The Diagnostic Evaluation of
Language Variation
Presenters: 2003 NYSSLHA Convention
Harry N. Seymour
Univ of Massachusetts
Thomas Roeper
Univ of Massachusetts
Jill deVilliers
Smith College
Peter deVilliers
Smith College
*supported by NIH grant N01-DC-8-2104
*webpage:www.umass.edu/aae
African American English: A Definition
African American English (AAE) is one of many
varieties of English, whose status as a dialect is defined
by a commonality of speech spoken primarily by
African Americans, but not by all. AAE is less
geographically defined than other dialects of English ,
rather it has emerged as a commonality of speech and
grammar of a culturally defined group, though there
are differences by geographic regions. Of course,
children or adults of other races who have strong
cultural identification or primary social interaction
with African Americans may speak AAE too. Thus,
AAE may be defined in terms of the features that
distinguish a pattern of grammar (morphology,
semantics, syntax and phonology) in the speech used by
culturally identified African Americans.
Definition
Myths Behind the Controversy
•
•
•
•
AAE is simply bad or broken English.
AAE jeopardizes learning Standard English
AAE is political correctness gone amuck.
AAE is a cruel self-esteem hoax.
Clinical Problem
• Standardized tests for children who
speak African American English
• The deficit/difference dilemma
• Too Many African American children fail
Misdiagnosis
• Over-representation
–14.8 % of general population
–20.2% of special education
• Under-representation
–Unclear
Clinical Solution
• Make the tests harder
– Avoid somewhat superficial aspects of language
• Contrasts between dialects
– Focus on deep principles of language every child
should know
• Noncontrastive elements between dialects
The DELV (Diagnostic Evaluation of
Language Variation) -- Goals
• To develop a comprehensive language assessment
of syntax, semantics, pragmatics, and phonology
between ages 4 and 9.
• To be able to determine whether language variation
in children is due to Development, Dialect, Delay,
or Disorder.
• To create a test that is not biased against dialect
speakers, especially African-American English
speakers.
Collaborators
Peggy Speas
Angelika Kratzer
Barbara Pearson Eliane Ramos
Lisa Green
Lamya Abdulkarim
Toya Wyatt
Bart Hollebrandse
Mike Dickey
Linda Bland
Mike Terry
Tempe Champion
Janice Jackson Laura Wagner
D’Jaris Coles
Robin Schafer
Valerie Johnson Kristen Asplin
Tim Bryant
Frances Burns
The Psychological Corporation
Christina Foreman
Lisa Selkirk
Shelley Velleman
Fred Hall
Debra Garrett
Minjoo Kim
Ida Stockman
Deanna Moore
Joe Pater
Caroline Jones
Uri Strauss
Diagnostic Evaluation of
Language Variation (DELV)
• Variation in speech and language development
• Variation in speech and language disorders
• Variation in speech and language dialects
The DELV Tests
• DELV-Screening Test (3/25/03)
– Identifies language variation status
– Identifies students at risk for a disorder
• DELV-Criterion Referenced Test (Spring, 03)
– Diagnose speech and language disorders
• Syntax, Semantics, Pragmatic, Phonology
• DELV-Standardized Version (2005)
– Standardized exclusively on AAE children
General Results of the DELV Field
Testing -- The Subject Sample
•
•
•
•
•
•
1014 four to nine year olds, most of them from working class backgrounds and
from all regions of the USA.
There were 217 four-year-olds, 266 five-year-olds, 300 six-year-olds, 56 sevenyear-olds, 101 eight-year-olds and 74 nine-year-olds.
Approximately 60% of the children were characterized by the testing clinicians
as speakers of African American English (AAE), the other 40% as speakers of
Mainstream American English (MAE).
AAE and MAE children were matched for parental education level.
Approximately 1/3rd of the children at each age and in each dialect group were
identified by the participating clinicians and schools as having a specific
language-impairment and were receiving language services.
10 to 15% of the children spread equally across ages and dialect groups were
diagnosed as having phonological or articulation problems.
DELV-SCR Structure
• The test has a screener version (DELV-SCR) that takes 15 to
20 minutes to administer.
• The screener contains morphosyntax and phonology
Identifier Items on which AAE-speaking children produce
systematically different responses from MAE.
• It also contains a set of Diagnostic Items designed to tell the
clinician whether further testing is needed because the child
is at risk for language delay or impairment.
Screener Morphosyntax
Identifier Items
• Have/has (“The girl have (has) a big kite”)
• 3rd person present tense ‘s (“The girl
always sleep(s).”)
• Doesn’t/don’t (“This girl don’t (doesn’t) like
to play basketball.”)
• Be copula forms (They was (were) sick”)
Screener Phonology
Identifier Items
• Substitution f/th: bath --->baf
• Substitution v/th: breathe --->breav or bread
• Zero Cluster Element: gift--->gif
Language Variation Status
• Mainstream American English (MAE)
• Some Variation from MAE
• Strong Variation from Mae
Performance of the different dialect and
impairment status groups on the Identifier Items
on the DELV-SCR (Non-mainstream responses).
