句型問答教學對國小高功能自閉症兒童問句理解之影響

The Effect of Sentence Pattern Instruction on Question Comprehension for Two High-Functioning Autism

10.6172/BSE200509.2901008

王嘉葦(Chia-Wei Wang)；王瓊珠(Chiung-Chu Wang)

句型問答教學 ； 高功能自閉症兒童 ； 問句理解 ； sentence pattern instruction ； autism ； question comprehension

特殊教育研究學刊

29期（2005 / 09 / 01）

151 - 174

繁體中文

本研究目的在探討句型問答教學對兩位國小低年級高功能自閉症兒童理解三個問句之影響。為了瞭解句型問答教學是否能增進自閉症兒童語句詞序理解能力，有效區辨三個詞序、語意不同的問句，因此，本研究透過相同圖片情境，採用跨不同問句多探試單一受試實驗設計，先後進行三個有關圖中主事者行為、主事者、受事者等不同語意問句的教學，即「S（主詞）在做什麼？」，「誰在V（動詞）？」，「誰被V（動詞）？」，以瞭解學生接受十五週的句型問答教學後，能否有效區辨三個不同詞序、不同語意的問句。研究結果顯示：一、第一階段的句型問答教學能增進兩位自閉症兒童回應「S在做什麼？」問句的能力，但似乎未能增進其詞序理解能力，所以當新句型介入教學時，其回應「S在做什麼？」的能力明顯下降，須經第二階段的句型問答補救教學後，方有良好的短期保留與類化效果。二、第一階段的句型問答教學對受試甲回應「誰在V？」問句句型具有初期立即效果，但對受試乙來說，句型二學習初期明顯受到句型－教學的影響，常將句型二誤解為句型一，所以立即效果較不顯著。另外，第一階段的句型問答教學似乎未能促進兩位受試者的詞序理解能力，所以當新句型介入教學時，其回應「誰在V？」的能力明顯下降，須經第二階段的句型問答補救教學後，方有良好的短期保留與類化效果。三、第一階段的句型問答教學對自閉症兒童理解「誰被V？」問句的初期介入立即效果並不顯著，兩位受試者皆於句型三學習初期明顯受到句型二教學的影響，所以立即效果較不顯著。不過，由於兩位受試者學習該句型後，沒有新句型的介入，所以句型三較前兩個句型具有良好的維持效果、短期保留與類化效果。

The purpose of this study was to examine the effect of sentence pattern instruction on question comprehension for two boys with autism. A single subject design with multiple baselines across three different sentence patterns was employed in this study. Three sentence patterns were ”What is S doing?” ”Who is V-ing ?” and ”Whom is V-ed ?” Results indicated that the boys' correct responses to the sentence pattern ”What is S doing?” significantly increased after intervention, but their correct responses decreased under the anticipated level during the second-stage of intervention. Their question comprehension scores bounced back to the anticipated level after brief remedial instruction, and kept well during the follow-up phase. The boys' question comprehension for the sentence pattern ”Who is V-ing?” was different after instruction. The second-grader's correct responses of this sentence pattern significantly increased after intervention, but the first-grader improved gradually. Their correct responses decreased under the anticipated level during the second-stage of intervention. However, their question comprehension scores bounced back to the anticipated level after brief remedial instruction, and kept well during the follow-up phase. Finally, the boys' correct responses to the sentence pattern ”Whom is V-ed?” didn't significantly increase after intervention, rather improved gradually. In addition, they kept high correct response rates during the second-stage of intervention and follow-up phase.

1. Baron-Cohen, S.(1988).Social and pragmatic deficits in autism : Cognitive or affective?.Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorder,18,379-397.
2. Bever, T. G.(1970).The cognitive basis for linguistic structure.Cognition and the development of language
3. Charlop-Christy, M. H.,Kelso, S. E.(2003).Teaching children with autism conversational speech using a cue card/written script program.Education and Treatment of Children,26(1),108-127.
4. Jahr, E.(2001).Teaching children with autism to answer novel wh-questions by utilizing a multiple exemplar strategy.Research in Developmental Disabilities,22,407-423.
5. Koegel, L. K.(1995).Teaching children with autism: Strategies for initiating positive interventions and improving learning opportunities.Baltimore, MD:Paul H. Brookes.
6. McMorrow, M. J.,Foxx, R. M.(1986).ome direct and generalized effects of replacing and autistic man's echolalia with correct response to question.Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis,19(3),287-297.
7. Miao, X. C.(1981).Word order and semantic strategies in Chinese sentence comprehension.International Journal of Psycholinguistics Research,8,109-122.
8. Paul, R.,Fischer, M. L.,Cohen, D., J.(1988).Sentence comprehension strategies in children with autism and specific language disorders.Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders,75(4),669-679.
9. Secan, K. E.,Egel, A. L.,Tilley, C. S.(1989).Acquisition, generalization, and maintenance of question-answering skills in autistic children.Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis,22(2),181-196.
10. Slobin, D. I.(1966).Grammatical transformations and sentence comprehension in childhood and adulthood.Journal of Verbal and Verbal Behavior,5,219-227.
11. Tager-Flusberg, H(1992).Autistic children's talk about psychological states: Deficits in the early acquisition of a theory of mind.Child Development,63,161-172.
12. Tager-Flusberg, H(1981).Sentence comprehension in autistic children.Applied Psycholiguistics,21(5),22.
13. ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED177788
14. Tager-Flusberg, H.(1981).On the nature of linguistic functioning in early infantile autism.Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorder,11,45-56.
15. Tsai, L. Y.(1992).High-functioning individual with autism.New York:Plenum.
16. Turner, E. A.,Rommentveit, R.(1967).Experimental manipulation of the production of active and passive voice in children.Language and Speech,10,169-180.
17. Williams, G.,Donley, C. R.,Keller, J, M.(2000).Teaching children with autism to ask questions about hidden objects.Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis,33,627-630.
18. 吳武典、蔡崇建、胡心慈、王振德、林幸台、郭靜姿(1996)。托尼非語文智力測驗。台北:心理。
19. 吳競存、梁伯樞(1999)。現代漢語句法結構與分析。台北:五南。
20. 宋維村(1992)。自閉症兒童指導手冊。台北:國立台灣師範大學特殊教育研究所。
21. 宋維村(1987)。自閉症兒童的診治與輔導。台北巿立師專特教中心。
22. 林初穗(1999)。幼兒教育研究發展學術研究會研習手冊。台東:台東師院。
23. 張欣戊(1991)。行政院國家科學委員會專題研究計畫成果報告(NSC 79-0301-H002-067)。
24. 張欣戊(1993)。中國語文心理學研究第一年度結案報告。嘉義:國立中正大學認知科學研究中心。
25. 張欣戊(1989)。國語的語序與語意。青少年兒童福利學報，1，47-57。
26. 曹純瓊(1999)。靜宜大學英國語文學研究碩士論文。
27. 曹純瓊(2000)。國立台灣師範大學特殊教育研究所博士論文。
28. 梁秋月(1990)。台灣師範大學特殊教育研究碩士論文。
29. 陳玲玲(1984)。中國文化大學兒童福利研究所碩士論文。
30. 陸莉、劉鴻香(1994)。畢保德圖畫詞彙測驗-修訂版。台北:心理。
31. 楊素花(2003)。輔仁大學心理學研究所碩士論文。
32. 鄭玲宜(1985)。國立台灣大學心理學研究所碩士論文。
33. 鄭麗玉(1995)。華語語意和語法的發展。9，1-14。

1. 姜忠信(2008)。台灣的自閉症研究：過去、現在與未來。應用心理研究，40，165-196。