Non-Word Repetition
37-975-01
Challenges to Language Acquisition:
Bilingualism and Language Impairment
Dr. Sharon Armon-Lotem
Bar Ilan University
What is a Non-Word Repetition
task?
In a non-word repetition task the child in
asked to repeat pseudo words and/or nonwords of 1-5 syllables, with or without a
cluster at the onset, middle or coda.
Pseudo word: target-like
Non-word: not target-like
GAPS - Grammar and Phonology
Screening Test
Gardner, H., Froud, K., McClelland, A. & van der Lely, H. (2006) The
development of the Grammar and Phonology Screening (GAPS) test
to assess key markers of specific language difficulties in young
children. International Journal of Language & Communication
Disorders
dep, pif, dremp, klest, tobilf, difimp,
bademper, fakester, padrepper, difrimple




What contributes to the complexity of these words?
Are they English like?
Could they be used as is in a Hebrew test?
Which considerations should apply?
The processing
involved in NWR






NW >>
Auditory processing
>>
Phonological Analysis
>>
Phonological storage
(and learning for real
words) >>
Speech motor
planning >>
Output
These can be
influenced by:







Hearing loss
Phonotactic
frequency
Language dominance
Stimulus length
STM deficit
Complexity
Articulatory deficit
Non-word repetition & word
learning – TLD, L1
At the age of 4 (Gathercole, Service, Hitch, Adams and Martin 1999)
At the age of 5 & 13 (Gathercole, Service, Hitch, Adams and Martin 1999)
L2 Acquisition (Masoura and Gathercole 1999)
 Success
on NWR reflects vocabulary
size in childhood
 Success on NWR correlates with the
rate of learning new words even to
adulthood

Chiat, S. (2006). The developmental
trajectory of nonword repetition. Applied
Psycholinguistics, 27, 552-556. ODELYA
13/12
NWR & SLI
NRT - Nonword Repetition Test
Dollaghan, C., and Campbell, T. F. 1998. Nonword Repetition and
Child Language Impairment. Journal of Speech, Language, and
Hearing Research Vol.41 1136-1146




What contributes to the complexity of these words?
Are they English like?
Could they be used as is in a Hebrew test?
Which considerations should apply?
CNRep - Children's Test of
Nonword Repetition
Gathercole, S. E., Willis, C. S., Baddeley,
A. D., and H. Emslie H. (1994) The
Children's Test of Nonword Repetition: a
test of phonological working memory.
Memory 2(2):103-27.
(Tables from Archibald, L. M. D., &
Gathercole, S. (2006))
How are they different?
# of words
# of Syllable
Clusters
Weak syllable with reduced
vowels (hampent)
Lexical components
(morphemes)
Prosodic pattern
Score
Test
+
NRT
16
1-4
- (CV structure, no late acquired
phonemes)
- (acoustically salient only)
+
-
Natural for English
Online
(correct/incorrect)
Morpho/Lexical abilities
+ ….
Equal stress on each syllable
From transcription (percentage of
correct phoneme)
Basic phonological processing or
memory skills
CNRep
40
2-5
+
What is NWR testing then?

Baddeley, A. D. (2003). Working memory
and language: An overview. Journal of
Communication Disorders, 36, 189–208.
ANNA 13/12
Phonological working memory
(phonological loop)
“Working memory (WM) according to Baddeley (1986) is a
multicomponent, capacity-limited system that comprises a
controlling ‘‘central executive’’ and that includes an articulatory loop
system. The central executive ... is thought to regulate information
flow within WM, retrieval of information from other memory systems,
and the processing and storage of information. The articulatory loop
… includes a capacity-limited phonological short-term store and an
articulatory control process … that acts to refresh and maintain
speech material in the store for a brief period. The articulatory loop’s
function is to store verbal input temporarily, especially novel
phonological input (Baddeley, Gathercole, & Papagno, 1998), while
other cognitive tasks such as auditory comprehension take place.
The ability to temporarily store novel material also allows the listener
the opportunity to create long-term phonological representations of
that material (Baddeley et al1998).” (Montgomery 2003, p. 222)
Digit Span
Gray, S. 2003. Diagnostic accuracy and test-retest reliability of
nonword repetition and digit span tasks administered to preschool
children with specific language impairment. Journal of
Communication disorders 36, 129-151
SLI (4-5;11)
NL (age)
Digit Span
Mean
S.D.
1.86
0.99
3.73
1.78
Min
0.00
1.00
Max
4.00
9.00
NWR [N=20]
Mean
S.D.
8.68
3.39
16.41
1.79
Min
3.00
12.00
Max
18.00
19.00
Linguistic Knowledge

Knowledge of lexical composition
 Size
of vocabulary
 Abstract representation / Poor
representational system
 Less efficient mechanism for using lexical
knowledge

Speech output
Archibald, L. M. D., & Gathercole, S. (2006). Nonword repetition: A
Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing .comparison of tests
.Research, 49, 970–983


Subjects: 36 native speakers: 12 SLI (9;8), 12 TD age (9;9), 12 TD
language (6;1). Same SES
Scores on standardized test:
Which one is easier?
Within group: CNRep is easier than NRT
 Across group: The gap is more significant
on CNRep

What influences these results?
How does NWR fairs with other
tasks?
Conti-Ramsden, G. (2003). Processing and linguistic markers in
young children with specific language impairment (SLI). Journal of
Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 46, 1029–1037.
Children with SLI are significantly worse
on all four markers
 NWR and past tense marking yield the
best results (sensitivity & specificity).
 Adding past tense to NWR raises the
predictive ability (from 81% to 87%)
 While verb morphology is useful for 4-5
y.o. in English, NWR might be more
promising for other languages

BISLI
Girbau, D., & Schwartz, R. G. (2008). Phonological
Working Memory in Spanish-English bilingual children
with and without Specific Language Impairment. Journal
of Communication Disorders, 41, 2, 124-145. MONA
13/12
A Russian-Hebrew NWR
task tested with bilinguals
with TDL and SLI - rational
and findings
Sharon Armon-Lotem, Bar Ilan University
Shula Chiat, City University
COST IS0804, Amsterdam
November 16-18, 2009

AMANI – NWR in Arabic 27/12