Screener Identifier Items
12
Average Score /16
10
8
IMPAIRED AAE
IMPAIRED MAE
6
TYPICAL AAE
TYPICAL MAE
4
2
0
4
5
6
7
Age
8
9
Major Theories of SLI
• Difficulty with morphosyntax:
(Leonard, Rice).
• Difficulty repeating nonsense words
(Bishop)
• Difficulty with variables and embedded clauses
(Penner, Roeper & Seymour, van der Lely)
Screener Diagnostic Items
• Past tense was/were auxiliary and copula forms (obligatory
in both MAE and AAE).
• Elliptical Possessive pronoun (obligatory in both MAE and
AAE). Thsee are for morphosyntax.
• Non-word Repetition (for memory problems)
• Wh-Question Comprehension (for variables and
embedding)
Performance of typically developing and language
impaired children on the Diagnostic Items on the
DELV-SCR (Errors)
Screener Diagnostic Items
14
Average Score
12
10
8
IMPAIRED
TYPICAL
6
4
2
0
4
5
6
7
Age
8
9
Performance of MAE and AAE speaking children
on the Diagnostic Items on the DELV-SCR
(Errors)
Screener Diagnostic Items
10
9
Average Score
8
7
6
AAE
MAE
5
4
3
2
1
0
4
5
6
7
Age
8
9
Is a screener enough?
• A screener is just that: it does not diagnose.
• A practitioner needs to know more precisely
what the child’s areas of difficulties are, for
both accurate diagnosis and design of
remediation.
• The DELV-CR goes deeper, and checks what
the results of the screener mean.
Characteristics of the DELV-CR
The DELV-CR (criterion-referenced test) has 11 subtest
components organized into four language domains.
• Syntax = Wh-Q comprehension, Passives comprehension,
Articles production.
• Pragmatics = Wh-Q asking, Communicative Role Taking
(production), Narrative.
• Semantics = Verb contrast production, Preposition contrast
production, Quantifier comprehension, and Syntactic
Bootstrapping/Fast mapping.
• Phonology
Components of The DELV
SYNTAX Domain
Question Type
Core Concepts
WH-QUESTION
COMPREHENSION
Variables
Movement
PASSIVES
Movement
Hidden properties
ARTICLES
Discourse properties
(something in a prior sentence making
requirements on an element in a
subsequent sentence)
ARTICLES: TESTING REQUIREMENTS OF
DISCOURSE PROPERTIES
Does the child carry information from one sentence
into another?
Ex.
A bird flew out of a cage because something
was open? What was it?
THE door (nor A door)
Has the child learned to interpret articles as reference
to context?
Examples of eliciting questions
Part-the: Sally was eating an ice-cream cone when suddenly- slosh! something
fell out and she only had the cone left. What was it? (THE icecream)
Familiar-the: A cat and a bird were sitting in a tree. They were friends. One of
them flew out of the tree. Guess which.
(THE bird)
Specific-a: I'll bet you have something hanging on the wall of your room at
home. What is it? (A picture)
Non-referential-a: Tyrone is going to take a nap, and he wants to cuddle with
something,. What does he need? (A blanket)
Predicational-a: Think of a baseball player. Can you imagine what one looks like?
What does he have? (A glove)
Wh-factors:
Query: what is that
Echo: you ate WHAT
Exclamative: What nice clothes you have!
Indirect question: he knows what to do
=> not answered
Relative clause: the man who you saw
Discourse connected:
John has 3 hats. Which is best?
Core CONCEPT #1 IN SYNTAX on
the DELV
•
•
•
•
•
•
I. Principles of MOVEMENT
Simple:
“I saw a boy, a girl, and a dog.” =>
“What did I see ( - ) ?”
Complex:
What did she say she saw ( - )?
•
Does the child get complex
movement right?
•
Core Syntactic Concept #1 on the
DELV (con’t)
Does the child know…
1. Where the WH word originates
• What did he eat ( - )?
• When did she say ( - ) she lost her purse (- )?
2. When certain structures "block" certain meanings:
Ex. When did she say how she lost her purse?
can only mean "when did she SAY it”
not “When did she lose it?”
Core Syntactic CONCEPT #2 on the DELV
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
II. VARIABLES
(words that are intended to refer not to a single
referent, but to members of a set)
Examples:
Simple Question (1 variable)
. (“I saw a boy, a girl, and a dog.”)
“What did I see?”
“what” = set of objects (boy, girl, dog)
“Who was at dinner?”
“who” = the 5 or 6 individuals at dinner
Core Syntactic CONCEPT #2 on the DELV
(con’t)
•
•
•
•
•
II. b. Complex Variables
2 variables in the same sentence:
“who bought what?” requires reference to all
the members in the 2 sets in an ordered relation:
Person 1 bought Thing 1
Person 2 bought Thing 2
•
Does the child get variable properties right?
Core Syntactic CONCEPT #2 on the DELV
(con’t)
Does the child know how to answer Double WH-questions:
Who ate what?
How did she play what?
• Requires “set” answers to BOTH questions
– (he and she, chocolate and vanilla)
• Not just listed, but PAIRED.
Ex. HE ate CHOCOLATE, and SHE ate VANILLA.
Testing Complex WH-Question
Comprehension
We test this:
1) Can children answer both parts of a double-WH?
