This article needs additional citations for verification. (December 2013) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)
Language development is a process starting early in human life. Infants start without knowing a language, yet by 10 months, babies can distinguish speech sounds and engage in babbling. Some research has shown that the earliest learning begins in utero when the fetus starts to recognize the sounds and speech patterns of its mother's voice and differentiate them from other sounds after birth.
Typically, children develop receptive language abilities before their verbal or expressive language develops. Receptive language is the internal processing and understanding of language. As receptive language continues to increase, expressive language begins to slowly develop.
Usually, productive language is considered to begin with a stage of pre-verbal communication in which infants use gestures and vocalizations to make their intents known to others. According to a general principle of development, new forms then take over old functions, so that children learn words to express the same communicative functions they had already expressed by proverbial means.
Language development is thought to proceed by ordinary processes of learning in which children acquire the forms, meanings, and uses of words and utterances from the linguistic input. Children often begin reproducing the words that they are repetitively exposed to. The method in which we develop language skills is universal; however, the major debate is how the rules of syntax are acquired. There are two major approaches to syntactic development, an empiricist account by which children learn all syntactic rules from the linguistic input, and a nativist approach by which some principles of syntax are innate and are transmitted through the human genome.
The nativist theory, proposed by Noam Chomsky, argues that language is a unique human accomplishment, and can be attributed to either "millions of years of evolution" or to "principles of neural organization that may be even more deeply grounded in physical law". Chomsky says that all children have what is called an innate language acquisition device (LAD). Theoretically, the LAD is an area of the brain that has a set of universal syntactic rules for all languages. This device provides children with the ability to make sense of knowledge and construct novel sentences with minimal external input and little experience. Chomsky's claim is based upon the view that what children hear—their linguistic input—is insufficient to explain how they come to learn language. He argues that linguistic input from the environment is limited and full of errors. Therefore, nativists assume that it is impossible for children to learn linguistic information solely from their environment. However, because children possess this LAD, they are in fact, able to learn language despite incomplete information from their environment. Their capacity to learn language is also attributed to the theory of universal grammar (UG), which posits that a certain set of structural rules are innate to humans, independent of sensory experience. This view has dominated linguistic theory for over fifty years and remains highly influential, as witnessed by the number of articles in journals and books.
The empiricist theory suggests, contra Chomsky, that there is enough information in the linguistic input children receive and therefore, there is no need to assume an innate language acquisition device exists (see above). Rather than a LAD evolved specifically for language, empiricists believe that general brain processes are sufficient enough for language acquisition. During this process, it is necessary for the child to actively engage with their environment. For a child to learn language, the parent or caregiver adopts a particular way of appropriately communicating with the child; this is known as child-directed speech (CDS). CDS is used so that children are given the necessary linguistic information needed for their language. Empiricism is a general approach and sometimes goes along with the interactionist approach. Statistical language acquisition, which falls under empiricist theory, suggests that infants acquire language by means of pattern perception.
Other researchers embrace an interactionist perspective, consisting of social-interactionist theories of language development. In such approaches, children learn language in the interactive and communicative context, learning language forms for meaningful moves of communication. These theories focus mainly on the caregiver's attitudes and attentiveness to their children in order to promote productive language habits.
An older empiricist theory, the behaviorist theory proposed by B. F. Skinner suggested that language is learned through operant conditioning, namely, by imitation of stimuli and by reinforcement of correct responses. This perspective has not been widely accepted at any time, but by some accounts, is experiencing a resurgence. New studies use this theory now to treat individuals diagnosed with autism spectrum disorders. Additionally, Relational Frame Theory is growing from the behaviorist theory, which is important for Acceptance and Commitment Therapy. Some empiricist theory accounts today use behaviorist models.
Other relevant theories about language development include Piaget's theory of cognitive development, which considers the development of language as a continuation of general cognitive development and Vygotsky's social theories that attribute the development of language to an individual's social interactions and growth.
Evolutionary biologists are skeptical of the claim that syntactic knowledge is transmitted in the human genome. However, many researchers claim that the ability to acquire such a complicated system is unique to the human species. Non-biologists also tend to believe that our ability to learn spoken language may have been developed through the evolutionary process and that the foundation for language may be passed down genetically. The ability to speak and understand human language requires speech production skills and abilities as well as multisensory integration of sensory processing abilities.
One hotly debated issue is whether the biological contribution includes capacities specific to language acquisition, often referred to as universal grammar. For fifty years, linguist Noam Chomsky has argued for the hypothesis that children have innate, language-specific abilities that facilitate and constrain language learning. In particular, he has proposed that humans are biologically prewired to learn language at a certain time and in a certain way, arguing that children are born with a language acquisition device (LAD). However, since he developed the minimalist program, his latest version of theory of syntactic structure, Chomsky has reduced the elements of universal grammar, which he believes are prewired in humans to just the principle of recursion, thus voiding most of the nativist endeavor.
Researchers who believe that grammar is learned rather than innate, have hypothesized that language learning results from general cognitive abilities and the interaction between learners and their human interactants. It has also recently been suggested that the relatively slow development of the prefrontal cortex in humans may be one reason that humans are able to learn language, whereas other species are not. Further research has indicated the influence of the FOXP2 gene.
Children versus adultsEdit
Language development and processing begins before birth. Evidence has shown that there is language development occurring antepartum. DeCasper and Spence performed a study in 1986 by having mothers read aloud during the last few weeks of pregnancy. When the infants were born, they were then tested. They were read aloud a story while sucking on a pacifier; the story was either the story read by the mother when the infant was in utero or a new story. The pacifier used was able to determine the rate of sucking that the infant was performing. When the story that the mother had read before was heard, the sucking of the pacifier was modified. This did not occur during the story that the infant had not heard before. The results for this experiment had shown that the infants were able to recognize what they had heard in utero, providing insight that language development had been occurring in the last six weeks of pregnancy.
Throughout the first year of life, infants are unable to communicate with language. Instead, infants communicate with gestures. This phenomenon is known as prelinguistic gestures, which are nonverbal ways that infants communicate that also had a plan backed with the gesture. Examples of these could be pointing at an object, tugging on the shirt of a parent to get the parent's attention, etc. Harding, 1983, devised the major criteria that come along with the behavior of prelinguistic gestures and their intent to communicate. There are three major criteria that go along with a prelinguistic gesture: waiting, persistence, and ultimately, development of alternative plans. This process usually occurs around 8 months of age, where an appropriate scenario may be of a child tugging on the shirt of a parent to wait for the attention of the parent who would then notice the infant, which causes the infant to point to something they desire. This would describe the first two criteria. The development of alternative plans may arise if the parent does not acknowledge what the infant wants, the infant may entertain itself to satisfy the previous desire.
When children reach about 15–18 months of age, language acquisition flourishes. There is a surge in word production resulting from the growth of the cortex. Infants begin to learn the words that form a sentence and within the sentence, the word endings can be interpreted. Elissa Newport and colleagues (1999) found that humans learn first about the sounds of a language, and then move on to how to speak the language. This shows how infants learn the end of a word and know that a new word is being spoken. From this step, infants are then able to determine the structure of a language and word.
It appears that during the early years of language development females exhibit an advantage over males of the same age. When infants between the age of 16 to 22 months were observed interacting with their mothers, a female advantage was obvious. The females in this age range showed more spontaneous speech production than the males and this finding was not due to mothers speaking more with daughters than sons. In addition, boys between 2 and 6 years as a group did not show higher performance in language development over their girl counterparts on experimental assessments. In studies using adult populations, 18 and over, it seems that the female advantage may be task dependent. Depending on the task provided, a female advantage may or may not be present. Similarly, one study found that out of the 5.5% of American children with language impairments, 7.2% are male, and 3.8% are female. There are many different suggested explanations for this gender gap in language impairment prevalence.
