LANGUAGE IN INDIA. Strength for Today and Bright Hope for Tomorrow. Volume 14:4 April 2014 ISSN

Similar documents
LANGUAGE IN INDIA Strength for Today and Bright Hope for Tomorrow Volume 12: 9 September 2012 ISSN

LANGUAGE IN INDIA Strength for Today and Bright Hope for Tomorrow Volume 11 : 12 December 2011 ISSN

LANGUAGE IN INDIA Strength for Today and Bright Hope for Tomorrow Volume 11 : 3 March 2011 ISSN

The Acquisition of English Grammatical Morphemes: A Case of Iranian EFL Learners

Language Acquisition by Identical vs. Fraternal SLI Twins * Karin Stromswold & Jay I. Rifkin

LANGUAGE IN INDIA Strength for Today and Bright Hope for Tomorrow Volume 12 : 2 February 2012 ISSN

GRAMMATICAL MORPHEME ACQUISITION: AN ANALYSIS OF AN EFL LEARNER S LANGUAGE SAMPLES *

Correspondence between the DRDP (2015) and the California Preschool Learning Foundations. Foundations (PLF) in Language and Literacy

Listening and Speaking Skills of English Language of Adolescents of Government and Private Schools

THE ACQUISITION OF INFLECTIONAL MORPHEMES: THE PRIORITY OF PLURAL S

The Acquisition of Person and Number Morphology Within the Verbal Domain in Early Greek

Program Matrix - Reading English 6-12 (DOE Code 398) University of Florida. Reading

1 st Quarter (September, October, November) August/September Strand Topic Standard Notes Reading for Literature

Derivational and Inflectional Morphemes in Pak-Pak Language

Curriculum Vitae. Sara C. Steele, Ph.D, CCC-SLP 253 McGannon Hall 3750 Lindell Blvd., St. Louis, MO Tel:

Age Effects on Syntactic Control in. Second Language Learning

Improved Effects of Word-Retrieval Treatments Subsequent to Addition of the Orthographic Form

Language Development: The Components of Language. How Children Develop. Chapter 6

ANNUAL REPORT SCHOOL OF COMMUNICATION SCIENCES & DISORDERS FACULTY OF MEDICINE

Linguistics. Undergraduate. Departmental Honors. Graduate. Faculty. Linguistics 1

2014 Colleen Elizabeth Fitzgerald

ELA/ELD Standards Correlation Matrix for ELD Materials Grade 1 Reading

Sample Goals and Benchmarks

Cross-linguistic aspects in child L2 acquisition

First Grade Curriculum Highlights: In alignment with the Common Core Standards

NAME: East Carolina University PSYC Developmental Psychology Dr. Eppler & Dr. Ironsmith

Special Education Program Continuum

Examinee Information. Assessment Information

English Language and Applied Linguistics. Module Descriptions 2017/18

Houghton Mifflin Reading Correlation to the Common Core Standards for English Language Arts (Grade1)

OPAC and User Perception in Law University Libraries in the Karnataka: A Study

Mandarin Lexical Tone Recognition: The Gating Paradigm

The Effect of Discourse Markers on the Speaking Production of EFL Students. Iman Moradimanesh

SOFTWARE EVALUATION TOOL

Title: Language Impairment in Bilingual children: State of the art 2017

Milton Public Schools Special Education Programs & Supports

5/29/2017. Doran, M.K. (Monifa) RADBOUD UNIVERSITEIT NIJMEGEN

Education. American Speech-Language Hearing Association: Certificate of Clinical Competence in Speech- Language Pathology

GERM 3040 GERMAN GRAMMAR AND COMPOSITION SPRING 2017

Dyslexia/dyslexic, 3, 9, 24, 97, 187, 189, 206, 217, , , 367, , , 397,

Florida Reading Endorsement Alignment Matrix Competency 1

CLASSIFICATION OF PROGRAM Critical Elements Analysis 1. High Priority Items Phonemic Awareness Instruction

Taught Throughout the Year Foundational Skills Reading Writing Language RF.1.2 Demonstrate understanding of spoken words,

