Volume 9, Issue 1-2
  • ISSN 2211-7245
  • E-ISSN: 2211-7253



This study examines the Dutch intelligibility of a group of monolingual Dutch and bilingual Turkish-Dutch preschool children in Flanders, as rated by native Dutch listeners and measured by a Dutch intelligibility test. The intelligibility of the bilingual children is compared to that of the monolingual Dutch children, in order to examine whether age and/or task effects are similar or different in the two groups. The results revealed that intelligibility was affected by age, but showed no significant interaction between age and group. However, we found a significant interaction between age and task: children’s intelligibility increased with age for a word production as well as a sentence production task, but much more so for the latter than for the former. We discuss the results in relation to the children’s developing phonological systems, the age of exposure to Dutch and the nature of the test.

Available under the CC BY 4.0 license.

Article metrics loading...

Loading full text...

Full text loading...



  1. Altinkamis, F. , & Agirdag, O.
    (2014) Determinants of language use and attitudes among Turkish speakers in Flanders: A focus on generational difference. Bilig, 70(3), 59–80. 10.12995/bilig.2014.7003
    https://doi.org/10.12995/bilig.2014.7003 [Google Scholar]
  2. Babel, M. , & Russell, J.
    (2015) Expectations and speech intelligibility. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 137(5), 2823–33. 10.1121/1.4919317
    https://doi.org/10.1121/1.4919317 [Google Scholar]
  3. Bates, D. , Maechler, M. , Bolker, B. , & Walker, S.
    (2015) Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4 . Journal of Statistical Software, 67(1), 1–48. 10.18637/jss.v067.i01
    https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v067.i01 [Google Scholar]
  4. Baudonck, N. L. H. , Buekers, R. , Gillebert, S. , & Van Lierde, K. M.
    (2009) Speech intelligibility of Flemish children as judged by their parents. Folia Phoniatrica et Logopaedica, 61, 288–295. 10.1159/000235994
    https://doi.org/10.1159/000235994 [Google Scholar]
  5. Bent, T. & Bradlow, A. R.
    (2003) The interlanguage speech intelligibility benefit. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 114, 1600–1610. 10.1121/1.1603234
    https://doi.org/10.1121/1.1603234 [Google Scholar]
  6. Best, C. T.
    (1995) A direct realist view of cross-language speech perception. In W. Strange (Ed.), Speech perception and linguistic experience: Issues in cross-language research, 171–204. Timonium, MD: York Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Boerma, T. , & Blom, E.
    (2017) Assessment of bilingual children: What if testing both languages is not possible?. Journal of Communication Disorders, 66, 65–76. 10.1016/j.jcomdis.2017.04.001
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcomdis.2017.04.001 [Google Scholar]
  8. Boersma, P. & Weenink, D.
    (2018) Praat: Doing Phonetics by computer [computer programme], Version 6.0.36.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Buekers, R. , Dekelver, J. , & Zoons, M.
    (2005) Beoordeling en meting Percentage Spraakverstaanbaarheid bij kinderen [Assessment and measurement Percentage Speech Intelligibility]. Logopedie, 17, 23–32.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Core, C. , & Hoff, E.
    (2012) Relationship of real and nonword production ability to vocabulary size in Spanish and English speaking toddlers. Paper presented atInternational Child Phonology Conference, June 4–6 2012. Minneapolis, MN.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Core, C. , & Scarpelli, C.
    (2015) Phonological development in young bilinguals: Clinical implications. Seminars in Speech and Language, 36(2), 100–108. 10.1055/s‑0035‑1549105
    https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0035-1549105 [Google Scholar]
  12. De Houwer, A.
    (2018) Input, context and early child bilingualism: implications for clinical practice. In A. Bar-On , & D. Ravid (Eds.), Handbook of communication disorders: Theoretical, empirical, and applied linguistic perspectives (pp.599–616). Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. De Jong, J. , Cavus, N. , & Baker, A. E.
    (2010) Language impairment in Turkish-Dutch bilingual children. In M. Topbas , & M. Yavas (Eds.), Communication disorders in Turkish (pp.290–302). Bristol: Multilingual Matters. 10.21832/9781847692474‑018
    https://doi.org/10.21832/9781847692474-018 [Google Scholar]
  14. De Smedt, H. , Roeyers, H. , & Schelpe, L.
    (2017) Suggesties voor een handelingsgerichte diagnostiek van de taalontwikkeling bij meertalige kinderen [Suggestions for an action-oriented diagnosis of language development in multilingual children]. Signaal, 26, 4–20.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Fox, J. , & Weisberg, S.
    (2019) An R companion to applied regression (3rd ed.). SAGE: Thousand Oaks.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Dodd, B. , Holm, A. , Hua, Z. , & Crosbie, S.
    (2003) Phonological development: A normative study of British English-speaking children. Clinical Linguistics and Phonetics, 17(8), 617–643. 10.1080/0269920031000111348
    https://doi.org/10.1080/0269920031000111348 [Google Scholar]
  17. Hayes-Harb, R. , Smith, B. L. , Bent, T. , & Bradlow, A. R.
    (2008) The interlanguage speech intelligibility benefit for native speakers of Mandarin: Production and perception of English word-final voicing contrasts. Journal of Phonetics, 36(4), 664–679. 10.1016/j.wocn.2008.04.002
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wocn.2008.04.002 [Google Scholar]
  18. Hoff, E.
    (2006) How social contexts support and shape language development. Developmental Review, 26, 55–88. 10.1016/j.dr.2005.11.002
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dr.2005.11.002 [Google Scholar]
  19. Jenkins, J.
    (2000) The phonology of English as an international language, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Kang, O. , Thomson, R. I. , & Moran, M.
    (2018) Empirical approaches to measuring the intelligibility of different varieties of English in predicting listener comprehension. Language Learning, 68(1), 115–146. 10.1111/lang.12270
    https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12270 [Google Scholar]
  21. Kent, D. R. , & Miolo, G.
    (1994) The intelligibility of children’s speech. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 3, 81–95. 10.1044/1058‑0360.0302.81
    https://doi.org/10.1044/1058-0360.0302.81 [Google Scholar]
  22. Munro, M. , & Derwing, T.
    (1995) Foreign accent, comprehensibility, and intelligibility in the speech of second language learners. Language Learning, 45(1), 73–97. 10.1111/j.1467‑1770.1995.tb00963.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-1770.1995.tb00963.x [Google Scholar]
  23. Prezas, R. F. , Hodson, W. B. , & Schommer-Aikins, M.
    (2014) Phonological assessment and analysis of bilingual preschoolers’ Spanish and English word productions. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 23, 176–185. 10.1044/2013_AJSLP‑12‑0132
    https://doi.org/10.1044/2013_AJSLP-12-0132 [Google Scholar]
  24. Rajadurai, J.
    (2007) Intelligibility studies: a consideration of empirical and ideological issues. World Englishes, 26(1), 87–98. 10.1111/j.1467‑971X.2007.00490.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-971X.2007.00490.x [Google Scholar]
  25. R Core Team
    R Core Team (2020) R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. URLhttps://www.R-project.org/
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Scarpelli, C. , & Core, C.
    (2014) Predictors of bilingual speech production in English-Spanish speaking preschoolers at 48 months. Poster presented atAnnual Convention of the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association; November 20–22 2014. Orlando, FL.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Thordardottir, E. , Rothenberg, A. , Rivard, M.-E. , & Naves, R.
    (2006) Bilingual assessment: Can overall proficiency be estimated from separate measurement of two languages?Journal of Multilingual Communication Disorders, 4(1), 1–21. 10.1080/14769670500215647
    https://doi.org/10.1080/14769670500215647 [Google Scholar]
  28. Vasandani, V. , Babel, M. , & Munson, B.
    (2018) Investigating the influence of listener attitudes and expectations on the intelligibility of Hindi English. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 143, p.1924. 10.1121/1.5036281
    https://doi.org/10.1121/1.5036281 [Google Scholar]

Data & Media loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error