l ' s  C.  Bob t a l k e d w i t h the g i r l whose h o r s e jumped  D.  Bob t a l k e d w i t h the g i r l who her horse jumped  Mary saw the boys.  horse jumped  The boys made a b i r d  Mary saw who made a b i r d house the boys.  B.  Mary saw the boys made a b i r d  C.  Mary saw who the boys made a b i r d  house.  D.  Mary saw the boys who made a b i r d  house.  A.  The t r u c k p u l l e d a c a r .  B.  A c a r p u l l e d the t r u c k .  C.  The t r u c k was p u l l e d a c a r .  D.  A c a r was p u l l e d by the t r u c k .  the f e n c e .  the f e n c e . the f e n c e .  LU  house.  A.  The t r u c k was p u l l e d by a c a r .  nr  the f e n c e .  house.  LU 89.  jcj  the f e n c e .  S 88.  QF]  LI  LU  LU  -  Be c a r e f u l .  These a r e d i f f e r e n t  You choose the r i g h t  118  -  k i n d s of  sentences.  answer.  Example: What d i d the boys play?  You choose one:  A.  yesterday  B.  football  C.  played  D.  a ball  B. i s the r i g h t word:  football.  fB~|  X  i s marked w i t h an  like  this:  A  24.  -  90.  91.  119  Do b i r d s make nests? A.  eggs  B.  i n trees  C.  B i r d s make nests,  D.  Yes, they do.  Is the elephant a b i g animal? A.  i n the zoo  B.  b i g animal  C.  The elephant i s b i g ,  D. yes  92.  93.  How f a r can B i l l h i t the b a l l ? A.  not very f a r  B.  He h i t the b a l l .  C.  a baseball  D.  Yes, he can h i t i t .  What does the word " l i t t l e " mean? A.  l i t t l e child  B.  not b i g  C.  The baby i s .  D.  small dog  -  120  Anne l i k e s i c e cream, doesn't  she?  A.  doesn't  like  B.  p i n k i c e cream  C.  Yes, she does.  D.  doesn't  Be c a r e f u l . You  These a r e d i f f e r e n t  d e c i d e what the sentences  Example:  The boy who  talked  What does the sentence You  choose  tell  k i n d s of  tell  sentences.  us.  to Dad  rode the b l a c k hor  us?  one:  A.  Dad  rode  the b l a c k h o r s e .  B.  The boy  talked  to  C.  The boy  talked  to the b l a c k h o r s e .  D.  Dad  talked  Dad.  to the b l a c k h o r s e .  m  B. i s the r i g h t  B  sentence: The boy  i s marked w i t h an  X  like  talked  this:  to  Dad.  A  n  -  95.  96.  122 -  The boy knows t h a t the woman l o v e s A.  The boy l o v e s t h e woman.  B.  The woman l o v e s  C.  The boy knows c h i l d r e n .  D.  The boy l o v e s  27,  children.  children.  children.  I t scared L i n d a t h a t the dogs h u r t t h e boy. A.  The dogs h u r t t h e boy.  B.  L i n d a scared  C.  The boy scared  D.  L i n d a h u r t the boy.  the dogs. Linda.  LU  97.  Father  planted  the f l o w e r s .  H i s hands were n o t c l e a n .  A.  Father d i d n o t p l a n t the f l o w e r s .  B.  H i s hands were  C.  H i s hands were n o t d i r t y .  D.  H i s hands were c l e a n .  dirty.  TI  98.  The man l e a r n e d a box f e l l on t h e g i r l , A.  The man l e a r n e d the g i r l .  B.  The g i r l  C.  The man l e a r n e d a box.  D.  A box f e l l on the g i r l .  f e l l on a box.  [B]  fc  -  99.  John l i s t e n e d  28.  123 -  to t h e teacher and f i n i s h e d  A.  John f i n i s h e d  B.  John and the teacher  finished  C.  The teacher l i s t e n e d  to John.  D.  The teacher f i n i s h e d  the work.  t h e work  the work. t h e work.  Ul  100.  101.  102.  The teacher l e a r n e d t h a t Tom chased A.  The teacher chased  B.  Tom chased  C.  The teacher l e a r n e d Tom.  D.  S a l l y chased Tom.  Sally.  Sally.  We watched the g i r l s who played A.  We played  B.  The g i r l s watched b a s e b a l l .  C.  We played w i t h t h e g i r l s .  D.  The g i r l s played  You c a l l e d  Sally.  baseball.  baseball.  baseball.  the women who Mother knew.  A.  You knew the women.  B.  Mother c a l l e d  C.  The women c a l l e d Mother.  D.  Mother knew the women.  t h e women.  IB  -  103.  104,  29,  124  Jim l o s t the book or Tom took i t . A.  E i t h e r Jim l o s t the book or Tom took i t .  B.  Jim d i d not lose the book but Tom took i t ,  C.  Tom took the book and Jim d i d not lose i t ,  D.  Jim l o s t the book and Tom d i d not take i t ,  I found the boy Dad gave the money to A.  I found the money.  B . The boy gave the money. C . Dad gave the money. D.  105.  