AUTHOR=Khetrapal Neha , Thornton Rosalind 

TITLE=C-Command in the Grammars of Children with High Functioning Autism

JOURNAL=Frontiers in Psychology

VOLUME=8

YEAR=2017

URL=https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/psychology/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00402

DOI=10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00402

ISSN=1664-1078

ABSTRACT=<p>A recent study questioned the adherence of children with Autism Spectrum Disorders (ASD) to a linguistic constraint on the use of reflexive pronouns (Principle A) in sentences <italic>like Bart's dad is touching himself</italic>. This led researchers to question whether children with ASD are able to compute the hierarchical structural relationship of c-command, and raised the possibility that the children rely on a linear strategy for reference assignment. The current study investigates the status of c-command in children with ASD by testing their interpretation of sentences like (1) and (2) that tease apart use of c-command and a linear strategy for reference assignment.
<list list-type="order"><list-item><p>The girl who stayed up late will not get a dime or a jewel (C-command)</p></list-item><list-item><p>The girl who didn't go to sleep will get a dime or a jewel (Non C-command)</p></list-item></list></p><p>These examples both contain negation (<italic>not</italic> or did<italic>n't</italic>) and disjunction (<italic>or</italic>). In (1), negation c-commands the disjunction phrase, yielding a conjunctive entailment. This gives rise to the meaning that the girl who stayed up late won't get a dime and she won't get a jewel. In (2), negation is positioned inside a relative clause and it does not c-command disjunction. Therefore, no conjunctive entailment follows. Thus, (2) is true if the girl just gets a dime or just a jewel, or possibly both. If children with ASD lack c-command, then (1) will not give rise to a conjunctive entailment. In this case, children might rely on a linear strategy for reference assignment. Since negation precedes disjunction in both (1) and (2), they might be interpreted in a similar manner. Likewise, children who show knowledge of c-command should perform well on sentences governed by Principle A. These hypotheses were tested in experiments with 12 Australian children with HFA, aged 5;4 to 12;7, and 12 typically-developing controls, matched on non-verbal IQ. There was no significant difference in the pattern of responses by children with HFA and the control children on either (1) and (2) or the Principle A sentences. The findings provide preliminary support for the proposal that knowledge of c-command and Principle A is intact in HFA children.</p>