Relationships Between Nonword Repetition Accuracy and Other Measures of Linguistic Development in Children With Phonological Disorders

2005 ◽  
Vol 48 (1) ◽  
pp. 61-78 ◽  
Author(s):  
Benjamin Munson ◽  
Jan Edwards ◽  
Mary E. Beckman
Keyword(s):  
Low Frequency ◽  
Nonword Repetition ◽  
Frequency Effect ◽  
Phonological Development ◽  
Vocabulary Size ◽  
Phonotactic Probability ◽  
Phonological Disorders ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Production Problems ◽  
Repetition Task

A growing body of research has documented effects of phonotactic probability on young children's nonword repetition. This study extends this research in 2 ways. First, it compares nonword repetitions by 40 young children with phonological disorders with those by 40 same-age peers with typical phonological development on a nonword repetition task in which the frequency of embedded diphone sequences was varied. Second, it examines the relationship between the frequency effect in the nonword repetition task and other measures of linguistic ability in these children. Children in both groups repeated low-frequency sequences less accurately than high-frequency sequences. The children with phonological disorders were less accurate overall but showed no larger disadvantage for the low-frequency sequences than their age peers. Across the group, the size of the frequency effect was correlated with vocabulary size, but it was independent of measures of speech perception and articulatory ability. These results support the hypothesis that the production difficulty associated with low/frequency sequences is related primarily to vocabulary growth rather than to developments in articulatory or perceptual ability. By contrast, production problems experienced by children with phonological disorders do not appear to result from difficulties in making abstractions over known lexical items. Instead, they may be associated with difficulties in building representations in the primary sensory and motor domains.

Nonword repetition and levels of abstraction in phonological knowledge

2006 ◽  
Vol 27 (4) ◽  
pp. 577-581 ◽  
Author(s):  
Benjamin Munson
Keyword(s):  
High Frequency ◽  
Low Frequency ◽  
Nonword Repetition ◽  
Chronological Age ◽  
Frequency Effect ◽  
Vocabulary Size ◽  
Levels Of Abstraction ◽  
Opposite Pattern ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Restriction Of Range

Susan Gathercole's Keynote Article (2006) is an impressive summary of the literature on nonword repetition and its relationship to word learning and vocabulary size. When considering research by Mary Beckman, Jan Edwards, and myself, Gathercole speculates that our finding of a stronger relationship between vocabulary measures and repetition accuracy for low-frequency sequences than for high-frequency sequences is due to differences in the range of the two measures. In our work on diphone repetition (e.g., Edwards, Beckman, & Munson, 2004; Munson, Edwards, & Beckman, 2005) we tried to increase the range in our dependent measures by coding errors on a finer grained scale than simple correct/incorrect scoring would allow. Moreover, restriction of range does not appear to be the driving factor in the relationship between vocabulary size and the difference between high- and low-frequency sequence repetition accuracy (what we call the frequency effect) in at least one of our studies (Munson et al., 2005). When the children with the 50 lowest mean accuracy scores for high-frequency sequences were examined, vocabulary size accounted for 10.5% of the variance in the frequency effect beyond what was accounted for by chronological age. When the 50 children with the highest mean accuracy scores for high-frequency sequences were examined (a group in which the range of high-frequency accuracy scores was more compressed, arguably reflecting ceiling effects), an estimate of vocabulary size accounted for only 6.9% of the frequency effect beyond chronological age. The associated β coefficient was significant only at the α<0.08 level. This is the opposite pattern than Gathercole's argument would predict.

scholarly journals The Relationship Between Lexical and Phonological Development in French-Speaking Children: A Longitudinal Study

2020 ◽  
Vol 63 (6) ◽  
pp. 1807-1821
Author(s):  
Margaret M. Kehoe ◽  
Tamara Patrucco-Nanchen ◽  
Margaret Friend ◽  
Pascal Zesiger
Keyword(s):  
Word Length ◽  
Low Frequency ◽  
Neighborhood Density ◽  
Phonological Development ◽  
Expressive Vocabulary ◽  
Vocabulary Size ◽  
French Speaking ◽  
Age Range ◽  
The Relationship

