On Day 5 of the Critical Neurodiversity Studies takeover, Eleonora Marocchini challenges the dominance of autism in cross-neurotype communication research and discourse, proposing a new critical view of clinical pragmatics: neurodivergent pragmatics.
Research and discourse on communication in communities conceptualized as clinical populations revolves around the ideas of deficits and impairments. In fact, while linguistic research on communication between neurotypical people focuses on co-construction of meaning and conversations (as well as textual and sociodemographic aspects), neurodivergent people are confined into the normative frameworks of clinical pragmatics (Marocchini 2023).
The first wave of neurodiversity studies challenged these pathologizing views and proposed an alternative view of cross-neurotype communication, drawing on Milton’s (2012) double empathy problem, which would reframe autistic impairments in pragmatics as mutual misunderstanding between autistic and non-autistic people (Williams et al. 2021). This led to the creation of new, neutral or even positive, descriptions of neurodivergent communication. However, critical neurodiversity scholars (and people interested in cross-neurotype communication) should probably ask themselves: does neurodivergent communication actually exist?
Neurodivergent communication is often described as entailing literal interpretation, direct communication, and monologuing. As such, “neurodivergent communication” seems to be construed as an ad hoc concept, or a euphemism, for “autistic communication”. In an attempt to decenter dominant perspectives (Bertilsdotter Rosqvist et al. 2020) against epistemic injustice, neurodivergent research and discourse on communication ended up creating a new center within the margins.
In order to actually talk about “neurodivergent communication”, Critical Neurodiversity Studies need to work towards decentering autism in cross-neurotype communication discourse. Doing so, it becomes possible to critically analyze, through a neurodivergent lens, many more communicative features observed in clinical pragmatics, not just in autism or other neurodivergences emerging during development, but also in acquired neurodivergence, including DLD, ADHD, intellectual disability, schizophrenia, traumatic brain injury, and neurodegenerative conditions (as can be seen in Cummings 2009, or any other clinical pragmatics foundational textbook).
Through this kind of analysis, it would then be possible to observe that neurodivergent communication involves both speaking directly and tangentially, monotropic attention, repetition, divergent associative patterns and thoughts, both monologues and sudden shifts in conversation, various approaches to humour, plurality in terms of voices heard or identities within the speaker, both very short and very long conversational turns, nonverbal responses, and both very direct and overly polite responses.
Moreover, neurodivergent people can exhibit neurotypical-like communicative and interpretive strategies, often considered as “compensatory strategies” from a clinical perspective. It could therefore seem to be impossible to find any common traits that we could think of as generic “neurodivergent communication”, broadly defined. Moreover, in an attempt to “centralize marginality” (hooks 1984), it would probably feel intriguing or even necessary to disregard said “compensatory strategies” as effects of neurotypical domination and neurodivergent people’s camouflaging, to list truly unmasked neurodivergent communication aspects, only. However, one could argue that a critical reading of neurodivergent communication practices could and should entail accounting for ambiguous mixtures of natural and imposed features of communication, that neurodivergent people (and not just autistic people) perform, but the neurotypical gaze would not recognize as “neurotypical”.
Another aspect that could be found to be shared by neurodivergent people who identify as neurodivergent is awareness of the relative improbability of talking to somebody whose communicative functioning is precisely the same. There is some qualitative and anecdotal evidence that neurodivergent people who do not share the same neurotype still feel like communication is easier between them than with neurotypical people (Marocchini & Baldin 2024). As one participant puts it: “with other people, especially ADHD people, it happens that we talk a lot without interruptions, jumping a little bit from one topic to another, it feels like parkour sometimes, but it is beautiful… a positive thing for me” (P04, 25yo Italian autistic woman, Marocchini & Baldin 2024). This would also be in line with a view of cross-neurotype communication that is closer to cross-cultural communication than is apparent from a clinical perspective. For instance, Hillary (2020) observes that recognizing cultural differences in communication leads to proactive attitudes toward misunderstandings, though ‘autism doesn’t get a culture’. However, several definitions of culture include linguistic, social, linguistic, and political aspects that autistic communities and neurodivergent communities can share – or, at least, make explicit; as a consequence, neurodivergent people who do not share the same neurotype could still communicate within a conversational space where (neuro)cultural differences are more expected (Marocchini, 2025).