I found Dad.  That the elephant ate the flowers surprised Father A.  The elephant ate the flowers.  B.  The elephant ate Father.  C.  Father surprised the elephant.  D.  The flowers surprised Father. TI  106.  The boys who worked with Dad l i k e d airplanes A.  Dad worked with a i r p l a n e s .  B.  The boys l i k e d Dad.  C.  Dad l i k e d a i r p l a n e s .  D.  The boys worked with Dad. [A  IT  30. 107.  The c r y i n g o f the g i r l  125  -  s u r p r i s e d the teacher  A.  The teacher  cried.  B.  The teacher s u r p r i s e d the g i r l .  C.  The c r y i n g s u r p r i s e d the t e a c h e r .  D.  The g i r l  surprised  the t e a c h e r . [A  108.  109.  110.  Bob watched the running o f the boy, A.  Bob watched  the boy's r u n n i n g .  B.  The boy watched  C.  The running watched  D.  The running watched the boy.-  Bob. Bob.  The scream of the c a t scared the dog, A.  The c a t scared the dog.  B.  The scream s c a r e d the dog.  C.  The dog screamed.  D.  The dog scared the c a t .  The men who  the policeman  A.  The men  chased  B.  The men  had a b l u e c a r .  C.  The policeman  D.  The men  chased  the  chased  had a b l u e c a r ,  policeman.  had a b l u e c a r . a blue c a r .  ITl  IB  -  111.  126  31.  -  The g i r l s , who were b e a u t i f u l , bought new dresses. A.  The b e a u t i f u l g i r l s bought new dresses.  B.  The b e a u t i f u l g i r l s were bought new dresses.  C.  The g i r l s were b e a u t i f u l bought new dresses.  D.  The g i r l s who the g i r l s were b e a u t i f u l bought new dresses.  ][1 G OD O 112.  The g i r l heard the r i n g i n g of the b e l l . A.  The r i n g i n g heard the b e l l .  B.  The r i n g i n g heard the g i r l .  C.  The g i r l heard the b e l l ' s r i n g i n g .  D.  The b e l l heard the g i r l . D  113.  114.  The growth of the plant excited the c h i l d r e n A.  The c h i l d r e n grew.  B.  The plant excited the c h i l d r e n .  C.  The c h i l d r e n excited the plant.  D.  The growth excited the c h i l d r e n .  The teacher heard the laughter of the student, A.  The teacher laughed.  B.  The laughter heard the teacher.  C.  The teacher heard the student's laughter.  D.  The student heard the teacher.  1]  LU  LU  115.  127  32,  -  I watched the c h i l d r e n who were s i c k . A.  I watched t h e c h i l d r e n  sick.  B.  I watched t h e c h i l d r e n were s i c k .  C.  I watched the c h i l d r e n who the c h i l d r e n were s i c k .  D.  I watched the s i c k  children.  DO 116.  117.  118.  The l i t t l e  g i r l s who a t e w i t h Cathy l o v e d i c e cream.  A.  Cathy a t e i c e cream.  B.  The l i t t l e  C.  Cathy l o v e d i c e cream.  D.  The l i t t l e  Anne waited  g i r l s l o v e d Cathy.  g i r l s a t e w i t h Cathy.  f o r the g i r l .  Bill  gave the b i c y c l e to the g i r l .  A.  Anne waited  f o r the g i r l who B i l l  B.  Anne waited  f o r who B i l l  C.  Anne waited  f o r the g i r l who B i l l  gave the b i c y c l e t o .  D.  Anne waited  f o r the g i r l who B i l l  gave the b i c y c l e to h e r .  The c r a s h o f t h e c a r scared A.  Bill  scared  B.  The c r a s h scared  C.  Bill  D.  The c a r scared  crashed  gave the b i c y c l e to the g i r l .  gave the b i c y c l e to the g i r l .  LH  11  (T)  [T  Bill.  the c a r . Bill.  the c a r . Bill.  -  119.  120.  33.  128 -  Bob knew the d r i v e r o f the c a r . A.  The d r i v e r  B.  Bob drove the c a r .  C.  Bob knew the c a r ' s d r i v e r .  D.  The c a r knew Bob.  You waited  knew Bob.  f o r the boys.  You sent a l e t t e r  to the boys.  A.  You waited  f o r the boys to whom you sent a l e t t e r  B.  You waited  f o r the boys to whom you sent a l e t t e r .  C.  You waited  f o r whom you sent a l e t t e r  D.  You waited  f o r the boys to whom you sent a l e t t e r  to them.  to the boys. to the boys.  -  129  -  -  130 -  TEST OF SYNTACTIC ABILITIES  SCREENING TEST FORM 2  DO NOT COPY  U n i v e r s i t y of I l l i n o i s a t Urbana-Champaign  Experimental E d i t i o n NOT FOR PUBLICATION OR REPRODUCTION IN ANY FORM S p e c i a l p e r m i s s i o n granted by Dr. Stephen Q u i g l e y f o r e x c l u s i v e use i n t h e Demographic Study of H e a r i n g Impaired Students i n B r i t i s h Columbia, Canada.  © 1971 BY THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS  -  131 -  TEST OF SYNTACTIC ABILITIES SCREENING TEST FORM 2  Name:  Date o f B i r t h :  School:  School D i s t r i c t :  \  Date of T e s t :  You w i l l right.  read groups o f s e n t e n c e s . You choose  Example 1.  the r i g h t  You choose  Only one o f the sentences  sentence.  one:  A.  One the g i r l s  found a baby b i r d .  B.  One o f the g i r l s  C.  The g i r l s one o f found a baby b i r d  D.  One of g i r l s  found a baby b i r d  found a baby b i r d .  |A  B. i s the r i g h t  BI  sentence: One of the g i r l s  i s marked w i t h an  X  like  this:  found a baby b i r d .  -  Example 2.  133  -  You choose one:  A.  Mary l i k e s f o r to read,  B.  Mary l i k e s  to r e a d i n g .  C.  Mary l i k e s  read.  D.  Mary l i k e s to r e a d . A]  D. i s the r i g h t  You mark  sentence: Mary l i k e s to r e a d .  [Dl w i t h an  X  :  DO  HE  -  Example 3.  -  You choose one:  A.  J i m have a new c a r .  B.  J i m has a new c a r .  C.  J i m a new c a r .  D.  J i m i s a new c a r .  B. i s t h e r i g h t  You mark  13 4  sentence: J i m has a new c a r .  [~B] w i t h an  X  :  In t h i s book a r e more s e n t e n c e s . Read the sentences Choose the r i g h t  carefully.  sentence.  Mark t h e r i g h t answer w i t h an I f you do n o t know,  X  i n your b o o k l e t .  guess.  STOP  -  1.  135  -  A.  The k i t t e n s weren't i n the box.  B.  The k i t t e n s not were i n the box.  C.  The k i t t e n s weren't not i n the box.  D.  Not the k i t t e n s were i n the box.  1.  E A.  The c a t had an k i t t e n s .  B.  The c a t had a k i t t e n s .  C.  The c a t had some k i t t e n s .  D.  The c a t had the a k i t t e n s .  S A.  Who  the boy found  B.  Who  found  C.  Who  he found  D.  Found who the k i t e ?  A.  The scream of the l i o n s c a r e d the c h i l d r e n .  B.  The scream the l i o n s c a r e d the c h i l d r e n .  C.  The scream to the l i o n s c a r e d the c h i l d r e n .  D.  The scream of the l i o n  S  S  GE!  the k i t e ?  the k i t e ? the k i t e ?  s c a r e the c h i l d r e n . LU  A.  Not the elephant  i s a small  animal.  B.  The elephant  i s not a s m a l l  animal.  C.  The elephant  i s a s m a l l animal  D.  The elephant h o t i s a s m a l l  no.  animal.  D  HD  H]  -  136 -  A.  Mary was making n o t t h e d r e s s .  B.  Mary not was making the d r e s s .  C.  Mary wasn't making the d r e s s .  D.  Mary d i d was n o t making the d r e s s .  A.  We don't walk to s c h o o l .  B.  We n o t walk to s c h o o l .  C.  We not do walk to s c h o o l ,  D.  We do no walk to s c h o o l .  2.  T)  [B]  [C]  [D  [Tj  fiT)  [c]  [D]  tU  LU  LU  A.  Mother made a cake.  An t h e cake was white.  B.  Mother made a cake.  A cake was w h i t e .  C.  Mother made a cake.  A the cake was w h i t e .  D.  Mother made a cake.  The cake was w h i t e .  A]  A.  The l i t t l e  boy no can not w r i t e .  B.  Not t h e l i t t l e  C.  The l i t t l e  boy not can w r i t e .  D.  The l i t t l e  boy can n o t w r i t e .  boy can w r i t e .  LU  10.  A.  The l i t t l e  girls  played.  B.  Little  the g i r l s  played.  C.  A little  D.  The some l i t t l e  girls  played. girls  played, U  LU  LU  137 11.  A.  Mother looked a t a the moon.  B.  Mother looked a t moon.  C.  Mother looked a t a moon.  D.  Mother looked a t t h e moon.  H 12.  A.  The baby w i l l  s i t a t the t a b l e next  B.  The baby a t t h e t a b l e next  C.  The baby s i t a t the t a b l e next  D.  The baby w i l l  Sunday.  Sunday. Sunday.  s a t a t the t a b l e next  Sunday.  [XI  13.  14.  15.  GO  A.  The boy would not read the s t o r y .  B.  The boy n o t read the s t o r y .  C.  The boy no would read the s t o r y .  D.  The boy would no read the s t o r y .  A.  John has an new b l u e c a r .  B.  John has c a r a new b l u e .  C.  John has a new b l u e c a r .  D.  John has new a b l u e c a r .  A.  The g i r l s d i d had not found  B.  Not the g i r l s had found  t h e puppy.  C.  