Receptive vocabulary, expressive vocabulary, and speech production of boys with fragile X syndrome in comparison to boys with down syndrome.

Boys with fragile X syndrome with (n = 49) and without (n = 33) characteristics of autism spectrum disorder, boys with Down syndrome (39), and typically developing boys (n = 41) were compared on standardized measures of receptive vocabulary, expressive vocabulary, and speech administered annually over 4 years. Three major findings emerged. Boys with fragile X without autism spectrum disorder did not differ from the younger typically developing boys in receptive and expressive vocabulary and speech production when compared at similar levels of nonverbal cognitive skills. Boys with fragile X without autism spectrum disorder and typically developing boys had higher receptive vocabulary and speech production than did boys with Down syndrome. There were mixed patterns of results for the boys with fragile X and characteristics of autism spectrum disorder.

A comparison of phonological skills of boys with fragile X syndrome and Down syndrome.

In this study, the authors compared the phonological accuracy and patterns of sound change of boys with fragile X syndrome, boys with Down syndrome, and typically developing mental-age-matched boys. Participants were 50 boys with fragile X syndrome, ages 3 to 14 years; 32 boys with Down syndrome, ages 4 to 13 years; and 33 typically developing boys, ages 2 to 6 years, who were matched for nonverbal mental age to both the boys with fragile X syndrome and the boys with Down syndrome. All participants were administered a standardized articulation test, and their sound accuracy, phonological process, and proportion of whole-word proximity scores were analyzed. Although boys with fragile X syndrome were delayed in their speech development, they did not differ from the typically developing, mental-age-matched boys in the percentage of correct early-, middle-, and late-developing consonants; phonological processes; or whole-word proximity scores. Furthermore, boys with fragile X syndrome had fewer errors on early-, middle-, and late-developing consonants; fewer syllable structure processes; and higher whole-word proximity scores than did boys with Down syndrome. Boys with Down syndrome also were delayed in their speech development, yet their phonological inventories, occurrences of phonological processes, and proportion of whole-word proximity scores indicated greater delays in their phonological development than the younger, typically developing boys. These results suggest that males with fragile X syndrome display phonological characteristics in isolated words similar to younger, typically developing children, whereas males with Down syndrome show greater delays as well as some developmental differences compared with both the males with fragile X syndrome and typically developing males.

Language and communication development in Down syndrome.

Although there is considerable variability, most individuals with Down syndrome have mental retardation and speech and language deficits, particularly in language production and syntax and poor speech intelligibility. This article describes research findings in the language and communication development of individuals with Down syndrome, first briefly describing the physical and cognitive phenotype of Down syndrome, and two communication related domains-hearing and oral motor skills. Next, we describe language development in Down syndrome, focusing on communication behaviors in the prelinguistic period, then the development of language in children and adolescents, and finally language development in adults and the aging period. We describe language development in individuals with Down syndrome across four domains: phonology, semantics, syntax, and pragmatics. Wethen suggest strategies for intervention and directions for research relating to individuals with Down syndrome.