Phonological Acquisition, Production, and Disordered Speech in Bilingual Children: A Review 1

Phonological Acquisition, Production, and Disordered Speech in Bilingual Children: A Review

Giuliana O’Connell

Northeastern University

ENGW 3307

Professor Musselman
20 October, 2019
Word Count: 2399
APA Formatting
Phonological Acquisition, Production, and Disordered Speech in Bilingual Children: A Review 2

Abstract

Bilingual children are at once over and under-diagnosed with speech and language disorders.

Some of the gaps in care that they experience may be explained by a lack of understanding of

typical and disordered bilingual language acquisition and language interaction. This review

focuses in on phonological acquisition, looking at various studies on typically developing (TD)

bilinguals as well as bilinguals with developmental language delays (DLD). The studies

evaluated agree that appearance of slight delays may be found in one or both of the phonetic

inventories of TD bilinguals when compared to inventories of their monolingual peers, but did

not have any consensus on the theories of transfer, acceleration, and deceleration. Additionally,

evidence was found for separation of the two inventories with some children having acquired

phonemes in one of their languages but not yet the other. This separation of phonetic inventories

indicates a need for DLD testing and treatment in both of a child’s languages.
Phonological Acquisition, Production, and Disordered Speech in Bilingual Children: A Review 3

Phonological Acquisition, Production, and Disordered Speech in Bilingual Children: A

Review

Compared to knowledge about the phonological acquisition and disordered speech of

monolingual children, little is known about that of their bilingual counterparts. In an increasingly

bilingual world, the lack of research on what typical bilingual development looks like may be

impeding diagnostic accuracy of bilingual children with speech and language disorders and

delays. The most easily recognizable of the speech and language disorders for parents, teachers,

and Speech Language Pathologists (SLPs) are phonological disorders, due to their effect on

pronunciation and intelligibility. To better understand language disorders we first need to know

how bilinguality in children affects phonological development and what these effects show in

bilinguals with phonological disorders. It had long been assumed that interaction between

languages in bilingual children would impede their overall language development. While this

theory has lost major traction, it is still unknown how and if the languages interact and what

those interactions might result in.

Methodology

This paper reviews recent research on normative and disordered bilingual phonological

acquisition. Recent has been defined as being published within the last 10 years and bilingual in

this context includes only simultaneous bilinguals with a focus on children. As there are

relatively few articles published on this topic, the main criteria for inclusion in this paper was

original research conducted with bilingual participants. Using that criteria, a large majority of

those studies conducted in the last 10 years have been discussed in this paper, creating a well-

rounded look at the forefront of the field.

Phonological Acquisition, Production, and Disordered Speech in Bilingual Children: A Review 4

Bilingual Development

Bilingual children are at once over and under-diagnosed with speech and language

impairments (Marini et al., 2019) (Montenari et al., 2018). SLPs may confuse language

differences for language delays or impairments leading to incorrect diagnoses (Marini et al.,

2019). Similarly, speech and language delays may go overlooked in bilingual children as they

can be attributed to language differences. Bilingual children are thought to exhibit a slower

phonological acquisition process than their monolingual peers as they are acquiring the

phonemes of two languages (Montenari et al., 2018). The slow phonological development is

especially pronounced in the earliest stages of their language development and the children

usually catch up to or exceed the abilities of their peers by age 5 (Montenari et al., 2018). It is in

the stages from 3-5 years old when potential for positive and negative misdiagnosis is highest

(Fabiano-Smith & Hoffman, 2018). Three processes of language interaction are observed in

bilingual phonological acquisition and are discussed in all of the 8 studies reviewed. These

processes are transfer, acceleration, and deceleration. Transfer effects can be seen when children

use phonemes exclusive to one of their languages, in speech in the other language (Fabiano-

Smith & Goldstein, 2009). Acceleration is a process similar to that of bootstrapping, where the

child uses knowledge and skills from one language to aid in, and speed up their acquisition of the

other language (Fabiano-Smith & Goldstein, 2009). Deceleration is a process in which a child

experiences negative effects on their language acquisition due to interference from their other

language (Fabiano-Smith & Goldstein, 2009).

