Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-r5fsc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T04:00:52.210Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Past tense productivity in Dutch children with and without SLI: the role of morphophonology and frequency*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 February 2013

JUDITH E. RISPENS  and
ELISE H. DE BREE
JUDITH E. RISPENS
Affiliation:
University of Amsterdam, Netherlands
ELISE H. DE BREE
Affiliation:
Utrecht University, Netherlands
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This study focuses on morphophonology and frequency in past tense production. It was assessed whether Dutch five- and seven-year-old typically developing (TD) children and eight-year-old children with specific language impairment (SLI) produce the correct allomorph in regular, irregular, and novel past tense formation. Type frequency of the allomorph, token frequency and phonotactic probability (PP) of the novel verb form are considered. The results showed all groups were sensitive to the phonological cue. PP did not contribute to past tense inflection of novel verbs in any of the groups, but type frequency did in all three groups. Only the seven-year-old typically developing children relied on token frequency for inflection of regulars. The findings point to an important role of phonology and frequency in past tense acquisition for both TD children and children with SLI. We discuss how the SLI performance pattern relates to theories on SLI.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Child Language , Volume 41 , Issue 1 , January 2014 , pp. 200 - 225
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2013 

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.)

Footnotes

[*]

Address for correspondence: Judith Rispens, University of Amsterdam – Linguistics, Spuistraat 210 Amsterdam 1012 VT, Netherlands. e-mail: [email protected]

