33 

Communication Abilities of  Non-Standard Language Speaking Children: 
A Follow-up Study 

Erna Alant, D. Phil (Pretoria) 
Department  of  Speech  Therapy  and  Audiology, 

University  of  Pretoria 

ABSTRACT 

There  has  recently  been  a growing  awareness  among  speech  and  language  pathologists  about  the  problems  of  the  non-standard  language 
speaker  when  entering  the  school  situation  where  standard  language  is  predominantly  used.  This  study  deals  with  the  preschool  non-
standard  language  speaker  and  aims  to  investigate  whether  and  to  what  extent  the  children's  language  and  interaction  patterns  change 
after  one  year's  exposure  to  a formal  school  situation.  Results  indicate  that  although  certain  language  skills  do  change,  the  functional 
interactions  patterns  of  these  children  tends  to  remain  the  same.  These  findings  are  interpreted  within  a social  context  and  implications 
for  intervention  discussed. 

OPSOMMING 

Daar  is  'n  groeiende  bewuswording  binne  die  geledere  van  die  spraak-  en  taalterapeute  oor  die  probleme  rakende  die  nie-standaardtaal-
spreker  veral  wanneer  die  nie-standaardtaalsprekende  kind  die  skoolsituasie  betree  waar  standaardtaal  hoofsaakhk  gebruik  word. 
Hierdie  studie  handel  oor  die  voorskoolse  nie-standaardtaalspreker  en  poog  om  na  te  vors  of,  en  in  welke  mate  die  kmders  se  taal  en 
interaksiepatroon  verander  na  een  jaar  se  blootstelling  aan  'n  formele  skoolsituasie.  Resultate  dui  daarop  dat  hoewel  sekere  taalvaar-
dighede  verander  het,  die  funksionele  interaksie  patroon  van  die  kinders  neig  om  meer  konstant  te  bly.  Hierdie  bevindings  wordgemter-
preteer  binne  'n  sosiale  konteks  en  implikasies  vir  intervensie  word  bespreek. 

In the recent literature on language evaluation, much 
emphasis has been placed on the assessment of  functional 
language, particularly in relation to non-standard language 
speakers. This pragmatic approach reflects  an awareness of 
the difficulties  involved iri comparing and describing com-
munication abilities of  children merely by looking at the 
formal  structure of  language (Labov 1972, Trudgill 1983, 
Erickson and Omark 1981). The inappropriateness of  labell-
ing the use of  non-standarci language structures as 'patholo-
gical or deviant' due to inflexibility  in the application of  syn-
tactic, phonological or other language rules, has contributed 
to an increasing consciousness of  the equality of  language 
variations as potential codes for  the transmission of  various 
kinds of  messages (Davis 1985, Sturm 1984, Edwards 1979, 
Labov 1972). 

This acceptance of  the equality of  language variations (Davis 
1985), does not deny the existence of  a standard language in 
society as represented by reading and writing. It acknow-
ledges that societies need standard languages in order to 
function  effectively,  just as "schools have to accept and 
teach standard language if  only because one' of  the primary 
purposes of  education is literacy" (Davis 1985: 191). 

The consequence of  schools aiming at familiarizing  children 
with standard language as required for  reading and writing, 
is the frequent  existence of  a 'mismatch' or 'discontinuity' 
between the language children use at home and at school 
(Labov 1972, Trudgill 1983, Cox and Jones 1983, Adler 
1979). 

Die Suid-Afrikaanse  Tydskrifvir  Kommunikasieafwykings,  Vol. 34, 1987 

"... some children have little or no experience of  the 
interactional demands of  the school because of  the 
type of  conversational interaction which they have ex-
perienced at home, and so they are less able to cope 
with classroom talk" (McTear 1985:21). 

The nature of  the discontinuity between home and school 
language is, however, not clear and could include a complex 
combination of  social and linguistic aspects ranging from 
the use of  different  language structures to different  com-
munication styles (Farran 1982). The question arises as to 
what extent children's language proficiency  can change in 
coping with the more formal  school situation after  exposure 
to the educational system. It would be interesting to deter-
mine whether the language abilities and communication 
styles of  children can be modified  effectively  in order to 
facilitate  interaction at school after  some experience with 
formal  schooling. 

Most of  the longitudinal research on the language abilities of 
children exposed to schooling has been done by the Ameri-
can Headstart Programmes (Moore 1979, Kellaghan 1977), 
as well as the projects on the Educational Priority Areas 
(EPA) in Britain (Cox and Jones 1983). These studies indicate 
that children who were part of  these projects enjoyed only 
temporary advantages in adapting to the formal  school situa-
tion and that they gradually drifted  back towards the perfor-
mance level of  their companions who had no exposure to 
preschool education (Moore 1979). Explanations for  these 
findings  varied from  ineffectively  or poorly directed pro-

© SASHA 1987 

R
ep

ro
du

ce
d 

by
 S

ab
in

et
 G

at
ew

ay
 u

nd
er

 li
ce

nc
e 

gr
an

te
d 

by
 th

e 
P

ub
lis

he
r 

(d
at

ed
 2

01
2)



34 Erna Alant 

grammes (Kellaghan 1977), to the acceptance that language 
is part of  a social structure and, therefore,  that exposure to 
some hours of  language or educational stimulation does not 
effectively  change the interaction style of  the individual 
(Sturm 1984). 

The measurement of  effective  participation in a school con-
text is, however, problematic in view of  the difficulties  in-
volved in developing relevant communication parameters 
for  indicating learning performance.  School achievement 
gives some indication of  children's ability to cope with 
scholastic demands, although only the results or outcome of 
learning behaviour is reflected.  The process of  learning 
itself  is not considered in this kind of  evaluation. 

In this respect it is pertinent to differentiate  between "basic 
communication proficiency"  which refers  to interpersonal 
communicative skills and "cognitive academic language 
proficiency"  which refers  to the understanding and ability 
to manipulate meanings inherent in the language itself  as 
proposed by Cummins (1981) and discussed by Skinner 
(1985). Alhough these skills are interrelated, the nature of 
language proficiency  required in different  contexts varies in 
relation in the degree of  context-dependency as well as cog-
nitive demands (Skinner 1985). Different  communication 
skills can therefore  be identified  in the formal  learning 
situation, including interactive skills and the more cogni-
tively orientated academic language skills. 

