**5. Anna — A child with early identified language problems**

Anna was referred to a speech and language therapist after screening at the Child Health Care center at the age of four. Her parents had elicited concern and asked for a referral to a speech and language specialist. Her preschool teachers had pointed out that Anna had difficulties when asked to tell about things that had happened at home, but also when referring to activities at preschool, telling and retelling stories. She almost never asked questions and actually did not manage to participate actively in simple everyday conversations. The CHC nurse had been a little sceptic about her having a developmental problem since Anna had for a long time demonstrated fully intelligible expressive language skills with almost perfect pronunciation. However, the nurse pointed out that she had experienced some difficulties in chatting with Anna, whose answers and comments were found to be quite odd and irrelevant. This was not something Anna herself seemed to worry about; she continued to speak even if others were not following and responding properly.

At preschool it was pointed out that it was difficult to understand what Anna wanted although her pronunciation was pretty clear. It was also difficult to calm her when she was upset. Communication with Anna was tricky and there was a feeling of frustration from both parts. Misunderstandings and conflicts were commonly occurring during play. However, the nurse at the CHC-center did not seem to find the situation problematic, she underlined that Anna since early age had a fully intelligible spoken language. Eventually the nurse also noticed that it was a little difficult to get answers from Anna to simple questions and that she sometimes gave a bit odd answers to trivial, simple questions.

When Anna was about to start preschool classes, make new friends and have a new preschool teacher, her mother was worried. She pictured Anna ending up to be excluded from the peer group, short of play mates and a lonely girl. She was also afraid that new playmates would make fun of her, tease and cheat her.

The pre-school year proved to be a challenge for Anna herself. Almost every day there were misunderstandings and conflicts. Anna was not aware of her own role in the communication problems, as is usually the case with pragmatic problems. In addition, neither preschool teachers nor parents or peers could point out or articulate what the problem was. There were often conflicts, chaos and confusion. However, it became a little easier as the months went by and everyone got to know each other. This was particularly true in structured and teacher-led activities and thematic work where the topic was well defined and known.

The first years of elementary school went quite well. The teacher got to know Anna and more or less intuitively she adapted the teaching to Anna's needs. For example, she repeated instructions, she explained with other and easier words and simplified grammar and asked for feed-back to make certain that Anna had understood. A special needs teacher gave Anna individual teaching and introduced her in a social communication-training group. In this group the communication itself was highlighted in a metacognitive way. This means that the participants of the group explicitly talked about what was said, how different conversational participants interpreted it and what the speaker intended to say. Altogether this was very helpful for Anna, who became more aware of what was going on in conversations. She also got some help in narrative skill by visualization of story grammar, which scaffolds the construction of meaning and chronology in a story. Sometimes, Anna's associations went too far away for the listener to be able to follow, i.e. topic drifts and abrupt topic shifts. Although Anna had learnt to use some communicative strategies, e.g. repetitions and reformulations, there was often a risk of misunderstanding. The time outside the classroom was much more of a challenge. All peer conversations were rapid and there were no adults participating and scaffolding.

The following years at school turned out to be an even bigger challenge for Anna-as well as for her teachers and parents who suffered seeing Anna withdrawing from active participations in social communication, predominantly at school but also after school at home. Anna became introvert and dropped her assertiveness and spontaneity and spent less time with peers. She completely avoided situations with demands on social communication, but since she had no expressive language difficulties it was not obvious for anybody that she had hidden language vulnerability with at least former language comprehension problems. Instead the teachers perceived her behavior as a teenage problem and as a sign of lack of motivation for school.

What can we learn from this story? First, developmental language problems do not necessarily involve expressive language problems. Therefore they might be more subtle and difficult for the environment to discover although they have a bad prognosis and are challenging for the child to cope with. Such problems have been referred to as pragmatic language impairment [5], but has been renamed as social communication disorder in the updated diagnostic manual DSM-5 (http://www.psychiatry.org/dsm5). The diagnosis of social communication disorder is hereby more precisely defined and seen as a distinct language problem rather than a variant of autism spectrum disorder [28].

