Do bilingual two-year-olds have separate phonological systems?

Paradis, Johanne

doi:10.1177/13670069010050010201

Cited by 215 publications

(204 citation statements)

References 42 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

179

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The majority of studies on cross-linguistic interactions have found evidence of transfer at the segmental level Fabiano-Smith & Goldstein, 2010;Keshavarz & Ingram, 2002), and to a lesser extent the prosodic level (Paradis, 2001).…”

Section: Cross-linguistic Interactionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Asymmetries in phonological development: the case of word-final cluster acquisition in Welsh–English bilingual children

2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study provides the first systematic account of word-final cluster acquisition in bilingual children. To this end, 40 Welsh-English bilingual children differing in language dominance and age (2;6 to 5;0) participated in a picture-naming task in English and Welsh. The results revealed significant age and dominance effects on cluster acquisition, with greater overall accuracy on the English clusters. Interestingly, although the Welsh-dominant children outperformed the English-dominant ones on the Welsh clusters, they did not exhibit a concomitant lag on the English clusters. It is argued that this asymmetry is a direct reflection of the sociolinguistic situation in Wales with English as the majority language and Welsh the minority language. The study also revealed accelerated rates of acquisition for English clusters compared with age-matched monolinguals reported elsewhere (Templin, 1957), thereby supporting claims that bilingual contexts may have a facilitative effect on phonological acquisition

show abstract

Section: Cross-linguistic Interactionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Asymmetries in phonological development: the case of word-final cluster acquisition in Welsh–English bilingual children

2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Thus, children's non-word repetition tasks have been created for a number of languages including Spanish (Girbau & Schwartz, 2007;Le Foll et al, 1995;Maridaki-Kassotaki, 2002;Paradis, 2001;Sahlén, Reuterskiöld-Wagner, Nettelbladt, & Radeborg, 1999;van Bon & van der Pijl, 1997;Stokes, Wong, Fletcher, & Leonard, 2006). Only several of these studies administered the task in specific language impaired children (the other ones analyzed other children's issues).…”

Section: Non-word Repetition Tasks In Other Languagesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Phonological working memory in Spanish–English bilingual children with and without specific language impairment

Girbau

Schwartz

2008

Journal of Communication Disorders

114

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The first is language dominance. Language dominance is defined as the language of the greatest exposure [33]. Both Lin and Johnson [18] and So and Leung [30] found that language dominance played a crucial role, despite the different findings between these two studies (see Table 1).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Phonological Skills in Korean-English Bilingual Children: Phonetic Inventory and Segmental Accuracy

Kim

Ballard

McCann

2017

Clin Arch Commun Disord

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: Type of surface-level speech errors can be diagnostically valuable information to identify children with speech sound disorder (SSD). There is a lack of such information for bilingual children, which makes identifying bilingual children with SSD a significant challenge. This article reports on error production in Korean-English bilingual (KEB) children.Methods: Single-word samples were collected from 52 KEB children aged between 3;0 and 7;11. The word productions were analysed for error and compared to the existing date from monolingual English-speaking (ME) and monolingual Korean-speaking (MK) children.Results: While some children's error production was similar to what would be expected in respective monolingual children, other children produced errors that would be considered delay, atypical or even advanced for their monolingual counterparts in both of their languages. No reliable factors could be identified to determine the characteristics associated with delay, atypical or advanced error production compared to monolingual children. Conclusions:There are qualitative differences in phonological development between monolingual and bilingual children. The clinical use of available monolingual normative data is likely to lead to an inaccurate diagnosis of SSD. Small cohort studies in bilingual phonological development should not be taken as normative data in clinical practice due to heterogeneity.

show abstract

Do bilingual two-year-olds have separate phonological systems?

Cited by 215 publications

References 42 publications

Asymmetries in phonological development: the case of word-final cluster acquisition in Welsh–English bilingual children

Asymmetries in phonological development: the case of word-final cluster acquisition in Welsh–English bilingual children

Phonological working memory in Spanish–English bilingual children with and without specific language impairment

Phonological Skills in Korean-English Bilingual Children: Phonetic Inventory and Segmental Accuracy

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About