Phonological short-term memory and phonological representations both significantly contribute to NWR. The predictive strength of the quality of phonological representations changes during development.

No abstract

A cross-linguistic investigation of the acquisition of the pragmatics of indefinite and definite reference in two-year-olds Rozendaal, M.I.; Baker, A.E. Disclaimer/Complaints regulationsIf you believe that digital publication of certain material infringes any of your rights or (privacy) interests, please let the Library know, stating your reasons. In case of a legitimate complaint, the Library will make the material inaccessible and/or remove it from the website. Please Ask the Library: http://uba.uva.nl/en/contact, or a letter to: Library of the University of Amsterdam, Secretariat, Singel 425, 1012 WP Amsterdam, The Netherlands. You will be contacted as soon as possible. The acquisition of reference involves both morphosyntax and pragmatics. This study investigates whether Dutch, English and French two-to three-year-old children differentiate in their use of determiners between non-specific/specific reference, newness/givenness in discourse and mutual/no mutual knowledge between interlocutors. A brief analysis of the input shows a clear association between form and function, although there are some language differences in this respect. As soon as determiner use can be statistically analyzed, the children show a relatively adult-like pattern of association for the distinctions of non-specific/specific and newness/givenness. The distinction between mutual/no mutual knowledge appears later. Reference involving no mutual knowledge is scarcely evidenced in the input and barely used by the children at this age. The development of associations is clearly related to the rate of determiner development, the French being quickest, then the English, then the Dutch.[

In this paper we discuss the mixed language input of four deaf mothers and the mixed output of their three deaf and three hearing children. Taking a strict definition of code-mixing (as defined by Muysken 2000) we find that the deaf mothers mainly use a form of code-mixing, or mixed code-blending, called congruent lexicalization, which results in a mixed form between NGT (Sign Language of the Netherlands) and Dutch in a structure which is compatible with both NGT and Dutch. The deaf children (up to 3 years), who are only just beginning to become bilingual, hardly produce any code-mixed utterances. The hearing children, however, are clearly bilingual in NGT and Dutch, and use code-blending of the mixed type in more or less the same form as their mother does.

The effect of using signed communication on the spoken language development of deaf children with a cochlear implant (CI) is much debated. We report on two studies that investigated relationships between spoken word and sign processing in children with a CI who are exposed to signs in addition to spoken language. Study 1 assessed rapid word and sign learning in 13 children with a CI and found that performance in both language modalities correlated positively. Study 2 tested the effects of using sign-supported speech on spoken word processing in eight children with a CI, showing that simultaneously perceiving signs and spoken words does not negatively impact their spoken word recognition or learning. Together, these two studies suggest that sign exposure does not necessarily have a negative effect on speech processing in some children with a CI.