Lecture 9- Deprivation of Ling input
Lecture 9- Deprivation of Ling input PSY/LING 34
Popular in Language Development
Popular in Linguistics and Speech Pathology
This 47 page Class Notes was uploaded by Texana Sonnefeld on Thursday April 2, 2015. The Class Notes belongs to PSY/LING 34 at University of Arizona taught by Louann Gerken in Spring2015. Since its upload, it has received 71 views. For similar materials see Language Development in Linguistics and Speech Pathology at University of Arizona.
Reviews for Lecture 9- Deprivation of Ling input
Report this Material
What is Karma?
Karma is the currency of StudySoup.
You can buy or earn more Karma at anytime and redeem it for class notes, study guides, flashcards, and more!
Date Created: 04/02/15
DISCLAIMER This note outline is made by LouAnn Gerken All text added in blue is mine Gerken L 2015 April 2 Deprivation of Lingustio Input University of Arizona Tucson AZ Children Deprived of Early Linguistic Input Theorelical Implicalions Up unlil now we39ve been lalking abou r normal children acquiring a spoken language based on plenly oF adull inpu r These are lhe mos r rypical circumstances For language acquisi rion Under these circumstances if is hard ro know how much oF lhe abilily lo learn language comes From the child39s innale biological slale and how much From their input Theorelical Implicafions cont In rhis section of ihe course we will consider some cases of children acquiring language under less rypical circumslances Hopefully doing so will shed some lighl on lhe debale abou r how much oF language is learned vs innale Questions We ll Address in 3rd Section Do children learning language without rich input make up for the lack of input in their generalizations Is there a critical or sensitive period For learning language Can linguistic ability be dissociated From general intelligence Is language a uni ed ability phonology syntax word learning How is language related to communication The Groups We39ll Examine Now The Groups We39ll Examine Laler Learning a second language From bir rh vs la rer Learning a nonspoken language al differenl 0995 ex sign language Impairmenls 0F in relligence andor language Vicfor I rard Lane 1977 called We Wild Boy oF Aveyronquot Found in We early found in France in the woods abou r 13 years oF age when Found in We wild insensi rive ro cold preferred Food raw make only grun ring noises never learned ro Speak learned ro associa re le r rer s rrings wi rh rhings he wan red mos rly FOOd block letter toys learned ro pu r several le r rer s rrings roge rher More on Victor Size of vocabulary and use of syntax in combinations not known Really long time ago no size of his vocab or syntax It is dif cult to determine the reason why Victor did not acquire language Was he too old For his biological program to work passed the period of critical language There is some speculation that he was abandoned in middle childhood when he began to show signs of childhood autism had to survive out their so he had to be a little older camping trip gone bad Therefore his Failure to acquire language may have less to do with deprivation than with a preexisting disorder Signs of possible autism maybe his parents dropped him off there If he had autism he wouldn t acquire much language anyway Isabelle Mason 1942 Davis 1947 Found af 6 12 illegifimafe child locked in dark room wi rh deaF mufe mofher who evenfually escaped whenshewas rst no speech or speech sounds When Found found used limifed gesfures fo communicafe wifh her mofher immediatelyputinto fherapisfs rewarded her For making speech speech therapy sounds More on Isabelle af abou1L 1 week affempfed vocalizafion affer 1 mom h produced single words mama Fat preHy bye aF rer 2 monfhs sang aF rer 3 mon rhs produced shor r sen rences open your eyes sfop i r fha r39s mine rhaf39s my baby doll affer 1 year could wrife coum add and paraphrase sfories 75 years old She was a success story More on Isabelle after 18 months vocabulary 15002000 words 34 per day she was learning 34 words a day after being exposed to language seemed like a very bright Child despite normal syntax Why does the paste come out if one upsets the jar Spoken by an8year old At least three differences between Victor and Isabelle Victor Close to puberty isabelle was early school years age at discovery l gesture system V none social and communicative contact preexisting mental ability autism vs no autism V possible autism I pretty normal Genie Curtis 1977 most famous story found 01 13 about the same age as Victor From the age of about 20 months Father convinced she was defective and would die had birth records had a normal birth had some sort of orthopedic problem with her legs Her father mentally ill thought she was going to be mentally challenged ocked in the garage locked in attic alone restricted in movement and punished For making sounds tied to a potty chair punished for sounds from almost age 2135 almost no interaction except when being punished mother escaped with her and social worker at Welfare of ce noticed and reported her More on Genie made no sounds when rst discovered after 1 month recognized Genie mother walk go no donquotl39 her progresswas not as great as Isabelles attended to mouth movements and imitated Si enHy watched people s mouths to immitate after 7 months rudimentary productions We have 39I39O baCk now BaCk took Isabelle aboutaweek That39s hot gt Burn seems to know the meanings of words people are saying better than the production side More on Genie after 3 years phoneme perception good a39OtPf39if guiStiC abi39itieS perCIeveing language point to lamb vs lamp point to picture that rhymes with call gt ball had Strong39anguage Ski s 0 Perception rather than production production like young children delete final consonant Cl gt D touch gt M consonant cluster blue gt belu epenthetic VOWQI stop Spitting gt tapapItI More on Genie good a r meaning ho rcold bigli r rle opposites gramma39l39ical morphemes never reached normal development righ r handed bu r processed language in rhe righ r hemisphere a very unusual pa r rern Faciors ihaf mighi affecf ou rcome language InpmL Ouicome Child exisiing Vinor no r recen r some evidence no speech older autismpsychosis possiblity not clear right hand right hem Genie ver li r rle some evidence li r rle speech older telling her 0 be quiet might indicate some injury never reached normal or neurological disorder Isobel le ges rure no evidence normal younger with her mother language Mary amp Louise Skuse 1984 discovered when Mary was 24 Louise was 36 mother mentally retarded with a possible psychiatric disorder children kept on leashes and covered with a blanket When noiSY living in a motel room at age 13 Mary showed comprehension abilities of a lhi grzrold and the roduction abilities of a 35yrold had signs of the same dia OSIS as her mother Louise developed normal language Factors that might affect outcome Child Age Input pre39exi ng Outcome condition Victor older not recent some evidence no speech Genie older very little some evidence little speech isabelle younger gesterure no eVeidenCG noram39 language some speech Mary younger some probably we language younger no evidence normal speech and language Factors that promoted language development age amp preexisting conditions Summary of Ex rreme Deprivalion If appears lhal some children deprived on early inpunL Failed learn language due lo a pre exisling menial condilion Having some communicalive com amL may play a role Age of discovery may play a role suggesling a orifical period For language development BunL lhere is r101L child discovered lale wilhounL a preexisling condilion Approaches lo Hearing Impairmenl Signing sysfems we39ll falk abouf fhese lafer Signed versions of spoken languages SEE Nafural sign languages ASL Oralisf approaches mosfly abandoned lip read and produce spoken language Mixed sysfems lip reading and speech wifh sign Sysfems using ampli cafionsignal processing hearing aidscochlear implants Ampli caiion hearing aids Hearing Sfa rus of Children of Words af Age 3 yrs Hearing 700 Hearing Impaired iden ri ed and ampli ed 500 at bir rh Hearing Impaired idem i ed and ampli ed lt25 af 25 yrs Cochlear Implants more of a push of cochlear implants today than amplification 3 Trumanquot a R 4 own 1Ilctophom 39 j I c D itquotx quot139quot V i a 1 I f wia ll J s I 39 If i 3 I 39 S Ix 39 i f a J h 39 y j 39 k 39 if p i 4quot H t s i t 39 I f 9 39 a 39 390 1 i g x I quotx D 5 Slimutoto I i 2 Speech procouor SIDE VIEW FRONT VIEW What is a cochlear implant A cochlear implant is an electronic device that provides electrical stimulation directly to the nerve bers problem quality of thespeechpmcessor An external Speech processor divides the sound into some number of channel band pass lters The number of channels determines the interpretability of the stimulation 2 channels 16 channels sounds blurryinfrequent deep voice like a morphized person like static radio like a ransom call person hard to recognize speech hard to learn language from that Cochlear Implants Coene et al 2011 cochlear implant vs hearing aid TyeMurray 1998 Children with cochlear implants acquire language more effectively than children with the same hearing loss who use hearing aids The biggest gains seen are in vocabulary growth incidental learning and prosody learning on the fly pitch changes and pauses New resear Ch looking at kids 35 and older now testing infants Uses the HPP and other infant testing methods to trace the development of language From infants who have been implanted Head turn preference Cochlear Implants Coene at al 2011 Pregrammatical lexical and early grammatical development as a function of age at access to linguistic input atCBR20 In months Ago 50 u u A A o m o m l 1 1 