Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-84b7d79bbc-dwq4g Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-30T02:09:30.107Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

23 - Clinical Linguistics

from Part III - SFL in Application

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 May 2019

By
Elissa Asp  and
Jessica de Villiers
Edited by
Geoff Thompson ,
Wendy L. Bowcher ,
Lise Fontaine  and
David Schönthal
Geoff Thompson
Affiliation:
University of Liverpool
Wendy L. Bowcher
Affiliation:
Sun Yat-Sen University, China
Lise Fontaine
Affiliation:
Cardiff University
David Schönthal
Affiliation:
Cardiff University
Get access

Summary

This chapter first outlines the goals and scope of clinical linguistics and then reviews the work that has been undertaken using Systemic Functional Linguistic (SFL) models. Our approach to SFL contributions is organized by diagnostic groups and, within those groups, by metafunctions, linguistic levels (‘strata’ in SFL terms), and domains as relevant. One of the goals of the chapter is to clarify the function(s), domain(s), strata, and disorders which have (or have not) been addressed by SFL work in clinical linguistics. This forms the ground for assessing existing and potential contributions of SFL to clinical linguistics and the 'state of the art'.
Type
Chapter
Information
The Cambridge Handbook of Systemic Functional Linguistics , pp. 587 - 619
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2019

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Aboraya, A., France, C., Young, J., Curci, K., and LePage, J.. 2005. The Validity of Psychiatric Diagnosis Revisited: The Clinician’s Guide to Improve the Validity of Psychiatric Diagnosis. Psychiatry (Edgmont) 2(9): 48–55.Google ScholarPubMed
Adams, C. and Bishop, D. V.. 1989. Conversational Characteristics of Children with Semantic-Pragmatic Disorder. I: Exchange Structure, Turntaking, Repairs and Cohesion. British Journal of Disorders of Communication 24(3): 211–39.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
American Psychiatric Association. 1968. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. 2nd ed. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association.Google Scholar
American Psychiatric Association. 1980. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. 3rd ed. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association.Google Scholar
American Psychiatric Association. 1994. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. 4th ed. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association.Google Scholar
American Psychiatric Association. 2013. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. 5th ed. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association.Google Scholar
Andreetta, S., Cantagallo, A., and Marini, A.. 2012. Narrative Discourse in Anomic Aphasia. Neuropsychologia 50: 1787–93.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Armstrong, E. 1987. Cohesive Harmony and Its Significance in Listener Perception of Coherence. In Brookshire, R. H., ed., Clinical Aphasiology. Minneapolis: BRK Publishers. 210–15.Google Scholar
Armstrong, E. 1991. The Potential of Cohesion Analysis in the Analysis and Treatment of Aphasic Discourse. Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics 5(1): 39–51.Google Scholar
Armstrong, E. 1997. A Grammatical Analysis of Aphasic Discourse: Changes in Meaning-making over Time. PhD Thesis, Macquarie University.Google Scholar
Armstrong, E. 2000. Aphasic Discourse Analysis: The Story so Far. Aphasiology 14(9): 875–92.Google Scholar
Armstrong, E. 2001. Connecting Lexical Patterns of Verb Usage with Discourse Meanings in Aphasia. Aphasiology 15(10–11): 1029–45.Google Scholar
Armstrong, E. 2005a. Language Disorder: A Functional Linguistic Perspective. Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics 19(3): 137–53.Google Scholar
Armstrong, E. 2005b. Expressing Opinions and Feelings in Aphasia: Linguistic Options. Aphasiology 19(3–5): 285–95.Google Scholar
Armstrong, E. and Ferguson, A.. 2010. Language, Meaning, Context, and Functional Communication. Aphasiology 24(4): 480–96.Google Scholar
Armstrong, E. and Mortensen, L.. 2006. Everyday Talk: Its Role in Assessment and Treatment for Individuals with Aphasia. Neurogenic Communication Disorders (Special Issue: Brain Impairment) 7(3): 175–89.Google Scholar