Variation in Studies. The selection of studies chosen to review included studies with bilingual

and monolingual typically developing (TD) and developmental language delay (DLD)

participants, studies with only bilingual TD and DLD participants, and studies with bilingual and
Phonological Acquisition, Production, and Disordered Speech in Bilingual Children: A Review 5

monolingual TD participants. In Table 1, participant types and numbers for all studies are listed.

Inclusion criteria varied by study with some taking in what can be thought of as unusual data on

participants such as the inclusion of participant handedness in Marini et al. (2018). Other studies

appeared to have deficits in diversity of demographics regarding parental education for one or

more language which may result in skewed data due to input differences in the home

environments (Fabiano-Smith & Goldstein, 2009). Three studies, two of which used the same

sets of data, controlled for dialects in their participant selection (Fabiano-Smith & Goldstein,

2009, Fabiano-Smith & Barlow, 2010, Fabiano-Smith & Hoffman, 2018) which should create

more accurate and consistent results. A single longitudinal study was conducted (Montenari et

al., 2018) evaluating the phonetic inventories of children in a Head Start preschool program at

the beginning of their first year of school and again at the beginning of their second year.

Notably, 5 out of the 8 studies included used Spanish as one of the languages of study and

5 used English as one of the languages of study, following a larger pattern of Euro-centric data

collection (Fabiano-Smith & Goldstein, 2009, Fabiano-Smith & Barlow, 2010, Fabiano-Smith &

Hoffman, 2018, Rossouw & Pascoe, 2018, Montenari et al., 2018, Aguilar-Mediavilla et al.,

2019). Table 2 shows the languages and tests used by each study examined. The trend towards

European data may be explained by frequency of use in the contexts of study. The studies

examined were all published in English and most originated out of America or European

countries where the majority languages are of European origin.

In the studies reviewed, all 8 involved a single word production task, many using

pictures to elicit naming responses from participants. This type of task is beneficial when

gathering data from many participants as it allows for the researcher to target specific phonemes

while still eliciting spontaneous production. In addition to the single word production, two
Phonological Acquisition, Production, and Disordered Speech in Bilingual Children: A Review 6

studies examined phoneme comprehension (Aguilar-Mediavilla et al., 2019, Marini et al., 2019).

In both studies this was achieved by presenting participants with photos containing lexical

minimal pairs in asking participants to point to the photo matching the word spoken by the

researcher (Aguilar-Mediavilla et al., 2019, Marini et al., 2019). This method creates data which

pairs well with the phonemic production data and would help to ensure that participants with

DLD were correctly diagnosed and not experiencing an articulation issue.

Findings. Agreement on a general lack of research on the topic was noted by all studies

examined. Additionally, those sounds found in both of a participant’s languages were

consistently stronger in their inventories (Fabiano-Smith & Goldstein, 2009, Montenari et al.,

2018), though this finding may also be explained by these sounds occurring at the highest

frequency (Fabiano-Smith & Goldstein, 2009). As hypothesized by all studies which examined

participants with DLD, the bilingual DLD participants had weaker phonetic inventories than

their TD counterparts (Aguilar-Mediavilla et al., 2019, Marini et al., 2019) Evidence for a

separation of the phonemic systems was found, with participants having demonstrated

acquisition of sounds which occur in both languages, in only one language and not the other

(Fabiano-Smith & Barlow, 2010). Despite the findings of separation of phonetic inventories,

transfer was also found across studies with participants using phonemes unique to one of their

languages in speech in the other (Fabiano-Smith & Goldstein, 2009, Fabiano-Smith & Barlow,

2010, Montenari et al., 2018, Rossouw & Pascoe, 2018). Similarly conflicting results were noted

for acceleration and deceleration (Fabiano-Smith & Goldstein, 2009, Fabiano-Smith & Barlow,

2010). Those studies which did not have monolingual participants noted positive and negative

transfer effects instead as they could not make claims of acceleration or deceleration without

monolingual data to compare to (Lam & To, 2017, Montenari et al., 2018 ). The single
Phonological Acquisition, Production, and Disordered Speech in Bilingual Children: A Review 7

longitudinal study (Montenari et al., 2018) found greater advances in the language of instruction

in school in participants phonological development than in their home language.

