International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021
Morpho-Syntactic Deficit in Children with Cochlear Implant: Consequence of Hearing Loss or Concomitant Impairment to the Language System?
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Benassi Erika, Boria Sonia, Berghenti Maria Teresa, Camia Michela, Scorza Maristella, Cossu Giuseppe
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Among implanted children with similar duration of auditory deprivation and clinical history, the morpho-syntactic skills remain highly variable, suggesting that other fundamental factors may determine the linguistic outcomes of these children, beyond their auditory recovery. The present study analyzed the morpho-syntactic discrepancies among three children with cochlear implant (CI), with the aim of understanding if morpho-syntactic deficits may be characterized as a domain-specific language disorder.
METHOD: The three children (mean age = 7.2; SD = 0.4) received their CI at 2.7, 3.7, and 5.9 years of age. Their morpho-syntactic skills were evaluated in both comprehension and production and compared with 15 age-matched normal-hearing children (mean age = 6.6; SD = 0.3).
RESULTS: Cases 1 and 2 displayed a marked impairment across morphology and syntax, whereas Case 3, the late-implanted child, showed a morpho-syntactic profile well within the normal boundaries. A qualitative analysis showed, in Cases 1 and 2, language deficits similar to those of normal hearing children with Developmental Language Disorder (DLD).
CONCLUSIONS: We suggest that a severe grammatical deficit may be, in some implanted children, the final outcome of a concomitant impairment to the language system. Clinical implications for assessment and intervention are discussed.
METHOD: The three children (mean age = 7.2; SD = 0.4) received their CI at 2.7, 3.7, and 5.9 years of age. Their morpho-syntactic skills were evaluated in both comprehension and production and compared with 15 age-matched normal-hearing children (mean age = 6.6; SD = 0.3).
RESULTS: Cases 1 and 2 displayed a marked impairment across morphology and syntax, whereas Case 3, the late-implanted child, showed a morpho-syntactic profile well within the normal boundaries. A qualitative analysis showed, in Cases 1 and 2, language deficits similar to those of normal hearing children with Developmental Language Disorder (DLD).
CONCLUSIONS: We suggest that a severe grammatical deficit may be, in some implanted children, the final outcome of a concomitant impairment to the language system. Clinical implications for assessment and intervention are discussed.