Chapter 5. The Components of Language and Reading Instruction

Word Stress and Intonation: Introduction

Recommended Guidelines for the Diagnosis of Children with Learning Disabilities

Content Language Objectives (CLOs) August 2012, H. Butts & G. De Anda

Language Acquisition Chart

AN EXPERIMENTAL APPROACH TO NEW AND OLD INFORMATION IN TURKISH LOCATIVES AND EXISTENTIALS

Language Acquisition Fall 2010/Winter Lexical Categories. Afra Alishahi, Heiner Drenhaus

California Rules and Regulations Related to Low Incidence Handicaps

COMMUNICATIVE LANGUAGE TEACHING

TITLE 23: EDUCATION AND CULTURAL RESOURCES SUBTITLE A: EDUCATION CHAPTER I: STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION SUBCHAPTER b: PERSONNEL PART 25 CERTIFICATION

The Effect of Written Corrective Feedback on the Accuracy of English Article Usage in L2 Writing

A Decent Proposal for Bilingual Education at International Standard Schools/SBI in Indonesia

Laurie Mercado Gauger, Ph.D., CCC-SLP

Curriculum Vitae of. JOHN W. LIEDEL, M.D. Developmental-Behavioral Pediatrician

California Department of Education English Language Development Standards for Grade 8

Acquisition vs. Learning of a Second Language: English Negation

The role of the first language in foreign language learning. Paul Nation. The role of the first language in foreign language learning

FOREWORD.. 5 THE PROPER RUSSIAN PRONUNCIATION. 8. УРОК (Unit) УРОК (Unit) УРОК (Unit) УРОК (Unit) 4 80.

Approaches to Teaching Second Language Writing Brian PALTRIDGE, The University of Sydney

A Minimalist Approach to Code-Switching. In the field of linguistics, the topic of bilingualism is a broad one. There are many

ENGBG1 ENGBL1 Campus Linguistics. Meeting 2. Chapter 7 (Morphology) and chapter 9 (Syntax) Pia Sundqvist

To appear in The TESOL encyclopedia of ELT (Wiley-Blackwell) 1 RECASTING. Kazuya Saito. Birkbeck, University of London

Monitoring Metacognitive abilities in children: A comparison of children between the ages of 5 to 7 years and 8 to 11 years

Iraqi EFL Students' Achievement In The Present Tense And Present Passive Constructions

ACCREDITATION STANDARDS

Language-Specific Patterns in Danish and Zapotec Children s Comprehension of Spatial Grams

2. CONTINUUM OF SUPPORTS AND SERVICES

Evaluation Off Off On On

Generative Second Language Acquisition & Foreign Language Teaching Winter 2009

Adults with traumatic brain injury (TBI) often have word retrieval problems (Barrow, et al., 2003; 2006; King, et al., 2006a; 2006b; Levin et al.

Syntactic and Lexical Simplification: The Impact on EFL Listening Comprehension at Low and High Language Proficiency Levels

THE USE OF ENGLISH MOVIE IN TEACHING AUSTIN S ACT

English for Life. B e g i n n e r. Lessons 1 4 Checklist Getting Started. Student s Book 3 Date. Workbook. MultiROM. Test 1 4

Communication Disorders Program. Strategic Plan January 2012 December 2016

The Impact of Morphological Awareness on Iranian University Students Listening Comprehension Ability

The Effect of Extensive Reading on Developing the Grammatical. Accuracy of the EFL Freshmen at Al Al-Bayt University

What the National Curriculum requires in reading at Y5 and Y6

Language Center. Course Catalog

International Conference on Education and Educational Psychology (ICEEPSY 2012)

Possessive have and (have) got in New Zealand English Heidi Quinn, University of Canterbury, New Zealand

Minimalism is the name of the predominant approach in generative linguistics today. It was first

Developing Grammar in Context

CS 598 Natural Language Processing

Progressive Aspect in Nigerian English

Effect of Cognitive Apprenticeship Instructional Method on Auto-Mechanics Students

Developing phonological awareness: Is there a bilingual advantage?

Language acquisition: acquiring some aspects of syntax.