Depending on the general approach to teaching, a more in-
teractive (less authoritarian) or on the other hand, a repre-
sentative interaction style (frequently  associated with a 
more formal,  authoritarian academic situation), could 
dominate. An interactive model of  learning emphasizes the 
ability of  the child to participate in the teaching situation by 
using a variety of  language functions,  i.e., to initiate, to res-
pond, or to ask for  clarification.  Interaction takes place 
primarily between pupil and teacher (Coulthard 1977, Brit-
ton 1973). Formal instruction, however, also involves at 
least to some extent the ability to listen to relatively long and 
cognitively demanding verbal instructions or explanations 
in order to respond appropriately in the context, i.e., 
representational skills as defined  by Russel and Russel 
(1979). Different  communication styles can therefore  be 
identified  in the teaching situation and should be noted 
when evaluating the communication abilities of  children in 
the school situation (Alant 1984). 

It is against this background that the present study sets out 
to investigate children's communication performance  in 
two contexts: a more cognitively demanding representative 
context in which comprehension questions relating to a 
story are asked similar to the question-answer situation at 
school, and a less cognitively demanding conversational 
context where children and an adult simulate communica-
tion skills required in interaction with the teacher in the 
classroom. In view of  this approach two questions demand 
to be posed, namely whether and to what extent the com-
munication skills of  children on a preschool level have 
changed after  one year of  exposure to the formal  school 
situation and secondly, whether there is any significant  as-
sociation between overall school performance  and com-
munication ability as defined  in the two contexts. 

METHODOLOGY 
Seventy-seven Afrikaans-speaking  children were tested on a 

preschool level. All of  these were prospective schoolbegin-
ners in the following  year at a specific  school in Eersterust. 
The whole population of  children that could be located was 
included in the study. Twelve months later the same 
children, were retested at the end of  their first  school year. 
Only forty-one  of  the original sample could be located at the 
school and were therefore  included in the study. All the 
children tested were from  the Nantes area which is one of 
the poorer areas in Eersterust, a community on the periphe-
ry of  Pretoria. It should be noted that, although close to the 
city, this township is relatively isolated from  the larger 
Afrikaans-speaking  community in Pretoria, and this has 
been contributed to the development of  certain linguistic 
differences  between the two Afrikaans-speaking  communi-
ties. These linguistic variations include differences  in voca-
bulary, syntactic structures as well as pronunciation 
(Claassen and Van Rensburg 1983). 

The average gross household income of  people in Eersterust 
was determined by a survey in 1979 (Lotter, Strijdom and 
Schurink 1979) and reported to be less than R300 a month 
per sub-economical four-roomed  house. As most of  the 
housing in the Nantes area is sub-economical, this could be 
taken as a reflection  of  the average income of  this subdivi-
sion of  the township. The average number of  dependents 
per household was at least eleven (Lotter et al. 1979:19). 

Table 1 gives a brief  description of  the subjects used in the 
study. As the same children were tested on both occasions, 
only the relevant information  will be given at the point of 
the second testing. 

Table 1: Description of  subjects at the end of  their first 
school year 

Variable Description 

Number of  children 41 
Male/female  distribution 48,8% female;  51,2% male 
Mean age 6,96 (SD = 0,53) 
Scholastic achievement at the 

6,96 (SD = 0,53) 

end of  the first  year 65% pass, 35% fail  ι 

MATERIALS 1 
ι 

The  Story: 

All children were exposed to a story and were required to 
answer questions about it. The same story and questions 
were used on both testing occasions. 

Although the effect  of  exposure to the story during the first 
testing could have influenced  performance  on the task in 
the second testing, this influence  was considered minimal. 
Firstly, there was a twelve month break between the two 
testings, which generally is regarded as a sufficient  period 
for  retesting (Dunn and Dunn 1981). Secondly, no answers 
were given to the children during the first  testing situation, 
therefore  no feedback  was provided in terms of  the correct 
answers. 

The story 'The fox  and the crab' was'adapted from  Berry 
(1969) as modified  by Alant (1984) for  use with five-and-a-
half  year olds in a comprehension situation (see Appendix 
1). The story was lengthened for  the purpose of  testing com-

The  South  African  Journal  of  Communication  Disorders,  Vol.  34, 1987 

R
ep

ro
du

ce
d 

by
 S

ab
in

et
 G

at
ew

ay
 u

nd
er

 li
ce

nc
e 

gr
an

te
d 

by
 th

e 
P

ub
lis

he
r 

(d
at

ed
 2

01
2)



Communication Abilities of  Non-Standard Language Speaking Children: A Follow-up Study 35 

prehension by including more characters (factual  material) 
while maintaining the basic story together with the in-
ferences  required to complete the ending. The story was 
told on video-tape (with facial  clues and gestures only, in 
order to stimulate stories or narratives occurring in normal 
communication). A nursery school teacher as well as the 
teachers of  the beginning classes at the school were asked to 
view the tape and to evaluate its appropriateness with 
regard to middle class biases in vocabulary, cultural pre-
judice, content, and age appropriateness. 

Some minor changes were suggested after  which the story 
was recorded for  use in the pilot and main study. 

Conversational  themes: 

The conversational themes, were developed from  the pilot 
study undertaken before  the first  testing. These topics 
centered around the children's interests and activities at 
school and at home, e.g., the family  and favourite  television 
programmes. 

PROCEDURE: 

Each child was tested individually at school in a classroom 
specially equipped for  the testing of  children. During the 
first  phase of  the testing the children were required to 
observe the video-story (4 minutes) after  which the compre-
hension questions were put to them. Immediately after  this 
interaction, the therapist having watched the video with the 
child, proceeded to initiate a conversation (12 minutes). The 
reason for  this specific  procedural sequence is that observa-
tion of  the television story was considered to be less threate-
ning to the children at the beginning of  the interaction. The 
same therapist interacted with the children on both occa-
sions in order to control for  idiosyncratic communication 
differences.  The complete contact with the child was recor-
ded on video-tape for  analysis at a later stage. However, the 
influence  that the presence of  the video equipment might 
have had on the performance  of  the children has to be consi-
dered. Similarly the presence of  a standard language speaker 
as a conversationalist could have had an inhibiting influence 
on the children. These two/factors  were held constant 
during both testings in order to compare the children's 
behaviour in the same situation under similar circumstan-
ces one year later. j 

i 

Verbal  analysis:  I  , 

Story situation: 
Accuracy of  answers: Four questions were asked, based on 
the story (Appendix 1). These questions were ranked from 
easy to difficult,  that is, from  questions demanding im-
mediate reproduction of  facts  to questions relating to 
answers based on inferences  drawn from  the story. The 
grading of  the questions was first  tested by Alant (1984) and 
proved to be satisfactory.  The specific  sequence of  questions 
was deemed important as easy questions could be a moti-
vating factor  in the beginning of  an interaction. 