Purpose This study examines the influence of lexical and phonological factors on expressive lexicon size in 40 French-speaking children tested longitudinally from 22 to 48 months. The factors include those based on the lexical and phonological properties of words in the children's lexicons (phonetic complexity, word length, neighborhood density [ND], and word frequency [WF]) as well as variables measuring phonological production (percent consonants correct and phonetic inventory size). Specifically, we investigate the relative influence of these factors at individual ages, namely, 22, 29, 36, and 48 months, and which factors measured at 22 and 29 months influence lexicon size at 36 and 48 months. Method Children were selected based on parent-reported vocabulary size. We included children with low, medium, and high vocabulary scores. The children's lexicons were coded in terms of phonetic complexity, word length, ND, and WF, and their phonological production skills were based on measures of percent consonants correct and phonetic inventory size extracted from spontaneous speech samples at 29, 36, and 48 months. In the case of ND and WF, we focused on one- and two-syllable nouns. Results Across the age range, the most important factor that explained variance in lexicon size was the WF of nouns. Children who selected low-frequency nouns had larger vocabularies across all ages (22–48 months). The WF of two-syllable nouns and phonological production measured at 29 months influenced lexicon size at 36 months, whereas the WF (of one- and two-syllable words) influenced lexicon size at 48 months. Conclusions The findings support the role of WF and phonological production in explaining expressive vocabulary development. Children enlarge their vocabularies by adding nouns of increasingly lower frequency. Phonological production plays a role in accounting for vocabulary size up until the age of 36 months. Supplemental Material https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.12291074

Structural Aspects of Phonological Development

1988 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
pp. 5-16 ◽  
Author(s):  
Karen E. Pollock ◽  
Richard G. Schwartz
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Management ◽  
Structural Complexity ◽  
Strong Preference ◽  
Phonological Development ◽  
Structural Position ◽  
Phonological Disorders ◽  
Syllabic Structure ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Structural Aspects ◽  
Target Words

The relationship between syllabic structure and segmental development was examined longitudinally in a child with a severe phonological disorder. Six speech samples were collected over a 4-year period (3:5 to 7:3). Analyses revealed gradual increases in the complexity and diversity of the syllable structures produced, and positional preferences for sounds within these forms. With a strong preference for [d] and [n] at the beginning of syllables, other consonants appeared first at the end of syllables. Implications for clinical management of phonological disorders include the need to consider both structural position and structural complexity in assessing segmental skills and in choosing target words for intervention.

scholarly journals A lexical advantage in four-year-old children's word repetition

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-24
Author(s):  
Margaret CYCHOSZ ◽  
Michelle ERSKINE ◽  
Benjamin MUNSON ◽  
Jan EDWARDS
Keyword(s):  
Language Development ◽  
Speech Production ◽  
Initial Position ◽  
Nonword Repetition ◽  
Real Word ◽  
Vocabulary Size ◽  
Word Repetition ◽  
Early Speech ◽  
Repetition Task

Abstract This study examined a potential lexicality advantage in young children's early speech production: do children produce sound sequences less accurately in nonwords than real words? Children aged 3;3-4;4 completed two tasks: a real word repetition task and a corresponding nonword repetition task. Each of the 23 real words had a paired consonant-vowel sequence in the nonword in word-initial position (e.g., ‘su’ in [ˈsutkes] ‘suitcase’ and [ˈsudrɑs]). The word-initial consonant-vowel sequences were kept constant between the paired words. Previous work on this topic compared different sequences of paired sounds, making it hard to determine if those results were due to a lexical or phonetic effect. Our results show that children reliably produced consonant-vowel sequences in real words more accurately than nonwords. The effect was most pronounced in children with smaller receptive vocabularies. Together, these results reinforce theories arguing for interactions between vocabulary size and phonology in language development.

scholarly journals The Effects of Frequency and Predictability on Repetition in Children With Developmental Language Disorder

2020 ◽  
Vol 63 (4) ◽  
pp. 1165-1180
Author(s):  
Justin B. Kueser ◽  
Laurence B. Leonard
Keyword(s):  
Language Production ◽  
Language Disorder ◽  
Low Frequency ◽  
Nonword Repetition ◽  
Developmental Language Disorder ◽  
Two Factors ◽  
High Predictability ◽  
Overall Performance ◽  
Mean Length Of Utterance ◽  
Repetition Task

