Bilingualism and Language Impairment

A special issue of Languages (ISSN 2226-471X).

Deadline for manuscript submissions: closed (31 March 2022) | Viewed by 19921

Special Issue Editors


E-Mail Website
Guest Editor
School of Linguistics and Cultural Studies, Carl von Ossietzky University of Oldenburg, 26129 Oldenburg, Germany
Interests: syntax; semantics; language acquisition; bilingualism; language impairment

E-Mail Website
Guest Editor
Department of Education for Communication Disorders, Europa-Universität Flensburg, 24943 Flensburg, Germany
Interests: language acquisition; bilingualism; language disorders; heritage language acquisition; phonology; morphosyntax; special education

Special Issue Information

Dear Colleagues,

We are publishing a call for papers for a Special Issue of Languages dedicated to bilingualism and language impairment. Both topics have been studied in their own right for decades, and the intersection of these fields is particularly relevant for several reasons.

Specific Language Impairment (SLI, more recently also called Developmental Language Disorder, or DLD, Bishop et al. 2017) occurs in about 7% of all 5-6-year-olds (Tomblin et al. 1997) so that such an incidence is to be expected in bilingual populations as well. Given that about 30% of school-children in many regions of the world speak a language other than the majority language at home, investigation of the interaction of SLI and bilingualism is not only theoretically relevant but will influence educational and therapeutic decisions. One of the first questions asked by theoretical linguists as well as educational and clinical practitioners concerned the possibility that SLI is aggravated by bilingualism (Paradis 2007, Paradis et al. 2003). First results indicated that this is not the case (Paradis et al. 2003), though the question is still in the center of investigation (see the discussion in Paradis 2010) and factors such as Executive Function, exposure patterns, language dominance, and attrition have to be discussed in this context (Blom et al. 2019). Shifting perspective, it can be asked whether there may be differential effects on L1 or L2, which might be particularly relevant for long term outcomes in each of the languages (Conti-Ramsden et al. 2012, Law et al. 2008). These questions are interesting in light of the early findings that SLI manifests differently in different languages (Leonard 2014a, 2014b).

As to Working Memory and EF, it has been shown that children with SLI have deficits in these areas, while bilinguals may have an advantage in EF, a result which is not uncontested (Valian, 2015 for an overview). Task effects (Lukács et al. 2016) and controversial findings on the interaction of EF/WM, and SLI (Engel de Abreu et al. 2014, Delage & Frauenfelder 2020, Marshall 2020, Meir & Novogrodsky 2020, Talli & Stavrakaki 2020) make it hard to establish causal relationships and call for more research, especially in the context of bilingualism.

Another early observation is that phenomena of language difficulty often are the same in bilinguals and children with SLI (see the many studies addressing the acquisition of accusative pronoun clitics in French) and differentiating these phenomena qualitatively or quantitatively is an active area of research (Paradis 2010).

This overlap in phenomena also makes language assessment and diagnosis in bilingual populations very difficult, so that new assessment tools have been developed specifically for this purpose (Armon-Lotem et al. 2015) and are being explored by many research groups (Grohmann & Armon-Lotem in press). Best practice for diagnosis in bilinguals requires assessing both languages, which is often not practical. A number of recent studies examined appropriate tools for bilingual assessment, such as narrative tools like the MAIN, sentence repetition, and nonword repetition (Boerma & Blom 2017, Bohnacker & Gagarina 2020 and publications therein, dos Santos and Ferré 2018, Meir & Armon-Lotem 2016, Tuller et al. 2018), developed either as quasi-universal tests or as tests for L2, but are often also available for L1-assessment.

For some of these tools, assessment in the majority language (L2) has been shown to be reliable in heritage but less so in refugee situations (Hamann et al. 2020), whereas L1-assessment may be compromised in heritage speakers due to attrition effects (Blom et al. 2019). The comparison of groups of heritage speakers and children learning a majority language after the age of 5 has only just begun. Clearly, factors such as minimal amount of exposure, age of onset, input and cognitive skills (Paradis et al. 2021) have to be investigated. Longitudinal studies are few in this area, but are sorely needed. Dynamic assessment methods have also been found to be promising and more research is welcome (Patterson et al. 2012).