Probing: 

Probing was used in order to prevent inhibited children 
from  being discredited for  lack of  understanding. Although 

the effectiveness  of  probing can be questioned, particularly 
with this sample of  children (Faegans and Farran 1982, 
Labov 1972), probes could contribute to an increase of  ver-
bal behaviour (Stalnaker and Creaghead 1982; Warren, 
McQuarter and Rogers-Warren 1984). A probe was defined 
as a verbalization from  the therapist followed  by a pause 
(approximately one second) during which the child could be 
given an opportunity to respond. Probing was used when 
children did not respond or when they responded with 
"don't know" or other short replies. Non-directive probing 
was used at first,  followed  by more direct probes depending 
on the vagueness of  the answers. 

Functional analysis of  conversation: 

The functional  categories developed by Dore (1977) were 
adapted for  use in the analysis of  conversation between the 
therapist (adult) and child (Appendix 2). This analysis only 
describes the kinds of  utterances used in the interaction 
(structural-functional)  whereas the transactional aspects in-
herent in the semantic development of  the conversation 
were not taken into account (McTear 1985). 

All the interviews were transcribed for  use in the functional 
analysis. Audi'o-recordings were used in order to enable the 
analyzers to do the functional  analysis with the written as 
well as the audio-information.  The inclusion of  both tran-
script and audio-material in the analysis was necessary in 
order to facilitate  reliable judgements of  utterances, particu-
larly in view of  the fact  that the function  of  an utterance 
cannot necessarily be deduced from  the structure of  the 
utterance (Willes 1981). 

Two groups of  two analyzers each worked together so as to 
control their interpretations of  the functional  categories in 
order to increase reliability of  the rating. An average of  96% 
agreement between raters was calculated for  each interac-
tion. 

SCHOLASTIC ACHIEVEMENT: 

An overall indicator of  the children's academic achievement 
was obtained from  the class teachers in the form  of  their 
final  class mark. This mark constituted the average perfor-
mance of  the child on all the different  levels, i.e., reading, 
writing, comprehension test, oral language and arithmetic. 
Although it could be argued that scholastic achievement as 
defined  above is too broad for  comparison with the above 
testing procedure, language can be seen as an important, 
although not necessarily the only, factor  influencing  perfor-
mance on all these levels. Due to the complexity of  factors 
that could influence  school performance  (e.g., visual pro-
blems) present findings  should therefore  only be interpreted 
tentatively. 

STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: 

Descriptive measures such as means, standard deviations 
and standard error of  the means were calculated to describe 
the performance  of  both groups on different  variables. The 
means of  specific  variables were used so that certain 
features  of  the groups could be represented graphically. The 

Die  Suid-Afrikaanse  Tydskrifvir  Kommunikasieafwykings,  Vol.  34, 1987 

R
ep

ro
du

ce
d 

by
 S

ab
in

et
 G

at
ew

ay
 u

nd
er

 li
ce

nc
e 

gr
an

te
d 

by
 th

e 
P

ub
lis

he
r 

(d
at

ed
 2

01
2)



36 
Erna Alant 

U-test of  Wilcoxon Mann-Whitney was used to test for  dif-
ferences  in population means. 

RESULTS 

The results will be discussed in three broad categories: 

— The children's performance  on the comprehension 
story; 

— The functional  analysis of  communication over the 
two testings; 

— The relationship between scholastic achievement and 
communication performance  on the last testing (i.e., 
after  the children had had eleven months' exposure to 
formal  schooling). 

The  children's  performance  on  the  comprehension  story 

Table 2 shows differences  in the means of  the children's 
performance  on the different  variables between the first 
(preschool) and second (school-going) testing. 

Table 2: Test for  difference  in means with respect to 
accuracy of  response and probing needed to 
elicit responses 

Variable T-value Probability 

Accuracy Question 1 1,27 0,2098 
Question 2 4,74 0,0001»» 
Question 3 2,87 0,0065»» 
Question 4 2,88 0,0064»» 

TOTAL 4,91 0,0001»» 

Probing Question 1 0,64 0,5253 
Question 2 2,24 0,0305» 
Question 3 -0,83 0,4119 
Question 4 1,18 0,2433 

TOTAL 1,99 0,0537 

** = Significant  on 1% level, * = Significant  on 5% level. 

The above table indicates that there are significant  differen-
ces between the means of  most of  the questions with respect 
to the accuracy of  the responses, whereas there are relati-
vely few  significant  differences  on the amount of  probing 
necessary to elicit responses from  the children. 

Functional  analysis  of  conversation 

Figures 1 and 2 graphically represent the mean number of 
utterances within each category for  each testing. 

Key: 

Therapist x x x x x 
Child: 3iack 

Qo = Open question 
Qyln = Yes/no question 

Qs = Specific  question 

Qc = Question for  clarification 
Qh - Question repeated 
Rvln = Y :s/no response 
Rf = Factual response 
Rc = Clarifying  response 
Rr - Repeating response 

D Description 
S 'Statement 
Aa Acknowledgement, acceptance 
Ap Acknowledgement: positive 
An Acknowledgement: negative 
Oa Organization device: attention 
Op Organization device: politeness 
Oc Organization device: contact 
Ρ Performatives 
Int Interruptions 
Irr In elevant utterances 

Qo Qyln 

Figure 1: Functional analysis of  conversations between therapist and child in 1984 

The  South  African  Journal  of  Communication  Disorders,  Vol.  34, 1987 

R
ep

ro
du

ce
d 

by
 S

ab
in

et
 G

at
ew

ay
 u

nd
er

 li
ce

nc
e 

gr
an

te
d 

by
 th

e 
P

ub
lis

he
r 

(d
at

ed
 2

01
2)



Communication Abilities of  Non-Standard Language Speaking Children: A Follow-up Study 

x x x x x 
x x x x x 
x x x x x 
x x x x x 
x x x x x 
x x x x x 
x x x x x 
x x x x x 
x x x x x 
x x x x x 
x x x x x 
x x x x x 
x x x x x 
x x x x x 
x x x x x 
x x x x x 
x x x x x 
x x x x x 
x x x x x 
x x x x x 
x x x x x 
x x x x x 
x x x x x 
x x x x x 
x x x x x 15,48 x x x x x 

x x x x x x x x x x 
x x x x x x x x x x 
x x x x x x x x x x 
x x x x x x x x x x 
x x x x x x x x x x 
x x x x x x x x x x 
x x x x x x x x x x 
x x x x x x x x x x 
x x x x x x x x x x 
x x x x x x x x x x 

8,05 x x x x x x x x x x 8,05 
x x x x x x x x x x 

x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x 
x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x 
x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x 
x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x 
x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x 
x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x 
x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x 
x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x 
x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x 
x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x 
x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x 
x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x 
x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x 

0,03 0,05 0,03 

Qo Qyln Qs 

Key. 

