**2. Communication in autism: Some considerations**

Human primates' natural trend to understand others as intentional agents with goals and perceptions is the basis for the engagement in collaborative activities and joint attention [1]. Different from other primates, humans have developed a specific capacity to share attention and establish a unique type of social interaction. Hence, scenes of joint attention constitute social interactional processes in which: 1) agents are reciprocally responsible; 2) there is a shared goal, that is, each partner is aware of the goal to be achieved together; and, 3) partici‐ pants coordinate their plans of action and intentions mutually so that each participant can anticipate the roles in the interaction and potentially help others with their role if necessary2 [4].

Scenes of joint attention contribute with the *locus* for the negotiation needed for the construc‐ tion of intersubjective and perspectivated meanings [1]. This is what characterizes the process of communication as a relational and systemic phenomenon. Subjects are actively involved in interaction with a particular dynamics of implicit or explicit rules over which none of the

Such intersubjective and perspectivated construction of meanings reveals the uniqueness of human language as, upon the specific use of a particular linguistic symbol, it carries a local, historical and social meaning jointly constructed. This is also to say that in each interaction,

By extension, learning a language is a process situated relationally, historically and culturally. In each interactional process where two individuals engage, there is an intersubjective reconstruction of the perspectives of the others in the representation of their own intentions and beliefs, which requires interacting individuals to select, filter and reconfigure symbols, according to the context, intentions, beliefs and mental representations of co-participants in

Communication implies reorganization and coordination of social, cultural and mental representations of subjects in interaction. It is precisely by means of linguistic symbols, namely signs, that it is possible to build and share meanings. That dialectical dimension of the use/ understanding/acquisition of a sign is a feature of the linguistic symbol which always involves two dimensions, language and thought. As a consequence, the attainment of a linguistic symbol constitutes a real and complex act of thought, represented by the word. It is not simply

Language acquisition is realized through the use of the symbol in actions of mediation (triadic) by which participants negotiate and construct meaning in an intersubjective way, because "[...] the meaning of a word is given through the process of verbal and social interaction with adults. Children do not build their own concepts freely. They derive them through the process of understanding the speech of others " [5] (p. 121). It is precisely within those triadic scenes, called joint attention scenes [1], that the interlocutors share some Aspect of their context3

where intersubjectivity occurs [4]. It is also important to note that interlocutors may reach

2 Especially in interactions between subjects with different levels of experience or knowledge about the situation.

different levels intersubjectivity depending on the extent of their exchanges [5, 6].

3 The context refers to the way objects and events are represented and meant in a situation [6].

and

subjects have complete control.

658 Recent Advances in Autism Spectrum Disorders - Volume I

the communication process.

participants quickly update possible meanings.

acquired by memorization or association [2].

Autism belongs in the group of Pervasive Developmental Disorders (PDDs). Literature highlights a triad of elements [7] for the identification of the disorder: behavior, social interaction, and language and communication [8]. In the presence of autism, such elements portray qualitative features which prove to be peculiar or bear deficits. This session aims at discussing the characteristics related to communication and language in autism in more detail without deepening other inter-related aspects of the syndrome (such as interaction and behavior). Presenting a state of the art of on autism is not intended here, but rather, a brief review of some researches concerning language use and communication.

The field of language and communication in autism presents a great potential for researches. Although there have been many recent studies on autism, there is a gap in what concerns language and communication. So far, emphasis has been on aspects of social interaction, diagnostic and prevalence.

It is widely known that there are certain deficits in communication, such as, the absence of expressive body cues (in non-verbal communication), deficits in understanding colloquial exchanges, and speech that is not adjusted the context (in verbal communication). Several elements in the speech of a subject with autism account for it being regarded as strange, unproductive, monotonous and unusual, such as a) the difficulty in using pronouns properly, particularly, with pronoun inversions; b) the repetition of questions which have already been answered or of fixed sentences in a mediated echolalic process; c) the literal understanding of metaphors or idiomatic slangs; and, d) the difficulty in using predicative abbreviations4 [9].