Purpose Studies have shown that children with typical development (TD) respond to frequency and predictability when repeating nonidiomatic multiword sequences (e.g., go wash your hands ). We extended these findings by explicitly examining the interaction between frequency and predictability in a repetition task for children with developmental language disorder (DLD) and children with TD. Method We created 48 four-word phrases, manipulating two factors: the frequency of occurrence of the entire four-word phrase (e.g., look in the mirror vs. look in the basket ) and the predictability of the fourth word in the phrase given the preceding three words (e.g., corn on the ___ vs. look in the ___ ). These phrases were presented in a repetition task to 17 children with DLD ( M age = 58.89 months), 19 same-age children with TD ( M age = 59.79 months), and 17 younger children with TD matched to the DLD group on nonword repetition and mean length of utterance ( M age = 38.94 months). Children's repetitions were judged for the presence or absence of word and morphological errors. Only the first three words of the sequence were scored (e.g., look in the ). Results We found a main effect of sequence frequency, with high-frequency sequences being repeated more accurately than low-frequency sequences, modulated by a significant interaction with predictability, where the effect of sequence frequency was larger for sequences with high-predictability contexts than for sequences with low-predictability contexts. We also found a significant effect of group, with children with DLD demonstrating poorer overall performance, particularly when compared to the same-age group with TD. Conclusions Frequency and predictability are strong predictors of language production in children with TD. These factors also have effects for children with DLD, raising important clinical questions about the design of facilitative contexts for the teaching of difficult linguistic forms.

scholarly journals Nonword repetition depends on the frequency of sublexical representations at different grain sizes: evidence from a multi-factorial analysis

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jakub M. Szewczyk ◽  
Marta Marecka ◽  
Shula Chiat ◽  
Zofia Wodniecka
Keyword(s):  
Language Impairment ◽  
Phonological Processing ◽  
Specific Language Impairment ◽  
Nonword Repetition ◽  
Typically Developing ◽  
Phonotactic Probability ◽  
Grain Sizes ◽  
Comprehensive Examination ◽  
Phonological Complexity ◽  
Repetition Task

The nonword repetition task (NWR) has been widely used in basic cognitive and clinical research, as well as in clinical assessment, and has been proposed as a clinical marker for Specific Language Impairment (SLI). Yet the mechanisms underlying performance on this task are not clear. This study offers insights into these mechanisms through a comprehensive examination of item-related variables identified in previous research as possibly contributing to NWR scores and through testing the predictive power of each in relation to the others. A unique feature of the study is that all factors are considered simultaneously. Fifty-seven typically developing children were tested with a NWR task containing 150 nonwords differing in length, phonotactic probability, lexical neighbourhood, and phonological complexity. The results indicate that phonological processing of novel words draws on sublexical representations at all grain sizes and that these representations are phonological, unstructured and insensitive to morphemehood. We propose a novel index – mean ngram frequency of all phonemes – that best captures the extent to which a nonword draws on sublexical representations. The study demonstrates the primacy of sublexical representations in NWR performance with implications for the nature of the deficit in SLI.

scholarly journals The relationship between inhibitory control and speech production in young multilinguals

2020 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 59-79
Author(s):  
Iga Krzysik
Keyword(s):  
Speech Production ◽  
Inhibitory Control ◽  
Voice Onset Time ◽  
Flanker Task ◽  
Onset Time ◽  
Phonological Development ◽  
L2 Production ◽  
Global Accuracy ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Repetition Task

AbstractSpeech production in multilinguals involves constant inhibition of the languages currently not in use. In relation to phonological development, higher inhibitory skills may lead to the improved suppression of interference from the remaining languages in one’s repertoire and more accurate production of target features. The participants were 20 sequential multilingual learners (13-year-olds with L1 Polish, L2 English, L3 German), acquiring their L2 and L3 by formal instruction in a primary school. Inhibition was measured in a modified flanker task (Eriksen & Eriksen 1974; Poarch & Bialystok 2015). Multilingual production of voice onset time (VOT) and rhotic consonants was tested in a delayed repetition task (e.g. Kopečková et al. 2016; Krzysik 2019) in their L2 and L3. The results revealed that higher inhibitory control was related to increased global accuracy in the L2 and L3 production. Moreover, higher inhibitory control was also linked to higher accuracy in the overall L2 production, but there was no significant relationship with the L3 accuracy. These findings suggest that inhibition may play a role in phonological speech production, however, it may depend on one’s level of proficiency.