Therapist xxxxx 
Child: Black 

24,05 

X X X X X 
x x x x x 
x x x x x 
x x x x x 
x x x x x 
x x x x x 
x x x x x 
x x x x x 
x x x x x 
x x x x x 
x x x x x 
x x x x x . 
x x x x x 
x x x x x 
x x x x x 
x x x x x 
x x x x x 
x x x x x 
x x x x x 
x x x x x 
x x x x x 
x x x x x 
x x x x x 
x x x x x 
x x x x x 
x x x x x 
x x x x x 
x x x x x 
x x x x x 
x x x x x 
x x x x x 
x x x x x 
x x x x x 
x x x x x 
x x x x x 
x x x x x 
x x x x x 
x x x x x 

l 18 I x x x x x 

Q» 
Qyln 

Qs 

Qc 

Qh 

Ryln 

Rl 

Rc 

Rr 

D 

s 
Aa 

A p 

An 

Oa 

Op 

Oc 

Ρ 
Inl 

Irr 

Open question 

Yes/no question 

Speeific  question 

Question for  clarification 

Question repeated 

Yes/no response 

Factual response 

Clarifying  response 

Repeating response 

Description 

Statement 

Acknowledgement: acceptance 

Acknowledgement: positive 

Acknowledgement: negative 

Organization device: attention 

Organization device: politeness 

Organization device: contact 

Performatives 

Interruptions 

Irrelevant utterances 

1,25 
2,05 2,5 

x x x x x x x x x x 
x x x x x x x x x x 

0,03 x x x x x 0,55 0,65 0,13 0,03 
x x x x x 

0,55 0,13 

Ap Op 

Figure 2: Functional analysis of  conversations between therapist and child in 1985 

These figures  indicate that there are no great differences 
between the therapist's and children's utterances for  the 
two testing situations. Table 3 reflects  significant  differen-
ces between the means on the different  categories for  the 
therapist's as well as the children's utterances. 

Table 3: Significant  differences  between means on 
categories used jby the therapist and child for 
the first  and second testing 

Table 4: Test for  the difference  in means between the 
two groups (children that failed  and passed) 
with respect to the story variables 

Therapist Child 

i 
Proba- Proba-

Category T-value bility Category T-value bility 

Qo 5,03 0,0001 φ φ Qc -3,14 0,0037** 
D 2,37 0,0244 φ 
Oa 3,58 0,0000 φ φ 

Clarification  of  abbreviations in Appendix II . 
** = Significant  on 1% level, * = Significant  on 5% level. 

Correlation  between  overall  scholastic  achievement  and  com-
munication  parameters 

Tables 4 and 5 represent the differences  between the means 
of  the story and conversational variables of  two groups of 
children, group 1 representing the children who passed the 
first  year of  schooling (65% in total) and group 2 represen-
ting those who failed  (35% in total). 

Variable T-value Probability 

Accuracy Question 1 (Values were the same for Accuracy 
one class level) 

Question 2 -0,52 0,6065 
Question 3 -1,37 0,1778 
Question 4 -2,21 0,0336* 

TOTAL -2,20 0,0038* 

Probing Question 1 2,25 0,0326** 
Question 2 1,27 0,2136 
Question 3 2,65 0,0120* 
Question 4 1,27 0,2124 

TOTAL 2,41 0,0210* 

Significant  on 1% level, * = Significant  on 5% level. 

From Tables 4 and 5 it is clear that there are some diffe-
rences between these two groups on the story variables, 
although fewer  significant  differences  seem to be indicated 
between the first  and second testing on the functional  use of 
language. 

Die  Suid-Afrikaanse  Tydskrif  vir  Kommunikasieafwykings,  Vol.  34, 1987 

R
ep

ro
du

ce
d 

by
 S

ab
in

et
 G

at
ew

ay
 u

nd
er

 li
ce

nc
e 

gr
an

te
d 

by
 th

e 
P

ub
lis

he
r 

(d
at

ed
 2

01
2)



38 Erna Alant 

Table 5: Significant  differences  in means with respect 
to the functional  categories used by the thera-
pist and child 

Therapist Child 

Category 

Qr 
Aa 

T-value 

2,55 
2,84 

Proba-
bility 

0,02* 
0,01** 

Category 

Ry 

T-value 

-1,94 

Proba-
bility 

0,05* 

Clarification  of  abbreviations in Appendix II 
** = Significant  on 1% level, * = Significant  on 5% level. 

DISCUSSION OF RESULTS 

Children's performance  on the comprehension story: 

Accuracy  of  the  responses: 

There is a highly significant  difference  in the children's ac-
curacy of  response between the first  and second testing, 
reflecting  definite  growth in semantic understanding of  the 
story during the twelve months. This improvement in the 
children's comprehension behaviour is reflected  in ques-
tions two to four,  with question one not showing any signifi-
cant difference.  This absence of  a significant  difference  on 
question one can be expected in view of  the inherent nature 
of  the question as it simply demands the name of  the animal 
which is the main character of  the story. 

The highly significant  difference  between the means on 
question two is, however, interesting considering the 
demands made on memory and recall of  the children as they 
were required to name all the animals that the fox  met. This 
finding  is in agreement with developmental research repor-
ting increased ability to remember factual  detail as age in-
creases (Bloom and Lahey 1978). 

Question three indicates the ability to analyse the purpose 
of  the actions in the story by describing the plan that the fox 
had. The significant  improvement in answers on this ques-
tion is in congruence with the research done by Peterson 
and McCabe (1983) where they emphasize the older child's 
tendency to move away from  describing action sequences to 
expressing relationships (cause — effect  or intentionality) 
between actions. They explain this phenomenon in terms of 
the children's increase in control over their environment in 
that they become better able to participate in events 
whereas the purpose of  these events might not have been 
evident to them before. 

Question four  emphasizes the ability to constructively pro-
cess information  by demanding that the children make in-
ferences  from  the story. The present data confirm  normal 
developmental research reporting an age effect  in the con-
structive processing of  information  (Small and Butterworth 
1981, Paris, Lindauer and Cox 1977). Weissmer (1983) also 
reported fewer  inferences  from  children aged 5,5 — 6,7 
compared to those aged 7,7 — 9,2. 

