Research has suggested that Danish-learning children lag behind in early language acquisition. The phenomenon has been attributed to the opaque phonetic structure of Danish, which features an unusually large number of non-consonantal sounds (i.e., vowels and semivowels/glides). The large number of vocalic sounds in speech is thought to provide fewer cues to word segmentation and to make language processing harder, thus hindering the acquisition process. In this study, we explored whether the presence of vocalic sounds at word boundaries impedes real-time speech processing in 24-month-old Danish-learning children, compared to word boundaries that are marked by consonantal sounds. Using eye-tracking, we tested children’s real-time comprehension of known consonant-initial and vowel-initial words when presented in either a consonant-final carrier phrase or in a vowel-final carrier phrase, thus resulting in the four boundary types C#C, C#V, V#C, and V#V. Our results showed that the presence of vocalic sounds around a word boundary—especially before—impedes processing of Danish child-directed sentences.
BasbøllH. (2005). The phonology of Danish. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
2.
BasbøllH. (2012). Monosyllables and prosody: The Sonority Syllable Model meets the word. In StolzT.NauN.StrohC. (Eds.), Monosyllables: From phonology to typology (pp. 13–41). Berlin, Germany: Akademie Verlag.
3.
Benavides-VarelaS.HochmannJ.MacagnoF.NesporM.MehlerJ. (2012). Newborn’s brain activity signals the origin of word memories. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA, 109, 17908–17913.
4.
BlesesD.BasbøllH. (2004). The Danish sound structure — Implications for language acquisition in normal and hearing impaired populations. In SchmidtE.MikkelsenU.PostI.SimonsenJ. B.FruensgaardK. (Eds.), Brain, hearing and learning. 20th Danavox symposium (pp. 165–190). Copenhagen, Denmark: Holmen Center Tryk.
5.
BlesesD.BasbøllH.LumJ.VachW. (2011). Phonology and lexicon in a cross–linguistic perspective: the importance of phonetics—A commentary on Stoel-Gammon’s ‘Relationships between lexical and phonological development in young children’. Journal of Child Language, 38, 61–68.
6.
BlesesD.BasbøllH.VachW. (2011). Is Danish difficult to acquire? Evidence from Nordic past–tense studies. Language and Cognitive Processes, 26, 1193–1231.
7.
BlesesD.TreccaF. (2016). Early acquisition of Danish in a cross-Scandinavian perspective: A psycholinguistic challenge? In EngerH.-O.KnophM. I. N.KristoffersenK. E.LindM. (Eds.), Helt fabelaktig! Festskrift til Hanne Gram Simonsen på 70-årsdagen (pp. 13–28). Oslo, Norway: Novus forlag.
8.
BlesesD.VachW.SlottM.WehbergS.ThomsenP.MadsenT.BasbøllH. (2008). Early vocabulary development in Danish and other languages: A CDI-based comparison. Journal of Child Language, 35, 619–650.
9.
BlesesD.VachW.WehbergS.FaberK.MadsenT.O. (2007). Tidlig kommunikativ udvikling: Værktøj til beskrivelse af sprogtilegnelse [Early communicative development: A tool for assessing language development]. Odense, Denmark: Syddansk Universitetsforlag.
10.
BonattiL.PeñaM.NesporM.MehlerJ. (2005). Linguistic constraints on statistical computations: The role of consonants and vowels in continuous speech processing. Psychological Science, 16, 451–459.
11.
BouchonC.FlocciaC.FuxT.Adda-DeckerM.NazziT. (2015). Call me Alix, not Elix: Vowels are more important than consonants in own name recognition at 5 months. Developmental Science, 18, 587–598.
12.
BürknerP.-C. (2017). brms: An R Package for Bayesian multilevel models using Stan. Journal of Statistical Software, 80, 1–28.
13.
ChaterN.ChristiansenM.H. (2018). Language acquisition as skill acquisition. Current Opinion in Behavioural Sciences, 21, 205–208.
14.
ChristiansenM. H.ChaterN. (2016). The Now-or-Never bottleneck: A fundamental constraint on language. Behavioral and Brain Science, 39, e62.
15.