2) Can children answer questions whose site of origin is far
away (long distance)?
and
3) Can children appropriately block meanings that the grammar
doesn’t allow, i.e.when there is a barrier?
Wh-Question Comprehension:
Testing Procedure
• The child is told a brief story about a pictured
event.
• They are then asked the key test question about
some aspect of the event.
• The pictured events and stories support several
possible interpretations of the question.
Typical Answers to double WH
questions
• PAIRED, EXHAUSTIVE responses
– Ex. She played the piano with her hands and the drums with her feet.
• SINGLETONS (Incorrect)
– One element: “piano” “with her feet”
– Both objects, no instruments: “piano and drums”
– One pair: “the piano with her hands.”
• OTHER
– “She played a lot.” “She was playing.”
Double WH Response Types by Age and Language Status
(N = 1014, 708 Typically Developing,
306 Language Impaired)
Fig. 1b. Double WH Response Types
1
Not Paired
0.8
OTHER-LI
0.6
Paired Exhaustive
0.4
Not Paired-LI
0.2
Paired
Exhaustive-LI
0
4
5
6
Age Yrs
7
8
9
Typical Answers to “False
Clause” questions
• LONG DISTANCE (LD) TWO CLAUSE responses
– Ex. She said she bought paper towels.
•
ONE CLAUSE responses (Incorrect)
– Ex. (She bought) a birthday cake.
• OTHER
– “a surprise” “a bag” “I don’t know.”
LD False Clause Response Types by Age and
Language Status (N = 1014)
Fig. 3 WH "False Clause" Response Types
by Age and Language Status
1 clauseTD
1
LD 2
clauses-TD
0.8
0.6
OTHER-LI
0.4
0.2
1-clauseTD
0
4
5
6
Age Yrs
7
8
9
LD 2
clauses-LI
Long distance movement
barriers
• We also tested children on long distance movement, and
respect for a variety of barrier effects:
wh-islands:
• How did the girl ask how to ride?
• Who did the girl ask what to bring?
relative clauses:
• How did the boy who sneezed drink the milk?
empty operators:
• Where did the boy buy the lemonade to splash on his face?
Typical Answers toWH-barriers
questions
• SHORT DISTANCE responses
– (How did she learn…?) By watching TV..
• MEDIAL ANSWERS (Incorrect)
– (…what to bake?) “a cake”
• LONG DISTANCE responses (Incorrect)
– (How…..bake?) “With a pudding mix,” “With a spoon”
• OTHER
– Ex. “She didn’t know how.”
WH Barrier Response Types by Age and
Language Status (N = 1014)
WH "Barriers" Response Types by Age and
Language Status
1
0.8
Short Distance-TD
Short Distance-LI
Medial-TD
Medial-LI
OTHER-li
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
4
5
6
Age Yrs
7
8
9
Summary of barrier effects
• All the barriers were obeyed well even in LI
but the rate of errors was higher in LI
children.
• The most prevalent error was answering the
medial, an error type that persists in LI.
• No children answer the “who”
complementizer in the relative clause, despite
superficial equivalence.
The Echo-Exhaustive distinction
Echo questions differ from ‘real” wh
questions in several ways:
What did the children eat?
The children ate what?
Differences
• Echo questions ask for the missing
constituent, real wh for an exhaustive answer
• Echo questions can be substitute for a part of
a constituent, real wh cannot:
• The boy said he bought a big blue what?
• * What did the boy say he bought a big blue
t?
Previous tests
• Mari Takahashi (1991) tested whether 3 year
olds respected this distinction and got nice
contrasting results: more exhaustive for real
wh, more constituents for echo questions.
• A student pilot study reported in de Villiers
and Roeper 1995 found intonation
insignificant for distinguishing the two.
Echo/Exhaustive Distinction by
age
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
disaae
dissae
tryaae
Ages
11
-1
2
78
6
5
trysae
4
Percentage of newscore "2"
Respect ec/ex distinction
Wh-Question Asking
Elicitation Procedure
• The child is shown a picture with something missing from it.
• They have to ask the right question to find out what the event is about.
• The missing elements of the pictures include objects, people, locations,
tools, and causes of emotions -- so what, who, where, how, and why
questions are motivated.
• Different levels of prompting are given for each trial if the child does not
spontaneously ask an appropriate question -- varying from the semantic
domain of the question to ask, to the specific wh-word to begin the
question with.
• If the child asks an appropriate question they are shown the complete
picture.
Wh-Question production in MAE and AAE
speaking children following all prompts.
Wh-Question Production
9
8
Average Score /9
7
6
5
AAE
MAE
4
3
2
1
0
4
5
6
7
Age
8
9
Wh-Question production in typically developing
and language impaired children following all
prompts.
Wh-Question Production
9
8
Average Score /9
7
6
5
IMPAIRED
TYPICAL
4
3
2
1
0
4
5
6
7
Age
8
9
Production of Double Wh-Questions by
Typically-developing and Language-impaired
Children following all prompts
Why is semantics a challenge?
• Bias of acquired vocabulary tests: too
culturally dependent?
• Want to look at process: CAN the child learn
a new word easily?
• For older children, lexical
organization/retrieval may be more
significant than size of vocabulary.