Whereas in a first phase of research on language impairment in the context of bilingualism, SLI was the focus of investigation, more recently, other developmental impairments with effects on language performance, such as ASD or dyslexia, have been studied in bilingual populations (Durrleman et al. 2017, Meir & Novogrodsky 2019, Peristeri et al. 2020, Stanford & Delage 2020). Comparative studies of the effects of different impairments on bilingual language development will be able to shed light on the nature of the impairments as well as on the mechanisms of bilingual acquisition.

Recently, there have been several journal issues or edited volumes dedicated to bilingualism or language impairment, and some Special Issues have addressed language impairment in bilinguals as outlined above., e.g. Special Issue of Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism 7:3/4 (2017); Journal of Communication Disorders, Volume 63; Language Acquisition, Volume 25, Issue 1, (2018). Very recent publications such as the Special Issues in Applied Psycholinguistics, Volumes 41 (2020) & 42 (2021) focus on typical bilingual development. However, more and more research groups are obtaining results on language impairment in bilinguals, also for less researched languages, so that the present Special Issue is in a unique position to take up the newly raised questions which emerged from recent studies or the longstanding unresolved questions outlined here. Concentrating on bilinguals with language impairment, we hope to complement existing research by soliciting papers covering the areas we described and list again below. Studies focusing on less widely researched languages (particularly including minority languages), longitudinal studies, or studies on long term outcomes in adolescents with language impairments (comparing SLI and ASD, etc.) will be given preference in order to complement existing research. This Special Issue will also be timely in that assumptions, predictions, methods, and tools derived from results on bilinguals or language impairment will be applied and verified in these bilingual populations with developmental impairments such as SLI or ASD, preferably comparatively. As a particular example, the LITMUS-assessment tools have been investigated in bilingual populations but could not always be applied to bilinguals with language impairment, or only in small groups or for a few language combinations. 

We warmly welcome researchers to submit proposals concerning bilingual language impaired populations addressing, but not limited to, the following topics:

  • Bilinguals with SLI, ASD, Down’s Syndrome, and Dyslexia, etc.
  • Effects of bilingualism on language impairments
  • Differential effects of impairment on L1 and L2
  • Interactions of EF/WM, bilingualism, and language impairments
  • Language assessment and diagnosis in bilingual contexts
  • Developmental paths in heritage vs. refugee contexts
  • Factors influencing (a)typical bilingual language development
  • Dynamic assessment
  • Development over time: longitudinal perspectives and long-term outcomes

We request that, prior to submitting a manuscript, interested authors initially submit a proposed title and an abstract of 400-600 words summarizing their intended contribution. Please send it to the guest editors (/) or to Languages editorial office (). Abstracts will be reviewed by the guest editors for the purposes of ensuring proper fit within the scope of the special issue. Full manuscripts will undergo double-blind peer-review.

Tentative completion schedule:

Abstract submission deadline: 2 August 2021

Notification of abstract acceptance: 31 August 2021

Full manuscript deadline: 31 March 2022

References:

Armon-Lotem, Sharon, Jan de Jong and Natalia Meir (Eds.). 2015. Assessing Multilingual Children. Disentangling Bilingualism from Language Impairment. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.

Bishop, Dorothy. V., Margaret J. Snowling, Paul A. Thompson, Trisha Greenhalgh and CATALISE-2 consortium. 2017. Phase 2 of CATALISE: a multinational and multidisciplinary Delphi consensus study of problems with language development: Terminology. Journal of child psychology and psychiatry, and allied disciplines, 58(10): 1068–1080. doi: 10.1111/jcpp.12721

Blom, Elma, Tessel Boerma and Jan De Jong. 2019. First Language Attrition and Developmental Language Disorder. In Oxford Handbook of Language Attrition. Edited by Monika S. Schmid and Barbara Köpke. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 108–120. 

