Identification of Differences in Verb Learning between Late Talkers and Typically Developing Children

项目摘要 在没有听力损失或发育障碍等已知缺陷的情况下，大约15%的两岁奥尔兹 然而，它们的表达词汇量却非常小。这些“晚说话者”（LT）的风险增加， 语言障碍的诊断，即使是那些没有被诊断出来的LT仍然有更差的长期语言结果 与他们的典型发展中的同龄人（TD）相比。目前，我们不知道为什么有些孩子挣扎着发展 他们的词汇量，我们无法预测哪些LT是语言障碍的最大风险。 这个项目的重点是幼儿的动词词汇，因为动词发挥的作用，在发展语法。 动词的困难被认为是以后语言障碍的警告信号，而语言障碍的儿童反过来 尤其是动词。为了学习新的动词，幼儿使用来自周围语言的信息。 上下文，如句子结构。然而，这种能力是建立在对动词已有的知识基础上的。令人担忧的是， 我们先前的研究表明LT和TD在早期动词知识方面不同：LT具有更多的结果动词（即，的动词 表示事件的结果，例如“break”）而不是方式动词（即，表示事件如何展开的动词，如 “跑”）在他们的词汇。这种模式模仿了在年龄较大的儿童中观察到的结果对方式意义的偏见， 语言障碍然而，在整个发展过程中，TD的方式动词多于结果动词。在动词 学习取决于对方式与结果意义的了解，LT和TD可能表现不同。 在目标1/研究1中，我们考虑了一种这样的操纵：语言信息的排序（即， 动词）及其所指动作影响动词学习。当动词位于动词之前时，TD似乎能最好地学习方式动词。 动作，但是当动词跟在动作之后时，他们对结果动词的学习效果最好。然而，患有语言障碍的大龄儿童 当动词跟随动作时，不管动词的意思如何，都能更好地学习动词。我们假设LT会显示相同的 语言障碍的年龄较大的儿童，因为他们也有偏见的结果超过方式动词。如果这是真的， 这将是第一次证明LT和TD之间的动词学习差异。 从语境中学习动词的意义也要求孩子们能够处理给定的信息 语言信息。相反，不处理语言语境的儿童无法学习新的动词含义。它 曾有人假设，语言处理速度更快的儿童更好地学习动词，但这还没有得到证实。 实验证明。在目标2/研究2中，我们考虑了熟悉的同时加工与 单词和动词学习任务上的表现（即，研究1）。我们假设，对于LT和TD， 更快地处理熟悉的单词也会更好地学习动词。 最终样本将包括52名幼儿（26名LT; 26名TD，年龄24.0 - 30.9个月），他们将完成两项测试。 问题研究将使用眼动追踪收集数据，并使用回归分析来验证我们的假设。结果 目标1/研究1的研究将支持未来对LT的动词学习干预的研究。目标2/研究2的结果将 为未来旨在预测LT结局的纵向研究提供基础。

PROJECT SUMMARY Absent known deficits such as hearing loss or developmental disorder, approximately 15% of two-year-olds nevertheless have atypically small expressive vocabularies. These “late talkers” (LTs) are at increased risk for a later diagnosis of language disorder, and even those LTs who are not diagnosed still have poorer long-term language outcomes as compared to their typically developing peers (TDs). At present, we do not know why some children struggle to develop their vocabularies, and we are unable to predict which LTs are at greatest risk for language disorder. This project focuses on toddlers’ verb vocabularies because of the role that verbs play in developing grammar. Difficulty with verbs is considered a warning sign for later language disorder, and children with language disorder in turn struggle particularly with verbs. To learn new verbs, toddlers use information derived from the surrounding linguistic context, such as sentence structure. However, this ability is predicated on preexisting knowledge of verbs. Concerningly, our prior research indicates that LTs and TDs differ in early verb knowledge: LTs have more result verbs (i.e., verbs that denote the result of an event, such as “break”) than manner verbs (i.e., verbs that denote how an event unfolds, such as “run”) in their vocabularies. This pattern mimics biases for result over manner meanings observed in older children with language disorder. However, TDs have more manner than result verbs throughout development. In contexts where verb learning is dependent on knowledge of manner versus result meanings, LTs and TDs are likely to perform differently. In Aim 1/Study 1, we consider one such manipulation: Whether the sequencing of the linguistic information (i.e., the verb) and its referent action impacts verb learning. TDs appear to learn manner verbs best when the verb precedes the action, but they learn result verbs best when the verb follows the action. However, older children with language disorder better learn verbs when they follow the action, irrespective of verb meaning. We hypothesize that LTs will show the same pattern as older children with language disorder because they also have a bias for result over manner verbs. If true, this would be the first demonstrated verb learning difference between LTs and TDs. Learning a verb’s meaning from its linguistic context also requires that children be able to process the given linguistic information. Conversely, children who do not process the linguistic context fail to learn new verb meanings. It has been hypothesized that children who are faster linguistic processors are better verb learners, but this has not yet been demonstrated experimentally. In Aim 2/Study 2, we consider the relationship between concurrent processing of familiar words and performance on a verb-learning task (i.e., Study 1). We hypothesize that for both LTs and TDs, those who are faster to process familiar words will also be better at verb learning. The final sample will include 52 toddlers (26 LTs; 26 TDs, ages 24.0 – 30.9 months) who will complete both studies. Data will be collected using eye tracking, and regression analyses will be used to test our hypotheses. Results from Aim 1/Study 1 will support future research on verb-learning interventions for LTs. Results from Aim 2/Study 2 will provide the basis for future longitudinal studies aimed at predicting outcomes for LTs.