Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Revised ages-of-acquisition for English phonemes
2015 ASHA Convention
Deborah G H James1,2
1 Southern Cross University, Gold Coast campus 2 The Robinson Institute, University of Adelaide
Disclosure. I have no relevant financial or nonfinancial relationships to disclose.
Southern Cross University
2
Dedication
• Althea Derrington
• Senior Speech Pathologist,
• Kindergarten Union in South Australia
3
Acknowledgements
• Channel 7 Children’s Research Foundation of South Australia Inc.
• Wendy Ferguson
• Lincoln Turner
4
Aim & Research Question
Do the ages-of-acquisition (AsA) for consonants and vowels differ to extant norms when they are repeatedly sampled in pilot-tested words varied for syllable number, stress and shape?
5
Background
Ages-of-acquisition of speech sounds (AsA)
• Consensus
– Accuracy
– Percentage of children
• Many sets (9) – (Anthony, Bogle, Ingram, & McIsaac, 1971; Chirlian & Sharpley,
1982; Dodd, Holm, Hua, & Crosbie, 2003; Kilminster & Laird, 1978; Poole, 1934; Prather, Hedrick, & Kern, 1975; Smit, Hand, Freilinger, Bernthal, & Bird, 1990; Templin, 1957; Wellman, Case, Mengert, & Bradbury, 1931)
• Variance 6
Background: AsA-the early eight 2;0 2;6 3;0 3;6 4;0 4;6 5;0 5;6 6;0 6;6 7;0 7;6 8;0
p
b
m
d
n
j
w
h
Adapted Lof (2004) (Chirlian & Sharpley, 1982; Dodd et al., 2003; Kilminster & Laird, 1978; Prather et al., 1975; Smit et al., 1990; Templin, 1957)
Background: AsA-the middle eight 2;0 2;6 3;0 3;6 4;0 4;6 5;0 5;6 6;0 6;6 7;0 7;6 8;0 9;0
t
k
ɡ
ŋ
f
v
ʧ
ʤ
Adapted Lof (2004) (Chirlian & Sharpley, 1982; Dodd et al., 2003; Kilminster & Laird, 1978; Prather et al., 1975; Smit et al., 1990; Templin, 1957)
Background: AsA -the late eight 2;0 2;6 3;0 3;6 4;0 4;6 5;0 5;6 6;0 6;6 7;0 7;6 8;0 9;0
s
z
ʃ
Ʒ
θ
ð
l
ɹ
Adapted Lof (2004) (Chirlian & Sharpley, 1982; Dodd et al., 2003; Kilminster & Laird, 1978; Prather et al., 1975; Smit et al., 1990; Templin, 1957)
Background
10
Background
• Sources of variance
– Ages of children
– Geographical differences
– Different criteria for acquisition
– Phonetic sampling context
11
Background
• Sources of variance
– Phonetic sampling context
• 1 rendition of the target in each of selected word positions
• /v-/ – MSWs
» vase (CVC); vest (CVCC) (Wellman et al., 1931)
» van (CVC) (Smit & Hand, 1997)
– PSWs
» vacuum cleaner, valentine (Templin, 1957)
12
Background: AsA-the middle eight 4;0 4;6 5;0 5;6 6;0 6;6 7;0 7;6 8;0 9;0
v Smit
Prather
Templin Kilminster
Chirlian
Adapted Lof (2004) (Chirlian & Sharpley, 1982; Dodd et al., 2003; Kilminster & Laird, 1978; Prather et al., 1975; Smit et al., 1990; Templin, 1957)
Background
• Validity
– Content validity- • Linear phonology
– Structuralism
• Non-linear phonology
– Hierarchy
» Features, phoneme, syllables, feet and prosodic words
– Constituents
14
onset rime
nucleus coda
C V C
Background
• Validity- Content and construct • Syllable numbers
(Carter & Gerken, 2003, 2004; Dodd, 1995; Echols & Newport, 1992; Ingram, 1989; Katz, 1986; Kehoe, 2001; Snowling, van Wagtendonk, & Stafford, 1988; Vance et al., 2005; Young, 1991),
• Syllable shape (Gilbert & Johnson, 1978; Ingram, 1989; Kenney & Prather, 1986)
• Sonority
• Syllable stress (Echols & Newport, 1992)
15
Background
• Construct validity – Distinguish between children with and without
impairments?
– Maybe not! • Children with and without SI
– Indistinguishable
» less marked or phonologically simple words
– Distinguishable
» phonologically complex words
(James, 2001; Johnson et al., 1999; Katz, 1986;
Stothard, Snowling, Bishop, Chipchase, & Kaplan, 1998)
16
Aim
Do the ages-of-acquisition (AsA) for consonants and vowels differ to extant norms when they are repeatedly sampled in pilot-tested words varied for syllable number, stress and shape?
17
Method
• Participants
– 283 typically developing 3- to 7-year olds
• Randomly sampled
• Normal hearing, non-verbal cognition & expressive language
• English main language
• Normal school performance, where relevant
Method
• Measures – Speech test ACAP (James, nd)
• Pilot tested
• Item analysis (James, 2001).
• 166 words – Consonants & vowels repeatedly sampled
– words where syllables varied for
» Numbers
» Shapes; V, CV, VC, CVC, CCV(C) –about 8 shapes
» Stress
– 71 MSWs, 56 DSWs & 39 PSWs
Method
Vowels MSWs DSW PSWs Total Vowel æ 2 6 10 18
e 5 7 12 24
ɪ 6 17 7 30
ɒ 3 6 8 17
ᴧ 2 11 3 16
a 2 3 3 8
i 7 4 11 22
u 6 5 4 15
ɔ 5 2 0 7
ɜ 3 2 1 6
ə 0 30 53 83
ʊ 2 4 3 9
aɪ 4 5 3 12
eɪ 6 3 2 11
ɔɪ 3 1 0 4
aʊ 4 1 1 6
Oʊ 7 3 4 14
ɪə 2 1 0 3
eə 2 1 1 4
ʊə 0 0 0 0
71 112 126 309
Consonants Sound Total MSWs XSWs
p 25 7 18
b 32 5 27
m 29 5 24
t 41 11 30
d 18 5 13
n 38 9 29
k 42 11 31
ɡ 12 2 10
ŋ 16 4 12
s 40 14 26
z 19 5 14
ʃ 12 5 7
Ʒ 1 0 1
f 18 6 12
v 10 3 7
t 11 5 6
d 11 5 6
θ 11 6 5
ð 5 1 4
h 10 3 7
l 38 7 31
ɹ 32 11 21
j 7 1 6
w 7 2 5
20
Method • Procedure
– Picture naming • most spontaneous
– Recorded
– Transcription- whole words • Point-to point reliability ≥85%
Method
• Procedure
– Analysis • PROPH+ module of Computerized Profiling (Long & Fey, 1996)
• Calculates phonemic inventory by word position – Initial , medial, final
– Indicated the number of renditions correct
– Statistical analysis (SPSS)
• criterion of acquisition – 90% of children
– 90% accuracy
CONSONANTS
RESULTS
23
Results- AsA: The early eight
Sound 3;0 4;0 5;0 6;0 7;0
p
b
m
d
n
j
w
h
24 Key: MSWs; DSWs; PSWs met criteria met criteria for elicitation contents .
Results- AsA: The middle eight
Sound 3;0 4;0 5;0 6;0 7;0
t
k
ɡ
ŋ
f
v
ʧ
ʤ
25 Key: MSWs; DSWs; PSWs met criteria met criteria for elicitation contents
Results- AsA: The late eight
26 Key: MSWs; DSWs; PSWs met criteria met criteria for elicitation contents
Sound 3;0 4;0 5;0 6;0 7;0
s
z
ʃ
Ʒ
θ
ð
l
ɹ
Results
– 8/24 (one third) consonants met acquisition criterion
– 10/24 met some criterion in ≤ MSWs, DSWs or PSWs
– 3/24 met conditional criteria
– 3/24 did not meet any criteria
27
VOWELS
RESULTS
28
Results
Key
• met criteria
• met criteria for ≤ 2 contexts of MSWs, DSWs or PSWs
• not tested in all contexts and met criteria for the contexts(s)
• Blue shading not elicited
29
Results
Key
• met criteria
• met criteria for I or 2 contexts of MSWs, DSWs or PSWs
• not tested in all contexts and met criteria for the contexts(s)
30
ə
Results
Key
• met criteria
• met criteria for I or 2 contexts of MSWs, DSWs or PSWs
• not tested in all contexts and met criteria for the contexts(s)
31
Results
• 5/20 vowels acquired by 3 years & maintained over the 5 age groups
• Short ᴧ, • Long i ,u a • Diphthong eə
• 7/20 met some criterion in ≤ MSWs, DSWs or PSWs • Short ʊ, e, æ, ɒ • Long ɜ, ɔ • Diphthong eɪ
• 5/24 met conditional criteria • Diphthongs aɪ ɔɪ, aʊ, oʊ, ɪə
• 1/20 did not meet any criteria ə • 1/20 Not elicited ʊə,
32
DISCUSSION
33
Summary
• Speech acquisition is a gradual process with mastery of sounds in words with marked and complex features occurring later than in words with unmarked and less complex features.