Bohnacker, Ute and Natalia Gagarina (Eds.). 2020. Developing narrative comprehension: Multilingual assessment instrument for narratives. Amsterdam: Benjamins

Conti-Ramsden, Gina, Michelle C. St Clair, Andrew Pickles and Kevin Durkin. 2012. Developmental trajectories of verbal and nonverbal skills in individuals with a history of specific language impairment: from childhood to adolescence. Journal of Speech Language, and Hearing Research, 55: 1716–1735. doi: 10.1044/1092-4388(2012/10- 0182)

Delage, Hélène and Ulrich H. Frauenfelder. 2020. Relationship between working memory and complex syntax in children Developmental Language Disorder. Journal of child language, 47(3): 600–632. doi:10.1017/S0305000919000722

dos Santos, Christophe and Sandrine Ferré. 2018. A nonword repetition task to assess bilingual children’s phonology. Language Acquisition, 25: 58–71.doi: 10.1080/10489223.2016.1243692

Durrleman, Stefanie, Morgane Burnel and Anne Reboul. 2017. Theory of mind in SLI revisited: links with syntax, comparisons with ASD. International journal of language & communication disorders, 52: 816–830. doi: 10.1111/1460-6984.12317

Engel de Abreu, Pascale M. J., Anabela Cruz‐Santos and Marina L. Puglisi. 2014. Specific language impairment in language minority children from low‐income families. International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders, 49: 736–747.

Grohman, Kleanthes and Sharon Armon-Lotem (Eds.) in press. LITMUS in action: Comparative studies across Europe, TILAR. Amsterdam: Benjamins

Hamann, Cornelia, Solveig Chilla, Lina Abed Ibrahim and István Fekete.  2020. Language assessment tools for Arabic-speaking heritage and refugee children in Germany. Applied Psycholinguistics, 41(6): 1375–1414. doi:10.1017/S0142716420000399

Law, James, J. Bruce Tomblin and Xuyang Zhang. 2008. Characterizing the growth trajectories of language-impaired children between 7 and 11 years of age. Journal of Speech Language, and Hearing Research, 51: 739–749. doi: 10.1044/1092-4388(2008/052)

Leonard, Laurence. 2014a. Children with Specific Language Impairment, 2nd Edn. Cambridge: MIT Press.

Leonard, Laurence. 2014b. Specific language impairment across languages. Child Development Perspectives, 8: 1–5.

Lukács, Ágnes, Eniko Ladányi, Kata Fazekas and Ferenc Kemény. 2016. Executive functions and the contribution of short-term memory span in children with specific language impairment. Neuropsychology, 30: 296–303.

Marshall, Chloë. 2020. Investigating the relationship between syntactic and short-term/working memory impairments in children with developmental disorders is not a straightforward endeavour. First Language, 40: 491–499.

Meir, Natalia and Rama Novogrodsky. 2020. Syntactic abilities and verbal memory in monolingual and bilingual children with High Functioning Autism (HFA). First Language 40.4: 341–366.

Paradis, Johanne. 2007. Bilingual children with specific language impairment: Theoretical and applied issues. Applied Psycholinguistics, 28: 551–564

Paradis, Johanne. 2010. The interface between bilingual development and specific language impairment. Applied Psycholinguistics, 31: 227–252.

Paradis, Johanne, Martha Crago, Fred Genesee and Mabel Rice. 2003. French-English bilingual children with SLI: how do they compare with their monolingual peers? Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 46: 113-27. PMID 12647892 DOI: 10.1044/1092-4388(2003/009) 

Paradis, Johanne, Adriana Soto-Corominas, Xi Chen and Alexandra Gottardo. 2020. How language environment, age, and cognitive capacity support the bilingual development of Syrian refugee children recently arrived in Canada. Applied Psycholinguistics, 41(6): 1255–1281. doi:10.1017/S014271642000017X

Patterson, Janet L., Barbara L. Rodríguez and Philip S. Dale. 2013. Response to dynamic language tasks among typically developing Latino preschool children with bilingual experience. American Journal of Speech Language Pathology, 22: 103-112. doi: 10.1044/1058-0360(2012/11-0129)

Peristeri, Eleni, Eleni Baldimtsi, Maria Andreou and Ianthi Tsimpli. 2020. The impact of bilingualism on the narrative ability and the executive functions of children with autism spectrum disorders. Journal of communication disorders, 85: 105999.