The g i r l s not had found  the puppy.  D.  The g i r l s hadn't found  the puppy.  the puppy.  rxi  IB  HE!  H  16.  13 8  A.  Mother has a b i g b l a c k pans.  B.  Mother has an b i g b l a c k pan.  C.  Mother has b i g a b l a c k pan.  D.  Mother has a b i g b l a c k pan. LU  17.  18.  19.  A.  You seem t i r e d n o t .  B.  You n o t seem  C.  You do n o t seem  D.  You seem no t i r e d .  tired. tired,  A.  The man  has an brown coat,  B.  The man  has a brown c o a t .  C.  The man  has a brown c o a t s ,  D.  The  A3  LU  LU  LU  U  LU  LU  LU  man has brown a c o a t .  A.  Mother walked a home.  B.  Mother walked home.  C.  Mother walked the home.  D.  Mother walked an home. LU  20.  A.  The dog has some o f food,  B.  The dog has an f o o d .  C.  The dog has a f o o d .  D.  The dog has some f o o d . LU  LU  LU  LU  -  21.  22.  23.  24.  25.  139  A.  Tom watched  the men  t o work.  B.  Tom watched  the men  work.  C.  Tom watched  the men  to working.  D.  Tom watched  the men  worked.  A.  You do the problems?  B.  D i d you do the problems?  C.  You done the problems?  D.  D i d do you the problems?  A.  I i n the park l a s t  B.  I s i t i n the park l a s t  C.  I am s a t i n the park l a s t  D.  I s a t i n the park l a s t  -  S  (H  LH  LH  H  LH  LH  LH  [AI  [H  LH  LH  LH  LH  LH  LH  H  LH  LH  LH  Sunday. Sunday. Sunday.  Sunday.  A.  The boy heard to the l a u g h t e r of the g i r l ,  B.  The boy h e a r i n g the l a u g h t e r of the  C.  The boy heard the l a u g h t e r of the  D.  The boy heard the l a u g h t e r the  A.  John found the k i t t e n s .  B.  John found a k i t t e n s .  C.  John found a the k i t t e n s ,  D.  John found an  girl.  girl.  girl.  kittens.  26.  140 -  A.  The work of t h e men s u r p r i s e the woman.  B.  The work t o t h e men s u r p r i s e d t h e woman.  C.  The work t h e men s u r p r i s e d the woman.  D.  The work o f t h e men s u r p r i s e d the woman. 0  27.  28.  A.  Some of the c a t s were b l a c k .  B.  Some o f t h e c a t were b l a c k .  C.  Cats t h e some o f were b l a c k .  D.  Some the c a t s were b l a c k .  A.  When d i d Susan walk to the farm?  B.  Susan walk t o t h e farm when?  C.  When to t h e farm d i d Susan walk?  D.  When Susan walked to t h e farm?  0  ^  [|] RO  [D]  0  LU  LU  29.  A.  Bob found a water.  B.  Bob found some water.  C.  Bob found some o f water.  D.  Bob found some a water.  ID  LU  30.  A.  What w i l l  I feed the k i t t e n ?  B.  What w i l l  I feed the k i t t e n m i l k ?  C.  What w i l l  I f e d the k i t t e n ?  D.  What t h e k i t t e n w i l l  I feed? ID  LU  LU  -141 31.  A.  Mother made some a bread,  B.  Mother made a b r e a d .  C.  Mother made some b r e a d .  D.  Mother made an b r e a d .  -  0 32.  A.  John saw the s t a r t  B.  John saw t h e s t a r t o f t h e r a c e .  C.  John saw t o the s t a r t o f the r a c e .  D.  John s e e i n g t h e s t a r t o f the r a c e .  @  @  LH  LH  the r a c e .  LH  33.  34.  35.  A.  The woman i s cooking  dinner.  B.  The woman cook d i n n e r .  C.  The woman i s cooked d i n n e r .  D.  The woman has cooking  dinner.  A.  The growth to t h e tomatoes s u r p r i s e d the farmer.  B.  The growth o f the tomatoes s u r p r i s e d the farmer.  C\  The growth o f the tomatoes s u r p r i s e t h e farmer.  D.  The growth t h e tomatoes s u r p r i s e d the farmer.  A.  Susan heard  to J i m helped  B.  Susan h e a r i n g t h a t J i m helped  C.  Susan heard  t h a t Jim helped  the l a d y .  D.  Susan heard  f o r J i m helped  the l a d y .  B  D  LH  D  the l a d y . the lady.  36.  142  -  A.  The c h a s i n g o f the dog was funny.  B.  The c h a s i n g t h e dog was  C.  The c h a s i n g t o t h e dog was funny.  D.  The c h a s i n g o f t h e dog funny.  funny.  U  37.  A.  Mary enjoyed  t o the swimming  B.  Mary e n j o y i n g the swimming  C.  Mary enjoyed  t h e swimming  the g i r l s .  D.  Mary enjoyed  the swimming  o f the g i r l s .  LU  LU  o f the g i r l s ,  of the g i r l s .  D  38.  39.  A.  The man s a i d  to David won t h e game.  B.  The man s a i d  t h a t David won the game.  C.  The man s a y i n g t h a t David won the game.  D.  The man s a i d  A.  