Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-2xdlg Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-25T15:43:41.710Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

34 - A New Perspective on the Connection between Memory and Sentence Comprehension in Children with Developmental Language Disorder

from Part VI - Language Disorders, Interventions, and Instruction

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 July 2022

By
James W. Montgomery ,
Ronald B. Gillam  and
Julia L. Evans
Edited by
John W. Schwieter  and
Zhisheng (Edward) Wen
John W. Schwieter
Affiliation:
Wilfrid Laurier University
Zhisheng (Edward) Wen
Affiliation:
Hong Kong Shue Yan University
Get access

Summary

Children with developmental language disorder (DLD) show significant difficulties mastering language yet exhibit normal-range nonverbal intelligence, normal hearing and speech, and no neurological impairment. Deficits in sentence comprehension represent a major feature of school-age children’s language profile. So do memory limitations, including deficits in verbal working memory, controlled attention, and long-term memory. Though there is general consensus that the memory and comprehension deficits of these children relate in some fashion, the relationship has historically been unclear. In this chapter, we present the first conceptually integrated and empirically validated model of the sentence comprehension abilities of school-age children with DLD that describes the structural relationship among all these abilities.

Keywords

ChildrenSchool-AgeDevelopmental Language DisorderWorking MemoryLong-Term MemorySentence Comprehension
Type
Chapter
Information
The Cambridge Handbook of Working Memory and Language , pp. 776 - 800
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2022

