Not all words are created equal:
Choosing speech targets for maximum
treatment efficiency
Disclosure
•  No financial or nonfinancial relationships
Alycia Cummings, Ph.D., CCC-SLP
University of North Dakota
2"
Session Objectives
Acknowledgements
•  Funding support provided by:
–  NIDCD R15DC013359
–  National Center for Research Resources
CO6RR022088
–  University of North Dakota Faculty Seed Grant
•  Collaborators
–  San Diego State University
•  Jessica Barlow
–  University of North Dakota
•  Sarah Robinson, Janet Babchishin, Heidi Thompson, Jillian
Kolquist, Karly Koenig, Brianna Jallo, Sheila Cassidy,
Courtney Rowan, Megan Nauman, Morgan Tescher,
Leanne Howlett, Alexia Larson
3"
Children with Speech Sound Disorders
•  Difficulty producing, using, and integrating
sounds
•  NOT due to lack of control of speech
articulators
•  Difficulties at all levels of phonology
•  5-8% of all children
•  What lexical and phonological factors are
inherent in words?
•  What is the two-representation model of
word processing, and why should I care?
•  What is the Sonority Sequencing Principle
and how does it define cluster complexity?
•  What are true clusters and what are adjunct
clusters?
•  What word characteristics should I be
concerned about when choosing treatment
targets?
4
Lexicon
=
Mental
Dictionary
Phonological
Representations
=
Sound System
[tod]
–  80% require intervention
•  99% of school SLP caseloads
–  Co-occurs with other impairments
(Bernthal et al., 2012; Gierut, 1998; NIDCD, 1994; Shriberg et al, 1999; Smit
et al., 1990)
"
5"
6"
Two-Representation Model
of Word Processing
Phonological Representations
•  Presence of phonological representations
in children with SSD?
•  Addresses the interaction of lexical
and phonological representations
•  Phonological representation
–  Individual phonemes and phoneme
sequences
–  /s/, / /, /t/
–  Example: Sound Complexity
•  Lexical representation
–  Word as a whole unit
–  /s t/
–  Example: Word Density & Frequency
(Gupta & MacWhinney, 1997; Luce et al., 2000; Storkel & Morrisette, 2002)"
7"
8"
Phonological Characteristic:
Sound Complexity
Phonological Characteristic:
Sound Complexity
•  Complex sounds
•  Complex sounds
–  “Marked” sounds: /T D s z r l S tS dZ/
–  “Unmarked” sounds: /p m t/
–  Late acquisition
–  Phonetically more difficult to produce
–  Often not stimulable
–  Singletons and consonant clusters
–  “Marked” sounds: /T D s z r l S tS dZ/
–  “Unmarked” sounds: /p m t/
–  Late acquisition
–  Phonetically more difficult to produce
–  Often not stimulable
–  Singletons and consonant clusters
•  Complexity theory: Target more complex
sounds for greater phonological change
9"
(Bleile, 2014; Gierut, 2001, 2007; Shriberg, 1993)
Phonological Characteristic:
Sound Complexity
•  Stridency contrast ([T s] or [D z])
Liquids
•  Stops in Final Position
Position
Nasals
•  Fricatives in Initial Position
Final Position
Fricatives
(Gierut et al., 1994; Ingram et al., 1980; Schmidt & Meyers, 1995)
•  Fricatives
Fricatives in
(Smith, 1973)
Stops
•  Consonants
(Catano et al., 2009; Dinnsen & Elbert, 1984; Elbert et al., 1984)
•  Voiced Obstruents
Stops in Initial
(Rockman, 1983)
(Dinnsen et al., 1990; Gierut et al., 1994; Tyler & Figurski, 1990)
•  Affricates
10"
Phonological Characteristic:
Sound Complexity
(Dinnsen et al, 1992; Dinnsen et al., 1990)
•  Liquids
"
(Bleile, 2014; Gierut, 2001, 2007; Shriberg, 1993; Thompson, 2007)
Vowels
(Robb et al., 1999)
Voiceless Obstruents
(Catano et al, 2009; Dinnsen & Elbert, 1984; McReynolds & Jetzke, 1986)
•  Velars
Coronals
(Stoel-Gammon, 1996)
11"
12"
Phonological Characteristic:
Sound Complexity
Sonority Sequencing Principle (SSP)
•  Sonority
•  Complex sounds
•  Consonant Clusters
–  Relative loudness of a
sound
•  Phonemes given
numerical value
•  Syllables rise and fall
13"
(Bleile, 2014; Gierut, 2001, 2007; Shriberg, 1993)
(Barlow et al., 2010; Clements, 1990; Gierut, 1999; 2001; Gierut & Champion, 2001;
"
Morrisette et al., 2006; Ohala, 1999; Roca & Johnson, 1999; Steriade, 1990)
14"
SSP for Clusters:
maximal rise and fall
1. 
2. 
3. 
4. 
5. 
6. 
7. 
8. 
SSP for Clusters: Practice
“friend”: /f®End/
Vowels
Glides
Liquids
Nasals
Voiced Fricatives
Voiceless Fricatives
Voiced Stops
Voiceless Stops
1. 
2. 
3. 
4. 
5. 
6. 
7. 
8. 
p
l
eI
Sonority Hierarchy
Most Sonorous
1. Vowels
2. Glides
3. Liquids
4. Nasals
5. Voiced Fricatives
6. Voiceless Fricatives
7. Voiced Stops
8. Voiceless Stops
Least Sonorous
Vowels
Glides
Liquids
Nasals
Voiced Fricatives
Voiceless Fricatives
Voiced Stops
Voiceless Stops
n
15"
16"
The status of /s/ + stop clusters
SSP for Clusters: Complexity
•  Violation of language-universal restrictions
(SSP)
–  Syllables do not rise in sonority: /sp-/, /st-/, /sk-/
V = Voiced; VL = Voiceless
17"
18"
# of peaks = # of syllables?
The structure of /s/ + stop clusters
•  Theoretical account
1. 
2. 
3. 
4. 
5. 
6. 
7. 
8. 
–  [s] is extra-syllabic (=adjunct or appendix)
–  [s] is outside of onset, outside of coda, thus
avoiding violation of SSP
Vowels
Glides
Liquids
Nasals
Voiced Fricatives
Voiceless Fricatives
Voiced Stops
Voiceless Stops
s
t
I
k
19"
20"
Anatomy of the syllable...
Onset complexity
σ
plant
CCVCC
Syllable
Symbol
Rhyme
Onset
Nucleus
X
X
X
X
p
l
Q
n
t
Rhyme
Onset
Coda
X
σ
stick
CCVC
adjunct
Nucleus
Coda
X
X
X
X
s
t
I
k
21"
/s/ + stop clusters are special
Sound Complexity
•  Children acquire /s/ + stop clusters
independently of all other (true) clusters
•  3-element /s/CC clusters
and non-/s/ clusters
–  /s/ clusters emerge before true clusters
–  True clusters emerge before /s/ clusters
2-element /s/
(Gierut & Champion, 2001; Maas et al., 2002)
•  Clusters with small sonority distance
Clusters with large sonority distance
•  There is no possibly no relationship
between adjunct and true clusters
(Gierut, 1999)
•  Clusters
–  Limited treatment generalization
–  Impact on other sounds?
–  Overgeneralization of /s/
Singletons
(Gallagher & Shriner, 1975)
•  Clusters
Affricates
(Gierut, 2007; Gierut & O’Connor, 2002)
•  True clusters = more phonological change
(Barlow, 2001; Gierut, 1999; Smit, 1993; Smit et al., 1990)
23"
24"
Complexity Resources
Sonority and Cluster Resources
•  Sonority Sequencing handout in online
packet
•  Jennifer Taps Richards
•  Caroline Bowen
–  http://speech-language-therapy.com/index.php?
option=com_content&view=article&id=21:admin
&catid=9:resources&Itemid=117
–  http://speech-language-therapy.com/index.php?
option=com_content&view=article&id=37:conso
nants&catid=9:resources&Itemid=117
–  http://slpath.com/
complexityapproachresources.html
–  http://slpath.com/phonologicalassessment.html
•  Judy Gierut and the Learnability Project at
Indiana University
–  http://www.indiana.edu/~sndlrng/reports.htm
25"
26"
Lexical Characteristic:
Neighborhood Density
Lexical Representations
•  Presence of lexical representation in
children with SSD?
•  Neighborhood Density
•  Word Frequency
•  Density
–  Sparse Neighborhood
•  Low Density: fewer than 10 neighbors
•  orange
–  Dense Neighborhood
•  High Density
•  cat: at, bat, fat, mat, cash, cap, cot, kit, etc.