DaleP.GoodmanJ. (2005). Commonality and individual differences in vocabulary growth. In TomaselloM.SlobinD. I. (Eds.), Beyond nature–nurture. Essays in honor of Elizabeth Bates (pp. 41–80). London, UK: Lawrence Erlbaum.
16.
Delle LucheC.PoltrockS.GoslinJ.NewB.FlocciaC.NazziT. (2014). Differential processing of consonants and vowels in the auditory modality: A cross-linguistic study. Journal of Memory and Language, 72, 1–15.
17.
DinkJ. W.FergusonB. F. (2015). eyetrackingR. R package version 0.1.8. Retrieved from http://www.eyetracking-R.com
18.
DussiasP.Valdés KroffJ.Guzzardo TamargoR.GerfenC. (2013). When gender and looking go hand in hand: Grammatical gender processing in L2 Spanish. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 35(2), 353–387. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263112000915
19.
FernaldA.MarchmanV. A. (2012). Individual differences in lexical processing at 18 months predict vocabulary growth in typically-developing and late-talking toddlers. Child Development, 83, 203–222.
20.
FernaldA.MarchmanV. A.WeislederA. (2013). SES differences in language processing skill and vocabulary are evident at 18 months. Developmental Science, 16, 234–248.
21.
FernaldA.ThorpeK.MarchmanV. A. (2010). Blue car, red car: Developing efficiency in online interpretation of adjective–noun phrases. Cognitive Psychology, 60, 190–217.
22.
FernaldA.ZanglR.PortilloA. L.MarchmanV. A. (2008). Looking while listening: Using eye movements to monitor spoken language comprehension by infants and young children. In SekerinaI. A.FernándezE. M.ClahsenH. (Eds.), Developmental psycholinguistics. On-line methods in children’s language processing (pp. 97–136). Amsterdam, The Netherlands/Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
23.
GooskensC.van HeuvenV. J.van BezooijenR.PacillyJ. J. A. (2010). Is spoken Danish less intelligible than Swedish?Speech Communication, 52, 1022–1037.
24.
GrønnumN. (1998). Danish: Illustrations of the IPA. Journal of the International Phonetic Association, 28, 99–105.
25.
GrønnumN. (2003). Why are the Danes so hard to understand? In JacobsenH. G.BlesesD.MadsenT. O.ThomsenP. (Eds.), Take Danish – For instance (pp. 119–130). Odense, Denmark: University Press of Southern Denmark.
26.
GrønnumN. (2005). Fonetik og fonologi [Phonetics and phonology]. Copenhagen, Denmark: Akademisk Forlag.
27.
HavyM.NazziT. (2009). Better processing of consonantal over vocalic information in word learning at 16 months of age. Infancy, 14, 439–456.
28.
HendricksonK.FriendM. (2013). Quantifying the relationship between infants’ haptic and visual response to word-object pairings. In Proceedings of the 37th Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development, Boston University Conference on Language Development (Vol. 37, Suppl). NIH Public Access.
29.
HochmannJ. R.Benavides-VarelaS.NesporM.MehlerJ. (2011). Consonants and vowels: Different roles in early language acquisition. Developmental Science, 14, 1445–1458.
30.
HøjenA.NazziT. (2016). Vowel bias in Danish word-learning: Processing biases are language-specific. Developmental Science, 19, 41–49.
31.
JesseA.JohnsonE. K. (2016). Audiovisual alignment of co-speech gestures to speech supports word learning in 2-year-olds. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 145, 1–10.
32.
JørgensenR. N.DaleP. S.BlesesD.FensonL. (2010). CLEX: A cross-linguistic lexical norms database. Journal of Child Language, 37, 419–428.
33.
KassR. E.RafteryA. E. (1995). Bayes Factors. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 90, 7732-795.
34.
KimY. J.SundaraM. (2015). Segmentation of vowel-initial words is facilitated by function words. Journal of Child Language, 42, 709–733.
35.
KyhlH. B.JensenT. K.BaringtonT.BuhlS.NorbergL. A.JørgensenJ. S., . . . HusbyS. (2015). The Odense Child Cohort: Aims, design, and cohort profile. Paediatric and Perinatal Epidemiology, 29, 250–258.