Stanford, Emily and Hélène Delage. 2020. Complex syntax and working memory in children with specific learning difficulties. First Language, 40: 411–436.

Talli, Ionna, and Stavroula Stavrakaki. 2020. Short term memory, working memory, and linguistic abilities in bilingual children with developmental language disorder. First Language, 40: 437–460.

Tomblin, J. Bruce, Nancy L. Records, Paula Buckwalter, Xuyang Zhang, Elaine Smith and Marlea O’Brien. 1997. Prevalence of Specific Language Impairment in kindergarten children. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 40: 1245–1260.

Tuller, Laurice, Cornelia Hamann, Solveig Chilla, Sandrine Ferré, Eleonore Morin, Philippe Prévost, Phillipe, Christope dos Santos, Lina Abed Ibrahim, Racha Zebib. 2018. Identifying language impairment in bilingual children in France and in Germany. International Journal Language Communication Disorders, 53: 888–904.     

Valian, Virginia. 2015. Bilingualism and cognition. Bilingualism, 18: 3–24. doi: 10.1017/S1366728914000522 

Prof. Dr. Cornelia Hamann
Dr. Lina Abed Ibrahim
Guest Editors

Manuscript Submission Information

Manuscripts should be submitted online at www.mdpi.com by registering and logging in to this website. Once you are registered, click here to go to the submission form. Manuscripts can be submitted until the deadline. All submissions that pass pre-check are peer-reviewed. Accepted papers will be published continuously in the journal (as soon as accepted) and will be listed together on the special issue website. Research articles, review articles as well as short communications are invited. For planned papers, a title and short abstract (about 100 words) can be sent to the Editorial Office for announcement on this website.

Submitted manuscripts should not have been published previously, nor be under consideration for publication elsewhere (except conference proceedings papers). All manuscripts are thoroughly refereed through a double-blind peer-review process. A guide for authors and other relevant information for submission of manuscripts is available on the Instructions for Authors page. Languages is an international peer-reviewed open access monthly journal published by MDPI.

Please visit the Instructions for Authors page before submitting a manuscript. The Article Processing Charge (APC) for publication in this open access journal is 1400 CHF (Swiss Francs). Submitted papers should be well formatted and use good English. Authors may use MDPI's English editing service prior to publication or during author revisions.

Keywords

  • language impaired bilinguals
  • diagnosis
  • L1/L2 assessment
  • developmental paths
  • factors influencing development
  • heritage speakers, refugees

Published Papers (8 papers)

Order results
Result details
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:

Research

44 pages, 1396 KiB  
Article
Subordination in Turkish Heritage Children with and without Developmental Language Impairment
by Nebiye Hilal Șan
Languages 2023, 8(4), 239; https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/languages8040239 - 19 Oct 2023
Viewed by 1938
Abstract
A large body of cross-linguistic research has shown that complex constructions, such as subordinate constructions, are vulnerable in bilingual DLD children, whereas they are robust in bilingual children with typical language development; therefore, they are argued to constitute a potential clinical marker for [...] Read more.
A large body of cross-linguistic research has shown that complex constructions, such as subordinate constructions, are vulnerable in bilingual DLD children, whereas they are robust in bilingual children with typical language development; therefore, they are argued to constitute a potential clinical marker for identifying DLD in bilingual contexts, especially when the majority language is assessed. However, it is not clear whether this also applies to heritage contexts, particularly in contexts in which the heritage language is affected by L2 contact-induced phenomena, as in the case of Heritage Turkish in Germany. In this study, we compare subordination using data obtained from 13 Turkish heritage children with and without DLD (age range 5; 1–11; 6) to 10 late successive (lL2) BiTDs (age range 7; 2–12; 2) and 10 Turkish adult heritage bilinguals (age range 20; 3–25; 10) by analyzing subordinate constructions using both Standard and Heritage Turkish as reference varieties. We further investigate which background factors predict performance in subordinate constructions. Speech samples were elicited using the sentence repetition task (SRT) from the TODİL standardized test battery and the Multilingual Assessment Instrument for Narratives (MAIN). A systematic analysis of a corpus of subordinate clauses constructed with respect to SRT and MAIN narrative production comprehension tasks shows that heritage children with TD and DLD may not be differentiated through these tasks, especially when their utterances are scored using the Standard Turkish variety as a baseline; however, they may be differentiated if the Heritage Turkish is considered as the baseline. The age of onset in the second language (AoO_L2) was the leading performance predictor in subordinate clause production in SRT and in both tasks of MAIN regardless of using Standard Turkish or Heritage Turkish as reference varieties in scoring. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Bilingualism and Language Impairment)
Show Figures