•  Low Density easier to access
–  More treatment change than High Density
•  Density caveat…
27"
Lexical Characteristic:
Word Frequency
(Luce & Pisoni, 1998; Gierut & Morrisette, 2012, 2014; Gierut et al., 1999; Morrisette
28"
& Gierut, 2002; Storkel & Morrisette, 2002; Vitevitch, 2002)
Frequency and Density Resources
•  Frequency
•  University of Washington, St. Louis
–  High Frequency: score of 100 or more (out of
100,000 words)
–  http://128.252.27.56/Neighborhood/Home.asp
•  High Frequency Word List in on-line
handout
•  Car
–  Low Frequency
•  Appendage
–  http://slpath.com/highfrequencywordlist.html
•  High Frequency easier to access
–  More treatment change than Low Frequency
(Luce & Pisoni, 1998; Gierut & Dale, 2007; Gierut et al., 1999; Kučera &
Francis, 1967; Morrisette & Gierut, 2002; Storkel & Morrisette, 2002;
Vitevitch, 2002)
29"
30"
Session Objectives
Why should I care about the tworepresentational model?
•  What lexical and phonological factors are
inherent in words?
–  Sound complexity, Density, Frequency
•  What is the two-representation model of word
processing, and why should I care?
•  What is the Sonority Sequencing Principle and
how does it define cluster complexity?
–  Clusters vary in sonority and complexity
•  What are true clusters and what are adjunct
clusters?
–  Adjuncts = /s/+stops
•  What word characteristics should I be
concerned about when choosing treatment
targets?
•  What does it imply about treatment
exemplars?
•  Words you choose may affect Tx outcome
–  Density
–  Frequency
–  Sound Complexity
•  Lexical Reps
31
Non-Words in Treatment
Phonological Reps
(Gierut, 2001, 2007; Luce & Pisoni, 1998; Morrisette & Gierut, 2002;
Storkel & Morrisette, 2002; Vitevitch, 2002)
32
32"
Cluster Treatment Effects
•  3-element /s/CC clusters
and non-/s/ clusters
•  Lexical interference
–  Frozen phonology
2-element /s/
(Gierut & Champion, 2001; Maas et al., 2002)
•  Early acquired words (e.g., family names)
•  Clusters with small sonority distance
Clusters with large sonority distance
•  Non-words = no prior experience
–  Phonotactically permissible sound strings
–  Effective in treatment
(Gierut, 1999)
•  Clusters
Singletons
(Gallagher & Shriner, 1975)
•  Focus on word’s phonological form
•  Clusters
Affricates
(Gierut, 2008; Gierut & O’Connor, 2002)
(Bryan & Howard, 1992; Gierut & Morrisette, 1998; Gierut et al., 1999;
Gierut et al., 2010; Storkel, 2004; Cummings & Barlow, 2011)
33"
34"
Cummings & Barlow (2011): Singletons
All Treatment Studies
Research Program Criteria
•  Children with SSDs
Cummings, Thompson, & Kolquist
(under review): Clusters
–  Between ages of 3;0 and 7;0
–  Pass hearing and oral peripheral mechanism
exams
–  No language or cognitive delays
High frequency real words
vs.
Non-words [zero frequency]
•  PPVT-4, TELD-3, CELF-P2/4/5, Leiter-R
–  Articulation score below 10th percentile or
missing at least 5 sounds
•  GFTA-2
35"
36"
Cummings & Barlow (2011)
Cummings et al. (under review)
37"
Cummings & Barlow (2011) & Cummings et al. (under review)
38"
Creating Non-Words
Treatment Words
•  Identify target phoneme(s) and real word
targets
•  Complexity theory
–  Word-initial: /®/
–  /st®/: 3-element cluster
–  /T®/: Sonority Difference of 3
–  Transcribe target words!
•  Move vowels and/or consonants from one
word to another
•  Real word or Non-word condition
–  Vowel context can be important
–  2-3 children in each condition
–  5 words per condition
–  Established lexical representation via story
•  Low Density words
39"
40"
The linked image cannot be displayed. The file may have been moved, renamed, or deleted. Verify that the link points to the correct file and location.
Creating Non-Words
•  Manipulate other phonemes in word based
on phonetic characteristics
–  Vowels: height, advancement, roundness
•  Stressed vs. unstressed vowels (tense vs. lax)
–  Consonants: place & manner of articulation,
voicing
•  Consonant & vowel charts included in online handout
41"
42"
Creating Non-Words
•  Keep prefix/suffix morphemes the same?
–  Plurals, Past tense –ed, Present progressive –
ing
•  Reading /®idIN/ turned into /®√vIN/
•  Running /®√nIN/ turned into /®QdIN/
43"
44"
The linked image cannot be displayed. The file may have been moved, renamed, or deleted. Verify that the link points to the correct file and location.
Creating Non-Words
•  Keep prefix/suffix morphemes the same?
–  Plurals, Past tense –ed, Present progressive –
ing
•  Reading /®idIN/ turned into /®√vIN/
•  Running /®√nIN/ turned into /®QdIN/
–  Irregulars are different
•  Thought /TAt/ turned into /Tug/
•  Threw /Tru/ turned into /TrçI/
•  Throughout /Tru/AUt/ turned into /TrçI/Ad/
45"
46"
Creating Non-Words
•  Ensure that the phoneme combinations are
viable in English
–  Voicing
•  Thousand /TAUzInd/ turned to /TIsAUNk/
•  But, the /s/ didn’t work with voiced phonemes around
it, changed it to /TIzAUNk/
–  Place of articulation
•  Oral Stops and Nasals: /nd/ vs. /Nk/
–  Clusters
•  Nothing like /dloUm/ or /tSrAd/
47"
48"
Creating Non-Words Activity
Non-Word Databases
•  ARC Nonword database:
•  Target words
–  http://www.cogsci.mq.edu.au/~nwdb/
–  Language /leINgwIdZ/"or"/lQNgwIdZ/
–  Learned /lŒ’’nd/
–  Level /lEv´l/"
•  Wuggy: A multilingual pseudoword generator
–  http://crr.ugent.be/programs-data/wuggy
•  The English Lexicon Project
–  http://elexicon.wustl.edu/
•  WordGen
–  http://www.wouterduyck.be/?page_id=29
•  Luca Campanelli
–  http://www.lcampanelli.org/
49"
Cummings & Barlow (2011) & Cummings et al. (under review)
Why two phases of treatment?
Treatment Procedure
• 
• 
• 
• 
50"
•  Imitation/Repetition
12-19 sessions for each child
Treated phoneme/cluster always word-initial
Individual 1 hour sessions/2x weekly
Imitation
–  75% accuracy over 2 consecutive sessions or until
5 (cluster) to 7 (singleton) sessions are completed
–  Book reading, direct placement and/or cluster and
syllable segmenting, drill play
–  Speech perception
–  Phonological encoding
–  Phonological memory
–  Phonological assembly
–  Articulation
•  Spontaneous Production
–  90% accuracy over 3 consecutive sessions or until
7 (cluster) to 12 (singleton) sessions are completed
–  Drill play
(Gierut et al., 1987, 1990, 1991, 1992, 1996, 2002)
51"
Dorsal"vs."Ventral"Neural"Pathways"
•  Spontaneous
Production
–  Visual perception and
recognition
–  Conceptual and
semantic processing
–  Lexical access
–  Phonological form
encoding
–  Planning and execution
of articulation
(van Riper, 1939, 1978; Dollaghan & Campbell, 1998; Gathercole & Baddeley, 1997;
Aslin & Smith, 1988; Coady & Evans, 2008; Levelt, 1999; Dell, 1986; Vance et al,
52"
2005; Bowey, 2006)
Why two phases of treatment?
