Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-hc48f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-22T19:02:36.241Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The relation of birth order and socioeconomic status to children's language experience and language development

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 November 2008

Erika Hoff-Ginsberg
Erika Hoff-Ginsberg*
Affiliation:
Florida Atlantic University
*
Florida Atlantic University, 2912 College Avenue, Davie, FL 33314-7714. Email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Variation in mothers' child-directed speech and in their children's rates of language development were examined as a function of child birth order and family socioeconomic status (SES). A total of 63 children between 18 and 29 months were recorded in dyadic interaction with their mothers on two separate occasions, 10 weeks apart. The children included first and later boms who came from high-SES and mid-SES backgrounds. Analyses of the children's speech at the second visit showed that the first-bom children were more advanced in lexical and grammatical development than the later-bom children, and that the later-bom children were more advanced in the development of conversational skill. High-SES children showed more advanced lexical development than mid-SES children. These differences are interpreted as the result of differences in language learning experience associated with birth order and SES, some of which were in evidence in the mothers' speech recorded at the first visit. With respect to theories of language acquisition, these findings suggest that language experience plays a nontrivial role in language development, and that the nature of that role is different for different components of language development. With respect to general developmental consequences of birth order and SES, the findings indicate that differences in early language experience may set the stage for later developmental differences, but that when long-term and pervasive differences are observed, as is the case for SES-related differences in achievement, it is likely that there are pervasive and continuing differences in experience.

Type
Articles
Information
Applied Psycholinguistics , Volume 19 , Issue 4 , October 1998 , pp. 603 - 629
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1998