Armstrong, E. and Ulatowska, H. K.. 2007. Making Stories: Evaluative Language and the Aphasia Experience. Aphasiology 21(6–8): 763–74.Google Scholar
Armstrong, E., Ciccone, N., Godecke, E., and Kok, B.. 2011. Monologues and Dialogues in Aphasia: Some Initial Comparisons. Aphasiology 25(11): 1347–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Armstrong, E., Mortensen, L., Ciccone, N., and Godecke, E.. 2012. Expressing Opinions and Feelings in a Conversational Setting. Seminars in Speech and Language 33(1): 16–26.Google Scholar
Armstrong, E., Fox, S., and Wilkinson, R.. 2013. Mild Aphasia: Is This the Place for an Argument? American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology 22(2): 268–78.Google Scholar
Asp, E. and de Villiers, J.. 2010. When Language Breaks Down: Analysing Discourse in Clinical Contexts. London: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Asp, E., Song, X., and Rockwood, K.. 2006a. Self-referential Tags in the Discourse of People with Alzheimer’s Disease. Brain and Language 97(1): 41–52.Google Scholar
Baltaxe, C. A. M. and D’Angiola, N.. 1992. Cohesion in the Discourse Interaction of Autistic, Specifically Language-impaired and Normal Children. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders 22: 1–21.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bartlett, S. C., Armstrong, E., and Roberts, J.. 2005. Linguistic Resources of Individuals with Asperger Syndrome. Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics 19(3): 203–13.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Berry, M. 1981. Systemic Linguistics and Discourse Analysis: A Multi-layered Approach to Exchange Structure. In Coulthard, M. and Montgomery, M., eds., Studies in Discourse Analysis. London: Routledge. 120–45.Google Scholar
Bottenberg, D., Lemme, M., and Hedberg, N.. 1985. Analysis of Oral Narratives of Normal and Aphasic Adults. In Brookshire, R. H., ed., Clinical Aphasiology: Conference Proceedings. Minneapolis: BRK Publishers. 241–7.Google Scholar
Brown, M. and Kuperberg, G. R.. 2015. A Hierarchical Generative Framework of Language Processing: Linking Language Perception, Interpretation, and Production Abnormalities in Schizophrenia. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience 9: 643.Google Scholar
Butt, D. G., Moore, A. R., Henderson-Brooks, C., Meares, R., and Haliburn, J.. 2010. Dissociation, Relatedness, and ‘Cohesive Harmony’. Linguistics and the Human Sciences 3(3): 263–93.Google Scholar
Chapman, S. B., Ulatowska, H. K., King, K., Johnson, J. K., and McIntire, D. D.. 1995. Discourse in Early Alzheimer’s Disease versus Normal Advanced Aging. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology 4(4): 124–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coelho, C. A. 2002. Story Narratives of Adults with Closed Head Injury and Non-Brain-injured adults: Influence of Socioeconomic Status, Elicitation Task, and Executive Functioning. Journal of Speech Language and Hearing Research 45(6): 1232–48.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Coelho, C. A., Liles, B. Z., and Duffy, R. J.. 1991a. Discourse Analyses with Closed Head Injured Adults: Evidence for Differing Patterns of Deficits. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation 72: 465–8.Google Scholar
Coelho, C. A., Liles, B. Z., and Duffy, R. J.. 1991b. The Use of Discourse Analyses for the Evaluation of Higher Level Traumatically Brain-injured Adults. Brain Injury 5(4): 381–92.Google Scholar
Coelho, C. A., Liles, B. Z., Duffy, R. J., Clarkson, J. V., and Elia, D.. 1994. Longitudinal Assessment of Narrative Discourse in a Mildly Aphasic Adult. Clinical Aphasiology 22: 145–55.Google Scholar
Coelho, C. A., Liles, B. Z., and Duffy, R. J.. 1995. Impairments of Discourse Abilities and Executive Functions in Traumatically Brain-injured Adults. Brain Injury 9(5): 471–7.Google Scholar
Cohen, I. 2011. The Expression of Schizophrenia through Interpersonal Systems at the Level of Discourse Semantics. PhD Thesis, Bar-Ilan University.Google Scholar
Crystal, D. 1981. Clinical Linguistics. Vienna: Springer.Google Scholar
Crystal, D. 2002. Clinical Linguistics and Phonetics’ First 15 Years: An Introductory Comment. Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics 16(7): 487–9.Google Scholar
Crystal, D. 2013. Clinical Linguistics: Conversational Reflections. Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics 27(4): 236–43.Google Scholar
