Rates of auxiliaryisandarein African American English speaking children with specific language impairment following language treatment

2014 ◽  
Vol 29 (2) ◽  
pp. 131-149 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shana Smith ◽  
Monica L. Bellon-harn
Keyword(s):  
African American ◽  
Language Impairment ◽  
Specific Language Impairment ◽  
American English ◽  
African American English ◽  
Specific Language ◽  
English Speaking

scholarly journals Marking of Tense and Agreement in Language Samples by Children With and Without Specific Language Impairment in African American English and Southern White English: Evaluation of Scoring Approaches and Cut Scores Across Structures

2021 ◽  
Vol 64 (2) ◽  
pp. 491-509
Author(s):  
Janna B. Oetting ◽  
Andrew M. Rivière ◽  
Jessica R. Berry ◽  
Kyomi D. Gregory ◽  
Tina M. Villa ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
African American ◽  
Language Impairment ◽  
Specific Language Impairment ◽  
American English ◽  
African American English ◽  
Past Tense ◽  
Typically Developing ◽  
Cut Scores ◽  
Specific Language

Purpose As follow-up to a previous study of probes, we evaluated the marking of tense and agreement (T/A) in language samples by children with specific language impairment (SLI) and typically developing controls in African American English (AAE) and Southern White English (SWE) while also examining the clinical utility of different scoring approaches and cut scores across structures. Method The samples came from 70 AAE- and 36 SWE-speaking kindergartners, evenly divided between the SLI and typically developing groups. The structures were past tense, verbal – s, auxiliary BE present, and auxiliary BE past. The scoring approaches were unmodified, modified, and strategic; these approaches varied in the scoring of forms classified as nonmainstream and other. The cut scores were dialect-universal and dialect-specific. Results Although low numbers of some forms limited the analyses, the results generally supported those previously found for the probes. The children produced a large and diverse inventory of mainstream and nonmainstream T/A forms within the samples; strategic scoring led to the greatest differences between the clinical groups while reducing effects of the children's dialects; and dialect-specific cut scores resulted in better clinical classification accuracies, with measures of past tense leading to the highest levels of classification accuracy. Conclusions For children with SLI, the findings contribute to studies that call for a paradigm shift in how children's T/A deficits are assessed and treated across dialects. A comparison of findings from the samples and probes indicates that probes may be the better task for identifying T/A deficits in children with SLI in AAE and SWE. Supplemental Material https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.13564709

scholarly journals Specific Language Impairment in African American English and Southern White English: Measures of Tense and Agreement With Dialect-Informed Probes and Strategic Scoring

2019 ◽  
Vol 62 (9) ◽  
pp. 3443-3461 ◽  
Author(s):  
Janna B. Oetting ◽  
Jessica R. Berry ◽  
Kyomi D. Gregory ◽  
Andrew M. Rivière ◽  
Janet McDonald
Keyword(s):  
African American ◽  
Language Impairment ◽  
Specific Language Impairment ◽  
Classification Accuracy ◽  
American English ◽  
African American English ◽  
Past Tense ◽  
Specific Language ◽  
The Past ◽  
Strategic Approach

Purpose In African American English and Southern White English, we examined whether children with specific language impairment (SLI) overtly mark tense and agreement structures at lower percentages than typically developing (TD) controls, while also examining the effects of dialect, structure, and scoring approach. Method One hundred six kindergartners completed 4 dialect-informed probes targeting 8 tense and agreement structures. The 3 scoring approaches varied in the treatment of nonmainstream English forms and responses coded as Other (i.e., those not obligating the target structure). The unmodified approach counted as correct only mainstream overt forms out of all responses, the modified approach counted as correct all mainstream and nonmainstream overt forms and zero forms out of all responses, and the strategic approach counted as correct all mainstream and nonmainstream overt forms out of all responses except those coded as Other. Results With the probes combined and separated, the unmodified and strategic scoring approaches showed lower percentages of overt marking by the SLI groups than by the TD groups; this was not always the case for the modified scoring approach. With strategic scoring and dialect-specific cut scores, classification accuracy (SLI vs. TD) was highest for the 8 individual structures considered together, the past tense probe, and the past tense probe irregular items. Dialect and structure effects and dialect differences in classification accuracy also existed. Conclusions African American English– and Southern White English–speaking kindergartners with SLI overtly mark tense and agreement at lower percentages than same dialect–speaking TD controls. Strategic scoring of dialect-informed probes targeting tense and agreement should be pursued in research and clinical practice.