In a study involving with neurotypical, mentally impaired and children with autism, the kind of gestures children use to communicate have been analyzed [10] and three main categories of gestures emerged: deictic (pointing); instrumental, to organize others' behavior; and, expressive, to share emotions. The study reveals that while typical and mentally impaired children use the three types of gestures, the group of children with autism only uses deictic

<sup>4</sup> Predicative abbreviations consist of replacind the subject of a sentence so that the predicative remains as a hidden subject. For example: "Laura always buys bread at the grocery at the corner. She takes a bag and some change her mother leaves on the fridge." The second statement has a predicative abbreviation. It contains the action and the subject is implicit (WERTSCH, 1988).

and instrumental gestures. Besides that, other studies have established that children with autism face difficulties when it comes to using time and space pragmatic markers [11, 12], expressing mental states [13, 14], using adequate expressions and gestures [15], organizing more complex and "if-so" statements [16].

functional communication by means of hierarchical organization, basic principles of behavior such as modeling, differential reinforcement, stimulus control, control transference of stimulus

Building an Alternative Communication System for Literacy of Children with Autism (SCALA) with Context-Centered

Design of Usage

661

http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/54547

PECS is one of several psychoeducational programs for people with autism available nowa‐ days [25]. It seeks to stimulate spontaneous communication through potential reinforcers, images and physical exchanges. The system is organized into six hierarchical phases inter‐ wined with a method of behavior analysis and teaching. Although PECS seems functionally efficient, our critique is targeted at the strong behavioral control imposed by the system and its disregard for prerequisite abilities for language use, such as joint attention, imitation or

Summing up, it is important to note that even children with autism who do not evidence language impairment might benefit from communication support systems at times, as a way to compensate for their lack of understanding of language semantics or pragmatics [26]. Is such cases, where speech is not present, the use of alternative communication systems can promote and develop processes to facilitate communication (facilitated communication). This way, the use of technology may contribute to the sociocognitive development of those subjects [27]; and, alternative communication systems may assist them in developing meaningful communica‐

**3. Alternative communication: Methodology and resource in an approach**

Alternative communication (AC) in one of the most important areas within the field known as Assistive Technology. It encompasses technical aids for communication, be it to comple‐ ment, supplement or provide alternatives to make the communicative process happen.

There are several systems of AC. These provide a vast repertoire of representative elements, such as photographs, drawings and pictograms. Support for those systems may require either low (concrete material) or high (computational systems) technological devices. The importance of AC lies in the communicative strategies and techniques to promote subjects' autonomy for

Given the impact language development on human development, subjects presenting deficits in communication can benefit from the use of AC systems as application of techniques and technology go beyond its instrumental character to enhance the development of abilities to use linguistic symbols intentionally. Considering that in the case of autism, communication deficits may exhibit alterations in language use, form or content in pragmatic level, and to a lesser extent, in syntactic, morphosyntactic, phonological or phonetic level, the importance of employing an AC system is more concerned with adequate reception and production proc‐

Although the use of AC dates from the 90s, researches are recent. One of the first works was the adaptation and standardization of the PECS [29, 30]. It is also worthy of note the research

communicative instances so; it is secondary whether support is mediatic or not.

esses, and those play an inter-related role [28].

through delayed strategies of questions [23].

visual contact as previously discussed.

tion [9, 17, 23].

**to autism**

As for stories and narratives, the greatest difficulty for children with autism seems to lie in the ability to follow a narrative with multiple characters and organize each character's specific traits and personality. It is also hard for them to follow a character's way of thinking and to put themselves into the character's position [9, 10, 17, 18].

Such deficits in symbolization affect communication because it requires an active use of symbols for representation, especially, when situations involve more abstract elements such as feelings and emotions. Narratives demand the narrator to organize information for a potential listener and to select relevant aspects from the listener's perspective. Researchers have tried to explain such deficits for understanding narratives through the Theory of Mind [11, 13, 14, 16, 19, 20]. In those researches, it is hypothesized that people with autism fail to read other people's state of minds and understand their intentions, beliefs and emotions.

From another perspective, problems in communication could be associated with joint attention [1] or mutual imitation [21]. A recent research, consistent with previous studies, has focused adults diagnosed with high functioning autism or Asperger's syndrome [22]. It has not found deviation in phonology and syntax or deficits in the subjects' ability to understand and extract the plot of narratives. There was significant difference in the use of referents, though. As a consequence, narratives have been less coherent and less organized. Just as in [9], the research has identified pronominal inconsistencies, preference for simple and unbound sentences, disregard for the relationship of a specific event with what happened previously, and limited use of time expressions.

In another research [22], however, subjects are able to apprehend the structure of the story and follow the main plot as they mention all the relevant events of the narrative. Such outcome confirms that adults diagnosed with high functioning autism or Asperger's syndrome do not present difficulties with morphosyntactic aspects but rather a limited perception of a charac‐ ter's intentions and inner states in the story, that is, in pragmatics of communication.