Davis, G. A. and Coelho, C. A.. 2004. Referential Cohesion and Logical Coherence of Narration after Closed Head Injury. Brain and Language 89: 508–23.Google Scholar
de Villiers, J. 2005. Experientially-based Narration in Autism: A Case Study. In Makkai, A., Sullivan, W. J., and Lommel, A. R., eds., LACUS Forum XXXI. Houston: LACUS. 215–25.Google Scholar
de Villiers, J. 2006a. Syntactic and Semantic Patterns of Pedantic Speech in Asperger’s Syndrome. In Hwang, S., Sullivan, W. J., and Lommel, A., eds., LACUS Forum XXXII. Houston: LACUS. 81–9.Google Scholar
de Villiers, J. 2006b. Discourse Analysis in Autism Spectrum Disorder. Linguistics and the Human Sciences 1(2): 245–60.Google Scholar
de Villiers, J. 2009. Use of Um and Uh in spontaneous speaking in Autism Spectrum Disorder. In Sutcliffe, P., Sullivan, W. J., and Lommel, A. R., eds., LACUS Forum XXXVI. Houston: LACUS, 101–10.Google Scholar
de Villiers, J. 2011. I Saw the Yellowish Going South: Narrative Discourse in Autism Spectrum Disorder. Belgian Journal of Linguistics, Cognitive and Empirical Pragmatics: Issues and Perspectives 25: 3–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
de Villiers, J. and Szatmari, P.. 2004. Message Organization in Autism Spectrum Disorder. In Fulton, G. D., Sullivan, W. J., and Lommel, A. R., eds., LACUS Forum XXX. Houston: LACUS. 207–14.Google Scholar
de Villiers, J., Fine, J., Ginsberg, G., Vaccarella, L., and Szatmari, P.. 2007. Brief Report: A Scale for Rating Conversational Impairment in Autism Spectrum Disorder. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders 37(7): 1375–80.Google Scholar
Dijkstra, K., Bourgeois, M. S., Allen, R. S., and Burgioc, L. D.. 2004. Conversational Coherence: Discourse Analysis of Older Adults with and without Dementia. Journal of Neurolinguistics 17: 263–83.Google Scholar
Docherty, N. M., DeRosa, M., and Andreasen, N. C.. 1996. Communication Disturbances in Schizophrenia and Mania. Archives of General Psychiatry 53(4): 358–64.Google Scholar
Docherty, N. M., Cohen, A. S., Nienow, T. M., Dinezo, T. J., and Dangelmaier, R. E.. 2003. Stability of Formal Thought Disorder and Referential Communication Disturbances in Schizophrenia. Journal of Abnormal Psychology 112(3): 469–75.Google Scholar
Ferguson, A. 1992. Interpersonal Aspects of Aphasic Conversation. Journal of Neurolinguistics 7(4): 277–94.Google Scholar
Ferstl, E. C. and von Cramon, D. Y.. 2001. The Role of Coherence and Cohesion in Text Comprehension: An Event-related fMRI Study. Cognitive Brain Research 11(3): 325–430.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fine, J. 2006. Language in Psychiatry: A Handbook of Clinical Practice. Sheffield: Equinox.Google Scholar
Fine, J. in press. Modeling Transitions in the Language of Psychiatric Disorders. In de Villiers, J., Sullivan, W., and Mailman, D., eds., LACUS Forum XLI. Houston: LACUS.Google Scholar
Fine, J., Bartolucci, G., Ginsberg, G., and Szatmari, P.. 1991. The Use of Intonation to Communicate in Pervasive Developmental Disorders. Journal of Child Psychiatry and Psychology 32(5): 771–82.Google Scholar
Fine, J., Bartolucci, G., Szatmari, P., and Ginsberg, G.. 1994. Cohesive Discourse in Pervasive Developmental Disorders. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders 24(3): 315–29.Google Scholar
Garcia, A. M. and Ibáñez, A.. 2016. Processes and Verbs of Doing, in the Brain: Theoretical Implications for Systemic Functional Linguistics. Functions of Language 23(3): 305–35.Google Scholar
Geertz, C. 1973. The Interpretation of Cultures: Selected Essays. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Glosser, G. and Deser, T.. 1990. Patterns of Discourse Production among Neurological Patients with Fluent Language Disorders. Brain and Language 40: 67–88.Google Scholar
Gregory, M. 2002. Phasal Analysis within Communication Linguistics: Two Contrastive Discourses. In Fries, P., Cummings, M., Lockwood, D., and Spruiell, W., eds., Relations and Functions within and around Language. London: Continuum. 316–45.Google Scholar
Grice, H. P. 1978. Further Notes on Logic and Conversation. In Cole, P., ed., Syntax and Semantics, Volume 9: Pragmatics. New York: Academic Press. 183–97.Google Scholar