•  Imitation
–  Articulation
–  Dorsal Pathway
•  Spontaneous production
–  Access and produce phonological and lexical
representations
–  Ventral Pathway
•  Together
–  Greater phonological change
(Hickok & Poeppel, 2007; Hickok, 2009)
53"
54"
Cummings & Barlow (2011) & Cummings et al. (under review)
Data analysis: PCC
Data analysis
•  Overall change in phonological system
•  Number of consonants produced correctly divided
by the total number targeted
•  Distorted productions counted as incorrect
•  Calculate change due to treatment
•  Generalization
–  Percent Consonants Correct (PCC)
–  Treated sound/cluster: /®/, /st®/, or /T®/
–  Overall PCC: all consonants
–  Target sound
–  Overall sound system change
(Shriberg, 1993; Shriberg et al., 1997; Shriberg & Kwiatkowski, 1982)
55"
(Shriberg, 1993; Shriberg et al., 1997; Shriberg & Kwiatkowski, 1982)
56"
PCC Activity
Data analysis: PCC
•  Helpful suggestions
–  Align words by syllables by identifying the vowels
–  Align consonants by similar phonetic characteristics
•  Place, manner, voicing
–  Any added/extra consonants are incorrect
57"
Shriberg & Kwiatkowski’s (1982)
PCC Severity Scale
• 
• 
• 
• 
86-100% = Mild
66-85% = Mild-Moderate
51-65% = Moderate-Severe
< 50% = Severe
58"
PCC Resources
•  GFTA PCC and PPC (percent phonemes
correct) form in your online handout
•  Phon (free) transcription program
–  https://www.phon.ca/phontrac
60"
Cummings & Barlow (2011) & Cummings et al. (under review)
Speech Assessment Resource
Data analysis
•  Little PEEP speech probe (PowerPoint®
pictures and assessment forms) available for
free from:
•  Generalization
–  Percent Consonants Correct (PCC)
–  Treated sound/cluster: /®/, /st®/, or /T®/
–  Overall PCC: all consonants
–  Assessment of English Phonology (Barlow, 2003)
–  http://slpath.com/littlepeep.html
•  256 word probe
–  Modified Onset Cluster Probe (adapted from Gierut,
1998)
•  115 word probe
(Shriberg, 1993; Shriberg et al., 1997; Shriberg & Kwiatkowski, 1982)
61"
62"
Cummings & Barlow (2011) & Cummings et al. (under review)
Data analysis
•  Generalization
•  Error Consistency Index (ECI)
–  Consistency of phonological system
–  Number of different productions of target sound
–  Sound deletions counted as a type of substitution
–  Correct productions included
–  Ideal ECI = 1.0
–  Relational analysis: align syllables and vowels
–  Number of substitutions for treated sound pre- and posttreatment: Proportion change
63"
ECI Interpretations
64"
Data analysis: ECI
•  Inability to learn from treatment
•  Calculate for consonant singleton or cluster
•  Substitution patterns may vary by word position
–  More substitutions = slower progress
•  Indicator of phonological reorganization
–  Sum total substitutions regardless of position
–  Instability in phonological system = ready to
reorganize and change
(Dodd"&"Bradford,"2000;"Forrest"et"al.,""2000;"Tyler"&"Lewis,"2005;"Tyler"et"al.,"2003;"
Isermann, 2001)
(Dodd"&"Bradford,"2000;"Forrest"et"al.,""2000;"Tyler"&"Lewis,"2005;"Tyler"et"al.,"2003;"
Isermann, 2001)
•  Just for treated sound, or all consonants
65"
66"
67"
68"
ECI Resources
•  English sound substitutions form in your online
handout
69"
Another comment on sonority…
70"
/s/ + nasal & /s/ + stop clusters
pattern similarly
71"
72"
/s/ + nasal & /s/ + stop clusters
pattern similarly
/s/ + nasal & /s/ + stop clusters
pattern similarly
•  Are /s/ + nasals true or adjunct clusters?
–  Clusters with sonority distance of 2 (plus OR
minus) may be a natural sound class
73"
Cummings & Barlow (2011) & Cummings et al. (under review)
(Barlow, 2001, 2004; Gierut, 1999)
74"
Summary thus far…
Treatment Summary
•  Nonwords were as effective as real words, if
not more
•  Similar amounts of change in treated sound/
cluster and overall PCC
•  Larger decrease in sound substitutions
•  Focus on the phonological form of the
nonwords
•  Due to their non-lexical status, nonwords
allow children to focus on their
phonological form
•  But, real words may help with treated
sound generalization
–  Functionality
–  Children with SSD at risk for academic
difficulties
•  So…what should we do?
–  Lessen the cognitive load
75"
Tier 2 Vocabulary Words
Other Vocabulary Tiers
•  Increasing vocabulary improves
phonological diversity
•  Tier 2 words
•  Tier One Words
–  warm, dog, tired, run, talk, party, swim, look
•  Tier Three words
–  “Academic Vocabulary”
–  Appear in texts = High utility
–  Critical to academic success
–  Low frequency in spoken English
–  analyze, assess, define, establish, identify,
indicate, interpret, method, occur, process,
section, significant, vary
(Beck et al., 1987, 2013; Girolametto et al., 1997; Whitehurst et al., 1994)
(Bird et al., 1995; Kamhi & Catts,1986; Clarke-Klein & Hodson, 1995; Hoffman,
1990; Hoffman & Norris, 1989; King et al., 1982; Lewis & Freebairn, 1992;
76"
Webster & Plante, 1992)
–  filibuster, pachyderm
77"
(Beck et al., 1987, 2013; Girolametto et al., 1997; Whitehurst et al., 1994)
78"
Tier 2 Academic Vocabulary Resources
Cummings & Babchishin (in progress)
•  Averil Coxhead
–  http://www.victoria.ac.nz/lals/resources/
academicwordlist/
Tier 2, Academic Vocabulary Real Words
vs.
Non-words
•  Coxhead’s Academic Words handout in
online packet
•  Jim Burke
–  http://englishcompanion.com/
–  http://www.englishcompanion.com/pdfDocs/
acvocabulary2.pdf
79"
Cummings & Babchishin (in progress)
80"
Cummings & Babchishin (in progress)
Treatment Words
•  Following Complexity Theory
–  Word-initial: /®/, /T/, /l/, /tS/
•  Tier 2 Word or Non-word condition
–  6 children in Tier 2, 9 in Non-Word
–  5 words per condition
–  Established lexical representation via story
–  Tier 2: quick incidental learning approach
•  Each story targeted 2 sounds
–  /®/ and /l/
–  /T/ and /tS/
81"
82"
Cummings & Babchishin (in progress)
Quick Incidental Learning Approach
(QUIL)
•  Quick 3-4 word definition during story
•  Apply semantic and syntactic knowledge
(Bedore & Leonard, 2000; Carey & Bartlett, 1978; Dollaghan, 1985, 1987;
Oetting et al., 1995; Rice et al., 1990, 1992,1994; Rice & Woodsmall,
1988)
83"
84"
85"
Cummings & Babchishin (in progress)
86"
Cummings & Babchishin (in progress)
Treatment Procedure
Data analysis
•  Treated phoneme always word-initial
•  Individual 1 hour sessions/2x week
•  Imitation
•  Generalization
–  75% accuracy over 2 consecutive sessions or until
7 sessions are completed
–  Book reading with QUIL, direct placement, drill play
•  Spontaneous Production
–  90% accuracy over 3 consecutive sessions or until
5 sessions are completed
–  Drill play
•  Up to 12 sessions for each child
(Gierut et al., 1987, 1990, 1991, 1992, 1996, 2002)
87"
(Dodd"&"Bradford,"2000;"Forrest"et"al.,"2000;"Tyler"et"al.,"2003)
88"
Cummings & Babchishin (in progress)
Data analysis
•  Generalization
•  Error Consistency Index (ECI)
89"
(Dodd"&"Bradford,"2000;"Forrest"et"al.,"2000;"Tyler"et"al.,"2003)
90"
Cummings & Babchishin (in progress)
Data analysis
•  Generalization
•  Error Consistency Index (ECI)
•  Vocabulary Assessment: Zero-One-Two (ZOT)
–  Sarah Robinson (UND)
–  Decontextualized vocabulary assessment
•  Metalinguistic skills
–  Define and use words
–  Zero to Two point scale
91"
Cummings & Babchishin (in progress)
(Cazden, 1976; Snow, 1990; Wehren"et"al.,"1981)
92"
Cummings & Babchishin (in progress)
ZOT Assessment: Word Use
ZOT Assessment: Word Definition
•  “Retreated”
•  “Retreated”
–  0 points
–  0 points
•  No response or incorrect content
•  “He was happy”
•  No response or incorrect response
•  “I don’t know”
–  1 point
–  1 point
•  Correct content but brief in the sense that it does
not fully illustrate word knowledge
•  “Riley retreated.”
•  Partially correct response
•  “To leave”
–  2 points
–  2 points
•  Oxford dictionary definition
•  “To get away from something”
93"
•  correct content with clear demonstration of word
knowledge
•  “Riley retreated away from the scary chicken
because he was scared of getting scratched.”
94"
Tier 2 = More Vocabulary Knowledge of Tier 2 Words
Cummings & Babchishin (in progress)
ZOT Assessment
•  Tier 2 Words
–  Regardless of treatment condition
95"
96"
Cummings & Babchishin (in progress)
Treatment Summary
Treatment Book Examples
•  T2 words
•  On my website
–  Greater PCC change in treated sound
–  https://sites.google.com/site/
dralyciacummings/speech-sound-disorders
–  Link to a shared Google Drive folder
•  Nonwords
–  Greater overall PCC change
–  Greater decrease in sound substitutions
•  Speech treatment with QUIL increases
children’s vocabulary
–  ZOT Age factor?