Lateralization effect on languageEdit
It is currently believed that in regards to brain lateralization males are left-lateralized, while females are bilateralized. Studies on patients with unilateral lesions have provided evidence that females are in fact more bilateralized with their verbal abilities. It seems that when a female has experienced a lesion to the left hemisphere, she is better able to compensate for this damage than a male can. If a male has a lesion in the left hemisphere, his verbal abilities are greatly impaired in comparison to a control male of the same age without that damage. However, these results may also be task-dependent as well as time-dependent.
Fine motor development rateEdit
Shriberg, Tomblin, and McSweeny (1999) suggest that the fine motor skills necessary for correct speech may develop more slowly in males. This could explain why some of the language impairments in young males seems to spontaneously improve over time.
It is also suggested that the gender gap in language impairment prevalence could also be explained by the clinical over diagnosis of males. Males tend to be clinically over diagnosed with a variety of disorders.
The study by Shriber et al. (1999) further explains that this gap in the prevalence of language impairment could be because males tend to be more visible. These researchers reveal that male children tend to act out behaviorally when they have any sort of disorder, while female children tend to turn inward and develop emotional disorders as well. Thus, the high ratio of males with language impairments may be connected with the fact that males are more visible, and thus more often diagnosed.
Research in writing development has been limited in psychology. In the research that has been conducted, focus has generally centred on the development of written and spoken language and their connection. Spoken and written skills could be considered linked. Researchers believe that children's spoken language influences their written language. When a child learns to write they need to master letter formation, spelling, punctuation and they also have to gain an understanding of the structure and the organisational patterns involved in written language.
Kroll's theory is one of the most significant on children's writing development. He proposed that children's writing development is split into 4 phases. Kroll explicitly states that these phases are 'artificial' in the sense that the boundaries between the phases are imprecise and he recognises that each child is different, thus their development is unique. The phases of writing development have been highlighted to give the reader a broad outline of what phases a child goes through during writing development; however when studying an individual's development in depth, the phases may be disregarded to an extent.
The first of Kroll's phases is the preparation for writing phase. In this phase the child is believed to grasp the technical skills needed for writing, allowing them to create the letters needed to write the words the children say. In this initial phase children experience many opportunities to extend their spoken language skills. Speaking and writing are considered fairly separate processes here, as children's writing is less well developed at this stage, whereas their spoken language is becoming more skilled.
Kroll considers the second phase in writing development to be consolidation. Here, children begin to consolidate spoken and written language. In this phase children's writing skills rely heavily on their spoken language skills, and their written and spoken language becoming integrated. Children's written language skills become stronger as they use their spoken language skills to improve their writing. Then in turn, when a development in children's written language skills is seen, their spoken language skills have also improved. A child's written language in this phase mirrors their spoken language.
In the third phase, differentiation, children begin to learn that written language regularly differs in structure and style from spoken language. The growth from consolidation to differentiation can be challenging for some children to grasp. Children can 'struggle with the transformation from the basically overt language of speech to the essentially covert activity of writing'. In this phase, the child learns that writing is generally considered more formal than spoken language, which is thought to be casual and conversational. Here, it is believed that children begin to understand that writing serves a purpose.
Kroll considers the last phase to be the systematic integration phase. A differentiation and integration between the child's speaking and writing can be seen in this phase. This means that speaking and writing have 'well-articulated forms and functions'; however, they are also integrated in the sense that they use the same system. As a result of the individual being aware of the audience, context and reason they are communicating, both written and spoken language are able to overlap and take several forms at this stage.
Kroll used the four phases to give an explanation and generalise about the development of these two aspects of language. The highest significance is placed on the second and third phase, consolidation and differentiation respectively. It could be concluded that children's written and spoken language, in certain respects, become more similar to age, maturation, and experience; however, they are also increasingly different in other respects. The content of the skills are more similar, but the approach used for both writing and speaking are different. When writing and speaking development is looked at more closely it can be seen that certain elements of written and spoken language are differentiating and other elements are integrating, all in the same phase.
Perera conducted a survey and her view mirrors that of Kroll to the extent that she used Kroll's four phases. When a child undergoes initial learning of the written language, they have not yet fully mastered the oral language. It is clear that their written language development is aided by their spoken language; it can also be said that their spoken language development is aided by the development of their written language skills. Kantor and Rubin believe that not all individuals successfully move into the final stage of integration. Perera is also aware that it is hard to assign chronological ages to each phase of writing development, because each child is an individual, and also the phases are 'artificial'.
Other than Kroll's theory, there are four principles on early patterns in writing development discussed by Marie Clay in her book What Did I Write?. The four principles are recurring principle, the generative principle, the sign principle, and the inventory principle. The recurring principle involves patterns and shapes in English writing that develop throughout writing development. The generative principle incorporates the idea that a writer can create new meanings by organizing units of writing and letters of the alphabet. The sign principle is understanding that the word print also involves paper arrangement and word boundaries. And lastly, the inventory principle is the fact that children have the urge to list and name items that they are familiar with, and because of this they can practice their own writing skills.
More recent research has also explored writing development. Myhill concentrated on the development of written language skills in adolescents aged 13 to 15. Myhill discovered that the more mature writer was aware of the shaping of text, and used non-finite clauses, which mirrored Perera's results (1984). Other researchers focused on writing development up until late adolescence, as there has been a limited research in this area. Chrisite and Derewianke recognize that the survey conducted by Perera (1984) is still one of the most significant research studies in the writing development field and believe Perera's study is similar to theirs. Chrisite and Derewianke (2010) again propose four phases of writing development. The researchers believe that the process of writing development does not stop when an individual leaves formal education, and again, the researchers highlight that these phases are flexible in their onset. The first phase focuses on spoken language as the main aid for writing development, and the development then takes its course reaching the fourth phase, which continues beyond formal education.
The environment a child develops in has influences on language development. The environment provides language input for the child to process. Speech by adults to children help provide the child with correct language usage repetitively. Environmental influences on language development are explored in the tradition of social interactionist theory by such researchers as Jerome Bruner, Alison Gopnik, Andrew Meltzoff, Anat Ninio, Roy Pea, Catherine Snow, Ernest Moerk and Michael Tomasello. Jerome Bruner who laid the foundations of this approach in the 1970s, emphasized that adult "scaffolding" of the child's attempts to master linguistic communication is an important factor in the developmental process.
One component of the young child's linguistic environment is child-directed speech (also known as baby talk or motherese), which is language spoken in a higher pitch than normal with simple words and sentences. Although the importance of its role in developing language has been debated, many linguists think that it may aid in capturing the infant's attention and maintaining communication. When children begin to communicate with adults, this motherese speech allows the child the ability to discern the patterns in language and to experiment with language.
Throughout existing research, it is concluded that children exposed to extensive vocabulary and complex grammatical structures more quickly develop language and also have a more accurate syntax than children raised in environments without complex grammar exposed to them. With motherese, the mother talks to the child and responds back to the child, whether it be a babble the child made or a short sentence. While doing this, the adult prompts the child to continue communicating, which may help a child develop language sooner than children raised in environments where communication is not fostered.
Child-directed speech concentrates on small core vocabulary, here and now topics, exaggerated facial expressions and gestures, frequent questioning, para-linguistic changes, and verbal rituals. An infant is least likely to produce vocalizations when changed, fed, or rocked. The infant is more likely to produce vocalizations in response to a nonverbal behavior such as touching or smiling.
Child-directed speech also catches the child's attention, and in situations where words for new objects are being expressed to the child, this form of speech may help the child recognize the speech cues and the new information provided. Data shows that children raised in highly verbal families had higher language scores than those children raised in low verbal families. Continuously hearing complicated sentences throughout language development increases the child's ability to understand these sentences and then to use complicated sentences as they develop. Studies have shown that students enrolled in high language classrooms have two times the growth in complex sentences usage than students in classrooms where teachers do not frequently use complex sentences.
Adults use strategies other than child-directed speech like recasting, expanding, and labeling:
- Recasting is rephrasing something the child has said, perhaps turning it into a question or restating the child's immature utterance in the form of a fully grammatical sentence. For example, a child saying "cookie now" a parent may respond with "Would you like a cookie now?"
- Expanding is restating, in a linguistically sophisticated form, what a child has said. For example, a child may say "car move road" and the parent may respond "A car drives on the road."
