نشانگرهای زبان تفاضلی با پاتولوژی در اوتیسم، اختلال فراگیر رشد نابرشمرده و اختلال زبان خاص
|کد مقاله||سال انتشار||تعداد صفحات مقاله انگلیسی||ترجمه فارسی|
|72361||2011||11 صفحه PDF||سفارش دهید|
نسخه انگلیسی مقاله همین الان قابل دانلود است.
هزینه ترجمه مقاله بر اساس تعداد کلمات مقاله انگلیسی محاسبه می شود.
این مقاله تقریباً شامل 7787 کلمه می باشد.
هزینه ترجمه مقاله توسط مترجمان با تجربه، طبق جدول زیر محاسبه می شود:
Publisher : Elsevier - Science Direct (الزویر - ساینس دایرکت)
Journal : Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders, Volume 5, Issue 4, October–December 2011, Pages 1402–1412
Language impairment is a common core feature in Pervasive Developmental Disorders (PDD) and Specific Language Impairment (SLI). Many studies have tried to define the specific language profiles of these disorders, some claiming the existence of overlaps, and others conceiving of them as separate categories. Fewer have sought to determine whether and how PDD-NOS language profile, including prosody, differs from those of Autistic Disorder (AD) and SLI. Here, 12 children with AD (mean age 9.75; sd 3.5), 10 with PDD-NOS (mean age 9.83; sd 2.17), and 13 children with SLI (mean age 9.17; sd 3.9) matched for age, sex and academic skills were explored for both receptive and expressive language skills. Prosody was also assessed with an intonation imitation task analyzed through automatic speech processing and compared to 70 typical developing controls matched for age and sex. A similar delay in phonology and vocabulary was observed in the three groups as were significant but variable differences between the groups in syntax, pragmatics and prosody. SLI showed correlations between chronological age and raw scores in all language tasks, while AD and PDD-NOS did not. Furthermore, SLI showed correlation within all raw scores in language tasks. Most of those correlations were also found in PDD-NOS but not in AD. In conclusion, these findings support the hypothesis that language skills in AD and SLI rely on different mechanisms, while PDD-NOS show an intermediate profile sharing some characteristics of both AD and SLI. They also suggest that expressive syntax, pragmatic skills and some intonation features could be considered as language differential markers of pathology, challenging the DSM-V proposal of broad criteria.