当前位置:
X-MOL 学术
›
Autism & Developmental Language Impairments
›
论文详情
Our official English website, www.x-mol.net, welcomes your feedback! (Note: you will need to create a separate account there.)
Pragmatic versus structural difficulties in the production of pronominal clitics in French-speaking children with autism spectrum disorder
Autism & Developmental Language Impairments Pub Date : 2018-01-01 , DOI: 10.1177/2396941518799643 Philippe Prévost 1 , Laurice Tuller 1 , Racha Zebib 1 , Marie Anne Barthez 2 , Joëlle Malvy 1, 2 , Frédérique Bonnet-Brilhault 1, 2
Autism & Developmental Language Impairments Pub Date : 2018-01-01 , DOI: 10.1177/2396941518799643 Philippe Prévost 1 , Laurice Tuller 1 , Racha Zebib 1 , Marie Anne Barthez 2 , Joëlle Malvy 1, 2 , Frédérique Bonnet-Brilhault 1, 2
Affiliation
Background and aims Impaired production of third person accusative pronominal clitics is a signature of language impairment in French-speaking children. It has been found to be a prominent and persistent difficulty in children and adolescents with specific language impairment. Previous studies have reported that many children with autism spectrum disorder also have low performance on these clitics. However, it remains unclear whether these difficulties in children with autism spectrum disorder are due to structural language impairment or to pragmatic deficits. This is because pragmatics skills, notoriously weak in children with autism spectrum disorder, are also needed for appropriate use of pronouns. Use of pronouns without clear referents and difficulty with discourse pronouns (first and second person), which require taking into account the point of view of one’s interlocutor (perspective shifting), have frequently been reported for autism spectrum disorder. Methods We elicited production of nominative, reflexive and accusative third and first person pronominal clitics in 19 verbal children with autism spectrum disorder (aged 6–12, high and low functioning, with structural language impairment, or with normal language) and 19 age-matched children with specific language impairment. If pragmatics is behind difficulties on these elements, performance on first-person clitics would be expected to be worse than performance on third person clitics, since it requires perspective shifting. Furthermore, worse performance for first person clitics was expected in the children with autism spectrum disorder compared to the children with specific language impairment, since weak pragmatics is an integral part of impairment in the former, but not in the latter. More generally, different error patterns would be expected in the two groups, if the source of difficulty with clitics is different (a pragmatic deficit vs. a structural language deficit). Results Similar patterns of relative difficulties were found in the autism spectrum disorder language impairment and specific language impairment groups, with third person accusative clitics being produced at lower rates than first-person pronouns and error patterns being essentially identical. First-person pronouns did not pose particular difficulties in the children with autism spectrum disorder (language impairment or normal language) with respect to third-person pronouns or to the children with specific language impairment. Performance was not related to nonverbal intelligence in the autism spectrum disorder group. Conclusions The elicitation task used in this study included explicit instruction, and focus on perspective shifting (both visual and verbal), allowing for potential pragmatic effects to be controlled. Moreover, the task elicited a variety of types of clitics in morphosyntactic contexts of varying complexity, providing ample opportunities for employment of perspective shifting, which may have also curtailed perseveration of third person over first person. These properties of the task allowed for the grammatical nature of children’s difficulties with third-person accusative clitics to emerge unambiguously. Implications Assessment of structural language abilities in children with autism spectrum disorder requires careful consideration of task demands. The influence of pragmatic abilities on structural language performance can be circumvented by making the pragmatic demands of the task explicit and salient. Filtering out this potential influence on structural language performance is fundamental to understanding language profiles in children with autism spectrum disorder and thus which children could benefit from which kinds of language intervention.