Working memory performance in children with and without specific language impairment in two nonmainstream dialects of English

2017 ◽  
Vol 39 (1) ◽  
pp. 145-167 ◽  
Author(s):  
JANET L. MCDONALD ◽  
CHRISTY M. SEIDEL ◽  
REBECCA HAMMARLUND ◽  
JANNA B. OETTING
Keyword(s):  
Working Memory ◽  
African American ◽  
Language Impairment ◽  
Specific Language Impairment ◽  
Standardized Test ◽  
American English ◽  
Memory Performance ◽  
Memory Task ◽  
African American English ◽  
Specific Language

ABSTRACTUsing speakers of either African American English or Southern White English, we asked whether a working memory measure was linguistically unbiased, that is, equally able to distinguish between children with and without specific language impairment (SLI) across dialects, with similar error profiles and similar correlations to standardized test scores. We also examined whether the measure was affected by a child's nonmainstream dialect density. Fifty-three kindergarteners with SLI and 53 typically developing controls (70 African American English, 36 Southern White English) were given a size judgment working memory task, which involved reordering items by physical size before recall, as well as tests of syntax, vocabulary, intelligence, and nonmainstream density. Across dialects, children with SLI earned significantly poorer span scores than controls, and made more nonlist errors. Span and standardized language test performance were correlated; however, they were also both correlated with nonmainstream density. After partialing out density, span continued to differentiate the groups and correlate with syntax measures in both dialects. Thus, working memory performance can distinguish between children with and without SLI and is equally related to syntactic abilities across dialects. However, the correlation between span and nonmainstream dialect density indicates that processing-based verbal working memory tasks may not be as free from linguistic bias as often thought. Additional studies are needed to further explore this relationship.

Negative Concord in Child African American English

2004 ◽  
Vol 47 (1) ◽  
pp. 212-222 ◽  
Author(s):  
D'Jaris Coles-White
Keyword(s):  
African American ◽  
Language Impairment ◽  
Specific Language Impairment ◽  
American English ◽  
Clinical Importance ◽  
African American English ◽  
Double Negative ◽  
Negative Concord ◽  
Double Negation ◽  
Cross Sectional

In this study, African American English (AAE)-speaking children's comprehension of 2 different types of double negative sentences was examined and contrasted with that of a comparison group of Standard American English (SAE)-speaking children. The first type of double negative, negative concord, involves 2 negative elements in a sentence that are interpreted together as single negation. The second type of double negative, called true double negation, involves 2 negatives that are interpreted as independent negatives. A cross-sectional cohort of 61 (35 AAE, 26 SAE) typically developing children ranging in age from 5;2 (years;months) to 7;11 participated. The children responded to story-based grammatical judgment tasks that required them to differentiate between negative concord and true double negation. Results revealed no statistically significant differences between AAE- and SAE-speaking children in the way they interpreted negative concord and true double negation. However, there were significantly more correct responses to negative concord sentences across combined groups. In particular, the older children (i.e., 7-year-olds) produced more correct responses to negative concord than did the younger group (i.e., 5-year-olds). Explanations for these findings are framed in terms of children's knowledge about sentences with 2 negatives, the constraints affecting the interpretation of 2 negatives that include negative concord, and the clinical importance of negative concord for assessing specific language impairment in child AAE speakers.

scholarly journals Children's Marking of Verbal –s by Nonmainstream English Dialect and Clinical Status

2013 ◽  
Vol 22 (4) ◽  
pp. 604-614 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lesli H. Cleveland ◽  
Janna B. Oetting
Keyword(s):  
African American ◽  
Language Impairment ◽  
Specific Language Impairment ◽  
American English ◽  
Clinical Status ◽  
Typically Developing ◽  
Linguistic Variables ◽  
Specific Language ◽  
Habitual Activity ◽  
English Dialect

