Sveta Fichman

Background Pragmatic language use in general and the use of evaluation devices (EDs) are very important components in everyday communication and expressing thoughts and feelings in narrative production. However, very little is known about the use of evaluative devices in the narratives of Arabic‐speaking adolescents, especially those who are deaf and hard of hearing (DHH). Aims The present study investigated the use of EDs in personal oral narratives elicited from 124 hearing and DHH Arabic‐speaking adolescents. Methods & Procedures Each participant was asked to tell a personal story about a time he or she was in a dangerous situation. Narratives were transcribed and coded for nine different types of evaluation. Outcomes & Results A three‐way interaction of group (hearing/DHH) by gender (Female/Male) by evaluation type emerged such that female hearing adolescents’ narratives contained significantly more frames of mind than the narratives of DHH females and hearing males and more hedges than DHH females. In addition, hearing males’ narratives contained more hedges than those of DHH males and more negative comments than the narratives of both hearing females and DHH males. Conclusions & Implications The present research identifies factors that facilitate narrative abilities by DHH. Discussion centres on explanations for group and gender differences in terms of exposure and language socialization. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS What is already known on this subject Although narratives have been researched extensively in comparisons of hearing and deaf and hard of hearing (DHH) children, only a few studies have examined pragmatic language use in general and evaluation devices in particular. These studies show that the narratives of DHH children and adolescents contain fewer figurative expressions, frames of mind and hedges and that children who are DHH have difficulty comprehending and producing metaphors. Very little is known about the use of evaluative devices in the narratives of Arabic‐speaking adolescents, especially those who are DHH. What this study adds The present study found that hearing participants produced significantly more evaluation devices (Eds) than their DHH peers, and female participants produced significantly more EDs than their male peers. Moreover, hearing females’ narratives contained more frames of mind and more hedges than did the narratives of DHH females; also, hearing females’ narratives contained more frames of mind than those of hearing males. In addition, hearing males’ narratives contained more hedges than those of DHH males. Finally, hearing males’ narratives had more negative comments than both the narratives of hearing females and those of DHH males. Clinical implications The one evaluation device produced in large numbers (hedges) by adolescents who are DHH was expressed in only one of two ways. One important clinical implication of this finding is that pragmatic language in general and use of EDs in particular should be part of any speech and language evaluation. Another takeaway is that intervention should attempt to provide rich exposure to social communicative language, providing many ways to convey each function, enabling ado