Computerized Adaptive Psychological Testing A Personalisation Perspective

The College Board Redesigned SAT Grade 12

Analyzing Linguistically Appropriate IEP Goals in Dual Language Programs

Appendix. Journal Title Times Peer Review Qualitative Referenced Authority* Quantitative Studies

A Critique of Running Records

Degeneracy results in canalisation of language structure: A computational model of word learning

CEFR Overall Illustrative English Proficiency Scales

Fluency Disorders. Kenneth J. Logan, PhD, CCC-SLP

Lexical and grammatical development in trilingual speakers of isixhosa, English and Afrikaans

Abstractions and the Brain

Transcription:

LANGUAGE IN INDIA Strength for Today and Bright Hope for Tomorrow Volume 14:4 April 2014 ISSN 1930-2940 Managing Editor: M. S. Thirumalai, Ph.D. Editors: B. Mallikarjun, Ph.D. Sam Mohanlal, Ph.D. B. A. Sharada, Ph.D. A. R. Fatihi, Ph.D. Lakhan Gusain, Ph.D. Jennifer Marie Bayer, Ph.D. S. M. Ravichandran, Ph.D. G. Baskaran, Ph.D. L. Ramamoorthy, Ph.D. C. Subburaman, Ph.D. (Economics) Assistant Managing Editor: Swarna Thirumalai, M.A. Brown s Morphological Skills in Typically Developing Bilingual (Malayalam-English) Speaking Children Jittu Susan Varghese, MASLP Deepa Elizabeth Thomas, MASLP Aswathy E Nebu, MASLP Sofia V Sunny, MASLP, Asst. Professor & Ph.D. Scholar ================================================================== Abstract Language is the core of an effective communicative process. The appearance and mastery of the 14 grammatical morphemes in relation to the stages of development was found in the Brown s research. Morphemes generally convey meanings that could only be implied through the simple word orders and they were mastered at various stages as the child s language Children 139

developed. The present study was determined to account which morphological structures were achieved by 5-6 years Malayalam English speaking children. A total of 30 typically developing children participated in the present study. The speech sample was obtained from conversation and picture description tasks. Results indicate that in picture description task out of 14 grammatical morphemes only six morphemes were present and for general conversation eight morphemes were present in 5-7 Years typically developing Malayalam-English bilingual children. Out of two tasks the children performed well in general conversation. The obtained data is useful for Speech- Language pathologists to understand typical English second language acquisition and how it differs from monolingual English in order to accurately assess and effectively identify potential language disorders as early as possible. Also the results can be used to compare with language disordered group. Key words: Morphological skills, Malayalam Language Introduction Language is the main vehicle for communication. Language is the core of an effective communicative process. Children in the process of language development go through the variety of universally sequential stages of development with amazing case unless on interference due to any motor or sensory deficits occurs. Language is a complex and dynamic system of conventional symbols that is used in various modes for thought and communication. Contemporary views of human language holds that, language evolves within specific historical, social and cultural context; language is a rule governed behavior, described by at least five parameters phonologic, morphologic, syntactic, semantic and pragmatic language learning and use are determined by interaction of biological, cognitive, psychological and environmental factors(american Speech and Hearing Association (ASHA,1982). An individual is exposed to more than one language, with increasing mobility or globalization. Hence an individual must or should know more than one language i.e. be bilingual Children 140

