Skip to main content

The Relationships Between Oral and Written Sentence Generation in English Speaking Children: The Role of Language and Literacy Skills

  • Chapter
Written and Spoken Language Development across the Lifespan

Part of the book series: Literacy Studies ((LITS,volume 11))

Abstract

Single word spelling is hypothesised to restrict text generation at the beginning phases of learning to write in English and to minimise or eliminate the impact of other linguistic factors. For young writers the natural level of idea generation may be at the sentence level. Studies which examine sentence level production offer the potential to examine children’s idea generation and the cognitive and linguistic factors which impact on this. Sixty-six English speaking children aged between the ages of 7 and 11 completed oral and written sentence generation tasks and a range of standardised language and literacy measures. We reasoned that oral language sentence generation would add significant variance to performance on the written sentence generation task especially for the younger writers. Participants performed significantly better in the oral modality. Developmental differences were evident in both modalities but there was no interaction between age group and modality effect. Correlations between standardised measures revealed a complex pattern of associations between language, literacy and writing. Regression analyses were used to explore the relationships.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    We use the term sentence generation to reflect both the written and oral products of the children. In the oral form the children are producing utterances. An utterance boundary is defined as a unit of speech bounded by silence.

References

  • Adams, A. M., Simmons, F. R., Willis, C. S., & Porter, S. (2013). The impact of the development of verbal recoding on children’s early writing skills. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 83(1), 76–97. doi:10.1111/j.2044-8279.2011.02056.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alarmagot, D., & Fayol, M. (2009). Modeling the development of written composition. In R. Beard, D. Myhill, J. Riley, & M. Nystrand (Eds.), The Sage handbook of writing development (pp. 23–47). Los Angeles: Sage.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • ArfĂ©, B., & Pizzoccaro. (in press). Sentence generation in children with and without problems of written expression.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arfè, B., Dockrell, J. E., & Berninger, V. W. (2014). Writing development and instruction in children with hearing, speech and oral language difficulties. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berninger, V. W., & Amtmann, D. (2003). Preventing written expression disabilities through early and continuing assessment and intervention for handwriting and/or spelling problems: Research into practice. In H. L. Swanson, K. Harris, & S. Graham (Eds.), Handbook of learning difficulties (pp. 345–363). New York: Guildford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berninger, V. W., & Fuller, F. (1992). Gender differences in orthographic, verbal, and compositional fluency. Implications for assessing writing disabilities in primary grade children. Journal of School Psychology, 30(4), 363–382. doi:10.1016/0022-4405(92)90004-o.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berninger, V. W., & Swanson, H. L. (1994). Modifying Hayes and Flowers’ model of skilled writing to explain developing writing. In E. C. Butterfield (Ed.), Advances in cognition and educational practice. Children’s writing: Toward a process theory of the development of skilled writing (Vol. 2, pp. 1–30). Greenwich: JAI Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berninger, V. W., & Winn, W. D. (2006). Implications of advancements in brain research and technology for writing development, writing instruction, and educational evolution. In C. MacArthur, S. Graham, & J. Fitzgerald (Eds.), Handbook of writing research (pp. 96–114). New York: Guildford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berninger, V. W., Nagy, W., & Beers, S. (2011). Child writers’ construction and reconstruction of single sentences and construction of multi-sentence texts: Contributions of syntax and transcription to translation. Reading and Writing, 24(2), 151–182. doi:10.1007/s11145-010-9262-y.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bourdin, B., & Fayol, M. (1994). Is written language production more difficult than oral language production. A working-memory approach. International Journal of Psychology, 29(5), 591–620. doi:10.1080/00207599408248175.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chenoweth, N. A., & Hayes, J. R. (2001). Fluency in writing – Generating text in L1 and L2. Written Communication, 18(1), 80–98. doi:10.1177/0741088301018001004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chenoweth, N. A., & Hayes, J. R. (2003). The inner voice in writing. Written Communication, 20(1), 99–118. doi:10.1177/0741088303253572.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dockrell, J. E., & Connelly, V. (2015). The role of oral language in underpinning the text generation difficulties in children with specific language impairment. Journal of Research in Reading, 38, 18–34. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9817.2012.01550.x, doi:10.1111/j.1467-9817.2012.01550.x#Link to external resource: 10.1111/j.1467-9817.2012.01550.x.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dockrell, J. E., Lindsay, G., Connelly, V., & Mackie, C. (2007). Constraints in the production of written text in children with specific language impairments. Exceptional Children, 73, 147–164.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Donaldson, M. L., & Cooper, L. S. M. (2013). Developmental relationships between speech and writing: Is verb-phrase anaphora production a special case? British Journal of Educational Psychology, 83(3), 521–534. doi:10.1111/j.2044-8279.2012.02078.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dunn, L. M., & Dunn, D. M. (2009). British Picture Vocabulary Scale III (BPVS-III). London: GL Assessment.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elliott, C. D., Smith, P., & McCulloch, K. (1997). British ability scales II. London: GL Assessment.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fayol, M., Alarmagot, D., & Berninger, V. (2012). Translation of thought to written text while composing: Advancing theory, knowledge, methods and applications. New York: Psychology Press/Taylor.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fey, M. E., Catts, H. W., Proctor-Williams, K., Tomblin, J., & Zhang, X. Y. (2004). Oral and written story composition skills of children with language impairment. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 47(6), 1301–1318. doi:10.1044/1092-4388(2004/098).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Foster, H. (2007). The single word reading test 6–16. London: nfer Nelson Publishing Company Ltd.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gillam, R. B., & Johnston, J. R. (1992). Spoken and written language relationships in language learning-impaired and normally achieving school-age-children. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 35(6), 1303–1315.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Green, L., McCutchen, D., Schwiebert, C., Quinlan, T., Eva-Wood, A., & Juelis, J. (2003). Morphological development in children’s writing. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(4), 752–761. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.95.4.752.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hayes, J. (2009). From idea to text. In R. Beard, D. Myhill, M. Nystrand, & J. Riley (Eds.), Handbook of writing development (pp. 65–79). London, Great Britain: Sage.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Juel, C., Griffith, P. L., & Gough, P. B. (1986). Acquisition of literacy. A longitudinal-study of children in 1st-grade and 2nd-grade. Journal of Educational Psychology, 78(4), 243–255. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.78.4.243.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Limpo, T., & Alves, R. A. (2013). Modeling writing development: Contribution of transcription and self-regulation to Portuguese students’ text generation quality. Journal of Educational Psychology, 105(2), 401–413. doi:10.1037/a0031391.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Macarthur, C. A., & Graham, S. (1987). Learning-disabled students composing under 3 methods of text production – Handwriting, word-processing, and dictation. Journal of Special Education, 21(3), 22–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCutchen, D. (1986). Domain knowledge and linguistic knowledge in the development of writing ability. Journal of Memory and Language, 25(4), 431–444.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCutchen, D., Stull, S., Herrera, B. L., Lotas, S., & Evans, S. (2014). Putting words to work: Effects of morphological instruction on children’s writing. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 47(1), 86–97. doi:10.1177/0022219413509969.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mehta, P. D., Foorman, B. R., Branum-Martin, L., & Taylor, W. P. (2005). Literacy as a unidimensional multilevel construct: Validation, sources of influence, and implications in a longitudinal study in grades 1 to 4. Scientific Studies of Reading, 9(2), 85–116.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, N. K. (2014). Integrating language assessment, instruction and intervention in an inclusive writing lab approach. In B. ArfĂ©, J. E. Dockrell, & V. W. Berninger (Eds.), Writing development in children with hearing loss, dyslexia or oral language problems: Implications for assessment and instruction (pp. 273–300). New York: Oxford University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Nunes, T., Bryant, P., & Bindman, M. (2006). The effects of learning to spell on children’s awareness of morphology. Reading and Writing, 19(7), 767–787. doi:10.1007/s11145-006-9025-y.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Olinghouse, N. G., & Leaird, J. T. (2009). The relationship between measures of vocabulary and narrative writing quality in second- and fourth-grade students. Reading and Writing, 22(5), 545–565. doi:10.1007/s11145-008-9124-z.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ouellette, G. P. (2006). What’s meaning got to do with it: The role of vocabulary in word reading and reading comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98(3), 554–566. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.98.3.554.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rust, J. (1996). The manual of the Wechsler Objective Language Dimensions (WOLD): UK edition. London: Psychological Corporation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Saddler, B. (2005). Sentence combining: A sentence-level writing intervention. Reading Teacher, 58(5), 468–471. doi:10.1598/rt.58.5.6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Semel, E., Wiig, E., & Secord, W. (2006). Clinical evaluation of language fundamentals (4th ed.) (CELF – 4 UK). London, United Kingdom: Pearson Assessments.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shanahan, T. (2006). Relations among oral language, reading and writing development. In C. MacArthur, S. Graham, & J. Fitzgerald (Eds.), Handbook of writing research (pp. 171–183). New York: Guildford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Silverman, R., Coker, D., Proctor, P., Harring, J., Piantedosi, K., & Meyer, A. (2015). The relationship between language skills and writing outcomes for linguistically diverse students in upper elementary school. Elementary School Journal.