In general the language performance  of  these children in-
dicates an increased ability to cope with the two main 
language proficiency  vectors as formulated  by Cummins 
(1981), i.e., the ability to determine and communicate mean-

ing in the absence of  contextual clues and the ability to think 
in more 'cognitively demanding' situations. Although this 
improved performance  could also be interpreted as the 
result of  the children's familiarity  with the testing situation 
it is doubtful  whether this is the case particularly in view of 
the twelve month gap between testings. 

Probing  necessary  to  elicit  responses: 

Only question two indicates a significant  difference  (at the 
5% level) between the means of  the two testings, implying 
that more probing was done on the second than on the first 
testing. This finding  is contrary to what is expected as it im-
plies that the children needed more encouragement to 
answer the questions on the second testing. This finding 
raises questions as to the influence  of  probing on the ac-
curacy scores of  the children. The association between prob-
ing and accuracy for  this particular procedure has, however, 
been computed, and indicates a highly significant  neg,.:t<ve 
correlation (1% level) between the two variables. As probii.0 
increased, the accuracy of  the responses, in fact,  decreased, 
which means that the present finding  points to improved lis-
tening and memory-recall abilities of  the children rather 
than improved accuracy due to an increase in probing. A se-
cond important implication of  this finding  is that the 
children were less at ease in coping with the question-
answer situation at the time of  the second testing. The asym-
metric nature of  the interaction has thus not shown any 
decline; rather the children might have become more con-
scious (as indicated by question 2) of  the inherent inequality 
in the adult-child interaction as discussed by French and 
Woll (1981) and Romaine (1984). This increase in awareness 
could be indicative of  an authoritarian teacher-pupil rela-
tionship. 

Functional  analysis  of  conversation: 

From Figures 1 and 2, it is clear that the pattern of  functio-
nal categories for  the two testings stayed virtually the 
same, i.e., a high frequency  of  questions from  the therapist, 
while the child mostly responded. This information  con-
firms  the notion that the same interaction (e.g., adult-child) 
tends to elicit similar functional  behaviour (Gallagher and 
Prutting 1983). The children showed little initiative (little 
additional information  was given, for  example few  descrip-
tions (D), stories (S) or questions (Q) were forthcoming) 
which could also be a reflection  of  the asymmetric nature of 
the interaction (Romaine 1984). 

I 
The test for  the difference  between the means for  all the 
categories, indicate that the therapist used significantly 
more open-ended questions (Qo), descriptions (D) and orga-
nizational devices (Oa) to attract the child's attention, and 
encourage interactions during the second testing. The child, 
however, did not experience the interaction any differently 
from  the first  in that there was no notable increase in the 
child's initiation, descriptions or statements. Romaine 
(1984:22) describes this phenomenon as follows: 

/ 
"Distribution of  power is clearly delimited and free 
conversation is not expected. Attempts to elicit nar-

' ratives and spontaneous speech by breaking out of  the 
question/answer format  violate the norms governing 
the event. According to Wolfson,  the informant's  reac-
tion to this may be surprise, confusion,  suspicion or 
even resentment". 

The  South  African  Journal  of  Communication  Disorders,  Vol.  34, 1987 

R
ep

ro
du

ce
d 

by
 S

ab
in

et
 G

at
ew

ay
 u

nd
er

 li
ce

nc
e 

gr
an

te
d 

by
 th

e 
P

ub
lis

he
r 

(d
at

ed
 2

01
2)



Communication Abilities of  Non-Standard Language Speaking Children: A Follow-up Study 39 

The lack of  response from  the children could, however, also 
indicate an inability to adapt to the dynamics of  the conver-
s a t i o n due to either insensitivity or insecurity on their part 
(McTear 1985). Unfamiliarity  with the prevalent conversa-
tional rules could thus have contributed to the seeming lack 
of  response from  the children (Willes 1981). 

The finding  indicating a significant  decrease in the 
children's questions for  clarification  during the second 
testing is interesting, in view of  the fact  that this behaviour 
could indicate a lesser need to ask for  clarification  due to im-
proved comprehension. As there were no significant  diffe-
rences in the other functional  categories of  the children, it is 
difficult  to verify  this interpretation. A more likely interpre-
tation could be that the children were more inhibited as 
they had become more conscious of  the asymmetric nature 
of  the relationship. 

Scholastic  performance  of  the  children: 

After  having described the performance  of  the children in 
both testings, it is important to get some measure of  the ef-
fectiveness  of  the children's performance  at school, in order 
to understand the prerequisites for  learning within the 
school context. 

Although the children who failed  and those who passed at 
the end of  their first  school year differed  significantly  in 
their performance  on isolated questions in the story, the 
total accuracy as well as the total probing score indicate 
significant  differences  on a 5% level. The children who pass-
ed therefore  obtained significantly  better accuracy scores on 
the total performance  and they also needed less probing on 
the four  questions in order to respond. One could therefore 
conclude that these children seemed to cope better with the 
situation demanding more cognitive academic language pro-
ficiency  (Cummins 1981). 

As far  as the functional  categories are concerned, there is 
only one significant  difference  between the two groups' 
functional  language categories, while there are two signifi-
cant differences  on the categories used by the therapist with 
the two groups. 

The significant  difference  in the frequency  of  yes/no 
responses between the two groups of  children is most in-
teresting, particularly as tile academic achievers tended to 
use more yes/no replies. Traditionally a high premium was 
placed on the syntactic completeness of  utterances, and 
restricted verbalization was frequently  equated with limited 
language abilities (Bernstein 1973, Lee, Koenigsknecht and 
Mulhern 1975, Crystal, Fletcher and Garman 1977). New 
theoretical insights, however, stress that structural com-
pleteness is no prerequisite for  effective  communication 
(Labov 1972). The higher frequency  of  yes/no responses in 
this study could therefore  rather be related to better 
understanding on the part of  the children and an inability to 
express themselves more explicitly. 

As for  the changes occurring in the therapist's utterances 
when talking to children of  different  academic achieve-
ment, it is notable that she had to repeat her own questions 
(Qr) more often  to the children who were academically 
poorer, whereas she also accepted more of  their verbaliza-
tions (Aa), possibly in an attempt to encourage further  ver-
balization. She therefore  tried to compensate for  the child's 

apparent difficulties  in the situation by accepting a greater 
variety of  utterances. 

It should be underlined in conclusion, that the present study 
aims at describing children's communication behaviour in 
two contexts by using certain methodological and analytical 
procedures. Data can, therefore,  only be interpreted within 
the context of  the study. It is no intent of  the author to 
generalize the present findings  to other language skills or 
communication situations. 