Figure 1

25 pages, 1690 KiB  
Article
The Interplay of Emotions, Executive Functions, Memory and Language: Challenges for Refugee Children
by Julie Franck and Hélène Delage
Languages 2022, 7(4), 309; https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/languages7040309 - 7 Dec 2022
Cited by 1 | Viewed by 1975
Abstract
Refugee children tend to show low emotional well-being and weak executive functions that may have consequences on language and therefore complicate a potential diagnosis of Developmental Language Disorder (DLD) in this population. We assessed the performance of 140 children living in Switzerland aged [...] Read more.
Refugee children tend to show low emotional well-being and weak executive functions that may have consequences on language and therefore complicate a potential diagnosis of Developmental Language Disorder (DLD) in this population. We assessed the performance of 140 children living in Switzerland aged 5 to 8 (20 monolinguals, 86 non-refugee bilinguals, 34 refugee bilinguals) on LITMUS language tasks (nonword repetition, sentence repetition, parental questionnaire), standardized language tasks, memory and executive function tasks. Parents also filled in the Child Behavior Checklist providing a measure of their child’s emotional well-being. Results indicate that refugee children are more emotionally vulnerable and show weaker performance in memory and executive functions tasks compared to non-refugee children, in line with the existing literature. Moreover, when compared to non-refugee bilingual children with similar length of exposure to French, refugee children are disadvantaged on all language tasks. Whereas emotional well-being does not predict language performance, memory and executive functions show up as predictors of both LITMUS and standardized language tasks, although in an unsystematic way. It is concluded that refugee children are at risk across the board and that a better understanding of the complex interplay between well-being, executive functions, memory and language is needed in order to build more appropriate diagnostic tools for these children. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Bilingualism and Language Impairment)
Show Figures

Figure 1

26 pages, 1784 KiB  
Article
Dynamic Assessment Identifies Morphosyntactic Deficits in Mono- and Bilingual Children with Developmental Language Disorder
by Olivia Hadjadj, Margaret Kehoe and Hélène Delage
Languages 2022, 7(4), 295; https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/languages7040295 - 21 Nov 2022
Cited by 2 | Viewed by 2727
Abstract
Dynamic Assessment (DA) is recommended for testing bilinguals as it tests the child’s learning potential and not her or his previously acquired language knowledge. Thus, it allows language difficulties to be distinguished from difficulties related to a lack of L2 exposure. This study [...] Read more.
Dynamic Assessment (DA) is recommended for testing bilinguals as it tests the child’s learning potential and not her or his previously acquired language knowledge. Thus, it allows language difficulties to be distinguished from difficulties related to a lack of L2 exposure. This study presents the findings of DA of morphosyntax in French-speaking monolingual and bilingual children, both Typically Developing (TD) and with Developmental Language Disorder (DLD). We examined whether DA was able to distinguish TD from DLD in children, irrespective of their linguistic group (mono- versus bilingual). Morphosyntactic skills were assessed in a sample of 37 children with DLD (19 bilinguals) and 42 with TD (18 bilinguals), aged from 5 to 12. We assessed six syntactic structures: simple sentences (SVO) in present and past tense, subject relatives, accusative clitic pronouns, passives, and object relatives. We provided graduated prompts if children were not able to produce the target sentences. The results confirmed the accuracy of our morphosyntactic task to disentangle children with TD from children with DLD, regardless of their linguistic group. Moreover, cutoffs for each structure as well as for the total score, as determined via ROC curves, indicated high sensitivity and specificity for children with DLD who had a documented morphosyntactic deficit. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Bilingualism and Language Impairment)
Show Figures