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Abbot-Smith, K., & Tomasello, M. (2006). Exemplar-learning and schematization in a usage-based account of syntactic acquisition. The Linguistic Review, 23, 275–290.Google Scholar
Adams, E., Nguyen, A., & Cowan, N. (2018). Theories of working memory: differences in definition, degree of modularity, role of attention and purpose. Language Speech and Hearing Services in Schools, 49, 340–355.Google Scholar
Altmann, G., & Kamide, Y. (1999). Incremental interpretation at verbs: Restricting the domain of subsequent reference. Cognition, 73, 247–264.Google Scholar
Andrews, G., Ogden, J., & Halford, G. (2017). Resolving conflicts between syntax and plausibility in sentence comprehension. Advances in Cognitive Psychology, 13, 11–27.Google Scholar
Archibald, L., & Gathercole, S. (2007). The complexities of complex memory span: Storage and processing deficits in specific language impairment. Journal of Memory and Language, 57, 177–194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arnon, I., & Christiansen, M. (2017). The role of multiword building blocks in explaining L1-L2 differences. Topics in Cognitive Science, 9, 621–636.Google Scholar
Arnon, I., & Clark, E. (2011). Why brush your teeth is better than teeth: Children’s word production is facilitated in familiar sentence-frames. Language Learning and Development, 7, 107–129.Google Scholar
Arnon, I., McCauley, S., & Christiansen, M. (2017). Digging up the building blocks of language: Age-of-acquisition effects for multiword phrases. Journal of Memory and Language, 92, 265–280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arnon, I., & Snider, N. (2008). More than words: Frequency effects for multi-word phrases. Journal of Memory and Language, 62, 67–82.Google Scholar
Baddeley, A. (2012). Working memory: Theories, models, and controversies. Annual Review of Psychology, 63, 1–29.Google Scholar
Bannard, C., & Lieven, E. (2012). Formulaic language in L1 acquisition. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 32, 3–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bannard, C., & Matthews, D. (2008). Stored word sequences in language learning. Psychological Science, 19, 241–248.Google Scholar
Barrouillet, P., & Camos, V. (2001). Developmental increase in working memory span: Resource sharing or temporal decay? Journal of Memory and Language, 45, 1–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barrouillet, P., Gavens, N., Vergauwe, E., Gaillard, V., & Camos, V. (2009). Working memory span development: A time-based resource-sharing model account. Developmental Psychology, 45, 477–490.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Borovsky, A., Elman, J., & Fernald, A. (2012). Knowing a lot for one’s age: Vocabulary skill and not age is associated with anticipatory incremental sentence interpretation in children and adults. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 112, 417–436.Google Scholar
Burgess, G., Gray, J., Conway, A., & Braver, T. (2011). Neural mechanisms of interference control underlie the relationship between fluid intelligence and working memory span. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 140, 674–692.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chater, N., McCauley, S., & Christiansen, M. (2016). Language as skill: Intertwining comprehension and production. Journal of Memory and Language, 89, 244–254.Google Scholar
Chein, J., Moore, A., & Conway, A. (2011). Domain-general mechanisms of complex working memory span. NeuroImage, 54, 550–559.Google Scholar
Christiansen, M., & Arnon, I. (2017). More than words: The role of multiword sequences in language learning and use. Topics in Cognitive Science, 9, 542–551.Google Scholar
Christiansen, M., & Chater, N. (2016). The now-or-never bottleneck: A fundamental constraint on language. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 39, 1–19.Google Scholar
Christiansen, M., & MacDonald, M. (1999). Fractionated working memory: Even in pebbles, it’s still a soup stone. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 22, 97–98.Google Scholar
Conti-Ramsden, G., & Faragher, N. (2001). Psycholinguistic markers for Specific Language Impairment. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 6, 741–748.Google Scholar
Conti-Ramsden, G., Ullman, M., & Lum, J. (2015). The relation between receptive grammar and procedural, declarative, and working memory in specific language impairment. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 1–11.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cornish, H., Dale, R., Kirby, S., & Christiansen, M. (2017). Sequence memory constraints give rise to language-like structure through iterated learning. PLoS ONE, 12(1), Article e0168532. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0168532.Google Scholar
Cowan, N., Rouder, J. Blume, C., & Saults, J. (2012). Models of verbal working memory capacity: What does it take to make them work? Psychological Review, 119, 480–499.Google Scholar
Cowan, N., Saults, J., & Blume, C. (2014). Central and peripheral components of working memory storage. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 143, 1806–1836.Google Scholar
Delage, H., & Frauenfelder, U. (2020). Relationship between working memory and complex syntax in children with developmental language disorder. Journal of Child Language, 47, 600–632.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dick, F., Wulfeck, B., Krupa-Kwiatkowski, M., & Bates, L. (2004). The development of complex sentence interpretation in typically developing children compared with children with specific language impairment or early unilateral focal lesions. Developmental Science, 7, 360–377.Google Scholar
Ellis Weismer, S., Evans, J., & Hesketh, L. (1999). An examination of verbal working memory capacity in children with specific language impairment. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 42, 1249–1260.Google Scholar
