Developmental patterns of non-word repetition by monolingual and bilingual school-aged children

Abstract

Purpose

The present study examines cross-sectional trends in performance on a quasi-universal non-word repetition (NWR) task. It also considers whether NWR performance is dependent on levels of exposure to a language and compares the performance of bilingual children across their two languages.

Method

A cross-sectional design was employed. The English and French quasi-universal NWR tasks, featuring stimuli from two to five syllables in length, was administered to Canadian school-aged monolinguals and two groups of bilinguals: those who encountered their second language in early childhood and those who encountered their second language at school entry.

Result

When evaluated in English, the early-exposure bilinguals produced significantly fewer errors than the school-entry exposure bilinguals and the English monolingual groups. When evaluated in French, the early-exposure bilinguals and the French monolinguals produced significantly fewer errors than the school-entry exposure bilinguals. Compared across languages, the French monolinguals produced fewer errors on the French version of the NWR task than the English monolinguals did on the English version of the same task. In both languages and across all analyses, the youngest age group (7–8 years) produced more errors than the two older groups (9–10 years and 11–12 years).

Conclusion

The quasi-universal NWR task showed sensitivity to improvements from 7 to 11 years of age in English and up to 9 years of age in French. Better performance in French may be due to the relatively greater frequency of multisyllabic words in that language. The development and use of this particular NWR task with monolinguals and bilinguals—in both of their languages—contribute to a deeper understanding of quasi-universal NWR performance in typically developing children.

Keywords:

• nonword repetition
• bilingualism
• school-age children
• monolingualism

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Additional information

Funding

This work was supported by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada (SSHRC) Insight Grant (award number 435-2016-1026).