Narrative Discourse Characteristics Persian Speaking Adults

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

1 Speech Therapy, Clinic of Buds

2 Department of Speech Therapy, School of Paramedical Sciences, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran

3 Linguistics, Hearing Aid Center

Abstract

Purpose:
During human life, language is important in social interaction and speech and language pathologists play a significant role in preservation and promotion of speech and communication in people. In adulthood, increasing age and particularly aging changes most cognitive functions that have impact on the ability of receptive and expressive language. As communication and discourse in aging can be improved by obtaining information on changing discourse features, studying language in different ages is crucial.
Methods:
This research is a descriptive-analytic cross-sectional study. In this study, 91 adult narrative discourses, with the age ranges of 19 to 74 years, divided into four age groups. First, each participant filled out personal information and consent form to participate in the research. Then cognitive assessment using Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) screening test was conducted. Finally, their capabilities of narrative discourse were evaluated using Persian narrative discourse assessment task. In order to check the normality of the data, the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test was used. For comparison of narrative discourse in different age groups, ANOVA and Kruskal-Wallis tests were used (for cohesion and coherence respectively).
Results:
Both cohesion and coherence variables were significantly different among aging group and all three other groups (p<0.01).
Conclusion:
Results of the present study indicate that discourse abilities are affected by age and especially by aging. Therefore, it is necessary for speech and language pathologists to consider the cognitive and linguistic demands in their clinical applications.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

  1. Marini A, Boewe A, Caltagirone C, Carlomagno S. Age-related differences in the production of textual descriptions. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 2005; 34(5): 439-63.
  2. Riegel KF, Riegel RM. Changes in associative behavior during later years of life: A cross-sectional analysis. Human Development 1964; 7(1): 1-32.
  3.  Justice LM, Bowles R, Pence K, Gosse C. A scalable tool for assessing children's language abilities within a narrative context: The NAP (Narrative Assessment Protocol). Early Childhood Research Quarterly 2010; 25(2): 218-34.
  4.  Ball MJ, Perkins MR, Müller N, Howard S. The handbook of clinical linguistics: Blackwell Pub; 2008.
  5.  Lê K, Mozeiko J, Coelho C. Discourse analyses: Characterizing cognitive-communication disorders following TBI. The ASHA Leader Retrieved February 2011; 19: 2015.
  6.  Cannizzaro MS, Coelho CA. Analysis of narrative discourse structure as an ecologically relevant measure of executive function in adults. Journal of psycholinguistic research 2013; 42(6): 527-49.
  7.  Capilouto GJ, Wright HH, Maddy KM. Microlinguistic processes that contribute to the ability to relay main events: influence of age. Aging, Neuropsychology, and Cognition 2016; 23(4): 445-63.
  8.  Marini A, Andreetta S, del Tin S, Carlomagno S. A multi-level approach to the analysis of narrative language in aphasia. Aphasiology 2011; 25(11): 1372-92.
  9. Enos T. Encyclopedia of rhetoric and composition: Communication from ancient times to the information age: Routledge; 2011.
  10. Au R, Joung P, Nicholas M, Obler LK, et al. Naming ability across the adult life span. Aging, Neuropsychology, and Cognition 1995; 2(4): 300-11.
  11.  Evans DA, Beckett LA, Albert MS, Hebert LE, et al. Level of education and change in cognitive function in a community population of older persons. Annals of epidemiology 1993; 3(1): 71-7.
  12.  Capilouto G, Wright HH, Wagovich SA. CIU and main event analyses of the structured discourse of older and younger adults. Journal of Communication Disorders 2005; 38 (6), 431-444
  13.  Wright HH, Capilouto G, Wagovich S, Cranfill T, Davis J. Development and reliability of a quantitative measure of adults' narratives. Aphasiology 2005; 19(3-5): 263-73.
  14.  American Speech-Language-Hearing Association; 1988.
  15.  WHO. Health topics-Ageing (url: http:// www. who.int/topics/ageing/en/), 2016.
  16.  Ansari NN, Naghdi S, Hasson S, Valizadeh L, Jalaie S. Validation of a Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) for the Persian population: a pilot study. Applied neuropsychology 2010; 17(3): 190-5.
  17. Ghayoumi Anaraki Z, Marini A, Yadegari F, Mahmoodi Bakhtiari B, et al. Narrative Discourse Impairments in Persian-Speaking Persons with Traumatic Brain Injury: A Pilot Study. Folia Phoniatrica et Logopaedica 2015; 66(6): 273-9.
  18. Halliday M. & Hasan, R. Cohesion in English. London: Longman Group Limited 1976; 1: 976.
  19.  Coelho CA, Management of discourse deficits following traumatic brain injury: Progress, caveats, and needs. Seminars in Speech and Language; Thieme Medical Publishers 2007; 28(2),122-135 .
  20.  Halliday MAK, Hasan R. Cohesion in English: Routledge; 1976.
  21.  Marini A, Galetto V, Zampieri E, Vorano L, et al. Narrative language in traumatic brain injury. Neuropsychologia 2011; 49(10): 2904-10.
  22.  Goral M. First-language decline in healthy aging: Implications for attrition in bilingualism. Journal of Neurolinguistics 2004; 17(1): 31-52.
  23.  Carpenter PA, Miyake A, Just MA. Working memory constraints in comprehension: Evidence from individual differences, aphasia, and aging. Handbook of psycholinguistics 1994: 1075-122
  24. .Glosser G, Deser T. A comparison of changes in macrolinguistic and microlinguistic aspects of discourse production in normal aging. Journal of Gerontology 1992; 47(4): P266-P72.
  25. Ehrlich JS, Obler LK, Clark L. Ideational and semantic contributions to narrative production in adults with dementia of the Alzheimer's type. Journal of Communication Disorders 1997; 30(2): 79-99.
  26. Schneider BA, Daneman M, Murphy DR, See SK. Listening to discourse in distracting settings: the effects of aging. Psychology and aging 2000; 15(1): 110.
  27.  Schneider BA, Daneman M, Pichora-Fuller MK. Listening in aging adults: from discourse comprehension to psychoacoustics. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology/Revue canadienne de psychologie expérimentale 2002; 56(3): 139.

Journal of Paramedical Sciences & Rehabilitation
Volume 6, Issue 4
November 2017
Pages 67-72

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics