Search

In her Keynote Article, Gathercole (2006) presents a theoretical framework intended to account for evidence regarding the relation between nonword repetition and word learning. This framework stems from an impressive amount and breadth of research on this topic, including findings from adults and children with typical language abilities as well as language learning disorders. In this commentary we focus on claims relative to the interpretation of nonword repetition deficits in children with specific language impairment (SLI). One issue we address pertains to the nature of the proposed model of nonword processing and word learning, particularly with respect to phonological sensitivity and storage. The second issue we address relates to the assumption that a phonological storage deficit, although not sufficient, is necessary for SLI.

To examine possible explanations of reported inaccuracies of children with specific language impairment (SLI) on nonword repetition, study compared repetitions of 54 SLI children and peers for number and type of error, latency, and duration of response. Found no evidence of differences between groups in auditory discrimination or response processes, but evidence suggested differences in either formation or storage of phonological representations in working memory. (Author/JL)

Recognizing familiar words quickly and accurately facilitates learning new words, as well as other aspects of language acquisition. This study used the visual world paradigm with semantic and phonological competitors to study lexical processing efficiency in 2- to 5-year-old children. Experiment 1 found this paradigm was sensitive to vocabulary-size differences. Experiment 2 included a more diverse group of children who were tested in their native dialect (either African American English or mainstream American English). No effect of stimulus dialect was observed. The results showed that vocabulary size was a better predictor of eye gaze patterns than was maternal education, but that maternal education level had a moderating effect; as maternal education level increased, vocabulary size was less predictive of lexical processing efficiency. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]