End the confusion teens with language impairments often have with unique and idiomatic expressions. These lessons teach them to "get it" and ultimately use these expressions with their peers.
- Recognize and correctly interpret indirect communication
- Add figurative language to expressive language repertoire
- Communicate clearly and efficiently
Spotlight on Figurative Language Indirect Language helps students with language disorders understand unspoken meaning, its purposes in communication, and how to use it successfully. The book is organized into five sections:
- Connotations—recognize and use connotative words appropriately
- Context Clues—determine meaning from body posture, facial expressions, and gestures
- Implications—understand how combinations of words and their contexts have differing implications
- Indirect Language—differentiate polite from impolite remarks, use indirect language to politely inform
- Sarcasm and Irony—recognize sarcasm and irony and how they differ; recognize the inappropriate use of sarcasm
The successful Spotlight series formula gives students these advantages:
- in-depth training
- step-by-step progression to build success and motivation
- a wide variety of curricular content as well as daily life experiences
- uncomplicated grammar
- clear explanations with examples
- a pretest/posttest to verify progress
You may purchase Spotlight on Figurative Language Indirect Language individually or as part of the Spotlight on Figurative Language 6-book set. The 6-book set consists of:
Copyright © 2012
The research base for specific forms of figurative language comprehension and usage is sparse, but "metaphor" and "metaphoric language" have been explored to some depth. The types of figurative language presented in these books can be classified under the general umbrella of metaphor, and the evidence under that label is relevant to the series.
- Reynolds and Ortony (1980) investigated the comprehension of similes and metaphors by second- through sixth-grade typical children. They found evidence of an ability to understand figurative language by children at all grade levels when adequate contextual supports were provided (Seidenberg & Bernstein, 1986).
- Many learning-disabled children appear to have the requisite abilities and strategies for metaphoric comprehension in their cognitive repertoires but fail to spontaneously and appropriately access and apply them when they should . . . learning-disabled children often fail to spontaneously identify the need to use appropriate, cognitive processing strategies that are well within their cognitive competence (Seidenberg & Bernstein, 1986).
- Metaphoric competence reflects an individual's cognitive level, abstract reasoning ability, and linguistic competence. The likelihood of [identifying] nonliteral responses [in figurative contexts] depends primarily on these competencies but is also influenced by an individual's familiarity with the specific figurative forms being studied (Lee & Kamhi, 1990).
- The ability to understand the motives and intentions of others is essential. Assisting children with ASDs to decode figurative language may improve their social skills in relating to others (Mackay & Shaw, 2004).
- Understanding a speaker's communicative intention is a central goal of communication and involves going beyond the literal meaning of an utterance. Children who do not understand these intentions have major communicative difficulties. Often, they are rejected by their peers, further reducing opportunities for interaction. Perhaps they struggle on with their frustration and confusion unnoticed, as the people around them continue to use figurative language. Our closer attention to the specifics of their difficulties should help them when they try to work out the meanings and intentions in the figurative language of their communicative partners (Mackay & Shaw, 2004).
Spotlight on Figurative Language Indirect Language incorporates these principles and is also based on expert professional practice.
Lee, R.F., & Kamhi, A.G. (1990). Metaphoric competence in children with learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 23(8), 476-482.
Mackay, G., & Shaw, A. (2004). A comparative study of figurative language in children with autistic spectrum disorders. Child Language Teaching & Therapy, 20(1), 13-32. doi: 10.1191/0265659004ct261oa
Reynolds, R.E., & Ortony, A. (1980). Some issues in the measurement of children's comprehension of metaphorical language. Child Development, 51, 1110-1119.
Seidenberg, P.L., & Bernstein, D.K. (1986). The comprehension of similes and metaphors by learning disabled and nonlearning-disabled children. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 17, 219-229.