Novel Word Learning in Children Who Are Bilingual: Comparison to Monolingual Peers

Abstract

Purpose We compared novel word learning in 2nd-grade children with typical development who were Spanish-English bilinguals to English monolinguals to understand word learning in bilingual children. Method Children (monolinguals n = 167, bilinguals n = 76) engaged in 5 computer-based tasks that assessed word learning in 6 different contexts. The tasks measured children's ability to link novel names with novel objects/actions, make decisions about the accuracy of those names and objects/actions, recognize the semantic features of the objects/actions, and produce the novel names. For analysis, we used Bayesian repeated-measures analyses of covariance with Bayesian independent-samples t tests to clarify interactions. Results Monolingual and bilingual children differed in some, but not most, word learning situations. There was at least moderate evidence that bilingual children were less accurate at naming in 1 condition and at detecting mispronunciations in 3 of 6 contexts and were less accurate at judging semantic features of a referent when that referent was paired with orthographic information. Discussion Among children with typical development, there were few differences in novel word learning between monolingual and bilingual participants. When differences did occur, they suggested that bilinguals were more accepting of phonological variations of word productions than their monolingual peers.

Figure 1.

Process for determining whether a bilingual child had typical language skills. CELF = Clinical Evaluation of Language Fundamentals; DQ = disqualify; FS = formulated sentences.

Figure 2.

Game details and task details.

Figure 3.

Example of the phonological–visual linking task where the child makes a correct response.

Figure 4.

Example of the visual feature recall task before the child has made a response.

Figure 5.

Example of the visual feature recall task for the verb game. Although these are still images, the actual task was animated to better illustrate these concepts.

Figure 6.

Means and standard errors for both groups by condition averaged across all four learning blocks for the location naming game. The asterisk indicates a condition that had moderate evidence for the alternative hypothesis.

Figure 7.

Percent correct and standard error for hits and foils on the mispronunciation detection task by group for all games. Asterisks indicate conditions that had at least moderate evidence for the alternative hypothesis.

Figure 8.

Means and standard errors for both groups averaged across all four blocks for the visual difference task for the orthography game. The asterisk indicates a condition that had very strong evidence for the alternative hypothesis.