Telepractice as a Reaction to the COVID-19 Crisis: Insights from Croatian SLP Settings

Telepractice facilitates services in exceptional settings and situations. The ongoing COVID-19 pandemic is certainly such a situation. Due to pandemic-related restrictions, speech-language pathologists (SLPs) needed to adopt new approaches to their professional functioning. The aim of the paper is to examine SLP professionals’ perceptions and application of telepractice in SLP settings in Croatia during the COVID-19 pandemic. Two hundred and fifty-five SLPs completed an online survey. The results demonstrated that most SLPs had provided direct online therapy, mainly those employed in health care and private practice. The chief reasons for clients’ refusal of therapy delivered via telepractice included the lack of equipment, insufficient independence, and doubts on the effectiveness of telepractice. Although only 3% of SLPs had acquired some formal knowledge of telepractice before the pandemic, over 70% expressed satisfaction with telepractice because it allowed them to provide undisturbed clinical services in an exceptional situation

Efficacy, Model of delivery, Intensity and Targets of Pragmatic Interventions for Children with Developmental Language Disorder:A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND: It is widely acknowledged that children with developmental language disorder (DLD) predominantly have difficulties in the areas of grammar and vocabulary, with preserved pragmatic skills. Consequently, few studies focus on the pragmatic skills of children with DLD, and there is a distinct lack of studies examining the effectiveness of pragmatic interventions. AIMS: To carry out a systematic review of the literature on pragmatic interventions for children with DLD. METHODS & PROCEDURES: This systematic review was registered with PROSPERO (ID = CRD42017067239). A systematic search in seven databases yielded 1031 papers, of which 11 met our inclusion criteria. The included papers focused on interventions for children with DLD (mean = 3–18 years), enhancing oral language pragmatic skills, published between January 2006 and May 2020, and were based on a group‐study design such as randomized control trial or pre‐post‐testing. Study participants were monolingual speakers. The quality of papers was appraised using the Cochrane Risk of bias tool for randomized controlled trials. OUTCOMES & RESULTS: There was a high degree of variability between the included intervention studies, especially regarding intensity, intervention targets and outcomes. The evidence suggested that pragmatic intervention is feasible for all models of delivery (individual, small and large group) and that interventions for pragmatic language are mostly focused on encouragement of conversation and narrative skills observed through parent–child interaction or shared book‐reading activities. CONCLUSIONS & IMPLICATIONS: This study highlights the importance of promoting and explicitly teaching pragmatic skills to children with DLD in structured interventions. A narrative synthesis of the included studies revealed that in addition to direct intervention, indirect intervention can also contribute to improving oral pragmatic skills of children with DLD. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: WHAT IS ALREADY KNOWN ON THE SUBJECT? An increasing number of studies have shown that difficulties in acquiring pragmatic language is not only present in children with autism. WHAT THIS STUDY ADDS TO EXISTING KNOWLEDGE? Interventions for pragmatic language in children with DLD are mostly focused on encouragement of conversation and narrative skills, very often through parent–child interaction or shared book‐reading activities. Interventions that target language pragmatic are feasible for all models of delivery (individual, small and large group). WHAT ARE THE POTENTIAL OR ACTUAL CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS OF THIS WORK? The efficacy of the existing studies varies, and it is difficult to give recommendations regarding the intensity and duration of the specific intervention. In addition to offering pragmatic intervention directly from a specialist, pragmatic interventions can also be carried out indirectly if the intervention is under the continuous supervision of a specialist

The acquisition of quantification across languages: Some predictions.

In this paper we review factors that are expected to affect the order of acquisition of quantifiers across languages. We draw a distinction between language-wide and language-specific factors as well as factors that relate to the biological and social profile of the learner (such as gender, socio-economic status and schooling). We then propose predictions for what cross-linguistically similar patterns may arise.This exposition provides the theoretical backgroundagainst which a major empirical project has been undertaken, with the goal of documenting the extent to which the acquisition of quantifiers proceeds uniformly across languages. Here we summarize the scope of the project, the specific hypotheses under test, and other factors that must be considered in analysing the outcome of the ongoing empirical work. We conclude by discussing the implications of these investigations for the interface between linguistic and non-linguistic cognition. But first we turn to cross-linguistic similarities in the meaning of quantifiers in the following section

Presentations / Publications

Overview of outputs related to the Global TALES projec

On the role of pragmatics in child-directed speech for the acquisition of verb morphology

Lituanistikos katedraUžsienio kalbų, lit. ir vert. s. katedraVytauto Didžiojo universiteta

A cross-linguistic study of the acquisition of clitic and pronoun production

This study develops a single elicitation method to test the acquisition of third-person pronominal objects in 5-year-olds for 16 languages. This methodology allows us to compare the acquisition of pronominals in languages that lack object clitics (“pronoun languages”) with languages that employ clitics in the relevant context (“clitic languages”), thus establishing a robust cross-linguistic baseline in the domain of clitic and pronoun production for 5-year-olds. High rates of pronominal production are found in our results, indicating that children have the relevant pragmatic knowledge required to select a pronominal in the discourse setting involved in the experiment as well as the relevant morphosyntactic knowledge involved in the production of pronominals. It is legitimate to conclude from our data that a child who at age 5 is not able to produce any or few pronominals is a child at risk for language impairment. In this way, pronominal production can be taken as a developmental marker, provided that one takes into account certain crosslinguistic differences discussed in the article

The Acquisition of Quantification across Languages: Some Predictions

International audienc

Cross-linguistic patterns in the acquisition of quantifiers

Learners of most languages are faced with the task of acquiring words to talk about number and quantity. Much is known about the order of acquisition of number words as well as the cognitive and perceptual systems and cultural practices that shape it. Substantially less is known about the acquisition of quantifiers. Here, we consider the extent to which systems and practices that support number word acquisition can be applied to quantifier acquisition and conclude that the two domains are largely distinct in this respect. Consequently, we hypothesize that the acquisition of quantifiers is constrained by a set of factors related to each quantifier's specific meaning. We investigate competence with the expressions for "all," "none," "some," "some. not," and "most" in 31 languages, representing 11 language types, by testing 768 5-y-old children and 536 adults. We found a cross-linguistically similar order of acquisition of quantifiers, explicable in terms of four factors relating to their meaning and use. In addition, exploratory analyses reveal that language-and learner-specific factors, such as negative concord and gender, are significant predictors of variationLituanistikos katedraVytauto Didžiojo universiteta