The b e g i n n i n g o f t h e r a c e  B.  The b e g i n n i n g o f the r a c e was e x c i t i n g .  C.  The b e g i n n i n g t o the r a c e was e x c i t i n g .  D.  The b e g i n n i n g the r a c e was e x c i t i n g .  f o r David won the game.  exciting.  U  40.  A.  Should you should go t o bed?  B.  D i d you should go to bed?  C.  Should  you went to bed?  D.  Should  you go to bed? LU  LU  LU  LU  41.  143  -  A.  Bill  enjoyed the showing  of the animals.  B.  Bill  enjoyed t h e showing  the a n i m a l s .  C.  Bill  e n j o y i n g the showing  D.  Bill  enjoyed to the showing  o f the a n i m a l s . o f the a n i m a l s .  [A]  42.  43.  A.  The cows some o f were  sick.  B.  Some of the cows were  sick.  C.  Some the cows were  D.  Some of the cow- were  A.  The boys knew f o r the dog was  B.  The boys knew to the dog was  C.  The boys knew the dog was  D.  The boys knowing t h a t the dog was  45.  [D|  sick. sick.  lost. lost.  lost. lost,  A]  44.  IB  A.  The f i n i s h i n g  the work was  B.  The f i n i s h i n g  to the work was  C.  The f i n i s h i n g  o f the work easy.  D.  The f i n i s h i n g  o f the work was easy.  A.  I t was sad t h a t the animals were l o s t .  B.  The a n i m a l s was sad were l o s t .  C.  That was sad the a n i m a l s were l o s t .  D.  The animals were l o s t was sad.  easy. easy.  [B]  [C]  [D]  10.  144  46.  A.  The t e a c h e r t o l d me where to s i t .  B.  The t e a c h e r t o l d me where s i t t i n g .  C.  The t e a c h e r t o l d me where s i t .  D.  The t e a c h e r t o l d me where to s i t t i n g .  a 47.  A.  W i l l Mary go?  B.  I s Mary w i l l go?  C.  W i l l Mary went?  D.  W i l l Mary w i l l go?  a 48.  A.  I saw Dad to came.  B.  I saw Dad to coming.  C.  I saw Dad to come.  v D.  49.  50.  I saw Dad coming.  A.  I r a n to the park to p l a y e d .  B.  I r a n to the park f o r to p l a y ,  C.  I r a n to the park to p l a y .  D.  I r a n to the park to p l a y i n g .  A.  The man was good a t to s p e l l .  B.  The man was good a t s p e l l i n g .  C.  The man was good a t s p e l l .  C.  The man was good a t to s p e l l i n g .  a  a  LU  51.  52.  53.  54.  145  -  A.  The baby was a s l e e p s u r p r i s e d  Father.  B.  F o r the baby was a s l e e p s u r p r i s e d  C.  So the baby was a s l e e p s u r p r i s e d  D.  That the baby was a s l e e p s u r p r i s e d F a t h e r .  A.  Mary l o v e s f l y to the a i r p l a n e .  B.  Mary l o v e s to f l y i n g  C.  Mary l o v e s to f l y the a i r p l a n e .  D.  Mary l o v e s to f l e w the a i r p l a n e .  A.  The g i r l s went to f i s h e d .  B.  The g i r l s went  C.  The g i r l s went f o r to f i s h .  D.  The g i r l s went  A.  Mother wanted Anne to p i c k i n g the f l o w e r s .  B.  Mother wanted Anne to p i c k the f l o w e r s .  C.  Mother wanted Anne p i c k the f l o w e r s .  D.  Mother wanted Anne to p i c k e d  Father. Father.  the a i r p l a n e .  fish.  fishing.  the f l o w e r s .  Be c a r e f u l .  These a r e d i f f e r e n t  kinds of sentences.  You choose the r i g h t word to make a good sentence.  Example: Dad's s h i r t i s r e d .  i s blue.  You choose one:  A.  Yours  B.  Your  C.  Our  D.  Ours  m A. i s the r i g h t word: Yours  [A~] i s marked w i t h an  X  like this:  13. 55.  56.  w a i t e d , the boys t o l d  While A.  their  B.  them  C.  they  D.  the boys  Dad s a i d ,  stories.  "She made the b i r d house by  A.  himself  B.  sheself  C.  her  D.  147  herself U  57.  Bob i s f l y i n g a k i t e and Anne A.  a toy  airplane,  fly  B.  was f l y  C.  is flying  D.  flies LU  58.  Mother cooked the eggs f o r me. They a r e A.  mine  B.  her  C.  theirs  D.  ours  .  LU  LU  14. 59.  Dad  p l a n t e d the seeds  The  flowers are  A.  him  B.  her  C.  ours  D.  us  148  -  f o r us. .  LH  60.  61.  the cake and B i l l w i l l buy  Dad A.  buy  B.  will  buying  C.  will  buy  D.  will  buys  Jim worked and A.  play  B.  playing  C.  played  D.  are play  the i c e cream.  Bill  A  62.  Cathy  called  A.  with  B.  but  C.  either  D.  or  the h o r s e s  B  C  D|  B  C  D  they r a n away.  A  -  63.  