Differentiating autism and Asperger syndrome on the basis of language delay or impairment.

Bennett et al. (2008) followed kids with autism into their teen years. They asked: does language skill at age 6 predict teen outcomes better than the old Asperger label?

They split the group by current language impairment, not by early history of speech delay. Then they tracked social, academic, and daily-living skills years later.

Teens who still had language impairment at age 6 showed weaker skills across the board. The label “Asperger” or “high-functioning autism” told us little.

Current language scores explained far more of the story than any past delay.

Durkin et al. (2012) extend this idea. They showed that teens with language impairment plus autistic traits fare worse than those with language problems alone. Together the papers say: watch language and autism features, not the old labels.

Boets et al. (2015) and Ruiz Callejo et al. (2023) look almost opposite at first glance. They found that early language delay links to weaker auditory skills in teens. Terry’s team says early history is weak; the 2015 and 2023 teams say it matters. The gap is simple: Terry measured broad teen outcomes, while the later labs tested tiny sound tasks. Early delay may shape ears, but day-to-day life is set by current language skill.

Sigman et al. (2005) came earlier and saw language gains slow or slip after preschool. Terry gives us the practical next step: check language again at age 6 to spot who needs the most help.

Stop trusting the “Asperger” tag to tell you how a child will do. Instead, run a full language test around age 6 and repeat it. Use the score to plan speech services, social-skills groups, and transition goals. The label on paper matters less than the words the kid can use today.