PSYCHO-LINGUISTIC DEVELOPMENT OF CHILDREN WITH DISABILITIES

The relationship between language and psychology is one of the most complex and close relationships, as human nature itself is. Language, as the identifying phenomenon of man and the only means of realizing human communication, is as biological, psychological as well as social. The relationship between biological, psychological, and social in the language is one of the most important. To understand the full complexity of this report, it is important to study the relationship between discourse and language, not only in the normal state ( in people with normal, biological, psychological, and neurological abilitie s) but also in people with different abilities. Before presenting the findings of a one-year observation to some children with different abilities, it would be appropriate to put forward some theoretical questions on the relation of language and discourse, the brain's process of speech recognition as neuro-psychological images are created, neuro-psychological knowledge of sentence syntactic structures, word recognition process, etc. All these and other reports are descriptive of human psycholinguistic development at different ages and with different cognitive and behavioral abilities. retardation with the bilateral or unilateral spectrum, epilepsy, and mild and severe mental retardation


THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN LANGUAGE AND DISCOURSE AS AN OPPORTUNITY TO RECOGNIZE PSYCHOLINGUISTIC DEVELOPMENT.
This report has long been the object of study by many different scholars. In the study of this report, the auditors have tried to give some definitions of both language and discourse. In the history of general linguistics, linguists such as Saussure, Chomsky, and Andre Martine, etc have created frameworks for both phenomena, paving the way for different studies.
When talking about language and discourse, Saussure has in mind the relationship created by the use and ability, language mastery. In his terminology, we have a relation between La lingua and La parole. In all its introductory and descriptive dynamics, we look at its approach to the social character of the language. Saussure thinks that language is a social institution and that studies on it cannot be detached from studies of society or society itself. On the other hand, he thinks that discourse has an individual as well as a social side that cannot be viewed separately (Ferdinnad de Saussure: 2002, p. 19).
While Chomsky sees this relationship between mastery and performance. Language is competence, the ability of the speaker -the listener ideal for mastering one's language system while being as capable as using the language system in concrete situations. (Rami Memushaj: 2002, p. 42).
The competence expressed by Chomsky when talking about grammatical structures, David W. Lightfoot views it as a system/system reflected in the human mind/human brain that has been acquired through exposure to various experiences and have been used in several ways during the understanding or production of the connection (David W. Lightfoot:2011, pp.7).
In expressing his opinion about language and discourse, Andre Martine has focused on presenting the features and functions of discourse to identify the features and attributes of language.
According to him, discourse is the ability of people to reach out to one another through signs of slavery (Andre Martine: 2002, p. 28) This relationship explains two features of language (social and abstract character), at the same time it explains the fact that the study of linguistic development is a study of both linguistic as well as psychological, both general and individual from one person to another.
The study of an individual's language development is no more or less than the study of his or her discourse, in different communicative circumstances and situations. In Throughout the range of approaches to teaching and language, there are some indications that language and discourse are two sides of the same coin and that their study may be based on different reports such as: a. The relationship between sound representation and signification(concept, object, reference), as a visualization of the neuro-psychological image. b. The relationship between the graphic representation and the mark (concept, object, reference), as a representation of the neuro-psychological image. c. The relationship between language (linguistic units in use) and thought (thoughts expressed on a lecture floor). d. The relationship between the articulation of linguistic units of all levels and their reproduction in different communicative situations. In summary, we would argue that all of the above reports are those created by the close relationship of the neuropsychological world of the individual to the language (as a collective experience of a given society).

