Word order, referential expression, and case cues to the acquisition of transitive sentences in Italian

In Study 1 we analyzed Italian child-directed-speech (CDS) andselected the three most frequent active transitive sentence frames usedwith overt subjects. In Study 2 we experimentally investigated howItalian-speaking children aged 2;6, 3;6, and 4;6 comprehended theseorders with novel verbs when the cues of animacy, gender, and subject–verb agreement were neutralized. For each trial, children chosebetween two videos (e.g., horse acting on cat versus cat acting onhorse), both involving the same action. The children aged 2;6comprehended S+object-pronoun+V (SOPROV) significantly betterthan S+V+object-noun (SVONOUN). We explain this in terms of cue collaboration between a low cost cue (CASE) and the FIRST ARGUMENT=AGENT cue which we found to be reliable 76% of the time. The mostdifficult word order for all age groups was the object-pronoun+V+S(OPROVS). We ascribe this difficulty to cue conflict between the twomost frequent transitive frames found in CDS, namely V+objectnounand object-pronoun+V

Children aged 2

The current study used a forced choice pointing paradigm to examine whether English children aged 2 ; 1 can use abstract knowledge of the relationship between word order position and semantic roles to make an active behavioural decision when interpreting active transitive sentences with novel verbs, when the actions are identical in the target and foil video clips. The children pointed significantly above chance with novel verbs but only if the final trial was excluded. With familiar verbs the children pointed consistently above chance. Children aged 2 ; 7 did not show these tiring effects and their performance in the familiar and novel verb conditions was always equivalen

Using shared knowledge to determine ironic intent; a conversational response paradigm

Mentalising has long been suggested to play an important role in irony interpretation. We hypothesised that another important cognitive underpinning of irony interpretation is likely to be childen’s capacity for mental set switching – the ability to switch flexibly between different approaches to the same task. We experimentally manipulated mentalising and set switching to investigate their effects on the ability of 7-year-olds to determine if an utterance is intended ironically or literally. The component of mentalising examined was whether the speaker and listener shared requisite knowledge. We developed a paradigm in which children had to select how a listener might reply, depending on whether the listener shared knowledge needed to interpret the utterance as ironic. Our manipulation of requisite set switching found null results. However, we are the first to show experimentally that children as young as seven years use mentalising to determine whether an utterance is intended ironically or literally

Topic maintenance in social conversation: What children need to learn and evidence this can be taught

Individual differences in children’s social communication have been shown to mediate the relationship between poor vocabulary or grammar and behavioural difficulties. Moreover, there is increasing evidence that social communication skills predict difficulties with peers over and above vocabulary and grammar scores. The essential social communicative skills needed to maintain positive peer relationships revolve around conversation. Children with weaker conversation skills are less likely to make and maintain friendships. While helping all children to participate actively in collaborative conversations is part of school curricula, evidence-based training on how to achieve this is rarely provided for teachers. In this review, we first provide an overview of the key components of conversation skills and the cognitive abilities required to maintain them. We then present a narrative review of randomised controlled trials and experimental studies that either trained child conversation skills or included conversation skills in both training and outcome measures. Most of the studies focussed on training conversational ability in autistic children. The general finding was that verbally fluent autistic children improve following conversation training on blind-assessed reciprocal conversational ability. Only two studies were found that trained conversation skills in typically developing children with adequate controls and outcome measures, which directly assessed conversational proficiency. Both studies focussed on typically developing children who, at baseline, were in the weaker third of the mainstream classroom. Importantly, training not only improved the conversational ability of these children, it also improved their rates of lunchtime interaction with peers and their peer popularity ratings. We argue that there is considerable potential for supporting conversation skills in the classroom as a universal or Tier 1 intervention. Future research should explore whether conversation skills training would benefit the whole classroom

Predictors of children’s conversational contingency

When in conversation, a child may respond to an adult’s turn by saying something that acknowledges what was previously said, saying something that furthers the topic of the conversation, saying something off topic, or by not saying anything at all. Different types of responses like these have been investigated with typically developing preschoolers and older children with autism but we still understand relatively little about what predicts their use. With a longitudinal sample of 40 Swedish-speaking five-year-olds, we carried out three studies investigating which factors, internal and external to the child, were the best predictors of the above four different aspects of children’s conversational behaviour. In Study 1, we investigated the predictive value of broadly concurrent linguistic and cognitive measures and found that receptive vocabulary was related to appropriate conversation responses. In Study 2, we investigated the predictive value of environmental factors and found that later preschool entry was positively related to contingent responses in this relatively socially advantaged sample. Finally, in Study 3, we investigated the predictive value of social and cognitive factors measured in early development and found no reliable relations. Together, these exploratory studies suggest that different aspects of children’s conversational skills may depend on strong lexical comprehension and may be facilitated by the caregiving environment