36.
LiebermanA. M.HarrisK. S.HoffmanH. S.GriffithB. C. (1957). The discrimination of speech sounds within and across phoneme boundaries. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 54, 358–368.
37.
LoBueV.Bloom PickardM.ShermanK.AxfordC.DeLoacheJ. S. (2013). Young children’s interest in live animals. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 31, 57–69.
38.
MacDonaldM. C.ChristiansenM. (2002). Reassessing working memory: Comment on Just and Carpenter (1992) and Waters and Caplan (1996). Psychological Review, 109, 35–54.
39.
MarchmanV. A.FernaldA. (2008). Speed of word recognition and vocabulary knowledge in infancy predict cognitive and language outcomes in later childhood. Developmental Science, 11, F9–F16.
40.
MarisE.OostenveldR. (2007). Nonparametric statistical testing of EEG- and MEG-data. Journal of Neuroscience Methods, 164, 177–190.
41.
MattysS.JusczykP. (2001). Do infants segment words or recurring contiguous patterns?Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 27, 644–655.
42.
MirmanD.DixonJ. A.MagnusonJ. S. (2008). Statistical and computational models of the visual world paradigm: Growth curves and individual differences. Journal of Memory and Language, 59, 475–494.
43.
NazziT. (2005). Use of phonetic specificity during the acquisition of new words: Differences between consonants and vowels. Cognition, 98, 13–30.
44.
NazziT.DilleyL.JusczykA.Shattuck-HufnagelS.JusczykP. (2005). English-learning infants’ segmentation of verbs from fluent speech. Language & Speech, 48, 279–298.
45.
NazziT.PoltrockS.Von HolzenK. (2016). The developmental origins of the consonant bias in lexical processing. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 25, 291–296.
46.
NesporM.PeñaM.MehlerJ. (2003). On the different roles of vowels and consonants in speech processing and language acquisition. Lingue e Linguaggio, 2, 221–247.
47.
NewB.AraújoV.NazziT. (2008). Differential processing of consonants and vowels in lexical access through reading. Psychological Science, 19, 1223–1227.
48.
NishibayashiL.-L.NazziT. (2016). Vowels, then consonants: Early bias switch in recognizing segmented word forms. Cognition, 155, 188–203.
49.
PoltrockS.NazziT. (2015). Consonant/vowel asymmetry in early word form recognition. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 131, 135–148.
50.
R Core Team (2019). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. Retrieved from https://www.R-project.org/
51.
SchüppertA.HiltonN. H.GooskensC. (2016). Why is Danish so difficult to understand for fellow Scandinavians?Speech Communication, 79, 47–60.
52.
SeidlA.JohnsonE. (2008). Boundary alignment enables 11-month-olds to segment vowel initial words from speech. Journal of Child Language, 35, 1–24.
53.
StevensK. N. (1998). Acoustic phonetics. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
54.
StokesS. F.BlesesD.BasbøllH.LambertsenC. (2012). Statistical learning in emerging lexicons: The case of Danish. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 55, 1265–1273.
55.
TreccaF.BlesesD.MadsenT. O.ChristiansenM. H. (2018). Does sound structure affect word learning? An eye-tracking study of Danish learning toddlers. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 167, 180–203.
56.
TreccaF.McCauleyS. M.AndersenS. R.BlesesD.BasbøllH.HøjenA., . . . ChristiansenM. H. (2019). Segmentation of highly vocalic speech via statistical learning: Initial results from Danish, Norwegian, and English. Language Learning, 69, 143–176.
57.
TreccaF.TylénK.HøjenA.ChristiansenM. H. (under review). The puzzle of Danish: Implications for language learning and use.
58.
VehtariA.GelmanA.GabryJ. (2017). Practical Bayesian model evaluation using leave-one-out cross-validation and WAIC. Statistics and Computing, 27, 1413–1432.
59.
WrightR. (2004). A review of perceptual cues and cue robustness. In HayesB.KirchnerR. M.SteriadeD. (Eds.), Phonetically based phonology (pp. 34–57). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
