Early language experience and underspecified phonological representations

2017 ◽  
Vol 38 (6) ◽  
pp. 1325-1329
Author(s):  
Cynthia R. Hunter ◽  
David B. Pisoni
Keyword(s):  
Language Development ◽  
Clinical Importance ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Phonological Development ◽  
Language Experience ◽  
Early Language ◽  
Phonological Representations ◽  
Language Input ◽  
First Year Of Life

Taking as a premise that phonological working memory (PWM) influences later language development, in their keynote article, Pierce, Genesee, Delcenserie, and Morgan aim to specify the relations between early language input and the development of PWM in terms of separable influences of timing, quantity, and quality of early language input. We concur that prior work has established that PWM and language development have reciprocal influences on one another during development (e.g., Baddeley, Gathercole, & Papagno, 1998; Gathercole, 2006; Gathercole, Hitch, Service, & Martin, 1997; Metsala & Chisolm, 2010). The goal of the keynote article was to describe how early language experience may influence the development of PWM. Pierce et al. argue that this can be done by comparing the development of PWM across groups of children with differing language experiences during early childhood, specifically (a) delayed exposure to language, (b) impoverished language input, or (c) enriched language input. The authors suggest that this comparison may contribute to establishing that individual differences in PWM are due, in part, to early language experience. Sensitive periods for phonological development that are open roughly in the first year of life are discussed, and it is suggested that the quantity and quality of early language input shapes the quality of phonological representations. Efforts to specify mechanisms by which early language input may influence the development of PWM have both theoretical and, potentially, clinical importance. Considering this, Pierce et al.’s article, which aims to create a platform for future research in terms of the timing, quantity, and quality of early language input, is a valuable contribution.

scholarly journals Lexicon–phonology relationships and dynamics of early language development – a commentary on Stoel-Gammon's ‘Relationships between lexical and phonological development in young children’

2010 ◽  
Vol 38 (1) ◽  
pp. 35-40 ◽  
Author(s):  
JAN EDWARDS ◽  
BENJAMIN MUNSON ◽  
MARY E. BECKMAN
Keyword(s):  
Young Children ◽  
Language Development ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Phonological Development ◽  
Early Language ◽  
Phonological Representations ◽  
Comprehensive Account ◽  
Early Language Development ◽  
Child Centered ◽  
The Relationship

We applaud Stoel-Gammon's (this issue) call for a more comprehensive account of the relationship between lexicon and phonology, and we strongly endorse her suggestions for future research. However, we think that it will not be enough simply to integrate findings and methods from the adult-centered and child-centered literatures. Both of these literatures suggest that we need to rethink standard assumptions about what phonological representations are and how they emerge to support the very large vocabularies that speakers develop over the course of a lifetime. Our commentary focuses on three themes relevant to this reconceptualization.

scholarly journals Bilingual language development in infancy: What can we do to support bilingual families?

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laia Fibla ◽  
Jessica Elizabeth Kosie ◽  
Ruth Kircher ◽  
Casey Lew-Williams ◽  
Krista Byers-Heinlein
Keyword(s):  
Language Learning ◽  
Direct Consequence ◽  
Community Context ◽  
Infants And Children ◽  
Language Experience ◽  
Early Language ◽  
Bilingual Language Development ◽  
Bilingual Development ◽  
Frequent Exposure

Many infants and children around the world grow up exposed to two or more languages. Their success in learning each of their languages is a direct consequence of the quantity and quality of their everyday language experience, including at home, in daycare and preschools, and in the broader community context. Here, we discuss how research on early language learning can inform policies that promote successful bilingual development across the varied contexts in which infants and children live and learn. Throughout our discussions, we highlight that each individual child’s experience is unique. In fact, it seems that there are as many ways to grow up bilingual as there are bilingual children. To promote successful bilingual development, we need policies that acknowledge this variability and support frequent exposure to high-quality experience in each of a child’s languages.

