title: Clinical markers in Italian-speaking children with and without specific language impairment: a study of non-word and real word repetition as predictors of grammatical ability.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  In many languages a weakness in non-word repetition serves as a useful clinical marker of specific language impairment (SLI) in children. However, recent work in Italian has shown that the repetition of real words may also have clinical utility. For young typically developing Italian children, real word repetition is more predictive of particular grammatical abilities than is non-word repetition. This finding is important because these particular grammatical abilities--the production of present-tense third-person plural inflections and direct-object clitic pronouns--are precisely those that are problematic for Italian-speaking children with SLI. Along with their grammatical requirements, these two morpheme types present a significant phonological/prosodic challenge for these children.
  
  
  OBJECTIVE
  To replicate the findings with young typically developing Italian children and to determine whether real word repetition is also more predictive of the use of these two morpheme types than is non-word repetition in a group of Italian-speaking children with SLI.
  
  
  METHODS
  Seventeen Italian-speaking children with SLI and 17 younger typically developing children matched for mean length of utterance participated in tasks of real word and non-word repetition as well as tasks requiring the production of direct-object clitic pronouns and present-tense third-person plural inflections.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Children with SLI were less accurate than their younger peers on all measures. Importantly, for the younger typically developing children, real word repetition explained a significant amount of variance in the use of third-person plural inflections and direct-object clitic pronouns. For the children with SLI, in contrast, non-word repetition was a significant predictor, whereas real word repetition was not a contributing factor.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  It is argued that in Italian SLI, the grammatical details showing the greatest weakness present phonological/prosodic obstacles as well as grammatical challenges to these children. Consequently, non-word repetition emerges as a predictor of these grammatical weaknesses in SLI, unlike the profile observed in typically developing Italian children.
authors.affiliation: Dipartimento di Psicologia dello Sviluppo e della Socializzazione, Università degli Studi di Padova, Padova, Italia.
authors.forename: Marco
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Dispaldro
authors.forename: Laurence B
authors.initials: LB
authors.lastname: Leonard
authors.forename: Patricia
authors.initials: P
authors.lastname: Deevy
mesh_terms: D002675:Child, Preschool; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D007558:Italy; D007805:Language Development Disorders / Q000175:diagnosis* / Q000523:psychology / Q000628:therapy; D007807:Language Tests; D007808:Language Therapy; D008297:Male; D010700:Phonetics; D011237:Predictive Value of Tests; D012044:Regression Analysis; D012660:Semantics; D014706:Verbal Learning; D014825:Vocabulary
keywords: Italian; grammar; non-word repetition; real word repetition; specific language impairment
references.citation: J Commun Disord. 2008 Mar-Apr;41(2):124-45
references.pmid: 17765916
references.citation: Int J Lang Commun Disord. 1999 Jul-Sep;34(3):337-52
references.pmid: 10884905
references.citation: J Speech Lang Hear Res. 1997 Aug;40(4):809-20
references.pmid: 9263945
references.citation: Genes Brain Behav. 2007 Feb;6(1):66-76
references.pmid: 17233642
references.citation: J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2011 Dec;54(6):1628-43
references.pmid: 21930616
references.citation: J Speech Lang Hear Res. 1998 Oct;41(5):1185-92
references.pmid: 9771639
references.citation: Behav Res Methods Instrum Comput. 2002 Aug;34(3):424-34
references.pmid: 12395559
references.citation: J Speech Lang Hear Res. 1998 Dec;41(6):1363-74
references.pmid: 9859891
references.citation: Genes Brain Behav. 2006 Mar;5(2):158-69
references.pmid: 16507007
references.citation: Int J Lang Commun Disord. 2011 Sep-Oct;46(5):564-78
references.pmid: 21899673
references.citation: Cortex. 2013 Sep;49(8):2126-39
references.pmid: 23154040
references.citation: Curr Dir Psychol Sci. 2006 Oct;15(5):217-221
references.pmid: 19009045
references.citation: J Child Psychol Psychiatry. 2001 Sep;42(6):741-8
references.pmid: 11583246
references.citation: J Speech Lang Hear Res. 1999 Jun;42(3):678-89
references.pmid: 10391632
references.citation: Cortex. 2012 Oct;48(9):1138-54
references.pmid: 21774923
references.citation: J Child Psychol Psychiatry. 1996 May;37(4):391-403
references.pmid: 8735439
references.citation: J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2007 Apr;50(2):429-43
references.pmid: 17463239
references.citation: J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2009 Apr;52(2):269-88
references.pmid: 18723601
references.citation: Int J Lang Commun Disord. 2009 Nov-Dec;44(6):941-61
references.pmid: 19107657
references.citation: J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2007 Feb;50(1):177-95
references.pmid: 17344558
references.citation: J Child Lang. 1999 Feb;26(1):69-111
references.pmid: 10217890
references.citation: Mem Cognit. 1995 Jan;23(1):83-94
references.pmid: 7885268
references.citation: Int J Lang Commun Disord. 2006 Nov-Dec;41(6):695-712
references.pmid: 17079223
references.citation: J Speech Hear Res. 1996 Dec;39(6):1239-57
references.pmid: 8959609
references.citation: J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2013 Feb;56(1):323-36
references.pmid: 22761319
references.citation: J Speech Lang Hear Res. 1998 Oct;41(5):1136-46
references.pmid: 9771635