DLLs have smaller vocabularies and slower growth in each language than monolinguals, but comparable conceptual vocabularies¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · review r3 · q2
Currency · newest study 2014 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person · overdue for a recheck since 2019: baselines and conditions change

Subclaims¶

q2 i? DLL infants/toddlers have smaller vocabularies and slower growth rates in each individual language compared to monolinguals. → Hammer 2014 q2 i? DLL infants/toddlers' conceptual vocabularies (concepts known across both languages combined) are the same size as monolinguals' vocabularies. → Hammer 2014 (2)

Evidence¶

Hammer 2014¶

Hammer, C. S., Hoff, E., Uchikoshi, Y., Gillanders, C., Castro, D., & Sandilos, L. E. (2014). The Language and Literacy Development of Young Dual Language Learners: A Critical Review. Early childhood research quarterly. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecresq.2014.05.008

q2 · i? · review · r3

The review's synthesis of vocabulary studies (Marchman et al., 2010; Place & Hoff, 2011; Vagh et al., 2009) finds that "DLLs have smaller vocabularies and slower rates of growth over time in each language when compared to monolinguals," though many remain within the normal monolingual range in their dominant language.

"With regard to the size of DLL infants/toddlers’ vocabularies in their individual languages, studies consistently found that DLLs have smaller vocabularies and slower rates of growth over time in each language when compared to monolinguals"

Hammer 2014 (2)¶

Hammer, C. S., Hoff, E., Uchikoshi, Y., Gillanders, C., Castro, D., & Sandilos, L. E. (2014). The Language and Literacy Development of Young Dual Language Learners: A Critical Review. Early childhood research quarterly. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecresq.2014.05.008

q2 · i? · review · r3

The review reports, citing Junker & Stockman (2002), Lundén & Silvén (2011), and Pearson et al. (1993), that DLLs' combined conceptual vocabularies match monolinguals' in size, with some overlap of words across languages.

"DLL infants/toddlers’ conceptual vocabularies (i.e., the number of vocabulary concepts known in their two languages combined) are the same size as monolinguals’ vocabularies"

Discussion¶

Learner Variables¶

• English-Learner Status — predictor: learners who differ on it differ in outcomes

Related Claims¶

• DLL children can catch up to monolingual norms in English vocabulary, but need substantial time and exposure to do so — related
• Simultaneous and sequential DLL learners show opposite vocabulary patterns in English versus the home language — related
• Controlling for SES, monolingual children outperform both simultaneous and sequential bilinguals on single-language English receptive and expressive vocabulary measures — a narrower finding that bears on this claim
• Each language entails a conceptually different world, so exact translation of conceptual structure between languages is impossible — related
• Language development functions as a consequence of, not a prerequisite for, deep conceptual exploration in secondary mathematics for English Learners — related