In terms of  the theory of  discontinuity, it could be argued 
that the children who had failed  their first  year of  schooling 
had difficulty  in orientating themselves to the situations 
demanding more cognitive academic language proficiency. 
This problem in orientation could be due to many factors, 
including cognition (which could according to Selowsky 
(1980) also be related to malnutrition), difficulty  in coping 
with the standard language as required in the more formal 
story situation, as well as a delay in the development of 
meta-linguistic abilities needed for  the making of  inferences 
in a given situation (Wallach and Butler 1984). 

As far  as functional  language is concerned, no big differen-
ces in the children's performances  were noted between 
preschool- and one year of  schooling-level, indicating that 
the children's conversational abilities as defined  by these 
categories did not show a significant  change or improve-
ment. Due to the minimal differences  found  between the 
skills of  the children who had failed  and those who had 
passed academically, it can also be said that conversation 
skills as defined  in this study did not influence  learning per-
formance  in the school. The model adhered to in the class-
room therefore  seems to be of  an authoritarian nature (Brit-
ton 1973) which demands little initiative and active partici-
pation on the part of  the children. In the same way the inter-
action model prevalent in the children's daily life  could also 
be of  a more authoritarian nature, as is suggested by 
Romaine (1984). 

The question arises as to the relevance of  trying to change or 
improve conversational abilities within the context of  an 
authoritarian teaching model and possibly also a parent or 
adult dominated society. This is a difficult  and complex 
question to answer. The problem remains, however, as to 
how these children will be able to cope with a different  level 
of  academic achievement, where an interactive approach to 
learning is more prominent, for  example, at secondary 
school or university. In the case of  these children, they are 
all from  the same geographical area and therefore  isolated 
from  contact with children from  other areas. Although this 
aspect facilitates  adaptation of  the children to the school 
situation, it could also be considered as a very protective 
learning environment, which has the disadvantage that, 
once confronted  with the broader society, the children 
might experience more difficulties  due to the 'mismatch' 
between educational and communication strategies in the 
different  contexts. There is, however, no merit in regarding 
the problem of  different  interaction styles (which reflect  dif-
ferent  ways of  life  according to Labov 1972 and Luckmann 
1975) in isolation from  the social situation in which they oc-
cur. Intervention strategies should therefore  only be in-
itiated after  extensive contact and collaboration with the 
communities involved, in order to prevent a different  com-
munication style from  being mistaken for  a pathological 
interaction model in the context. 

Die  Suid-Afrikaanse  Tydskrif  vir  Kommunikasieafwykings,  Vol.  34, 1987 

R
ep

ro
du

ce
d 

by
 S

ab
in

et
 G

at
ew

ay
 u

nd
er

 li
ce

nc
e 

gr
an

te
d 

by
 th

e 
P

ub
lis

he
r 

(d
at

ed
 2

01
2)



40 Erna Alant 

The implications of  these findings  for  language assessment 
and remediation are multiple. Firstly, it is important to 
realize that there is no objectively defined  concept of 
pathology. Deviancy is defined  within a particular context, 
which implies that there is no 'ideal' communication model 
within which therapists remediate. Therapy should be 
directed at meeting the needs of  the patient which presup-
poses an understanding of  the environment and context 
within which the individual lives. The general interactive 
style of  the school context as well as the environment has to 
be considered before  deciding that functional  behaviour is 
inappropriate or limited. 

Secondly, the range of  language skills tested should be close-
ly considered, particularly when working with school-going 
children. The evaluation of  functional  communication skills 
does not necessarily reflect  the child's cognitive academic 
language proficiency  as indicated by the poor correlation 
between school performance  and functional  communica-
tion illustrated in this study. 

Finally, it is clear that when preparing children for  formal 
learning within a context as described here, it is important 
to focus  on cognitive academic language proficiency  in 
order to facilitate  the transition from  home to school en-
vironments. 

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 

This research is part of  the 'Eersterust Project' of  the 
Department of  Speech Pathology and Audiology of  the 
University of  Pretoria. I would like to express my sincere 
appreciation for  the invaluable contributions of  all the team 
members: Annemarie Beukes, Heila van den Berg, Alta Krit-
zinger, Ingrid van Zyl, Rialette Gous, Santie Meyer, Marina 
Hurter and Felicity van Rensburg. The assistance of  Mrs. M. 
Botha as well as Prof  S.H.C. du Toit in the computerisation 
and statistical analyses of  the data is also greatly ap-
preciated. Finally, the dedicated participation of  the 
teachers and children at the school contributed greatly to 
the success of  the project. 
REFERENCES 
Adler, S. Poverty  Children  and  Their  Language  New York: Grune & 

Stratton, 1979. 
Alant, E. The Development of  a Procedure for  Analysing Com-

munication of  Preschool Children. D.Phil.  Thesis,  University 
of  Pretoria, 1984 (unpublished). 

Bernstein, B. (Ed.) Class,  Codes  and  Control.  London: Routledge and 
Kegan Paul, 1973. 

Berry, M. Language  Disorders  of  Children.  Englewood-Cliffs: 
Prentice-Hall, 1969. 

Bloom, L. & Lahey, M. Language  Development  and  Language 
Disorders.  New York: John Wiley, 1978. 

Britton, J. Language  and  Learning.  London: Penguin Books, 1973. 
Claassep, G. and Van Rensburg, M.C.J. Taalverskeidenheid.  Cape 

Town: Academica, 1983. 
Coulthard, M. An  Introduction  to  Discourse  Analysis.  London: 

Longman, 1977. 
Cox, Τ and Jones, G. Disadvantaged  Eleven  Year  Olds.  Oxford: 

Pergamon Press, 1983. 
Crystal, D. and Fletcher, P. and Garman, M. The  Grammatical 

Analysis  of  Language  Disability.  London: Edward Arnold, 
1977. 

Cummins, J. The Role of  Primary Language Development in Pro-
moting Educational Success for  Language Minority Students. 
In California  State Department of  Education (Eds.) Schooling 
and  Language.  Minority  Students.  Los Angeles: Evaluation, 
Dissemination and Assessment Center, 1981. 

Davis, A. Standard and Dialect English. Journal  of  Multilingual  and 
Multicultural  Development,  6, 2, 183-192, 1985. 

Dore, J. On Them Sheriff:  A Pragmatic Analysis of  Children's 
Responses. In S. Ervin-Tripp and C. Mitchell-Kernan (Eds.) 
Child  Discourse,  New York: Academic Press, 1977. 