The g l a s s e s were broken. A.  149  15.  -  I cut  it  B.  themselves  C.  myself  D.  me  I]  64.  The g i r l s went to s c h o o l , A. B.  [B]  The puppy p l a y e d by  it yourself  C.  themselves  D.  itself  LU 65.  [c] E  You thanked the t e a c h e r s A.  who  B.  when  C.  what  D.  where  helped  LU  Tom.  D  66.  The l i t t l e The g i r l s A.  him  B.  her  C.  his  D.  boy was told  lost. mother.  them LU  16. 67.  150  Susan and Tom made the i c e cream. f r i e n d s made the cake. A. B.  Her  C.  Him  D.  68.  69,  Theirs  Their  When the g i r l s came home, B i l l A.  themselves  B.  the g i r l s  C.  him  D.  them  I liked  _  A.  which  B.  what  C.  who  D.  whose  A)  LU  LAJ  rm m  LU  LU  came to see  LU  Mother cooked,  LU  70.  Mother or Anne made the d r e s s . A.  Both  B.  With  C.  Neither  D.  Either  LU  LU  LU  LU  -  71.  You kept the k i t t e n s A.  that  B.  whose  C.  when  D.  where  151  -  17.  had b l a c k f e e t ,  ~U  72.  After  EU  LP_  mother cooked l u n c h , Anne washed the pans.  A.  she  B.  Anne's  C.  her  D.  hers  John nor Mary came to the p a r t y .  73. A.  Neither  B.  Either  C.  Both  D.  But  T]  74,  LU  We saw A.  that  B.  where  C.  which  D.  what  H]  LU  LU  U  LU  LU  Cathy put the k i t e .  152  75.  The c h i l d r e n found A.  which  B.  when  C.  what  D.  whose  the b a l l  -  18.  went i n t o the l a k e .  S  76.  77.  The g i r l s made d i n n e r A.  which  B.  when  C.  that  D.  whose  We helped A.  that  B.  who  C.  whose  D.  what  the g i r l  Dad  leg  was  E  E  came home.  A  B  C  D  U  LU  LU  LU  broken.  19. -153  Be c a r e f u l .  These a r e d i f f e r e n t  -  k i n d s of sentences.  You choose another r i g h t way o f s a y i n g the sentences.  Example: The bus stopped.  B i l l went to s c h o o l .  You choose one:  A.  The bus stopped B i l l went to  school.  B.  The bus stopped and B i l l went to s c h o o l .  C.  The bus and B i l l went to s c h o o l .  D.  The bus stopped and went to  school. LU  B. i s the r i g h t  sentence: The bus stopped and B i l l went to s c h o o l .  B | i s marked w i t h an  X  like  this:  C  D  Dad opened the door.  154  -  Mother saw a man.  A.  Dad opened the door Mother saw a man.  B.  Dad opened the door saw a man.  C.  Dad opened the door and Mother saw a man.  D.  Dad opened the door and man.  LU IT]  T) The man walked i n t o the house.  The woman walked i n t o the house.  A.  The man and woman walked i n t o the house.  B.  The man walked i n t o the house and the woman walked.  C.  The man walked i n t o the house the woman walked i n t o the hous  D.  The man woman walked i n t o the house.  in The boys made a t a b l e .  i  Bi  in  po  The boys made c h a i r s .  A.  The boys made a t a b l e made c h a i r s .  B.  The boys made a t a b l e  C.  The boys made a t a b l e the boys made c h a i r s .  D.  The boys made a t a b l e and c h a i r s .  chairs.  ID  Bob opened the door.  Bob c l o s e d  the door.  A.  Bob opened c l o s e d  the door.  B.  Bob opened the door Bob c l o s e d  C.  Bob opened and c l o s e d  the door.  D.  Bob opened Bob c l o s e d  the door.  the door.  m  LU  21. 82.  The g i r l s  f e d the p e t s .  155  -  The boys washed the p e t s .  A.  The g i r l s  f e d the pets and the boys washed them.  B.  The g i r l s f e d and washed the p e t s .  C.  The g i r l s  f e d the boys washed the p e t s .  D.  The g i r l s  f e d the pets the boys washed them.  U  83.  84.  I h i t the boy.  B  LU  The boy c r i e d .  A.  I h i t the boy the boy c r i e d .  B.  I h i t the boy c r i e d .  C.  I h i t the boy and the boy c r i e d .  D.  I h i t the boy and c r i e d .  A horse k i c k e d Anne. A.  Anne got k i c k e d a horse.  B.  Anne k i c k e d by a h o r s e .  C.  Anne got k i c k by a h o r s e .  D.  Anne got k i c k e d by a horse. LU  85.  S  Susan was thrown by a h o r s e . A.  A horse threw Susan.  B.  Susan was throw by a h o r s e .  C.  A horse was thrown by Susan.  D.  Susan thrown by a h o r s e .  LU  LU  LU  22. 86.  156  The cows were chased by a dog. A.  The cows chased a dog.  B.  A dog was chased by the cows.  C.  The cows were chased a dog.  D.  A dog chased  t h e cows.  