1. No category

The challenge from Bilingual /L2
children for the identification of
Specific Language Impairment and
Developmental Dyslexia
Maria Teresa Guasti
Università di Milano Bicocca
Road map
Where is the problem?
 How to identify SLI within EL2?
 Two approaches
 Clinical markers in Italian and how we can
identify SLI in EL2 Italian
 Diagnosis in two languages
 What to do after the diagnosis
 Dyslexia and EL2

EARLY L2 AND SLI

Language in EL2 and SLI
◦ Delay
◦ Weaknesses
 Vocabulary
 Morphosyntax
 How could we identify EL2 with SLI?
 Should bilingualism abandoned after a diagnosis of SLI?
Two approaches
Identification of
language-specific
markers in the L1
and L2
 Computer-based
implementation


Identification of
language-specific
markers in the L2

Find out the distinct
linguistic behavior of
EL2 vs SLI and
Monolingual
Find out weakness
within the EL2s alone
 (with Lorusso, IRCCS
Nostra Famiglia)

FIRST APPROACH
CLINICAL MARKERS
◦ (1) 3rd person DO clitic pronouns: lo, la, le,
li
◦ Lo leggerò
◦ L’ho vista
◦ (2) Non word repetition (bisdagosa, fapolo)

How do EL2 perform on (1) and (2)?
CLITIC PRODUCTION

Cosa fa la bambina al nonno? What does the granpa to
the girl?
◦ Lo bacia (she) kisses him
CLITIC PRODUCTION IN SLI
CHILDREN (AGE 5)
CLITIC PRODUCTION IN SLI
CHILDREN
OUR STUDY (WITH VENDER, SORACE AND
GARAFFA): SUBTRACTIVE BILINGUALISM
Subjects
 160 children age 4 to 6 years
◦ 40 Albanian L1 (ALB, 4;7 anni)
◦ 40 Arabic L1 (ARA, 4;9 anni)
◦ 40 Rumanian L1 (RUM, 4;8 anni)
◦ 40 Mono (MON, 4;8 anni)


Measures: Language and cognitive abilities;
exposure
RESULTS
CLITICS
TARGET: LO BACIA
1
0,8
0,6
0,4
0,2
0
TARGET
ERROR
MONO


NP
ALB
ARA
OMISSION
OTHER
ROMA
EL2 < MONO, ARA < ALB, ROM
Production of clitics is predicted by cumulative load of
exposure
WRONG CLITIC: LA BACIA
1
0,8
0,6
0,4
0,2
0
TARGET
ERROR
MONO


NP
ALB
OMISSION
ARA
OTHER
ROMA
EL2 > MONO, ARA < ALB
Target+error more clitics than in 3 year olds (even
if 3 years of exposure to Italian)
CLITIC PRODUCTION IN TD
CHILDREN
Italian-speaking children start to use clitic around age
2;0

100
80
60
40
20
0
Target
omission
clitic errors
3
4
np
other
5
From Arosio and Pagliarini, in prep.
IRRELEVANT RESPONSES: È FELICE
1
0,8
0,6
0,4
0,2
0
TARGET
ERROR
NP
MONO


ALB
OMISSION
ARA
OTHER
ROMA
ARA > all other Groups, ALB > MONO
Other responses is predicted by cumulative lenght
of exposure
NON WORD REPETITION (PRCR-2)
Risultati
Numero di sillabe corrette
60,00
50,00
40,00
30,00
20,00
10,00
0,00
SCORE
ALB
49,10
ARA
45,76
ROM
48,05
MON
49,41
DISCUSSION

Cumulative load of exposure accounts for poor
performance in Arabic children

Distinctive features of L2: wrong clitic
Development clitics in L2 (N=37
children, L1=Tagalog, Arabic and
Spanish)
1
0,9
0,8
0,7
0,6
L2
0,5
L1
0,4
0,3
0,2
0,1
0
I
II
III
Development clitics in SLI
16 con DSL, 16 CA e 16 LA
18
19
DIFFERENCE BETWEEN SLI VS EL2




SLI: omissions at 5 years (Bortolini et al., 2006)
also wrong clitics at 5 years (Dispaldro et al.,
2013).
Irrelevant responses not analyzed in SLI
Bad non word repetition

EL2: wrong clitics or irrelevant responses
no omission
Good non word repetition

EL2 catch up their peers at 7, SLI don’T


Non word repetition is less affected
by lenght of exposure
Bilingui inglesefrancese
21
Message to take home

Can we differentiate L2 from SLI? Yes

You need to know the formal structure of
language and that does come from being a
compentent and fluent speaker

Do we have the tools to find out SLI
among L2? Likely yes
Should one abandon bilingualism
after a diagnosis of SLI?
Franch-English in Canada (Paradis,
Genesee, Crago)

Bilingualism does not aggravate SLI

Similar difficulties as monolingual SLI
25
Spanish-English: distinguish languages
Subjects not expressed in Spanish,
but expressed in English
26
6-10 year old Italian-friulan children
with SLI
27
Should one abandon bilingualism
after a diagnosis of SLI?
Science says that it is not necessary
L1 Language is vehicle of education, praising, scolding,
emotion
Parents may not know very well the L2
Dyslexia and EL2
Premise: Oral language is the
foundation of reading
Our study
SUBTRACTIVE BILINGUALISM
Study with 77 L2 children 6 - 11 years
 37 monolingui
 Reading and language measures

Results reading: Delay in
automatization of lexical route in
L2
L2 weaker than monolinguals in reading
words from III grade
 No difference in I and II grade


L2 readers better than L1 in reading nonword: compensation
Exposure to oral Italian matters

Early L2 (before 3) better than late L2 (after 3) in
reading

Morphological modification of words and nonwords (Cosimo test, Lorusso et al.)
◦ L2 worse than L1
◦ Late L2 worse than Early L2
◦ L2: Better in morphological modification better in
reading

Lexical route or morphological route in reading
Message to take home

Dyslexia cannot be diagnosed in L2 at the
same age as in Monolingual kids

Morphological intervention to boost
language

You need to know the formal structure of
language
Two approaches
Identification of
language-specific
markers in the L1
and L2
 Computer-based
implementation


Identification of
language-specific
markers in the L2

Find out the distinct
linguistic behavior of
EL2 vs SLI and
Monolingual
Find out weakness
within the EL2s alone
 (with Lorusso, IRCCS
Nostra Famiglia)

Preliminary data from first
approach (from Lorusso)

42 Wenzhounese-Italian children in primary
school

Sensitive markers for Italian:
◦ Measure of metaphonology and grammar

Whenzhou:
◦ Ran, grammar

We are preparing a version for MandarinItalian children
36
CONCLUSIONS







EL2 are delayed (subtractive bilingualim)
Exposure matters
There are language measure to identify SLI in
EL2 population
No reason to abandon L2 after diagnosis
Dyslexia cannot be diagnosed in L2 at the same
age as in L2
L2 children may need specific linguistic support
Technology offers us the tool for screening and
science can contribute the specific markers
Siti

www.cladeurope.eu

http://www.bilinguismoconta.it/

http://www.frepy.eu/

http://www.airipa.it/servizi_airipa/materiali_airipa
php
38
Risorse online

http://www.airipa.it/servizi_airipa/materiali
_airipa.php

La valutazione delle abilità cognitive
nei bambini stranieri.

Arabo e rumeno.
Dislessia IRCCS Santa Lucia
per monolingui

http://www.hsantalucia.it/modules.php?na
me=content&pa=showpage&pid=1032
THANK
XIE XIE
GRAZIE