- Labeling is identifying the names of objects. If a child points to an object such as a couch the mother may say "couch" in response. Labeling can also be characterized as referencing.
Some language development experts have characterized child directed speech in stages. Primarily, the parents use repetition and also variation to maintain the infant's attention. Secondly, the parent simplifies speech to help in language learning. Third, any speech modifications maintain the responsiveness of the child. These modifications develop into a conversation that provides context for the development.
Cultural and socioeconomic effectsEdit
While most children throughout the world develop language at similar rates and without difficulty, cultural and socioeconomic differences have been shown to influence development. An example of cultural differences in language development can be seen when comparing the interactions of mothers in the United States with their infants with mothers in Japan. Mothers in the United States use more questions, are more information-oriented, and use more grammatically correct utterances with their 3-month-olds. Mothers in Japan, on the other hand, use more physical contact with their infants, and more emotion-oriented, nonsense, and environmental sounds, as well as baby talk, with their infants. These differences in interaction techniques reflect differences in "each society's assumptions about infants and adult-to-adult cultural styles of talking."
Specifically in North American culture, maternal race, education, and socioeconomic class influence parent-child interactions in the early linguistic environment. When speaking to their infants, mothers from middle class "incorporate language goals more frequently in their play with their infants," and in turn, their infants produce twice as many vocalizations as lower class infants. Mothers from higher social classes who are better educated also tend to be more verbal, and have more time to spend engaging with their infants in language. Additionally, lower class infants may receive more language input from their siblings and peers than from their mothers.
It is crucial that children are allowed to socially interact with other people who can vocalize and respond to questions. For language acquisition to develop successfully, children must be in an environment that allows them to communicate socially in that language. Children who have learnt sound, meaning and grammatical system of language that can produce clear sentence may still not have the ability to use language effectively in various social circumstance. Social interaction is the footing stone of language.
There are a few different theories as to why and how children develop language. The most popular—and yet heavily debated—explanation is that language is acquired through imitation. This theory has been challenged by Lester Butler, who argues that children do not use the grammar that an adult would use. Furthermore, "children's language is highly resistant to alteration by adult intervention", meaning that children do not use the corrections given to them by an adult. The two most accepted theories in language development are psychological and functional. Psychological explanations focus on the mental processes involved in childhood language learning. Functional explanations look at the social processes involved in learning the first language.
- Phonology involves the rules about the structure and sequence of speech sounds.
- Semantics consists of vocabulary and how concepts are expressed through words.
- Grammar involves two parts.
- Pragmatics involves the rules for appropriate and effective communication. Pragmatics involves three skills:
- using language for greeting, demanding etc.,
- changing language for talking differently depending on who it is you are talking to;
- following rules such as turn taking, staying on topic.
Each component has its own appropriate developmental periods.
Babies can recognize their mother's voice from as early as few weeks old. It seems like they have a unique system that is designed to recognize speech sound. Furthermore, they can differentiate between certain speech sounds. A significant first milestone in phonetic development is the babbling stage (around the age of six months). This is the baby's way of practicing his control over that apparatus. Babbling is independent from the language. Deaf children for instance, babble the same way as hearing ones. As the baby grows older, the babbling increases in frequency and starts to sound more like words (around the age of twelve months). Although every child is an individual with different pace of mastering speech, there is a tendency to an order of which speech sounds are mastered:
- Vowels before consonants
- Stop sounds before any other consonant sounds (for example: 'p','t','b')
- Place of articulation – labials, alveolar, velars, alveopalatals, and interdentals in that order by the age of 4. That means that there is some order to the development of the physical system in young children.
Early phonetic processesEdit
As the children's ability to produce sound develops, their ability to perceive the phonetic contrast of their language develops. The better they get in mastering the sound, the more sensitive they become to the changes in those sounds in their language once they get exposed to it. They learn to isolate individual phenomes while speaking which also serves as the basis of reading.
Some processes that occur in early age:
- Syllable deletion – stressed syllables are emphasis that may be given to certain syllables in a word. They are more likely to be retained in children's pronunciation than unstressed syllables (less emphasis on the sound) because they are more salient to children in an early language acquisition process. So children may say helikat instead of helicopter or fowe instead of telephone. That way, they don't pronounce the more emphasized sound in the word.
- Syllable simplification – another process that happens in order to simplify syllable structure, children delete certain sounds systematically. For example, children might say 'tap' instead of "stop" and completely drop the 's' sound in that word. That is a common process in children's speech development.
- Substitution – systematic replacement of one sound by an alternative, easier one to articulate (substitution process – stopping, fronting, gliding). It means that the young toddler may use sounds that are easier to produce instead of the proper sound in a word. We may see that the child replace the 'r' sound with 'l' or 'w', the 'n' with 'd' and so on.
- Assimilation – modification of segments of the word influenced by neighboring sounds, due to ease of articulation. In order for the young speaker to produce sounds easier, he or she may replace the sound in a specific word to a different one, which is somewhat similar. For example, the word "pig" may sound as "big" – 'p' and 'b' are close in their sound. (Lightbown, Spada, Ranta & Rand, 2006).
From shortly after birth to around one year, the baby starts to make speech sounds. At around two months, the baby engages in cooing, which mostly consists of vowel sounds. At around four to six months, cooing turns into babbling, which is the repetitive consonant-vowel combinations. Babies understand more than they are able to say. In this 0–8 months range, the child is engaged in vocal play of vegetative sounds, laughing, and cooing.
Once the child hits the 8–12 month, range the child engages in canonical babbling, i.e. dada as well as variegated babbling. This jargon babbling with intonational contours the language being learned.
From 12–24 months, babies can recognize the correct pronunciation of familiar words. Babies also use phonological strategies to simplify word pronunciation. Some strategies include repeating the first consonant-vowel in a multisyllable word ('TV' → 'didi') or deleting unstressed syllables in a multisyllable word ('banana' → 'nana'). Within this first year, two word utterances and two syllable words emerge. This period is often called the holophrastic stage of development, because one word conveys as much meaning as an entire phrase. For instance, the simple word "milk" can imply that the child is requesting milk, noting spilled milk, sees a cat drinking milk, etc. One study found that children at this age were capable of comprehending 2-word sentences, producing 2–3 word sentences, and naming basic colors.
By 24–30 months awareness of rhyme emerges as well as rising intonation. One study concludes that children between the ages of 24–30 months typically can produce 3–4 word sentence, create a story when prompted by pictures, and at least 50% of their speech is intelligible.
By 36–60 months, phonological awareness continues to improve as well as pronunciation. At this age, children have a considerable experience with language and are able to form simple sentences that are 3 words in length. They use basic prepositions, pronouns, and plurals. They become immensely creative in their language use and learn to categorize items such as recognizing that a shoe is not a fruit. At this age, children also learn to ask questions and negate sentences to develop these questions. Over time, their syntax gets more and more unique and complex. A study reveals that at this age, a child's speech should be at least 75% intelligible.
By 6–10 years, children can master syllable stress patterns, which helps distinguish slight differences between similar words.
The average child masters about fifty words by the age of eighteen months. These might include words such as, milk, water, juice and apple (noun-like words). Afterwards they acquire 12 to 16 words a day. By the age of six, they master about 13 to 14 thousand words.
The most frequent words include adjective-like expressions for displeasure and rejection such as 'no'. They also include social interaction words, such as "please" and "bye".
There are three stages for learning the meaning of new words:
- Whole object assumption:
A new word refers to a whole object. For example, when an eighteen-months old child sees a sheep and his mother points at it and says the word 'sheep', the child infers that the word 'sheep' describes the whole animal and not parts of it (such as color, shape, etc.).
- Type assumption:
A new word refers to a type of thing, not just to a particular thing. For example, when the child hears the word 'sheep' he infers that it is used for the animal type and not only for that particular sheep that he saw.
- Basic level assumption:
A new word refers to objects that are alike in basic ways (appearance, behavior, etc.).