NEURO-PSYCHOLOGICAL IMAGES ARE CREATED.
The relation between speech (as a unit of sound and graphic representation) and what it signifies is the connection between the image, the neuro-psychological, the prototypal provided by the collective memory of the social group, the society we belong to. These images are not only prototypical in form, but they differ depending on our cognitive, psychological, neural, social, and so on.
The sound unit (linguistic sign) in this case is an external exciter of the peripheral or even central nervous system to create the connection between it and the neuropsychological image. These images are conditioned by two factors, first by empirical factors (images created by the five senses of contact with the outside world: hearing, seeing, enjoying, smelling, touching); secondly by factors about the sensory and belief worlds. The creation of neuro-psychological imaging is directly conditioned by the condition of the nervous organs, especially the brain and peripheral nervous system. This impact is conditioned by their normal development or not.
Neurological studies on the brain, especially focused on the results of external harassment, especially when these are linguistic harassment have made it possible to see how the brain manages to recognize different words, even minimal word pairs.
In this process, the brain creates a preliminary image until the final image is reached. These images are called pseudo-images (Friedmann Pulvrmuller:2009, p.120) before the brain creates the full image of the corresponding word. Later studies have shown that neuropsychological images are influenced by two main factors, in terms of standard and nonstandard use of language. The use of the standard variant is very important for determining the psycholinguistic process of perceiving images and associating them with relevant words. On the other hand, this process is also influenced by word categories such as naming words and serving words. In the case of naming words, the brain creates a complete image, while in the case of serving words (links, prepositions, and nodes, etc.) the image that is projected into the human brain is incomplete. Another aspect that is thought to have an impact is the selection of which side of the cerebral cortex will be excited.
Here too we have some interesting data about the creation of connections between speech and neuropsychological imagery. The data in this area are very interesting for the treatment of language development in children with disabilities. (Friedmann Pulvrmuller: 2009, p.122).
Research in this area has also continued to present data on the perception of linguistic data by the brain regarding the content and function of words directly (word naming).
If we were to suffice with the presentation of the recognition process only in terms of the relation between neuro-psychological imaging and speech, we would omit the appearance of language in an act of communication. In other words, we would leave out the syntagmatic links and structures that exist between them.

NEURO-PSYCHOLOGICAL KNOWLEDGE OF SYNTACTIC SENTENCE STRUCTURES.
The syntactic structures of sentences are the starting point of communication, and at the same time, there is the minimal possibility of expressing thoughts during a lecture situation. Compared to lexical-grammatical units, the syntactic structures are stronger stimuli for the human brain, they are structures that promote not only neuro-psychological images, but they activate large centers of the brain to create the relation between thought and articulated language structure. At this level, we are already in a larger structure both linguistically and psychologically.
Linguistic development at this level is becoming more complex, as it must be able to produce finite syntactic structures from an infinite combination model structure (Noam Chomsky:2011, p.42) based on well-defined linguistic rules (grammar).
How are these reports presented to children with disabilities? The above statement is about describing the whole process of language learning and development under normal conditions, but it is the task of describing, analyzing the data collected for the development of children with disabilities. Our target group has included children with different abilities of various diagnoses ranging from do a syndrome, autism, hyperactivity, infantile autism, mild to severe mental The group of students with disabilities that is observed is composed of about 30 students who attend compulsory education in the schools of the city of Kukes in Albania. Students attend classes in normal classes, where students with normal development attend all aspects. The provision of educational service in these classes is done in compliance with the legal obligation deriving from the Law on Pre-University Education in the Republic of Albania.
The data collected is very interesting and will be reflected and analyzed in terms of their language units.

The phonetic plane and data for this plane in psycho-linguistic development.
In general, children with a diagnosis of mild but severe mental retardation tend to have not very stable phoneticphonological development, but not too much underdevelopment. Usually, this group of children manages to distinguish vowels after being assigned to another set of phonemes, which they find difficult to distinguish directly. Non-loudness of vowels without being included in another set of phonemes is related to several factors: a. Failure to create their psychological image without comparing it to other phonemes.
b. Since vowels are presented as laryngeal (acoustically) tones and do not pose any nodal difficulties, they can easily be confused with any laryngeal noise that may have left a mark in their early or late memory. c. Their recognition, in linearity ratios, is also conditioned by the fact of the neuro-psychological image they create as no longer vocal units, but as marker units with acoustic features easily accessible by this group of children, this is attested by the fact that these children achieve to distinguish graphic hand signs from those of the press. In the wake of this argument lies the fact that this group of children manages to discern the meanings that come from the images of the images. d. This group of students fails to articulate what they write. This indicator is also very important because the relationship with the markers and the markers, not only at the levels of words, phonemes, and sounds but also at the structural levels, fails to be perceived as a linguistically expressed mental structure. This group of children manages to distinguish letters but fails to associate letters in syllables, the failure to associate letters in syllables is related to their ability to create syntagmatic links in slightly larger units as structures readily reproduced at a later time. This group of children tends to be incapable of remembering, their memory centers are not very functional, as they fail to collect and overlap different images that would correspond to sound expressions at all levels of expression.
Some cases do not distinguish all the letters (this is also influenced by the aforementioned factors), they are only limited to a few letters of the alphabet. There are cases where these children remember only a few letters of the press, as in the case of some children who remember only a letter / b / press. Even this feature of their development is related to the neuropsychological image that is created in correlation with what is called. Sounded representation. Children with autism syndrome and autism are in the same situation, except for a few cases. In general, children with different phonetic abilities have the following characteristics: a. They manage to distinguish many letters, but with much difficulty distinguish between vowels and consonants. b. They fail to remember the phonemes they have spotted the day before and often they no longer articulate them. c. They fail to create higher structures in terms of horizontal phoneme connections. d. They show an interest in letters that are larger and in letters that are more visible than other phonemes. e. All students have difficulty identifying "double" letters of the type: / th /, / ll, / dh /, / sh /, / gj /, / xh /, / zh / etc.