l I It 1 o 0 f OJ C 1 agec nonnal 0 I 4 W xix quot39Z39mo s 6 QatarCi O S I 0 l S 20 Acoatlmplmutioni1momhs Reduplicoted babble n 0 LB 1 U 1 O 1 u30wor loxlcon In months An SOl 039 9 9 3o I39 5 20 I 39i n y 10quot P Sq lw 33M 04 V Y Y Y Y 5 10 15 1 0 Aoeatlmplantationinmonths 30 intelligible words hovered around the age or normal dev 135 months child who gets oooh imp at 5 months did Redup babble at after 6 months the 18 month took 2 months when they say their first 30 intelligible words as you get older they are further away from the normal line tnmomm Agon0mmlnortmorgonco Cochlear Implants Coene at al 2011 50 w 0 a x r o 9 30 039 b S o 20 P7 10 SeanCTI 0 1 Y Y Y Y Y O 5 10 15 20 Agoalmplanta oninmomhs Child implanted at 5 months is around the normal line Determiner Use atTTR06ln months Ago 50 9 IV 0 6 3m 304 b o Ix 7 mos PALquot 3 5 01 I Y Y Y 1 0 S 10 15 20 implanted at Wo l39ta3939e 39lnfmm39oquotnths to have normal implanted at 18 months takes 22 months to get to same level Type Token Ratio how productive they were in their word use ex use the word yellow for big bird others can use the word in various uses Cochlear Implanls Coene el al 2011 The ca rchup rime needed increases as more learning is involved A child implanled al 18 monlhs lakes only 2 mos lo slar r babbling whereas a child implan red al 5 mos lakes 6 mos lo slar r babbling Bu r a child implanled al 18 mos needs 22 mos lo use words produc rively TTR whereas a child implan red al 5 mos needs only 17 mos experience ro achieve rhe same TTR biological increases as input is increased Cochlear Implants Coene et al 2011 native language acquisition results From a delicate interplay between the innate blueprint and sensory input but also that the possibility to Fully develop oral language after a particular period without linguistic experience may vary over time and For the different linguistic processes investigated In particular prelexical language processes such as babbling seem to be less affected by the duration of deprivation than later developing language processes which seem to be more tightly constrained by the biological timing of exposure different components of language have different critical periods preIexical babbling are less affected from duration of deprivation if ability requires a lot of input then the input needs to come around the critical time it takes to acquire those skills Why Study Language Development in Blind Children What information for language development is gained through the visual modality P helped by visual input learning words Early Phonology children who are not visually impaired learn labial consonants early because easier to produce can see those sounds being made In a study oF 1 lo 2yearold blind children if was Found rha r rheir consonan r inven rories did no r Favor labial consonan rs b p m v F rhe way rhe inven rories oF sigh red children do 53335335ggiglocgggonams Similarly sighled children often subs ri ru re one foramother9Very39gtbequotylabial For ano rher very gt berry bu r blind children are as likely ro subs ri ru re on ano rher phone ric dimension eg m gt n Labial bias in sigh red children is due ro rhese sounds being easier ro see Onset of First Words Word learning in blind children It was believed that blind children were delayed in early vocabulary production However until the 198039s the major cause oF blindness was exposing premature infants to too much oxygen which results in cognitive impairments as well confounding factor there oxygen causes cognitive impairments as well as blindness More recent studies suggest that rst words are acquired by blind children at about the same time as by sighted children vocabulary development is not as problematic as we originally thought Characleriza rion of Early Words Landau amp Gleilman 1985 Language and Experience however blind children tend to learn different words Early vocabulary For 2 blind children learning EngHsh more nouns Fewer verbs and adjec rives wilhin rhe noun ca regory blind children have more words For household ob clsz fhseeyigg ifgeheiithem Fewer For animals lhan sighled children Characterization of Early Words It has been argued that blind children engage in more underextension than sighted children and that they engage in less overextension Other researchers note overextensions but based on different properties eg density not B bgipgengaged more in underextension one particular dog not full range all dogs Also show overextension all four legged animals are dogs Vocab development see why they are doing that based on there perspective sug the ofs SightRelated Words See comprehension in a blind child Kelli 3 years gest that she understands II word seenfmm the perspectiveLet me see the back of your pants KellI turns so omeone who can see that her back IS toward the experimenter Make it so Mommy can t see X Kelli hides X in her pocket under a