The Interaction Between Vocabulary Size and Phonotactic Probability Effects on Children's Production Accuracy and Fluency in Nonword Repetition

2004 ◽  
Vol 47 (2) ◽  
pp. 421-436 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jan Edwards ◽  
Mary E. Beckman ◽  
Benjamin Munson
Keyword(s):  
Phonological Processing ◽  
High Frequency ◽  
Small Body ◽  
Low Frequency ◽  
Phonological Acquisition ◽  
Vocabulary Size ◽  
Phonotactic Probability ◽  
Lower Accuracy ◽  
Frequency Sequence ◽  
Production Accuracy

Adults' performance on a variety of tasks suggests that phonological processing of nonwords is grounded in generalizations about sublexical patterns over all known words. A small body of research suggests that children's phonological acquisition is similarly based on generalizations over the lexicon. To test this account, production accuracy and fluency were examined in nonword repetitions by 104 children and 22 adults. Stimuli were 22 pairs of nonwords, in which one nonword contained a low-frequency or unattested two-phoneme sequence and the other contained a high-frequency sequence. For a subset of these nonword pairs, segment durations were measured. The same sound was produced with a longer duration (less fluently) when it appeared in a low-frequency sequence, as compared to a high-frequency sequence. Low-frequency sequences were also repeated with lower accuracy than high-frequency sequences. Moreover, children with smaller vocabularies showed a larger influence of frequency on accuracy than children with larger vocabularies. Taken together, these results provide support for a model of phonological acquisition in which knowledge of sublexical units emerges from generalizations made over lexical items.

Relationship between early phonological processing and later phonological awareness: Evidence from nonword repetition

2020 ◽  
Vol 41 (2) ◽  
pp. 319-346
Author(s):  
Michelle E. Erskine ◽  
Benjamin Munson ◽  
Jan R. Edwards
Keyword(s):  
Speech Perception ◽  
Phonological Awareness ◽  
Phonological Processing ◽  
Receptive Vocabulary ◽  
Nonword Repetition ◽  
Implicit Measure ◽  
Phonotactic Probability ◽  
Testing Period ◽  
Repetition Task ◽  
Speech Perception And Production

AbstractThis study investigated whether individual differences in receptive vocabulary, speech perception and production, and nonword repetition at age 2 years, 4 months to 3 years, 4 months predicted phonological awareness 2 years later. One hundred twenty-one children were tested twice. During the first testing period (Time 1), children’s receptive vocabulary, speech perception and production, and nonword repetition were measured. Nonword repetition accuracy in the present study was distinct from other widely used measures of nonword repetition in that it focused on narrow transcription of diphone sequences in each nonword that differed systematically in phonotactic probability. At the second testing period (Time 2), children’s phonological awareness was measured. The best predictors of phonological awareness were a measure of speech production and a measure of phonological processing derived from performance on the nonword repetition task. The results of this study suggest that nonword repetition accuracy provides an implicit measure of phonological skills that are indicative of later phonological awareness at an age when children are too young to perform explicit phonological awareness tasks reliably.

The Influence of Vocabulary Size, Phonotactic Probability, and Wordlikeness on Nonword Repetitions of Children With and Without Specific Language Impairment

2005 ◽  
Vol 48 (5) ◽  
pp. 1033-1047 ◽  
Author(s):  
Benjamin Munson ◽  
Beth A. Kurtz ◽  
Jennifer Windsor
Keyword(s):  
Language Impairment ◽  
Specific Language Impairment ◽  
Nonword Repetition ◽  
Vocabulary Size ◽  
Phonotactic Probability ◽  
Specific Language ◽  
Phonological Categories ◽  
Low Probability ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Speech And Language Development

Research has shown that children repeat high-probability phoneme sequences more accurately than low-probability ones. This effect attenuates with age, and its decrease is predicted by developmental changes in the size of the lexicon (J. Edwards, M. E. Beckman, & B. Munson, 2004; B. Munson, 2001; B. Munson, J. Edwards, & M. Beckman, 2005). This study expands on these findings by examining relationships between vocabulary size and repetition accuracy of nonwords varying in phonotactic probability by 16 children with specific language impairment (SLI), 16 chronological-age-matched (CA) peers with typical speech and language development, and 16 younger children matched with the children with SLI on vocabulary size (VS). As in previous research, children with SLI repeated nonwords less accurately than did CA children. The children with SLI and the VS children showed similar levels of nonword repetition accuracy. Phonotactic probability affected repetition accuracy more for children with SLI and VS children than for CA children. Regression analyses showed that measures of vocabulary size were the best predictor of the difference in repetition accuracy between high- and low-probability sequences. Analyses by items showed that measures of phonotactic probability were stronger predictors of repetition accuracy than judgments of wordlikeness. Taken together, the results support research demonstrating that vocabulary size mediates the influence of phonotactic probability on nonword repetition, perhaps due to its influence on the ongoing refinement of phonological categories.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document