Analysis of Amount and Style of Oral Interaction Related to Language Outcomes in Children With Hearing Loss: A Systematic Review (2006–2016)

2019 ◽  
Vol 62 (9) ◽  
pp. 3470-3492 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nuzhat Sultana ◽  
Lena L. N. Wong ◽  
Suzanne C. Purdy
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Oral Language ◽  
Full Text ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Language Outcomes ◽  
Input Language ◽  
Study Results ◽  
Language Input

Purpose This systematic review summarizes the evidence for differences in the amount of language input between children with and without hearing loss (HL). Of interest to this review is evaluating the associations between language input and language outcomes (receptive and expressive) in children with HL in order to enhance insight regarding what oral language input is associated with good communication outcomes. Method A systematic review was conducted using keywords in 3 electronic databases: Scopus, PubMed, and Google Scholar. Keywords were related to language input, language outcomes, and HL. Titles and abstracts were screened independently, and full-text manuscripts meeting inclusion criteria were extracted. An appraisal checklist was used to evaluate the methodological quality of studies as poor, good, or excellent. Results After removing duplicates, 1,545 study results were extracted, with 27 eligible for full-text review. After the appraisal, 8 studies were included in this systematic review. Differences in the amount of language input between children with and without HL were noted. Conversational exchanges, open-ended questions, expansions, recast, and parallel talk were positively associated with stronger receptive and expressive language scores. The quality of evidence was not assessed as excellent for any of the included studies. Conclusions This systematic review reveals low-level evidence from 8 studies that specific language inputs (amount and style) are optimal for oral language outcomes in children with HL. Limitations were identified as sample selection bias, lack of information on control of confounders and assessment protocols, and limited duration of observation/recordings. Future research should address these limitations.

scholarly journals Toward a model of multiple paths to language learning: Response to commentaries

2017 ◽  
Vol 38 (6) ◽  
pp. 1351-1362
Author(s):  
LARA J. PIERCE ◽  
FRED GENESEE ◽  
AUDREY DELCENSERIE ◽  
GARY MORGAN
Keyword(s):  
Language Development ◽  
Language Learning ◽  
Language Learners ◽  
Developmental Process ◽  
Sensitive Period ◽  
Language Outcomes ◽  
Early Language ◽  
Phonological Representations ◽  
Multiple Paths ◽  
Early Effects

Language learning, while seemingly effortless for young learners, is a complex process involving many interacting pieces, both within the child and in their language-learning environments, which can result in unique language learning trajectories and outcomes. How does the brain adjust to or accommodate the myriad variations that occur during this developmental process. How does it adapt and change over time? In our review, we proposed that the timing, quantity, and quality of children's early language experiences, particularly during an early sensitive period for the acquisition of phonology, shape the establishment of neural phonological representations that are used to establish and support phonological working memory (PWM). The efficiency of the PWM system in turn, we argued, influences the acquisition and processing of more complex aspects of language. In brief, we proposed that experience modulates later language outcomes through its early effects on PWM. We supported this claim by reviewing research from several unique groups of language learners who experience delayed exposure to language (children with cochlear implants [CI] or internationally adopted [IA] children, and children with either impoverished [signing deaf children with hearing parents)] or enriched [bilingual] early language experiences). By comparing PWM and language outcomes in these groups, we sought to highlight general patterns in language development that emerge based on variation in early language exposure. Moving forward, we also proposed that the language acquisition patterns in these groups, and others, can be used to understand how variability in early language input might affect the neural systems supporting language development and how this might affect language learning itself.

Impact of mother–infant interaction on development during the first year of life: A systematic review

2019 ◽  
Vol 24 (3) ◽  
pp. 365-385 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nelci Adriana Cicuto Ferreira Rocha ◽  
Fernanda Pereira dos Santos Silva ◽  
Mariana Martins dos Santos ◽  
Stacey C Dusing
Keyword(s):  
Motor Development ◽  
Social Cognitive ◽  
Future Research ◽  
First Year ◽  
Exclusion Criteria ◽  
History Of ◽  
First Year Of Life ◽  
The Impact ◽  
The Relationship

The objectives of this project were to systematically review the impact of mother–infant interaction on the development of infants 12 months or younger and determine factors that mediate this relationship and early development. We systematically reviewed the literature and identified 21 papers which fulfilled inclusion and exclusion criteria. The majority of the studies found significant association between mother–infant interaction and language, cognition, motor, and social development during the first year of life. Only seven studies assessed motor development and four studies found significant relationship between motor development and mother–infant interaction. Prematurity, infant age, multiples births, maternal anxiety, maternal opioid exposure, history of foster care, and criminal record were the only factors found to mediate the relationship between mother–infant interaction and social, cognitive, and language development. The quality of the interactions between a mother and infant can both positively and negatively influence cognitive, language, and social outcomes during the first year of life. Additional research is needed to determine the influence of mother–infant interaction on motor development. Future research is needed on the efficacy of interventions designed to alter mother–infant interaction with the ultimate goal of achieving positive developmental outcomes during the first year of life.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document