Three Semantics tests
• Novel verb learning/fast mapping
- gets at the process of learning a new word
• Verb contrasts
• Preposition contrasts
- these get at lexical organization and contrasts
Syntactic Bootstrapping and Fast Mapping
of Word Meanings from Context
• Children acquire a verb’s meaning in part through the
argument frames in which it appears. This phenomenon of
fast mapping of meanings from context is often called
syntactic bootstrapping.
• We test how much children can learn from intransitives,
transitives, datives, and complement argument frames.
• Nonsense verbs were used in these frames to describe
strange actions in ambiguous contexts. The child then
answered questions about the verb and its subjects and/or
objects.
Procedure
• The child saw a picture that contained at least
two events. S/he heard a sentence about it
containing either a REAL or a NOVEL verb.
• The child had to answer a set of questions
about the picture that are designed to test
which action s/he has associated with the
verb.
Argument structures
• Intransitive: one argument
E.g. the dog is barking
• Transitive: two arguments
E.g. The boy poured the drink
• Dative: three arguments
E.g. The mailman handed the letter to the boy
• Complement: three arguments
E.g. The policeman asked the woman to stop the car
Question types
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
ING e.g Which one is zanning? (agent)
ER e.g. Which one is the zanner? (agent)
Got-ED e.g. Which one got zanned? (patient)
ABLE e.g. Which one is zannable? (patient)
Subj-comp e.g.
Which one did she sug (e) to send the ball?
Obj-comp e.g.
Which one did she sug the man to send (e)?
Verb Contrasts
• How do children organize their lexicon for easy retrieval of
e.g. contrasts or opposites?
• Waxman & Hatch studied noun organization in 3 year olds
e.g. plantflowerrose
• We decided to focus on verbs because
a) less culturally biased
b) maybe disordered in SLI (Rice)
• Tried to elicit different verbs from the children for the same
picture depending on the prompt, to tap versatility and
organization of verb lexicon.
Procedure
• The child sees a picture (of a man crawling
out of a building) and is told e.g.
“The man is not WALKING, he’s…?”
(crawling)
• THEN, for the same picture:
“The man is not ENTERING the building,
he’s…?”
(going out)
Preposition contrasts
• Finally, we decided to tap preposition
contrasts in the same way, to see if children
could handle the different semantic and
grammatical forms they take.
• The format is the same as for verb contrasts,
i.e. we prompt for two different prepositions
per picture.
Prompts to picture
• “She’s not looking at the radio, she’s
listening . . .”
(to the radio)
• “She’s not lifting the chair, she’s sitting . . .”
(under the chair)
Development of MAE and AAE speaking children
on the Semantics Domain Score
DELV-CRT Semantics Subdomain
40
35
Average Score
30
25
AAE
MAE
20
15
10
5
0
4
5
6
7
Age
8
9
Development of typically developing and
language impaired children on the Semantics
Domain Score
DELV-CRT Semantics Subdomain
40
35
Average Score
30
25
IMPAIRED
TYPICAL
20
15
10
5
0
4
5
6
7
Age
8
9
Double Questions
Among the questions we elicited were double
wh-questions such as:
• Who is eating what?
• Or
• Which person is eating which food?
Singleton answers by age
Decline in singletons,
subtest 2wh 1-6
Percentage singletons
30
25
disaae
20
dissae
15
tryaae
10
trysae
5
0
4
4.6
5
5.6
6
Ages
6.6 7-8
9- 1110 12
II. General Background:
Quantification
1. Problems with quantification (Roeper and
DeVilliers (1991)
a. A boy saw every fish. He raised his eyebrow.
=> fish, not boy
•
How do child ren und erstand Quanti fiers?
Every, some, only, all, most, many
These words are easily confusing:
Some child ren kno w every present
each one received from every pa rent?
Hidden Ambiguity
Some boy had every toy
= every toy was possessed by a different
boy
= one boy had all the toys
Mathematics:
Does every boy have three shovels?
=>
boy-shovel
boy-shovel
boy-shovel
Answer: "no", but ask a 7yr old and many will say "yes"
Do the boys have three shovels?
ambiguous: 1. each one has three shovels
2. they have three shovels altogether
Cont rol-No, no rmal vs. diso rdered
Summ ary: d evelopm ent p attern is th e same, with th e normals outp erforming th e
diso rdereds th e whol e way. NB: th e graph sp ans 0 to mo re than 1, so th e differe nces
between th e two lin es is not as insigni ficant as it might s eem. E.g. at age 4, th e differe nce
is clos e to 20 %.
Control-no, Normal vs. Disordered
1.2
1
% Correct
0.8
Normal
0.6
Disordered
0.4
0.2
0
4
5
6
7
8
Age
9
10
11
12
No Quantifier Hypothesis: WhSingletons and Control-No Failure
Results on 2 control-no que stions
Normal
Disorder
Overall
0 errors
540 (60.7%)
200 (49.3%)
740 (57.1%)
1 error
128 (14.4)
74 (18.2)
202 (15.6)
2 errors
221 (24.9)
132 (32.5)
353 (27.3)
Total
889
406
1295
349/ 889 normal children => 1 or 2 errors: 128 made 1 error, 221 made 2 errors. Out of ,
206 /406 disordered children=:> 1 or 2 errors
Correlation of Wh-singletons
and Control-No
Wh-exhaustivity errors:
0
1
2+
11.2
23.3
22.4
3.9
12.9
17.6
Quantifier errors:
0
1
2
84.9
63.9
59.8
- 35% children who show one Q error, have 1or 2 wh- errors
- 40% children who show two Q, errors, have 1or 2 wh-errors
Significance
• Results are highly significant (statistically):
• Chi-squared analysis result: p < 0.001
• (i.e. probability that the 2 effects are
independent and only appear to be related by
accident is less than 0.1%.
