JSLHR
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research Vol.40 556-566 June 1997.
© American Speech-Language-Hearing Association
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow My Folders
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Rescorla, L.
Right arrow Articles by Dahlsgaard, K.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Rescorla, L.
Right arrow Articles by Dahlsgaard, K.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Facebook   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Late Talkers at 2

Outcome at Age 3

Leslie Rescorla 1
Julie Roberts 2

Katherine Dahlsgaard 3
1 Bryn Mawr College Bryn Mawr, PA
2 University of Vermont Burlington
3 University of Pennsylvania Philadelphia

lrescorl{at}brynmawr.edu

Age 3 follow-up data are presented for a sample of 34 toddlers diagnosed between the ages of 24 and 31 months with expressive type specific language impairment (SLI-E). At age 3, the late talkers scored significantly lower on all language measures than 21 comparison peers matched at intake on age, SES, and nonverbal ability. When seen at follow-up, the former late talkers scored in the average range on the Expressive One-Word Picture Vocabulary Test (EOWPVT) and on the Reynell Expressive Language Scale, but more than 1.5 SDs below age expectations in MLU and on Scarborough's (1990a) IPSyn. The proportion of late talkers performing in the average range at follow-up varied markedly as a function of measure used (EOWPVT: 79%, Reynell: 58%, MLU: 35%, and IPSyn: 24%), indicating that the late talkers made more rapid progress in lexical development and in the use of language to define, explain, and describe than they did in the areas of syntactic and morphological development. The only significant predictor of age 3 outcome was intake expressive language level, with toddlers who had been more severely delayed in expressive language at intake relative to age level having the worst outcomes at age 3.

KEY WORDS: late talkers, SLI-E, language outcome

Submitted on March 2, 1994
Accepted on December 13, 1996


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Facebook Facebook   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 JSLHRHome page
M. J. Moyle, S. Ellis Weismer, J. L. Evans, and M. J. Lindstrom
Longitudinal Relationships Between Lexical and Grammatical Development in Typical and Late-Talking Children
J Speech Lang Hear Res, April 1, 2007; 50(2): 508 - 528.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 JSLHRHome page
S. Gray
The relationship between phonological memory, receptive vocabulary, and fast mapping in young children with specific language impairment.
J Speech Lang Hear Res, October 1, 2006; 49(5): 955 - 969.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 First LanguageHome page
S. Eisenberg
Production of Infinitival Object Complements in the Conversational Speech of 5-Year-Old Children with Language-Impairment
First Language, October 1, 2003; 23(3): 327 - 341.
[Abstract] [PDF]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
All ASHA Journals AJA AJSLP JSLHR LSHSS
Copyright © 1997 by the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association.