S  E  87.  We t a l k e d w i t h the g i r l .  The g i r l ' s dog chased  A.  We t a l k e d w i t h t h e g i r l ' s dog chased  B.  We t a l k e d w i t h the g i r l who her dog chased  C.  We t a l k e d w i t h t h e g i r l whose dog chased  D.  We t a l k e d w i t h the g i r l  dog  chased  89.  The puppies played w i t h the g i r l .  [D  cars.  cars. cars.  cars.  cars. LU  88.  d]  LU  LU  The g i r l wore a r e d d r e s s .  A.  The puppies p l a y e d w i t h the g i r l who wore a red d r e s s .  B.  The puppies played w i t h who wore a r e d d r e s s the g i r l .  C.  The puppies played w i t h who the g i r l wore a r e d d r e s s .  D.  The puppies played w i t h t h e g i r l who the g i r l wore a red d r e s s . LU  LU  LU  LU  LU  LU  LU  LU  The t r a i n was h i t by a c a r . A.  A c a r was h i t by the t r a i n .  B.  The t r a i n was h i t a c a r .  C.  A c a r h i t the t r a i n .  D.  The t r a i n h i t a c a r .  Be c a r e f u l . You  These are d i f f e r e n t k i n d s of  choose the r i g h t  sentences.  answer.  Example: What c o l o r  You  choose  i s the  grass?  one:  A.  green  B.  color  C.  trees  D.  grass  ra  A. i s the r i g h t word: green  1X1  i s marked w i t h an  X  like  this:  90.  158  24.  -  Should she go w i t h Mother? A.  Yes, she  should.  B.  Mother should  C.  i f she i s good  D.  Yes, she d i d .  go.  E  91.  92.  Could  Bill  Yes, he d i d .  B.  Yes, he c o u l d .  C.  He w i l l buy the p e t .  D.  Bill  How  l o n g d i d the boys p l a y  A.  The boys played  B.  a l l day  C.  football  ®  H]  keep the p e t .  ball?  football.  w i t h a bat  A] 93.  HD  keep the pet?  A.  D.  s  Which a r e b i g g e r , c a t s or k i t t e n s ? A.  cats  B.  baby  C.  Cats a r e s m a l l .  D.  They a r e b i g g e r .  L!  Bob  can't f i x the toy, can  A.  can't f i x  B.  can  C.  No,  D .  a toy t r u c k  he  can't.  he  -  Be c a r e f u l .  These are d i f f e r e n t  160  -  k i n d s o f sentences  You d e c i d e what the sentences t e l l  us.  Example: Dad  l i k e d the g i r l  who  thanked Joe.  What does the sentence t e l l You choose  us?  one:  A.  Joe thanked the  B.  Dad  C.  The g i r l  D.  Dad l i k e d Joe.  girl.  thanked Joe. thanked  Joe.  [Al  C. i s the r i g h t  C  sentence:  i s marked w i t h an  X  The  girl  like this:  thanked Joe.  j~A~j  27. 95.  96.  Bill  161  knew t h a t the c h i l d r e n l i k e d  A.  The c a t s l i k e d  B.  Bill  C.  The c h i l d r e n l i k e d  D.  Bill  liked  -  cats.  children.  cats. cats.  knew the c a t s .  I t surprised  the g i r l s that  the c a t s were c h a s i n g  A.  The g i r l s were c h a s i n g  B.  The dogs s u r p r i s e d  C.  The c a t s were c h a s i n g  the dogs.  D.  The dogs were c h a s i n g  the c a t s .  the dogs.  the dogs.  the g i r l s .  [H d] [H H 97.  Cathy l o v e s  the d o l l .  I t i s n o t new.  A.  The d o l l i s not o l d .  B.  The d o l l  i s old.  C.  The d o l l  i s new.  D.  Cathy does not l o v e  the d o l l .  a 98.  John knew the c a r h i t the policeman. A.  The policeman h i t John.  B.  John knew the c a r .  C.  The c a r h i t the policeman.  D.  John h i t the policeman.  i  i  28.  - 162 99.  Bill  thanked the teacher and went home.  A.  B i l l went home.  B.  The teacher went home.  C.  The teacher thanked B i l l .  D.  B i l l and the teacher went home.  Tj  100.  The g i r l  knew that the boy burned the cake,  A.  The boy burned the cake.  B.  The g i r l  C.  The boy knew the g i r l .  D.  The g i r l burned the cake.  knew the cake.  LU  101.  lc  Tom liked the man who started the boat, A.  Tom started the boat.  B.  Tom liked the boat.  C.  The man liked the boat.  D.  The man started the boat. •LU  102.  \c\ fiTi  You saw the g i r l s who Jim liked, A.  Jim saw the g i r l s .  B.  You saw Jim.  C.  Jim liked the g i r l s .  D.  You liked the g i r l s .  LU  103.  163  29.  -  Anne o r Mother made the d r e s s . A.  Anne and Mother made the d r e s s .  B.  E i t h e r Anne or Mother made the d r e s s .  C.  Both Anne and Mother made the d r e s s .  D.  N e i t h e r Anne nor Mother made the dress,  ru 104.  Bill  h e l d the baby who Cathy gave the t o y to  A.  