Elin T Thordardottir1. 1. School of Communication Sciences and Disorders, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada. elin.thordardottir@mcgill.ca
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Although a number of studies have been conducted on normal acquisition in French, systematic methods for analysis of French and normative group data have been lacking. AIMS: To develop a systematic method for the analysis of language samples in Quebec French, and to provide preliminary normative data on early lexical and syntactic development in French with a comparison with English. METHODS & PROCEDURES: Language samples were collected for groups of monolingual French- and English-speaking children (n=39, age range 21-47 months) with normal language development. Coding conventions for French were developed based on similar principles as English SALT conventions. However, due to structural differences between the languages, coding of inflectional morphology was considerably more complex in French than in English. OUTCOMES & RESULTS: The French procedure provided developmentally sensitive measures of lexical and syntactic development, including mean length of utterance in morphemes and in words, and number of different words, and should be an important addition to the assessment procedures available for French. Cross-linguistic similarities and differences were noted in the language sample measures. Although the same elicitation context was used in the English and the French language samples, and the analysis methods were designed to rest on similar principles across languages, systematic differences emerged such that the French-speaking children exhibited a higher mean length of utterance, but smaller vocabulary sizes. Differences were also noted in error patterns, with much lower error rates occurring in samples of the French-speaking children. CONCLUSIONS: The findings have important implications for language assessment involving cross-linguistic comparisons, such as occurs in the assessment of bilingual children, and in the matching of participants in cross-linguistic studies. Given differences in the mean length of utterance and vocabulary scores across the languages, the finding of the same mean length of utterance or vocabulary obtained in the two languages for a given bilingual child or for monolingual speakers of the two languages does not imply equivalent levels of language development in the two languages.
BACKGROUND: Although a number of studies have been conducted on normal acquisition in French, systematic methods for analysis of French and normative group data have been lacking. AIMS: To develop a systematic method for the analysis of language samples in Quebec French, and to provide preliminary normative data on early lexical and syntactic development in French with a comparison with English. METHODS & PROCEDURES: Language samples were collected for groups of monolingual French- and English-speaking children (n=39, age range 21-47 months) with normal language development. Coding conventions for French were developed based on similar principles as English SALT conventions. However, due to structural differences between the languages, coding of inflectional morphology was considerably more complex in French than in English. OUTCOMES & RESULTS: The French procedure provided developmentally sensitive measures of lexical and syntactic development, including mean length of utterance in morphemes and in words, and number of different words, and should be an important addition to the assessment procedures available for French. Cross-linguistic similarities and differences were noted in the language sample measures. Although the same elicitation context was used in the English and the French language samples, and the analysis methods were designed to rest on similar principles across languages, systematic differences emerged such that the French-speaking children exhibited a higher mean length of utterance, but smaller vocabulary sizes. Differences were also noted in error patterns, with much lower error rates occurring in samples of the French-speaking children. CONCLUSIONS: The findings have important implications for language assessment involving cross-linguistic comparisons, such as occurs in the assessment of bilingual children, and in the matching of participants in cross-linguistic studies. Given differences in the mean length of utterance and vocabulary scores across the languages, the finding of the same mean length of utterance or vocabulary obtained in the two languages for a given bilingual child or for monolingual speakers of the two languages does not imply equivalent levels of language development in the two languages.