How much exposure to English is necessary for a bilingual toddler to perform like a monolingual peer in language tests?

Background Bilingual children are under-referred due to an ostensible expectation that they lag behind their monolingual peers in their English acquisition. The recommendations of the Royal College of Speech and Language Therapists (RCSLT) state that bilingual children should be assessed in both the languages known by the children. However, despite these recommendations, a majority of speech and language professionals report that they assess bilingual children only in English as bilingual children come from a wide array of language backgrounds and standardized language measures are not available for the majority of these. Moreover, even when such measures do exist, they are not tailored for bilingual children. Aims It was asked whether a cut-off exists in the proportion of exposure to English at which one should expect a bilingual toddler to perform as well as a monolingual on a test standardized for monolingual English-speaking children. Methods & Procedures Thirty-five bilingual 2;6-year-olds exposed to British English plus an additional language and 36 British monolingual toddlers were assessed on the auditory component of the Preschool Language Scale, British Picture Vocabulary Scale and an object-naming measure. All parents completed the Oxford Communicative Development Inventory (Oxford CDI) and an exposure questionnaire that assessed the proportion of English in the language input. Where the CDI existed in the bilingual's additional language, these data were also collected. Outcomes & Results Hierarchical regression analyses found the proportion of exposure to English to be the main predictor of the performance of bilingual toddlers. Bilingual toddlers who received 60% exposure to English or more performed like their monolingual peers on all measures. K-means cluster analyses and Levene variance tests confirmed the estimated English exposure cut-off at 60% for all language measures. Finally, for one additional language for which we had multiple participants, additional language CDI production scores were significantly inversely related to the amount of exposure to English. Conclusions & Implications Typically developing 2;6-year-olds who are bilingual in English and an additional language and who hear English 60% of the time or more, perform equivalently to their typically developing monolingual peers

Analysis of the visual spatiotemporal properties of American Sign Language.

Careful measurements of the temporal dynamics of speech have provided important insights into phonetic properties of spoken languages, which are important for understanding auditory perception. By contrast, analytic quantification of the visual properties of signed languages is still largely uncharted. Exposure to sign language is a unique experience that could shape and modify low-level visual processing for those who use it regularly (i.e., what we refer to as the Enhanced Exposure Hypothesis). The purpose of the current study was to characterize the visual spatiotemporal properties of American Sign Language (ASL) so that future studies can test the enhanced exposure hypothesis in signers, with the prediction that altered vision should be observed within, more so than outside, the range of properties found in ASL. Using an ultrasonic motion tracking system, we recorded the hand position in 3-dimensional space over time during sign language production of signs, sentences, and narratives. From these data, we calculated several metrics: hand position and eccentricity in space and hand motion speed. For individual signs, we also measured total distance travelled by the dominant hand and total duration of each sign. These metrics were found to fall within a selective range, suggesting that exposure to signs is a specific and unique visual experience, which might alter visual perceptual abilities in signers for visual information within the experienced range, even for non-language stimuli

Trump-induced anxiety among Latina/os

During the 2016 election, Donald Trump castigated unauthorized immigrants as “murderers and rapists.” During his presidency, he continued the use of this rhetoric, explicitly linking unauthorized migrants to threatening narratives. Here, we consider three questions: Did Donald Trump and his immigration positions serve as an “anxiety trigger” for Latina/os? Are individuals with contextually stigmatized attributes especially sensitive to Trump and his policy proposals? Is Spanish language itself, an attribute negatively stigmatized in the context of the immigration issue, sufficient to increase deportation anxiety? Utilizing survey experiments of Latina/os, we demonstrate that exposure to a Trump immigration cue is sufficient to increase anxiety about deportation. We also demonstrate that stigmatized attributes predict anxiety, but do not moderate the effect of the Trump cue. Lastly, we provide evidence that survey language affects anxiety among Latina/os. In Studies 1 (n = 736) and 2 (n = 1,040), we show that exposure to information about Trump’s immigration agenda significantly increases reports about deportation anxiety. In Study 3 (n = 1,734), we show that the Trump exposure condition induces heightened anxiety but that Latina/o attributes (language proficiency and use, immigration status, assessed phenotype) and identity strength have an independent effect on deportation anxiety. In Study 4 (n = 775), we randomized bilingual respondents into Spanish or English language survey protocols and found that comparable bilinguals exposed to Spanish language report higher levels of anxiety compared to English-language survey takers

Reaching out to the other side: Formal-linguistics-based SLA and Socio-SLA

Generative linguistics has long been concerned with the linguistic competence of the “ideal speaker-listener, in a completely homogeneous speech-community, who knows its language perfectly” (Chomsky 1965: 3). Research in formal-linguistics-based second language acquisition takes as its starting point the second language (L2) speaker's underlying mental representation. Here the factors of interest are influence of the learner's native language and, in generative SLA, the operation of innate linguistic mechanisms (Universal Grammar). Similar to methodology in formal syntax, lxSLA adopts techniques such as grammaticality judgment, comprehension and perception tasks supplementing spontaneously produced oral data. While there may be individual differences in oral production, tasks that tap learners' mental representations reveal commonalities across learners from a given native language background with the same amount/ type of exposure and age of initial L2 exposure. When it comes to phonology, age has long been a central factor with numerous comparative studies showing younger learners far outperforming older learners (see Piske et al. 2001). This paper discusses a case of possible non-acquisition by L2 children who had had considerable exposure to the L2. Children's non-acquisition is only apparent, and this allows us to consider the value of lxSLA methodology on the one hand, and and raises issues about what might be lacking in the current socio-SLA paradigm, on the other. We argue that only when we return to the cooperation that marked its birth in the 1960s will we have a comprehensive picture of SLA

Occupational Therapy’s Role in Early Language Development of Babies and Young Children

Occupational therapy practitioners in their interactions with babies, young children and their families, can be change-agents who promote rich language environments as a foundation to social interactions, social participation and academic successes. OTPs may be the sole provider working with a family or may reinforce with families the plan of care developed by speech-language pathologists (SLP) or early intervention teachers. The first step for OTPs is deeper knowledge of the importance of early language exposure, social interaction and participation development in young children and approaches that promotes rich language environments

An Analysis of English and Spanish Stop Production in Heritage Spanish Speech: The Columbus, Ohio Speech Community

Due to the rising Hispanic population in the US, Heritage Spanish speakers, a type of bilingual speaker who grew up with some degree of exposure to a minority language as their first language [L1] while living in a country with some other majority language which is learned as their second language [L2], are becoming more prevalent in our society. Though these speakers account for a large number of the population throughout the country, studies focusing on Heritage Spanish typically focus on "traditionally" Spanish speaking areas such as the southwest. This study seeked to provide a snapshot into the Columbus, Ohio Heritage Spanish speech community, focusing on the stop consonants /p,t,k,b,d,g/, which appear in both languages but have distinct productions for each language. Stress, location within the word, place of articulation, and language dominance were then analyzed to discern any effects they had on the overall and individual productions of VOT and intensity ratio. Lastly, sociolinguistic factors of highest level of education completed, age of exposure, and amount of exposure were also tracked to determine their effect on individual sound production. Speakers were found to maintain separate phonetic categories for their Spanish and English sounds. Stress was found to have a significant effect on English voiceless stops, the realization of Spanish and English voiced stops, and the intensity of Spanish and English voiced stops. Location within the word was also found to have a significant effect on both English and Spanish voiceless stops, as well as the realization and intensity of Spanish and English voiced stops. The effects of sociolinguistic factors varied between voiced and voiceless sounds, but a strong connection was found linking percentage of time spent using English to VOT and intensity production for both sets. This strongly suggests that the sociolinguistic factor which is most important in phonological acquisition is use of the target language.No embargoAcademic Major: LinguisticsAcademic Major: Spanis

Language Practice and Study Abroad

The present study measures the impact that pragmatic intervention has when students are exposed to targeted language practice during a six-week study abroad programme in Buenos Aires, Argentina. The intervention had three goals. First, the researcher drew learners’ attention to language use and context through discussion about pragmatics and exposure to authentic input. Second, the intervention aimed at making students aware of the pragmatic norms of the target culture, including the appropriate use of communication strategies. The third and final goal was to afford the participants opportunities to engage in what DeKeyser (2007) and others argue are five critical aspects of language practice during study abroad: input, output, interaction, guided reflection and targeted feedback. Results indicated that over time all six students increased their use of targetlike request strategies. Journal entries and interviews with the researcher also revealed that the students became more aware of appropriate target-like request behaviour as a result of the language practice. In their journals and interviews, the students also attributed their pragmatic development to three additional sources: interactions with host families and other native speakers, their participation in service encounter exchanges and the targeted feedback given to them by the researcher. The results suggest that exposure to targeted language practice prior to and during study abroad can facilitate pragmatic learning and, in turn, contribute to a more successful study abroad experience

Deaf children need language, not (just) speech

Deaf and Hard of Hearing (DHH) children need to master at least one language (spoken or signed) to reach their full potential. Providing access to a natural sign language supports this goal. Despite evidence that natural sign languages are beneficial to DHH children, many researchers and practitioners advise families to focus exclusively on spoken language. We critique the Pediatrics article ‘Early Sign Language Exposure and Cochlear Implants’ (Geers et al., 2017) as an example of research that makes unsupported claims against the inclusion of natural sign languages. We refute claims that (1) there are harmful effects of sign language and (2) that listening and spoken language are necessary for optimal development of deaf children. While practical challenges remain (and are discussed) for providing a sign language-rich environment, research evidence suggests that such challenges are worth tackling in light of natural sign languages providing a host of benefits for DHH children – especially in the prevention and reduction of language deprivation.Accepted manuscrip