How Toddlers Use Core and Fringe Vocabulary: What's in an Utterance?

IF 2.3 3区 医学 Q1 AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY
Cathy Binger, Priscilla Magallanes, Vanessa San Miguel, Nancy Harrington, Debbie Hahs-Vaughn
{"title":"How Toddlers Use Core and Fringe Vocabulary: What's in an Utterance?","authors":"Cathy Binger, Priscilla Magallanes, Vanessa San Miguel, Nancy Harrington, Debbie Hahs-Vaughn","doi":"10.1044/2024_AJSLP-23-00366","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Selecting vocabulary for preliterate individuals who use augmentative and alternative communication presents multiple challenges, as the number of symbols provided must be balanced with cognitive, motoric, and other needs. Prioritizing certain types of vocabulary thus becomes a necessity. For example, prioritizing core vocabulary-that is, words that are commonly used across a group of people and contexts-is a common practice that attempts to address some of these issues. However, most core vocabulary research to date has narrowly focused on individual word counts, ignoring other critical aspects of language development such as how vocabulary aligns with typical development and how children use core and fringe vocabulary within their utterances.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Descriptive and inferential statistics were used to analyze 112 transcripts to describe how typically developing toddlers (aged 2.5 years) use core and fringe vocabulary within their utterances, in reference to a range of commonly used core vocabulary lists.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Results indicated that the proportion of the toddlers' utterances that consisted of only core, only fringe, or core + fringe vocabulary varied dramatically depending on the size of the core vocabulary list used, with smaller core lists yielding few \"core-only\" utterances. Furthermore, utterances containing both core and fringe vocabulary were both grammatically and semantically superior to utterances containing only core or only fringe vocabulary, as evidenced by measures such as mean length of utterance and total number of words.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Thus, relying on word frequency counts is an insufficient basis for selecting vocabulary for aided preliterate communicators.</p>","PeriodicalId":49240,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1044/2024_AJSLP-23-00366","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/3/20 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: Selecting vocabulary for preliterate individuals who use augmentative and alternative communication presents multiple challenges, as the number of symbols provided must be balanced with cognitive, motoric, and other needs. Prioritizing certain types of vocabulary thus becomes a necessity. For example, prioritizing core vocabulary-that is, words that are commonly used across a group of people and contexts-is a common practice that attempts to address some of these issues. However, most core vocabulary research to date has narrowly focused on individual word counts, ignoring other critical aspects of language development such as how vocabulary aligns with typical development and how children use core and fringe vocabulary within their utterances.

Method: Descriptive and inferential statistics were used to analyze 112 transcripts to describe how typically developing toddlers (aged 2.5 years) use core and fringe vocabulary within their utterances, in reference to a range of commonly used core vocabulary lists.

Results: Results indicated that the proportion of the toddlers' utterances that consisted of only core, only fringe, or core + fringe vocabulary varied dramatically depending on the size of the core vocabulary list used, with smaller core lists yielding few "core-only" utterances. Furthermore, utterances containing both core and fringe vocabulary were both grammatically and semantically superior to utterances containing only core or only fringe vocabulary, as evidenced by measures such as mean length of utterance and total number of words.

Conclusion: Thus, relying on word frequency counts is an insufficient basis for selecting vocabulary for aided preliterate communicators.

幼儿如何使用核心词汇和边缘词汇?语句中包含什么?
目的:为使用辅助和替代性交流手段的识字前儿童选择词汇是一项多重挑战,因为所提供的符号数量必须与认知、运动和其他需求相平衡。因此,必须优先考虑某些类型的词汇。例如,优先使用核心词汇--即在不同人群和语境中常用的词汇--就是一种试图解决其中一些问题的常见做法。然而,迄今为止,大多数核心词汇研究都狭隘地关注单个词汇的数量,而忽视了语言发展的其他重要方面,如词汇如何与典型发展相一致,以及儿童如何在他们的话语中使用核心词汇和边缘词汇:方法:使用描述性和推论性统计方法对 112 份记录进行分析,以描述发育典型的幼儿(2.5 岁)如何参照一系列常用的核心词汇表,在其话语中使用核心词汇和边缘词汇:结果表明,幼儿话语中仅包含核心词汇、仅包含边缘词汇或核心+边缘词汇的比例因所使用的核心词汇表的大小而有很大不同,较小的核心词汇表产生的 "仅包含核心词汇 "的话语很少。此外,同时包含核心词汇和边缘词汇的语篇在语法和语义上都优于只包含核心词汇或只包含边缘词汇的语篇,语篇平均长度和总词数等指标都证明了这一点:结论:因此,依靠词频计数来为文盲辅助交际者选择词汇是不够的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology
American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY-REHABILITATION
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
11.50%
发文量
353
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Mission: AJSLP publishes peer-reviewed research and other scholarly articles on all aspects of clinical practice in speech-language pathology. The journal is an international outlet for clinical research pertaining to screening, detection, diagnosis, management, and outcomes of communication and swallowing disorders across the lifespan as well as the etiologies and characteristics of these disorders. Because of its clinical orientation, the journal disseminates research findings applicable to diverse aspects of clinical practice in speech-language pathology. AJSLP seeks to advance evidence-based practice by disseminating the results of new studies as well as providing a forum for critical reviews and meta-analyses of previously published work. Scope: The broad field of speech-language pathology, including aphasia; apraxia of speech and childhood apraxia of speech; aural rehabilitation; augmentative and alternative communication; cognitive impairment; craniofacial disorders; dysarthria; fluency disorders; language disorders in children; speech sound disorders; swallowing, dysphagia, and feeding disorders; and voice disorders.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信