Cover not available
Article published In:
Dutch Journal of Applied Linguistics
Vol. 6:1 (2017) ► pp.119–146

Syllable type development in toddlers acquiring Dutch

| Universiteit Antwerpen
| Universiteit Antwerpen
| Universiteit Antwerpen
| Universiteit Antwerpen
Compiling syllable type inventories from children’s spontaneous speech is all but straightforward: so far studies vary considerably in their methodologies and consequently the selection of the speech samples differs. This paper shows that different methodologies for selecting a speech sample lead to substantial differences in syllable inventories. Two main sources for this variation are explored: differences in size and content of the speech samples. Both factors influence the results significantly and this questions the comparability of previous study results. An empirical procedure to investigate syllable type development is proposed to overcome such methodological problems, and this procedure is implemented to provide an initial empirically sound assessment of the acquisition of syllable types in Dutch speaking toddlers.
Keywords: language acquisition, phonology, syllable inventories, methodology
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Study 1: Comparison of different procedures
    • 2.1Method
      • 2.1.1Participants, data collection and annotation
      • 2.1.2Data collection
      • 2.1.3Data annotation
      • 2.1.4Inter and intra transcriber reliability
    • 2.2Procedure
    • 2.3Results
    • 2.4Discussion
  • 3.Study 2: The effect of sample size on the size of syllable inventories
    • 3.1Method
      • 3.1.1Participants
      • 3.1.2Bootstrapping procedure
    • 3.2Results
    • 3.3Discussion
  • 4.Study 3: Syllable inventory size, content and order of emergence: A new procedure
    • 4.1Method
      • 4.1.1Participants
      • 4.1.2Procedure
    • 4.2Results
      • 4.2.1Inventory size and content
      • 4.2.2Order of emergence
    • 4.3Discussion
  • 5.General discussion and conclusion
    • 5.1Methodological issues in syllable inventory studies
    • 5.2The relationship between amount of speech data and syllable inventory size
    • 5.3Syllable inventory size, content, and order of emergence: A new procedure
    • 5.4Theoretical implications
    • 5.5Conclusion
  • References


This article is currently available as a sample article.