    Google Scholar 

  • Snowling, M. J., Stothard, S. E., Clarke, P., Bowyer-Crane, C., Harrington, A., Truelove, E., & Hulme, C. (2009). York assessment of reading for comprehension. London: GL Assessment.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stothard, S., Hulme, C., Clarke, P. J., Barnby, P., & Snowling, M. (2010). The York Assessment of Reading for Comprehension (YARC): Passage reading secondary. London: GL Assessment.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tolchinsky, L. (2009). The configuration of literacy as a domain of knowledge. In D. Olson & N. Torrance (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of literacy (pp. 468–486). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Torrance, M., & Galbraith, D. (2006). The processing demands of writing. In C. A. MacArthur, S. Graham, & J. Fitzgerald (Eds.), Handbook of writing research (pp. 67–82). New York: The Guildford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wagner, R. K., Puranik, C. S., Foorman, B., Foster, E., Wilson, L. G., Tschinkel, E., & Kantor, P. T. (2011). Modeling the development of written language. Reading and Writing, 24(2), 203–220. doi:10.1007/s11145-010-9266-7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yu, G. (2010). Lexical diversity in writing and speaking task performances. Applied Linguistics, 31(2), 236–259. doi:10.1093/applin/amp024.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Julie E. Dockrell .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Dockrell, J.E., Connelly, V. (2016). The Relationships Between Oral and Written Sentence Generation in English Speaking Children: The Role of Language and Literacy Skills. In: Perera, J., Aparici, M., Rosado, E., Salas, N. (eds) Written and Spoken Language Development across the Lifespan. Literacy Studies, vol 11. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-21136-7_11

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-21136-7_11

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-21135-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-21136-7

  • eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics