Code-Switching and Language Proficiency in Bilingual Children With and Without Developmental Language Disorder

Abstract

Purpose This study examined the frequency of code-switching by Spanish–English-speaking children as a function of language proficiency in each language and diagnosis (developmental language disorder [DLD] or typical language development [TLD]). Method Sixty-two Spanish–English-speaking children, 5–7 years of age, participated in this study (24 with DLD and 38 with TLD). Language samples were used to determine the level of language proficiency in each language as a continuum of performance. Correlational analyses were conducted to evaluate the relationship between Spanish and English language proficiency and the frequency of code-switching considering the total number of code-switched words, intrasentential code-switching (i.e., number of sentences/C-units with code-switched parts), and intersentential code-switching (i.e., code-switched sentences/C-units). Negative binomial and zero-inflated Poisson regressions were conducted to evaluate whether the frequency of code-switched words, code-switched parts, and code-switched sentences is different across children with DLD and their peers with TLD, controlling for Spanish and English proficiency. Results When Spanish was the target language, lower proficiency in Spanish was associated with higher frequency of code-switches to English for the group with DLD, but not for their peers with TLD who code-switched to English regardless of their Spanish and English proficiency. There were no statistically significant effects of diagnosis on the frequency of code-switches. Conclusion Results indicate that code-switching occurs similarly across children with DLD and their peers with TLD; therefore, the frequency and type of code-switches should not be used as an indicator of DLD.

The Relationship between Code-switching and the Level of Language Proficiency in the Second Language of Saudi Female Students

“…The result indicates that both groups switched codes with the same frequency. This result is similar to that reached by Montanari et al (2019) and Kapantzoglou et al (2021), who found no remarkable relationships between the frequency of CS and language proficiency. Furthermore, the analysis reveals that the high-level language proficiency group used more intrasentential code-switches than the intermediate level of language proficiency group, who used more intersentential code-switching during their speech.…”

“…For instance, Reyes (2004) found a significant statistical difference in the frequency of CS between two groups of bilinguals due to their levels of language proficiency. On Arab World English Journal www.awej.org ISSN: 2229-9327 313 the other hand, Montanari et al (2019) and Kapantzoglou et al (2021) found no remarkable relationships between CS in Spanish-English bilinguals and language proficiency. The contrastive results across studies might be attributed to the different methodological approaches of each study.…”

Focus on the Outcomes of Communication Under Six: Validation of Language Skills in the Jamaican Context

“…During the scheduled interviews, parents of JC-Englishspeaking children in the current study completed the FOCUS in English only but considered how their children dynamically used communication across both of their spoken languages. Important to note is that code-mixing (i.e., use of features of both languages in a single production) is ubiquitous in the Jamaican context (Wright , in-keeping with observations of language use in other multilingual children (Castilla-Earls et al, 2016;Kapantzoglou et al, 2021;Paradis et al, 2021), offering ecological validity in support of our chosen approach. Based on availability at the time of data collection, the FOCUS or FOCUS-34 was used.…”

“…However, when considering MLU as a metric for assessing multilingual children, researchers have identified MLU in words (i.e., MLUw; Gutierrez-Clellen et al, 2012) as a more responsive and accurate calculation. The MLUw calculation responds to differences across languages regarding morphological “rules, rate, and order” (Baron et al, 2018, p. 975) and addresses natural features of multilingualism, such as crosslinguistic influence (Baron et al, 2018; Kapantzoglou et al, 2021; Paradis et al, 2021). Because MLUw is unaffected by cross-linguistic influence and is more responsive to differences in morphemes (Baron et al, 2018), it is increasingly recommended for use with multilingual children (Gutierrez-Clellen et al, 2012).…”

“…This immersive and participatory method of inquiry facilitated research team members in completing the Pragmatics Profile based on observations of each child in a variety of naturally occurring cultural and linguistic contexts. To illustrate, research team members were able to observe and interact with children across multiple linguistic contexts where children would primarily communicate in either JC, English, or dynamically use both languages (i.e., cross-linguistic influence; Kapantzoglou et al, 2021; Paradis et al, 2021), and could supplement observations with feedback from parents and teachers. By implementing this approach, the Pragmatics Profile questions were answered based on a broad range of children’s social interactions, rather than their ability to socially interact in only one of their languages with research team members who, for the most part, were not members of Jamaican culture.…”