中文翻译:
法语自闭症谱系障碍儿童代名词气候产生中的语用与结构困难
背景和目标第三人称代词性气候的产生障碍是法语儿童语言障碍的标志。已经发现,这是患有特定语言障碍的儿童和青少年的突出而持续的困难。先前的研究报道,许多患有自闭症谱系障碍的儿童在这些气候条件下的表现也很差。然而,尚不清楚自闭症谱系障碍儿童的这些困难是由于结构性语言障碍还是由于语用缺陷。这是因为为了适当地使用代词,还需要自闭症谱系障碍儿童的实用技巧。没有明确指称的代词的使用以及话语代词(第一和第二人称)的困难,自闭症谱系障碍经常被报道,这需要考虑到对话者的观点(透视转移)。方法我们在19名自闭症谱系障碍儿童(6至12岁,高,低功能,结构性语言障碍或正常语言)的19名言语儿童中产生了代称,反身和指称的第三和第一人称代词气候。有特定语言障碍的儿童。如果在这些要素上的实用主义背后有困难,那么第一人称视角的表现将比第三人称视角的表现差,因为这需要改变视角。此外,与特定语言障碍儿童相比,自闭症谱系障碍儿童的第一人称气候表现预期较差,因为语用力弱是前者而非后者的不可或缺的一部分。更普遍地说,如果气候困难的来源不同(语用缺陷与结构性语言缺陷),则两组的错误模式将会不同。结果在自闭症谱系障碍语言障碍者和特定语言障碍者群体中,发现了相似的相对困难模式,与第一人称代词相比,第三人称指控性气候的发生率更低,错误模式也基本相同。在自闭症谱系障碍儿童(语言障碍或正常语言)中,第一人称代词对第三人称代词或特定语言障碍的儿童没有特别的困难。自闭症谱系障碍组的表现与非语言智力无关。结论:本研究中使用的启发式任务包括明确的指导,并着重于视角转换(视觉和言语),从而可以控制潜在的语用效果。此外,该任务在复杂程度各异的形态句法环境中引发了多种类型的气候,为运用视角转移提供了充足的机会,这也可能减少了第三人称对第一人称的坚持。这项任务的这些特性使儿童面对第三人称指控性语法时所遇到的困难的语法性质变得清晰起来。启示评估自闭症谱系障碍儿童的结构性语言能力需要仔细考虑任务需求。可以通过使任务的实用要求明确和突出来规避实用能力对结构语言性能的影响。滤除这种对结构性语言表现的潜在影响,对于理解自闭症谱系障碍儿童的语言特征至关重要,因此哪些儿童可以从哪种语言干预中受益。启示评估自闭症谱系障碍儿童的结构性语言能力需要仔细考虑任务需求。可以通过使任务的实用要求明确和突出来规避实用能力对结构语言性能的影响。滤除这种对结构性语言表现的潜在影响,对于理解自闭症谱系障碍儿童的语言特征至关重要,因此哪些儿童可以从哪种语言干预中受益。启示评估自闭症谱系障碍儿童的结构性语言能力需要仔细考虑任务需求。可以通过使任务的实用要求明确和突出来规避实用能力对结构语言性能的影响。滤除这种对结构性语言表现的潜在影响,对于理解自闭症谱系障碍儿童的语言特征至关重要,因此哪些儿童可以从哪种语言干预中受益。
更新日期:2018-01-01
中文翻译:
法语自闭症谱系障碍儿童代名词气候产生中的语用与结构困难
背景和目标第三人称代词性气候的产生障碍是法语儿童语言障碍的标志。已经发现,这是患有特定语言障碍的儿童和青少年的突出而持续的困难。先前的研究报道,许多患有自闭症谱系障碍的儿童在这些气候条件下的表现也很差。然而,尚不清楚自闭症谱系障碍儿童的这些困难是由于结构性语言障碍还是由于语用缺陷。这是因为为了适当地使用代词,还需要自闭症谱系障碍儿童的实用技巧。没有明确指称的代词的使用以及话语代词(第一和第二人称)的困难,自闭症谱系障碍经常被报道,这需要考虑到对话者的观点(透视转移)。方法我们在19名自闭症谱系障碍儿童(6至12岁,高,低功能,结构性语言障碍或正常语言)的19名言语儿童中产生了代称,反身和指称的第三和第一人称代词气候。有特定语言障碍的儿童。如果在这些要素上的实用主义背后有困难,那么第一人称视角的表现将比第三人称视角的表现差,因为这需要改变视角。此外,与特定语言障碍儿童相比,自闭症谱系障碍儿童的第一人称气候表现预期较差,因为语用力弱是前者而非后者的不可或缺的一部分。更普遍地说,如果气候困难的来源不同(语用缺陷与结构性语言缺陷),则两组的错误模式将会不同。结果在自闭症谱系障碍语言障碍者和特定语言障碍者群体中,发现了相似的相对困难模式,与第一人称代词相比,第三人称指控性气候的发生率更低,错误模式也基本相同。在自闭症谱系障碍儿童(语言障碍或正常语言)中,第一人称代词对第三人称代词或特定语言障碍的儿童没有特别的困难。自闭症谱系障碍组的表现与非语言智力无关。结论:本研究中使用的启发式任务包括明确的指导,并着重于视角转换(视觉和言语),从而可以控制潜在的语用效果。此外,该任务在复杂程度各异的形态句法环境中引发了多种类型的气候,为运用视角转移提供了充足的机会,这也可能减少了第三人称对第一人称的坚持。这项任务的这些特性使儿童面对第三人称指控性语法时所遇到的困难的语法性质变得清晰起来。启示评估自闭症谱系障碍儿童的结构性语言能力需要仔细考虑任务需求。可以通过使任务的实用要求明确和突出来规避实用能力对结构语言性能的影响。滤除这种对结构性语言表现的潜在影响,对于理解自闭症谱系障碍儿童的语言特征至关重要,因此哪些儿童可以从哪种语言干预中受益。启示评估自闭症谱系障碍儿童的结构性语言能力需要仔细考虑任务需求。可以通过使任务的实用要求明确和突出来规避实用能力对结构语言性能的影响。滤除这种对结构性语言表现的潜在影响,对于理解自闭症谱系障碍儿童的语言特征至关重要,因此哪些儿童可以从哪种语言干预中受益。启示评估自闭症谱系障碍儿童的结构性语言能力需要仔细考虑任务需求。可以通过使任务的实用要求明确和突出来规避实用能力对结构语言性能的影响。滤除这种对结构性语言表现的潜在影响,对于理解自闭症谱系障碍儿童的语言特征至关重要,因此哪些儿童可以从哪种语言干预中受益。