Bill  h e l d Cathy.  B.  Bill  h e l d the t o y .  C.  The baby  D.  Cathy gave the toy to the baby.  gave the t o y .  [Ai  105.  3  1  That B i l l y was c h a s i n g b i r d s s u r p r i s e d Mary. A.  B i l l y was c h a s i n g  birds.  B.  Mary was c h a s i n g  C.  Mary s u r p r i s e d B i l l y .  D.  The b i r d s s u r p r i s e d Mary.  birds.  IT  106.  0  LU  LU  The boys who made the f i r e f o r Mother brought the l u n c h . A.  The boys made the l u n c h .  B.  Mother made the l u n c h .  C.  Mother brought the l u n c h .  D.  The boys made the f i r e . LU  LU  LU  LU  107.  108.  109.  110.  The s e l l i n g  of the dog d i s a p p o i n t e d D a v i d .  A.  David s o l d the dog.  B.  David d i s a p p o i n t e d the dog.  C.  The s e l l i n g  D.  The dog d i s a p p o i n t e d D a v i d .  Susan enjoyed  disapppointed David.  the r u n n i n g of the a n i m a l .  A.  Susan enjoyed the animal's r u n n i n g .  B.  The animal enjoyed Susan.  C.  The r u n n i n g enjoyed  D.  The r u n n i n g enjoyed the a n i m a l .  Susan.  The c r a s h of the boats s c a r e d the c h i l d r e n . A.  The boats s c a r e d the c h i l d r e n .  B.  The c r a s h s c a r e d the c h i l d r e n .  C.  The c h i l d r e n  crashed.  D.  The c h i l d r e n  s c a r e d the b o a t .  The boy who  Mary watched' threw the b a l l .  A.  Mary watched the b a l l .  B.  The boy threw the b a l l .  C.  Mary threw the b a l l .  D.  The boy watched  Mary.  T]  jj]  [c]  [F  111.  112.  The b a b i e s , who were t i r e d ,  s l e p t on t h e bed.  A.  The t i r e d b a b i e s were s l e p t on t h e bed.  B.  The t i r e d b a b i e s s l e p t on t h e bed.  C.  The b a b i e s were t i r e d  D.  The b a b i e s who t h e b a b i e s were t i r e d  s l e p t on t h e bed. s l e p t on t h e bed.  The boy heard t h e screaming of the woman, A.  The boy heard the woman's screaming.  B.  The woman heard t h e boy.  C.  The screaming heard t h e woman.  D.  The screaming heard the boy.  LU 113.  The work o f t h e g i r l  surprised  A.  F a t h e r worked.  B.  The g i r l s u r p r i s e d  C.  Father surprised  D.  The work s u r p r i s e d  Father,  Father. the g i r l . Father. U  114.  Anne watched the marriage o f her f r i e n d . A.  Anne m a r r i e d .  B.  The marriage watched Anne.  C.  Anne watched h e r f r i e n d ' s  D.  Her f r i e n d watched Anne.  marriage.  LU  LU  LU  d]  115.  We p i c k e d  the boys who were  166  32.  -  little.  A.  We p i c k e d the boys  little.  B.  We p i c k e d the boys were  C.  We p i c k e d the boys who the boys were  D.  We p i c k e d the l i t t l e  little. little.  boys. LU  116.  A.  Father wore a brown c o a t .  B.  The man bought a brown c o a t .  C.  Father bought a brown c o a t .  D.  The man bought the cow.  The boys knew the man  LH  The teacher gave the money to  LU  the man.  A.  The boys knew the man who the teacher gave the money to •  B.  The boys knew the man who the teacher  gave the money to the man  C.  The boys knew the man who the teacher  gave the money to him.  D.  The boys knew who the teacher  gave the money to the man • A  118.  LH  The man who bought the cow from F a t h e r wore a brown coat  LH  117.  LU  The d i s c u s s i o n o f the p a r t y d i s a p p o i n t e d A.  Susan d i s a p p o i n t e d  B.  The d i s c u s s i o n d i s a p p o i n t e d  C.  Susan d i s c u s s e d the p a r t y .  D.  The p a r t y d i s a p p o i n t e d  B  LH  LH  [¥  LH  D  Susan.  the p a r t y . Susan.  Susan. Ill  33.  - 167 119.  John watched the growth o f the p l a n t , A.  The growth knew John.  B.  John grew t h e p l a n t .  C.  John watched t h e p l a n t ' s  D.  The p l a n t watched John.  growth.  GO 120.  I saw t h e c h i l d r e n .  The man t a l k e d  to the c h i l d r e n .  A.  I saw the  c h i l d r e n to whom the man t a l k e d .  B.  I saw the  c h i l d r e n to whom the man t a l k e d to them.  C.  I saw whom the man t a l k e d  D.  I saw the  t o the c h i l d r e n .  c h i l d r e n to whom the man t a l k e d to the  children.  -  16 8  

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0054428/manifest

Comment

Related Items