Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-gtxcr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-20T07:55:09.168Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The use of descriptive data from bilingual children to inform theories of specific language impairment

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 March 2010

Susan Ellis Weismer  and
Margarita Kaushanskaya
Susan Ellis Weismer
Affiliation:
University of Wisconsin–Madison
Margarita Kaushanskaya
Affiliation:
University of Wisconsin–Madison
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In her Keynote Article, Paradis reviews evidence from bilingual language development to assess the claims of two opposing theoretical views of language disorders. Specifically, she examines the evidence for similarities in language profiles of typically developing (TD) sequential bilingual (second language [L2]) children and monolingual children with specific language impairment (SLI) with respect to Rice's extended optional infinitive (EOI) account. A limited processing capacity (LPC) account of SLI, Leonard's surface hypothesis, is evaluated within the context of comparisons among bilingual children with SLI, monolingual children with SLI, and TD bilingual children. Paradis concludes that the evidence from bilingual children poses challenges for both accounts of SLI.

Type
Commentaries
Information
Applied Psycholinguistics , Volume 31 , Issue 2 , April 2010 , pp. 277 - 282
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2010

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Aksu-Koc, A. A., & Slobin, D. I. (1985). The acquisition of Turkish. In Slobin, D. I. (Ed.), The crosslinguistic study of language acquisition: Vol. 1. The data (pp. 839–878). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Bedore, L. M., & Leonard, L. B. (2001). Grammatical morphology deficits in Spanish-speaking children with specific language impairment. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 44, 905–924.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bortolini, U., Caselli, M. C., & Leonard, L. B. (1997). Grammatical deficits in Italian-speaking children with specific language impairment. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 40, 809–820.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bottari, P., Cipriani, P., Chilosi, A. M., & Pfanner, L. (1998). The determiner system in a group of Italian children with SLI. Language Acquisition, 7, 285–315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crago, M., & Paradis, J. (2003). Two of a kind? Commonalities and variation in languages and language learners. In Levy, Y. & Schaeffer, J. (Eds.), Language competence across populations: Towards a definition of specific language impairment (pp. 97–110). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Dromi, E., Leonard, L. B., Adam, G., & Zadunaisky-Ehrlich, S. (1999). Verb agreement morphology in Hebrew-speaking children with specific language impairment. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 42, 1414–1431.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dromi, E., Leonard, L.B., & Shteiman, M. (1993). The grammatical morphology of Hebrew-speaking children with specific language impairment: Some competing hypotheses. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 36, 760–771.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Håkansson, G., & Nettelbladt, U. (1996). Similarities between SLI and L2 children: Evidence from the acquisition of Swedish word order. In Johnson, C. E. & Gilbert, J. H. V. (Eds.), Children's language (Vol. 9, pp. 135–151). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Hayiou-Thomas, M., Bishop, D. V. M., & Plunkett, K. (2004). Simulating SLI: General cognitive processing stressors can produce a specific linguistic profile. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 47, 1347–1362.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jakubowicz, C., Nash, L., Rigaut, C., & Gerard, C.-L. (1998). Determiners and clitic pronouns in French-speaking children with SLI. Language Acquisition, 7, 113–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kohnert, K. (2008). Primary language impairments in bilingual children and adults. In Altarriba, J. & Heredia, R. R. (Eds.), An introduction to bilingualism: Principles and processes (pp. 295–319). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Leonard, L. B., & Bortolini, U. (1998). Grammatical morphology and the role of weak syllables in the speech of Italian-speaking children with specific language impairment. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 41, 1363–1374.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Leonard, L. B., Bortolini, U., Caselli, M. C., McGregor, K., & Sabbadini, L. (1992). Morphological deficits in children with specific language impairment: The status of features in the underlying grammar. Language Acquisition, 2, 151–179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leonard, L. B., Sabbadini, L., Leonard, J., & Volterra, V. (1987). Specific language impairment in children: A cross-linguistic study. Brain and Language, 32, 233–252.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lukács, Á., Leonard, L. B., Kas, B., & Pléh, C. (2009). The use of tense and agreement by Hungarian-speaking children with language impairment. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 52, 98–117.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nicoladis, E., Palmer, A., & Marentette, P. (2007). The role of type and token frequency in using past tense morphemes correctly. Developmental Science, 10, 237–254.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Norbury, C. F., Bishop, D. V. M., & Briscoe, J. (2001). Production of English finite verb morphology: A comparison of SLI and mild-moderate hearing impairment. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 44, 165–178.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Paradis, J. (2007). Bilingual children with specific language impairment: Theoretical and applied issues. Applied Psycholinguistics, 28, 551–564.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paradis, J., & Crago, M. (2000). Tense and temporality: A comparison between children learning a second language and children with SLI. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 43, 834–847.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Paradis, J., & Crago, M. (2001). The morphosyntax of specific language impairment in French: Evidence for an extended optional default account. Language Acquisition, 9, 269–300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paradis, J., & Crago, M. (2004). Comparing L2 and SLI grammars in French: Focus on DP. In Prévost, P. & Paradis, J. (Eds.), The acquisition of French in different contexts: Focus on functional categories (pp. 89–108). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Plunkett, K., & Marchman, V. (1991). U-shaped learning and frequency effects in a multi-layered perception: Implications for child language acquisition. Cognition, 38, 43–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Restrepo, M. A., & Kruth, K. (2000). Grammatical characteristics of a Spanish–English bilingual child with specific language impairment. Communication Disorders Quarterly, 21, 66–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sanz-Torrent, M., Serrat, E., Andreu, L., & Serra, M. (2008). Verb morphology in Catalan and Spanish children with specific language impairment: A developmental study. Clinical Linguistics and Phonetics, 22, 459–474.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Thordardottir, E., & Namazi, M. (2007). Specific language impairment in French-speaking children: Beyond grammatical morphology. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 50, 698–715.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Windsor, J., & Kohnert, K. (2004). In search of common ground: Part I. Lexical performance by linguistically diverse learners. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 47, 877–890.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed