Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7fkt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T18:11:08.677Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The potential of studying specific language impairment in bilinguals for linguistic research on specific language impairment in monolinguals

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 March 2010

Monika Rothweiler
Monika Rothweiler*
Affiliation:
Universität Bremen
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In her Keynote Article, Paradis discusses the role of the interface between bilingual development and specific language impairment (SLI) on two different levels. On the level of theoretical explanations of SLI, Paradis asks how domain general versus domain-specific perspectives on SLI can account for bilingual SLI, as well as what bilingual SLI may contribute to the discussion of these theories. Paradis argues in favor of domain-specific deficits (in addition to well-documented processing deficits in SLI), and especially for the maturational model (Rice, 2004). She argues against a mere processing deficit of input information and against deficits in working memory and processing speed as sole sources of SLI. On the practical level, Paradis focuses on the question of whether and how language tests that have been standardized for monolingual children are valid for the assessment of SLI in bilingual children. Both discussions, on theory and on practice, are based on empirical data from Canadian studies on bilingual children with and without SLI carried out by Johanne Paradis, Martha Crago, and Fred Genesee (e.g., Crago & Paradis, 2003; Paradis, 2007; Paradis, Crago, & Genesee, & Rice, 2003).

Type
Commentaries
Information
Applied Psycholinguistics , Volume 31 , Issue 2 , April 2010 , pp. 327 - 332
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

Abdalla, F., & Crago, M. (2008). Verb morphology deficits in Arabic-speaking children with specific language impairment. Applied Psycholinguistics, 29, 315–340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Babur, E., & Rothweiler, M. (2007). Specific language impairment in bilingual Turkish: The use of Turkish morphology. Paper presented at Child Language Seminar, University of Reading.Google Scholar
Babur, E., Rothweiler, M., & Kroffke, S. (2007). Spezifische Sprachentwicklungsstörung in der Erstsprache Türkisch. Linguistische Berichte, 212, 377–402.Google Scholar
Chilla, S. (2008). Erstsprache, Zweitsprache, Spezifische Sprachentwicklungsstörung? Eine Untersuchung des Erwerbs der deutschen Hauptsatzstruktur durch sukzessiv-bilinguale Kinder mit türkischer Erstsprache. Hamburg, Germany: Verlag Dr. Kovač.Google Scholar
Chilla, S., & Babur, E. (in press). Specific language impairment in Turkish–German successive bilingual children. Aspects of assessment and outcome. In Topbaş, S. & Yavaş, M. (Eds.), Communication disorders in Turkish in monolingual and multilingual settings. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Clahsen, H. (2008). Chomskyan syntactic theory and language disorders. In Ball, M. J., Perkins, M., Mueller, N., & Howard, S. (Eds.), The handbook of clinical linguistics (pp. 165–183). Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Clahsen, H., Bartke, S., & Göllner, S. (1997). Formal features in impaired grammars: A comparison of English and German SLI children. Journal of Neurolinguistics, 10, 151–171.Google Scholar
Crago, M., & Allen, S. (2001). Early finiteness in Inuktitut: The role of language structure and input. Language Acquisition, 9, 59–111.Google 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: Toward a definition of specific language impairment (pp. 97–110). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Demuth, K., & Suzman, S. (1997). Language impairment in Zulu. In Hughes, E., Hughes, M., & Greenhill, A. (Eds.), BUCLD 21: Proceedings of the 21st annual Boston University Conference on Language Development (pp. 121–135). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Fletcher, P., Leonard, L., Wong, A., & Stokes, S. (2005). The expression of aspect in Cantonese-speaking children with specific language impairment. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 48, 621–634.Google Scholar
Friedmann, N., & Novogrodsky, R. (in press). Subtypes of SLI and the comprehension of Wh questions. Lingua.Google Scholar
Law, S.-P., Weekes, B. S., & Wong, A. M.-Y. (Eds.). (2009). Language disorders in speakers of Chinese. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Leonard, L. (2003). Specific language impairment: Characterizing the deficit. In Levy, Y. & Schaeffer, J. (Eds.), Language competence across populations: Toward a definition of specific language impairment (pp. 209–231). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Meisel, J. M. (2008). Child second language acquisition or successive first language acquisition? In Haznedar, B. & Gavruseva, E. (Eds.), Current trends in child second language acquisition. A generative perspective (pp. 55–80). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Meisel, J. M. (2009). Second language acquisition in early childhood. Zeitschrift für Sprachwissenschaft, 28, 5–34.Google Scholar
Orgassa, A., & Weerman, F. (2008). Dutch gender in specific language impairment and second language. Second Language Research, 24, 325–356.Google Scholar
Paradis, J. (2007). Bilingual children with specific language impairment: Theoretical and applied issues. Applied Psycholinguistics, 28, 512–564.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paradis, J., Crago, M., Genesee, F., & Rice, M. (2003). French–English bilingual children with SLI: How do they compare with their monolingual peers? Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 46, 113–127.Google Scholar
Rice, M. (2004). Growth models of developmental language disorders. In Rice, M. & Warren, S. (Eds.), Developmental language disorders. From phenotypes to etiologies (203–236). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rothweiler, M. (2006). The acquisition of V2 and subordinate clauses in early successive acquisition of German. In Lleó, C. (Ed.), Interfaces in multilingualism (pp. 91–113). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Rothweiler, M. (2009). Critical periods and SLI. Comment on Jürgen Meisel “Second Language Acquisition in Early Childhood.” Zeitschrift für Sprachwissenschaft, 28, 49–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rothweiler, M., Chilla, S. & Babur, E. (in press). Specific language impairment in Turkish: Evidence from case morphology in Turkish–German successive bilinguals. Clinical Linguistics and Phonetics.Google Scholar
Rothweiler, M., Chilla, S., & Clahsen, H. (2009). Agreement and complex syntax in specific language impairment: A study of monolingual and bilingual German-speaking children. Paper presented at the IAS-ISF Workshop on Bilingualism and Specific Language Impairment, Hebrew University, Jerusalem.Google Scholar
Van Der Lely, H. (2003). Do heterogeneous deficits require heterogeneous theories? SLI subgroups and the RDDR hypothesis. In Levy, Y. & Schaeffer, J. (Eds.), Language competence across populations: Toward a definition of specific language impairment (pp. 109–133). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar