Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism - Volume 7, Issue 3-4, 2017

Purpose: This study examined the effects of language impairment (LI) and bilingualism across vocabulary, morphology and verbal memory in a sample of children learning Dutch. Methods: Children (MAGE = 71 months) were assigned to a monolingual group with typical development (TD) (n = 30), bilingual TD (n = 30), monolingual LI (n = 30) or bilingual LI group (n = 30). Vocabulary was measured with the Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test, morphology with the Taaltoets Alle Kinderen, verbal short-term (VSTM) and working memory (VWM) with forward and backward digit span tasks. Results: Language knowledge (vocabulary, morphology) was affected by LI and bilingualism. Language processing (VSTM, VWM) was influenced by LI only. When language knowledge was controlled, the bilinguals outperformed the monolinguals on VSTM and VWM when TD and LI were collapsed. Bilingualism aggravated the effects of LI for vocabulary. Conclusions: Bilingualism may create a risk for the vocabulary knowledge of children with LI, but might be beneficial for their verbal memory.

The current study assessed independent and combined effects of SLI and bilingualism on tasks tapping into verbal short-term memory (vSTM) with varying linguistic load in two languages (Russian and Hebrew). The study explored the extent to which the presence of SLI is related to limited vSTM storage and bilingualism is associated with reduced vocabulary size.

A total of 190 monolingual and bilingual children aged 5;5–6;8 participated in the current study: 108 sequential Russian-Hebrew bilinguals (18 with SLI), 48 Hebrew monolinguals (13 with SLI) and 34 Russian monolinguals (14 with SLI). Children performed three repetition tasks: forward-digit span (FWD), non-word repetition (NWR) and sentence repetition (SRep); bilingual children were tested in both of their languages.

Results indicated a negative effect of SLI on all experimental tasks tapping into vSTM. The effect of SLI rose as a function of increased linguistic load. Regarding bilingualism, no effect was found on the measure of vSTM with the lowest linguistic load (FWD), while its effect was robust once the linguistic load was increased (SRep). The results reported in this study bring evidence that lower performance on measures of vSTM in children with SLI and bilingual children stem from different sources. Although, children with SLI have limitations of vSTM, deficient vSTM cannot fully account for the linguistic difficulties observed in children with SLI. As for bilingualism, it does not affect verbal storage when the linguistic load is minimal, while poor performance in bilingual children on tasks with greater linguistic load is attributed to smaller vocabulary sizes.

We report on the usefulness of three LITMUS tools in distinguishing bilingual children with SLI (Bi-SLI) from bilingual children with typical development (Bi-TD), in France: LITMUS-NWR-FR (non-word repetition), LITMUS-SR-FR (sentence repetition), and LITMUS-PABIQ (parental questionnaire). 82 bilingual children, aged 5–8, who had all been exposed to both French and either Arabic, Portuguese or Turkish, recruited both in ordinary schools and in SLP practices, were divided into Bi-TD (n = 61) and Bi-SLI (n = 21) groups based on parental questionnaire (LITMUS-PABIQ) information and standardized language scores in each language. Monolingual controls included 17 children with SLI and 37 TD children. NWR and SR significantly distinguished between the Bi-TD and the Bi-SLI children, and there was minimal impact of different factors related to bilingual development on children’s performance.

Currently there are no standardized language assessments for English-Irish bilingual school age children that would test languages in a comparable way. There are also no standardized language assessments of Irish for this age group. The current study aimed to design comparable language assessments in both languages targeting structures known to be challenging for children with language impairments. A sentence repetition (SRep) task equivalent to the English SRep task ( Marinis, Chiat, Armon-Lotem, Piper, & Roy, 2011 ) was designed for Irish. Twenty-four typically developing, sequential bilingual children immersed in Irish in the educational setting performed better on the English SRep task than on the Irish SRep task. Different patterns were observed in language performance across sentence types with performance on relative clauses being particularly poor in Irish. Similarly, differences were observed in error patterns with the highest number of errors of omission in Irish, and the highest number of substitution errors in English.

Pronominal clitics are sensitive to both morphosyntax and discourse. Problems in clitic use could therefore stem from morphosyntactic or discourse management problems in children with SLI. Previous studies focused on 3rd person clitic use identifying morphosyntactic problems. We compare 1st with 3rd person clitic elicitation by monolingual and bilingual children with SLI to examine whether perspective-switching in the same task would affect performance. Elicited 3rd person clitics were further compared with clitic use in narratives to investigate the role of richer discourse context in clitic production. Perspective-taking was independently examined with first- and second-order Theory of Mind tasks. Bilingual were more accurate than monolingual children with SLI in 1st person clitics, in the use of unambiguous clitics in narratives and in second-order ToM reasoning. We conclude that bilingualism seems to enhance SLI children’s discourse use and perspective-taking strategies which, in turn, improve their use of clitics in context-sensitive conditions.

Language tests often fail to diagnose specific language impairment (SLI) in bilinguals due to the confounding impact of SLI and bilingualism on language. The present study focuses on the contribution of executive functioning to the diagnosis of SLI in bilinguals. Performance of monolingual and bilingual children with and without SLI on a task tapping response inhibition was assessed. Results revealed a negative effect of SLI but no effect of bilingualism. The diagnostic accuracy of the task was also estimated. Sensitivity and specificity were low, suggesting that response inhibition could not be considered as a reliable clinical marker of SLI. Although the results at the group level showed that children with SLI seemed more at risk than their typically-developing peers for a deficit in response inhibition, our results on diagnostic accuracy challenge the hypothesis of a relationship between deficits in language and deficits in inhibition in children with SLI.

We examine the impact of bilingualism on verbal fluency in four groups of school-age (5 to 10 years-old) children: 13 Typically-developing (TYP) monolingual children, 13 TYP bilingual children, 13 monolingual children with Autism Spectrum Disorders (ASD) and 13 bilingual children with ASD. Participants were matched on chronological age and nonverbal IQ. Verbal fluency was examined via the word association subtest of the Clinical Evaluation of Language Fundamentals (CELF-4; Semel et al., 2003 ). The bilingual ASD group performed unexpectedly well on the verbal fluency task, not differing from the typically-developing groups, but outperforming the monolingual ASD group with respect to number of correct words produced. These findings are in line with previous research on bilingual children with ASD (e.g., Hambly & Fombonne, 2012 ) and taken together suggest that bilingualism does not have a negative impact on the lexical-semantic skills of children with ASD.