22 / 68
20
S
p eech
P
athology
A
ustralia
MULTICULTURALISM AND DYSPHAGIA
At the end of over two years of development and seven
working drafts, we arrived at the Conceptual Model of
Language and Related Constructs (figure 5) to illustrate our
personal conceptual model of how language relates to literacy,
how language is integral to learning and thinking, how
cognitive capacities are functionally intertwined but con
ceptually separate from language, and how complex thinking
processes involving executive function are built upon a
sophisticated internal language system.
Implications
The current version of the Conceptual Model of Language
and Related Constructs was included in the major project
report (Education Queensland, 2008). It has helped us to
understand and articulate our definition of language as well
as our potential role in literacy, learning and behaviour. It
illustrates how we, as speech pathologists, see language,
rather than literacy, at the centre of learning.
Currently, we are in stage four of our journey, which is to
explore how this conceptual model influences our practice.
The questions we continue to ponder include:
n
If most people outside speech pathology use the term
language
to label the material symbols, do we need to
create another term for the “internal language system”?
n
Can we craft definitions of primary language impairment
that are related to the internal language system?
n
What aspect of language does any specific assessment tool
actually target within the complex multifaceted
phenomenon of language?
Links to thinking and behaviour
The internal language system consists of neurologically
situated symbolic representations, not specifically “words”,
with links and organised storage, and incorporates all sorts of
symbols (maths, music, words, etc.). The effective integration
of the maturing cognitive capacities and the maturing internal
language system are integral to higher level thinking (e.g.,
problem-solving), learning and self-regulation or executive
function. Language is thus enmeshed with executive control
and ongoing learning (Singer & Bashir, 1999). It is the internal
language system that is central to higher level cognitive
functioning, not the words the child knows (i.e., not the
“material” language). Effective integration of the internal
language system, the cognitive capacities, and other resources
(e.g., world knowledge) allows an individual to communicate,
think, learn and self-regulate behaviour (Singer & Bashir,
1999).
Spoken
code
Other
codes
Written
code
Internal language system
All codes draw on the same internal
language system; each code draws on some
additional specific resources
Feedback
Figure 4. The internal language system is made material through
spoken, other and written codes
Cognitive capacities
– memory, attention, etc.
Image system/
conceptual system
Language system
– symbolic representation and
organisation of concepts
All codes draw on the same internal
language system; each code draws on some
additional specific resources
Emotion and other aspects (e.g., smell) can impact on the
formation and “links” made between one concept
and others.
Individual
:
Need to learn
and adapt
to survive
drives
development
Other codes:
Experience of
signed, pictorial
symbolled, etc.
language
Oral code:
Experience of
spoken
language
Literate code:
Experience of
written
language
Feedback
Environment:
opportunity and experiences
The interaction between
the environment, the
maturing cognitive
capacities and the
maturing language
system allows
efficient
application
of thinking to
a range of settings. This
enables higher level
learning.
The
efficient integration
of cognition and
language
is expressed as
executive function
(appropriate self-talk,
self-regulation, organis-
ing, maintaining and
shifting set, etc.) which
manages interaction with
the learning environment
to ensure success.
Language
is thus
enmeshed in executive
function.
Note.
From “Conceptual model
of language and related
constructs” by R. Walsh &
K. Stassi, 2007, revised 2008;
reprinted with permission of
Education Queensland.
Figure 5. Conceptual model of language and related constructs