Online Measures of Basic Language Skills in Children with Early Focal Brain Lesions

MacWhinney, Brian; Feldman, Heidi M.; Sacco, Kelley; Valdés-Pérez, Raúl E.

doi:10.1006/brln.1999.2273

Cited by 52 publications

(30 citation statements)

References 55 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Between 14 and 46 months, the children with BI in our sample lagged slightly behind their TD peers in vocabulary production, but there was wide and overlapping variation within and across the groups. Differences across groups in MLU were more pronounced, particularly after 3 years of age, adding support to previous findings that deficits often emerge only on more difficult linguistic tasks (e.g., producing complex syntactic forms; MacWhinney, Feldman, Sacco, & Vaaldes-Perez, 2000; Weckerly, Wulfeck, & Reilly, 2004). Thus, language development after pre- or perinatal brain injury may appear more resilient when earlier, less complex aspects of language development are considered.…”

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 85%

Does linguistic input play the same role in language learning for children with and without early brain injury?

Rowe

Levine

Fisher

et al. 2009

Developmental Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Children with unilateral pre-or perinatal brain injury (BI) show remarkable plasticity for language learning. Previous work highlights the important role that lesion characteristics play in explaining individual variation in plasticity in the language development of children with BI. The current study examines whether the linguistic input that children with BI receive from their caregivers also contributes to this early plasticity, and whether linguistic input plays a similar role in children with BI as it does in typically developing (TD) children. Growth in vocabulary and syntactic production is modeled for 80 children (53 TD, 27 BI) between 14 and 46 months. Findings indicate that caregiver input is an equally potent predictor of vocabulary growth in children with BI and in TD children. In contrast, input is a more potent predictor of syntactic growth for children with BI than for TD children. Controlling for input, lesion characteristics (lesion size, type, seizure history) also affect the language trajectories of children with BI. Thus, findings illustrate how both variability in the environment (linguistic input) and variability in the organism (lesion characteristics) work together to contribute to plasticity in language learning.

show abstract

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 85%

Does linguistic input play the same role in language learning for children with and without early brain injury?

Rowe

Levine

Fisher

et al. 2009

Developmental Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Between 14 and 46 months, children with brain injury lagged slightly behind children without brain injury in vocabulary production, but there was wide and overlapping variation within and across groups. Differences across groups in syntax (MLU) were more pronounced, particularly after three years of age, adding support to previous findings that deficits often emerge only on more difficult linguistic tasks (e.g., producing complex syntactic forms; MacWhinney, Feldman, Sacco, & Vaaldes-Perez, 2000; Weckerly, Wulfeck, & Reilly, 2004). Language development after pre- or perinatal brain injury thus may appear more resilient when earlier developed, less complex, aspects of language development are considered.…”

Section: Varying the Learning Environment (Ses) And The Learner (Bsupporting

confidence: 84%

Studying the mechanisms of language learning by varying the learning environment and the learner

Goldin‐Meadow

2015

Language, Cognition and Neuroscience

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Language learning is a resilient process, and many linguistic properties can be developed under a wide range of learning environments and learners. The first goal of this review is to describe properties of language that can be developed without exposure to a language model – the resilient properties of language – and to explore conditions under which more fragile properties emerge. But even if a linguistic property is resilient, the developmental course that the property follows is likely to vary as a function of learning environment and learner, that is, there are likely to be individual differences in the learning trajectories children follow. The second goal is to consider how the resilient properties are brought to bear on language learning when a child is exposed to a language model. The review ends by considering the implications of both sets of findings for mechanisms, focusing on the role that the body and linguistic input play in language learning.

show abstract

“…In both humans and songbirds, FoxP expression occurs early in development, at a time when both hemispheres of the human brain are capable, albeit not equipotent, of giving rise to language later in development (MacWhinney et al, 2000;Vicari et al, 2000). Given the bilateral expression of the FoxP genes observed here, molecular understanding of the predominantly lateralized aspects of language function in humans remains as a significant challenge for future studies.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 86%

ParallelFoxP1andFoxP2Expression in Songbird and Human Brain Predicts Functional Interaction

et al. 2004

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Humans and songbirds are two of the rare animal groups that modify their innate vocalizations. The identification of FOXP2 as the monogenetic locus of a human speech disorder exhibited by members of the family referred to as KE enables the first examination of whether molecular mechanisms for vocal learning are shared between humans and songbirds. Here, in situ hybridization analyses for FoxP1 and FoxP2 in a songbird reveal a corticostriatal expression pattern congruent with the abnormalities in brain structures of affected KE family members. The overlap in FoxP1 and FoxP2 expression observed in the songbird suggests that combinatorial regulation by these molecules during neural development and within vocal control structures may occur. In support of this idea, we find that FOXP1 and FOXP2 expression patterns in human fetal brain are strikingly similar to those in the songbird, including localization to subcortical structures that function in sensorimotor integration and the control of skilled, coordinated movement. The specific colocalization of FoxP1 and FoxP2 found in several structures in the bird and human brain predicts that mutations in FOXP1 could also be related to speech disorders.

show abstract

Online Measures of Basic Language Skills in Children with Early Focal Brain Lesions

Cited by 52 publications

References 55 publications

Does linguistic input play the same role in language learning for children with and without early brain injury?

Does linguistic input play the same role in language learning for children with and without early brain injury?

Studying the mechanisms of language learning by varying the learning environment and the learner

ParallelFoxP1andFoxP2Expression in Songbird and Human Brain Predicts Functional Interaction

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About