Figure 1

21 pages, 2071 KiB  
Article
The Use of the LITMUS Quasi-Universal Nonword Repetition Task to Identify DLD in Monolingual and Early Second Language Learners Aged 8 to 10
by Angela Grimm
Languages 2022, 7(3), 218; https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/languages7030218 - 15 Aug 2022
Cited by 2 | Viewed by 2367
Abstract
This study evaluates whether the short version of the German LITMUS quasi-universal nonword repetition task (LITMUS-QU-NWR) can be used as an index test for monolingual and early second language learners (eL2) of German aged 8 to 10 years. The NWR taps into quasi-universal [...] Read more.
This study evaluates whether the short version of the German LITMUS quasi-universal nonword repetition task (LITMUS-QU-NWR) can be used as an index test for monolingual and early second language learners (eL2) of German aged 8 to 10 years. The NWR taps into quasi-universal phonological knowledge via the so-called language-independent part and into language-specific phonological knowledge via the language-dependent part. Thirty-six monolingual and thirty-three eL2 learners of German, typically developing (TD) and diagnosed as language-impaired (DLD), participated in the study. The effects of the language group (Mo vs. eL2) and the clinical status (TD vs. DLD) on repetition accuracy are investigated by a logistic mixed-model analysis. Receiver operating characteristics (ROC) and likelihood ratios are calculated to determine the diagnostic accuracy of the two parts. The group comparisons showed significant effects of the clinical status but not of the language group. The ROC analyses and the likelihood ratios reveal better diagnostic values for the language-dependent compared to the language-independent part and almost similar diagnostic values for the monolingual and the eL2 group. The results indicate that the LITMUS-QU-NWR helps to disentangle DLD and DLD in monolingual children and eL2 learners aged 8 to 10 years. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Bilingualism and Language Impairment)
Show Figures

Figure 1

33 pages, 2101 KiB  
Article
Non-Word Repetition and Vocabulary in Arabic-Swedish-Speaking 4–7-Year-Olds with and without Developmental Language Disorder
by Linnéa Öberg and Ute Bohnacker
Languages 2022, 7(3), 204; https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/languages7030204 - 2 Aug 2022
Viewed by 2219
Abstract
The Arabic-speaking community in Sweden is large and diverse, yet linguistic reference data are lacking for Arabic-Swedish-speaking children. This study presents reference data from 99 TD children aged 4;0–7;11 on receptive and expressive vocabulary in the minority and the majority language, as well [...] Read more.
The Arabic-speaking community in Sweden is large and diverse, yet linguistic reference data are lacking for Arabic-Swedish-speaking children. This study presents reference data from 99 TD children aged 4;0–7;11 on receptive and expressive vocabulary in the minority and the majority language, as well as for three types of non-word repetition (NWR) tasks. Vocabulary scores were investigated in relation to age, language exposure, and socio-economic status (SES). NWR performance was explored in relation to age, type of task, item properties, language exposure, and vocabulary. Eleven children with DLD were compared to the TD group. Age and language exposure were important predictors of vocabulary scores in both languages, but SES did not affect vocabulary scores in any language. Age and vocabulary size had a positive effect on NWR accuracy, whilst increasing item length and presence of clusters had an adverse effect. There was substantial overlap between the TD and DLD children for both vocabulary and NWR performance. Diagnostic accuracy was at best suggestive for NWR; no task or type of item was better at separating the two groups. Reports from parents and teachers on developmental history, language exposure, and functional language skills emerged as important factors for correctly identifying DLD in bilinguals. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Bilingualism and Language Impairment)
Show Figures

