Journal of Research in Rehabilitation Sciences

The Study of Perception of Lexical Synonymy by Educable Children with Intellectual Disability Compared to Typically Developing Children

Document Type : Original Articles

Authors

1 Associate Professor, Department of English Language and Literature, School of Literature and Humanities, University of Sistan and Baluchestan, Zahedan, Iran

2 Associate Professor, Department of Psychology, School of Psychology and Educational Sciences, University of Sistan and Baluchestan, Zahedan, Iran

3 Department of English Language and Literature, School of Literature and Humanities, University of Sistan and Baluchestan, Zahedan, Iran

10.22122/jrrs.v12i5.2772

Abstract

Introduction: Synonymy occurs when two words have a similar meaning. Language perception is superior to language production. Moreover, considering that, due to some mental problems and low IQ, intellectually disabled children suffer from some difficulties in language comprehension, conducting a research on the perception of synonymy can help these children in their language communication. Thus, the purpose of the present research was to examine and compare the perception of synonymy in educable children with intellectual disability and typically developing children.Materials and Methods: The present study was a casual-comparative research. The data used in this research were gathered using the researcher-made Perception of Synonymy Questionnaire. To this end, 15 educable children with intellectual disability from exceptional schools and 15 typically developing children from ordinary schools of Jiroft, Iran, were asked to complete this questionnaire. The independent t-test was used to investigate and analyze the hypothesis of the present research and MANOVA was used to compare the perception of different kinds of synonymy.Results: The result of independent t-test showed that there was a significant difference between the mean of synonymy perception in educable children with intellectual disability and typically developing children (P < 0.05).Conclusion: Educable children with intellectual disability had difficulty in the perception of synonymy compared to typically developing children. However, the results of the present study showed no difference between educable children with intellectual disability and typically developing children in the understanding of two synonymous words belonging to different dialects and two synonymous words belonging to different languages.

Keywords

  1. Steinberg DD, Sciarini NV. An introduction to psycholinguistics. Trans. Golfam A. 8th ed. Tehran, Iran: Samt; 2012. p. 21. [In Paersian].
  2. Karousou A, Lopez-Ornat S. Prespeech vocalizations and the emergence of speech: a study of 1005 Spanish children. Span J Psychol 2013; 16: E32.
  3. Yule G. The study of language. 5th ed. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press; 2014. p. 113.
  4. Brek L. Child development. 7th ed. Boston, MA: Pearson/Allyn and Bacon; 2006. 2017.
  5. Dollaghan C. Child meets word: "fast mapping" in preschool children. J Speech Hear Res 1985; 28(3): 449-54.
  6. Akhtar N, Montague L. Early lexical acquisition: the role of cross-situational learning. First Language 1999; 19(57): 347-58.
  7. Wehren A, De Lisi R, Arnold M. The development of noun definition. J Child Lang 1981; 8(1): 165-75.
  8. Glynn D, Robinson JA. Corpus methods for semantics: Quantitative studies in polysemy and synonymy. Amsterdam, Netherlands: John Benjamins Publishing Company; 2014. p. 10.
  9. Zimmermann TE, Sternefeld W. Introduction to semantics: An essential guide to the composition of meaning. Berlin, Germany: De Gruyter Mouton; 2013. p. 19.
  10. Crystal D. Dictionary of linguistics and phonetics. 6th ed. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley; 2009. p.470.
  11. Saeed JI. Semantics. 3rd ed. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-Blackwell; 2011.
  12. Paradis C. Lexical semantics. In: Chapelle CA, editor. The encyclopedia of applied linguistics. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-Blackwell; 2012. p. 3356-7.
  13. Fromkin V, Rodman R, Hyams N. An introduction to language. 10th ed. Boston, MA: Cengage Learning; 2014. p.181.
  14. Safavi K. An introduction to semantics. 4th ed. Tehran, Iran: Soure Mehr; 2011. p. 106-10. [In Persian].
  15. Palmer FR. Semantics. 2nd ed. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press; 1981. p. 59-65.
  16. Apresjan JD. Synonymy and synonyms. In: Kiefer F, editor. Trends in soviet theoretical linguistics. New York, NY: Springer Netherlands; 1973. p. 175.
  17. American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders. 4th ed. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association; 2000.
  18. American Association on Mental Retardation. Mental retardation: Definition, classification, and systems of supports. 10th ed. London, UK: American Association on Mental Retardation; 2002.
  19. Hoffenberg SE. Mild mental retardation. In: Goldstein S, Naglieri JA, editors. Encyclopedia of child behavior and development. New York, NY: Springer US; 2010. p. 941-3.
  20. Reschly D. Psychological testing in educational classification and placement. Am Psychol 1981; 36(10): 1094-102.
  21. Shea SE. Mental retardation in children ages 6 to 16. Semin Pediatr Neurol 2006; 13(4): 262-70.
  22. Shafee B, Tavakoli S, Mashhadi-Alinia L. Speech and language pathology. Isfahan, Iran: Isfahan University of Medical Sciences; 1999. [In Persian].
  23. Karlin IW, Strazzulla M. Speech and language problems of mentally deficient children. J Speech Hear Disord 1952; 17(3): 286-94.
  24. Fowler AE. Language in mental retardation: Association with and dissociations from general cognition. In: Burack JA, Hodapp RM, Zigler E, editors. Handbook of mental retardation and development. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press; 1998.
  25. Soltani Goharniri A. Study of language concept's comprehension in mental disability children with mental age 4-6 years from exceptional school and typically development children with chorological age of 4-6 from Nursery School of Kerman [Thesis]. Tehran, Iran: Allameh Tabatabaei University; 1997. [In Persian].
  26. Duchan JF, Erickson JG. Normal and retarded children's understanding of semantic relations in different verbal contexts. J Speech Hear Res 1976; 19(4): 767-76.
  27. Davies D, Sperber RD, McCauley C. Intelligence-related differences in semantic processing speed. J Exp Child Psychol 1981; 31(3): 387-402.
  28. Stan EA, Mosley JL. Semantic encoding by mildly retarded and non-retarded individuals. J Ment Defic Res 1988; 32 (Pt 5): 371-82.
  29. Megalakaki O, Yazbek H. Categorization activities performed by children with intellectual disability and typically developing children. Int J Child Health Hum Dev 2013; 6: 355-66.
  30. Razavieh A, Shahim S. A short form of the Wechsler Preschool and Primary Scale of Intelligence for use in Iran. Psychol Rep 1992; 71(3 Pt 1): 863-6.
  31. Rajabi G. Normalizing the raven color progressive matrices test on students of city Ahvaz. Contem Psychol 2008; 3(1): 23-32. [In Persian].
  32. Rajabi G, Najarian B, Attari Y. Validity and reliability of goodenough on children of 6-11 age in Boshehr. Psychology 2010; 4(3): 247-67. [In Persian].
  33. Stobin D. Universal of grammatical development in children. Proceedings of the Conference with International Participation on Psychology of Human Learning; 1969 Jul 16; Prague, Czechoslovakia.
  34. Heidenheimer P. Logical relations in the semantic processing of children between six and ten: Emergence of antonym and synonym categorization. Child Development 1978; 49(4): 243-6.
Journal of Research in Rehabilitation Sciences
Volume 12, Issue 5 - Serial Number 5
January 2017
Pages 290-298