Guo, Y. E. and Togher, L.. 2008. The Impact of Dysarthria on Everyday Communication after Traumatic Brain Injury: A Pilot Study. Brain Injury 22(1): 83–97.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Halliday, M. A. K. 1985. Introduction to Functional Grammar. London: Edward Arnold.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. 1994. Introduction to Functional Grammar. 2nd ed. London: Edward Arnold.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. 2005. A Note on Systemic Functional Linguistics and the Study of Language Disorders. Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics 19(3): 133–5.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. and Hasan, R.. 1976. Cohesion in English. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K., and Matthiessen, C. M. I. M.. 2004. Introduction to Functional Grammar. 3rd ed. London: Edward Arnold.Google Scholar
Hartley, L. L. and Jensen, P.. 1991. Narrative and Procedural Discourse after Closed Head Injury. Brain Injury 5(3): 267–85.Google Scholar
Hasan, R. 1984. Coherence and Cohesive Harmony. In Flood, J., ed., Understanding Reading Comprehension. Newark: International Reading Association. 181–219.Google Scholar
Hasan, R. 1985. The Texture of a Text. In Halliday, M. A. K., and Hasan, R., eds., Language, Context and Text: Aspects of Language in a Social-semiotic Perspective. Victoria: Deakin University Press. 70–96.Google Scholar
Huddleston, R. and Pullum, G. K.. 2002. The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Iverach, L. and Rapee, R.. 2014. Social Anxiety Disorder and Stuttering: Current Status and Future Directions. Journal of Fluency Disorders 40: 69–82.Google Scholar
Jorgensen, M. and Togher, L.. 2009. Narrative after Traumatic Brain Injury: A Comparison of Monologic and Jointly-produced Discourse. Brain Injury 23(9): 727–40.Google Scholar
Kemper, S., Thompson, M., and Marquis, J.. 2001. Longitudinal Change in Language Production: Effects of Aging and Dementia on Grammatical Complexity and Semantic Content. Psychology and Aging 16(4): 600–14.Google Scholar
Kempler, D. 1995. Language Changes in Dementia of the Alzheimer Type. In Lubinski, R., ed., Dementia and Communication: Research and Clinical Implications. San Diego: Singular Publishing Group. 98–114.Google Scholar
Körner, H., Newman, C., Limin, M., Kidd, M. R., Saltman, D., and Kippax, S.. 2011. ‘The Black Dog Just Came and Sat on my Face and Built a Kennel’: Gay Men Making Sense of ‘Depression’. Health (London) 15(4): 417–36.Google Scholar
Korrel, H., Mueller, K. L., Silk, T., Anderson, V., and Sciberras, E.. 2017. Research Review: Language Problems in Children with Attention‐Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder: A Systematic Meta‐analytic Review. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry 58(6): 640–54.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kuperberg, G. R. 2010. Language in Schizophrenia Part 1: An Introduction. Language and Linguistics Compass 4(8): 576–89.Google Scholar
Kuperberg, G. R., Lakshmanan, B. M., Caplan, D. N., and Holcomb, P. J.. 2006. Making Sense of Discourse: An fMRI Study of Causal Inferencing across Sentences. Neuroimage 33(1): 343–61.Google Scholar
Kurczek, J. and Duff, M. C.. 2012. Intact Discourse Cohesion and Coherence Following Bilateral Ventromedial Prefrontal Cortex. Brain and Language 123(3): 222–7.Google Scholar
Lee, A., van Dulm, O., Robb, M., and Ormond, T.. 2015. Communication Restriction in Adults Who Stutter. Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics 29(7): 536–56.Google Scholar
Lee, A., Robb, M., van Dulm, O., and Ormond, T.. 2016a. Communication Restriction in Adults Who Stutter: Part II. Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics 30(7): 546–67.Google Scholar
Lee, A. S., Robb, M., van Dulm, O., and Ormond, T., 2016b. Communication Restriction in Adults Who Stutter: Part III. Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics 30(11): 911–24.Google Scholar
Liles, B. Z. 1985. Narrative Ability in Normal and Language-disordered Children. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research 23: 123–33.Google Scholar
Liles, B. Z., Coelho, C. A., Duffy, R. J., and Zalagens, M. R.. 1989. Effects of Elicitation Procedures on the Narratives of Normal and Closed Head-injured Adults. Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders 54: 356–66.Google Scholar
Linnik, A., Bastiaanse, R., and Hӧhle, B.. 2016. Discourse Production in Aphasia: A Current Review of Theoretical and Methodological Challenges. Aphasiology 30(7): 765–800.Google Scholar