(Benelli et al., 1988; Davidson et al., 1986; Johnson & Anglin, 1995; Litowitz,
1977; Nippold, 1995; Snow, 1990; Watson, 1985
97"
Session Objectives
Final Thoughts
•  What lexical and phonological factors are
inherent in words?
•  Use books in speech treatment
–  Sound complexity, Density, Frequency
•  What is the two-representation model of word
processing, and why should I care?
–  The words used in treatment can affect outcomes
•  What is the Sonority Sequencing Principle and
how does it define cluster complexity?
–  Clusters vary in sonority and complexity
•  What are true clusters and what are adjunct
clusters?
–  Adjuncts = /s/+stops
•  What word characteristics should I be concerned
about when choosing treatment targets?
–  Lexicality, Academic Utility (Tier 2 Words)
98"
–  Functional
–  Provide meaning and context to treatment words
–  Teach vocabulary
–  Promote literacy development
–  Good “homework” activities
•  Promotes generalization
•  Some suggestions for books targeting
speech sounds are provided in your online
handout
99
More book ideas
100
More book ideas
•  Other books
•  Robert Munsch books
–  Sheep on a Ship (Nancy E. Shaw)
–  http://robertmunsch.com/books
–  Thomas’ Snowsuit
•  ʃ: she, shall, show, shot, shone
•  Nontarget words: Shelby
•  Ɵɹ: threw, three, throughout, throat, thread
•  Ɵ: thing, thousand, thought, think, thin
•  Nontarget words: Theo
–  Maisy and Friends (Lucy Cousins)
•  ɹ: ready, really, running, reading, river
–  Stone Soup (Ann Mcgovern & Winslow Pinney
Peis)
–  Stephanie’s Ponytail
•  ʧ: change, child, children, choice, chance
•  Nontarget words, Chelsea
•  l: lost, little, likely, large, lady
–  How the zebra got its stripes (Ron Fontes)
•  stɹ: stripes, strawberries, straw, strange, strong
–  Pigs
–  Splat the cat (Rob Scotton)
•  f: father, family, %eld, %nally, farm
•  Nontarget words: Fiona
101
•  spl: splish, splash, splosh, splitting, splendid
•  Nontarget words: Splat
102
High"Frequency"Words:"serious,"situaOon"
"Tier"2"Words:"scenario,"sequence"
High"Frequency"Words:"learned,"local"
"Tier"2"Words:"logic,"locate"
103"
High"Frequency"Words:"reacOon,"result"
"Tier"2"Words:"raOonal,"rigid"
104"
High"Frequency"Words:"something,"several"
"Tier"2"Words:"select,"sufficient"
105"
106"
High"Frequency"Words:"reacOon,"remember"
Tier"2"Words:"random,"relax"
Thank you!
QUESTIONS?
107"
Contact: [email protected]
108"
References
Aslin, R. N., & Smith, L. B. (1988). Perceptual development. Annual Review of Psychology, 39, 435–473. http://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ps.39.020188.002251 Barlow, J. A. (2001). The structure of /s/-­‐sequences: evidence from a disordered system. Journal of Child Language, 28(2), 291–324. Barlow, J. A. (2004). Consonant clusters in phonological clusters in phonological acquisition: Applications to assessment and treatment. CSHA Magazine, 34, 10–13. Barlow, J. A., Taps, J., & Storkel, H. L. (2010). Phonological Assessment and Treatment Target Selection. San Diego, CA: San Diego Unified School District. Beck, I. L., McKeown, M. G., & Kucan, L. (2013). Bringing Words to Life: Robust Vocabulary Instruction. Guilford Press. Beck, I. L., McKeown, M. G., & Omanson, R. C. (1987). The effects and uses of diverse vocabulary instructional techniques. In McKeown, M.G., & Curtis, M.E. (eds.), The nature of vocabulary acquisition (pp. 147–163). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Bedore, L. M., & Leonard, L. B. (2000). The effects of inflectional variation on fast mapping of verbs in English and Spanish. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research: JSLHR, 43(1), 21–33. Benelli, B., Belacchi, C., Gini, G., & Lucangeli, D. (2006). “To define means to say what you know about things”: the development of definitional skills as metalinguistic acquisition. Journal of Child Language, 33(1), 71–97. Bernthal, J. E., Bankson, N. W., & Flipsen, P. (2012). Articulation and Phonological Disorders: Speech Sound Disorders in Children (7 edition). Boston: Pearson. Bird, J., Bishop, D. V. M., & Freeman, N. H. (1995). Phonological awareness and literacy development in children with expressive phonological impairments. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 38(2), 446–462. Bleile, K. M. (2014). The late eight (2nd. ed.). San Diego, CA: Plural Pub. Bowey, J. A. (2006). Clarifying the phonological processing account of nonword repetition. Applied Psycholinguistics, 27(04), 548–552. http://doi.org/10.1017/S0142716406220393 Bryan, A., & Howard, D. (1992). Frozen phonology thawed: The analysis and remediation of a developmental disorder of real word phonology. International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders, 27(4), 343–365. http://doi.org/10.3109/13682829209012045 Busk, P. L., & Serlin, R. C. (1992). Meta-­‐analysis for single-­‐case research. In Kratochwill, T.R. & Levin, J.R. (eds.), Single-­‐case research design and analysis (pp. 187–212). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Carey, S., & Bartlett, E. (1978). Acquiring a Single New Word. Retrieved from http://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED198703 Cataño, L., Barlow, J. A., & Moyna, M. I. (2009). A retrospective study of phonetic inventory complexity in acquisition of Spanish: implications for phonological universals. Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics, 23(6), 446–472. http://doi.org/10.1080/02699200902839818 Cazden, C. (1976). Young fluent readers. London: Heinemann. Clarke-­‐Klein, S., & Hodson, B. W. (1995). A Phonologically Based Analysis of Misspellings by Third Graders With Disordered-­‐Phonology Histories. Journal of Speech Language and Hearing Research, 38(4), 839. http://doi.org/10.1044/jshr.3804.839 Clements, G. (1990). The role of the sonority cycle in core syllabification. In Kingston, J. & Beckman, M. (eds.). Papers in Laboratory Phonology I: Between the grammar and the physics of speech (pp. 283–333). Cambridge: Cambri. Coady, J. A., & Evans, J. L. (2008). Uses and interpretations of non-­‐word repetition tasks in children with and without specific language impairments (SLI). International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders / Royal College of Speech & Language Therapists, 43(1), 1–40. http://doi.org/10.1080/13682820601116485 Cummings, A., & Barlow, J. A. (2011). A comparison of word lexicality in the treatment of speech sound disorders. Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics, 25(4), 265–286. http://doi.org/10.3109/02699206.2010.528822 Davidson, R. G., Kline, S. B., & Snow, C. E. (1986). Definitions and definite noun phrases: Indicators of children’s decontextualized language skills. Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 1, 37–48. Dell, G. S. (1986). A spreading-­‐activation theory of retrieval in sentence production. Psychological Review, 93(3), 283–321. http://doi.org/10.1037/0033-­‐295X.93.3.283 Dinnsen, D. A., Chin, S. B., & Elbert, M. (1992). On the lawfulness of change in phonetic inventories. Lingua, 8, 207–222. Dinnsen, D. A., Chin, S. B., Elbert, M., & Powell, T. W. (1990). Some constraints on functionally disordered phonologies: phonetic inventories and phonotactics. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 33(1), 28–37. Dinnsen, D. A., & Elbert, M. (1984). On the relationship between phonology and learning. ASHA Monographs, (22), 59–68. Dodd, B., & Bradford, A. (2000). A comparison of three therapy methods for children with different types of developmental phonological disorder. International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders / Royal College of Speech & Language Therapists, 35(2), 189–209. Dollaghan, C. (1985). Child meets word: “fast mapping” in preschool children. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 28(3), 449–454. Dollaghan, C. A. (1987). Fast mapping in normal and language-­‐impaired children. The Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, 52(3), 218–222. Dollaghan, C. A., & Campbell, T. F. (1998). Nonword Repetition and Child Language Impairment. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 41(5), 1136–1146. Elbert, M., Dinnsen, D. A., & Powell, T. W. (1984). On the prediction of phonologic generalization learning patterns. The Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, 49(3), 309–317. Forrest, K., Elbert, M., & Dinnsen, D. A. (2000). The effect of substitution patterns on phonological treatment outcomes. Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics, 14(7), 519–531. http://doi.org/10.1080/026992000750020341 Gallagher, T. M., & Shriner, T. H. (1975). Contextual variables related to inconsistent /s/ and /z/ production in the spontaneous speech of children. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 18(4), 623–633. Gathercole, S. E., & Baddeley, A. D. (1996). The Children’s Test of Nonword Repetition. London: Psychological Corporation. Gierut, J. A. (1990). Differential learning of phonological oppositions. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 33(3), 540–549. Gierut, J. A. (1991). Homonymy in phonological change. Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics, 5(2), 119–137. http://doi.org/10.3109/02699209108985509 Gierut, J. A. (1992). The conditions and course of clinically induced phonological change. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 35(5), 1049–1063. Gierut, J. A. (1998). Treatment efficacy: functional phonological disorders in children. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research: JSLHR, 41(1), S85–100. Gierut, J. A. (1999). Syllable onsets: clusters and adjuncts in acquisition. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research: JSLHR, 42(3), 708–726. Gierut, J. A. (2001a). A model of lexical diffusion in phonological acquisition. Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics, 15(1-­‐2), 19–22. http://doi.org/10.3109/02699200109167624 Gierut, J. A. (2001b). Complexity in Phonological Treatment: Clinical Factors. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 32(4), 229–241. http://doi.org/10.1044/0161-­‐1461(2001/021) Gierut, J. A. (2007). Phonological complexity and language learnability. American Journal of Speech-­‐Language Pathology / American Speech-­‐Language-­‐Hearing Association, 16(1), 6–17. http://doi.org/10.1044/1058-­‐0360(2007/003) Gierut, J. A., & Champion, A. H. (2001). Syllable onsets II: three-­‐element clusters in phonological treatment. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research: JSLHR, 44(4), 886–904. Gierut, J. A., & Dale, R. A. (2007). Comparability of lexical corpora: word frequency in phonological generalization. Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics, 21(6), 423–433. http://doi.org/10.1080/02699200701299891 Gierut, J. A., Elbert, M., & Dinnsen, D. A. (1987). A functional analysis of phonological knowledge and generalization learning in misarticulating children. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 30(4), 462–479. Gierut, J. A., & Morrisette, M. L. (1998). Lexical properties in implementation of sound change. In Greenhill, A., Hughes, M., Littlefield, H., & Walsh, H. (eds.), Proceedings of the 22nd Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development (pp. 257–268). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press. Gierut, J. A., & Morrisette, M. L. (2011). Effect size in clinical phonology. Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics, 25(11-­‐12), 975–980. http://doi.org/10.3109/02699206.2011.601392 Gierut, J. A., & Morrisette, M. L. (2012). Density, frequency and the expressive phonology of children with phonological delay. Journal of Child Language, 39(4), 804–834. http://doi.org/10.1017/S0305000911000304 Gierut, J. A., & Morrisette, M. L. (2014). Dense neighborhoods and mechanisms of learning: evidence from children with phonological delay. Journal of Child Language, 1–37. http://doi.org/10.1017/S0305000914000701 Gierut, J. A., Morrisette, M. L., & Champion, A. H. (1999). Lexical constraints in phonological acquisition. Journal of Child Language, 26(2), 261–294. Gierut, J. A., Morrisette, M. L., Hughes, M. T., & Rowland, S. (1996). Phonological Treatment Efficacy and Developmental Norms. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 27(3), 215–230. Gierut, J. A., Morrisette, M. L., & Ziemer, S. M. (2010). Nonwords and generalization in children with phonological disorders. American Journal of Speech-­‐Language Pathology / American Speech-­‐Language-­‐Hearing Association, 19(2), 167–177. http://doi.org/10.1044/1058-­‐0360(2009/09-­‐0020) Gierut, J. A., & O’Connor, K. M. (2002). Precursors to onset clusters in acquisition. Journal of Child Language, 29(3), 495–517. Gierut, J. A., Simmerman, C. L., & Neumann, H. J. (1994). Phonemic structures of delayed phonological systems. Journal of Child Language, 21(2), 291–316. Gierut, J. A., & Storkel, H. L. (2002). Markedness and the grammar in lexical diffusion of fricatives. Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics, 16(2), 115–134. Girolametto, L., Pearce, P. S., & Weitzman, E. (1997). Effects of lexical intervention on the phonology of late talkers. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research: JSLHR, 40(2), 338–348. Gupta, P., & MacWhinney, B. (1997). Vocabulary acquisition and verbal short-­‐term memory: computational and neural bases. Brain and Language, 59(2), 267–333. http://doi.org/10.1006/brln.1997.1819 Hickok, G. (2009). The functional neuroanatomy of language. Physics of Life Reviews, 6(3), 121–143. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.plrev.2009.06.001 Hickok, G., & Poeppel, D. (2007). The cortical organization of speech processing. Nature Reviews. Neuroscience, 8(5), 393–402. http://doi.org/10.1038/nrn2113 Hoffman, P. R. (1990). Spelling, Phonology, and the Speech-­‐Language Pathologist: A Whole Language Perspective. Language Speech and Hearing Services in Schools, 21(4), 238. http://doi.org/10.1044/0161-­‐1461.2104.238 Hoffman, P. R., & Norris, J. A. (1989). On the Nature of Phonological Development: Evidence from Normal Children’s Spelling Errors. Journal of Speech Language and Hearing Research, 32(4), 787. http://doi.org/10.1044/jshr.3204.787 Ingram, D., Christensen, L., Veach, S., & Webster, B. (1980). The acquisition of word-­‐initial fricatives and affricates in English by children between 2 and 6 years. In In: Yeni-­‐ Komshian, GH, Kavanagh, FJ, & Ferguson, CA., eds., Child phonology, Vol. 1: Production (pp. 169–192). New: Academic Press. Isermann, B. (2001). Variability of consistency of articulation in children with phonological disorders. The Ohio State. Johnson, C. J., & Anglin, J. M. (1995). Qualitative developments in the content and form of children’s definitions. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 38(3), 612–629. Kamhi, A. G., & Catts, H. W. (1986). Toward an understanding of developmental language and reading disorders. The Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, 51(4), 337–347. Kučera, H., & Francis, W. N. (1967). Computational analysis of present-­‐day American English. Providence: Brown University Press. Levelt. (1999). Models of word production. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 3(6), 223–232. Lewis, B. A., & Freebairn, L. (1992). Residual Effects of Preschool Phonology Disorders in Grade School, Adolescence, and Adulthood. Journal of Speech Language and Hearing Research, 35(4), 819. http://doi.org/10.1044/jshr.3504.819 Litowitz, B. (1977). Learning to make definitions. Journal of Child Language, 4, 289–304. Luce, P. A., Goldinger, S. D., Auer, E. T., & Vitevitch, M. S. (2000). Phonetic priming, neighborhood activation, and PARSYN. Perception & Psychophysics, 62(3), 615–625. Luce, P. A., & Pisoni, D. B. (1998). Recognizing spoken words: the neighborhood activation model. Ear and Hearing, 19(1), 1–36. Maas, E., Barlow, J., Robin, D., & Shapiro, L. (2002). Treatment of sound errors in aphasia and apraxia of speech: Effects of phonological complexity. Aphasiology, 16(4-­‐6), 609–622. http://doi.org/10.1080/02687030244000266 McReynolds, L. V., & Jetzke, E. (1986). Articulation generalization of voiced-­‐voiceless sounds in hearing-­‐impaired children. The Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, 51(4), 348–355. MICHAEL P. ROBB, K. M. B., STEPHANIE S. L. YEE. (1999). A phonetic analysis of vowel errors during the course of treatment. Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics, 13(4), 309–
321. http://doi.org/10.1080/026992099299103 Morrisette, M. L., Farris, A. W., & Gierut, J. A. (2006). Applicaitons of learnability theory to clnical phonology. Advances in Speech-­‐Language Pathology, 8, 207–219. Morrisette, M. L., & Gierut, J. A. (2002). Lexical organization and phonological change in treatment. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research: JSLHR, 45(1), 143–
