Search

A talking face provides redundant cues on the mouth that might support language learning and highly salient social cues in the eyes. What drives children's looking toward the mouth versus eyes of a talking face? This study reports data from 292 children who viewed faces speaking English, French, and Russian. We investigated the impact of children's age (5 months to 5 years) and language background (monolingual English, monolingual French, bilingual English-French), and the speaker's language (dominant, nondominant, or nonnative) relative to children's native language(s). Data from 129 bilingual adults were also collected for comparison. Five-month-olds showed balanced attention to the eyes and mouth, but children up to 5 years tended to be most interested in the mouth. In contrast, adults were most interested in the eyes. We found little evidence for different patterns of attention for monolinguals versus bilinguals, or to a native versus a nonnative speaker. Using percentile scores, monolinguals with larger productive vocabularies looked more at the mouth, while bilinguals with larger comprehension vocabularies looked marginally less at the mouth, although both effects were small and not as robust with raw vocabulary scores. Children showed large but stable individual variability in their face scanning patterns across different speakers. Our results show that the way that children allocate their attention to talking faces continues to change from infancy through the preschool years and beyond. Future studies will need to go beyond looking at bilingualism, speaker language, and vocabulary size to understand what drives children's in-the-moment attention to talking faces.

In bilingual language environments, infants and toddlers listen to two separate languages during the same key years that monolingual children listen to just one and bilinguals rarely learn each of their two languages at the same rate. Learning to understand language requires them to cope with challenges not found in monolingual input, notably the use of two languages within the same utterance (e.g., Do you like the "perro"? or ¿"Te gusta el doggy"?). For bilinguals of all ages, switching between two languages can reduce the efficiency in real-time language processing. But language switching is a dynamic phenomenon in bilingual environments, presenting the young learner with many junctures where comprehension can be derailed or even supported. In this study, we tested 20 Spanish-English bilingual toddlers (18- to 30-months) who varied substantially in language dominance. Toddlers' eye movements were monitored as they looked at familiar objects and listened to single-language and mixed-language sentences in both of their languages. We found asymmetrical switch costs when toddlers were tested in their dominant versus non-dominant language, and critically, they benefited from hearing nouns produced in their dominant language, independent of switching. While bilingualism does present unique challenges, our results suggest a united picture of early monolingual and bilingual learning. Just like monolinguals, experience shapes bilingual toddlers' word knowledge, and with more robust representations, toddlers are better able to recognize words in diverse sentences.

Previous research suggests that English monolingual children and adults can use speech disfluencies (e.g., "uh") to predict that a speaker will name a novel object. To understand the origins of this ability, we tested 48 32-month-old children (monolingual English, monolingual French, bilingual English-French; Study 1) and 16 adults (bilingual English-French; Study 2). Our design leveraged the distinct realizations of English ("uh") versus French ("euh") disfluencies. In a preferential-looking paradigm, participants saw familiar-novel object pairs (e.g., "doll-rel"), labeled in either Fluent ("Look at the doll/rel!"), Disfluent Language-consistent ("Look at 'thee uh' doll/rel!"), or Disfluent Language-inconsistent ("Look at 'thee euh' doll/rel!") sentences. All participants looked more at the novel object when hearing disfluencies, irrespective of their phonetic realization. These results suggest that listeners from different language backgrounds harness disfluencies to comprehend day-to-day speech, possibly by attending to their lengthening as a signal of speaker uncertainty. Stimuli and data are available at .

In bilingual language environments, children learn twolanguages in the same amount of time that monolingualchildren learn one, and children do not learn their twolanguages at exactly the same rate. Furthermore, learning twolanguages requires children to deal with challenges not foundin monolingual input, notably the use of two languages withinone utterance (Do you like the perro?/¿Te gusta el doggy?).For bilinguals of all ages, switching between languages canimpede processing efficiency. But are all switches equallychallenging? We tested Spanish-English bilingual toddlers’processing of single-language and mixed-language sentencesin both languages. We found asymmetrical switch costs whentoddlers were tested in their dominant vs. non-dominantlanguage, and toddlers benefited from hearing nounsproduced in their dominant language. These results suggest animportant commonality between monolingualism andbilingualism: when toddlers have more robust representationsof a particular item, they can better recognize it in diversecontexts.

Bilingual infants vary in when, how, and how often they hear each of their languages. Variables such as the particular languages of exposure, the community context, the onset of exposure, the amount of exposure, and socioeconomic status are crucial for describing any bilingual infant sample. Parent report is an effective approach for gathering data about infants' language experience. However, its quality is highly dependent on how information is elicited. This paper introduces a Multilingual Approach to Parent Language Estimates (MAPLE). MAPLE promotes best practices for using structured interviews to reliably elicit information from parents on bilingual infants' language background, with an emphasis on the challenging task of quantifying infants' relative exposure to each language. We discuss sensitive issues that must be navigated in this process, including diversity in family characteristics and cultural values. Finally, we identify six systematic effects that can impact parent report, and strategies for minimizing their influence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]