When Anna was about to start preschool classes, make new friends and have a new preschool teacher, her mother was worried. She pictured Anna ending up to be excluded from the peer group, short of play mates and a lonely girl. She was also afraid that new playmates would

The pre-school year proved to be a challenge for Anna herself. Almost every day there were misunderstandings and conflicts. Anna was not aware of her own role in the communication problems, as is usually the case with pragmatic problems. In addition, neither preschool teachers nor parents or peers could point out or articulate what the problem was. There were often conflicts, chaos and confusion. However, it became a little easier as the months went by and everyone got to know each other. This was particularly true in structured and teacher-led

The first years of elementary school went quite well. The teacher got to know Anna and more or less intuitively she adapted the teaching to Anna's needs. For example, she repeated instructions, she explained with other and easier words and simplified grammar and asked for feed-back to make certain that Anna had understood. A special needs teacher gave Anna individual teaching and introduced her in a social communication-training group. In this group the communication itself was highlighted in a metacognitive way. This means that the participants of the group explicitly talked about what was said, how different conversational participants interpreted it and what the speaker intended to say. Altogether this was very helpful for Anna, who became more aware of what was going on in conversations. She also got some help in narrative skill by visualization of story grammar, which scaffolds the construction of meaning and chronology in a story. Sometimes, Anna's associations went too far away for the listener to be able to follow, i.e. topic drifts and abrupt topic shifts. Although Anna had learnt to use some communicative strategies, e.g. repetitions and reformulations, there was often a risk of misunderstanding. The time outside the classroom was much more of a challenge. All peer conversations were rapid and there were no adults participating and

The following years at school turned out to be an even bigger challenge for Anna-as well as for her teachers and parents who suffered seeing Anna withdrawing from active participations in social communication, predominantly at school but also after school at home. Anna became introvert and dropped her assertiveness and spontaneity and spent less time with peers. She completely avoided situations with demands on social communication, but since she had no expressive language difficulties it was not obvious for anybody that she had hidden language vulnerability with at least former language comprehension problems. Instead the teachers perceived her behavior as a teenage problem and as a sign of lack of motivation for school.

What can we learn from this story? First, developmental language problems do not necessarily involve expressive language problems. Therefore they might be more subtle and difficult for the environment to discover although they have a bad prognosis and are challenging for the child to cope with. Such problems have been referred to as pragmatic language impairment [5], but has been renamed as social communication disorder in the updated diagnostic manual DSM-5 (http://www.psychiatry.org/dsm5). The diagnosis of social communication disorder is

activities and thematic work where the topic was well defined and known.

make fun of her, tease and cheat her.

86 Autism Spectrum Disorder - Recent Advances

scaffolding.

In a study by [19] the symptoms of earlier diagnosed language impairment commonly persist at age 11 years, although they are no longer specific language problems, but problems of general learning skill and/or social communication. With increasing age the demands on language skills both in academic literacy and in social communication are accentuated. As a teenager and young adult one is expected to make new acquaintances, to listen, understand and respond to what people say, both in more spontaneous conversations and while reading and writing academic texts. The more one is engaged into broader perspectives and new subjects, the more ones world is widened and the more concepts and language one needs to develop. The single most important factor for school success is a wide and well organized vocabulary [37], a skill that is continously being challenged and stimulated in all contexts during a persons whole life. [33] underline the importance of teaching children wordlearning principles explicitly, stressing associations and morphologic as well as semantic relationships between known and new words with focus on meningfulness and usability. The better a person's vocabulary is organized and structured, the more fast and easy it is to retrieve words when narrating stories. This is an important argument for the need of interdisciplinary collaboration in a long time perspective [11].

One question is if Anna's language problems could have been compensated for at an early age and thereby prevented or proactively been scaffolded? A predictive symptom was her early reluctance to tell and retell stories. Narrative skill has been found to predict the later language development [8]. Story telling is an important activity that is continuously performed and thereby stimulated and challenged in preschool activities, which makes is possible to scaffold narrative skill from early childhood.

Another symptom regards language comprehension focusing the ability to engage in social communication, i.e. pragmatic skill. Can such problems be identified and compensated for at an early age? There is not one straightforward answer on this question. At an early age there is a huge tolerance for breaking social rules and expectations. Explicit comments on social behavior e.g. politeness or the absence of it, are commonly given by parents and other adults. Anna's language problems affecting the functional aspects of language rather than the structural ones, made social interactions based on verbal conversation difficult. This in turn affected her status as a playmate during childhood and she often preferred playing with adults [21]. As she grew older Anna became less and less assertive and she had few close friends of her age [5, 7]. As a child becomes older both these parameters are changed: the tolerance for differences decreases – at least in similar age groups – and explicit comments on behavior are not expected. On the other hand being practiced in a variety of contexts and social meetings pragmatic skill is developed in an emergent way [30]. One way of stimulating pragmatics is therefore to involve and engage the child during social communication with different people, possibly representing different roles in play. Such imaginative play stimulates the ability to take different perspectives from different points of view, which means a kind of decontextu‐ alisation and mindreading, often referred to as theory of mind [25].