or multilingual to be an efficient communicator. Bilingualism means a person who knows more than one language (Mackey, 1962). Tucker (1998) reported that majority of children across the globe grow up speaking more than one language. The pattern of language development in these children has attracted various researchers. Generally it is accepted that there are two different pattern of bilingual language development i.e. Simultaneous and sequential. Simultaneous bilingual children are those whose dual language learning experiences began at birth or at least before the age of three (Howard 1995). Sequential bilinguals are distinct from simultaneous bilinguals in that one language introduced after the other language has become somewhat established (Castilla, Restrepo & Leroux, 2009). Hence one needs to study each aspects of bilingual language to comment on the development of bilinguals. Relatively little research has been conducted on children s English grammatical development in bilinguals. Bland-Stewart and Fitzgerald (2001) studied Standard American English (SAE) morphological development in bilingual Hispanic preschoolers. Analysis of the data revealed emergent use of Brown s 14 grammatical morphemes, although mastery generally was not seen at the same ages as those expected for SAE speakers. They found that the English morphological structures produced by bilingual children followed a different developmental pattern when compared to the order of acquisition of typically developing monolingual English children as outlined by Brown (1973). Khan and James (2008) the order and rate of acquisition of Brown s(1973) 14 grammatical morphemes were investigated in three children with language disorders periodic spontaneous language samples were analyzed for correct and incorrect use of the morphemes in obligatory contexts. Results indicated that the group s order of acquisition was similar to that reported by Brown (1973) and De Villiers (1973) for normal children but that there were individual variations in the children s acquisition orders. Also, the language disordered children Children 141

demonstrated a much slower rate of acquisition than that reported for normally developing children. Steckol and Leonard (1979) studied the grammatical morpheme usage of normal children and language- impaired children matched at two different levels of mean utterance length. The language- impaired children displayed less grammatical morpheme usage than the normal children with equivalent mean utterance length. Viji and Kumaraswamy (2013) studied Brown s Morphological skills in Kannada English Bilingual children and results shows that out of 14 grammatical morphemes only 6 morphemes namely present progressive ing, articles, plurals, prepositions like on, in and contractible auxiliary were present in 5-7 years in Kannada-English speaking bilingual children. Need of the Study India with its history of exposure to English language and current demand for English medium Education joins global trend of multilingualism. English is generally learnt as second language in school system from the age of 3 or 4 years. English language development hence forms an important Educational issue in India. Since, English is spoken in India (Indian English) and currently treated as one of the official languages in India. Speech Language Pathologist need to understand typical English language acquisition and how it differs from monolingual English in order to accurately assess and effectively identify potential language disorders as early as possible. Hence, in the current study we take a small step towards studying English morphological development in Malayalam-English bilinguals. Aim The aim of the study was to determine the order of acquisition of English morphological structures produced by Malayalam-English bilingual children and which morphological structures mastered by 5-7 years. Children 142

Methodology A total of thirty school going Malayalam speaking children in the age range of 5-7 years attending English medium school, speaking Malayalam as native language and English as their second language with no history of speech and hearing problems, Neurological problems and other medical illness participated in the present study. A conversation sample between clinician-child and picture card description (school, home, and playground) was digitally recorded using PRAAT software 5.1 version (Boersma & Weenink, 2009). Stimulus preparation was done based on the 5 experienced Speech Language Pathologists view, four color picture cards depicting the activities of school, home and playground were chosen for picture description task. The most noise free room of the school was chosen for the recording of data. At a time one child was taken for the recording. Child was asked to sit in a chair, conversation sample was recorded and four picture cards were given to him, one after the other which he had to describe the activities happened in the picture card. The instruction by the clinician was given in English for conversation sample and for picture description task. For the above two task the client has to describe in full and meaningful sentence. If the participants were not able to say in complete sentence, semantic cues were given only once. A score of one for presence of morphemes and zero for absence was obtained. The audio recorded samples were transcribed using International Phonetic Alphabet -5 and analyzed for morphological structures. This data is statistically analyzed using Kruskal Walli s test to find the presence or absence of the various morphemes as well as the pattern of the morphemic development to have a general idea about the bilingual Malayalam-English speakers speaker s English morphemic development. The identified morphemes were compared with Brown s 14 stages and checked for order of acquisition and its relevance in Malayalam-English bilinguals. Children 143