Published online: 26 October 2017
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/dujal.6.1.07van
References
Carson, P., Klee, T., Carson, D. K., & Hime, L. K.
(2003) Phonological profiles of 2-year-olds with delayed language development: Predicting clinical outcomes at age 3. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 121, 28–39. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Corpus Gesproken Nederlands
Retrieved from [URL]
Demuth, K.
(1997) Variation in acquisition: An optimal approach. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Linguistic Club.Google Scholar
Efron, B.
(1979) Bootstrap methods: Another look at the jackknife. The Annals of Statistics, 71, 1–26. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Elffers, B., Van Bael, C., & Strik, H.
(2005) ADAPT: Algorithm for dynamic alignment of phonetic transcriptions. (Internal report retrieved from the Department of Language and Speech). Radboud University, Nijmegen. Available from [URL]
Fikkert, P.
(1994) On the acquisition of prosodic stress. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Leiden.Google Scholar
Goldstein, B., & Cintron, P.
(2001) An investigation of phonological skills in Puerto Rican Spanish-speaking 2-year-olds. Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics, 15(5), 343–361. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Grijzenhout, J., & Joppen-Hellwig, S.
(2002) The lack of onsets in German child phonology. In I. Lasser (Ed.), The process of language acquistion (pp. 319–339). Frankfurt: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Hesterberg, T. C., Moore, D. S., Monaghan, S., Clipson, A., & Epstein, R.
(2005) Bootstrap methods and permutation tests. New York, NY: W. H. Freeman.Google Scholar
Hutchins, T. L., Brannick, M., Bryant, J. B., & Silliman, E. R.
(2005) Methods for controlling amount of talk: Difficulties, considerations and recommendations. First Language, 25(3), 347–363. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Keren-Portnoy, T., Majorano, M., & Vihman, M. M.
(2009) From phonetics to phonology: The emergence of first words in Italian. Journal of Child Language, 361, 235–267. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Levelt, C. C., Schiller, N. O., & Levelt, W. J. M.
(2000) The acquisition of syllable types. Language Acquisition, 8(3), 237–264. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
MacWhinney, B.
(2000) The CHILDES Project: Tools for analyzing talk. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Molemans, I., Van Severen, L., Van den Berg, R., Govaerts, P., & Gillis, S.
(2010) Spraakzaamheid van Nederlandstalige baby’s en peuters [Speech volubility in Dutch-speaking babies and toddlers]. Logopedie, 231, 12–23.Google Scholar
Paul, R., & Jennings, P.
(1992) Phonological behavior in toddlers with slow expressive language development. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 351, 99–108. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pharr, A. B., Bernstein Ratner, N., & Rescorla, L.
(2000) Syllable structure development of toddlers with expressive specific language impairment. Applied Psycholinguistics, 211, 429–449. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rescorla, L., & Bernstein Ratner, N.
(1996) Phonetic profiles of toddlers with specific expressive language impairment (SLI-E). Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 39(1), 153–166. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rowland, C. F., Fletcher, S. L., & Freundenthal, D.
(2008) How big is big enough? In H. Behrens (Ed.), Corpora in language acquisition research: History, methods, perspectives (pp. 1–24). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schiller, N. O., Meyer, A. S., Baayen, H. R., & Levelt, W. J. M.
(1996) A comparison of lexeme and speech syllables in Dutch. Journal of Quantitative Linguistics, 3(1), 8–28. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stoel-Gammon, C., & Cooper, J. A.
(1984) Patterns of early lexical and phonological development. Journal of Child Language, 1(1), 247–271. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stoel-Gammon, C.
(1987) Phonological skills of 2-year-olds. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 181, 323–329. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2011) Relationships between lexical and phonological development in young children. Journal of Child Language, 38(1), 1–34. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Taelman, H., Durieux, G., & Gillis, S.
(2005) Notes on Ingram’s whole-word measures for phonological development. Journal of Child Language, 321, 391–405. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Thal, D. J., Oroz, M., & McCaw, V.
(1995) Phonological and lexical development in normal and late-talking toddlers. Applied Psycholinguistics, 161, 407–424. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tomasello, M., & Stahl, D.
(2004) Sampling children’s spontaneous speech: How much is enough? Journal of Child Language, 311, 101–121. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Van den Berg, R.
(2012) Syllables inside out. A longitudinal study of the development of syllable types in toddlers acquiring Dutch: A comparison between hearing impaired children with a cochlear implant and normally hearing children. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Antwerp.Google Scholar
Vihman, M. M., Ferguson, C. A., & Elbert, M.
(1986) Phonological development from babbling to speech: Common tendencies and individual differences. Applied Psycholinguistics, 71, 3–40. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Vihman, M. M., & McCune, L.
(1994) When is a word a word? Journal of Child Language, 211, 517–542. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Vihman, M. M., DePaolis, R. A., & Keren-Portnoy, T.
(2009) A dynamic systems approach to babbling and words. In E. L. Bavin (Ed.), The Cambridge Handbook of Child Language (pp. 163–182). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Vogel Sosa, A., & Stoel-Gammon, C.
(2006) Patterns of intra-word phonological variability during the second year of life. Journal of Child Language, 331, 31–50. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Watson, M. M., & Scukanec, G. P.
(1997) Profiling the phonological abilities of 2-year-olds: A longitudinal investigation. Child Language Teaching and Therapy, 131, 3–14. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zink, I., & Lejaegere, M.
(2002) N-CDI’s Lijsten voor communicatieve ontwikkeling [Dutch version of MacArthur-Bates Communicative Development Inventories]. Leuven: ACCO.Google Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 1 other publications

van Haaften, Leenke, Sanne Diepeveen, Lenie van den Engel‐Hoek, Bert de Swart & Ben Maassen
2020. Speech sound development in typically developing 2–7‐year‐old Dutch‐speaking children: A normative cross‐sectional study. International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders 55:6 ► pp. 971 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 24 november 2023. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.