The Interface of Syntax with Pragmatics and Prosody in Children with Autism Spectrum Disorders

35Citations
Citations of this article
154Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

In order to study problems of individuals with Autism Spectrum Disorders (ASD) with morphosyntax, we investigated twenty high-functioning Greek-speaking children (mean age: 6;11) and twenty age- and language-matched typically developing children on environments that allow or forbid object clitics or their corresponding noun phrase. Children with ASD fell behind typically developing children in comprehending and producing simple clitics and producing noun phrases in focus structures. The two groups performed similarly in comprehending and producing clitics in clitic left dislocation and in producing noun phrases in non-focus structures. We argue that children with ASD have difficulties at the interface of (morpho)syntax with pragmatics and prosody, namely, distinguishing a discourse prominent element, and considering intonation relevant for a particular interpretation that excludes clitics.

Figures

  • Table 1 Results from baseline tasks
  • Fig. 1 Sample of pictures used for the comprehension of clitics/clitic left dislocation
  • Fig. 2 Sample of pictures used for the elicitation task. a Elicitation of clitics. b Elicitation of clitic left dislocation. c Elicitation of noun phrases (with/without introduction of characters). d Elicitation of noun phrases in focus structures
  • Fig. 3 Mean difference in the comprehension and production accuracy of clitics in children with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) compared to typically developing (TD) children. The children with ASD had lower accuracy than the TD children and overall production scores were lower than comprehension scores. Standard errors are represented in the figure by the error bars attached to each column
  • Fig. 4 Accuracy in the comprehension and production of clitic left dislocation (CLLD) in children with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) compared to typically developing (TD) children. There was no between group difference and no difference between comprehension and production. Standard errors are represented in the figure by the error bars attached to each column
  • Fig. 5 Accuracy in the production of simple noun phrases presented with an introductory sentence (DP1), simple noun phrases presented without an introductory sentence (DP2), and focus sentences (Focus) in children with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) compared to typically developing (TD) children. The children with ASD were less accurate than the TD children in focus sentences. Standard errors are represented in the figure by the error bars attached to each column

References Powered by Scopus

Children's Knowledge of Locality Conditions in Binding as Evidence for the Modularity of Syntax and Pragmatics

303Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Prosody in autism spectrum disorders: A critical review

292Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

A Derivational Syntax for Information Structure

212Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Cited by Powered by Scopus

Functionally distinct language and theory of mind networks are synchronized at rest and during language comprehension

49Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Grammar is differentially impaired in subgroups of autism spectrum disorders: Evidence from an investigation of tense marking and morphosyntax

48Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

The impact of bilingualism on the narrative ability and the executive functions of children with autism spectrum disorders

47Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Terzi, A., Marinis, T., & Francis, K. (2016). The Interface of Syntax with Pragmatics and Prosody in Children with Autism Spectrum Disorders. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 46(8), 2692–2706. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-016-2811-8

Readers over time

‘16‘17‘18‘19‘20‘21‘22‘23‘24‘2507142128

Readers' Seniority

Tooltip

PhD / Post grad / Masters / Doc 61

66%

Researcher 14

15%

Professor / Associate Prof. 10

11%

Lecturer / Post doc 7

8%

Readers' Discipline

Tooltip

Linguistics 34

40%

Psychology 28

33%

Neuroscience 11

13%

Social Sciences 11

13%

Article Metrics

Tooltip
Social Media
Shares, Likes & Comments: 18

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free
0