Dunn, L.M. and Dunn, L. Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test-
revised. American  Guidance  Service.  Minnesota: Circle Pines 
1981. 

Edwards, J.R. Language  and  Disadvantage.  London: Edward Arnold 
1979. 

Erickson, J.G. and Omark, D.R. Communication  Assessment  of  the 
Bilingual,  Bicultural  Child.  Baltimore: University Park Press 
1981. 

Faegans, L. and Farran, D.C. The  Language  of  Children  Reared  in 
Poverty.  New York: Academic Press, 1982. 

Farran, D.C. Intervention for  Poverty Children: Alternative Ap-
proaches. In L. Faegans and D. Farran (Eds.) The  Language  of 
Children  Reared  in  Poverty.  New York: Academic Press, 1982. 

Francis, H. What Does the Child Mean? Child  Language,  6, 227-241 
1978. 

French, H. and Woll, B. Contest, Meaning and Strategy in Parent-
child Conversation. In G. Wells (Ed.) Learning  Through  Inte-
raction,  New York: Cambridge, 1981. 

Gallagher, T. and Prutting, C. (Eds.) Pragmatic  Assessment  and  In-
tervention  Issues  in  Language.  California:  College-Hill Press, 
1983. 

Kellaghan, T. The  Evaluation  of  An  Intervention  Programme  for  Disad-
vantaged  Children.  Windsor: NFER Publishing Company, 
1977. 

Labov, W. The Logic of  Non-Standard English. In Giglioli, Ρ (Ed). 
Language  and  Social  Context,  New York: Penguin, 1972. 

Lee, L.L.; Koenigsknecht, R.L. and Mulhern, S. Interactive  Language 
Development  Teaching.  Evanston: Northwestern University 
Press, 1975. 

Lotter, J.M.; Strydom, H.G. and Schurink, W.J. Eersterust:  'n  Sosio-
logiese  Studie  van  'n  Kleurlinggemeenskap.  Pretoria: RGN, 
1979. 

Luckmann, T. Sociology  of  Language.  Indianopolis: The Bobbs-
Merrill Company, 1975. 

McTear, M. Children's  Conversation.  Oxford:  Basil Blackwell, 1985. 
Moore, S. Past Research and Current Perspectives on Head Start 

and Follow Through. Viewpoints  in  Teaching  and  Learning, 
55, 3, 75-82, 1979. 

Paris, S; Lindauer, B. and Cox, G. The Development of  Inferential 
Comprehension. Child  Development,  48, 1728-1733, 1977. 

Peterson, C. and McCabe, A. Developmental  Psycholinquistics:  Three 
Ways  of  Looking  at  a Child's  Narrative.  New York: Plenum 
Press, 1983. 

Russel, D. and Russel, E. Listening  Aids  Through  The  Grades.  New 
York: Collumbia University, Teachers College, 1979. 

Romaine, S. The  Language  of  Children  and  Adolescents:  The  Acquisi-
tion  of  Communication  Competence.  Oxford:  Basil Blackwell, 
1984. 

Selowsky, M. Preschool Age Investment in Human Capital. In J. 
Simmons (Ed.) The  Education  Dilemma:  Policy  Issues  for  Deve-
loping  Countries  in  the  1980's,  New York: Pergamon Press, 
1978. 

Skinner, D. Access to Meaning: The Anatomy of  the Language/ 
Learning Connection. Journal  of  Multilingual  and  Multicultu-
ral  Development,  6, 2, 97-116, 1985. 

Small, M. and Butterworth, J. Semantic Integration and the 
Development of  Memory for  Logical Inferences.  Child  Deve-
lopment,  52, 732-735, 1981. ' I 

Stalnaker, L.D. and Creaghead, N.A. An Examination of  Language 
Samples Obtained under Three Experimental Conditions. 
Language  Speech  and  Hearing  Services  in  Schools,  13, 2, 121-
128, 1982. ' 

Sturm, J. Deficit  and Difference:  A False Dichotomy in an Educa-
tional Perspective. In K. Deprez (ed.), Sosiolinquistics  in  the 
Low  Countries.  Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing 
Company, 1984. 

Trudgill, P. Accent,  Dialect  and  the  School.  London: Edward Arnold, 
1983. 

Wallach, G.P. and Butler, K.G. Language  Learning  Disabilities  in 
School-Age  Children,  London: Williams and Wilkins. 1984. 

Warren, S.F.; McQuarter, R.J. and Rogers-Warren, A.K. The Effects 
of  Mands and Models on the Speech of  Unresponsive Lan-
guage Delayed Preschool Children. Journal  of  Speech  and 
Hearing  Disorders,  49, 43-52, 1984. 

Weissmer, S.E. Constructive Comprehension Abilities Exhibited by 
Language-Disordered Children. Journal  of  Speech  and  Hearing 
Research,  23, 2, 175-184, 1983. . 

Willes, M. Learning to Take Part in Classroom Interaction. In P. 
French and M. Maclure (eds.). Adult-Child  Conversation.  Lon-
don: Croom Helm, 1981. 

The  South  African  Journal  of  Communication  Disorders,  Vol.  34, 1987 

R
ep

ro
du

ce
d 

by
 S

ab
in

et
 G

at
ew

ay
 u

nd
er

 li
ce

nc
e 

gr
an

te
d 

by
 th

e 
P

ub
lis

he
r 

(d
at

ed
 2

01
2)



Communication Abilities of  Non-Standard Language Speaking Children: A Follow-up Study 41 

APPENDIX 1 

STORY 

Unit 1 

Ε 3 Ε.3 Ε.2 Ε.3 
Eendag//  stap ou jackals in die bos./ Hy  loop en spog  te lek-
ker,/ want hy  kan tog SO:  vinnig hardloop.// Toe hy nog so 
stap, sien hy vir olifant  onder  die  boom  staan.H  "Goeie  More 
OU olifant"  se jakkals./ "Kom  ons  hardloop  reisies,  dan  kyk 
O.NS  wie  van ons  twee  hardloop die vinnigste."// Ou olifant 
dink  toe so 'n bietjie en se toe "Agge  nee  ou jakkals  jy is gans 
te vinnig vir MY."/ Ou jakkals  lag  te lekker./ "Ja ou olifant, 
ek  sal jou sommer ve:r  wen."II  En so stap jakkals toe aan.// 

2 = Partially correct repetition of  actions, e.g., hanged 
on tail 

1 = No response/Response out of  context/Do not know 

Question 4: Who do you think won the race and why? 
The WHY part of  the question is scored only: 
4 = In context explanation, e.g., crab won because he 

made a clever plan 
3 = In context, but concrete, e.g., crab, because he jum-

ped on the fox's  tail 
2 = Vague, out of  context, e.g., fox,  because he is faster 
1 = No response/Do not understand/Do not know 

