From the first months of life, human infants produce “protophones,” speech-like, non-cry sounds, presumed absent, or only minimally present in other apes. But there have been no direct quantitative comparisons to support this presumption. In addition, by 2 months, human infants show sustained face-to-face interaction using protophones, a pattern thought also absent or very limited in other apes, but again, without quantitative comparison. Such comparison should provide evidence relevant to determining foundations of language, since substantially flexible vocalization, the inclination to explore vocalization, and the ability to interact socially by means of vocalization are foundations for language. Here we quantitatively compare data on vocalization rates in three captive bonobo ( Pan paniscus ) mother–infant pairs with various sources of data from our laboratories on human infant vocalization. Both humans and bonobos produced distress sounds (cries/screams) and laughter. The bonobo infants also produced sounds that were neither screams nor laughs and that showed acoustic similarities to the human protophones. These protophone-like sounds confirm that bonobo infants share with humans the capacity to produce vocalizations that appear foundational for language. Still, there were dramatic differences between the species in both quantity and function of the protophone and protophone-like sounds. The bonobo protophone-like sounds were far less frequent than the human protophones, and the human protophones were far less likely to be interpreted as complaints and more likely as vocal play. Moreover, we found extensive vocal interaction between human infants and mothers, but no vocal interaction in the bonobo mother–infant pairs—while bonobo mothers were physically responsive to their infants, we observed no case of a bonobo mother vocalization directed to her infant. Our cross-species comparison focuses on low- and moderate-arousal circumstances because we reason the roots of language entail vocalization not triggered by excitement, for example, during fighting or intense play. Language appears to be founded in flexible vocalization, used to regulate comfortable social interaction, to share variable affective states at various levels of arousal, and to explore vocalization itself.

Examination of infant vocalization patterns across interactive and noninteractive contexts may facilitate better understanding of early communication development. In the current study, with 24 infant-parent dyads, infant volubility increased significantly when parent interaction ceased (presenting a “still face,” or SF) after a period of normal interaction (“face-to-face,” or FF). Infant volubility continued at the higher rate than in FF when the parent re-engaged (“reunion,” or RE). Additionally, during SF, the variability in volubility across infants decreased, suggesting the infants adopted relatively similar rates of vocalization to re-engage the parent. The pattern of increasing volubility in SF was seen across all of the most common speech-like vocal types of the first half-year of life (e.g., full vowels, quasivowels, squeals, growls). Parent and infant volubility levels were not significantly correlated. The findings suggest that by six months of age infants have learned that their vocalizations have social value and that changes in volubility can affect parental engagement.

Although parental volubility, or amount of talk, has received considerable recent attention, infant volubility has received comparatively little attention despite its potential significance for communicative risk status and later linguistic and cognitive outcomes. Volubility of 16 typically developing infants from 2 to 11 months of age was longitudinally investigated in the present study across three social circumstances: parent talking to infant, parent not talking to infant and parent talking to interviewer while the infant was in the room. Results indicated that volubility was least in the Interview circumstance. There were no significant differences in volubility between the parent Talk and No Talk circumstances. Volubility was found to reduce with age. These results suggest that infants vocalise in a variety of circumstances, even when no one talks to or interacts with them. The presence of a stranger or perhaps overhearing adults speaking to each other, however, may significantly reduce infant volubility.

90We are very excited about the future of The Volta Review , to build on its greatness and continue its revered position as a first-rate publication. Just as the African proverb proclaims, "it takes a village to raise a child," it takes the AG Bell membership to keep The Volta Review at the forefront of research and scholarship related to children who are deaf and hard of hearing. This work involves the parent members, the professional members, and the members who are deaf and hard of hearing. Katie and I welcome your comments, your suggestions, your ideas, and most importantly any manuscripts that you feel address the concerns of the membership. With your help, The Volta Review will grow and prosper as it undergoes transition and transformation in maintaining its premier role in the field of research related to deafness. Sincerely,The difficulties for students with hearing loss in gaining proficient literacy skills are well documented. However, studies describing the nature and variability of emergent literacy skills for students with hearing loss or the rate at which progress occurs at young ages are limited. We assessed emergent literacy skills and outcomes at the beginning and end of a school year for 44 young children (mean age = 5.2 years) who are deaf and hard of hearing and who had some speech perception skills. These children generally showed gains similar to their peers with typical hearing in knowledge of letter names and common written words, but lagged in phonological awareness skills. Correlational analyses suggest that these skills were systematically related to the children's literacy development, similar to what has been found in children with typical hearing. The results show that children participating in this study progressed on some phonological awareness skills (alliteration, blending, and elision) but not on others (rhyming, syllable segmentation). This article discusses the relevance of the findings for an emergent literacy curriculum .

S tudents with disabilities are increasingly receiving services in the general education classroom, and as a result, speech-language pathologists (SLPs) are using a variety of flexible models to meet the needs of these students. Although some schools continue to provide pullout service delivery models for speech-language therapy, many are increasing the number of hours SLPs spend in inclusive classroom settings (Katz, Fallon, Van Der Linden, & DiDonato, 2006).Collaboration among classroom teachers and SLPs is crucial to deliver effective treatment and services for students with speech-language impairments in an inclusive classroom setting (Ehren, Montgomery, Rudebusch, & Whitmire, 2007). Students who are at risk are more apt to receive appropriate intervention services and more continuity of care when a qualified team is establishing academic and communication objectives (Peña & Quinn, 2003). Banotai (2006) suggested that carryover and the long-term success of students with speech-language deficits depend on a collaborative approach because it allows the student to apply newly acquired communication skills in the general education classroom.Many challenges impede a successful collaborative relationship between classroom teachers and speechlanguage pathologists. MacDonald and Speece (2001) and Mastropieri (2001) asserted that effective classroom collaboration is difficult to implement and is often limited because of time constraints. Collaboration is also challenging given scheduling and planning difficulties (Kaff, 2004). Other constraints faced by teachers include the rigor of their curricula, large class sizes, lack of assistants in the classroom, and other responsibilities as faculty members. Challenges to collaboration for SLPs may include large caseloads, travel required between facilities to provide services, coordination of service delivery around curriculum blocks, and excessive paperwork (Katz et al., 2006;Whitmire & Eger, 2003).This column provides 20 practical strategies for classroom teachers and SLPs to work together collaboratively as they strive to meet the needs of the individual student in the least restrictive environment.