Some perspectives on intervention strategies for persons with developmental disorders.

Yoder et al. (1981) wrote a position paper, not an experiment.

They argued that language lessons for people with developmental disorders should look like real conversations.

The paper says stop drilling single sounds or grammar rules and start teaching while two people talk back and forth.

The authors did not collect data, so there are no numbers.

Their main point: meaning and turn-taking matter more than perfect pronunciation or correct word order.

If the learner can get needs met and keep the chat going, the lesson worked.

Wilkie et al. (1981) published the same idea the same year. Both papers tell clinicians to swap syntax drills for pragmatic goals like asking, answering, and staying in the game.

Skinner (1981) widens the lens. That review says you must watch how cognition, sounds, words, grammar, and pragmatics mix. E et al. fit inside this bigger picture by picking one slice—pragmatics—to spotlight.

Polišenská et al. (2014) later gave data. Kids with Down syndrome followed typical grammar steps, just slower, while kids with language impairment broke the pattern. The finding backs E et al.: if profiles differ, teach use, not just form.

Next time you write a language goal, try this. Pick a routine the client cares about—snack, game, leaving the room. Write one goal for the client to start the routine and one to keep it going. Count turns, not perfect sentences. You will be doing what E et al. asked for forty years ago.