Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-5r2nc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-02-11T19:23:03.208Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Early vocabulary development in Danish and other languages: A CDI-based comparison

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 June 2008

DORTHE BLESES ,
WERNER VACH ,
MALENE SLOTT ,
SONJA WEHBERG ,
PIA THOMSEN ,
THOMAS O. MADSEN  and
HANS BASBØLL
DORTHE BLESES*
Affiliation:
Center for Child Language, Institute of Language and Communication, University of Southern Denmark
WERNER VACH
Affiliation:
Center for Child Language, Institute of Language and Communication, University of Southern Denmark and Department of Statistics, University of Southern Denmark
MALENE SLOTT
Affiliation:
Center for Child Language, Institute of Language and Communication, University of Southern Denmark
SONJA WEHBERG
Affiliation:
Department of Statistics, University of Southern Denmark and Institute of Language and Communication, University of Southern Denmark
PIA THOMSEN
Affiliation:
Institute of Language and Communication, University of Southern Denmark
THOMAS O. MADSEN
Affiliation:
Center for Child Language, Institute of Language and Communication, University of Southern Denmark
HANS BASBØLL
Affiliation:
Center for Child Language, Institute of Language and Communication, University of Southern Denmark
*
Address for correspondence: Dorthe Bleses, Center for Child Language, Institute of Language and Communication, University of Southern Denmark, Denmark. Email: [email protected]. Fax: +45 6550 3180.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The main objective of this paper is to describe the trajectory of Danish children's early lexical development relative to other languages, by comparing a Danish study based on the Danish adaptation of The MacArthur-Bates Communicative Development Inventories (CDI) to 17 comparable CDI-studies. The second objective is to address the feasibility of cross-linguistic CDI-comparisons. The main finding is that the developmental trend of Danish children's early lexical development is similar to trends observed in other languages, yet the vocabulary comprehension score in the Danish children is the lowest across studies from age 1 ; 0 onwards. We hypothesize that the delay is related to the nature of Danish sound structure, which presents Danish children with a harder task of segmentation. We conclude that CDI-studies are an important resource for cross-language studies, but reporting of studies needs to be standardized and the availability of published data improved in order to make comparisons more straightforward.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Child Language , Volume 35 , Issue 3 , August 2008 , pp. 619 - 650
Copyright
Copyright © 2008 Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

*

We thank Larry Fenson and colleagues for permission to adapt the MacArthur-Bates Communicative Development Inventories to Danish. The data for the cross-sectional study presented in this paper were collected as part of a research project, ‘Danish children's language acquisition’ (2002–2005), funded by the Carlsberg Foundation and the University of Southern Denmark. Part of the data collection was funded by the Oticon Foundation. We also wish to thank the student assistants and all of the other people who have contributed to data collection and data entry. We also wish to thank all of the parents of the participating children who have completed CDI-parental reports for our studies. Finally, we want to express our thanks to Eva Sophia Myers, Rune N. Jørgensen, Kasper Østerholdt Jensen and Penny Kristiansen for their assistance in the preparation of this paper.

