Early Sound Patterns in the Speech of Two Brazilian Portuguese Speakers

Abstract

Sound patterns in the speech of two Brazilian-Portuguese speaking children are compared with early production patterns in English-learning children as well as English and Brazilian-Portuguese (BP) characteristics. The relationship between production system effects and ambient language influences in the acquisition of early sound patterns is of primary interest, as English and BP are characterized by differing phonological systems. Results emphasize the primacy of production system effects in early acquisition, although even the earliest word forms show evidence of perceptual effects from the ambient language in both BP children. Use of labials and coronals and low and midfront vowels in simple syllable shapes is consistent with acquisition data for this period across languages. However, potential ambient language influences include higher frequencies of dorsals, use of multisyllabic words, and different phone types in syllable-offset position. These results suggest that to fully understand early acquisition of sound systems one must account for both production system effects and perceptual effects from the ambient language.

A phonetic approach to consonant repetition in early words

“…That is, children produce more available forms (i.e., labials and coronals) in early repetitions and then reduce the number of repetitions as they achieve consonant place variegation capacities required for target accuracy. Production system capacity as one primary underlying motivation for early speech development has been reported in other studies of babbling and first words (Davis & MacNeilage, 1995;Davis et al, 2002), phonetic inventories in child speech (e.g., Kent & Bauer, 1985;Lewis, 1936;Locke, 1983), hearing-impaired children (Warner-Czyz et al, 2010) as well as in infants from other language environments regardless of input language (Gildersleeve-Neumann et al, 2000;Kern & Davis, 2009;Teixeira & Davis, 2002).…”

“…As a consequence of the motor limitation of coupled structures such as the jaw and tongue, children produce the intrasyllable consonant-vowel (CV) patterns or CV co-occurrence patterns (i.e., labial consonants with central vowels; coronal consonants with front vowels; dorsal consonant with back vowels) in babbling and early words (Davis & MacNeilage, 1995;Davis et al, 2002). These intrasyllabic patterns have largely been observed in early words of other children (GildersleeveNeumann, Davis, & MacNeilage, 2000;Kern & Davis, 2009;Teixeira & Davis, 2002) as well as in hearing-impaired children (Warner-Czyz, . Based on these intersyllabic co-occurrence patterns in early speech forms, a movement-based approach (e.g., Frame/Content Theory) (MacNeilage & Davis, 1990) proposed the jaw-dominated production may be central to understanding frequently occurring patterns in early acquisition of speech.…”

‘Frame Dominance’ and the SerialOrganization of Babbling, and First Words in Korean-Learning Infants

“…The resultant small number of data points per infant and per condition reduced the statistical power of her data. In addition to these group studies, case studies of either 1 or 2 children are available MacNeilage, 1990, 1994;Zlatic et al, 1997;Zmarich and Lanni, 1999;Teixeira and Davis, 2002]. The labial-central and coronal-front CV co-occurrence patterns have been largely confirmed in these studies with few exceptions.…”

An analysis of the frame-content theory in babble of 9-month-old babies with cleft lip and palate

“…Data from the current study and others (e.g., Chen & Kent, 2005; Davis & MacNeilage, 1995; Hapsburg et al, 2008; Kern et al, in press) indicate that the labial-back pattern is a preferred pattern for some babies. Other co-occurrence patterns that appear to be preferred by some study participants across studies include the alveolar-back (Davis & MacNeilage, 1995, Davis, MacNeilage, & Matyear, 2002; Teixeira & Davis, 2002), labial-front (Teixeira & Davis, 2002) velar-front (Davis & MacNeilage, 1995; Kern et al, in press), and velar-central (Chen and Davis, 2005; Davis & MacNeilage, 1995). MacNeilage, Davis, Kinney, and Matyear (2000) acknowledged the discrepant findings reported by others and argued that these studies may have classified vowels differently, used a smaller number of vocalizations, and calculated expected frequencies differently.…”

“…Support for the F-C theory has been obtained in studies involving typically developing, English-speaking infants as well as infants from other language environments (MacNeilage, Davis, Kinney, & Matyear, 2000), including those who speak Swedish, Japanese, Quichua, Brazilian-Portuguese, Italian, Serbian, and Korean (with the exception of velar-back co-occurrence patterns in Italian and Serbian infants) (Davis & MacNeilage, 2002; Gildersleeve-Neumann and Davis, 1998; Teixeira and Davis, 2002). The three consonant-vowel co-occurrence patterns predicted by the F-C theory have also been observed in French, Turkish, and Dutch babies (Kern et al, in press).…”