| 34. | | 8 English DS (CA: 12.0 - 14.3 years, MA: 5.4 - 6.10 years)/various groups of unimpaired children matched for MA (CA: 4.10 - 6.11 years) | Four elicitation tasks examining the past tense (use of existing regular and irregular past tense verbs/distinction between existing irregular verbs and homophonous denominal verbs), noun plurals (production of existing regular and irregular plurals), and comparative adjectives | DS: significantly higher percentage of unmarked forms in both regular and irregular conditions. A similar pattern is seen in the Past Tense 2 task, the DS group produced significantly more unmarked forms in both conditions. Similarly, in the comparative adjective task the DS group used significantly more uninflected forms in two of the three conditions than the control group. The results are parallel for non-tense related morphemes indicating that the linguistic impairment in DS is broader than in SLI and not restricted to the finiteness cluster. No significant difference of examined groups in the use of corrected forms for regular or denominal verbs, nor in the correct production of irregular forms for irregular verbs. |
| 35. | | 8 English DS (CA: 12.6 - 13.4 years)/10 with WS (CA: 11.4 - 13.9 years)/ 10 - 12 participants of 5-, 6-, and 7-year old unimpaired children | Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children TROG STOP (Syntactic Test of Pronominal Reference) TAPS (Test of Active and Passive Sentences) | No significant differences between the different age subgroups, either for the DS or the control participants and no significant differences between the match and the mismatch conditions. DS: particular difficulties in the interpretation of sentences with reflexive pronouns, whereas more accurate performance on sentences with non-reflexive pronouns. DS performed significantly worse than the controls in all conditions, but they had more difficulties interpreting passive than active sentences. Distinct patterns of linguistic impairment indicating that different genetic etiologies are associated with different specifically linguistic patterns of impairment and no with low levels of general intelligence. |
| 36. | | 11 DS (mean CA: 9.10 years)/16 DS (mean CA: 18.4 years)/15 DS (mean CA: 30.8 years)/11 non intellectually impaired children (mean CA: 3.8 years) | MLU TVAP TVP BEMS (8 receptive subtests) | The language of most DS adults formally restricted morphosyntactically. Their utterances were short, mono-propositional with limited and inconsistent use of grammatical morphology. Infrequent use of articles and verbs were not regularly inflected. DS adults: 50% or less correct responses in sentence comprehension (personal pronouns, articles, verbal inflections, subordinate clauses, negative + passive sentences). Slightly better receptive performance in relative clauses. No evidence for progress in receptive-expressive morphosyntactic aspects of the language of the DS adults compared to DS adolescents. |
| 37. | | 10 American DS (CA: 10.6 - 17.5 years, mean MA: 6.2 years)/10 MR (CA: 12.5 - 18.7 years, mean MA: 6.3 years)/Normal 1 (CA: 5.1 - 6.11 years, mean MA: 6.7 years)/Normal 2 (CA: 12.2 - 18.6 years, mean MA: 17.45 years) | Hearing Columbia Mental Maturity Scale-3rd ed. Slosson Intelligence Test PPVT R Miller Yoder Language Comprehension Test Token Test for children MLU Intelligibility Rating Goldman Fristoe Test of Articulation Oral Motor Evaluation Aerodynamic measures | DS: significantly different from the other groups for MLU, comprehension of syntax, single word articulation, selected diadochokinetic tasks, and some aerodynamic tasks. DS: problems with sequential processing (both comprehension and production) which influences the entire communication profile. They were less intelligible. Intelligibility improvement as mental maturity increased. Different pattern for the DS subjects, different communication profiles and shorter MLU. |