Perception of tones by bilingual infants learning non-tone languages

2016 ◽  
Vol 20 (3) ◽  
pp. 561-575 ◽  
Author(s):  
LIQUAN LIU ◽  
RENÉ KAGER
Keyword(s):  
Language Development ◽  
First Year ◽  
Simultaneous Exposure ◽  
Tone Language ◽  
Development Trajectory ◽  
Bilingual Language Development ◽  
Tonal Perception ◽  
Cognitive Perspectives ◽  
Shaped Pattern ◽  
Study Offer

This paper examines the ability of bilingual infants who were learning Dutch and another non-tone language to discriminate tonal contrasts. All infants from 5 to 18 months of age succeeded in discriminating a tonal contrast of Mandarin Chinese (Tone 1 versus Tone 4) and showed a U-shaped pattern when facing a less acoustically salient manipulated version (contracted) of the aforementioned contrast. Specifically, infants showed initial sensitivity to the contracted contrast during their early months, followed by a loss of sensitivity at the stage where tonal perceptual reorganization typically occurs, and a sensitivity rebound by the end of the first year after birth. Compared to a previous studying of ours testing monolingual Dutch infants (Liu & Kager, 2014), the discrimination patterns of bilingual infants revealed both similarities and differences. On one hand, as with monolinguals, non-tone-learning bilingual infants’ tonal perception presented plasticity influenced by contrast acoustic salience along the trajectory of perceptual reorganization; as well as a general U-shaped perceptual pattern when discriminating non-native tones. On the other hand, bilingual infants appeared to regain sensitivity to the contracted tonal contrast at an earlier age (11–12 months) in comparison with monolinguals infants (17–18 months). We provide several explanations, stemming from the simultaneous exposure to two languages, to account for the 6-month bilingual perceptual plasticity from linguistic and cognitive perspectives. The overall outcomes of the study offer insights into the infant perceptual reorganization and language development trajectory, expand on the differences between monolingual and bilingual language development, and broaden our understanding of the influence of bilingual exposure to the perception of non-native contrasts in infancy from linguistic and cognitive perspectives.

Interface or face to face? The profiles and contours of bilinguals and specific language impairment

2010 ◽  
Vol 31 (2) ◽  
pp. 282-293 ◽  
Author(s):  
Virginia C. Mueller Gathercole
Keyword(s):  
Language Development ◽  
Language Impairment ◽  
Specific Language Impairment ◽  
Growing Up ◽  
Specific Language ◽  
Face To Face ◽  
Development Trajectory ◽  
Bilingual Language Development ◽  
Development Of Language ◽  
Two Populations

What makes a child's language development trajectory have the patterns that it has, and what causes differences across children in those patterns? These fundamental questions have for over half a century been at the heart of research on language development in monolingual children, on the cross-linguistic development of language in children from distinct language communities, on bilingual language development, and on development in cases of language disorders in children. Paradis has taken the important step of carefully comparing the trajectories of two populations of children—children with specific language impairment (SLI) and children growing up bilingually—who both differ in interesting ways from normally developing monolingual children. Her Keynote Article highlights striking similarities and potential differences between these two groups. This Commentary focuses on three issues: what influences developmental profiles in language development, bilinguals' development of vocabulary and syntax, and assessment issues related to treating monolinguals as the “standard.”

Phonological working memory and language development: What are the measures and what do they measure?

2017 ◽  
Vol 38 (6) ◽  
pp. 1313-1321
Author(s):  
Cornelia Hamann
Keyword(s):  
Language Development ◽  
Language Impairment ◽  
Specific Language Impairment ◽  
Recent Trend ◽  
First Year ◽  
Language Outcomes ◽  
Specific Language ◽  
Bilingual Language Development ◽  
Different Populations ◽  
First Year Of Life

In line with the recent trend in comparative analysis of different populations (see Friedmann & Rusou, 2015, as an example), Pierce, Genesee, Delcenserie, and Morgan (2017) present a comprehensive review of different language outcomes in populations that have received qualitatively and quantitatively different input during the first year of life, from enriched stimuli in bilingual situations to no stimuli at all in the case of children with profound hearing impairment. The claims derived from these data deserve some comment, however, and need some caveats about the measures used, which I will provide in the following with a brief discussion of complementing research and the presentation of some new data derived from the Bilingual Language Development (BiLaD) Project, a recent French/German collaboration studying bilingual populations with and without specific language impairment (SLI).

