China
Africa
Explore chapters and articles related to this topic
Age 4 years
Published in Ajay Sharma, Helen Cockerill, Lucy Sanctuary, Mary Sheridan's From Birth to Five Years, 2021
Ajay Sharma, Helen Cockerill, Lucy Sanctuary
Speech is grammatically correct and completely intelligible. Shows only a few immature sound substitutions, usually of the r-l-w-y group, p-th-f-s group or k-t sound group. May simplify consonant clusters, e.g. ‘sring' for ‘string'. Gives a connected account of recent events and experiences. Gives full name, home address and usually age.
Phonemic Segmentation: Testing and Training
Published in Kees P. van den Bos, Linda S. Siegel, Dirk J. Bakker, David L. Share, Current Directions in Dyslexia Research, 2020
Wim H.J. van Bon, Rob Schreuder, Hermien C.M. Duighuisen, Mariëtte T. Kerstholt
A related finding that underscores the view that the central problem is in skill execution rather than in phonemic awareness per se, is that some words are especially difficult to segment, in particular, words containing consonant clusters. Consonant clusters in general are difficult to segment (Marcel, 1980; Schreuder & van Bon, 1989; Treiman & Wheaterstone, 1992; van Bon & Duighuisen, submitted), and some are more difficult than others. For instance, postvocalic clusters lead to more errors than prevocalic clusters, partly because vowel and adjacent consonant are left far more often unsegmented in the case of postvocalic clusters (e.g., m-ut-s) than with prevocalic clusters (e.g., s-to-m) (van Bon & Duighuisen, submitted). This suggests that the central problem is a phonological or phonetic factor, such as the degree to which a consonant is encoded in the surrounding speech sounds. The fact, however, that a consonant cluster adversely affects the processing of segments earlier in the word (Schreuder & van Bon, 1989; but see Treiman Sc Weatherston, 1992) and that initial segments are better identified in short than in long words (Schreuder & van Bon, 1989; Treiman & Weatherston, 1992) indicates that such factors may operate by influencing working memory.
Frequently Asked Questions
Published in Catherine de la Bedoyere, Catharine Lowry, School Start Year 1, 2018
Catherine de la Bedoyere, Catharine Lowry
Children develop in their ability to discriminate between sounds in words and so the tasks become increasingly difficult across the weeks. For example, the number of the syllables in the target word increases. Or, the word contains consonant clusters (‘spr’ as in ‘spring’); teachers may refer to these as consonant blends.
Effect of dialect on identification and severity of speech sound disorder in Fijian children
Published in Speech, Language and Hearing, 2023
Holly McAlister, Suzanne C. Hopf, Sharynne McLeod
Patterns of children’s consonant cluster errors have been described in terms of the markedness theory (the most marked consonant in a cluster is deleted; Watts & Rose, 2020) and the sonority hypothesis (that children are more likely to delete the most sonorous consonant sound (e.g., liquids) in word-initial clusters and the least sonorous consonant sound (e.g., stops, fricatives) in word-final clusters; Yavaş, Ben-David, Gerrits, Kristoffersen, & Simonsen, 2008). The students’ errors typically supported the markedness theory, as the consonants deleted from these clusters were marked in comparison to those consonants which remained (e.g., word-final /-nʤ/ to [n]). The lack of consistency in errors is likely in response to the complex interplay between phonology, morphology and semantics in these children who are still acquiring English. Unfortunately, no developmental norms are available for any Fiji language. Future assessment of all Fiji English consonant clusters should consider children’s language acquisition patterns.
English-Malay speech acquisition by children with Indian (Tamil) heritage
Published in Speech, Language and Hearing, 2022
Hui Woan Lim, Adriana Chee Jing Chieng
The age of acquisition for singleton consonants in English and Malay and consonant clusters in English are displayed in Table 2. Table 2 shows that all singleton consonants in both languages were acquired by 4;05. Consonant clusters were generally acquired later than singleton consonants in English (Table 2). All initial consonant clusters except for one (/dɹ/) were acquired by 4;05. Vowels were generally acquired earlier than consonants. All vowels were acquired by 2;11 in both languages (Table 2). These patterns of findings were generally comparable to past studies of English and Malay by local children of other ethnic heritages (Chinese and Malay) as well as Indian children from India. However, the age of acquisition for consonant clusters in English was noted to be much earlier than the local Chinese children cited in the past studies (see further discussion).
Fijian school students’ Fiji English speech sound acquisition
Published in International Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 2022
Holly McAlister, Sharynne McLeod, Suzanne C. Hopf
Table III summarises the acquisition of consonant clusters presented in the DEAP (Dodd et al., 2002) across word positions for both FFE- and FHFE-speaking students, with consideration of the 75 and 90% criterion. All word-initial consonant clusters /kw, sw, ɡl, pr, br, tr, kr, fr, θr, sp, sk, sn, sw, spl, str, skw/ were acquired by 90% of FFE- and FHFE-speaking students by 9;6, with r-clusters tending to be the latest acquired. FFE-speaking students acquired /kw, sw, br, str/ by 6;0; however, reversals were evident as these clusters did not meet the 75% criteria for the 6;1–6;6 age group, due to increased rates of cluster reduction, epenthesis and two students in the 5;6–6;0 age group not producing queen, which impacted the overall percentage for acquisition. For FHFE-speaking children, reversal of acquisition to 75% was apparent for the clusters /pr, kr, spl, str/ for the 9;7–10;1 age group, potentially due to an increased rate of epenthesis and/or cluster simplification for these students. Within word consonant cluster acquisition was based on a relatively small sample which included /br, sk, ŋk/. All within word consonant clusters were acquired by 6;6 across dialects. The acquisition of word-final consonant clusters /ts, ɡz, nt, nʤ/ was highly variable for both FFE- and FHFE-speaking students, as students often produced dialectal variants of the target consonants within the clusters (e.g. [lek̚s] for legs; [eləfən] for elephant) or omitted morphological /s/ or /z/ for plural target words (e.g. biscuits).