Non-Word Repetition

Non-Word Repetition

37-975-01

Challenges to Language Acquisition: Bilingualism and Language Impairment

Dr. Sharon Armon-LotemBar Ilan University

What is a Non-Word Repetition task?

In a non-word repetition task the child in asked to repeat pseudo words and/or non-words of 1-5 syllables, with or without a cluster at the onset, middle or coda.

Pseudo word: target-likeNon-word: not target-like

GAPS - Grammar and Phonology Screening Test

Gardner, H., Froud, K., McClelland, A. & van der Lely, H. (2006) The development of the Grammar and Phonology Screening (GAPS) test to assess key markers of specific language difficulties in young children. International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders

dep, pif, dremp, klest, tobilf, difimp, bademper, fakester, padrepper, difrimple

What contributes to the complexity of these words? Are they English like? Could they be used as is in a Hebrew test? Which considerations should apply?

The processing involved in NWR

NW >> Auditory processing

>> Phonological Analysis

>> Phonological storage

(and learning for real words) >>

Speech motor planning >>

Output

These can be influenced by:

Hearing loss Phonotactic

frequency Language dominance Stimulus length STM deficit Complexity Articulatory deficit

Non-word repetition & word learning – TLD, L1 At the age of 4 (Gathercole, Service, Hitch, Adams and Martin 1999)

At the age of 5 & 13 (Gathercole, Service, Hitch, Adams and Martin 1999)

L2 Acquisition (Masoura and Gathercole 1999)

Success on NWR reflects vocabulary size in childhood

Success on NWR correlates with the rate of learning new words even to adulthood

Chiat, S. (2006). The developmental trajectory of nonword repetition. Applied Psycholinguistics, 27, 552-556. ODELYA 13/12

NWR & SLI

NRT - Nonword Repetition Test

Dollaghan, C., and Campbell, T. F. 1998. Nonword Repetition and Child Language Impairment. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research Vol.41 1136-1146

What contributes to the complexity of these words? Are they English like? Could they be used as is in a Hebrew test? Which considerations should apply?

CNRep - Children's Test of Nonword Repetition

Gathercole, S. E., Willis, C. S., Baddeley, A. D., and H. Emslie H. (1994) The Children's Test of Nonword Repetition: a test of phonological working memory. Memory 2(2):103-27.

(Tables from Archibald, L. M. D., & Gathercole, S. (2006))

How are they different? CNRep NRT # of words 40 16 # of Syllable 2-5 1-4 Clusters + - (CV structure, no late acquired

phonemes) Weak syllable with reduced vowels (hampent)

+ - (acoustically salient only)

Lexical components (morphemes)

+ -

Prosodic pattern Natural for English Equal stress on each syllable Score Online

(correct/incorrect) From transcription (percentage of correct phoneme)

Test Morpho/Lexical abilities + ….

Basic phonological processing or memory skills

What is NWR testing then?

Baddeley, A. D. (2003). Working memory and language: An overview. Journal of Communication Disorders, 36, 189–208. ANNA 13/12

Phonological working memory (phonological loop)

“Working memory (WM) according to Baddeley (1986) is a multicomponent, capacity-limited system that comprises a controlling ‘‘central executive’’ and that includes an articulatory loop system. The central executive ... is thought to regulate information flow within WM, retrieval of information from other memory systems, and the processing and storage of information. The articulatory loop … includes a capacity-limited phonological short-term store and an articulatory control process … that acts to refresh and maintain speech material in the store for a brief period. The articulatory loop’s function is to store verbal input temporarily, especially novel phonological input (Baddeley, Gathercole, & Papagno, 1998), while other cognitive tasks such as auditory comprehension take place. The ability to temporarily store novel material also allows the listener the opportunity to create long-term phonological representations of that material (Baddeley et al1998).” (Montgomery 2003, p. 222)

Digit Span

Gray, S. 2003. Diagnostic accuracy and test-retest reliability of nonword repetition and digit span tasks administered to preschool children with specific language impairment. Journal of Communication disorders 36, 129-151

Digit Span NWR [N=20] Mean S.D. Min Max Mean S.D. Min Max SLI (4-5;11) 1.86 0.99 0.00 4.00 8.68 3.39 3.00 18.00 NL (age) 3.73 1.78 1.00 9.00 16.41 1.79 12.00 19.00

Linguistic Knowledge

Knowledge of lexical composition Size of vocabularyAbstract representation / Poor

representational systemLess efficient mechanism for using lexical

knowledge Speech output

Archibald, L. M. D., & Gathercole, S. (2006). Nonword repetition: A comparison of tests. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 49, 970–983 .

Subjects: 36 native speakers: 12 SLI (9;8), 12 TD age (9;9), 12 TD language (6;1). Same SES

Scores on standardized test:

Which one is easier?

Within group: CNRep is easier than NRT Across group: The gap is more significant

on CNRep

What influences these results?

How does NWR fairs with other tasks?Conti-Ramsden, G. (2003). Processing and linguistic markers in young children with specific language impairment (SLI). Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 46, 1029–1037.

Children with SLI are significantly worse on all four markers

NWR and past tense marking yield the best results (sensitivity & specificity).

Adding past tense to NWR raises the predictive ability (from 81% to 87%)

While verb morphology is useful for 4-5 y.o. in English, NWR might be more promising for other languages

BISLI

Girbau, D., & Schwartz, R. G. (2008). Phonological Working Memory in Spanish-English bilingual children with and without Specific Language Impairment. Journal of Communication Disorders, 41, 2, 124-145. MONA 13/12

A Russian-Hebrew NWR task tested with bilinguals with TDL and SLI - rational and findings

Sharon Armon-Lotem, Bar Ilan UniversityShula Chiat, City UniversityCOST IS0804, Amsterdam

November 16-18, 2009

AMANI – NWR in Arabic 27/12