Result and Discussion The aim of the present study is to determine which English morphemes were produced by 5-7 years typically developing bilingual (Malayalam- English) children. Each subject s utterances were analyzed separately for the acquisition of 14 Brown's morphological skills. Age group: Total Present Progression "ing" Preposition-in Preposition on Plural Past Irregular Possessive Inflection Uncontractible Copula Articles Regular Past Tense Regular Third Person Singular Irregular Third Person Singular Uncontractible Auxillary Contractible Copula Contractible Auxillary Total Task Mannwhit Std. ney test Z N Minimum Maximum Sum Mean Deviation Median value p value 30 1 2 42 1.40.498 1.00 3.02.003 30 0 2 28.93.583 1.00 HS 30 0 1 21.70.466 1.00 2.32.021 30 0 1 12.40.498.00 sig 30 0 1 16.53.507 1.00 2.09.037 30 0 1 8.27.450.00 sig 30 0 1 15.50.509.50 1.30.194 30 0 1 10.33.479.00 30 0 1 5.17.379.00 2.32.021 30 0 0 0.00.000.00 sig 30 0 0 0.00.000.00.00 1.000 30 0 0 0.00.000.00 30 0 0 0.00.000.00.00 1.000 30 0 0 0.00.000.00 30 0 1 20.67.479 1.00 1.55.121 30 0 1 14.47.507.00 30 0 1 4.13.346.00 2.05.040 30 0 0 0.00.000.00 sig 30 0 0 0.00.000.00.00 1.000 30 0 0 0.00.000.00 30 0 0 0.00.000.00.00 1.000 30 0 0 0.00.000.00 30 0 0 0.00.000.00.00 1.000 30 0 0 0.00.000.00 30 0 0 0.00.000.00.00 1.000 30 0 0 0.00.000.00 30 0 1 10.33.479.00.85.394 30 0 1 7.23.430.00 30 2 7 133 4.43 1.331 5.00 4.42.000 30 0 5 79 2.63 1.273 3.00 HS Children 144

Table 1: showing the mean, standard deviation of evaluated Brown 14 morphemes for general conversation and picture description tasks. The above table reveals the 14 Brown s morphemes. In picture description task out of 14 grammatical morphemes only six morphemes were present in 5-7 Years typically developing Malayalam-English bilingual children namely present progressive ing (0.93),articles(0.47),prepositions like in (0.40), on (0.27) plurals(0.33), and contractible auxiliary(0.23) from most commonly used morpheme to least used morphemes respectively. In general conversation out of 14 grammatical morphemes eight morphemes were present in 5-7 years typically developing Malayalam-English bilingual children namely present progressive ing (1.40), prepositions like in (0.70),) on (0.53),plurals(0.50),contractible auxiliary(0.33), articles(0.67) past irregular(0.17), and regular past tense(0.13) from most commonly used morpheme to least used morphemes respectively. Out of two tasks the children performed well in general conversation. Children 145

Figu Children 146

re 1: showing the mean of evaluated Brown 14 morphemes for general conversation and picture description tasks. Discussion The present study investigated which morphological structures achieved by 5-7 years bilingual (Malayalam English)speaking children.more specifically,accuracy in the production of Brown s(1973)14 grammatical morphemes were compared between Malayalam-English speaking children, who were not expected to communicate in English until they began kindergarten and they had been expected only to communicate in Malayalam at home before entering kindergarten. The present study reveals that out of 14 morphemes only 6 and 8 morphemes were present in picture task and general conversation. Summary and Conclusion Language is the systematic and conventional use of sounds for the purpose of communication or self-expression (Crystal, 1995).In the recent year s language behavior of children has become an important area. The description of language acquisition in children is basic to providing data on normal language acquisition and all language groups need to be studied. An individual is exposed to more than one language, with increasing mobility or globalization. Hence an individual must or should know more than one language i.e. be bilingual or multilingual to be an efficient communicator. Bilingualism means a person who knows more than one language (Mackey, 1962). However, differences in morphologic language development may be observed when considering children learning two languages. Under the assumptions of a usage-based theory of language acquisition (Tomasello, 2003) language input and age have important role for children s morphologic language development. Relatively little research has been conducted on children's English grammatical development in bilinguals. The present study investigated which morphological structures achieved by 5-7 years Malayalam English bilingual children. A conversation sample between clinician- child and picture card description was recorded on thirty school going (Malayalam-English) bilingual speakers. More specifically, Children 147