Wh without “every”?
• Singleton => wh-without "every"
• Control-no => no comprehension of every
• Conclusion: Children must learn: => whcontains hidden "every"
• LI children: fail to recognize this factor
Spreading total
100
80
disaae
dissae
tryaae
trysae
60
40
20
0
4
4.7
5
5.7
Ages
6
6.7
7-12
Spreading incidence
• Quantifier Spreading: Prominent until a late age for all children
•
•
•
•
LI children definitely show Q-spreading, but many
Normals do as well until a late age.
Spreading exists for all, some, every, most
And may disappear differentially
Key Features of the Pragmatics Assessment
Procedures on the DELV-CR
• They test the interaction of syntactic and semantic forms with specific
pragmatic functions -- assessment of pragmatic skills cannot be divorced
from the forms that are needed for those functions of language.
• They sample a range of simpler to more complex syntactic forms that
serve the same communicative functions.
• They assess pragmatic skills that are important for early school success
and literacy development.
• The materials are all picture-based so they require minimal technology
and can be administered and scored by a single clinician interacting with
the child.
Wh-Question Asking
Elicitation Procedure
• The child is shown a picture with something missing from it.
• They have to ask the right question to find out what the event is about.
• The missing elements of the pictures include objects, people, locations,
tools, and causes of emotions -- so what, who, where, how, and why
questions are motivated.
• Different levels of prompting are given for each trial if the child does not
spontaneously ask an appropriate question -- varying from the semantic
domain of the question to ask, to the specific wh-word to begin the
question with.
• If the child asks an appropriate question they are shown the complete
picture.
who
where
what
how
what
who
where
why
who eats what
5 year old TryAAE
WHAT IS THE NURSE FEEDING?
WHERE DID SHE GO SWIMMING?
WHAT IS THE GIRL MAD ABOUT?
HOW IS THE GIRL FIXIN' THAT?
WHAT IS THE WOMAN EATING?
WHO IS RIDING THE BIKE?
WHERE IS THAT BOY GOING?
WHAT HAPPENED?
WHAT IS THEY EATING?
5 year old DISAAE
NR
SHE MAKING A POOL.
WHAT THE GIRL
SHE'S FIXING HIS BIKE
WHAT SOME MEAT
WHAT A BOY
THE BOY IS RUNNING TO THE ICE CREAM
WHAT?
NR
who
where
what
how
what
who
where
why
who eats what
6 year old TryAAE
WHO IS THE NURSE FEEDING?
WHERE DID THE GIRL SWIM?
WHAT IS THE GIRL MAD FOR?
WHAT IS THE GIRL FIXING?
WHAT IS THE GIRL EATING?
WHO IS RIDING THE BIKE?
WHERE IS THE BOY RUNNING?
WHY IS THE BOY CRYING?
WHAT ARE THE PEOPLE EATING?
6 year old DISAAE
WHO IS THAT FEEDING HIM?
SHE JUMPED IN THE WATER.
SHE MAD AT THE TABLE.
SHE IS FIXIN THE TOY.
WHO'S EATIN?
A BOY RIDIN ON THE BIKE.
WHO'S RUNNING?
HE DROPPED HIS ICE CREAM.
WHO'S EATIN?
who
where
what
how
what
who
where
why
who eats what
8 year-old TRYAAE
WHO IS THE NURSE FEEDING?
WHERE DID THE GIRL GO SWIMMING?
WHY IS THE GIRL MAD?
HOW IS THE GIRL FIXING THE TOY?
WHAT IS THE WOMAN EATING?
WHO IS RIDING THE BIKE?
WHAT IS THE BOY RUNNING TO?
WHY IS THE BOY CRYING?
WHO IS EATING WHAT FOOD?
8 year old DISAAE
WHO IS SHE FEEDING?
WHAT SOMETHING SHE SWIM IN?
WHO IS SHE MAD AT?
WHAT'S SHE HOLDING ON HER HAND?
WHAT HER MOM EATING FROM HER TWO FINGERS AND HER
SOMETHING RIDING A BICYCLE.
WHERE IS HIS HOUSE?
WAS HE CRYING?
HOW WAS THEY WAS EATING?
Narratives
Narratives have three important components:
• Coherence = use of required story grammar components
• Cohesion =
a. use of linguistic devices to establish, maintain, and specify referents
(e.g., articles and pronouns, or referent characterizing expressions)
b. expression of causal and temporal links between events in the story.
• Adopting different perspectives on the events -- “inside” versus
“outside” view -- “landscape of action” versus “landscape of
consciousness” (Bruner, 1986). This depends on having a “theory of
mind”.