Otitis Media and Language Development at 1 Year of Age

1988 ◽  
Vol 53 (3) ◽  
pp. 245-251 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ina F. Wallace ◽  
Judith S. Gravel ◽  
Cecelia M. McCarton ◽  
Robert J. Ruben
Keyword(s):  
Language Development ◽  
Otitis Media ◽  
Infant Development ◽  
Expressive Language ◽  
Positive Outcome ◽  
First Year ◽  
Positive Group ◽  
Communication Development ◽  
Medical Visits ◽  
Bayley Scales

The effect of otitis media on emerging language was examined in a group of 1-year-olds. Based on pneumatic otoscopy, 15 babies were considered to be free of otitis media in both ears at 80% or more of their first year medical visits (otitis free) and 12 infants had bilaterally positive otoscopy results at 30% or more of their visits (otitis positive). Outcome measures at 1 year included the Bayley Scales of Infant Development (Bayley, 1969) and the Sequenced Inventory of Communication Development (SICD; Hedrick, Prather, & Tobin, 1984) Receptive and Expressive scales. No significant differences were detected on either the Bayley or the SICD Receptive scale. However, the otitis positive group exhibited significantly lower expressive language scores than the otitis free group, suggesting that impairments in language expression may be evident as early as 1 year of age in children with otitis media.

Bi-directional communication journals as a method of caregiver support during speech and language intervention: A pilot study

2020 ◽  
Vol 36 (2) ◽  
pp. 127-139
Author(s):  
Christina Yeager Pelatti ◽  
Alison Martino ◽  
Kaitlyn P. Wilson
Keyword(s):  
Pilot Study ◽  
Language Development ◽  
Positive Impact ◽  
Mixed Methods Design ◽  
Speech And Language ◽  
Caregiver Support ◽  
Main Effect ◽  
Quantitative Results ◽  
Language Environment ◽  
Study Offer

The purpose of this study was to determine whether the inclusion of a bi-directional communication journal between caregivers and student clinicians during a five-week summer preschool programme impacted caregivers’ perceptions and had a positive impact on their children’s language development. This study included a mixed methods design. Child participants (mean age = 4 years, 4 months) were assigned to one of four classrooms; two classrooms served as control classrooms ( n = 12 children), and two participated in the journal intervention ( n = 15 children). Quantitative and qualitative data were collected through questionnaires reflecting caregivers’ perceptions of the speech and language environment and their children’s language development at the start and end of the programme. Quantitative results revealed a significant main effect of time regarding caregivers’ perceptions of their child’s language development. Thematic analysis of narrative questionnaire responses revealed three core themes including: improved communication between caregivers and student clinicians, insight about child’s routines, and application in the home environment. Overall, the results of this pilot study offer preliminary support for the use of bi-directional communication journals as a method of supporting preschoolers’ growth in speech and language skills through caregiver involvement.

scholarly journals Bringing together autism and bilingualism research: Language matters

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bérengère Galadriel Digard ◽  
Antonella Sorace
Keyword(s):  
Language Development ◽  
Bilingual Language Development ◽  
Linguistic Approaches

Please note this paper has been published ahead of print in Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism: Digard, B. G., & Sorace, A. (2021). Bringing together autism and bilingualism research: Language matters. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism. https://doi.org/10.1075/lab.21071.digPlease do not cite this preprint. - (Commentary to keynote by Philippe Prevost and Laurice Tuller, “Bilingual language development in autism”)

scholarly journals Parents should keep talking to boost infant language development

2018 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Socioeconomic Status ◽  
Language Development ◽  
Low Socioeconomic Status ◽  
Language Skills ◽  
First Year ◽  
Low Socioeconomic ◽  
Infant Language Development ◽  
Starting School ◽  
Infant Language ◽  
First Year Of Life

Children from low socioeconomic status (SES) backgrounds tend to have poorer language skills when starting school than those from higher SES backgrounds. Now, data shows that increasing the amount of “contingent talk”— whereby a caregiver talks about objects that an infant is directly focusing on — within an infant’s first year of life promotes a wide vocabulary later in infancy.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document