Figure 1

23 pages, 6012 KiB  
Article
Dynamic Assessment of Word Learning to Diagnose Developmental Language Disorder in French-Speaking Monolingual and Bilingual Children
by Mélodie Matrat, Hélène Delage and Margaret Kehoe
Languages 2022, 7(3), 181; https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/languages7030181 - 14 Jul 2022
Cited by 4 | Viewed by 2747
Abstract
Dynamic assessment (DA), which evaluates the learning process rather than static knowledge, has been found to be effective in diagnosing developmental language disorder (DLD) in English-speaking bilingual children. We present three studies that examine whether a French dynamic word learning task can distinguish [...] Read more.
Dynamic assessment (DA), which evaluates the learning process rather than static knowledge, has been found to be effective in diagnosing developmental language disorder (DLD) in English-speaking bilingual children. We present three studies that examine whether a French dynamic word learning task can distinguish caseload children with DLD from control children with typical development (TD). Forty-eight monolingual and 69 bilingual French-speaking children, aged four to nine, were required to learn three to six non-words and their semantic characteristics. DA consisted of three phases: (1) a teaching phase in which non-words were taught to the child; (2) an immediate test phase, with graduated prompts, in which children were required to identify and produce the target words and their semantic features; and (3) a delayed test phase. Global results indicated that there were no differences between monolingual and bilingual TD children on the DA whereas there were differences on the static assessment of vocabulary knowledge: bilinguals performed less well than monolinguals. In addition, DA differentiated control and caseload monolingual children. Further work is needed to develop a dynamic word learning task, administered in one session, which can even more accurately differentiate TD and DLD bilingual children. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Bilingualism and Language Impairment)
Show Figures

Figure 1

16 pages, 770 KiB  
Article
Language Competence in Italian Heritage Speakers: The Contribution of Clitic Pronouns and Nonword Repetition
by Giuditta Smith, Roberta Spelorzi, Antonella Sorace and Maria Garraffa
Languages 2022, 7(3), 180; https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/languages7030180 - 11 Jul 2022
Cited by 1 | Viewed by 1874
Abstract
The linguistic profile of bilingual children is known to show areas of overlap with that of children affected by Developmental Language Disorder (DLD), creating a need to differentiate the profiles and provide clinicians with tools to evaluate bilingual speakers in both of their [...] Read more.
The linguistic profile of bilingual children is known to show areas of overlap with that of children affected by Developmental Language Disorder (DLD), creating a need to differentiate the profiles and provide clinicians with tools to evaluate bilingual speakers in both of their languages. Data from typical adult bilinguals provide a picture of the language of a bilingual speaker at the end of language development. The present work explores how clitic production and nonword repetition (NWR) behave in mature language systems in situations of bilingualism, aiming to provide initial data as a benchmark on Italian as a non-dominant language. Heritage speakers (HSs) of Italian were confronted with adult immigrants (AIs) who moved from Italy to an English-speaking country in adulthood. Clitic pronouns were found to be vulnerable in HSs, who produced approximately 35% of the target clitics against the 80% of Ais, suggesting that clitic pronouns may not be reliable structures to test language competence in heritage Italian. On the other hand, HSs were >97% correct in NWR, suggesting that this paradigm should be explored as a possible marker to test language competence in these populations. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Bilingualism and Language Impairment)
Show Figures

Figure 1

16 pages, 428 KiB  
Article
A Preliminary Content Validity Analysis of the Receptive and Expressive Language Pre-Referral Protocol for Bilingual Learners (RELPP-BL)
by Karla Garza, Janelle Beth Flores and Belinda Bustos Flores
Languages 2022, 7(3), 164; https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/languages7030164 - 30 Jun 2022
Viewed by 2194
Abstract
The number of bilingual-bicultural students in the US continues to grow exponentially. With this growth, educators have an increased need for ensuring that all bilingual-bicultural students have equal language learning opportunities. It is, therefore, crucial that bilingual educators have access to valid tools [...] Read more.
The number of bilingual-bicultural students in the US continues to grow exponentially. With this growth, educators have an increased need for ensuring that all bilingual-bicultural students have equal language learning opportunities. It is, therefore, crucial that bilingual educators have access to valid tools that can serve as guides for determining if a speech and language referral is needed. The Receptive and Expressive Language Pre-Referral Protocol for Bilingual Learners [RELPP-BL] was developed as a data gathering tool to assist educators in the decision-making process. The purpose of this study was to explore the content validity of the RELPP-BL. The preliminary results demonstrate that the RELPP-BL is a viable, valid tool for use in the pre-referral process; it is not intended as an evaluation measure. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Bilingualism and Language Impairment)
Back to TopTop