Narrative Samples from the
DELV-CR
• I want my train. I’m gonna hide the train from him. I’m gonna play out
of the toy box. I’m gonna find that train. Bring that train. (C: 4;2)
• He was looking for the choo choo train because the other boy was
playin’. And then… and then he said, “I want that choo choo train back”,
and umm… he put it in his toy box. And then he came back to find it and
he looked under the bed and it wasn’t there. (SC: 4;9)
More Narrative Samples from the
DELV-CR
•
The big boy came into the little boy’s room and took away the little boy’s train.
Then he hid it under the boy’s bed where he couldn’t get it. Then the little boy…
when he left… he got out his train and put it in the toy box while the big boy
was eating. Then the big boy thought about the train and he went under the bed
to go see it but it wasn’t there.
(A: 6;4)
•
The little brother was trying to get his toy from the big brother. And the big
brother hiding his toy under the bed. When he is eating his sandwich, the little
boy go and get it and put it inside of his toy box. When his big brother walk in,
he think about the train and he look under his bed for it. (J: 6;3)
Development of reference contrast in narratives
(contrasting the two main characters) in typically
developing MAE and AAE speaking children.
Reference Contrast in Spoken Narrative
Proportion of Group
1
0.8
0.6
AAE
MAE
0.4
0.2
0
4.5
5.5
6.5
8
Age
10
12
Development of reference contrast in narratives
(contrasting the two main characters) in typically
developing and language impaired children.
Reference Contrast in Spoken Narrative
Proportion of the Group
1
0.8
0.6
Impaired
Typical
0.4
0.2
0
4.5
5.5
6.5
8
Age
10
12
Development of the expression of temporal links between
events in the narratives of typically developing MAE and
AAE speaking children.
Temporal Links in Spoken Narrative
Average Score /2
2
1.5
AAE
MAE
1
0.5
0
4.5
5.5
6.5
8
Age
10
12
Development of the expression of temporal links between
events in the narratives of typically developing and
language impaired children.
Temporal Links in Spoken Narrative
Average Score /2
2
1.5
Impaired
Typical
1
0.5
0
4.5
5.5
6.5
8
Age
10
12
Development of “theory of mind” explanations for the
character’s mistaken action in the picture narrative
(typically developing MAE versus AAE speaking
children).
Mental State Explanations of Action
Average Score /2
2
1.5
AAE
MAE
1
0.5
0
4.5
5.5
6.5
8
Age
10
12
Development of “theory of mind” explanations for the
character’s mistaken action in the picture narrative
(typically developing versus language impaired children).
Mental State Explanations of Action
Average Score /2
2
1.5
Impaired
Typical
1
0.5
0
4.5
5.5
6.5
8
Age
10
12
Communicative Role Taking and
Understanding Speech Acts
• Children not only need to produce different kind of speech acts at
appropriate times (e.g., asking for information, requesting action,
rejecting or denying, prohibiting etc.); they also need to understand the
circumstances and force of those utterances in other people.
• The children were shown pictures in which a person was communicating
to another about some object or event that was clearly depicted. They
were asked what the characters were telling (reporting an observed
event), asking, or saying (prohibiting an action), depending on the
scenario.
Development of appropriate speech act production
in a communicative role taking context (MAE
versus AAE speaking children)
Communicative Role Taking
4
Average Score /4
3
AAE
MAE
2
1
0
4
5
6
7
Age
8
9
Development of appropriate speech act production
in a communicative role taking context (typically
developing versus language impaired children).
Communicative Role Taking
4
Average Score /4
3
IMPAIRED
TYPICAL
2
1
0
4
5
6
7
Age
8
9
Phonology Structure
–
–
–
–
25 target phonemic Clusters
Cluster targets only--two and three elements
Initial and medial positions of words only
Phonotactic Properties
Phonology Format
– Sentence repetition
– Cartoon illustrations
– Carrier Phrase--”I see…”
Fig.Phonology
3 Phonology
Subtest
Subtest
by by
AgeAge
andand
Dialect
Dialect
30
Fig. 3 Phonology Subtest by Age and Dialect
30
25
Number Correct
Number Correct
25
20
15
20
AAE
15
MAE
AAE
aae
10
MAE
sae
5
10
0
4
5
6
5
7
8
9
Age Years
0
4
55
66
77
Age
AgeYears
Years
88
99
Phonology Subscore by Age and Articulation Status
Number C orrect (of 25)
30
25
20
Disart
15
TDart
10
5
0
4
5
6
7
Age Years
8
9
Typical Answers to “False
Clause” questions
• LONG DISTANCE (LD) TWO CLAUSE responses
– Ex. She said she bought paper towels.
•
ONE CLAUSE responses (Incorrect)
– Ex. (She bought) a birthday cake.
• OTHER
– “a surprise” “a bag” “I don’t know.”
WH-False Clause Example Responses
from field testing
CHILD A (12663)
CHILD B (18221)
A cake
Paper towels
1 clause answer
0 points
2-clause answer (long
distance)
1 point
Item Type 3 Barrier to Long Distance Movement
Note: Children’s ability to give LD answers
(without embedded false clause) was tested in
piloting and then in the DSLT Tryout testing. 90%
of the children ages 4-6 and 95% of the children
7-10 gave at least one Long Distance answer, so
for reasons of time, simple Long Distance items
do not appear on the DELV.