159. http://doi.org/10.1044/1092-­‐4388(2002/011) Nippold, M. A. (1995). School-­‐age children and adolescents: Norms for word definition. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 26, 320–325. Oetting, J. B., Rice, M. L., & Swank, L. K. (1995). Quick Incidental Learning (QUIL) of words by school-­‐age children with and without SLI. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 38(2), 434–445. Ohala, D. K. (1999). The influence of sonority on children’s cluster reductions. Journal of Communication Disorders, 32(6), 397–421; quiz 421–422. Rice, M. L., Buhr, J. C., & Nemeth, M. (1990). Fast mapping word-­‐learning abilities of language-­‐delayed preschoolers. The Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, 55(1), 33–42. Rice, M. L., Buhr, J., & Oetting, J. B. (1992). Specific-­‐language-­‐impaired children’s quick incidental learning of words: the effect of a pause. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 35(5), 1040–1048. Rice, M. L., Oetting, J. B., Marquis, J., Bode, J., & Pae, S. (1994). Frequency of input effects on word comprehension of children with specific language impairment. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 37(1), 106–122. Rice, M. L., & Woodsmall, L. (1988). Lessons from television: children’s word learning when viewing. Child Development, 59(2), 420–429. Roca, I., & Johnson, W. (1999). Course in phonology. Oxford: Blackwell. Rockman, B. K. (1983). An experimental investigation of generaliation and individual differences in phonological training. Indiana University Dissertation. Schmidt, A. M., & Meyers, K. A. (1995). Traditional and phonological treatment for teaching English fricatives and affricates to Koreans. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 38(4), 828–838. Shriberg, L. D. (1993). Four new speech and prosody-­‐voice measures for genetics research and other studies in developmental phonological disorders. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 36(1), 105–140. Shriberg, L. D., Austin, D., Lewis, B. A., McSweeny, J. L., & Wilson, D. L. (1997). The Percentage of Consonants Correct (PCC) Metric: Extensions and Reliability Data. Journal of Speech Language and Hearing Research, 40(4), 708. http://doi.org/10.1044/jslhr.4004.708 Shriberg, L. D., & Kwiatkowski, J. (1982). Phonological Disorders III: A Procedure for Assessing Severity of Involvement. Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, 47(3), 256. http://doi.org/10.1044/jshd.4703.256 Shriberg, L. D., Tomblin, J. B., & McSweeny, J. L. (1999). Prevalence of Speech Delay in 6-­‐
Year-­‐Old Children and Comorbidity With Language Impairment. J Speech Lang Hear Res, 42(6), 1461–1481. Smit, A. B. (1993). Phonologic error distributions in the Iowa-­‐Nebraska Articulation Norms Project: Word-­‐initial consonant clusters. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 36, 931–947. Smit, A. B., Hand, L., Freilinger, J. J., Bernthal, J. E., & Bird, A. (1990). The Iowa Articulation Norms Project and its Nebraska Replication. Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, 55(4), 779–798. Smith, N. V. (1973). The acquisition of phonology: a case study. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Snow, C. E. (1990). The development of definitional skill. Journal of Child Language, 17(3), 697–710. Steriade, D. (1990). Greek prosodies and the nature of syllabification, (Doctoral dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 1982). New York: Garland Press. Stoel-­‐Gammon, C. (1996). On the acquisition of velars in English. In Bernhardt, B., Gilbert, J., & Ingram, D. (eds.), Proceedings of th eUBC Itnernational Conference on Phonological Acquisition (pp. 201–214). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press. Storkel, H. L. (2004). The emerging lexicon of children with phonological delays: phonotactic constraints and probability in acquisition. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research: JSLHR, 47(5), 1194–1212. Storkel, H. L., & Morrisette, M. L. (2002). The Lexicon and Phonology: Interactions in Language Acquisition. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 33(1), 24–
37. http://doi.org/10.1044/0161-­‐1461(2002/003) Thompson, C. K. (2007). Complexity in language learning and treatment. American Journal of Speech-­‐Language Pathology / American Speech-­‐Language-­‐Hearing Association, 16(1), 3–5. http://doi.org/10.1044/1058-­‐0360(2007/002) Tyler, A. A., & Figurski, G. R. (1994). Phonetic inventory changes after treating distinctions along an implicational hierarchy. Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics, 8(2), 91–107. http://doi.org/10.3109/02699209408985299 Tyler, A. A., & Lewis, K. E. (2005). Relationships among consistency/variability and other phonological measures over time. Topics in Language Disorders, 25(3), 243–253. Tyler, A. A., Lewis, K. E., & Welch, C. M. (2003). Predictors of phonological change following intervention. American Journal of Speech-­‐Language Pathology / American Speech-­‐
Language-­‐Hearing Association, 12(3), 289–298. http://doi.org/10.1044/1058-­‐
0360(2003/075) Vance, M., Stackhouse, J., & Wells, B. (2005). Speech-­‐production skills in children aged 3–7 years. International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders, 40(1), 29–48. http://doi.org/10.1080/13682820410001716172 Van Riper, C. (1939). Speech Correction: Principles and Methods. Prentice-­‐Hall, Incorporated. Van Riper, C. (1978). Speech correction: Principles and methods. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-­‐Hall. Retrieved from http://books.google.com/books?id=LbVrAAAAMAAJ Vitevitch, M. S. (2002). The influence of phonological similarity neighborhoods on speech production. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 28(4), 735–747. http://doi.org/10.1037/0278-­‐7393.28.4.735 Watson, R. (1985). Towards a theory of definition. Journal of Child Language, 12, 181–197. Webster, P. E., & Plante, A. S. (1992). Effects of Phonological Impairment on Word, Syllable, and Phoneme Segmentation and Reading. Language Speech and Hearing Services in Schools, 23(2), 176. http://doi.org/10.1044/0161-­‐1461.2302.176 Wehren, A., De Lisi, R., & Arnold, M. (1981). The development of noun definition. Journal of Child Language, 8(1), 165–175. Whitehurst, G. J., Arnold, D. S., Epstein, J. N., Angell, A. L., Smith, M., & Fischel, J. E. (1994). A picture book reading intervention in day care and home for children from low-­‐
income families. Developmental Psychology, 30(5), 679–689. http://doi.org/10.1037/0012-­‐1649.30.5.679 Most complex Sonority Sequencing Principle For Clusters (Gierut, 1999) 7 = voiceless stops 6 = voiced stops 5 = voiceless fricatives 4 = voiced fricatives 3 = nasals 2 = liquids 1 = glides (Steriade, 1990) sonority distance = 2 voiceless fricative + nasal /sm‐/ /sn‐/ /mj‐/ sonority distance = 3 voiceless fricative + liquid /fl‐/ /fr‐/ /θr‐/ /sl‐/ /ʃr‐/ /sr‐/ (This cluster does not appear in English. However, children with disordered phonologies sometimes produce this combination, which suggests knowledge of clusters with a sonority distance of 3.) sonority distance = 4 voiced stops + liquid or voiceless fricative + glide /bl‐/ /br‐/ /dr‐/ /gl‐/ /gr‐/ /sw‐/ /fw‐/, /ʃw‐/, /θw‐/ (These clusters do not appear in English. However, children with disordered phonologies sometimes produce these combinations, which suggests knowledge of clusters with a sonority distance of 4.) sonority distance = 5 Least complex voiceless stop + liquid or voiced stop + glide /pl‐/ /pr‐/ /tr‐/ /kl‐/ /kr‐/ /bw‐/, /dw‐/, /gw‐/ (/bw‐/ does not appear in English while /dw‐/ (e.g., dwindle) and /gw‐/ (e.g., guava) do not frequently occur in English. However, children with disordered phonologies sometimes produce these combinations, which suggests knowledge of clusters with a sonority distance of 5.) sonority distance = 6 voiceless stop + glide /tw‐/ /kw‐/ /pj‐/ /pw‐/ (This cluster does not appear in English. However, children with disordered phonologies often produce this combination, which suggests knowledge of clusters with a sonority distance of 6.) © 2011 Jennifer Taps and SLPath.com
Implicational Laws and
Examples of Complex Treatment Targets
(Adapted from Gierut, J.A. (2007). Phonological complexity and language learnability.
American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 16, 6 – 17.)
Hierarchical properties
of sound systems
Phonetic inventory
Phonemic inventory
Observed implicational
relationships
Acquisition evidence
Examples of complex
treatment targetsa
A stridency and/or laterality distinction
implies the phonetic occurrence of a liquid,
which implies a fricative and/or affricate,
which implies a voice distinction among
cognate stops, which implies a nasal and
glide.b
Tyler & Figurski, 1994
Consonants imply vowels.
Robb et al., 1999
Consonant excluded from child’s
inventory
Affricates imply fricatives.
Dinnsen et al., 1992
/tʃ dʒ/
Fricatives imply stops.
Dinnsen & Elbert, 1984
/f v θ ð s z ʃ ʒ/
Voiced obstruents (i.e., stops, fricatives,
affricates) imply voiceless obstruents.
McReynolds & Jetske, 1986
/b d g/
/v ð z ʒ/
/s/ in contrast to /θ/
/z/ in contrast to /ð/
/r/ in contrast to /l/
/dʒ/
Distributional
properties
Liquids imply nasals.
Gierut et al., 1994
Velars imply coronals (i.e. alveolars,
interdentals, palatals).
Stoel-Gammon, 1996
Fricatives in initial position imply fricatives in
final position.
Ferguson, 1977
Word-initial /f v θ ð s z ʃ ʒ/
Stops in final position imply stops in initial
position.
Dinnsen, 1996
Word-final /p b t d k g/
(c) 2010 Jennifer Taps, M.A., CCC-SLP and SLPath.com
/l r/
/k g/
Implicational Laws and
Examples of Complex Treatment Targets
(Adapted from Gierut, J.A. (2007). Phonological complexity and language learnability.
American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 16, 6 – 17.)
Hierarchical properties
of sound systems
Syllable structure
a
Observed implicational
relationships
Acquisition evidence
Examples of complex
treatment targetsa
Clusters imply singletons.
Gierut & Champion, 2001
Clusters, with exception of of
s+obstruent stop sequences (/sp-/,
/sk-/, /st-/) and /sm-/ and /sn-/c
Clusters imply affricates.
Gierut & O’Connor, 2002
Clusters c
Clusters with a small sonority difference
imply clusters with a large sonority difference.
Gierut, 1999
/fl- fr- sl -θr- ʃr-/
Fricative + Liquid clusters imply Stop +
Liquid clusters.
Elbert et al., 1984
/fl- fr- sl- θr- ʃr-/
Three-element clusters imply two-element
clusters.
Gierut & Champion, 2001
/str- spr- skr- spl- skw-/
Any one of the examples in the corresponding cell represents a complex treatment target.
b
This is a relative markedness relationship that involves a chain of phonetic properties (see Dinnsen, 1992, for details). Phonetic
inventories are determined by a two-time occurrence of a sound independent of context and accuracy (Stoel-Gammon, 1985), and
distinctions are established by contrasts among phones in the inventory.
c
/sp- st- sk-/ are not true clusters, and therefore they pattern differently in typological markedness, speakers’ psycholinguistic
judgments, and children’s learning in treatment. Treatment of these sequences has been experimentally shown to inhibit generalization
learning (see Gierut, 1999; Gierut & Champion, 2001). This may also be the case for /sn-/ and /sm-/. These two-element clusters
should be avoided in treatment. (Three-element clusters operate differently in systems and often constitute ideal, complex targets.)
(c) 2010 Jennifer Taps, M.A., CCC-SLP and SLPath.com
Place
Manner
Obstruents
Stop
Fricative
Affricate
Approximants
Sonorants
Nasal
Liquid: Lateral
Liquid: Rhotic
Glide
Tap or Flap
Voicing
Bilabial
Voiceless
p
Voiced
b
Labiodental
Lingua-Palatal
Lingua-Dental,
Lingua-Alveolar,
Post-Alveolar,
Inter-Dental,
Velar Glottal
Palatal
Alveolar
Palato-Alveolar
Dental
t
k
d
Voiceless
f
T
s
Voiced
v
D
z
g
S
tS
Voiced
dZ
m
n
N
l
Voiced
® *
Voiced
Voiceless
„
**
Voiced
w
**
Voiced
h
Z
Voiceless
Voiced
(„)
R
/
j
* Unless the speech sample also includes trills (e.g., Spanish), this can be transcribed as [r]. Place depends on articulation. Can be
apical/retroflex or bunched. Both are considered "correct".
** /w/ and /„/ are most accurately classified as labial velar
(w)
/bid/ bead
/but/ boot
/bɪb/ bib
/bʊk/ book
/bʌbə/ Bubba
/beɪk/ bake
/bɝgɚ/ burger
/bɛd/ bed
/boʊt/ boat
/bæt/bat
/baks/ box /bɔt/ bought
(take a) /baʊ/
bow
/baɪk/ bike
/bɪɚd/ beard
/bɛɚ/ bear
/bɔɪ/ boy
/baʊɚɪ/ bowery
/baɚ/ bar
/baɪɚ/ buyer
/bɔɚd/ board
High Frequency Word List
Key: word, frequency (100 or higher is considered high-frequency in English), density (10 or lower is considered low density, 11 or higher high density)
r (initial)
race, 103, 29
radio, 120, 2
ran, 134, 28
range, 160, 8
rate, 209, 39
rather, 373, 3
reach, 106, 20
reaction, 124, 0
read, 178, 28
reading, 140, 1
ready, 143, 6
real, 260, 16
really, 275, 4
reason, 241, 6
recent, 179, 1
record, 137, 2
red, 197, 29
remember, 138, 0
report, 174, 4
research, 171, 0
respect, 125, 0
responsibility, 118, 0
rest, 164, 20
result, 244, 0
return, 180, 1
right/write, 727, 35
rise, 102, 21
river, 165, 4
road, 237, 29
role, 139, 34
room, 384, 23
run, 212, 26
running, 123, 1
wrote, 181, 35
er (final)
after, 1070, 5
another, 683, 0
answer, 152, 3
better, 414, 8
center, 226, 9
character, 118, 0
consider, 127, 0
corner, 115, 2
during, 585, 2
either, 284, 4
ever, 345, 6
father, 183, 6
former, 131, 2
further, 218, 3
her, 3037, 22
however, 552, 1
latter, 114, 21
letter, 145, 13
longer, 193, 2
lower, 123, 16
manner, 129, 10
matter, 308, 16
member, 137, 1
mother, 216, 4
neither, 141, 2
never, 698, 4
number, 472, 3
officer, 101, 1
order, 376, 5
other, 1702, 5
over, 1236, 10
paper, 157, 9
per, 371, 19
power, 342, 9
rather, 373, 3
remember, 138, 0
river, 165, 4
summer, 134, 7
sure, 264, 9
together, 267, 0
under, 707, 4
water, 442, 3
weather, 355, 6
whatever, 112, 0
ar (all)
are, 4459, 19
army, 132, 4
art, 208, 13
car, 274, 24
charge, 122, 8
dark, 185, 10
far, 427, 18
farm, 125, 6
hard, 202, 18
hardly, 106, 1
heart, 186, 16
large, 361, 7
march, 120, 11
market, 155, 1
part, 500, 17
party, 216, 5
start, 154, 7
ire (all)
fire, 187, 22
ear (all)
© Jennifer Taps / SLPath.com 2007
Page 1 of 8
appear, 118, 2
clear, 219, 9
experience, 276, 0
fear, 127, 31
hear, 903, 30
material, 174, 1
near, 198, 25
period, 265, 1
series, 130, 1
serious, 116, 1
spirit, 182, 1
theory, 129, 7
year, 660, 18
rl (all)
early, 366, 10
girl, 220, 16
world, 787, 5
air (all)
air, 266, 30
American, 569, 0
area, 323, 4
care, 162, 23
hair, 149, 24
military, 212, 0
necessary, 222, 0
secretary, 191, 1
square, 143, 3
their/there 5394, 17
therefore, 206, 0
various, 201, 2
vary, 830, 10
where, 938, 7
High Frequency Word List
Key: word, frequency (100 or higher is considered high-frequency in English), density (10 or lower is considered low density, 11 or higher high density)
or (all)
before, 1016, 0
board, 239, 16
born, 121, 14
coarse, 475, 16
core, 146, 36
corner, 115, 2
court, 230, 17
for, 9855, 33
force, 230, 16
form, 370, 15
former, 131, 2
forth, 145, 9
forward, 115, 0
hoarse, 122, 11
importance, 108, 0
more, 2216, 29
morning, 219, 0
nor, 195, 28
normal, 136, 3
north, 206, 4
or, 4210, 32
order, 376, 5
organization, 127, 0
original, 103, 0
performance, 122, 0
poor, 124, 31
record, 137, 2
report, 174, 4
short, 212, 10
sort, 164, 14
story, 153, 5
support, 180, 2
therefore, 206, 0
war, 529, 29
your, 925, 19
r-blends
across, 282, 2
bring, 158, 8
British, 118, 0
brought, 253, 10
brown, 176, 10
congress, 152, 0
country, 324, 0
degree, 125, 3
district, 135, 1
drive, 105, 9
free, 260, 17
freedom, 128, 0
french, 139, 4
friend, 133, 5
from, 4369, 5
front, 221, 5
grate, 668, 21
green, 116, 13
ground, 186, 5
group, 390, 11
growth, 155, 6
hundred, 171, 0
increase, 195, 0
present, 377, 3
president, 382, 0
press, 127, 6
pressure, 185, 0
pretty, 107, 4
price, 108, 10
principal, 201, 0
private, 191, 1
probably, 261, 0
problem, 313, 0
process, 196, 0
production, 148, 0
professional, 105, 1
progress, 120, 0
property, 156, 1
provide, 216, 0
secretary, 191, 1
spring, 127, 5
straight, 119, 8
street, 244, 6
strength, 136, 0
stress, 107, 2
strong, 202, 3
three, 610, 9
