What do bilingual infants actually hear? Evaluating measures of language input to bilingual‐learning 10‐month‐olds

Abstract

Examining how bilingual infants experience their dual language input is important for understanding bilingual language acquisition. To assess these language experiences, researchers typically conduct language interviews with caregivers. However, little is known about the reliability of these parent reports in describing how bilingual children actually experience dual language input. Here, we explored the quantitative nature of dual language input to bilingual infants. Furthermore, we described some of the heterogeneity of bilingual exposure in a sample of French–English bilingual families. Participants were 21 families with a 10‐month‐old infant residing in Montréal, Canada. First, we conducted language interviews with the caregivers. Then, each family completed three full‐day recordings at home using the Language Environment Analysis recording system. Results showed that children’s proportion exposure to each language was consistent across the two measurement approaches, indicating that parent reports are reliable for assessing a bilingual child’s language experiences. Further exploratory analyses revealed three unique findings: (a) there can be considerable variability in the absolute amount of input among infants hearing the same proportion of input, (b) infants can hear different proportions of language input when considering infant‐directed versus overheard speech, (c) proportion of language input can vary by day, depending on who is caring for the infant. We conclude that collecting naturalistic recordings is complementary to parent‐report measures for assessing infant’s language experiences and for establishing bilingual profiles.

Off to a good start: Early Spanish‐language processing efficiency supports Spanish‐ and English‐language outcomes at 4½ years in sequential bilinguals

“…Another limitation is that these estimates were based on parent reports of relative exposure. While reported measures of relative language exposure are widely used in the literature for reasons of convenience (Byers-Heinlein et al, 2019;De Anda, Bosch, et al, 2016;Marchman & Martínez-Sussmann, 2002;Orena et al, 2019), they do not capture individual variation in the absolute amount of language that children experience which are likely to have significant impacts on outcomes (Marchman et al, 2017;Orena et al, 2019).…”

The coarticulation-duration relationship in early Quechua speech

“…This study did not report participants' bilingual language dominance, but all speakers identified as Quechua-Spanish bilinguals and reported using both languages. However, bilingual children, including those in the current study, are rarely exposed to or use equal quantities of their two languages (Orena et al 2020). Naturalistic assessments of the child Quechua-Spanish speakers' bilingual language practices has been reported elsewhere (Cychosz 2020a); results showed that there is variability in the amount of Spanish and Quechua that the children use.…”

Language exposure predicts children’s phonetic patterning: Evidence from language shift

“…Another Combined with smart sampling and annotation procedures, they offer new insight into children's everyday environments. Nevertheless, the environmental factors were computed from a single daylong recording which does not capture the complexities of a child's learning experience Orena, Byers-Heinlein, and Polka (2020). For example, when the child participants from this study travel to more rural areas, where more monolingual Quechua speakers live, the children are more likely to speak Quechua.…”