Typical Answers toWH-barriers
questions
• SHORT DISTANCE responses
– (How did she learn…?) By watching TV..
• MEDIAL ANSWERS (Incorrect)
– (…what to bake?) “a cake”
• LONG DISTANCE responses (Incorrect)
– (How…..bake?) “With a pudding mix,” “With a spoon”
• OTHER
– Ex. “She didn’t know how.”
WH-barrier Example Responses 2
Who did she ask what to buy?
CHILD A (12663)
CHILD B (18221)
bologna
The grocery store lady
Medial
Short Distance
0 points
1 point
Other WH Example Responses
CHILD A (12663)
2 correct barriers,
2 barrier violations
1 other
CHILD B (18221)
4 correct barriers
1 medial
2 points (of 5)
4 points (of 5)
Total:4 of 14
Total: 12 of 14
Who are these children?
CHILD A (12663)
5 years old
White Female
From South
Parents w/ HS education
Mainstream English
speaker
Not receiving speech or
language services
CHILD B (18221)
4 years old
African American boy
From “north Central” US
Parents w/ HS education
“Some difference” from
MAE”
Not receiving speech or
language services
Profiles of semantic problems
Purpose: discuss some individual
response patterns to show the tasks in
detail, the kinds of responses to
expect as a function of age of the
child, and possible disordered status.
1)Fast mapping task
• The child saw a picture that contained at least
two events. S/he heard a sentence about it
containing either a REAL or a NOVEL verb.
• The child had to answer a set of questions
about the picture that are designed to test
which action s/he has associated with the
verb.
Six AAE-speaking children
Which one was the zann er?
Which one go t zann ed?
Which one was zann able?
Which one was zann ing?
Which one was the sugg er?
Which one d id the g irl sug to send th e ball ?
Which one d id the g irl sug the man to send?
Which one was sugg ing?
Total
4 yr- old 4 yr-old 6 yr o ld 6-yr-old 8 yr-old 8-yr-old
TRYAA E DISAAE TRYAA E DISAAE TRYAA E DISAAE
0
0
1
1
1
0
1
0
1
1
1
0
1
1
1
0
0
1
0
0
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
6
1
0
0
1
3
1
1
0
0
6
0
0
0
0
3
0
1
1
1
6
0
0
0
0
2
Summary
• This is a demanding task over this age range, but younger
children can do some questions easily. In general, transitive
is easier than dative, and both are easier than complements.
• Children with a language disorder have a hard time fastmapping a new word from the grammar, and make many
errors.
• The task reveals a problem some children may have picking
up new words casually from conversation or text: a process
increasingly necessary with schooling. They may need more
support and repetition than normally developing children.
2) Verb Contrasts
• How do children organize their lexicon for easy
retrieval of e.g. contrasts or opposites?
• Tried to elicit different verbs from the children for
the same picture depending on the prompt, to tap
versatility and organization of verb lexicon.
Examples
• The child sees a picture (of a man crawling out of a building) and is told e.g.
“The man is not WALKING, he’s…?”
(crawling)
• THEN, for the same picture:
“The man is not ENTERING the building,
he’s…?”
(going out)
The child is shown a picture of a woman buttoning her coat as she walks out the door.
• The child is told,
“She’s not taking off her coat, she’s…?”
(putting it on)
And then:
“She not undressing, she’s…?
(dressing)
Six AAE-speaking children
DisAAE
4 SLIP ON THE STEP
TryAAE
score
score
STAY R IGHT THERE
0
0
SLIDING DOWN THE STEPS
COMING OUT THE BUILDING
0
1
4 PUTTING IT IN THERE
0
PUT HE COAT ON
1
0
DRESSING
1
0
0
CRAWL ING
ENTERING OUT THE BUILDING
1
0
0
1
PUTTING ON HER COAT
LEAVING OUT THE DOOR
1
0
1
0
CRAWL IN'
LEAVING
1
1
0
0
PUTTING ON HER COAT
DRESSING
1
1
PUTTIN IT IN THE COAT (P) GOING TO
WORK
6 SITTING DOWN
TRYING TO DO THAT
6 TRYING TO GO TO WORK
FIXING HER COAT
8 CRAWL ING HIS HANDS
PUTTING STUFF IN
8 ON IT THE COAT
ZIPPING THE COAT
Summary
• Normally developing children have flexibility in
describing a scene, and can find the right “level” to
describe it at given the prompt.
• Language-disorded children have less flexibility
and also don’t hit the right contrast so easily. They
use more “all -purpose” or “vague” verbs.
• This suggests the verb lexicon is an area of concern
for children with language difficulties: both
incomplete, and poorly organized into contrasts.
Prompts to picture
• “She’s not looking at the radio, she’s
listening . . .”
(to the radio)
• “She’s not lifting the chair, she’s sitting . . .”