Engel de Abreu, P., Conway, A., & Gathercole, S. (2010). Working memory and fluid intelligence in young children. Intelligence, 38, 552–561.Google Scholar
Engelhardt, P., Nigg, J., & Ferreira, F. (2017). Executive function and intelligence in the resolution of temporary syntactic ambiguity: An individual differences investigation. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 70, 1263–1281.Google Scholar
Engle, R. W. (2018). Working memory and executive attention: A revisit. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 13(2), 190–193.Google Scholar
Engle, R., Tuholski, S., Laughlin, J., & Conway, A. (1999). Working memory, short-term memory, and general fluid intelligence: a latent-variable approach. Journal of experimental psychology: General, 128, 309–331.Google Scholar
Evans, J., Saffran, J., & Robe-Torres, K. (2009). Statistical learning in children with specific language impairment. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 52, 321–335.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fernald, A., Perfors, A., & Marchman, V. (2006). Picking up speed in understanding: Speech processing efficiency and vocabulary growth across the 2nd year. Developmental Psychology, 42, 98–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ferreira, V., & Bock, K. (2006). The functions of structural priming. Language and Cognitive Processes, 21, 1011–1029.Google Scholar
Ferretti, R., McRae, K., & Hatherell, A. (2001). Integrating verbs, situation schemas, and thematic role concepts. Journal of Memory and Language, 44, 516–547.Google Scholar
Finney, M., Montgomery, J., Gillam, R., & Evans, J. (2014). Role of working memory storage and attention focus switching in children’s comprehension of spoken object relative sentences. Child Development Research, 54, 1–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Friedmann, N., & Novogrodsky, R. (2007). Is the movement deficit in syntactic SLI related to traces or to thematic role transfer? Brain and Language, 101, 5063.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fukuda, K., Vogel, E., Mayr, U., & Awh, E. (2010). Quantity, not quality: The relationship between fluid intelligence and working memory capacity. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 17, 673–679.Google Scholar
García-Madruga, J. A., Vila, J. O., Gómez-Veiga, I., Duque, G., & Elosúa, M. R. (2014). Executive processes, reading comprehension and academic achievement in 3rd grade primary students. Learning and Individual Differences, 35, 41–48.Google Scholar
Garraffa, M., Coco, M., Branigan, H. (2018). Impaired implicit learning of syntactic structure in children with developmental language disorder: Evidence from syntactic priming. Autism & Developmental Language Impairments, 3, 1–15.Google Scholar
Gillam, R., Montgomery, J., Evans, J., & Gillam, S. (2019). Cognitive predictors of sentence comprehension in children with and without developmental language disorder: Implications for assessment and treatment. International Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 21, 240–251.Google Scholar
Gillam, R. & Pearson, N. (2004). Test of narrative language. Pro-Ed.Google Scholar
Gómez, R., & Gerken, L. (1999). Artificial grammar learning by 1-year-olds leads to specific and abstract knowledge. Cognition, 70, 109–135.Google Scholar
Grunow, H., Spaulding, T., Gomez, R., & Plante, E. (2006). The effects of variation on learning word order rules by adults with and without language-based learning disabilities. Journal of Communication Disorders, 39, 158–170.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hamrick, P., Lum, J., & Ullman, M. (2018). Child first language and adult second language are both tied to general-purpose learning systems. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 7, 1487–1492.Google Scholar
Hardman, K., & Cowan, N. (2015). Reasoning and memory: People make varied use of the information available in working memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 42, 700–722Google Scholar
Hedenius, M., Persson, J., Tremblay, A., Adi-Japha, E., Veríssimo, J., Dye, C., et al. (2011). Grammar predicts procedural learning and consolidation deficits in children with specific language impairment. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 32, 2362–2375.Google Scholar
Hsu, J., & Bishop, D. (2010). Grammatical difficulties in children with specific language impairment: Is learning deficient? Human Development, 53, 264–277.Google Scholar
Joanisse, M., & McClelland, J. (2015). Connectionist perspectives on language learning, representation and processing. WIREs Cognitive Science, 6, 235–247.Google Scholar
Kane, M., Hambrick, D., Tuholski, S., Wilhelm, O., Payne, T., & Engle, R. (2004). The generality of working memory capacity: A latent-variable approach to verbal and visuospatial memory span and reasoning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 133, 189–217.Google Scholar
Kidd, E. (2012). Implicit statistical learning is directly associated with the acquisition of syntax. Developmental Psychology, 48, 171–184.Google Scholar
Kidd, E., & Arciuli, J. (2016). Individual differences in statistical learning predict children’s comprehension of syntax. Child Development, 87(1), 184–193.Google Scholar
Leclercq, A., Majerus, S., Prigent, G., & Maillart, C. (2013). The impact of dual tasking on sentence comprehension in children with specific language impairment. Journal of Speech, Language and Hearing Research, 56, 265–280.Google Scholar
Leonard, L. (2014). Children with specific language impairment (2nd ed.). MIT Press.Google Scholar
Leonard, L., Deevy, P., Fey, M., & Bredin-Oja, S. (2013). Sentence comprehension in specific language impairment: A task designed to distinguish between cognitive capacity and syntactic complexity. Journal of Speech, Language and Hearing Research, 56, 577–589.Google Scholar
Leonard, L., Eyer, J., Bedore, L., & Grela, B. (1997). Three accounts of the grammatical morpheme difficulties of English-speaking children with specific language impairment. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 40, 741–753.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lieven, E., Salomo, D., & Tomasello, M. (2009). Two-year-old children’s production of multiword utterances: A usage-based analysis. Cognitive Linguistics, 20, 481–507.Google Scholar
Loaiza, V., & Camos, V. (2018). The role of semantic representations in verbal working memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 44, 863–881.Google Scholar
Lum, J., & Conti-Ramsden, G. (2013). Long-term memory: A review and meta-analysis of studies of declarative and procedural memory in specific language impairment. Topics in Language Disorders, 33, 282–297.Google Scholar
Lum, J., Conti-Ramsden, G., Morgan, A., & Ullman, M. (2014). Procedural learning deficits in specific language impairment (SLI): A meta-analysis of serial reaction time task performance. Cortex, 51, 1–10.Google Scholar
Lum, J., Youssef, G., & Clark, G. (2017). Using pupillometry to investigate sentence comprehension in children with and without specific language impairment. Journal of Speech, Language and Hearing Research, 60, 1648–1660.Google Scholar
MacDonald, M., & Christiansen, M. (2002). Reassessing working memory: Comment on Just and Carpenter (1992) and Waters and Caplan (1996). Psychological Review, 109, 35–54.Google Scholar
Marshall, C., Marinis, T., & van der Lely, H. (2007). Passive verb morphology: The effect of phonotactics on passive comprehension in typically developing and Grammatical-SLI children. Lingua, 117, 302–320.Google Scholar
Marshall, C., & van der Lely, H. (2006). A challenge to current models of past tense inflection: The impact of phonotactics. Cognition, 100, 302–320.Google Scholar
Marslen-Wilson, W., & Zwitserlood, P. (1989). Accessing spoken words: The importance of word onsets. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 15, 576–585.Google Scholar
Marton, K., Campanelli, L., Eichorn, N., Scheuer, J., & Yoon, J. (2014). Information processing and proactive interference in children with and without specific language impairment. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 57, 106–119.Google Scholar
McCauley, S., & Christiansen, M. (2013). Toward a unified account of comprehension and production in language development. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 36, 38–39.Google Scholar
McCauley, S., & Christiansen, M. (2014). Acquiring formulaic language: A computational model. The Mental Lexicon, 9, 419–436.Google Scholar
McCauley, S., & Christiansen, M. (2015). Individual differences in chunking ability predict on-line sentence processing. Proceedings from The 37th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, 1553–1558.Google Scholar
McCauley, S., & Christiansen, M. (2017). Computational investigations of multiword chunks in language learning. Topics in Cognitive Science, 9, 637–652.Google Scholar
McCauley, S., Isbilen, E., & Christiansen, M. (2017). Chunking ability shapes sentence processing at multiple levels of abstraction. In Gunzelmann, G., Howes, A., Tenbrink, T., & Davelaar, E. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 39th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 2681–2686). Cognitive Science Society.Google Scholar
Montgomery, J. (1995). Sentence comprehension in children with specific language impairment: The role of phonological working memory. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 38, 187–199.Google Scholar
Montgomery, J. (2000). Relation of working memory to offline and real-time sentence processing in children with specific language impairment. Applied Psycholinguistics, 21, 117–148.Google Scholar
Montgomery, J. (2008). Role of auditory attention in the real-time processing of simple grammar by children with specific language impairment: A preliminary investigation. International Journal of Language and Communication Disorders, 43, 499–527.Google Scholar
Montgomery, J., & Evans, J. (2009). Complex sentence comprehension and working memory in children with specific language impairment. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 52, 269–288.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Montgomery, J., Evans, J., Fargo, J., Schwartz, S., & Gillam, R. (2018). Structural relationship between cognitive processing and syntactic sentence comprehension in children with and without developmental language disorder. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 61, 2950–2976.Google Scholar
Montgomery, J., Evans, J., & Gillam, R. (2009). Relation of auditory attention and complex sentence comprehension in children with specific language impairment: A preliminary study. Applied Psycholinguistics, 30, 123–151.Google Scholar
Montgomery, J., Evans, J., Gillam, R., Sergeev, A., & Finney, M. (2016). “Whatdunit?” Developmental changes in children’s syntactically based sentence comprehension abilities and sensitivity to word order. Applied Psycholinguistics, 37, 1281–1309.Google Scholar
Montgomery, J., Gillam, R., Evans, J., Fargo, J., & Schwartz, S. (2019). Comparison of the storage-only deficit and joint mechanism deficit hypotheses of the verbal working memory capacity limitation of children with developmental language disorder. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 62, 3808–3825.Google Scholar
Montgomery, J., Gillam, R., Evans, J., & Sergeev, A. (2017). Whatdunit? Sentence comprehension abilities of children with SLI: Sensitivity to word order in canonical and noncanonical sentences. Journal of Speech and Language Hearing Research, 60, 2603–2618.Google Scholar
Motallebzadeh, K., & Yazdi, M. (2016). The relationship between EFL learners’ reading comprehension ability and their fluid intelligence, crystallized intelligence, and processing speed. Cogent Education, 3, 1–8.Google Scholar