In other words, when the child hears the word "sheep" he overgeneralizes it to other animals that look like sheep by the external appearance, such as white, wooly and four-legged animal.
Contextual clues are a major factor in the child's vocabulary development.
The child uses contextual clues to draw inferences about the category and meaning of new words. By doing so, the child distinguishes between names and ordinary nouns.
For example, when an object is presented to the child with the determiner "a" (a cat, a dog, a bottle) he perceives it as an ordinary noun.
However, when the child hears a noun without the determiner, he perceives it as a name, for instance "this is Mary".
Children usually make correct meaning associations with the words that the adults say. However, sometimes they make semantic errors.
There are a few types of semantic errors:
Overextension: When a child says or hears a word, they might associate what they see or hear as more generalized concept than the real meaning of the word. For example, if they say "cat", they might overextend it to other animals with same features.
Underextension: It involves the use of lexical items in an overly restrictive fashion. In other words, the child focuses on core members of a certain category. For example: 'cat' may only refer to the family cat and no other cat, or 'dog' may refer to certain kinds of dogs that the child is exposed to.
Verb meaning: when a pre-school child hears the verb 'fill', he understands it as the action 'pour' rather than the result, which is 'make full'.
Dimensional terms: the first dimensional adjectives acquired are big and small because they belong to the size category. The size category is the most general one. Later children acquire the single dimension adjectives, such as, tall-short, long-short, high-low. Eventually they acquire the adjectives that describe the secondary dimension, such as thick-thin, wide-narrow and deep-shallow.
From birth to one year, comprehension (the language we understand) develops before production (the language we use). There is about a 5-month lag in between the two. Babies have an innate preference to listen to their mother's voice. Babies can recognize familiar words and use preverbal gestures.
Within the first 12–18 months semantic roles are expressed in one word speech including agent, object, location, possession, nonexistence and denial. Words are understood outside of routine games but the child still needs contextual support for lexical comprehension.
18–24 months Prevalent relations are expressed such as agent-action, agent-object, action-location. Also, there is a vocabulary spurt between 18–24 months, which includes fast mapping. Fast mapping is the babies' ability to learn a lot of new things quickly. The majority of the babies' new vocabulary consists of object words (nouns) and action words (verbs).
30–36 months The child is able to use and understand why question and basic spatial terms such as in, on or under.
36–42 months There is an understanding of basic color words and kinship terms. Also, the child has an understanding of the semantic relationship between adjacent and conjoined sentences, including casual and contrastive.
42–48 months When and how questions are comprehended as well as basic shape words such as circle, square and triangle.
48–60 months Knowledge of letter names and sounds emerges, as well as numbers.
By 3–5 years, children usually have difficulty using words correctly. Children experience many problems such as underextensions, taking a general word and applying it specifically (for example, 'cartoons' specifically for 'Mickey Mouse') and overextensions, taking a specific word and applying it too generally (example, 'ant' for any insect). However, children coin words to fill in for words not yet learned (for example, someone is a cooker rather than a chef because a child may not know what a chef is). Children can also understand metaphors.
From 6–10 years, children can understand meanings of words based on their definitions. They also are able to appreciate the multiple meanings of words and use words precisely through metaphors and puns. Fast mapping continues. Within these years, children are now able to acquire new information from written texts and can explain relationships between multiple meaning words. Common idioms are also understood.
The development of syntactic structures follows a particular pattern and reveals much on the nature of language acquisition, which has several stages. According to O'Grady and Cho (2011), the first stage, occurring between the ages of 12–18 months, is called "one-word stage." In this stage, children cannot form syntactic sentences and therefore use one-word utterances called "holophrases" that express an entire sentence. In addition, children's comprehension is more advanced than their production abilities. For example, a child who wants candy may say "candy" instead of expressing a full sentence.
The following stage is the "two-word stage" in which children begin to produce "mini-sentences" that are composed of two words, such as "doggy bark" and "Ken water" (O'Grady & Cho, 2011, p. 346). At this stage, it is unclear whether children have an understanding of underlying rules of the language such as syntactic categories, since their "mini-sentences" often lack distinction between the categories. However, children do exhibit sensitivity to sentence structures and they frequently use appropriate word order.
After several months of speech that is restricted to short utterances, children enter the "telegraphic stage" and begin to produce longer and more complex grammatical structures (O'Grady & Cho, 2011, p. 347). This stage is characterized by production of complex structures as children begin to form phrases consisting of a subject and a complement in addition to use of modifiers and composition of full sentences. Children use mostly content words and their sentences lack function words. For example, a child may say "fill cup water," instead of saying, "Fill my cup with water." Subsequently, language acquisition continues to develop rapidly and children begin to acquire complex grammar that shows understanding of intricate linguistic features, such as the ability to switch the position of words in sentences.
Throughout the process of syntactic development, children acquire and develop question structures. According to O'Grady and Cho (2011), at the early stages of language acquisition, children ask yes-no questions by rising intonation alone as they develop awareness to auxiliary verbs only at a later stage. When auxiliary verbs make their appearance, it takes children a few months before they are able to use inversion in yes-no questions. The development of WH- questions occurs between the ages of two and four, when children acquire auxiliary verbs that then leads to the ability to use inversion in questions. However, some children find inversion easier in yes-no questions than in WH- questions, since the position of the WH- word and the auxiliary verb both must changed (e.g., "You are going where?" instead of "Where are you going?").
Morphological structures development occurs over a period of several years. Before language is acquired, children lack any use of morphological structures.
The morphological structures that children acquire during their childhood, and even up to the early school years, are: determiners (a, the), -ing inflection, plural –s, auxiliary be, possessive –s, third person singular –s, past tense –ed).
When children start using them they tend to overgeneralize the rules and project them upon all the words in the language, including irregulars. For example: if a child knows the –ed (past tense) there is a possibility that they'll say "I eated"( Man-mans cat-cats). These errors result from overgeneralization of rules.
This overgeneralization is very noticeable, in fact, children do that in less than 25 percent of the time at any point before reducing that percentage. Then they improve their mastery, which can be tested in various ways, such as the "wug test" (Berko, 1958).
Children often figure out quickly frequent irregular verbs, such as go and buy rather than less common ones, such as win. This suggests that children must hear the word several hundred times before they are able to use it correctly.
This development of bound morphemes is similar in order among children, for example: -ing is acquired before the article the. The interesting part though is that parents tend to use a different order while speaking to their kids, for example, parents use the article 'the' more frequently than -ing. Meaning, other factors determine the order of acquisition, such as:
- Morphemes that come at the end of an utterance are remembered better.
- Children seem to remember morphemes such as –ing better because they contain their own syllables rather than single consonant morpheme, such as plural –s.
- Affixes with more than one meaning are more difficult to acquire, e.g., –s functions both as plural noun and singular third.
As it comes to word formation processes such as derivation and compounding, the earliest derivational suffixes to show up in children's speech are those they hear adults use most frequently. (-er as the *'doer' of the action such as walker.) When it comes to compounds, children first make up names for agents and instruments that they don't know by a pattern (N-N), though some of them do not follow the pattern (*cutter grass for grass cutter). Then, they might have the right structure but the words are inappropriate since English already has words with the intended meaning such as car-smoke = exhaust. This process points to a preference for building words from other words, thus place less demand on memory than learning an entirely new word for each concept.
Syntactic development and morphological developmentEdit
Syntactic development involves the ways that various morphemes are ordered or combined in sentences.Morphemes, which are basic units of meaning in language, get added as children learn to produce simple sentences and become more precise speakers. Morphemes can be whole words (like "happy") or parts of words that change meaning of words ("un"happy). Brown proposed a stage model that describes the various types of morphological structures that are developed in English and the age range within which they are normally acquired.
Stage I: From 15–30 months, children start using telegraphic speech, which are two word combinations, for example 'wet diaper'. Brown (1973) observed that 75% of children's two-word utterances could be summarized in the existence of 11 semantic relations:
- Attributive: 'Big house'
- Agent-action: 'Daddy hit'
- Action-object: 'Hit ball'
- Agent-object: 'Daddy ball'
- Nominative: 'That ball'
- Demonstrative: 'There ball'
- Recurrence: 'More ball'
- Non-existence: 'All-gone ball'
- Possessive: 'Daddy chair'
- Entity + Locative: 'book table'
- Action + Locative: 'go store'
Stage II: At around 28–36 months, children begin to engage in the production of simple sentences, usually 3 word sentences. These simple sentences follow syntactic rules and are refined gradually as development continues. The morphological developments seen in this age range include use of present progressive (-ing endings), the prepositions "in" and "on", and regular plurals (-s endings).
Stage III: Around 36–42 months, children continue to add morphemes and gradually produce complex grammatical structures. The morphemes that are added at this age include irregular past tense, possessive ('s), and use of the verb 'to be' (It is, I am, etc.).
Stage IV:Around 40–46 months children continue to add to their morphological knowledge. This range is associated with use of articles (a or the), regular past tense (-ed endings), and regular third person speech (He likes it).
Stage V: Around 42-52+ months children refine the complex grammatical structures and increase their use of morphemes to convey more complex ideas. Children in this stage use irregular third-person speech, the verb 'to be' as an auxiliary verb (She was not laughing), and in its contraction forms (It's, She's, etc.).
From birth to one year, babies can engage in joint attention (sharing the attention of something with someone else). Infants also can engage in turn taking activities on the basis of their sensitivity to reactive contingency, which can elicit social responses in the babies from very early on.
- By 1–2 years, they can engage in conversational turn taking and topic maintenance and understand that turn taking interaction of others can convey relevant, communicative information.
- By age 3–5, children can master illocutionary intent, knowing what you meant to say even though you might not have said it and turnabout, which is turning the conversation over to another person.
- By age 6–10, shading occurs, which is changing the conversation topic gradually. Children are able to communicate effectively in demanding settings, such as on the telephone.
Effect of bilingualismEdit
There is a large debate regarding whether or not bilingualism is truly beneficial to children. Parents of children often view learning a second language throughout elementary and high school education beneficial to the child. Another perspective dictates that the second language just confuses the child and prevents them from mastering their primary language. Studies have shown that American bilingual children have greater cognitive flexibility, better perceptual skills and tend to be divergent thinkers than monolingual children between the ages of five to ten. Better executive functioning skills are likely because bilingual children have to choose one language to speak while actively suppressing the other. This builds stronger selective attention and cognitive flexibility because these skills are being exercised more. In addition, bilingual children have a better understanding of universal language concepts, such as grammar, because these concepts are applied in multiple languages. However, studies comparing Swedish-Finnish bilingual children and Swedish monolingual children between the ages of five to seven have also shown that the bilingual children have a smaller vocabulary than monolingual children. In another study throughout America, elementary school English-monolingual children performed better in mathematics and reading activities than their non-English-dominant bilingual and non-English monolingual peers from kindergarten to grade five. Learning two languages simultaneously can be beneficial or a hindrance to a child's language and intellectual development. Further research is necessary to continue to shed light on this debate.
In addition to the study of bilingualism in children, similar research is being conducted in adults. Research findings show that although bilingual benefits are muted in middle adulthood, they are more profound in older age when those who develop dementia experience onset about 4.5 years later in bilingual subjects. The increased attentional control, inhibition, and conflict resolution developed from bilingualism may be accountable for the later onset of dementia.
Misdiagnoses as a language impairmentEdit
There is some research that demonstrates that bilingualism may often be misdiagnosed as a language impairment. A subtopic of bilingualism in the literature is nonstandard varieties of English. While bilingualism and nonstandard varieties of English cannot be considered a true language impairment, they are misrepresented in the population of those receiving language interventions.
A language disorder is the impaired comprehension and or use of a spoken, written, and/or other symbol system. A disorder may involve problems in the following areas:
- The form of language i.e. phonology, morphology, or syntax
- The content i.e. semantics
- The function of language in communication i.e. pragmatics
Olswang and colleagues have identified a series of behaviors in children in the 18–36 month range that are predictors for the need of language intervention.
These predictors include:
- A smaller than average vocabulary
- A language comprehension delay of 6 months or a comprehension deficit with a large comprehension production gap
- Phonological problems such as restricted babbling or limited vocalizations
- Few spontaneous vocal imitations and reliance on direct modeling in imitation tasks
- Little combinatorial or symbolic play
- Few communicative or symbolic gestures
- Behavior problems
Some of the many conditions that cause language development problems include:
- Computational models of language acquisition
- Errors in early word use
- Essay on the Origin of Languages
- Evolutionary linguistics
- Genie (feral child)
- Infantile speech
- KE family
- Language acquisition
- Language acquisition device
- List of children's speech corpora
- Mean length of utterance
- Metalinguistic awareness
- Origin of language
- Phonological development
- Pragmatic mapping
- Proto-Human language
- Victor of Aveyron
- Graven, Stanley N.; MD; Browne, Joy V. (December 2008). "Auditory development in the fetus and infant". Newborn and Infant Nursing Reviews. 8 (4).
- Guess, D (1969). "A functional analysis of receptive language and productive speech: acquisition of the plural morpheme". Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis. 2 (1): 55–64. doi:10.1901/jaba.1969.2-55. PMC 1311037. PMID 16795203.
- Kennison, S. M. (2013). Introduction to language development. Los Angeles, CA: Sage. ISBN 9781412996068.
- Cameron-Faulkner, Thea; Lieven, Elena; Tomasello, Michael (2003-11-01). "A construction based analysis of child directed speech". Cognitive Science. 27 (6): 843–873. doi:10.1207/s15516709cog2706_2. ISSN 1551-6709.
- Chomsky, Noam (1965). Aspects of the Theory of Syntax. MIT Press. p. 25.
- Davies, Alan (November 2012). Nativism. The Encyclopedia of Applied Linguistics. doi:10.1002/9781405198431.wbeal0856. ISBN 9781405194730.
- Flevaris, Taki (2015). "Nativism in Linguistics: Empirical and Theoretical Issues".
- Poll, G. H. (2011). "Increasing the Odds: Applying Emergentist Theory in Language Intervention". Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools. 42 (4): 580–591. doi:10.1044/0161-1461(2011/10-0041). PMC 3164388. PMID 21616988.
- Roediger, R. (2004) "What happened to Behaviorism." American Psychological Society.
- Ramscar M, Yarlett D (November 2007). "Linguistic self-correction in the absence of feedback: a new approach to the logical problem of language acquisition" (PDF). Cogn Sci. 31 (6): 927–60. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.501.4207. doi:10.1080/03640210701703576. PMID 21635323.
- Clibbens, John (October 1993). "From theory to practice in child language development" (PDF). Down Syndrome Research and Practice. 1 (3): 101–106. doi:10.3104/reviews.20. Retrieved 2012-11-20.
- Schneider, Phyllis; Watkins, Ruth (April 1996). "Applying Vygotskian Developmental Theory to Language Intervention". Language, Speech & Hearing Services in Schools. 27 (2): 157–170. doi:10.1044/0161-1461.2702.157.
- Santrock, John W. (2007). A Topical Approach to Lifespan Development. McGraw-Hill Humanities/Social Sciences/Languages. ISBN 978-0-07-338264-7. OCLC 171151508.
- Hauser MD, Chomsky N, Fitch WT (November 2002). "The faculty of language: what is it, who has it, and how did it evolve?" (PDF). Science. 298 (5598): 1569–79. doi:10.1126/science.298.5598.1569. PMID 12446899. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2013-12-28.
- Thompson-Schill SL, Ramscar M, Chrysikou EG (2009). "Cognition without control: When a little frontal lobe goes a long way" (PDF). Curr Dir Psychol Sci. 18 (5): 259–263. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8721.2009.01648.x. PMC 2855545. PMID 20401341.
- Ramscar M, Gitcho N (July 2007). "Developmental change and the nature of learning in childhood" (PDF). Trends Cogn. Sci. (Regul. Ed.). 11 (7): 274–9. doi:10.1016/j.tics.2007.05.007. PMID 17560161.