Treatment Implications. Results from Fabiano-Smith & Barlow (2010) indicating the

separation of phonetic inventories between languages would call for evaluation and treatment in

both of the child’s languages. While findings about acceleration (Fabiano-Smith & Goldstein,

2009, Fabiano-Smith & Barlow, 2010) indicate that language learning in one language can aid in

that of another, it is yet unknown whether speech therapy treatment experiences these same

effects. Research on the potential of effects of acceleration on the language not used in treatment

of children receiving speech therapy for DLD is needed.

Rossouw & Pascoe were the only researchers to document results pre and post-treatment

as well as discussion of the course of treatment of a documented bilingual DLD participant

(2018). In their case study, treatment was administered to the isiXhosa and English bilingual

participant only in English though the researchers noted dual language treatment is the ideal

method. The decision to use English as the language of treatment was made in order to replicate

what are most common treatment environments in the country of study (Rossouw & Pascoe,

2018). Treatment was found to be effective for reducing instances of gliding, a phonological

process which was appropriate at the participant’s age in English but not isiXhosa, but no

reduction occurred of consonant cluster reduction, a process age-inappropriate in both languages

(Rossouw & Pascoe, 2018). The retention of consonant cluster reduction may be explained by

the lack of consonant clusters in isiXhosa (Rossouw & Pascoe, 2018)., indicating potential

language interference and deceleration.

Discussion. The co-occurrence of acceleration, deceleration, transfer, and separation in

bilinguals demonstrate the messy appearance of bilingual acquisition data. These conflicting
Phonological Acquisition, Production, and Disordered Speech in Bilingual Children: A Review 8

results point towards no clear understanding of a single way in which phonological acquisition

occurs in bilinguals but instead a beautiful mess of processes working with and against each

other. While bilingual acquisition was slightly behind that of monolinguals in all studies which

included monolinguals (Fabiano-Smith & Goldstein, 2009, Fabiano-Smith & Barlow, 2010,

Fabiano-Smith & Hoffman, 2018), none of the studies found it to be a significant difference.

Research to create phonetic inventories for different stages of typical development in bilinguals

would be useful in creating diagnostic tools for SLPs, however; these studies have demonstrated

that unique inventories would be needed for each combination of languages in order to

accurately reflect the population which they represent.

Phonological Acquisition, Production, and Disordered Speech in Bilingual Children: A Review 9

References

Aguilar-Mediavilla, E., Buil-Legaz, L., & Sanchez-Azanza, V. A. (2019). Speech profiles of

Spanish-Catalan children with developmental language disorder. Clinical Linguistics &

Phonetics. https://doi.org/10.1080/02699206.2019.1619096 Another study looking at direct

information from child language acquisition. The concrete results will be useful for analysis and

comparing to the others.

Core, C., & Scarpelli, C. (2015). Phonological Development in Young Bilinguals:

Clinical Implications. 36(2), 100–108. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0035-1549105 Looks at

potential positive and negative influences of bilinguality on phonological development. Appears

to cover a lot of ground but may only hit things on a shallow level.

Babatsouli, Elena P. D. (2015). What Bilingualism Tells us About Phonological Acquisition.

Retrieved from

https://www.academia.edu/15851419/What_Bilingualism_Tells_us_About_Phonological_Acqui

sition This will provide a good basis for understanding what phonological development looks

like in the average bilingual allowing for comparison to disordered development.

Fabiano-Smith, L., & Barlow, J. A. (2010). Interaction in Bilingual Phonological Acquisition:

Evidence from Phonetic Inventories. International Journal of Bilingual Education and

Bilingualism, 13(1), 81. https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050902783528 Again looks at the

Phonological Acquisition, Production, and Disordered Speech in Bilingual Children: A Review
10
differences between acquisition of bilinguals vs monolinguals but through the lens of whether

language interaction is accounting for any detriments.