Overall, results from this analysis suggest that neurodivergent pragmatics, if it was a thing, would be a much richer and broader field of investigation than what the recurring examples and definitions of “neurodivergent communication” entails, encompassing new framings of many more divergent communicative strategies than just autistic ones. Moreover, a critical view of neurodivergent “compensatory strategies” makes it possible to frame them as chameleonic survival abilities to celebrate, rather than bad mimicking of neurotypical abilities.
Future investigation and reflection should focus on the possibility that shared knowledge and acceptance of neurodiversity, or maybe even shared rejection of the expected norm in communication, can help leave assumptions behind and limit miscomprehension. This could be one of the main features of a truly neurodivergent pragmatics.
About the Author
Eleonora (Elle) Marocchini is a neurodivergent psycholinguist and an independent researcher at the Institute for Globally Distributed Open Research and Education (IGDORE). Her work focuses on (double) empathy and pragmatics, challenging pathologizing approaches to neurodiversity. She is currently a Critical Neurodiversity Studies Fellow in the ND Hums Network in Durham. Her first book, “Neurodivergente. Capire e coltivare la diversità dei cervelli umani”, provides an introduction to neurodiversity for Italian readers, and has been listed among the 10 best science communication books in Life Sciences of 2024 by the Italian National Prize for Science Communication (Giancarlo Dosi). She can be found on Twitter/X @E_Marocchini, Bluesky @marocchini.bsky.social, and Instagram @narraction
About the Critical Neurodiversity Studies Conference
Critical Neurodiversity Studies: Directions/Intersections/Contradictions is a free fully-hybrid international conference running from 24-26 June 2025 at Durham University and online. It is believed to be the first formal research event in the field undertaken at this scale, responding to a gathering energy and engagement with neurodiversity across disciplines and methodologies. The conference takeover of The Polyphony runs from 23-30 June, with the full collection of articles available under the Critical Neurodiversity Studies Conference 2025 tag.
References
Bertilsdotter Rosqvist, Hanna, Nick Chown, and Anna Stenning. 2020. Neurodiversity Studies: A New Critical Paradigm. London: Routledge.
Cummings, Louise. 2009. Clinical Pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Hillary, Alyssa. 2020. Neurodiversity and cross-cultural communication. In H. Bertilsdotter Rosqvist, Hanna, Chown, Nick & Stenning, Anna (Eds.), Neurodiversity Studies: A New Critical Paradigm. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429322297-10
hooks, bell. 1984. Feminist Theory: From Margin to Center. Boston, MA: South End Press.
Marocchini, Eleonora. 2023. “Impairment or Difference? The Case of Theory of Mind Abilities and Pragmatic Competence in the Autism Spectrum.” Applied Psycholinguistics 44 (3): 365–383. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0142716423000024.
Marocchini, Eleonora, and Irene Baldin. 2024. “Cross‑Neurotype Communication from an Autistic Point of View: Insights on Autistic Theory of Mind from a Focus Group Study.” International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders 59 (6): 2465–2482. https://doi.org/10.1111/1460-6984.13095.
Marocchini, Eleonora. 2025. Reframing Social Communication through the Double Empathy Lens: Implications for Pragmatics in Autism. In Milton, Damian (Eds.). The Double Empathy Reader: Exploring Theory, Neurodivergent Lived Experience and Implications for Practice. Pavilion Publishing.
Milton, Damian. 2012. “On the Ontological Status of Autism: The Double Empathy Problem.” Disability & Society 27 (6): 883–887.
Williams, Gemma L., Tim Wharton, and Caroline Jagoe. 2021. “Mutual (Mis)understanding: Reframing Autistic Pragmatic ‘Impairments’ Using Relevance Theory.” Frontiers in Psychology 12: 616664. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.616664.