• Refining
– Consonants after the age of other studies
– Vowels beyond 3 years
• The schwa is notable
34
Ages-of-acquisition - the early eight 2;0 2;6 3;0 3;6 4;0 4;6 5;0 5;6 6;0 6;6 7;0 7;6 8;0
p
b
m
d
n
j
w
h
Adapted Lof (2004) = Extant norms; Criteria not met; met criteria met criteria in elicited contexts
Ages-of-acquisition - the middle eight 20 2;6 3;0 3;6 4;0 4;6 5;0 5;6 6;0 6;6 7;0 7;6 8;0 9;0
t
k
ɡ
ŋ
f
v
ʧ
ʤ
Adapted Lof (2004) = Extant norms; Criteria not met; met criteria met criteria in elicited contexts
Ages-of-acquisition - the late eight 2;0 2;6 3;0 3;6 4;0 4;6 5;0 5;6 6;0 6;6 7;0 7;6 8;0 9;0
s
z
ʃ
Ʒ
θ
ð
l
ɹ
Adapted Lof (2004) = Extant norms; Criteria not met; met criteria met criteria in elicited contexts
Discussion points
• /p/ – Not meeting the criteria
– PSWs • policeman, potato, pyjamas, spaghetti, hippopotamus,
octopus
• The common feature – The syllable stress
» Missed as onset non-final weak syllables
» Accurate as onset of a non-final stressed syllable
» Not /p/ specific- a trend in the study
(James et al., 2008)
38
Recommendations
• Take note of non-final weak syllables and the sounds within them
• The schwa is a BIG clue
– Missing
– Lengthened
39
Take home message
• If a child “passes” a traditional picture naming test be suspicious!
– Reflect : “Does the test contain complex words with unmarked features?”
• Yes
• No – Probe them
40
Take home message
• Probe XSWs with non-final weak syllables – behind, giraffe, (balloon, baboon)
– spaghetti, computer, ambulance, animals
– Note the schwa • Missing or lengthened
– [ˈhaɪnd] [ˈbiˌhaɪnd]
• Probe words with within-word consonant sequences that abut at syllable junctions – pump/kin; skate/board
– am/b(j)u/lance
41
Selected References Anthony, A., Bogle, D., Ingram, T. T. S., & McIsaac, M. (1971). Edinburgh articulation test. Edinburgh: Churchill Livingstone.
Chirlian, N. S., & Sharpley, C. F. (1982). Children's articulation development: Some regional differences. Australian Journal of Human Communication Disorders, 10 (2), 23-30.
Dodd, B., Holm, A., Hua, Z., & Crosbie, S. (2003). Phonological development: A normative study of British English-speaking children. Clinical Linguistics and Phonetics, 17, 617-643.
James, D. G. H. (2001a). An item analysis of words for an articulation and phonological test for children aged 2 to 7 years. Clinical Linguistics and Phonetics, 15(6), 457-485.
James, D. G. H., van Doorn, J., McLeod, S., & Esterman, A. (2008). Patterns of consonant deletion in typically developing children aged 3 to 7years. International Journal in Speech-Language Pathology, 10(3), 179-192.
Johnson, C. J., Beitchman, J. H., Young, A., Escobar, M., Atkinson, L., Wilson, B., . . . Wang, M. (1999 ). Fourteen-year follow-up of children with and without speech/language impairments: Speech/language stability and outcomes. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 42(3), 744-760.
Katz, R. B. (1986). Phonological deficits in children with reading disability: Evidence from an object naming task. Cognition, 22, 225-257.
Kilminster, M. E., & Laird, E. M. (1978). Articulation development in children aged three to nine years. Australian Journal of Human Communication Disorders, 6, 23-30.
Poole, I. (1934). Genetic development of articulation of consonant sounds in speech. Elementary English Review, 11, 159-161.
Prather, E. M., Hedrick, D. L., & Kern, C. A. (1975). Articulation development in children aged two to four years. Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, 40, 179-191.
Smit, A. B., Hand, L., Freilinger, J. J., Bernthal, J. E., & Bird, A. (1990). The Iowa articulation norms project and it's Nebraska replication. Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, 55, 779-798.
Smit, A. B., & Hand, L. S. (1997). Smit-Hand articulation and phonology evaluation. Los Angeles, CA: Western Psychological Services.
Stothard, S. E., Snowling, M. J., Bishop, D. V. M., Chipchase, B. B., & Kaplan, C. A. (1998). Language impaired preschoolers: A follow-up into adolescence. Journal of Speech, Language and Hearing Research, 41, 407-418.
Templin, M. C. (1957). Certain language skills in children. Minneapolis: The University of Minnesota Press.
Wellman, B., Case, I., Mengert, D., & Bradbury, D. (1931). Speech sounds in young children. University of Iowa Studies in Child Welfare, 5, 1-82.
42