PROBING ANALYSES: 

Unit 2 

Toe  jakkals nog so stap,/ sien hy vir skihpad.l  "Goeie  More 
skilpad./ Kom  ons hardloop reisies dan kyk ons  wie  van ons 
twee is die vinnigste."/ Skilpad  dink  toe so 'n bietjie/ en se: 
"Agge  nee  ou jakkals  jy is gans  te vinnig  vir My."// Ou jakkals 
lag  te lekker.  Dis tog te lekker  vir hom  om te weet  dat al  die 
diere  te bang  is om teen hom  reisies te hardloop.// En so stap 
jakkals toe aan...11 

Unit 3 

Toe jakkals nog so stap, sien hy vir krap  op die grond./ 
"Goeie more  ou krap. Kom ons hardloop reisies, dan kyk ons 
wie  van ons  twee is die vinnigste."// Ou krap dink  toe so 'n 
bietjie...// en toe  kry  hy  'n  baie  Goeie  plan./  "Goed  ou jakkals, 
kom  ons hardloop  reisies  dank kyk ons  wie van ons  twee is 
die vinnigste."//  Ou jakkals  is stom  geslaan./Hy  kan  nie  glo  dat 
krap  teen hom  wil reisies  hardloop  nie.II 

Unit 4 

Die twee begin toe hardloop./ MAAR  net toe jakkals begin 
hardloop, spring  krap  op jakkals  se  stert  en Khou  daar  vas./ 
Jakkals  hardloop baie  vinnig tot by die wenpaal./ En toe hy 
by die wenpaal  kom/ skud  lhy  sy stert  en kyk  om  om te sien 
waar die krap is.// Huuu. J en  daar  sien  jakkals  vir krap OP 
DIE  GROND!  "Ag Ou  jakkals,"  se die krap toe "Ek  wag  al 
lankal  hier vir jou op die grond." 

t 
I 

VERBAL ANALYSES: j 

Accuracy:  ! -

Question 1: Who walked in the veld? 
4 = Fox 
3 = Description of  animal, no name 
2 = Wrong animal 
1 = No response/did not understand 

Question 2: Whom did he meet there? 
4 = All three correct 
3 = Two correct 
2 = One correct 
1 = None correct 

Question 3: What was the clever plan of  the crab? 
4 = Indication of  relationship between action and 

intention 
3 = Repeat actions involved, e.g., jumped onto tail and 

clung onto it 

All the probes on each question were calculated and 
categorized according to the following  scoring system: 

1 = 0-5 probes 3 = 11-15 probes 
2 = 6-10 probes 4 = 16-20 probes 

S = Smile 1 - 4 
Ε = Eye widening/ 

Eye narrowing 1—4 
F = Frowning 1—4 
HN = Head nod 
HS = Head shake 
IL = Illustration 

Italics = Emphasized 

CAPITAL LETTERS = STRESSED with more LOUDNESS 

SO: = The last sound prolonged 
/ = Pause (untimed duration shown by number of  II) 
II  — Longer pause 

APPENDIX 2 

Functional categories used for  the analysis of  the conversa-
tions between therapist and child. Adapted from  Dore 
(1977). 

Requests/Questions: 

Qo : Open question, e.g., tell me... 
Qy/n : Yes no question, e.g., do you know this? 
Qs : Specific  question, e.g., what are you doing? 
Qc : Question for  clarification  (related to previous utte-

rance) e.g., what?) 
Qr : Repetition of  previous question 

Responses: 

Ry/n : Yes/no response 
Rf  : Factual response to the question 
Rc : Response on request for  clarification 
Rr : Repetition of  previous response 

Descriptions: 

D : Giving of  additional information,  descriptions 

Die  Suid-Afrikaanse  Tydskrifvir  Kommunikasieafwykings,  Vol.  34, 1987 

R
ep

ro
du

ce
d 

by
 S

ab
in

et
 G

at
ew

ay
 u

nd
er

 li
ce

nc
e 

gr
an

te
d 

by
 th

e 
P

ub
lis

he
r 

(d
at

ed
 2

01
2)



42 Erna Alant 

Statements: 
S : Statements not directly related to the previous ut-

terance 

Acknowledgements (non-requests): 

Aa : Accepting an utterance, e.g., hmm... 
Ap : Positive acknowledgement, e.g., that was good 
An : Negative acknowledgement, e.g., no, try again 

Organizational devices: 

Oa : Utterance to draw attention, e.g., Justin, look 
here... 

Op : Utterance indicating politeness, e.g., thank you 
Oc : Utterance to maintain contact, e.g., Mmmm and 

then... 

Performatives:  Utterances aimed at changing behaviour 

Ρ : Utterances aimed at changing behaviour, e.g., 
don't do that, no, what are you doing? 

Additional categories used: 

Int : Interruptions 
Irr : Irrelevant utterances 

These two categories were indicated by putting the specific 
category in brackets e.g. 

Τ : Waar werk jou pa? 
Κ : Saam met sy tjomme 
Τ : Ja, en waar werk jou pa? 
Κ : Daar by die swembad 

Qs 
(Rf) 
Aa...Qr 
Rf 

C/O  Jan Smuts 
and Gordon Aves 
Blairgowrie Randburg 
2194 
P.O. Box 84518 
Greenside 2034 

Smile Education Systems (Pty) Ltd. 
We all know about the Smile Phonic Workbooks R2,99 each. 
We all know about "Leergenot Fonemiese Werkboeke" R2,99 each. 
We've all enjoyed Smile and Learn Book I. 
But perhaps you don't know about 

Peg-A-Pattern (A language based perceptual programme) 
Learn to Think (Early leadership with logic) 
Early Learning Animal Puzzles 

At Smile Education Systems we know that language skills are important. 
We encourage parents to communicate with their children. 
We promote learning through perceptual and cognitive development. 
.Perhaps we can be of  help to you. Pop in and see us or write to Smile Educa-
tion Systems, P.O. Box 84518, Greenside 2034, for  a free  catalogue and pfice 

list. 

/ 

The  South  African  Journal  of  Communication  Disorders,  Vol.  34, 1987 

R
ep

ro
du

ce
d 

by
 S

ab
in

et
 G

at
ew

ay
 u

nd
er

 li
ce

nc
e 

gr
an

te
d 

by
 th

e 
P

ub
lis

he
r 

(d
at

ed
 2

01
2)