Bilingual And Multilingual Phonological And Speech Sound Disorders

Summary of Interpretation: Given the information provided in Interpretation A, the clinician diagnosed Kara-Lynn with a severe phonological disorder. This diagnosis was made based on evidence provided by testing results, clinician observations, and speech analyses. Kara-Lynn demonstrated phoneme collapses into /d/ in place of stops (/p/, /t/, /k/, /g/), fricatives (/s/, /z/, /θ/, /ð/), and some consonant clusters (/tr/, /gr/) across all word positions. For example, Kara-Lynn produced /diə/ for “seal,” /dædɚ/ for “treasure,” and /dədudɚ/ for “computer.” Kara-Lynn also presented with active phonological processes of final consonant deletion (/fɪ/ for “fish”), cluster reduction (/tul/ for “school”), vocalization (/ɛləkə/ for “helicopter”), and deaffrication (/ʃi/ for “cheese”). She also presented with inconsistent patterns of initial-consonant deletion (/ɑʊps/ for “house”, /ɪʒ/ for “bridge”). In most instances, Kara-Lynn presented with both final consonant deletion and another phonological process, which markedly impacted her speech intelligibility, as when she produced /lɑʊ/ for “clown,” demonstrating both final consonant deletion and cluster reduction. She also expressed a high percentage of CV (27%) and CVC (29%) syllable and word shapes, with little other variation. Analysis of Kara-Lynn’s speech sample revealed similar errors exhibited during formal assessment, including phoneme collapse into /d/, high occurrences of initial and final consonant deletion and cluster

According to Pen᷈a-Brooks and Hegde (2015), speech sound disorders are the perceived errors when producing speech sounds. A speech sound disorder usually impacts the intelligibility of someone based on nature and severity level of it. For instance, a phonological disorder affects a child’s understanding of how sounds contrast or distinct from one another. For example, the usage of persistent patterns of substitutions and omissions when the child knows how to produce a sound. Imagine a five-year-old producing “firetruck” correctly, but then producing “ruml” for “trunk.” Or an articulation disorder which affects the production of individual sounds, usually have consistent errors, and the person often perceives linguistic contrast. In other words, a speech sound disorder is when a person is unable to produce speech sounds fluently or has a problem with their quality of

Kohnert, K. (2010). Bilingual children with primary language impairment: Issues, evidence and implications for clinical actions. Journal of Communication Disorders, 43(6), 456-473.

The purpose of this evidence based research paper is to evaluate the efficacy of the cycles approach when compared to the traditional articulation therapy approach in the treatment of children who are highly unintelligible. The Cycles Phonological Remediation Approach (Hodson, 2011) is a treatment method for children with severe speech sound disorders. This approach targets phonological pattern errors in a sequential manner. During each cycle, one or more phonological patterns are targeted and after each cycle is complete, another cycle begins. Recycling of phonological patterns continues until the targeted patterns are generalized into the child’s conversational speech. The cycles approach is meant to mirror typical phonological development in children (Hodson, 2011).

The second article, Intervention for children with severe speech disorder: A comparison of two approaches compares the phonological contrast and core vocabulary therapy. Phonological contrast explores speech and error patterns. This includes minimal pairs, multiple and maximal oppositions, and contrasting speech sounds. The Core Vocabulary therapy focuses on targeting the whole word. The

The researchers utilized 186 monolingual and bilingual kindergarteners, first graders, and second graders from Taiwan. The author’s hypothesized that the bilingual children (Mandarin & Southern Min) would be likely to learn experimentally manipulated phonotactic patterns more readily than their monolingual peers. The researchers provided the parents with a home language use questionnaire. The authors created two artificial languages with the same phonemes. The two artificial phonological systems consisted of four onsets (/p/, /ph/, /l/, and /n/) and eight rimes. The test phase involved a two-option forced-choice judgment

Clinical Implications: Minimal-contrast treatment is effective and efficient for treating children with phonological disability. Avoiding listener confusion is motivating for suppressing process use.

Pen᷈a-Brooks and Hegde (2015) interpret ethnocultural dialectical variations as the phonological characteristics, properties and rules of the linguistically diverse child’s primary language. When assessing bilingual children it is important to recognize the ethnocultural dialectical variation of the child’s primary language. Since different languages produce different sounds, differ in phonological patterns, and grammatical rules. Pen᷈a-Brooks and Hegde (2015) argue that for a bilingual child their secondary language would be influenced by the rules, and properties of their ethnocultural language. For example in a bilingual Spanish-English child, the American English will be influenced by the dialectical variations of Spanish. For instance

intend to expose in their studies how Educational Neuroscience can reshape educational policies and practices in teaching and learning the core content areas, especially in timing and sequencing content exposure. One approach was to study whether exposing a young child to two languages caused delay in language development and language confusion. Studies revealed that the optimal age for dual language development was before age five. Children were not delayed in phonetic contrasts acquisition. Imaging brains of monolingual and bilingual infants revealed that both groups presented similar neural activation. Regarding reading in bilingual children studies showed that children experiencing bilingual education in primary grades outperformed

Learning a language involves comprehension about the properties of that language. Infants need to learn the phoneme collection of the language, words, and syntactic information among a wide range of segments. A potential test confronted by bilingual infants is the need to separate the languages they are presented to. An inability to segregate may bring troubles in figuring out the phonetic codes of the two

During this podcast, I connected to Dr.Gleason first interest in linguistics. Similarly to Dr.Gleason I have a brother with special needs, I like her interpret my brother needs and help him communicate. Language is an important aspect of life. I have always wondered about different languages and how language develops. I found it interesting, how a child’s language develops before birth. I always thought when an expecting mother would put headphone on their belly for the child could hear music; I thought that was a myth. However, I now that is not a myth. For instance, in the article, Dr. Gleason discusses babies in the womb listen to multiple languages. She states, “Babies who are hearing two languages in utero are born with a bilingual brain”

Several language behaviors of bilingual children with typical development (TD) resemble language behaviors of monolingual children with language impairment (Bedore & Peña, 2008). This complicates the identification of language impairment among bilingual children and often leads to over- or under-diagnoses of language impairment.

“Phonological disorders in children can result from physical or organic causes or may be functional in nature ("Phonological disorders in," 2013)”. Children with a phonological disorder may experience a higher risk for reading and writing disabilities. “If left unresolved, phonological disorders have long-term consequences that may interfere with an individual's future social, academic, and vocational well-being, largely resulting from persistent, reduced intelligibility of speech ("Phonological disorders in," 2013).”

According to the “interaction hypothesis,” (IH) child–adult differences in L2 phonological learning are contingent on the degree to which the L1 and L2 interact. These IH predictions were measured in two trials involving sixty-four native English-speaking and Korean-speaking children and adults in the second segment. Experiment one examines whether children are less likely than adults to discriminate L2 sounds as instances of L1 sound categories.

Hypotheses stated in the main article is whether or not the same initial perceptual biases and early learning mechanisms that underlie monolingual acquisition operate in the bilingual neonate to propel bilingual acquisition.