References

REFERENCES

Adriaans, F. (2006). PhonotacTools (Test version). [Computer program]. Utrecht Institute of Linguistics OTS, Utrecht University, the Netherlands.Google Scholar
Baayen, R. H., Piepenbrock, R. & van Rijn, H. (1995). The CELEX lexical database. CD-ROM. Philadelphia, PA. Linguistic Data Consortium, University of Pennsylvania.Google Scholar
Beers, M. (1995). The phonology of normally developing and language impaired children. (IFOTT dissertation series, No. 20). Amsterdam: IFOTT.Google Scholar
Berko, J. (1958). The child's learning of English morphology. Word 14, 150–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blom, E. & Paradis, J. (in press). Past tense production by English second language learners with and without language impairment. Journal of Speech, Language and Hearing Research.Google Scholar
de Bree, E. & Kerkhoff, A. (2010). Bempen or bemben: differences between children at-risk of dyslexia and children with SLI on a morpho-phonological task. Scientific Studies of Reading 14, 85–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bybee, J. (1995). Regular morphology and the lexicon. Language and Cognitive Processes 10, 425–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bybee, J. (2001). Phonology and language use. Cambridge: C.U.P.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bybee, J. (2007). Frequency of use and the organization of language. Oxford: O.U.P.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bybee, J. (2008). Usage-based grammar and second language acquisition. In Robinson, P. & Ellis, N. (eds.), Handbook of cognitive linguistics and second language acquisition. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Bybee, J. & Slobin, D. (1982). Rules and schemas in the development and use of the English past tense. Language 58, 265–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chiat, S. (2001). Mapping theories of developmental language impairment: premises, predictions and evidence. Language and Cognitive Processes 16, 113–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Derwing, B. L. & Baker, W. J. (1980). Rule learning and the English inflections (with special emphasis on the plural). In Prideaux, G. D., Derwing, B. L. & Baker, W. J. (eds.), Experimental linguistics: integration of theory and applications. Ghent: E.Stroy-Scientia.Google Scholar
Ernestus, M. & Baayen, H. (2001). Choosing between the Dutch past tense suffixes -te and -de. In van der Wouden, T. and de Hoop, H. (eds.), Linguistics in the Netherlands 2001, 77–87. Amsterdam.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ernestus, M. & Baayen, H. (2003). Predicting the unpredictable: interpreting neutralized segments in Dutch. Language 18, 5–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Finneran, D. A. & Leonard, L. B. (2010). Role of linguistic input in third person singular -s use in the speech of young children. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research 53, 1065–74.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Forrest, K. & Morrisette, M. L. (1999). Feature analysis of segmental errors in children with phonological disorders. Journal of Speech, Language and Hearing Research 42, 187–94.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Goddijn, S. & Binnenpoorte, D. (2003). Assessing manually corrected broad phonetic transcriptions in the Spoken Dutch Corpus. In Proceedings of the 15th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences, 1361–64. Barcelona.Google Scholar
Gor, K. (2007). Experimental study of first and second language morphological processing. In Gonzalez-Marquez, M., Mittelberg, I., Coulson, S. & Spivey, M. J. (eds.), Methods in cognitive linguistics. Ithaca: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Hsu, H. J. & Bishop, D. V. M. (2011). Grammatical difficulties in children with specific language impairment: is learning deficient? Human Development 21(53), 264–77.Google Scholar
Joanisse, M. F. & Seidenberg, M. S. (1998). Specific Language Impairment in children: an impairment in grammar or processing? Trends in Cognitive Sciences 2, 240–46.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jusczyk, P. W., Luce, P. A. & Charles-Luce, J. (1994). Infants' sensitivity to phonotactic patterns in the native language. Journal of Memory and Language 33, 630–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kager, R., van der Feest, S., Fikkert, P., Kerkhoff, A. & Zamuner, T. (2007). Representations of [voice]. Evidence from acquisition. In van de Weijer, J. & van der Torre, E. J. (eds.), Voicing in Dutch: (de)voicing phonology, phonetics, and psycholinguistics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Kerkhoff, A., de Bree, E., Kager, R. & Zonneveld, W. (2011). Voicing errors in regular past tense inflection. Presentation at the Tin dag, Utrecht, February 2011.Google Scholar
Kidd, E. & Kirjavainen, E. (2011). Investigating the contribution of procedural and declarative memory to the acquisition of the past tense: evidence from Finnish. Language and Cognitive Processes 26, 794–829.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van der Lely, H. K. J. & Ullman, M. (2001). Past tense morphology in specifically language impaired and normally developing children. Language and Cognitive Processes 16, 177–217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leonard, L. B. (1998). Children with specific language impairment. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google ScholarPubMed
Leonard, L. B., Davis, J. & Deevy, P. (2007). Phonotactic probability and past tense use by children with specific language impairment and their typically developing peers. Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics 21, 747–58.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Leonard, L. B., Ellis Weismer, S., Miller, C. A., Francis, D. J., Tomblin, J. B. & Kail, R. V. (2007). Speed of processing, working memory, and language impairment in children. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research 50, 408–28.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
MacWhinney, B. (2000). The CHILDES project: tools for analyzing talk: Vol. 2. The database. London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.Google Scholar
Marchman, V. A. (1997). Children's productivity in the English past tense: the role of frequency, phonology, and neighbourhood structure. Cognitive Science 21, 283–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marchman, V. A. & Bates, E. (1994). Continuity in lexical and morphological development: a test of the critical mass hypothesis. Journal of Child Language 21, 339–66.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Marchman, V. A., Wulfeck, B. & Ellis Weismer, S. (1999). Morphological productivity in children with normal language and SLI: a study of the English past tense. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research 42, 206–19.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Marinis, T. (2011). On the nature and cause of Specific Language Impairment: a view from sentence processing and infant research. Lingua 121, 463–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marinis, T. & Chondrogianni, V. (2011). Comprehension of reflexives and pronouns in sequential bilingual children: do they pattern similarly to L1 children, L2 adults, or children with specific language impairment? Journal of Neurolinguistics 24, 202–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marshall, C. & van der Lely, H. (2006). A challenge to current models of past tense inflection: the impact of phonotactics. Cognition 100, 302–20.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Marshall, C. & van der Lely, H. (2007). The impact of phonological complexity on past tense inflection in children with Grammatical-SLI. Advances in Speech-Language Pathology 9, 191–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Matthews, D. E. & Theakston, A. (2006). Errors of omission in English-speaking children's production of plurals and the past tense: the effects of frequency, phonology, and competition. Cognitive Science 30, 1027–52.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Moscoso del Prado Martín, F., Ernestus, M. & Baayen, R. H. (2004). Do type and token effects reflect different mechanisms? Connectionist modeling of Dutch past-tense formation and final devoicing. Brain and Language 90, 287–98.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Oetting, J. & Horohov, J. (1997). Past-tense marking by children with and without specific language impairment. Journal of Speech, Language and Hearing Research 40, 62–74.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Paradis, J. (2010). Bilingual children's acquisition of English verb morphology: effects of language exposure, structure complexity, and task type. Language Learning 60, 651–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paradis, J., Nicoladis, E., Crago, M. & Genesee, F. (2010). Bilingual children's acquisition of the past tense: a usage-based approach. Journal of Child Language 38, 554–78.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Raven, J. (2006). Raven Standard Progressive Matrices (SPM). Enschede: Harcourt Test Publishers.Google Scholar
Rice, M., Wexler, K. & Cleave, P. (1995). Specific language impairment as a period of optional infinitive. Journal of Speech, Language and Hearing Research 38, 850–63.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schlichting, L. (2005). Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test-III NL. Amsterdam: Harcourt Test Publisher.Google Scholar
Song, J. Y., Sundara, M. & Demuth, K. (2009). Effects of phonology on children's production of English 3rd person singular -s. Journal of Speech, Language & Hearing Research 52, 623–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vitevitch, M. S. & Luce, P. A. (1999). Probabilistic phonotactics and neighborhood activation in spoken word recognition. Journal of Memory and Language 40, 374–408.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zonneveld, W. (1983). Lexical and phonological properties of Dutch voicing assimilation. In van de Broecke, M., van Heuven, V. & Zonneveld, W. (eds.), Sound and structure: Studies for Antonie Cohen, 297–312. Dordrecht: Foris.CrossRefGoogle Scholar