- Scharff C, Petri J (July 2011). "Evo-devo, deep homology and FoxP2: implications for the evolution of speech and language". Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B Biol. Sci. 366 (1574): 2124–40. doi:10.1098/rstb.2011.0001. PMC 3130369. PMID 21690130.
- DeCasper A.; Lecanuet J.; Bunsel M.; Granier-Deferre C.; Maugeais R. (1994). "Fetal Reactions to Recurrent Maternal Speech" (PDF). Infant Behavior and Development. 17 (2): 159–164. doi:10.1016/0163-6383(94)90051-5.
- Harding C. (1983). "An Investigation Of Developmental Mechanisms In The Development Of Intentional Communication" (PDF). Foundation for Child Development: 1–27.
- Saffran J.; Aslin R.; Newport E. (1994). "Statistical learning by 8-month-old infants" (PDF). Science. 274 (5294): 1926–1928. doi:10.1126/science.274.5294.1926. PMID 8943209.
- Huttenlocher J.; Haight W.; Bryk A.; Seltzer M.; Lyons T. (1991). "Early vocabulary growth: Relation to language input and gender". Developmental Psychology. 27 (2): 236–248. doi:10.1037/0012-16220.127.116.11.
- Bornstein, M. H. (2004). "Specific and general language performance across early childhood: Stability and gender considerations". First Language. 24 (3): 267–304. doi:10.1177/0142723704045681.
- Danger, S (2005). "Child-Centered Group Play Therapy with Children with Speech Difficulties". International Journal of Play Therapy. 14 (1): 1–97.
- Frith, Uta; Vargha-Khadem, Faraneh (2001). "Are there sex differences in the brain basis of literacy related skills? Evidence from reading and spelling impairments after early unilateral brain damage". Neuropsychologia. 39 (13): 1485–1488. doi:10.1016/S0028-3932(01)00063-X.
- Kansaku, Kenji; Kitazawa, Shigeru (2001). "Imaging studies on sex differences in the lateralization of language". Neuroscience Research. 41 (4): 333–337. doi:10.1016/S0168-0102(01)00292-9.
- Shriberg, Lawrence D.; Tomblin, J. Bruce; McSweeny, Jane L. (1999-12-01). "Prevalence of Speech Delay in 6-Year-Old Children and Comorbidity With Language Impairment". Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research. 42 (6): 1461–1481. doi:10.1044/jslhr.4206.1461. ISSN 1092-4388.
- Christie, F., & Derewianka, B. (2010). School discourse: Learning to write across the years of schooling. Bloomsbury Publishing.
- Kroll, B. M. (1981) Developmental relationships between speaking and writing. In Kroll & Vaan (eds) (1981), 32–54
- Perera, K. (1984). Children's writing and reading: Analysing classroom language. Oxford: Blackwell.
- Petty 1978 Petty, W. T. The writing of young children. In C. R. Cooper & L. Odell (Eds.), Research on composing: Points of departure. Urbana, Il.: NCTE, 1978.
- Kroll, B. M. (1981) Developmental relationships between speaking and writing. In Kroll & Vaan (eds) (1981), 32–54.
- Kantor, K. J. & Rubin, D. L. (1981) Between speaking and writing: processes of differentiation. In Kroll & Vaan (eds) (1981), 55–81.
- Sulzby, Elizabeth; Teale, William H. (1985). "Writing Development in Early Childhood". Educational Horizons. 64 (1): 8–12. JSTOR 42925853.
- Myhill, D. (2008). Towards a linguistic model of sentence development in writing. Language and Education, 22(5), 271–288.
- Paul, Rhea; Elwood, Terril J. (1991-10-01). "Maternal Linguistic Input to Toddlers With Slow Expressive Language Development". Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research. 34 (5): 982–988. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.687.6924. doi:10.1044/jshr.3405.982. ISSN 1092-4388.
- Mani, Nivedita; Plunkett, Kim (2010). "Twelve-Month-Olds Know Their Cups From Their Keps and Tups". Infancy. 15 (5): 445–470. doi:10.1111/j.1532-7078.2009.00027.x. ISSN 1525-0008.
- HOFF, E (2006). "How social contexts support and shape language development☆". Developmental Review. 26 (1): 55–88. doi:10.1016/j.dr.2005.11.002.
- Nathanson, Amy I.; Rasmussen, Eric E. (2011-10-01). "TV Viewing Compared to Book Reading and Toy Playing Reduces Responsive Maternal Communication with Toddlers and Preschoolers". Human Communication Research. 37 (4): 465–487. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2958.2011.01413.x. ISSN 0360-3989.
- Owens, Robert E. (2012). Language development : an introduction. Boston: Pearson. pp. 130–135. ISBN 978-0-13-258252-0. OCLC 682896734.
- Nicholas, Howard; Lightbown, Patsy M.; Spada, Nina (2001-12-01). "Recasts as Feedback to Language Learners". Language Learning. 51 (4): 719–758. doi:10.1111/0023-8333.00172. ISSN 1467-9922.
- Tamis-LeMonda, Catherine S.; Bornstein, Marc H.; Cyphers, Lisa; Toda, Sueko; Ogino, Misako (2016-06-30). "Language and Play at One Year: A Comparison of Toddlers and Mothers in the United States and Japan". International Journal of Behavioral Development. 15 (1): 19–42. doi:10.1177/016502549201500102.
- Burchinal, Margaret R.; Roberts, Joanne E.; Nabors, Laura A.; Bryant, Donna M. (1996). "Quality of Center Child Care and Infant Cognitive and Language Development". Child Development. 67 (2): 606–620. doi:10.2307/1131835. JSTOR 1131835.
- Michnik Golinkoff&Hirsh-Pasek, Roberta&Kathy (2000). How Babies Talk. New York: Penguin Group. p. 231.
- Butler, Lester G. (1947). "Language Acquisition of Young Children: Major Theories and Sequences". Elementary English. 51 (8): 1120–1123, 1137. JSTOR 41388312.
- "Speech & Language Milestones – Speech Clinic™". Speech Clinic.
- Fernandez, Eva (2011). Fundamentals of Psycholinguistics. West Sussex: Wiley-Blackwell. p. 110.
- Luinge, Margreet R.; Post, Wendy J.; Wit, Hero P.; Goorhuis-Brouwer, Sieneke M. (2006-10-01). "The Ordering of Milestones in Language Development for Children From 1 to 6 Years of Age". Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research. 49 (5): 923–940. doi:10.1044/1092-4388(2006/067). ISSN 1092-4388. PMID 17077206.
- Brandone, Amanda C; Salkind, Sara J.; Golinkoff, Roberta Michnick; Hirsh-Pasek, Kathy (2006). George G Bear; Kathleen M Minke (eds.). Language Development (PDF). Children's needs III : development, prevention, and intervention. Bethesda, Md: National Association of School Psychologists. ISBN 9780932955791. OCLC 70691810. Retrieved 2013-12-09.CS1 maint: Uses editors parameter (link)
- "Grammar". Dictionary.com.
- "the definition of syntactic". Dictionary.com. Retrieved 2016-01-29.
- Brown, R. (1973). A first language: The early stages. Harvard University Press.
- Bowen, C. (1998). "Brown's Stages of Syntactic Development". speech language therapy dot com.
- Rochat, Philippe; Querido, Jane G.; Striano, Tricia (1999). "Emerging sensitivity to the timing and structure of protoconversation in early infancy". Developmental Psychology. 35 (4): 950–957. doi:10.1037//0012-1618.104.22.1680. ISSN 0012-1649.
- Watson, John S. (1972). "SMILING, COOING, AND "THE GAME"". Merrill-Palmer Quarterly of Behavior and Development. 18 (4): 323–339. JSTOR 23084026.
- Tauzin, Tibor; Gergely, György (2018-06-22). "Communicative mind-reading in preverbal infants". Scientific Reports. 8 (1): 9534. doi:10.1038/s41598-018-27804-4. ISSN 2045-2322. PMC 6015048. PMID 29934630.