(under the chair)
Six AAE-speaking children
Disaae
4 TO THE RADIO
UNDER THE CHAIR
A FORK
DOWN ON FLOOR
GET THE CAT
IN THE NIGHT TIME
6 TO THE RADIO
IN THE CHAIR
THE FORK
THE SIDE THE TV
GET THE CAT
UP THERE
8 THE RADIO
DOWN THE CHAIR
FORK
NEXT T O IT
UP THE CAT
IN THE NIGHT
Tryaae
1
1
0
0
0
1
TO THE RADIO
UNDER THE CHAIR
WITH A FORK
ON THE FLOOR
TO GET THE CAT
AT DARK
1
1
1
1
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
TO THE RADIO
UNDER THE CHAIR
WITH A FORK
IN FRONT OF THE TV
HE TRYING TO GET HIS CAT
IN THE NIGHT
1
1
1
1
0
1
0
0
0
1
0
1
TO THE RADIO
UNDER THE CHAIR
WITH A FORK
ON SIDE OF THE TV
BY HIMSELF
IN THE NIGHT
1
1
1
0
1
1
Summary
• As with the verb contrasts, languagedisordered children show difficulty finding
the right preposition. Sometimes they omit
one, sometimes they use an odd form e.g.
“down the chair” instead of “under the
chair”.
• Their lexicon of prepositions may be poorly
organized too.
Overall Summary
• The three AAE-speaking children who are normally
developing reveal similar strengths across these
semantic tasks.They all pass the DELV.
• The three AAE-speaking children identified as
possibly disordered show marked problems across
the semantic tasks. They all fail the DELV.
• It is possible that existing tests that look at MAE
morphology and at acquired vocabulary normed on
MAE would pick out all six as disordered.
Communicative Role Taking and
Understanding Speech Acts
• Children not only need to produce different kind of speech acts at
appropriate times (e.g., asking for information, requesting action,
rejecting or denying, prohibiting etc.); they also need to understand the
circumstances and force of those utterances in other people.
• The children were shown pictures in which a person was communicating
to another about some object or event that was clearly depicted. They
were asked what the characters were telling (reporting an observed
event), asking, or saying (prohibiting an action), depending on the
scenario.
Four-year-old AAE Children
TYPICAL AAE
TELL
ASK
ASK
SAY
HIS BIG SISTER FELLED OFF HER BIKE
CAN I PLAY BASEBA LL?
CAN I HAVE A PI ECE OF CAKE?
YOU DON'T FEED THE DOG. THAT'S HIS OWN FOOD
IMPAIRED AAE
TELL
ASK
ASK
SAY
HER BLEEDIN'
HIM CARRY SOME THING
HER SAY LOOK AT THE CAKE
HE FEEDIN THE DOG
Six-year-old AAE Children
TYPICAL AAE
TELL THAT HIS SISTER GOT HURT
ASK CAN HE GO OUTSIDE AND PLAY WITH HIS BROTHER
ASK CAN I GET A PIECE OF THAT CAKE ?
SAY DON'T GIVE THE DOG NONE OF YOUR FOOD
IMPAIRED AAE
TELL SHE GOT AN OW IE, A SORE
ASK I GOT A BAT AND A GLOVE
ASK SHE CAN EAT CAKE YET
SAY NO
IMPAIRED AAE?
TELL THE GI RL SHE HAD FELL AND SHE WAS BLEEDIN' ON HER KNEE
ASK CAN HE COME OUTSIDE?
ASK CAN SHE HAVE SO ME CAKE?
SAY NO
Narrative
• Uniquely specifying referents -- telling my
listener(s) who and what I am referring to.
• Linking meaning across referents and events -expression of temporal relationships.
• Marking point of view -- appreciating different
perspectives on events -- having a “theory of mind”.
Four-year-old AAE Children
TYPICAL AAE
REF
TIME
PICT5
ToM
YES
SEQUENCER
HE DREA MED THAT HIS TRAIN WAS UNDER THE BED
BECAUSE HE WANTED IT.
IMPAIRED AAE
REF
TIME
PICT5
ToM
NONE
NONE
THE BOY TAKE THAT FOR HIM.
CAUSE HE G OT FIND THE TRAIN
Six-year-old AAE Children
TYPICAL AAE
REF YES
TIME ADVERB IAL CLAUSE
PICT5 THE BIG BROTHER IS THINKING ABO UT THE T RAIN AND HE GOING BACK TO HIS ROOM
ToM HE THINK IT'S THERE
IMPAIRED AAE
REF NONE
TIME SEQUENCER
PICT5 THE BOY CAN'T FIND THE CHOO CHOO TRAIN
ToM BECAUSE HE CAN'T FIND IT
IMPAIRED AAE?
REF YES
TIME ADVERB IAL CLAUSE
PICT5 HE THINK THE T RAINS UNDER THE BED.
ToM HIS BIG BROTHER IS LOOKING FOR HIS TRAIN…
HE THINK IT'S UNDER THE BED, BUT ITS IN THE TOYB OX.
Conclusions
• We have shown that the assessment of complex aspects of children’s
syntactic development between the ages of 4 and 9 can be carried out in
a dialect neutral fashion.
• These materials and procedures capture the development of several
aspects of language that are vital for success in early schooling and the
transition to literacy.
• They provide the clinician with a substantial profile of the child
language strengths and weaknesses, not just a diagnostic categorization.
• As such they provide a much richer evaluation of language variation and
its sources that has direct implications for areas and methods of
intervention.