Lock, S. and Armstrong, L.. 1997. Cohesion Analysis of the Expository Discourse of Normal, Fluent Aphasic and Demented Adults: A Role in Differential Diagnosis? Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics 11(4): 299–317.Google Scholar
Martin, J. R. and Rochester, S. R.. 1975. Cohesion and Reference in Schizophrenic Speech. In Makkai, A. and Makkai, V. B., eds., The First LACUS Forum. Columbia: Hornbeam Press. 302–11.Google Scholar
Martin, J. R. and White, P. R.. 2005. The Language of Evaluation: Appraisal in English. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Mathers, M. E. 2005. Some Evidence for Distinctive Language Use by Children with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder. Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics 19(3): 215–25.Google Scholar
Mathers, M. E. 2006. Aspects of Language in Children with ADHD: Applying Functional Analyses to Explore Language Use. Journal of Attention Disorders 9: 523–33.Google Scholar
McDonald, S. 1993. Pragmatic Language Skills after Closed Head Injury: Ability to Meet the Informational Needs of the Listener. Brain and Language 44(1): 28–46.Google Scholar
McKenna, P. and Oh, T.. 2005. Schizophrenic Speech. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Mentis, M. and Prutting, C. A.. 1987. Cohesion in the Discourse of Normal and Head Injured Adults. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research 30: 88–98.Google Scholar
Mesulam, M. 2008. Representation, Inference, and Transcendent Encoding in Neurocognitive Networks of the Human Brain. Annals of Neurology 64(4): 367–78.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mok, Z. and Müller, N.. 2013. Staging Casual Conversations for People with Dementia. Dementia 13(6): 834–53.Google Scholar
Mortensen, L. 1992. A Transitivity Analysis of Discourse in Dementia of the Alzheimer’s Type. Journal of Neurolinguistics 7(4): 309–21.Google Scholar
Mortensen, L. 2005. Written Discourse and Acquired Brain Impairment: Evaluation of Structural and Semantic Features of Personal Letters from a Systemic Functional Linguistic Perspective. Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics 19(3): 227–47.Google Scholar
Müller, N., Ball, M. J., and Rutter, B.. 2008. An Idiosyncratic Case of /r/ Disorder: Application of Principles from Systemic Phonology and Systemic Functional Linguistics. Asia Pacific Journal of Speech, Language and Hearing 11(4): 269–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Müller, N. and Mok, Z.. 2012. Applying Systemic Functional Linguistics to Conversations with Dementia: The Linguistic Construction of Relationships between Participants. Seminars in Speech and Language 33(1): 5–15.Google Scholar
Müller, N. and Wilson, B. T.. 2008. Collaborative Role Construction in a Conversation with Dementia: An Application of Systemic Functional Linguistics. Clinical Linguistics and Phonetics 22: 767–74.Google Scholar
Olness, G. S. and Ulatowska, H. K.. 2011. Personal Narratives in Aphasia: Coherence in the Context of Use. Aphasiology 25: 1393–413.Google Scholar
Perkins, M. 2011. Clinical Linguistics: Its Past, Present and Future. Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics 25(11–12): 922–7.Google Scholar
Piehler, M. F. and Holland, A. L.. 1984. Cohesion in Aphasic Language. In Brookshire, R. H., ed., Clinical Aphasiology: Conference Proceedings. Volume 14. Seabrook Island: BRK Publishers. 208–14.Google Scholar
Quirk, R., Greenbaum, S., Leech, G., and Svartvik, J.. 1985. A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Reilly, S., Tomblin, B., Law, J., McKean, C., Mensah, F. K., Morgan, A., Goldfeld, S., Nicolson, J. M., and Wake, M.. 2014. Specific Language Impairment: A Convenient Label for Whom? International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders 49(4): 416–51.Google Scholar
Rigaudeau-McKenna, B. 2005. Towards an Analysis of Dysfunctional Grammar. Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics 19(3): 155–74.Google Scholar
Ripich, D. and Terrell, B.. 1988. Patterns of Discourse Cohesion and Coherence in Alzheimer’s Disease. Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders 53: 8–15.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ripich, D. N., Terrell, B. Y., and Spinelli, F.. 1983. Discourse Cohesion in Senile Dementia of the Alzheimer Type. In Brookshire, R. H., ed., Clinical Aphasiology Conference Proceedings. Volume 13. Minneapolis: BRK Publishers. 316–21.Google Scholar