- Bialystok, E.; Craik, FI.; Luk, G. (Apr 2012). "Bilingualism: consequences for mind and brain". Trends Cogn Sci. 16 (4): 240–50. doi:10.1016/j.tics.2012.03.001. PMC 3322418. PMID 22464592.
- Blumenfeld, H; Faroqi-Shah, Y (2009). "Bilingualism: Consequences for language, cognition, development, and the brain". American Speech-Language-Hearing Association. 14 (13): 10.
- Poulin-Dubois, D.; Blayne, A.; Coutya, J.; Bialystok, E. (Mar 2011). "The effects of bilingualism on todders' executive functioning". Journal of Experimental Psychology. 108 (3): 567–579. doi:10.1016/j.jcep2010.10.009 (inactive 2019-03-15).
- Katsos, N.; Ezeisabarrena, MJ.; Gavarró, A.; Kraljević, JK.; Hrzica, G.; Noveck, I. "The acquisition of quantification across languages: some predictions". Cascadilla Press.
- Korkman, M.; Stenroos, M.; Mickos, A.; Westman, M.; Ekholm, P.; Byring, R. (Sep 2012). "Does simultaneous bilingualism aggravate children's specific language problems?". Acta Paediatr. 101 (9): 946–52. doi:10.1111/j.1651-2227.2012.02733.x. PMID 22591054.
- Han, WJ. (2012). "Bilingualism and academic achievement". Child Dev. 83 (1): 300–21. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.2011.01686.x. PMID 22098584.
- Alladi, S.; Bak, TH.; Duggirala, V.; Surampudi, B.; Shailaja, M.; Shukla, AK.; Kaul, S. (Nov 2013). "Bilingualism delays age at onset of dementia, independent of education and immigration status". Neurology. 18 (20): 1938–1944. doi:10.1212/01.wnl.0000436620.33155a4 (inactive 2019-03-15).
- Kohnert, K (2010). "Bilingual children with primary language impairment: Issues, evidence, and implications for clinical actions". Journal of Communication Disorders. 15 (1): 20–35.
- Stockman, Ida J. (2010-01-01). "A Review of Developmental and Applied Language Research on African American Children: From a Deficit to Difference Perspective on Dialect Differences". Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools. 41 (1): 23–38. doi:10.1044/0161-1461(2009/08-0086). ISSN 0161-1461. PMID 20051577.
- Dockrell, Julie E.; Marshall, Chloë R. (2015-05-01). "Measurement Issues: Assessing language skills in young children" (PDF). Child and Adolescent Mental Health. 20 (2): 116–125. doi:10.1111/camh.12072. ISSN 1475-3588.
- Olswang, Lesley B; Rodriguez, Barbara; Timler, Geralyn (1998). "Recommending Intervention for Toddlers With Specific Language Learning Difficulties" (PDF). American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology. pp. 23–32. Retrieved 9 December 2013.
- Lightbown, P. M., Spada, N., Ranta, L., & Rand, J. (2006). How languages are learned. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
- O'Grady, W., & Cho, S. W. (2011). First Language Acquisition. 345–350.
- Abbot-Smith, Kirsten; Tomasello, Michael (2006). "Exemplar-learning and schematization in a usage-based account of syntactic acquisition" (PDF). The Linguistic Review. 23 (3): 275–290. doi:10.1515/TLR.2006.011.
- Balari S, Benítez-Burraco A, Camps M, Longa VM, Lorenzo G, Uriagereka J (2011). "The archaeological record speaks: bridging anthropology and linguistics". Int J Evol Biol. 2011: 1–17. doi:10.4061/2011/382679. PMC 3123707. PMID 21716806.
- Beitchman, J. H., Wilson, B., Brownlie, E., Walters, H., & Lancee, W. (1996). Long-term consistency in speech/language profiles: I. developmental and academic outcomes. Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 35(6), 804–814. doi:10.1097/00004583-199606000-00021
- Berk, Laura E. (2009). "9, Language Development". Child development. Boston: Pearson Education/Allyn & Bacon. ISBN 978-0-205-61559-9. OCLC 637146042.
- Bornstein, MH.; Putnick, DL. (Mar 2012). "Stability of language in childhood: a multiage, multidomain, multimeasure, and multisource study". Dev Psychol. 48 (2): 477–91. doi:10.1037/a0025889. PMC 3412562. PMID 22004343.
- Brown, C. L. (2004). Reducing the over-referral of culturally and linguistically diverse students (CLD) for language disabilities. NABE Journal of Research and Practice, 2(1), 235- 243.
- Burchinal, M. R., Roberts, J. E., Nabors, L. A., & Bryant, D. M. (1996). Quality of center child care and infant cognitive and language development. Child Development, 67(2), 606–620. doi:10.2307/1131835
- Buschmann, A., Jooss, B., Rupp, A., Feldhusen, F., Pietz, J., & Philippi, H. (2008). Parent based language intervention for 2-year-old children with specific expressive language delay: a randomized controlled trial. Archives of Disease in Childhood, 94(2), 110–116. doi:10.1136/adc.2008.141572
- Bybee, J. L. (2006). From usage to grammar: The mind's response to repetition. Language, 82(4), 711–733. doi:10.1353/lan.2006.0186
- Cameron-Faulkner, T., Lieven, E., & Tomasello, M. (2003). A construction-based analysis of child directed speech. Cognitive Science, 27(6), 843–873. doi:10.1207/s15516709cog2706_2
- Campbell R (March 2008). "The processing of audio-visual speech: empirical and neural bases". Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B. 363 (1493): 1001–10. doi:10.1098/rstb.2007.2155. PMC 2606792. PMID 17827105.
- Chomsky, Noam (1963–65). Robert Duncan Luce (ed.). Three models for the description of language. Readings in mathematical psychology. New York: Wiley. OCLC 190574.
- Chomsky, Noam (1965). Aspects of the theory of syntax. Cambridge: M.I.T. Press. ISBN 9780262530071. OCLC 309976.
- Crain-Thoreson, C., & Dale, P. S. (1999). Enhancing linguistic performance: Parents and teachers as book reading partners for children with language delays. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 19(1), 28-39.
- Dale, P. S., Crain-Thoreson, C. Notari-Syverson, A., & Cole, K., (1996). Parent-child book reading as an intervention technique for young children with language delays. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 16(2), 213–235.
- Dockrell, J. E., & Marshall, C. R. (2014). Measurement issues: Assessing language skills in young children. Child and Adolescent Mental Health, 20(2), 116–125. doi:10.1111/camh.12072
- Elardo, R., Bradley, R., & Caldwell, B. M. (1977). A longitudinal study of the relation of infants' home environments to language development at age three. Child Development, 48(2), 595–603. doi:10.2307/1128658
- Ford, C. E., Fox, B. A., & Thompson, S. A. (2002). “Social interaction and grammar.” In Michael Tomasello, ed. The new psychology of language. vol. 2. 119–143. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
- Gonzalez, J. E., & Uhing, B. M. (2008). Home literacy environments and young Hispanic children's English and Spanish oral language. Journal of Early Intervention, 30(2), 116–139. doi:10.1177/1053815107313858
- Grimm, A., & Schulz, P. (2014). Specific language impairment and early second language acquisition: The risk of over- and under diagnosis. Child Indicators Research, 7(4), 821–841. doi:10.1007/s12187-013-9230-6
- Guess, D. (1969). A functional analysis of receptive language and productive speech: acquisition of the plural morpheme. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 2(1), 55–64. doi:10.1901/jaba.1969.2-55
- Gutierrez-Clellen, V. F. (1999). Language choice in intervention with bilingual children. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 8(4), 291–302. doi:10.1044/1058-0360.0804.291
- Harrison, L. J., & McLeod, S. (2009). Epidemiology of speech and language impairment in a nationally in a nationally representative sample of 4- to 5-year-old children. Journal of Speech, Language & Hearing Research, 52, 1213–1229
- Hickok G, Poeppel D (2004). "Dorsal and ventral streams: a framework for understanding aspects of the functional anatomy of language" (PDF). Cognition. 92 (1–2): 67–99. doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2003.10.011. PMID 15037127.
