| 1 |
Exploring the interactive and linguistic dimensions of parent input and their role in the development of children's simple sentences.
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 2 |
Exploring Sentence Diversity at the Boundary of Typical and Impaired Language Abilities
|
|
|
|
In: J Speech Lang Hear Res (2020)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 5 |
Grammatical input differences remain six-months following toy talk instruction
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 7 |
Uniformity of pronoun case errors in typical development: the association between children's first person and third person case errors in a longitudinal study
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 9 |
Child-adult differences in implicit and explicit second language learning
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 10 |
The Sentence Diversity Checklist: Characterizing Early Syntactic Development Using Parent Report
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 11 |
Parent-Examiner Differences in their use of Toy Talk and its Influence on Input Informativeness
|
|
|
|
Abstract:
Input contributes to children’s grammatical development. Specifically, verbs and their overt and ambiguous evidence for tense revealed on a variety of verb forms have been found to facilitate children’s development of grammar (Hadley, Rispoli, Fitzgerald, & Bahnsen, 2011). That is, differences in grammatical properties of parent input provided to children account for a substantial portion of the between-child differences in the acquisition of tense marking. Fitzgerald (2010) has also shown that English-speaking parents who use proportionately more other-focused discourse produce proportionately more overt evidence for tense marking in their input. The purpose of this study was to describe differences in parents’ and examiners’ use of a special type of other-focused input, namely “toy talk”. It was hypothesized that examiners would produce more toy talk than parents while interacting with the same toddlers. The examiners’ levels of input informativeness for tense marking were also expected to be greater than the parents’ levels. The participants were twelve parent-child dyads and 3 trained examiners. Language samples were collected when the children were 21 months of age. Using SALT, the utterances were then analyzed to determine the amount of toy talk used by each parent and examiner. Adult sentences which contained an explicitly stated 3rd person subject that referred to an object present in the physical context were coded for toy talk. Results show that trained examiners used more toy talk and had higher levels of input informativeness than untrained parents. The discussion addresses the benefits of using toy talk to increase adults’ input informativeness. ; unpublished
|
|
Keyword:
Toy Talk
|
|
URL: http://hdl.handle.net/2142/25767
|
|
BASE
|
|
Hide details
|
|
|
| 12 |
Toy talk: A simple strategy to promote richer grammatical input
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 13 |
Understanding Contributors to Input Informativeness for Tense Marking: Overlap among English Typology, Parent-Toddler Interaction Style, and Register
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 17 |
Use of family history information in school-based prevention practice
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 20 |
Social biases toward children with speech and language impairments: A correlative causal model of language limitations
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
|
|
