Spontaneous language samples are a useful tool in studying the nature of morphosyntactic production in both clinical and academic settings. However, little work has been done on typical frequency of occurrence of morpheme production and even less on the degree of temporal reliability of morpheme frequency between samples. This study compares two language samples recorded within a week of each other under similar conditions in a test–retest paradigm for each of 23 typically developing children aged 2;6–3;6 to examine the production of the following morphemes associated with specific language impairment: contracted auxiliary, copula, do as an uncontracted auxiliary, be as an uncontracted auxiliary, third person singular and past tense. Also analyzed were all utterances containing more than one verb. Frequency and reliability of four different sample lengths ranging from 50 to 200 utterances were tested. Results showed generally low degrees of reliability at 50 and 100 utterances, with only limited improvement for most targets at 200 utterances. Clinical implications of these results are discussed.
CasbyM (2011) An examination of the relationship of sample size and mean length of utterance for children with developmental language impairment. Child Language Teaching and Therapy27: 286–293.
2.
CicourelA (1996) Ecological validity and ‘white room effects’: The interaction of cognitive and cultural models in the pragmatic analysis of elicited narratives from children. Pragmatics and Cognition4: 221–264.
3.
CleavePRiceM (1997) An examination of morpheme BE in children with specific language impairment: The role of contractibility and grammatical form class. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research40: 480–492.
4.
ColeKMillsPDaleP (1989) Examination of test–retest and split-half reliability for measures derived from language samples of young handicapped children. Language, Speech and Hearing Services in Schools20: 259–268.
5.
CrystalD (1982) Profiling Linguistic Disability. London: Edward Arnold.
6.
CrystalDFletcherP (1979) Profile analysis of language disability. In: FillmoreCKemplerDWangW(eds) Individual Differences in Language Ability and Language Behavior. San Francisco, CA: Academic Press, pp. 167–188.
7.
CrystalDFletcherPGarmanM (1976) The Grammatical Analysis of Language Disability: A Procedure of Assessment and Remediation. The Hague: Elsevier-North Holland.
8.
CrystalDFletcherPGarmanM (1989) Grammatical Analysis of Language Disability. London: Whurr.
9.
DunnMFlaxJSliwinskiMAramD (1996) The use of spontaneous language measures as criteria for identifying children with specific language impairment. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research39: 643–654.
10.
EvansJCraigH (1992) Language sample collection and analysis: Interview compared to freeplay assessment contexts. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research35: 343–353.
11.
FensonLDalePSReznickJS. (1994) Variability in early communicative development. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, serial no. 242, vol. 59, no. 5. Wiley.
12.
GallagherT (1993) Pre-assessment: A procedure for documenting language use variability. In: GallagherTPruttingC (eds) Pragmatic Assessment and Intervention in Language. San Diego, CA: College-Hill Press, pp. 1–28.
13.
GavinWGilesL (1996) Sample size effects on temporal reliability of language sample measures of preschool children. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research39: 1258–1262.
14.
HanssonKNettelbladtUNilholmC (2000) Contextual influence on the language production of children with speech/language impairment. International Journal of Language and Communication Disorders35: 31–47.
15.
HewittLHammerCYontKTomblinJ (2005) Language sampling for kindergarten children with and without SLI: Mean length of utterance, IPSYN, and NDW. Journal of Communication Disorders38: 197–213.
JohnsonMTomblinJ (1975) The reliability of developmental sentence scoring as a function of sample size. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research18: 372–380.
18.
KramerCJamesSSaxmanJ (1979) A comparison of language samples elicited at home and in the clinic. Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders44: 321–330.
19.
LeadholmBMillerJ (1992) Language Sample Analysis: The Wisconsin Guide. Madison, WI: Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction.
20.
LeeL (1974) Developmental Sentence Analysis: A Grammatical Assessment Procedure for Speech and Language Clinicians. Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press.
21.
LeonardL (1998) Children with Specific Language Impairment. London: MIT Press.
22.
LeonardLEyerJBedoreLGrelaB (1997) Three accounts of the grammatical morpheme difficulties of English-speaking children with specific language impairment. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research40: 741–753.
23.
LindsayG (2011) The collection and analysis of data on children with speech, language and communication needs: The challenge to education and health services. Child Language Teaching and Therapy27: 135–150.
24.
LundNDuehartJ (1993) Assessing Children’s Language in Naturalistic Contexts. 3rd edn. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
25.
MacWhinneyBSnowC (1990) The child language data exchange system: An update. Journal of Child Language17: 457–472.
26.
MaillartCParisseCTommerdahlT (2011) F-LARSP 1.0: An adaptation of the LARSP language profile for French. Clinical Linguistics and Phonetics26: 188–198.
27.
MarinellieS (2004) Complex syntax used by school-age children with specific language impairment (SLI) in child–adult conversation. Journal of Communication Disorders37: 517–533.
28.
MillerJ (1996) Progress in assessing, describing, and defining child language disorder. In: ColeKDalePThalD (eds) Assessment of Communication and Language. Baltimore, MD: Brookes.
29.
MinifieRDarleyFShermanD (1963) Temporal reliability of seven language measures. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research6: 139–149.
30.
MuskettTBodyRPerkinsM (2012) Uncovering the dynamic in static assessment interaction. Child Language Teaching and Therapy28: 87–99.
31.
NaremoreRDensmoreAHarmanD (1995) Language Intervention with School-aged Children: Conversation, Narrative, and Text. San Diego, CA: Singular.
32.
OwensR (1999) Language Disorders: A Functional Approach to Assessment and Intervention, 3rd edn.Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
33.
RiceMWexlerK (1996) A phenotype of specific language impairment: Extended optional infinitives. In: RiceM (ed.) Toward a Genetics of Language. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, pp. 215–237.
34.
RiceMSmolikFPerpichD. (2010) Mean length of utterance levels in 6-month intervals for children 3 to 9 years with and without language impairments. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research53: 333–349.
35.
RiceMWexlerKCleaveP (1995) Specific language impairment as a period of extended optional infinitive. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research39: 1239–1257.
36.
RolandDDickFElmanJ (2007) Frequency of basic English grammatical structures: A corpus analysis. Journal of Memory and Language57: 348–379.
37.
RondalJGhiottoMBredartSBacheletJ (1987) Age-relation, reliability and grammatical validity of measures of utterance length. Journal of Child Language14: 433–446.
38.
ScarboroughH (1990) Index of productive syntax. Applied Psycholinguistics11: 1–22.
39.
ShewanCHendersonV (1988) Analysis of spontaneous language in the older normal population. Journal of Communication Disorders21: 139–154.
40.
SouthwoodFRussellA (2004) Comparison of conversation, freeplay, and story generation as methods of language sample elicitation. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research47: 366–376.
41.
StalnakerLCreagheadN (1982) An examination of language samples obtained under three experimental conditions. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools13: 121–128.
42.
WexlerK (1994) Optional infinitives. In: LightfootDHornsteinN (eds) Verb Movement. New York: Cambridge University Press, pp. 305–350.
43.
YoderPKaiserA (1989) Alternative explanations for the relationship between maternal verbal interaction style and child language development. Journal of Child Language16: 141–160.