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

Arriaga, R. J., Fenson, L., Cronan, T., & Pethick, S. J. (1998). Scores on the MacArthur Communicative Development Inventory of children from low- and middle-income families. Applied Psycholinguistics, 19, 209–223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barnes, S., Gutfreund, M., Satterly, D., & Wells, G. (1983). Characteristics of adult speech which predict children's language development. Journal of Child Language, 10, 65–84.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Barton, M., & Tomasello, M. (1994). The rest of the family: The role of fathers and siblings in early language development. In Gallaway, C. & Richards, B. J. (Eds.), Input and interaction in language acquisition (pp. 109–134). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Bates, E. (1975). Peer relations and the acquisition of language. In Lewis, M. & Rosenblum, L. (Eds.), Friends and peer relations (pp. 259–292). New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Bates, E., & MacWhinney, B. (1982). Functionalist approaches to grammar. In Gleitman, L. & Wanner, E. (Eds.), Language acquisition: The state of the art (pp. 173–218). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Bernicot, J., & Roux, M. (in press). La structure et l'usage des énoncés: Comparison d'enfants uniques et d'enfants second nés. In Bernicot, J., Marcos, H., Day, C., Guidetti, M., RabainJamin, J., Laval, V., Babelot, & G. (Eds.), De l'usage des gestes el des mots chez les enfants. Paris: Armand Colin.Google Scholar
Black, B., & Logan, A. (1995). Links between communication patterns in mother-child, fatherchild, and child-peer interactions and children's social status. Child Development, 66, 255–271.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bloom, L., Rocissano, L., & Hood, L. (1976). Adult-child discourse: Developmental interaction between information processing and linguistic knowledge. Cognitive Psychology, 8, 521–551.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Budwig, N. (1991). Introduction [to the special issue on functional approaches to child language]. First Language, 11, 1–5.Google Scholar
Chall, J. S., Jacobs, V. A., & Baldwin, L. E. (1990). The reading crisis: Why poor children fall behind. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Culp, A. M., Osofsky, J. D., & O'Brien, M. (1996). Language patterns of adolescent and older mothers and their one-year-old children: A comparison study. First Language, 16, 61–75.Google Scholar
Deutsch, M. (1965). The role of social class in language development and cognition. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 35, 78–88.Google Scholar
Dunn, J., & Shatz, M. (1989). Becoming a conversationalist despite (or because of) having an older sibling. Child Development, 60, 399–410.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fenson, L., Dale, P. S., Reznick, J. S., Bates, E., Thai, D. J., & Pethick, S. J. (1994). Variability in early communicative development. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 59 (5, Serial No. 242).Google Scholar
Femald, A. (1992). Human maternal vocalizations to infants as biologically relevant signals: An evolutionary perspective. In Barkow, J. H., Cosmides, L., & Tooby, J. (Eds.), The adapted mind: Evolutionary psychology and the generation of culture (pp. 391–428). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Gleason, J. B. (1975). Fathers and other strangers: Men's speech to young children. In Data, D. P. (Ed.), Georgetown University Round Table on Language and Linguistics (pp. 289–297). Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
Goldfield, B., & Reznick, J. (1990). Early lexical acquisition: Rate, content, and the vocabulary spun. Journal of Child Language, 17, 171–184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Golinkoff, R. M., & Ames, G. (1979). A comparison of mothers’ and fathers’ speech to young children. Child Development, 50, 28–32.Google Scholar
Greenwood, C., Carta, J., Hart, B., Kamps, D., Terry, B., Arreaga-Mayer, C, Atwater, J., Walker, D., Risley, T., & Dequadri, J. (1992). Out of the laboratory and into the community. American Psychologist, 47, 1464–1474.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Grice, H. (1975). Logic and conversation. In Cole, P. & Morgan, J. (Eds.), Speech acts: Syntax and semantics (Vol. 3, pp. 41–58). New York: Academic.Google Scholar
Hart, B., & Risley, T. (1995). Meaningful differences in the everyday experience of young American children. Baltimore: Brookes.Google Scholar
Hartup, W. W. (1970). Peer interaction and social organization. In Mussen, P. H. (Ed.), Carmichael's manual of child psychology (3rd ed., pp. 361–456). New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Hoff-Ginsberg, E. (1985). Some contributions of mothers’ speech to their children's syntactic growth. Journal of Child Language, 12, 367–386.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hoff-Ginsberg, E. (1986). Function and structure in maternal speech: Their relation to the child's development of syntax. Developmental Psychology, 22, 155–163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hoff-Ginsberg, E. (1987). Topic relations in mother-child conversation. First Language, 7, 145–158.Google Scholar
Hoff-Ginsberg, E. (1991). Mother-child conversation in different social classes and communicative settings. Child Development, 62, 782–796.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hoff-Ginsberg, E. (1992). How should frequency in input be measured? First Language, 12, 233–244.Google Scholar
Hoff-Ginsberg, E. (1993, July). Early syntax is robust, but learning object labels depends on input. Paper presented at the Sixth International Congress for the Study of Child Language, Trieste, Italy.Google Scholar
Hoff-Ginsberg, E. (1994). Influences of mother and child on maternal talkativeness. Discourse Processes, 18, 105–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hoff-Ginsberg, E. (in press). Formalism or functionalism? Evidence from the study of language development. In Darnell, M., Marovscik, E., Noonan, M., Newmeyer, F., & Wheatley, K. (Eds.), Functionalism and formalism in linguistics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Hoff-Ginsberg, E., & Krueger, W. (1991). Older siblings as conversational partners. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 37, 465–481.Google Scholar