Moyle, M., Karasinski, C., Ellis Weismer, S., & Gorman, B. (2011). Grammatical morphology in school-age children with and without language impairment: A discriminant function analysis. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 42, 550–560.Google Scholar
Nee, D., & Jonides, J. (2013). Trisecting representational states in short-term memory. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 7, 1–15.Google Scholar
Nippold, M. (2017). Reading comprehension deficits in adolescents: Addressing underlying language abilities. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 48, 125–131.Google Scholar
Nippold, M., Hesketh, L., Duthie, J., & Mansfield, T. (2005). Conversational versus expository discourse: A study of syntactic development in children, adolescents, and adults. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 48, 1048–1064.Google Scholar
Nippold, M., Mansfield, T., Billow, J., & Tomblin, B. (2008). Expository discourse in adolescents with language impairments: Examining syntactic development. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 17, 356–366.Google Scholar
Nippold, M., Mansfield, T., Billow, J., & Tomblin, B. (2009). Syntactic development in adolescents with a history of language impairments: A follow-up investigation. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 18, 241–251.Google Scholar
Osaka, M., Osaka, N., Kondo, H., Morishita, M., Fukuyama, H., Aso, T., & Shibasaki, H. (2003). Neural basis of individual differences in working memory: An fMRI study. NeuroImage, 18, 789–797.Google Scholar
Öztekin, I., & Cowan, N. (2015). Editorial: Representational states in memory: Where do we stand? Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 9, 1–3.Google Scholar
Öztekin, I., Davachi, L., & McElree, B. (2010). Are representations in working memory distinct from representations in long-term memory? Neural evidence in support of a single store. Psychological Science, 21, 1123–1133.Google Scholar
Peterson, S., & Posner, M. (2012). The attention system of the human brain: 20 years after. Annual Review of Neuroscience, 35, 73–89.Google Scholar
Plante, E., Patterson, D., Sandoval, M., Vance, C., & Asbjørnsen, A. (2017). An fMRI study of implicit language learning in developmental language impairment. NeuroImage: Clinical, 14, 277–285.Google Scholar
Rice, M., Wexler, K., & Hershberger, S. (1998). Tense over time: The longitudinal course of tense acquisition in children with specific language impairment. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 41, 1412–1431.Google Scholar
Robertson, E., & Joanisse, M. (2010). Spoken sentence comprehension in children with dyslexia and language impairment: The roles of syntax and working memory. Applied Psycholinguistics, 31, 141–165.Google Scholar
Roid, G., & Miller, L. (1997). Leiter International Performance Scale–Revised. Stoelting.Google Scholar
Savage, C., Lieven, E., Theakston, A., & Tomasello, M. (2003). Testing the abstractness of children’s linguistic representations: Lexical and structural priming of syntactic constructions in young children. Developmental Science, 6, 557–567.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Shipstead, Z., Harrison, T., & Engle, R. (2016). Working memory capacity and fluid intelligence: Maintenance and disengagement. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 11, 771–779.Google Scholar
Squire, L., Knowlton, B., & Musen, G. (1993). The structure and organization of memory. Annual Review in Psychology, 44, 453–495.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
The state of learning disabilities: Facts, trends and emerging issues (2014). National Center for Learning Disabilities (3rd Ed.).Google Scholar
Theakston, A., & Lieven, E. (2017). Multiunit sequences in first language acquisition. Topics in Cognitive Science, 9, 588–603.Google Scholar
Thiessen, E. (2017). What’s statistical about learning? Insights from modelling statistical learning as a set of memory processes. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B, 372, 20160056.Google Scholar
Ullman, M. (2016). The declarative/procedural model: A neurobiology model of language learning, knowledge, and use. In Hickok, G. & Small, S. (Eds.), Neurobiology of language (pp. 953–968). Elsevier.Google Scholar
Ullman, M. (2004). Contributions of memory circuits to language: The declarative/procedural model. Cognition, 92, 231–270.Google Scholar
Ullman, M., & Pierpont, E. (2005). Specific language impairment is not specific to language: The procedural deficit hypothesis. Cortex, 41, 399–433.Google Scholar
Unsworth, N., & Engle, R. (2007). The nature of individual differences in working memory capacity: Active maintenance in primary memory and controlled search from secondary memory. Psychological Review, 114, 104–132.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
van der Lely, H., & Stollwerck, L. (1997). Binding theory and grammatical specific language impairment in children. Cognition, 62, 245–290.Google Scholar
Victorino, K., & Schwartz, R. (2015). Control of auditory attention in children with specific language impairment. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 58, 1245–1257.Google Scholar
Weisleder, A., & Fernald, A. (2013). Talking to children matters: Early language experience strengthens processing and builds vocabulary. Psychological Science, 24, 2143–2152.Google Scholar
Wells, J., Christiansen, M., Race, D., Acheson, D., & MacDonald, M. (2009). Experience and sentence processing: Statistical learning and relative clause comprehension. Cognitive Psychology, 58, 250–271.Google Scholar
Wilhelm, O., Hildebrandt, A., & Oberauer, K. (2013). What is working memory capacity, and how can we measure it? Frontiers in Psychology, 4, 1–22.Google Scholar
Zwitserlood, P. (1989). The locus of the effects of sentential-semantic context in spoken-word processing. Cognition, 32, 25–64.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×