Abstract The Aspect-First Hypothesis observes that children tend to associate the lexical semantics of predicates with grammatical aspect marking and tense, and children with SLI are known to have problems with tense. A theoretical question raised by these facts is whether the SLI difficulty with tense is limited to morphosyntax, or whether it extends to the lexical semantics implicated in the Aspect-First phenomenon as well. In previous work, children with SLI have been less consistent than controls in their Aspect-First prototypical tense–aspect groupings. In the current project, we study the spontaneous production data of 38 five-year-old monolingual Spanish-speakers in Mexico, half of whom are diagnosed with SLI and half of whom are age-matched controls. We coded the spontaneous production of each child’s 20- to 30-minute language sample for tense, grammatical aspect and lexical aspect to determine: (1) whether each group followed Aspect-First prototypical tense–aspect groupings and (2) whether children in the SLI and TD groups were different from one another in their tense–aspect distributions. Children in both groups appeared to follow the Aspect-First prototypes, in contrast to comprehension findings. SLI children were not significantly different from TD children in their distribution of predicates, as a function of tense and lexical aspect, contra elicited production results from English. Results are discussed in terms of methodological and comprehension-production differences.

中文翻译：

---

母语为SLI的西班牙语儿童的自发性言语中的典型时态-时态对齐和时态缺陷

摘要方面优先假说指出，儿童倾向于将谓词的词汇语义与语法方面的标记和时态联系起来，而已知SLI的儿童存在时态问题。这些事实提出的理论问题是，SLI时态的困难性是否仅限于词素语法，还是它还扩展到Aspect-First现象所牵涉的词汇语义。在以前的工作中，SLI患儿在“方面优先”原型时态-方面分组中的控制力较对照组差。在当前项目中，我们研究了墨西哥38位五岁的会说英语的五岁西班牙语的自发性数据，其中一半被诊断为SLI，另一半为年龄匹配的对照。我们对每个孩子的20至30分钟语言样本的自发产生进行时态，语法方面和词汇方面的编码，以确定：（1）每个组是否遵循“方面优先”原型时态-方面分组；（2）是否在SLI和TD组的时态分布彼此不同。与理解结果相反，两组中的孩子似乎都遵循Aspect-First原型。作为时态和词汇方面的函数，SLI子代与TD子代在谓词分布上没有显着差异，这与英语的生成结果相反。根据方法论和理解产生差异来讨论结果。（1）每个小组是否遵循“先入为主”的原型时态-方面分组；（2）SLI和TD组中的孩子的时态-方面分布是否彼此不同。与理解结果相反，两组中的孩子似乎都遵循Aspect-First原型。作为时态和词汇方面的函数，SLI子代与TD子代在谓词分布上没有显着差异，这与英语的生成结果相反。根据方法论和理解产生差异来讨论结果。（1）每个小组是否遵循“先入为主”的原型时态-方面分组；（2）SLI和TD组中的孩子的时态-方面分布是否彼此不同。与理解结果相反，两组中的孩子似乎都遵循Aspect-First原型。作为时态和词汇方面的函数，SLI子代与TD子代在谓词分布上没有显着差异，这与英语的生成结果相反。根据方法论和理解产生差异来讨论结果。作为时态和词汇方面的函数，SLI子代与TD子代在谓词分布上没有显着差异，这与英语的生成结果相反。根据方法论和理解产生差异来讨论结果。作为时态和词汇方面的函数，SLI子代与TD子代在谓词分布上没有显着差异，这与英语的生成结果相反。根据方法论和理解产生差异来讨论结果。