Marini, A., Sperindè, P., Ruta, I., Savegnago, C., & Avanzini, F. (2019). Linguistic Skills in

Bilingual Children With Developmental Language Disorders: A Pilot Study. Frontiers in

Psychology, 10, 493. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00493 This study uses various case

studies with Bilingual and Monolingual speakers of various languages to analyze for potential

differences in the presentation of language disorders.

Montanari Simona, Mayr Robert, & Subrahmanyam Kaveri. (2018). Bilingual Speech Sound

Development During the Preschool Years: The Role of Language Proficiency and Cross-

Linguistic Relatedness. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 61(10), 2467–

2486. https://doi.org/10.1044/2018_JSLHR-S-17-0393 This is a longitudinal study following

Bilingual children over the course of a year to analyze phonological development when

involvement of a dominant (school/society in this instance) language is introduced.

Rossouw, K., & Pascoe, M. (2018). Intervention for bilingual speech sound disorders: A case

study of an isiXhosa-English-speaking child. South African Journal of Communication

Disorders, 65(1), a566. https://doi.org/10.4102/sajcd.v65i1.566 Looks at treatment and

intervention for speech disorders in bilingual children. Will be helpful to look at treatment and

how/if it is different for bilinguals.

Phonological Acquisition, Production, and Disordered Speech in Bilingual Children: A Review
11
McLeod, S., & Goldstein, B. (2012). Multilingual aspects of speech sound disorders in children.

Retrieved from http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/northeastern-

ebooks/detail.action?docID=922853

Fabiano-Smith Leah, & Goldstein Brian A. (2010). Phonological Acquisition in Bilingual

Spanish–English Speaking Children. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research,

53(1), 160–178. https://doi.org/10.1044/1092-4388(2009/07-0064)

Kitty K.Y. Lam, & Carol K.S To. (2017, November 1). Speech sound disorders or differences:

Insights from bilingual children speaking two Chinese languages- ClinicalKey. Retrieved

October 20, 2019, from Clinicalkey.com website: https://www-clinicalkey-

com.ezproxy.neu.edu/#!/content/playContent/1-s2.0-
Phonological Acquisition, Production, and Disordered Speech in Bilingual Children: A Review
12
Tables

Table 1: Breakdown of participant demographics in included studies

Author(s) Total # Bilingual Total DLD Bilingual DLD Age of
Participants Participants Participants Participants Participants
Fabiano-Smith & 44 22 15 8 5 y/o
Hoffman
Aguilar & Mediavila 28 28 14 14 6 y/o
Fabiano-Smith & 24 8 0 0 3-4 y/o
Barlow
Marini et al. 22 22 11 11 7-10 y/o

Montanari et al. 35 35 0 35 3-4 and 4-5 y/o

Rossouw & Pascoe 1 1 1 1 4 y/o

Fabiano-Smith & 24 8 0 0 3-4 y/o
Goldstein
Lam & To 54 54 0 0 3.5-6 y/o

Table 2: Languages and tests used in included studies. * indicates variation in languages used.

Author(s) Language 1 Language 2 Tests used

Fabiano-Smith & English Spanish GFTA & BESA
Hoffman
Aguilar & Mediavila Spanish Catalan A-RE-HA & A-RE-PA
Fabiano-Smith & English Spanish BESA
Barlow
Marini et al. Italian German BVL_4-12

Montanari et al. English Spanish BESA

Rossouw & Pascoe isiXhosa English DEAP & Masincokoleni

isiXhosa Speech Assessment
Fabiano-Smith & English Spanish BESA
Goldstein
Lam & To Putonghua Cantonese HKCAT & a Putonghua
picture-naming task
Phonological Acquisition, Production, and Disordered Speech in Bilingual Children: A Review
13
Acknowledgements

To come.
Phonological Acquisition, Production, and Disordered Speech in Bilingual Children: A Review
14