Purpose Children's marking of verbal –s was examined by their dialect (African American English [AAE] vs. Southern White English [SWE]) and clinical status (specific language impairment [SLI] vs. typically developing [TD]) and as a function of 4 linguistic variables (verb regularity, negation, expression of a habitual activity, and expression of historical present tense). Method The data were language samples from 57 six-year-olds who varied by their dialect and clinical status (AAE: SLI = 14, TD = 12; SWE: SLI = 12, TD = 19). Results The AAE groups produced lower rates of marking than did the SWE groups, and the SWE SLI group produced lower rates of marking than did the SWE TD group. Although low numbers of verb contexts made it difficult to evaluate the linguistic variables, there was evidence of their influence, especially for verb regularity and negation. The direction and magnitude of the effects were often (but not always) consistent with what has been described in the adult dialect literature. Conclusion Verbal –s can be used to help distinguish children with and without SLI in SWE but not in AAE. Clinicians can apply these findings to other varieties of AAE and SWE and other dialects by considering rates of marking and the effects of linguistic variables on marking.

scholarly journals Nonmainstream Dialect Use and Specific Language Impairment

2001 ◽  
Vol 44 (1) ◽  
pp. 207-223 ◽  
Author(s):  
Janna B. Oetting ◽  
Janet L. McDonald
Keyword(s):  
Discriminant Function ◽  
Language Impairment ◽  
Specific Language Impairment ◽  
American English ◽  
Surface Characteristics ◽  
Specific Language ◽  
Question Formation ◽  
Important Direction ◽  
Surface Patterns ◽  
Main Effects

Most work looking at specific language impairment (SLI) has been done in the context of mainstream dialects. This paper extends the study of SLI to two nonmainstream dialects: a rural version of Southern African American English (SAAE) and a rural version of Southern White English (SWE). Data were language samples from 93 4- to 6-year-olds who lived in southeastern Louisiana. Forty were classified as speakers of SAAE, and 53 were classified as speakers of SWE. A third were previously diagnosed as SLI; the others served as either agematched (6N) or language-matched (4N) controls. The two dialects differed in frequency of usage on 14 of the 35 coded morphosyntactic surface patterns; speakers of these dialects could be successfully discriminated (94%) from each other in a discriminant analysis using just four of these patterns. Across dialects, four patterns resulted in main effects that were related to diagnostic condition (SLI vs. 6N), and a slightly different set of four patterns showed effects that were related to developmental processes (4N vs. 6N). More interestingly, the surface characteristics of SLI were found to manifest in the two dialects in different ways. A discriminant function based solely on SAAE speakers tended to misclassify SWE children with SLI as having normal language, and a discriminant function based on SWE speakers tended to misclassify SAAE unaffected children as SLI. Patterns within the SLI profile that cut across the two dialects included difficulties with tense marking and question formation. The results provide important direction for future studies and argue for the inclusion of contrastive as well as noncontrastive features of dialects within SLI research.

BE, DO, and Modal Auxiliaries of 3-Year-Old African American English Speakers

2014 ◽  
Vol 57 (4) ◽  
pp. 1383-1393 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brandi L. Newkirk-Turner ◽  
Janna B. Oetting ◽  
Ida J. Stockman
Keyword(s):  
African American ◽  
American English ◽  
African American English ◽  
English Speakers ◽  
Surface Form ◽  
Specific Effects ◽  
Modal Auxiliaries ◽  
Different Types ◽  
English Speaking ◽  
American English Speakers

PurposeThis study examined African American English–speaking children's use of BE, DO, and modal auxiliaries.MethodThe data were based on language samples obtained from 48 three-year-olds. Analyses examined rates of marking by auxiliary type, auxiliary surface form, succeeding element, and syntactic construction and by a number of child variables.ResultsThe children produced 3 different types of marking (mainstream overt, nonmainstream overt, zero) for auxiliaries, and the distribution of these markings varied by auxiliary type. The children's nonmainstream dialect densities were related to their marking of BE and DO but not modals. Marking of BE was influenced by its surface form and the succeeding verbal element, and marking of BE and DO was influenced by syntactic construction.ConclusionsResults extend previous studies by showing dialect-specific effects for children's use of auxiliaries and by showing these effects to vary by auxiliary type and children's nonmainstream dialect densities. Some aspects of the children's auxiliary systems (i.e., pattern of marking across auxiliaries and effects of syntactic construction) were also consistent with what has been documented for children who speak other dialects of English. These findings show dialect-specific and dialect-universal aspects of African American English to be present early in children's acquisition of auxiliaries.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document