- Hoff, E. (2003). The specificity of environmental influence: Socioeconomic status affects early vocabulary development via maternal speech. Child Development, 74(5), 1368–1378. doi:10.1111/1467-8624.00612
- Hoff, E. (2006). How social contexts support and shape language development. Developmental Review, 26(1), 55–88. doi:10.1016/j.dr.2005.11.002
- Kennison, Shelia (2013). Introduction to language development. Los Angeles, CA: Sage. ISBN 9781412996068.
- Kohnert, K. (2010). Bilingual children with primary language impairment: Issues, evidence, and implications for clinical actions. Journal of Communication Disorders, 43(6), 456-473. doi:10.1016/j.jcomdis.465-473.
- Kuhl PK, Conboy BT, Coffey-Corina S, Padden D, Rivera-Gaxiola M, Nelson T (March 2008). "Phonetic learning as a pathway to language: new data and native language magnet theory expanded (NLM-e)". Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B. 363 (1493): 979–1000. doi:10.1098/rstb.2007.2154. PMC 2606791. PMID 17846016.
- Law, J., Boyle, J., Harris, F., Harkness, A., & Nye, C. (2000). The feasibility of universal screening for primary speech and language delay: findings from a systematic review of the literature. Developmental Medicine & Child Neurology, 42(3), 190–200. doi:10.1017/s0012162200000335
- Letourneau, N. L., Duffett-Leger, L., Levac, L., Watson, B., & Young-Morris, C. (2011). Socioeconomic status and child development: A meta-analysis. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 21(3), 211–224.
- McCormack, J., Harrison, L. J., McLeod, S., & McAllister, L. (2011). A nationally representative study of the association between communication impairment at 4–5 years and children's life activities at 7–9 years. Journal of Speech Language and Hearing Research, 54(5), 1328–1348. doi:10.1044/1092-4388(2011/10-0155)
- Nathanson, A. I., & Rasmussen, E. E. (2011). TV viewing compared to book reading and toy playing reduces responsive maternal communication with Toddlers and preschoolers. Human Communication Research, 37(4), 465–487. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2958.2011.01413.x
- Nelson, H. D., Nygren, P., Walker, M., & Panoscha, R. (2006). Screening for speech and language delay in preschool children: Systematic evidence review for the US preventive services task force. Pediatrics, 117(2), 298–319. doi:10.1542/peds.2005-1467
- Paradis, J. (2005). Grammatical morphology in children learning English as a second language. Language Speech and Hearing Services in Schools, 36(3), 172–187. doi:10.1044/0161-1461(2005/019)
- Paul, R. (1993). Patterns of development in late talkers: Preschool years. Journal of Childhood Communication Disorders, 15(1), 7–14. doi:10.1177/152574019301500103
- Paul, R., & Elwood, T. J. (1991). Maternal linguistic input to toddlers with slow expressive language development. Journal of Speech Language and Hearing Research, 34(5), 982–988. doi:10.1044/jshr.3405.982
- Paul, R., & Smith, R. L. (1993). Narrative skills in 4-year-olds with normal, impaired, and late-developing language. Journal of Speech Language and Hearing Research, 36(3), 592–602. doi:10.1044/jshr.3603.592
- Perani D, Saccuman MC, Scifo P, et al. (September 2011). "Neural language networks at birth". Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 108 (38): 16056–61. doi:10.1073/pnas.1102991108. PMC 3179044. PMID 21896765.
- Rescorla, L., Ross, G. S., & McClure, S. (2007). Language delay and behavioral/emotional problems in toddlers: Findings from two developmental clinics. Journal of Speech Language and Hearing Research, 50(4), 1063-1078. doi:10.1044/1092-4388(2007/074)
- Richardson FM, Price CJ (October 2009). "Structural MRI studies of language function in the undamaged brain". Brain Struct Funct. 213 (6): 511–23. doi:10.1007/s00429-009-0211-y. PMC 2749930. PMID 19618210.
- Roberts, T. A. (2008). Home storybook reading in primary or second language with preschool children: Evidence of equal effectiveness for second-language vocabulary acquisition. Reading Research Quarterly, 43(2), 103-130. doi:10.1598/rrq.43.2.1
- Roseberry, S., Hirsh-Pasek, K., & Golinkoff, R. M. (2013). Skype me! Socially contingent interactions help toddlers learn language. Child Development, 85(3), 956–970. doi:10.1111/cdev.12166
- Rowe, ML.; Ozçalişkan, S.; Goldin-Meadow, S. (Jan 2008). "Learning words by hand: Gesture's role in predicting vocabulary development". First Lang. 28 (2): 182–199. doi:10.1177/0142723707088310. PMC 2745165. PMID 19763249.
- Shriberg, L. D., Tomblin, J. B., & McSweeny, J. L. (1999). Prevalence of speech delay in 6-year-old children and comorbidity with language impairment. Journal of Speech Language and Hearing Research, 42(6), 1461–1479. doi:10.1044/jslhr.4206.1461
- Spencer, T. D., & Slocum, T. A. (2010). The effect of a narrative intervention on story retelling and personal story generation skills of preschoolers with risk factors and narrative language delays. Journal of Early Intervention, 32(3), 178–199. doi:10.1177/1053815110379124
- Stockman, I. J. (2010). A review of developmental and applied language research on African American children: From a deficit to difference perspective on dialect differences. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 41(1), 23–38. doi: 10.1044/0161-1461(2009/08-0086)
- Sually, A., Yount, S., Kelly-Vance, L., & Ryalls, B. (2011). Using a play intervention to improve the play skills of children with a language delay. International journal of Psychology: A Biopsychosocial Approach, 9, 105–122.
- Tempel, A. B., Wagner, S. M., & McNeil, C. B. (2009). Parent-child interaction therapy and language facilitation: The role of parent-training on language development. The Journal of Speech and Language Development- Applied Behavior Analysis, 3(2–3), 216–232. doi:10.1037/h0100241
- Thordardottir, E. (2010). Towards evidence-based practice in language intervention for bilingual children. Journal of Communication Disorders, 43(6), 523–537. doi:10.1016/j.jcomdis.2010.06.001
- Tomasello, M., & Farrar, M. J. (1986). Joint attention and early language. Child Development, 57(6), 1454–1463. doi:10.2307/1130423
- Tomblin, J. B., Records, N. L., Buckwalter, P., Zhang, X., Smith, E., & O’Brien, M. (1997). Prevalence of specific language impairment in kindergarten children. Journal of Speech Language and Hearing Research, 40(6), 1245–1260. doi:10.1044/jslhr.4006.1245
- Vigil, D. C., Hodges, J., & Klee, T. (2005). Quantity and quality of parental language input to late-talking toddlers during play. Child Language Teaching and Therapy, 21(2), 107–122. doi:10.1191/0265659005ct284oa
- Wandell BA, Rauschecker AM, Yeatman JD (January 2012). "Learning to see words". Annu Rev Psychol. 63: 31–53. doi:10.1146/annurev-psych-120710-100434. PMC 3228885. PMID 21801018.
- Wasik, B. A., & Bond, M. A. (2001). Beyond the pages of a book: Interactive book reading and language development in preschool classrooms. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93(2), 243-250. doi:10.1037//0022-0622.214.171.124
- Whitehurst, G. J., Arnold, D. S., Smith, M., Fischel, J. E., Lonigan, C. J., & Valdez-Menchaca, M. C. (1991). Family history in developmental expressive language delay. Journal of Speech Language and Hearing Research, 34(5), 1150–1157.
- Whitehurst, G. J., Fischel, J. E., Lonigan, C. J., Valdez-Menchaca, M. C., Arnold, D. S., & Smith, M. (1991). Treatment of early expressive language delay: If, when, and how. Topics in Language Disorders, 11(4), 55–68.
- Zimmerman, F. J., Christakis, D. A., & Meltzoff, A. N. (2007). Associations between media viewing and language development in children under age 2 years. The Journal of Pediatrics, 151(4), 364–368. doi:10.1016/j.jpeds.2007.04.071