No abstract

No abstract

Native Spanish early and late acquirers of English as well as native Vietnamese early and child acquirers of English made grammaticality judgments of sentences in their second language. Native Spanish early acquirers were not distinguishable from native English speakers, whereas native Spanish late acquirers had difficulty with all aspects of the grammar tested except word order. Native Vietnamese early acquirers had difficulty with those aspects of English that differ markedly from Vietnamese. Native Vietnamese child acquirers had more generalized problems, similar to those of native Spanish late acquirers. Thus, native language appeared to make a difference for early acquirers, whereas a later age of acquisition caused a more general problem. A processing-based model focusing on the difficulty non-native language learners have in rapidly decoding surface form is offered as a possible explanation for both effects.

No abstract

Most work looking at specific language impairment (SLI) has been done in the context of mainstream dialects. This paper extends the study of SLI to two nonmainstream dialects: a rural version of Southern African American English (SAAE) and a rural version of Southern White English (SWE). Data were language samples from 93 4-to 6-year-olds who lived in southeastern Louisiana Forty were classified as speakers of SAAE, and 53 were classified as speakers of SWE. A third were previously diagnosed σs SLI; the others served as either age-matched (6N) or language-matched (4N) controls.The two dialects differed in frequency of usage on 14 of the 35 coded morphosyntactic surface patterns; speakers of these dialects could be successfully discriminated (94%) from each other in a discriminant analysis using just four of these patterns. Across dialects, four patterns resulted in main effects that were related to diagnostic condition (SLI vs. 6N), and a slightly different set of four patterns showed effects that were related to developmental processes (4N vs. 6N). More interestingly, the surface characteristics of SLI were found to manifest in the two dialects in different ways. A discriminant function based solely on SAAE speakers tended to misclassify SWE children with SLI as having normal language, and a discriminant function based on SWE speakers tended to misclassify SAAE unaffected children as SLI. Patterns within the SLI profile that cut across the two dialects included difficulties with tense marking and question formation. The results provide important direction for future studies and argue for the inclusion of contrastive as well as noncontrastive features of dialects within SLI research. Keywords dialect; specific language impairment; morphosyntaxIn a recent publication, Tager-Flusberg and Cooper (1999) summarize the comments of participants from an NIH-sponsored workshop that focused on the study of specific language impairment (SLI). The participants included experts in the fields of SLI and other developmental disorders such as autism, learning disabilities, and dyslexia. As part of the report, the authors highlight important study topics to help guide future research. One of the recommendations listed in the report is the development of constructs that are important for defining SLI in individuals who come from many language, cultural, and dialect backgrounds.The goal of the current work is to begin, at an exploratory level, to extend the study of SLI to two nonmainstream dialects of English. Although the grammatical profile of SLI has been explored in a wide range of languages, including Dutch, English, French, German, Greek, Hebrew, Hungarian, Italian, Japanese, Spanish, Swedish, and even Inukitut (an Eskimo- NIH-PA Author ManuscriptNIH-PA Author Manuscript NIH-PA Author ManuscriptAleut language) (Leonard, 1998), the study of SLI within nonmainstream varieties of these languages has been nonexistent. A primary reason for this has been limited knowledge on the part of researchers about the developmenta...

No abstract

Abstract:Child language researchers have often taken gender and case paradigms to be interesting test cases for theories of language learning. In this paper we develop a computational model of the acquisition of the gender, number, and case paradigm for the German definite article. The computational formalism used is a connectionist algorithm developed by Rumelhart, Hinton, and Williams (1986). Three models are developed. In the first two, various cues to gender studied by Köpcke and Zubin (1983, 1984) are entered by hand. In the third, the simulation is given only the raw phonological features of the stem. Despite the elimination of the hand-crafting of the units, the third model outperformed the first two in both training and generalization. All three models showed a good match to the developmental data of Mills (1986) andMacWhinney (1978). Advantages of a connectionist approach over older theories are discussed.When generative grammarians write a grammar for a language, they do it by formulating a set of rules together with a set of exceptions to these rules. In their classic work, "The Sound Pattern of English" (SPE), Chomsky and Halle (1968) provided a fairly complete generative grammar for English derivational and inflectional morphology. One of the goals of that work was to express the grammar in a maximally compact form, thereby capturing the maximum number of "linguistically significant generalizations." As a result, the rules of SPE were highly symbolic, having numerous subconditions, alternative environments, and variables. Moreover, the forms upon which those rules operated were abstract, often with no direct relation to any actually occurring phonological form. Although modern generative phonology no longer subscribes to the formulations of SPE, it still accepts the view of grammar as a set of rules based on often highly abstract symbols.

Three different approaches to the characterization of research participants' nonmainstream dialect use can be found in the literature. They include listener judgment ratings, type-based counts of nonmainstream pattern use, and token-based counts. In this paper, we examined these three approaches, as well as shortcuts to these methods, using language samples from 93 children previously described in J. Oetting and J. McDonald (2001). Nonmainstream dialects represented in the samples included rural Louisiana versions of Southern White English (SWE) and Southern African American English (SAAE). Depending on the method and shortcut used, correct dialect classifications (SWE or SAAE) were made for 88% to 97% of the participants; however, regression algorithms had to be applied to the type- and token-based results to achieve these outcomes. For characterizing the rate at which the participants produced the nonmainstream patterns, the token-based methods were found to be superior to the others, but estimates from all approaches were moderately to highly correlated with each other. When type- and/or token-based methods were used to characterize participants' dialect type and rate, the number of patterns included in the analyses could be substantially reduced without significantly affecting the validity of the outcomes. These findings have important implications for future child language studies that are done within the context of dialect diversity.