Grammatical level and psycholinguistic development
From the data obtained from the observation of the language development of the group of children with different abilities we note that we have some very interesting data such as: a. Most children fail to clearly distinguish the boundaries of the morphological units, even failing to accurately create the image of the phonetic word. They look at both the naming units (words) and the serving units as words. b. Most of them fail to articulate and write lexicalgrammatical units according to grammar.
c. There are cases where children have a lot of difficulties creating syntactic units larger than the syntagm, there are children who use words -sentences because they fail to create syntactic structures larger than the word or word. Even when we tend to create sentences to describe, tell something, their structures are incomplete.

Lexical and semantic plane
The lexical level and the data for this level for this group of children is a very interesting indicator for the neuropsychological development of these children. The indicators of this field are an opportunity to study in many fields such as neurology, psychology, sociology, etc. It would be impossible to classify all the indicators in this area in detail, so we will outline all the indicators in the hope that we will detail them in one of the largest works in the future.
Let's look at some of the trainers directly related to their psychology and language such as: a. Generally, they distinguish between the files they are told but are explained in detail or by presenting different objects, phenomena, and objects. b. A factor that helps these students identify words is the colors that characterize the objects that mark those words. For example, the word sun is identified with yellow, the word sky is identified with blue, the word machine is identified with many colors as they first came into contact with this object. c. Other factors that help them identify words are also the shapes of various objects, such as the word is identified with a ball, with a pumpkin, or vice versa. d. In terms of meaning, this group of children has many difficulties in connecting the lateral side to the expression. The above indicators speak of the great complexity of the relation of speech as a linguistic unit and the creation of neuropsychological images in their perception.
Research on the development of language in children with disabilities is an issue that requires a great deal of commitment and is the object of study for long-term studies.
From the presentation of theoretical issues and findings in the observations made, we can come to some conclusions that may serve as orientations for later studies in many different fields. CONCLUSIONS a. The study of psycholinguistic development cannot be seen as detached from the study of discourse and communication as a repetitive and completely separate act. b. The psycholinguistic study cannot be studied without considering the process of recognizing the sign of language as a neuropsychological image influenced by many factors, which we have set out above. c. The psycholinguistic study cannot be limited to just a few fields, it must be comprehensive for all fields: phonetic, grammatical, lexical, and semantic. d. The data gathered from the observation of the language development of children with disabilities prove that linguistic cognition cannot be detached from the human neuropsychological world, the social world, and human biological abilities. e. Accumulated data show that language is a hybrid phenomenon between biological, psychological, and social. f. The psycholinguistic development of children with different abilities in the field of phonetics is less evident due to the very nature of the phonetic plane as highly abstract and empirically unobstructed. The data provided for this level is data that relates more to the listener as a substance of substance and not as a substance of the content. g. The psycholinguistic development of children with disabilities in the grammatical, lexical, and semantic contexts is conditioned by many factors and is living proof of the complexity of the psychological and neurological worlds in their development, accumulation in memory, and their reproduction as structures. h. Studies in this field pave the way for studies in the fields of neurology, developmental psychology, sociology, sociolinguistics, etc.