Ripich, D. N., Carpenter, B. D., and Ziol, E. W.. 2000. Conversational Cohesion Patterns in Men and Women with Alzheimer’s Disease: A Longitudinal Study. International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders 35(1): 49–64.Google Scholar
Robins, E. and Guze, S. B.. 1970. Establishment of Diagnostic Validity in Psychiatric Illness: Its Application to Schizophrenia. American Journal of Psychiatry 126: 983–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rochester, S., Martin, J. R., and Thurston, S.. 1977. Thought-process Disorder in Schizophrenia: The Listener’s Task. Brain and Language 4: 95–114.Google Scholar
Rochester, S. and Martin, J. R.. 1979. Crazy Talk: A Study of the Discourse of Schizophrenic Speakers. New York: Plenum.Google Scholar
Ryle, G. 1968. The Thinking of Thoughts: What is “Le Penseur” Doing? In Collected Papers, Vol. 2: Collected Essays 1929–1968. New York: Barnes and Noble.Google Scholar
Sachdev, P. S., Blacker, D., Blazer, D. G., Ganguli, M., Jeste, D. V., Paulsen, J. S., and Petersen, R. C.. 2014. Classifying Neurocognitive Disorders: The DSM-5 Approach. Nature Reviews Neurology 10(11): 634–42.Google Scholar
Spencer, E., Packman, A., Onslow, M., and Ferguson, A.. 2005. A Preliminary Investigation of the Impact of Stuttering on Language Use. Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics 19(3): 191–201.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Spencer, E., Packman, A., Onslow, M., and Ferguson, A.. 2009. The Effect of Stuttering on Communication: A Preliminary Investigation. Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics 23(7): 473–88.Google Scholar
Taler, V. and Phillips, N. A.. 2008. Language Performance in Alzheimer’s Disease and Mild Cognitive Impairment: A Comparative Review. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology 30(5): 501–56.Google Scholar
Tannock, R., Fine, J., Heintz, T., and Schachar, R. J.. 1995. A Linguistic Approach Detects Stimulant Effects in Two Children with Attention-Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder. Journal of Child and Adolescent Psychopharmacology 5(3): 177–89.Google Scholar
Tebble, H. 2012. Subjectivity in the Discourse of Depressed Acute Care Hospital Patients. In Baumgarten, N., Du Bois, I., and House, J., eds., Subjectivity in Language and in Discourse. Studies in Pragmatics, Volume 10. Bingley: Emerald. 115–35.Google Scholar
Thomson, J. 2005. Theme Analysis of Narratives Produced by Children with and without Specific Language Impairment. Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics 19(3): 175–90.Google Scholar
Togher, L. 2001. Discourse Sampling in the 21st Century. Journal of Communication Disorders 34: 131–50.Google Scholar
Togher, L. and Hand, L.. 1998. Use of Politeness Markers with Different Communication Partners: An Investigation of Five Subjects with Traumatic Brain Injury. Aphasiology 12(7/8): 491–504.Google Scholar
Togher, L., Hand, L., and Code, C.. 1997a. Analyzing Discourse in the Traumatic Brain Injury Population: Telephone Interactions with Different Communication Partners. Brain Injury 11(3): 169–89.Google Scholar
Togher, L., Hand, L., and Code, C.. 1997b. Measuring Service Encounters with the Traumatic Brain Injury Population. Aphasiology 11(4–5): 491–504.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Togher, L., McDonald, S., Code, C., and Grant, C.. 2004. Training Communication Partners of People with Traumatic Brain Injury: A Randomised Controlled Trial. Aphasiology 18(4): 313–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Togher, L., McDonald, S., Tate, R., Power, E., and Rietdijk, R.. 2009. Training Communication Partners of People with Traumatic Brain Injury: Reporting the Protocol for a Clinical Trial. Brain Impairment 10(2): 188–204.Google Scholar
Togher, L., McDonald, S., Tate, R., Power, E., and Rietdijk, R.. 2013. Training Communication Partners of People with Severe Traumatic Brain Injury Improves Everyday Conversations: A Multicenter Single Blind Clinical Trial. Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine 45: 637–45.Google Scholar
Ventola, E. 1979. The Structure of Casual Conversation in English. Journal of Pragmatics 3: 267–98.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×