Skip to main content
Like
Create new Glog
previous
next
Email share
52 views | 0 likes | 0 reposts
Conclusion
References
Twin 1 and Twin 2 both expressed no deviant language behaviors. Though at times their utterances seemed peculiar and odd, in the context of their development states, the speech was precisely on target. Twin 1 had a desire to stretch the use of adverbs and sentence structure to accommodate more complex expressions, but this can be attributed to a misunderstanding of the word’s individual functions rather than an incorrect use of grammar rules or a dismissal of universal grammar. Twin 2, in her comfort to let her brother speak for her, was merely developmentally delayed as a result of Down’s Syndrome, using repetition frequently as a new language learner would in trying to make sense of what has just been said. Her knowledge of pronouns and other grammar essentials suggests that, liker her brother, her speech is in no ways wrong, just merely delayed. The twins’ unique modes of speech help each other in gaining linguistic knowledge as well as displaying a unique example of differences helping to build understandings.
Twin 1 Data
Twin 2 Data Results/Data
Thanks to Professor Parker and Professor Lewis.
Acknowledgements
Our research involved three half-hour recorded sessions with a normally developing 4 and half year old male and his twin sister with Down Syndrome, as well as a preliminary meeting with the mother and children. The sessions occurred on Nov 14th, Nov 20th, and Nov 23rd. The recordings were done in the children’s home in their play area, with a computer microphone and digital recording software. We used naturalistic observation, holding no preconceived notions about where the data would lead, attempting to elicit everyday speech samples and narratives from the two children with the intent of comparing the patterns and specifics of both children’s speech. The context of the meeting was playtime, as we played with toys and chatted with the children about subjects which might interest them. The Nov 14th session had both children and researchers recording all at the same time, which provided for interesting interplay but a bit of chaos as the male dominated the conversation. The following two sessions had the researchers recording the children separately. The mother was present during all recording sessions.
Fay and Mermelstein. “Language in Infantile Autism”. Handbook of Applied Psycholinguistics, pp. 395-428. Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers, 1982. Graham, Teresa K. and Rosalind R. Scudder. “Parent Interactions With Twins Who Are Developmentally Different”. Communication Disorders Quarterly, vol. 28, no. 2, pp. 107-115. 2007. Johnston, Rhona Poole. “Social Class and the Speech of Four Year Olds: The Effect of Intelligence”. Language and Speech, vol 20 (1), pp. 40-47. Jan-Mar 1977. Kumin, Libby. Communication Skills in Children with Down Syndrome. Bethesda: Woodbine House, 1994. Rosenburg, Sheldon. “The Language of the Mentally Retarded: Development, Processes, and Intervention”. Handbook of Applied Psycholinguistics, pp. 329-392. Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers, 1982.
Abstract
This research involved two four-year-old twins, one of whom had Down's Syndrome. We analyzed and contrasted their speech patterns through the narratives we recorded over several sessions.. We focused on the complexity of the twins' utterances and also examined the presence of repetition in the speech of the child with Down's Syndrome. After comparing the differences, were able to suggest possible reasons for the discrepencies, as well.
Method/Procedure
Research
Discrepencies in Speech Among Twins
One of Whom has Down's Syndrome.
Presented by Math Horne and Sam Johnston