References

REFERENCES

Almgren, M., Barnes, J., Colina, A. & Garcia, S. I. (2005). Language acquisition in Basque children reflected by the MacArthur-Bates Communicative Development Inventories. Poster presented at the Xth International Congress for the Study of Child Language, IASCL, Berlin.Google Scholar
Atkinson, J., Anker, S., Braddick, O., Nokes, L., Mason, A. & Braddick, F. (2001). Visual and visiospatial development in young children with Williams syndrome. Developmental Medicine & Child Neurology 43, 330–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bleses, D. & Basbøll, H. (2004). The Danish sound structure – Implications for language acquisition in normal and hearing impaired populations. In Schmidt, E., Mikkelsen, U., Post, I., Simonsen, J. B. & Fruensgaard, K. (eds) Brain, Hearing and Learning. 20th Danavox Symposium, 2003, 165–90. Copenhagen: Holmen Center Tryk.Google Scholar
Bleses, D., Vach, W., Slott, M., Wehberg, S., Thomsen, P., Madsen, T. & Basbøll, H. (in press). The Danish Communicative Development Inventories: validity and main developmental trends. Journal of Child Language.Google Scholar
Bleses, D., Vach, W., Wehberg, S., Faber, K. & Madsen, T. (2007). Tidlig kommunikativ udvikling. Et værktøj til beskrivelse af sprogtilegnelse baseret på CDI-forældrerapportundersøgelser af danske normalthørende og hørehæmmede børn. Odense: Syddansk Universitetsforlag.Google Scholar
Brink, L. (1979). Ordforrådets omfang og vækst. In Jansen, M. & Lund, J. (eds) Børnenes sprog – sprogene omkring børn, 107–175. Copenhagen: Hans Reitzels Forlag.Google Scholar
Caselli, C. M. & Casadio, P. (1995). Il primo vocabolario del bambino: Guida all'uso del questionario MacArthur per la valutazione della comunicazione e del linguaggio nei primi anni di vita. Milan: FrancoAngeli.Google Scholar
Cepanec, M., Kuvac, J. & Kovačević, M. (2005). How much does KORALJE tell us about grammatical development of late talkers? Poster presented at the Xth International Congress for the Study of Child Language, IASCL, Berlin.Google Scholar
Dale, P. & Goodman, J. (2005). Commonality and individual differences in vocabulary growth. In Tomasello, M. & Slobin, D. I. (eds) Beyond nature–nurture. Essays in honor of Elizabeth Bates, 41–80. London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Delsing, L. O. & Åkesson, K. (2005). Håller språket ihop Norden? En forskningsrapport om ungdomars förståelse av danska, svenska och norska. Copenhagen: Nordiska ministerrådet.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Devescovi, A., Caselli, M. C., Marchione, D., Pasqualetti, P., Reilly, J. & Bates, E. (2005). A crosslinguistic study of the relationship between grammar and lexical development. Journal of Child Language 32, 759–86.Google ScholarPubMed
Eriksson, M. & Berglund, E. (2002). Instruments, scoring manual and percentile levels of the Swedish Early Communicative Development Inventories, SECDI. FoU-rapport Nr. 17. FoU-nämnden.Google Scholar
Fenson, L., Marchman, V. A., Thal, D., Dale, P., Reznick, S. & Bates, E. (2007). The MacArthur Communicative Development Inventories: User's guide and technical manual, 2nd ed.Baltimore, MD: Paul. H. Brookes Publishing Co.Google Scholar
Fernández, M. C. & Umbel, V. M. (1991). Inventario del Desarrollo de las Habilidades Comunicativas: Adaptación Cubana. Miami, FL: University of Miami, Mailman Center for Child Development.Google Scholar
Fletcher, P., Chan, C., Wong, P., Stokes, S., Tardif, T. & Leung, S. (2004). The interface between phonetic and lexical abilities in early Cantonese language development. Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics 18(6–8), 535–45.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gooskens, C. (2006). Linguistic and extra-linguistic predictors of Inter-Scandinavian intelligibility. In van de Weijer, J. & Los, B. (eds) Linguistics in the Netherlands 23, 101–113. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Grimm, H. & Doil, H. (2000). Elternfragebogen fur die Früherkennung von Risikokindern. ELFRA-1: Elternfragebogen fur einjährige Kinder: Sprache, Gesten, Feinmotorik. ELFRA-2: Elternfragebogen fur zweijährige Kinder: Sprache und Kommunikation. Göttingen: Hogrefe Verlag.Google Scholar
Grønnum, N. (2003). Why are the Danes so hard to understand? In Galberg Jacobsen, H., Bleses, D., Madsen, T. O. & Thomsen, P. (eds) Take Danish – for instance: Linguistic Studies in honour of Hans Basbøll presented on the occasion of his 60th birthday 12 July 2003, 119–30. Odense: University Press of Southern Denmark.Google Scholar
Hamadani, J. D., Hilaly, A., Mehreen, F., Yesmin, S., Tofail, F., Huda, S. N. & Grantham-McGregor, S. M. (2006). Does quality of psychosocial stimulation at home predict rural Bangladeshi children's development and behavior? Abstract presented at the 8th CAPGAN meeting, 6–8 February 2006, Dhaka, Bangladesh.Google Scholar
Hamilton, A., Plunkett, K. & Schafer, G. (2000). Infant vocabulary development assessed with a British Communicative Development Inventory. Journal of Child Language 27, 689–705.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hilaire, G., Kern, S., Viguié, A., Dudognon, P., Langue, J. & Romieu, J. (2001). Le développement communicatif des enfants français de 8 à 30 mois. Le pédiatre, XXXVI(182), 7–13.Google Scholar
