BAR ILAN UNIVERSITY
RAMAT GAN
ISRAEL
Verb inflections as indicators
of Bilingual SLI
Sharon Armon-Lotem,
The Bilingual SLI project*
Bar Ilan University
CLS, July17-19, Reading
*This project is funded by ISF grant no. 938
Acknowledgement
This work has been done in collaboration
with:
Anat Blass, Jonathan Fine, Efrat Harel, Elinor
Saiegh-Haddad, and Joel Walters, Bar-Ilan
University
Galit Adam, The Open University
With the help of:
Dori Braude, Michal Giladi, Ruti Litt, Lyle
Lustinger, and Efrat Shimon
The bilingual SLI Project - Aim



Examining the linguistic production of
bilingual children, ages 4-7, who were
diagnosed for SLI in order to assess the
relative contribution of each to the child’s
linguistic representations and underlying
processes.
In the overall effort, we look at the interface
of SLI and bilingualism, exploring primarily
the use of morpho-syntax, pragmatics, and
discourse, as well as lexical, phonological,
and sub-lexical processing.
The present paper focuses on the use of
the inflectional verbal system by
English-Hebrew bilingual children
Definitions


Specific Language Impairment (SLI)
Children with normal performance IQ, who score
12 months/1 SD below chronological age on
standardized language tests, and have no:
hearing disabilities, emotional or behavior
problems, observed neurological deficit, or severe
articulation/phonological deficit.
Bilingual children
Children with bilingual background who are able to
function in two languages (carry a conversation
and understand) at a near native level (typical or
impaired). This includes both simultaneous
bilinguals and sequential bilinguals.
Subject selection




Preschool children from bilingual or monolingual Englishspeaking homes, who attend regular preschools and special
“language preschools”, and have been exposed to Hebrew for at
least two years.
All children come from the same neighbourhood and same
(middle-high) SES
Children are screened for both languages and are categorized in
accordance with their linguistic abilities as diagnosed by
standardized tests (e.g., CELF Preschool for English, Goralnik for
Hebrew), where TD is measured by less than 1.5 SD below
norm.
This yields a division into children with typical development in
both languages (TD), children with English typical development
(E-TD), and children with English atypical development (EATD). This later group comprises of children with Hebrew typical
development (H-TD), and children with atypical development in
both languages (A-TD) – all are considered at-risk for SLI.
TD-children: 6 case studies
 6 case studies, 3 simultaneous, 3 sequential
 3 boys, 3 girls
 Age range 5;5-6;5
Name
Im605
Ef601
Mf602
Af509
Nm509
Em505
Age
6;5
6;1
6;2
5;9
5;9
5;5
Length of exposure
3H
sim
3H
sim
sim
2H
E-TD children – 5 case studies



5 case studies
3 boys, 2 girls
Age range 4;1-6;6
Age
Name
Rf606
Bm509
Cm506
Am411
Mf401
6;06
5;08
5;06
4;11
4;01
CELF
Total
Lang
Length
4
3
2
2
3.5
age eqiv
100
91
90
92
98
6;2
4;7
4;7
4;1
3;6
Goralnik
Overall
Test
140
99
122
60
82
age eqiv
4;7
3;1
3;7
<2;7
<2;7
At risk children: 6 case studies



6 case studies, 3 from each sub-group
3 boys, 3 girls
Age range 5;5-6;9
Age
H-TD
A-TD
Name
Af609
Of602
Lf505
Dm606
Sm506
Am506
Length
6.9
2
6.2
3.5
5.5
2
6.6
2
5.5 4 (Sim)
5.6 4 (Sim)
CELF
Total
Lang
age eqiv
63
80
83
73
69
67
3;5
4;2
3;6
4;3
3;1
3;1
Goralnik
Overall
Test
148
147
142
130
135
121
age eqiv
5;6
5;1
5;1
3;7
4;1
3;7
Linguistic Measures: Inflections

English:



past tense
3rd person in the present
Hebrew:


gender and number in present tense
gender, number and person in past and future
Inflections in Monolingual SLI and
TD Bilinguals


English: Both SLI and bilinguals use root
infinitives (RIs), e.g., David play ball.
Hebrew: SLI children find past tense 2nd
person inflection more difficult.
Tasks




Naturalistic samples (interview, story
telling, free play
Sentence completion (Based on
Dromi et al 1999)
Enactment (Based on Dromi et al
1999)
Elicited imitation
TD – verb inflections
TD Rate of Target Responses by Task
(in Percentage)
 No errors in
Hebrew
enactment
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
Em505
Mf602
Im605
Seq
Nm509
Af509
Sim
Sentence completion E N=22
Imitation E N=26
Sentence completion H N=45
Imitation H N=40
Enactment H N=24
Ef601
 In other tasks,
error rate is very
low, mostly less
than 10% and
never more then
20% (on the
sentence
completion task).
At Risk – Verb Inflections
Total target responses by task per child
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
Mf401 Am411 Cm506 Bm509 Rf606
L505
E-TD
Of603
H-TD
E Sentence completion N=22
E Imitation N=26
H Imitation N=40
H Enactment N=24
Af609 Sm506 Am506 Dm606
A-TD
H Sentence completion N=45
Types of errors - English




V-ing: The cat hops and the dog hopping
Wrong tense: Here the boy jumps and the
girl jumped
Wrong 3rd person: The cat hops and the
dogs hops
Root infinitives: The cat hops and the dog
hop
Types of Errors - Hebrew





Root infinitives
Wrong tense – past for present or vice
versa
Wrong gender – masculine for feminine
Wrong number – singular for plural
Wrong person – 1st person for 2nd person
and or versa
TD - Sentence Completion Task:
Frequency of Error Types
Hebrew
English
10
10
8
8
6
6
4
4
2
2
0
0
Em505
Mf602
Im605
Nm509
Seq
Wrong tense [N=16]
Af509
Ef601
Sim
Wrong 3rd person [N=6]
Root Infinitives [N=16]
5/96 wrong tense, 12/96
person and tense omission
(Root Infinitives), (13%)
wrong 3rd person with plural
subject
Em505
Mf602
Im605
Nm509
Seq
Root Infinitives [N=42]
Af509
Ef601
Sim
Wrong tense [N=42]
wrong gender [N=42]
2/252 infinitive, 4/252 wrong
tense, 9/256 wrong gender
(all present, feminine, plural
[N=24])
TD -Imitation Task: Frequency of
Errors in Different Linguistic Contexts
Hebrew
English
10
10
8
8
6
6
4
4
2
2
0
0
Em505
Mf602
Im605
Nm509
Seq
Af509
Ef601
Sim
3rd person
past tense
5/72 in 3rd person, 4/72 in
past tense. All errors reflected
use of root infinitives
Em505
Mf602
Im605
Nm509
Seq
1st sg 2nd ms
Af509
Ef601
Sim
2nd fm
1st pl
2nd pl
1/48 in 1st person, 6/48 in 2nd
masculine, 5/48 in 2nd
feminine and 12/48 in 2nd
plural. All errors reflected use
of 1st for 2nd and vice versa
TD - Summary

No errors on Hebrew enactment, up to 20%
errors on the sentence completion task, and up
to 10% on other tasks
 English errors are mostly Root Infinitives (13%
of relevant contexts) and wrong 3rd person with
plural subjects (13% of plural subjects)
 Hebrew errors are mostly wrong gender in
[present, feminine, plural] forms (9 of 24 –
37%) and in [past second person] forms (23 of
144 – 15%).
E-TD and TD - Sentence Completion Task:
Frequency of Error Types
Hebrew
English
10
10
8
8
6
6
4
4
2
2
0
Em505
Mf602
Im605
Nm509
Seq
Af509
Ef601
0
Sim
Em505
Mf602
Im605
Nm509
Seq
Af509
Ef601
Sim
15
15
12
12
9
9
6
6
3
3
0
0
Mf401
Mf401
V+ing
Am411
Cm506
Bm509
E-TD
[N=16 Wrong tense [N=16]
Wrong 3rd person [N=6]
Root Infinitives [N=16]
Rf606
Am411
Cm506
Bm509
E-TD
Root Infinitives [N=42]
Wrong tense [N=42]
wrong gender [N=42]
Wrong Number [N=42]
Rf606
TD and E-TD -Imitation Task: Frequency of
Errors in Different Linguistic Contexts
Hebrew
English
10
10
8
8
6
6
4
4
2
2
0
0
Em505
Mf602
Im605
Nm509
Seq
Af509
Em505
Ef601
Sim
Mf602
Im605
Nm509
Af509
Seq
Ef601
Sim
English
Hebrew
10
10
8
8
6
6
4
4
2
2
0
Mf401
Am411
Cm506
Bm509
Rf606
0
Mf401
Am411
Cm506
Bm509
E-TD
E-TD
V+ing for 3rd [N=26]
Wrong tense [N=26]
Wrong 3rd person [N=10]
Root Infinitives [N=16]
1st sg
2nd ms
2nd fm
1st pl
2nd pl
Rf606
E-TD Enactment - Hebrew
10
8
6
4
2
0
Mf401
Am411
Cm506
Bm509
Rf606
E-TD
1st sg
2nd ms
2nd fm
 E-TD have many errors in person inflection,
using 3rd person
E-TD - Summary

English



Sentence completion – All but one child show TD error frequency
Imitation – TD error frequency with RIs among the younger
children
Hebrew



Sentence completion – the 3 older children show TD error
frequency, the 2 younger ones are a little worse than the TD
child with shorter exposure, reflection usage of 3rd person bare
forms
Imitation – TD error frequency, with a lot of 3rd person bare
forms rather than 1st/2nd person alternations
Enactment – A very high rate of errors using 3rd person bare
forms rather than 1st/2nd person alternations
At Risk - Sentence completion
English
Hebrew
15
15
12
12
9
9
6
6
3
3
0
0
L505
Of603
Af609
Sm506
H-TD
Am506
Dm606
L505
Of603
Af609
Sm506
Am506
A-TD
V+ing [N=16]
Wrong tense [N=16]
H-TD
Root Infinitives [N=42]
Wrong 3rd person [N=6]
Root Infinitives [N=16]
wrong gender [N=42]
 H-TD – 60% RIs
 A-TD – 50% RIs, 30%
wrong 3rd person
A-TD
Wrong tense [N=42]
Wrong Number [N=42]
 TD error frequency
Dm606
At Risk - Imitation
English
Hebrew
12
10
10
8
8
6
4
6
4
2
2
0
0
L505
Of603
Af609
Sm506
Am506
L505
Dm606
Of603
H-TD
V+ing for 3rd [N=26]
A-TD
Wrong tense [N=26]
H-TD
Wrong 3rd person [N=10]
Root Infinitives [N=16]
1st sg

 H-TD – 60% RIs
 A-TD – 60% RIs


Af609
Sm506
Am506
Dm606
A-TD
2nd ms
2nd fm
1st pl
2nd pl
2nd to 1st person errors
A few Sg > Pl and Pl >
Sg)
H-TD show 40% error
rate, A-TD show up to
100% error rate
E-TD and At Risk - Enactment
(Hebrew)
10
8
6
4
2
0
Mf401
Am411
Cm506
Bm509
Rf606
L505
E-TD
Of603
H-TD
1st sg
2nd ms
Af609
Sm506
[N=8]
Am506
A-TD
2nd fm
 H-TD and A-TD show near TD profile
 E-TD have many errors in person inflection,
using 3rd person
Dm606
At Risk, E-TD and TD Errors - English

Root infinitives:
TD & E-TD:
Up to 20% of 3rd person and past contexts. The
younger E-TD have a higher ratio of RIs.
H-TD & A-TD:
Root Infinitives in 50-60% of 3rd
person and past contexts

Erroneous tense and erroneous 3rd person mostly
with plural subjects in all groups
At Risk, E-TD and TD errors - Hebrew






Sentence completion – At risk, older E-TD and TD
have around 10% errors, showing the same
variety of errors. The increase ratio of errors
among the young E-TD reflects their use of 3rd
person bare forms.
Second person triggers substitution
E-TD opt for 3rd person bare forms
H-TD and A-TD opt for 1st person
Higher error rate in enactment for E-TD group
(60%)
Higher error rate in imitation for At-Risk Groups
(up to 70%)
Conclusions






Studying the inflectional system of 17 EnglishHebrew bilinguals, ages 4-7, we found that:
In English, TD and E-TD bilinguals tend to use
root infinitive in up to 20% of the relevant
contexts.
By contrast, At-risk, (like young E-TD)
children showed the same kind of errors in
50-60% of the relevant context.
In Hebrew, the TD bilinguals used the wrong
person inflection in 15.5% of the contexts which
triggered verbs inflected for 1st and 2nd person.
By contrast, E-TD children opt for the bare
form.
At-risk children showed the same kind of
error in 50-60% of the relevant context.
Inflections as indicators for SLI in
Bilingual population

The same kind of error was found in both TD and at-risk
children, but the quantity was different.

Is the high ratio of root infinitives indicative of SLI in the
H-TD and A-TD groups?

Does it mean that the E-TD group is not SLI?

Are difficulties with 2nd person indicative of SLI in the ETD group?


E-TD children are not SLI, but rather
slow second language learners, who
have not mastered the inflectional
system of their L2
For the At-Risk children, though
tense-marking may not be a
qualitative clinical indicator of SLI in
bilingual populations, the quantity of
errors, when manifested in both
languages, might be a potential
indicator.
Thank you
‫תודה‬