Low-literate users with intellectual or developmental disabilities (IDD) and/or complex communication needs (CCN) require specific writing support. We present a system that interactively supports fast and correct writing of a variant of Leichte Sprache (LS; German term for easy-to-read German), slightly extended within and beyond the inner-sentential syntactic level. The system provides simple and intuitive dialogues for selecting options from a natural-language paraphrase generator. Moreover, it reminds the user to add text elements enhancing understandability, audience design, and text coherence. In earlier development phases, the system was evaluated with different groups of substitute users. Here, we report a case study with seven low-literate users with IDD.

Simplified languages are instruments for inclusion aiming to overcome language barriers. Leichte Sprache (LS), for instance, is a variety of German with reduced complexity (cf. Basic English). So far, LS is mainly provided for, but rarely written by, its target groups, e.g. people with cognitive impairments. One reason may be the lack of technical support during the process from message conceptualization to sentence realization. In the following, we present a system for assisted typing in LS whose accuracy and speed is largely due to the deployment of real time natural-language processing enabling efficient prediction and context-sensitive grammar support.

From two corpus studies into varieties of clausal coordination in English (Meyer, 1995 and Greenbaum & Nelson, 1999), it is known that the incidence of clausal coordinate ellipsis (CCE) is about two times higher in written than in spoken language. We present a treebank study into CCE in written and spoken Dutch and German which confirms this tendency. Moreover, we observe considerable differences between written and spoken language with respect to the incidence of four main types of clausal coordinate ellipsis—Gapping, Forward Conjunction Reduction (FCR), Backward Conjunction Reduction (BCR), and Subject Gap with Finite/Fronted Verb (SGF). We argue that the detailed data pattern cannot be accounted for in terms of audience design, and propose an explanation based on the assumption that during spontaneous speaking—but not during writing—, the scope of online grammatical planning is basically restricted to one (finite) clause.