Hoff-Ginsberg, E., & Shatz, M. (1982). Linguistic input and the child's acquisition of language. Psychological Bulletin, 92, 3–26.Google Scholar
Hoff-Ginsberg, E., & Tardif, T. (1995). Socioeconomic status and parenting. In Bornstein, M. H. (Ed.), Handbook of parenting: Vol. 2: Ecology and biology of parenting (pp. 161–188). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Huttenlocher, J., Haight, W.Bryk, A., Seltzer, M., & Lyons, T. (1991). Early vocabulary growth: Relation to language input and gender. Developmental Psychology, 27, 236–248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jones, C, & Adamson, L. B. (1987). Language use in mother-child and other child-sibling interactions. Child Development, 58, 356–366.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jordan, N., Huttenlocher, J., & Levine, S. (1992). Differential calculation abilities in young children from middle- and low-income families. Developmental Psychology, 28, 644–653.Google Scholar
Lawrence, V. (1997) Middle- and working-class Black and White children's speech during a picturelabeling task. Journal of Genetic Psychology, 158, 226–240.Google Scholar
Lawrence, V., & Shipley, E. (1996). Parental speech to middle-and working-class children from two racial groups in three settings. Applied Psycholinguistics, 17, 233–255.Google Scholar
Lesser, G. S., Fifer, G., & Clark, D. H. (1965). Mental abilities of children from different socialclass and cultural groups. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 30 (4, Serial No. 102).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lewis, C, Freeman, N. H., Kyriakidou, C, Maridaki-Kassotaki, K., & Berridge, D. (1996). Social influences on false belief access: Specific influences or general apprenticeship? Child Development, 67, 2930–2947.Google Scholar
McCarthy, D. (1930). The language development of the preschool child. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
McCartney, K. (1984). Effect of quality of day care environment on children's language development. Developmental Psychology, 20, 244–260.Google Scholar
McCartney, K., Robeson, W., Jordan, E., & Mouradian, V. (1991). Mothers’ language with first-and second-born children: A within-family study. In Pillemer, K. & McCartney, K. (Eds.), Parent-child relations throughout life (pp. 125–142). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Miller, J., & Chapman, R. (1985). SALT: Systematic analysis of language transcripts. Madison: University of Wisconsin, Waisman Center, Language Analysis Laboratory.Google Scholar
Moore, T. (1968). Language and intelligence: A longitudinal study of the first 8 years. Part II: Environmental correlates of mental growth. Human Development, 11, 1–24.Google Scholar
Morisset, C, Barnard, K., Greenberg, M., Booth, C, & Spieker, S. (1990). Environmental influences on early language development: The context of social risk. Development and Psychopathology. 2, 127–149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Naigles, L., & Hoff-Ginsberg, E. (1998). Why are some verbs learned before other verbs? Effects of input frequency and structure on children's early verb use. Journal of Child Language, 25, 95–120.Google Scholar
Newport, E. L., Gleitman, H., & Gleitman, L. (1977). Mother, I'd rather do it myself: Some effects and noneffects of maternal speech style. In Snow, C. E. & Ferguson, C. A. (Eds.), Talking to children: Language input and acquisition (pp. 109–150). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Pemer, J., Ruffman, T., & Leekam, S. R. (1994). Theory of mind is contagious: You catch it from your sibs. Child Development, 65. 1228–1238.Google Scholar
Pine, J. (1994). Environmental correlates of variation in lexical style: Interactional style and the structure of the input. Applied Psycholinguistics, 15, 355–370.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pine, J. (1995). Variation in vocabulary development as a function of birth order. Child Development, 66, 272–281.Google Scholar
Richards, B. J. (1987). Type/token ratios: What do they really tell us? Journal of Child Language, 14, 201–209.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rollins, P. R., Snow, C. E., & Willett, J. B., (1996). Predictors of MLU: Semantic and morphological development. First Language, 16, 243–259.Google Scholar
Sampson, E. E. (1965). The study of ordinal position: Antecedents and outcomes. In Maher, B. A. (Ed.), Progress in experimental personality research (Vol. 2, pp. 175–229). New York: Academic.Google Scholar
Snow, C. (1983). Literacy and language: Relationships during the preschool years. Harvard Educational Review, 53, 165–189.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Snow, C, Perlmann, R., & Nathan, D. (1987). Why routines are different: Toward a multiple-factors model of the relation between input and language acquisition. In Nelson, K. E. & Van Kleeck, A. (Eds.), Children's language (Vol. 6, pp. 65–98). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Tager-FIusberg, H. (1994). The relationship between language and social cognition: Lessons from autism. In Levy, Y. (Ed.), Other children, other languages (pp. 359–382). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Tomasello, M., & Mannle, S. (1985). Pragmatics of sibling speech to 1-year-olds. Child Development, 56. 911–917.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van der Geest, T., Gerstel, T., Appel, R., & Tervoort, B. T. (1973). The child's communicative competence: Language capacity in three groups of children from different social classes. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
Wachs, T., Uzgiris, I., & Hunt, J. (1971). Cognitive development in infants of different age levels and from different environmental backgrounds: An explanatory investigation. MerrillPalmer Quarterly, 17, 283–317.Google Scholar