chair etc See vs look Look comprehension in Kelli If Kem wanted to look look means apprehend or explore with hands for 3 at something she would feel n with herhandsmutshe year old blind chIld different from touch understood that look for sighted Peop39e meanstoturn Your look means turn eyes toward for blindfolded sighted eyes toward the object ldr C l en SightRelated Words look and see production Kelli used the words correctly For example you can say Look as command but not SeeV How did Kelli learn look and see Was she taught Probably not The only case in which it appeared her parents taught her was in a song Look up look downquot and taught her to tilt her head Kelli was the older kid and her younger sibling was seeing Kelli was taught to look up tilt head up look down tilt head down Look was taught in the terms of a seeing person SightRelated Words Could she learn From the real world context maybe look was used when an object was at hand and see was not look was used when object at hand but hold put and give all used that way too why didn t Kelli confuse these words if she was learning from context she would mix them all up but that was not the case SightRelated Words Syntactic boot strapping learning meaning of word from the sentence type it occurs in Could she learn From language look put and hold used in different sentence Forms IOOK 0 139 39I39he dog directing attention toward object put the dog on the tablequot NP PP hold the dogquot NP The combination of sentence types plus the experience help her learn those words SightRelated Words Kelli s comprehension oF color terms knows what color terms are eg is green a color yes is loud a color no is vermillion a color no never heard it used Kelli knows that color terms apply to objects that have substance Summary Kelli can use a combination oF language and the real world to learn the meaning oF sightrelated words using syntax and real world context to learn the meaning of words Summary of Early Deprivation Most of the studies suggest that early deprivation of input due to a single cause parental neglect parental deafness intermittent hearing loss blindness can be overcome when Full input is received We still need to talk about age effects which we will do when we talk about bilingualism If deprivaiton comes form a single causes neglect blindness etc the children are resisliatn in getting past that and learning language normally Summary of Early Deprivation However it is very important to note that more than a single source of problem leads to much greater dif culty in language learning and much less chance of normal language Eg autism mental retardation genetic predisposition toward language impairment multiple sensory handicaps If additional factors then learning language becomes a lot more less likely Outcome is a lot more difficult 4 Possible form of language deprivation Wha r are rhe dafa easiest problem Wha r coum s as normal39 language developmem Wha r is rhe role of science in public policy SES and Language Development Some Data Children From lower SES groups show slower rates oF vocabulary development than do children From higher socioeconomic strata beginning within the second year oF liFe and continuing through the school years Arriaga Fenson Cronan amp Pethick 1998 Dollaghan et al 1999 Huttenlocher Vasilyeva Cymerman amp Levine 2002 Rescorla 1989 Rescorla amp Alley 2001 Main thing affected is vocabulary lower SES show lower learning rates than higher SES children in terms of vocab SES and Language Development Some Data Mothers From lower SES groups have consistently been Found to talk less to use a smaller vocabulary to be more directive and to ask Fewer questions oF their children than higher SES mothers HoFF Laursen amp Not that the moms have a small vocab they are more directive trying to get them Tardnc to do things rather than teaching them The amount oF speech addressed to children the size oF the vocabulary used the rate oF guestion asking and the qlen th oF utterances are Bornstein Haynes amp Painter 1998 Hart amp Risley 1995 HoFF amp Naigles 2002 Huttenlocher Haight Bryk Seltzer amp Lyons 1991 Weizman amp Snow 2001 Biggest factor the amount of sheer talk that is going on in the home Vocabulary vs Other Language Development It appears that phonology morphology and syntax are not affected by SES Vocabulary is affected BigvocabvaiueEhh What is the value of a larger vocabulary intrinsic value societal value other value Is it insulting to people of a culture that don t normally talk to preIinguistic children to urge them to talk to them Video Public service videos to get parents to talk to kids more
Are you sure you want to buy this material for
You're already Subscribed!
Looks like you've already subscribed to StudySoup, you won't need to purchase another subscription to get this material. To access this material simply click 'View Full Document'