Objective: The aim of this study was to standardize an Egyptian Arabic Pragmatic Language Test (EAPLT) using linguistically and socially suitable questions and pictures in order to be able to address specific deficits in this language domain. Participants and Methods: Questions and pictures were designed for the EAPLT to assess 3 pragmatic language subsets: pragmatic skills, functions, and factors. Ten expert phoniatricians were asked to review the EAPLT and complete a questionnaire to assess the validity of the test items. The EAPLT was applied in 120 typically developing Arabic-speaking Egyptian children (64 females and 56 males) randomly selected by inclusion and exclusion criteria in the age range between 2 years, 1 month, 1 day and 9 years, 12 months, 31 days. Children’s scores were used to calculate the means and standard deviations and the 5th and 95th percentiles to determine the age of the pragmatic skills acquisition. Results: All experts have mostly agreed that the EAPLT gives a general idea about children’s pragmatic language development. Test-retest reliability analysis proved the high reliability and internal consistency of the EAPLT subsets. A statistically significant correlation was found between the test subsets and age. Conclusion: The EAPLT is a valid and reliable Egyptian Arabic test that can be applied in order to detect a pragmatic language delay.

1.
Cohen DJ, Menna R, Vallance DD, Barwick M, Im N, Horodezky NB: Language, social cognitive processing, and behavioral characteristics of psychiatrically disturbed children with previous identified and unsuspected language impairments. J Child Psychol Psychiatry 1998; 39: 853–864.
2.
Geurts M, Verte S, Oosterlaan J, Roeyers H, Adams C, Mulder J, Sergeant A: Can the Children’s Communication Checklist differentiate between children with autism, children with ADHD and normal controls? J Child Psychol Psychiatry 2004; 45: 1437–1453.
3.
Laws G, Bishop DVM: Pragmatic language impairment and social deficits in Williams’s syndrome: a comparison with Down’s syndrome and specific language impairment. Int J Lang Commun Disord 2004; 39: 45–64.
4.
Adams C: The assessment of language pragmatics. J Child Psychol Psychiatry 2002; 43: 973–987.
5.
Bloom L, Lahey M: Language Development and Language Disorders. New York, Wiley, 1978.
6.
Kotby MN, Khairy A, Baraka M, Rifaie N, El-Shobary A: Language testing of Arabic speaking children; in Kotby MN (ed): Proceedings of the XXIII World Congress of the International Association of Logopedics and Phoniatrics. Cairo, 1995, pp 263–266.
7.
Abou Hassiba AM, El-Sady SR, El-Shoubary AM, Hafez NG: Translation, modification and standardization of Preschool Language Scale, ed 4. Ain Shams University Medical School, Unpublished Doctoral Thesis, 2011.
8.
El Hoshy ZH, Khaled AM, Shohdi S, Mostafa D, Anter AAS: Pragmatic profile of a group of typically developing Egyptian children aged from two to eight years old. Egypt J Otolaryngol 2011; 27: 160–172.
9.
Alduais AMS, Shoeib RM, Al-Hammadi FS, Al-Malki KH: Testing the usability of an Arabic version of TOPL-2 in measuring pragmatic language impairment in children and adolescents with developmental dysphasia. Int J Linguist 2012; 4: 193–214.
10.
Alduais AM, Albassam RA, AlSantli A, Alha-zimi AY: Investigating the relationship between pragmatic language development and early childhood education: a correlational-study on a sample of Saudi female preschoolers and non-preschoolers. J Humanit Soc Sci 2012; 4: 41–51.
11.
Alduais AM, Al-Hammadi FS, Shoeib RA, Almalki KH, Alenezi FH: Use of an Arabic-language version of TOPL-2 to identify typical and atypical manifestations of pragmatic language impairment in individuals with developmental dysphasia. J Humanit Soc Sci 2012; 3: 11–22.
12.
Alduais AM, Shoeib RA, Al-Hammadi FS, Al-Malki KH, Alenezi FH: Measuring pragmatic language in children with developmental dysphasia: comparing results of Arabic versions of TOPL-2 and CELF-4 (PP and ORS subtests). Int J Linguist 2012; 4: 475–494.
13.
Bishop DVM: Development of the Children’s Communication Checklist (CCC): a method for assessing qualitative aspects of communicative impairment in children. J Child Psychol Psychiatry 1998; 39: 879–893.
14.
Bishop DVM: The Children’s Communication Checklist, version 2 (CCC-2). London, Psychological Corporation, 2003.
15.
Phelps-Terasaki D, Phelps-Gunn T: Test of Pragmatic Language. Hove, Psychological Corporation, 1992.
16.
Wilkinson W: Test review of the Test of Pragmatic Language; in Conoley JC, Impara JC (eds): Mental Measurements Yearbook. Lincoln, NE, Buros Institute of Mental Measurements, 1995, pp 1059–1060.
17.
Prutting CA, Kirchner DMA: Clinical appraisal of the pragmatic aspects of language. J Speech Hear Disord 1987; 52: 105–119.
18.
Adams C, Bishop DVM: Conversation characteristics of children with semantic-pragmatic language disorder; exchange structure, turn taking, repairs and cohesion. Br J Disord Commun 1989; 24: 211–239.
19.
Bishop DVM, Chan J, Adams C, Hartley J, Weir F: Conversational responsiveness in specific language impairment: evidence of disproportionate pragmatic difficulties in a subset of children. Dev Psychopathol 2002; 12: 177–199.
20.
Wiig E, Secord W: Test of Language Competence – Expanded Edition. Hove, Psychological Corporation, 1989.
21.
Wagner C, Nettelbadt U, Sahlen B, Nilholm C: Conversation versus narration in pre-school children with language impairment. Int J Lang Commun Disord 2000; 35: 83–93.
22.
Norbury CF, Bishop DVM: Inferential processing and story recall in children with communication problems: a comparison of specific language impairment, pragmatic language impairment and high-functioning autism. Int J Lang Commun Disord 2000; 37: 227–251.
23.
Searle JR: Speech Acts: An Essay in the Philosophy of Language. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1969.
24.
Dewart H, Summers S: The Pragmatics Profile of Everyday Communication Skills in Children. Windsor, NFER-Nelson, 1995.
25.
Ninio A, Snow CE: The development of pragmatics: learning to use language appropriately; in Ritchie WC, Bhatia TK (eds): Handbook of Child Language Acquisition. San Diego, CA, Academic Press, 1999, pp 347–383.
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.