Other study, aiming at the identification of the symbolic understanding of images with three children aged 7 to 9 years old [23], has shown it is possible to use functional communication successfully. In that study, non-verbal children not employing any type of visual/symbolic communication previously have undergone a process of systematic visual literacy consisting of understanding family, people, actions and sequences. Each category has been composed by a set of 10 symbols (or photographs); and, after nine weeks the proposal of intervention has shown positive results as children begin using the images to communicate requests, define tasks and other communicative activities. Such research adds to other of the kind focusing functional communication in autism [24].

Functional communication has started in the 90s with the Picture Exchange Communication System (PECS). PECS is an Alternative Communication (AC) system with a behavioral methodology for children with social communication deficits. Its main goal is to teach functional communication by means of hierarchical organization, basic principles of behavior such as modeling, differential reinforcement, stimulus control, control transference of stimulus through delayed strategies of questions [23].

and instrumental gestures. Besides that, other studies have established that children with autism face difficulties when it comes to using time and space pragmatic markers [11, 12], expressing mental states [13, 14], using adequate expressions and gestures [15], organizing

As for stories and narratives, the greatest difficulty for children with autism seems to lie in the ability to follow a narrative with multiple characters and organize each character's specific traits and personality. It is also hard for them to follow a character's way of thinking and to

Such deficits in symbolization affect communication because it requires an active use of symbols for representation, especially, when situations involve more abstract elements such as feelings and emotions. Narratives demand the narrator to organize information for a potential listener and to select relevant aspects from the listener's perspective. Researchers have tried to explain such deficits for understanding narratives through the Theory of Mind [11, 13, 14, 16, 19, 20]. In those researches, it is hypothesized that people with autism fail to read other people's state of minds and understand their intentions, beliefs and emotions.

From another perspective, problems in communication could be associated with joint attention [1] or mutual imitation [21]. A recent research, consistent with previous studies, has focused adults diagnosed with high functioning autism or Asperger's syndrome [22]. It has not found deviation in phonology and syntax or deficits in the subjects' ability to understand and extract the plot of narratives. There was significant difference in the use of referents, though. As a consequence, narratives have been less coherent and less organized. Just as in [9], the research has identified pronominal inconsistencies, preference for simple and unbound sentences, disregard for the relationship of a specific event with what happened previously, and limited

In another research [22], however, subjects are able to apprehend the structure of the story and follow the main plot as they mention all the relevant events of the narrative. Such outcome confirms that adults diagnosed with high functioning autism or Asperger's syndrome do not present difficulties with morphosyntactic aspects but rather a limited perception of a charac‐

Other study, aiming at the identification of the symbolic understanding of images with three children aged 7 to 9 years old [23], has shown it is possible to use functional communication successfully. In that study, non-verbal children not employing any type of visual/symbolic communication previously have undergone a process of systematic visual literacy consisting of understanding family, people, actions and sequences. Each category has been composed by a set of 10 symbols (or photographs); and, after nine weeks the proposal of intervention has shown positive results as children begin using the images to communicate requests, define tasks and other communicative activities. Such research adds to other of the kind focusing

Functional communication has started in the 90s with the Picture Exchange Communication System (PECS). PECS is an Alternative Communication (AC) system with a behavioral methodology for children with social communication deficits. Its main goal is to teach

ter's intentions and inner states in the story, that is, in pragmatics of communication.

more complex and "if-so" statements [16].

660 Recent Advances in Autism Spectrum Disorders - Volume I

use of time expressions.

functional communication in autism [24].

put themselves into the character's position [9, 10, 17, 18].

PECS is one of several psychoeducational programs for people with autism available nowa‐ days [25]. It seeks to stimulate spontaneous communication through potential reinforcers, images and physical exchanges. The system is organized into six hierarchical phases inter‐ wined with a method of behavior analysis and teaching. Although PECS seems functionally efficient, our critique is targeted at the strong behavioral control imposed by the system and its disregard for prerequisite abilities for language use, such as joint attention, imitation or visual contact as previously discussed.

Summing up, it is important to note that even children with autism who do not evidence language impairment might benefit from communication support systems at times, as a way to compensate for their lack of understanding of language semantics or pragmatics [26]. Is such cases, where speech is not present, the use of alternative communication systems can promote and develop processes to facilitate communication (facilitated communication). This way, the use of technology may contribute to the sociocognitive development of those subjects [27]; and, alternative communication systems may assist them in developing meaningful communica‐ tion [9, 17, 23].