accuracy in production of Brown s (1973) 14 grammatical morphemes were compared between Malayalam-English speaking children, who were not expected to communicate in English until they began kindergarten and they had been expected only to communicate in Malayalam at home before entering kindergarten. The present study reveals that out of 14 morphemes only 6 and 8 morphemes were present in picture task and general conversation respectively which are in accordance with Bland-Stewart and Fitzgerald (2001). He hypothesized that English morphological structures produced by bilingual (Hispanic English) children followed a different developmental pattern when compared to the order of acquisition of typically developing monolingual English children. Malayalam-English bilingual children followed a different morphological developmental pattern when compared to the typically developing monolingual English children. Clinical Implications Speech language pathologists may benefit by using the above profile for better assessment and rehabilitation of language in Malayalam speaking individual. So for further research this study can be carried across various Indian languages and other language impaired population. ===================================================================== References 1. American Speech-Language-Hearing Association. (1982). Language [Relevant Paper]. Available from www.asha.org/policy. 2. Bland-Stewart, L. M., & Fitzgerald, S. M. (2001). Use of Brown's 14 grammatical morphemes by bilingual Hispanic preschoolers: a pilot study. Communication disorders quarterly, 22 (4), 171-186 3. Boresma, P., & Weenink, D. (2007). PRAAT, Doing Phonetics by computer (version 5.3.14), Computer software available from website: http//www.praat.org. 4. Brown, R. (1973). Development of syntax. In R. C. Naremure, R. Hopper (Eds.) Children learning language. A practical introduction to communication development. London (3rd) singular publishing group. Children 148

5. Castilla et al (2009). International journal of bilingual education and bilingualism, 12 (5), 288-297. 6. Crystal, D. (1995). The Cambridge encyclopedia of the English language. Cambridge: Cambridge University press. 7. De Villiers, J. G., & De Villiers, P. A. (1973). A cross sectional study of the acquisition of grammatical morphemes in child speech. Journal of psycholinguistic Research, 2(3), 267-278. 8. Howard. J.(1995). Language learning in bilingual children. International Journal of Educational Development, 15 (3), 231-243. 9. Khan L. M., & James, S. L. (2008). Grammatical morpheme acquisition: An approximately invariant order? Journal of psycholinguistic research, 11(4), 381-388. 10. Mackey, W. F. (1962). The description of bilingualism. Canadian Journal of Linguistics, 7, 57-85. 11. Steckol, K. F., & Leonard, L.B. (1979).The use of grammatical morphemes by normal and language-impaired children. Journal of Communication Disorders, 12(4), 291-301. 12. Tomasello, M. (2003). Constructing a language. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. 13. Tucker, G. R. (1998). A global perspective on multilingualism and multilingual education. In. J. Cenoz and F. Genesee (eds.), beyond bilingualism: Multilingualism and Multilingual education. (3-15). 14. Varghese, M. V., Kumaraswamy, S. (2013).Brown s morphological skills in typically developing bilingual (kannada- English) speaking children. An unpublished dissertation submitted to Mangalore University. Mangalore. =================================================================== Our grateful thanks are due to Mr. Assistant Professor Dr. M. V. Shetty College of Speech and Hearing Mangalore 575015 Karnataka India satishnayaka@yahoo.co.in for his guidance and supervision in writing this paper. Children 149

Jittu Susan Varghese (Corresponding Author) Final Year Post Graduate Student Dr. M. V. Shetty College of Speech and Hearing Mangalore 575015 Karnataka India jittuvarghese89@gmail.com Deepa Elizabeth Thomas Second Year Post Graduate Student Dr. M. V. Shetty College of Speech and Hearing Mangalore 575015 Karnataka India dt81072@gmail.com Aswathy E Nebu Second Year Post Graduate Student Dr. M. V. Shetty College of Speech and Hearing Mangalore 575015 Karnataka India aswathy.enebu@gmail.com Sofia V Sunny First year postgraduate Student Dr. M. V. Shetty College of Speech and Hearing Mangalore 575015 Karnataka India sophiasunny91@gmail.com Assistant Professor Dr. M. V. Shetty College of Speech and Hearing Bangalore 575015 Karnataka India satishknayaka@yahoo.co.in Children 150