Parental screening measures for language development in Russian

While a variety of well-established standardised language assessment tools exist in English-speaking countries, only very a few standardised tests with clear norms are available in Russian. The aim of the present study was to contribute to a further development of tests of language ability for monolingual Russian-speaking children. One way to screen young children for a developmental language disorder is by the means of parental questionnaires. However, no such questionnaires are currently standardised for Russian language. We assessed which of the two parent-reported questionnaires, the Russian adaptation of the Children’s Communication Checklist-2 (CCC-2) or the Russian version of the 8-item questionnaire assessing ‘Current Language Skills’ is a more reliable predictor of children’s performance on direct measures of language. The two composite scores available in the CCC-2 (General Communication Composite (GCC), a measure of formal/structural language, and the General Pragmatic Composite (GenPragC), a measure of pragmatic competence) as well as the ‘Current Language Skills’ measure were correlated with the results of a direct assessment of structural and pragmatic language. 19 monolingual typically-developing Russian-speaking children aged between 4;0 and 6;8 years and their parents participated in the study. A strong relationship was found between the parent-reported ‘Current Language Skills’ questionnaire and a direct measure of expressive vocabulary (a Russian version of the Cross Linguistic Lexical Tasks (CLTs), noun production subtest). These results suggest that further investigation is warranted into establishing the validity of a Russian adaptation of the parental questionnaire assessing ‘Current Language Skills’ as a screening tool for a language disorder

How do three-year-olds use relevance inferencing to interpret indirect speech?

If a child asks a friend to play football and the friend replies “I have a cough”, the requesting child must make a ‘relevance inference’ to determine the communicative intent. Relevance inferencing is a key component of pragmatics, that is, the ability to integrate social context into language interpretation and use. We tested which cognitive skills relate to relevance inferencing. Additionally, we asked whether children’s lab-based pragmatic performance relates to children’s parent-assessed pragmatic language skills. We tested 3½- to 4-year-olds (Study 1: N = 40, Study 2: N = 32). Children were presented with video-recorded vignettes ending with an utterance requiring a relevance inference, for which children made a forced choice. Study 1 measured children’s Theory of Mind, their sentence comprehension and their real-world knowledge and found that only real-world knowledge retained significance in a regression analysis with children’s relevance inferencing as the outcome variable. Study 2 then manipulated children’s world-knowledge via priming but found this did not improve children’s performance on the relevance inferencing task. Study 2 did, however, find a significant correlation between children’s relevance inferencing and a measure of morpho-syntactic production. In both studies parents rated their children’s pragmatic language usage in daily life, which was found to relate to performance in our lab-based relevance inferencing task. This set of studies is the first to empirically demonstrate that lab-based measures of relevance inferencing are reflective of children’s pragmatic abilities ‘in the wild’. We argue that real-world knowledge is a necessary (but not sufficient) for relevance inferencing

Using parental questionnaires to investigate the heritage language proficiency of bilingual children

We asked whether parental questionnaires on the heritage language proficiency of bilingual children might elucidate how proficient bilingual children are in their heritage language. We tested 20 UK-based Polish-English bilingual children between 4;5 and 5;9 years on Polish and English versions of the Cross-Linguistic Lexical Tasks (CLTs). These comprise receptive and expressive picture tasks. Our bilingual group performed significantly worse on the Polish CLTs than on the English CLTs overall. They also performed significantly worse on the English CLTs than did an age- and gender-matched group of monolingual English-speaking children. Therefore our bilingual sample represent the type of bilinguals for whom education professionals have difficulty determining whether weak English is due to diminished English input versus an underlying Speech, Language or Communication Need. Parents of the bilinguals completed a Polish adaptation of the Children’s Communication Checklist 2. They also completed the Parents of Bilingual Children Questionnaire (PaBiQ), which includes Risk Factor measures (‘No Risk Index’ and children’s ‘Current Language Skills’). The PaBiQ also includes measures of the Amount and Length of Exposure to the majority language (English) prior to age four as well as the proportion of English in the current input. For the bilingual sample the CCC2 General Communication Composite (GCC), which measures structural language, significantly predicted Polish CLT production, uniquely accounting for 25% of the variance. The parent-rated PaBiQ ‘current Polish skills’ section predicted the Polish CLT comprehension. While the PaBiQ measure of Amount and Length of English Exposure was related to both Polish comprehension and production, it did not retain significance in a regression analysis. Therefore, parental questionnaires of the heritage language could provide a useful first step for education professionals when deciding whether to refer bilingual children for speech and language assessment. Large scale studies are needed to further develop these parental questionnaires

Can early years professionals determine which preschoolers have comprehension delays? A comparison of two screening tools

Language comprehension delays in pre-schoolers are predictive of difficulties in a range of developmental domains. In England, early years setting staff are required to assess the language comprehension of two-year-olds in their care. Many use a format based on the Early Years Foundation Stage My Unique Child (EYFS:UCCS ) in which the child’s language comprehension is assigned to an age band based on written guidance. Seventy 2½-3-year-olds were assessed on the comprehension component of the Preschool Language Scale (PLS) by psychology graduates. Early years practitioners assessed language comprehension in the same children using the EYFS:UCCS and the WellComm which involves some direct testing. The EYFS:UCCS had poor sensitivity and specificity and the understanding section did not correlate with the PLS. The WellComm had good-acceptable levels of sensitivity and specificity and significantly correlated with the PLS. Early years setting staff can accurately assess the language comprehension of two-year-olds if provided with a tool which gives specific instructions on administration, but current frequently used procedures (EYFS:UCCS) are not fit for this purpose