Jackson-Maldonado, D., Thal, D., Fenson, L., Marchman, V., Newton, T. & Conboy, B. (2003). MacArthur Inventarios del Desarrollo de Habilidades Comunicativas. User's Guide and Technical Manual. Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes Publishing Co.Google Scholar
Jespersen, O. (1916). Nutidssprog hos börn og voxne. Copenhagen/Christiania: Gyldendal.Google Scholar
Kern, S. (2007). Lexicon development in French-speaking infants. First Language, 27(2), 191–212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kim, M., McGregor, K. K. & Thompson, C. K. (2000). Early lexical development in English- and Korean-speaking children: language-general and language-specific patterns. Journal of Child Language 27, 225–54.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Klee, T. & Stokes, S. (2005). Validity and preliminary norms for a British-English adaptation of the MacArthur-Bates CDI: Words and Sentences. Poster presented at the Xth International Congress for the Study of Child Language, IASCL, Berlin.Google Scholar
Kovačević, M., Jelaska, Z. & Brozovic, B. (1998). Comparing lexical and grammatical development in morphologically different languages. In Aksu-Koç, A., Erguvanli-Taylan, E., Sumru Özsoy, A. & Küntag, A. (eds) Perspectives on language acquisition, 368–83. Estambul: Bogaziçi University Printhouse.Google Scholar
Kuhl, P. K., Conboy, B. T., Padden, D., Nelson, T. & Pruitt, J. (2005). Early speech perception and later language development: Implications for the ‘critical period’. Language Learning and Development 1(3–4), 237–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
López Ornat, S., Gallego, C., Gallo, P., Karousou, A., Mariscal, S. & Martínez, M. (2005). Inventarios de Desarrollo Comunicativo MacArthur: Manual Técnico. Madrid: Ediciones TEA.Google Scholar
Lytinen, P. (1999). Varhaisen kommunikaation ja kilen kehityksen arviointimenetekemä. Niilo Mäkii Instituutti. Jyväskylän Yliopiston Lapsitetkimuskeskus.Google Scholar
Maital, S. L., Dromi, E., Sagi, A. & Bornstein, M. H. (2000). The Hebrew Communicative Developmental Inventory: language specific properties and cross-linguistic generalizations. Journal of Child Language 27, 43–67.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Marschik, P. B., Einspieler, C., Garzarolli, B. & Prechtl, H. F. R. (2006). Events at early development: are they associated with early word production and neurodevelopmental abilities at the preschool age? Early Human Development 83(2): 107–114.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ogura, T., Yamashita, Y., Murase, T. & Dale, P. S. (1993). Some findings from the Japanese Early Communicative Development Inventories. Memoirs of the Faculty of Education, Shimane University 27, 26–38.Google Scholar
Pérez Pereira, M., Resches, M. & Fernández, P. (2005). Interrelationships between components of language and communicative development in Galician as reflected by the MacArthur-Bates inventories. Poster presented at the Xth International Congress for the Study of Child Language, IASCL, Berlin.Google Scholar
Pine, J. M., Lieven, E. V. M. & Rowland, C. F. (1996). Observational and checklist measures of vocabulary composition: What do they mean? Journal of Child Language 23, 573–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Plunkett, K. (1993). Lexical segmentation and vocabulary growth in early language acquisition. Journal of Child Language 20, 43–60.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Reese, E. & Read, S. (2000). Predictive validity of the New Zealand MacArthur Communicative Development Inventory: Words and Sentences. Journal of Child Language 27, 255–66.Google Scholar
Szagun, G. & Steinbrink, C. (2004). Typikalität und Variabilität in der frühkindlichen Sprachentwicklung: eine Studie mit einem Elternfragebogen. Sprache Stimme Gehör 28, 137–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Teixeira, E. (2005). CDI's Adaptation to Brazilian Portuguese: Validation study of the words and sentences form. Unpublished paper presented at the Xth International Congress for the Study of Child Language, IASCL, Berlin.Google Scholar
Thordardottir, E. T. & Weismer, S. (1996). Language assessment via parent report: development of a screening instrument for Icelandic Children. First language 16, 265–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wehberg, S., Vach, W., Bleses, D., Thomsen, P., Madsen, T. O. & Basbøll, H. (2007). Danish children's first words – analysing longitudinal data based on monthly CDI parental reports. First Language, 27(4), 361–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wu, J. (1997). Language, play and general development for Chinese infant-toddlers: Using adapted assessments. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Colorado, Boulder.Google Scholar
Zink, I. & Lejaegere, M. (2002). N-CDIs: Lijsten voor Communicatieve Ontwikkeling. Aanpassing en hernormering van de MacArthur CDIs van Fenson et al. Acco, Leuven (Belgium)/Leusden (Netherlands).Google Scholar