threw, 1015, 10
throughout, 141, 0
trade, 143, 13
trial, 134, 10
tried, 170, 16
trouble, 134, 5
true, 231, 18
truth, 126, 5
try, 140, 19
s (initial)
c/sea/see, 997, 40
cell, 106, 26
cent, 309, 22
center, 226, 9
central, 164, 3
century, 207, 2
certain, 313, 4
cite, 157, 28
city, 393, 7
© Jennifer Taps / SLPath.com 2007
Page 2 of 8
said, 1961, 21
same, 686, 21
sat, 150, 32
saw, 352, 23
say, 504, 37
scene, 385, 29
science, 131, 1
seam, 238, 22
season, 105, 3
second, 373, 0
secretary, 191, 1
section, 189, 2
sense, 311, 13
series, 130, 1
serious, 116, 1
serve, 107, 14
service, 315, 2
set, 414, 32
seven, 113, 2
several, 377, 1
side, 380, 23
similar, 157, 2
simple, 161, 6
since, 628, 8
single, 172, 6
situation, 196, 0
six, 220, 8
size, 138, 12
small, 542, 5
so, 1990, 29
social, 380, 0
society, 237, 0
some, 1662, 23
something, 450, 0
son, 278, 26
High Frequency Word List
Key: word, frequency (100 or higher is considered high-frequency in English), density (10 or lower is considered low density, 11 or higher high density)
soon, 199, 24
sort, 164, 14
sound, 204, 10
south, 240, 5
southern, 137, 0
subject, 161, 0
such, 1303, 12
summer, 134, 7
sundae, 101, 2
supply, 102, 1
support, 180, 2
surface, 200, 2
system, 416, 0
s (medial)
also, 1069, 1
analysis, 108, 0
answer, 152, 3
association, 132, 0
basic, 171, 0
basis, 184, 1
consider, 127, 0
council, 120, 2
except, 181, 2
fiscal, 116, 1
force, 230, 16
herself, 125, 1
inside, 174, 4
myself, 129, 1
necessary, 222, 0
officer, 101, 1
person, 175, 4
personal, 196, 1
policy, 222, 0
possible, 373, 0
principal, 201, 0
purpose, 149, 0
question, 257, 0
recent, 179, 1
research, 171, 0
society, 237, 0
system, 416, 0
university, 214, 0
influence, 132, 0
its, 1858, 1
justice, 114, 0
less, 438, 24
mass, 110, 26
miss, 258, 23
office, 255, 3
once, 499, 4
peace, 327, 19
performance, 122, 0
s (final)
across, 282, 2
perhaps, 307, 0
analysis, 108, 0
place, 571, 7
audience, 115, 0
police, 155, 1
basis, 184, 1
press, 127, 6
business, 392, 0
price, 108, 10
case, 362, 22
process, 196, 0
chance, 131, 9
progress, 120, 0
choice, 113, 3
purpose, 149, 0
class, 207, 12
race, 103, 29
close, 234, 6
religious, 165, 2
coarse, 475, 16
s, 135, 21
congress, 152, 0
science, 131, 1
defense, 167, 2
sense, 311, 13
difference, 148, 1
serious, 116, 1
distance, 108, 0
service, 315, 2
else, 176, 6
since, 628, 8
evidence, 204, 0
six, 220, 8
existence, 107, 0
space, 184, 6
experience, 276, 0
stress, 107, 2
face, 371, 21
surface, 200, 2
force, 230, 16
tax, 197, 9
hoarse, 122, 11
this, 5146, 4
house, 591, 7
thus, 312, 6
importance, 108, 0
unless, 101, 0
increase, 195, 0
us, 672, 10
© Jennifer Taps / SLPath.com 2007
Page 3 of 8
various, 201, 2
voice, 226, 7
yes, 144, 9
s-blends
against, 626, 0
almost, 432, 0
ask, 128, 8
best, 351, 23
cost, 229, 5
district, 135, 1
east, 183, 8
first, 1360, 9
history, 286, 1
hospital, 110, 0
instead, 173, 1
interest, 330, 1
its, 1858, 1
itself, 304, 0
just, 872, 12
justice, 114, 0
last, 676, 14
least, 343, 12
list, 133, 19
lost, 173, 9
most, 1160, 13
must, 1013, 16
outside, 210, 2
past, 281, 17
respect, 125, 0
responsibility, 118, 0
rest, 164, 20
school, 492, 8
space, 184, 6
speak, 110, 11
High Frequency Word List
Key: word, frequency (100 or higher is considered high-frequency in English), density (10 or lower is considered low density, 11 or higher high density)
special, 250, 2
specific, 115, 1
spent, 104, 3
spirit, 182, 1
spring, 127, 5
square, 143, 3
staff, 113, 5
stage, 174, 11
stand, 148, 3
standard, 110, 0
start, 154, 7
state, 808, 16
station, 105, 2
stay, 113, 17
step, 131, 6
still, 782, 17
stock, 147, 12
stood, 212, 4
stop, 120, 11
story, 153, 5
straight, 119, 8
street, 244, 6
strength, 136, 0
stress, 107, 2
strong, 202, 3
student, 131, 0
study, 246, 6
test, 119, 18
understand, 137, 0
west, 235, 19
western, 137, 0
theta (initial)
theory, 129, 7
thing, 333, 11
think, 433, 13
third, 190, 7
thought, 515, 11
three, 610, 9
threw/through, 1015, 10
throughout, 141, 0
theta (medial)
method, 142, 0
nothing, 412, 0
something, 450, 0
without, 583, 0
theta (final)
both, 730, 13
death, 277, 10
earth, 150, 12
faith, 111, 11
forth, 145, 9
growth, 155, 6
health, 105, 7
length, 116, 0
month, 130, 2
mouth, 103, 7
north, 206, 4
south, 240, 5
strength, 136, 0
teeth, 103, 12
truth, 126, 5
with, 7289, 13
eth (all)
another, 683, 0
either, 284, 4
father, 183, 6
further, 218, 3
mother, 216, 4
neither, 141, 2
other, 1702, 5
rather, 373, 3
southern, 137, 0
than, 1789, 12
that, 10595, 14
the, 69971, 7
their/there, 5394, 17
them, 1789, 5
themselves, 270, 0
then, 1377, 17
therefore, 206, 0
these, 1573, 9
they, 3618, 20
this, 5146, 4
those, 850, 9
though, 442, 20
thus, 312, 6
together, 267, 0
weather, 355, 6
esh (initial)
shall, 267, 13
she, 2859, 31
shone, 171, 22
short, 212, 10
shot, 112, 23
should, 888, 10
show, 287, 23
sure, 264, 9
esh (medial)
action, 291, 3
© Jennifer Taps / SLPath.com 2007
Page 4 of 8
addition, 142, 5
additional, 120, 1
association, 132, 0
commission, 103, 1
education, 214, 0
function, 113, 2
information, 269, 0
international, 155, 0
issue, 152, 3
machine, 103, 0
nation, 139, 1
national, 375, 0
operation, 113, 0
organization, 127, 0
population, 136, 1
position, 241, 4
pressure, 185, 0
production, 148, 0
professional, 105, 1
reaction, 124, 0
section, 189, 2
situation, 196, 0
social, 380, 0
special, 250, 2
station, 105, 2
esh (final)
British, 118, 0
English, 195, 0
wish, 110, 13
j (initial)
general, 497, 1
j, 139, 22
job, 238, 19
High Frequency Word List
Key: word, frequency (100 or higher is considered high-frequency in English), density (10 or lower is considered low density, 11 or higher high density)
just, 872, 12
justice, 114, 0
j (medial)
education, 214, 0
individual, 239, 0
major, 247, 4
original, 103, 0
subject, 161, 0
j (final)
age, 227, 16
average, 130, 0
change, 240, 3
charge, 122, 8
college, 267, 3
image, 119, 4
knowledge, 145, 2
language, 109, 1
large, 361, 7
range, 160, 8
stage, 174, 11
ch (initial)
chance, 131, 9
change, 240, 3
charge, 122, 8
chief, 119, 12
child, 213, 4
children, 355, 0
choice, 113, 3
ch (medial)
action, 291, 3
actual, 100, 2
actually, 166, 1
attention, 179, 2
future, 227, 0
natural, 156, 2
nature, 191, 3
ch (final)
approach, 123, 0
each, 877, 14
french, 139, 4
march, 120, 11
much, 937, 17
reach, 106, 20
research, 171, 0
such, 1303, 12
which, 3562, 11
l (initial)
labor, 149, 7
lack, 110, 38
land, 217, 14
language, 109, 1
large, 361, 7
last, 676, 14
late, 179, 32
latter, 114, 21
law, 299, 24
lay, 139, 35
lead, 261, 31
learned, 117, 4
least, 343, 12
leave, 205, 26
left, 480, 11
length, 116, 0
less, 438, 24
let, 384, 30
letter, 145, 13
level, 213, 6
life, 715, 20
light, 333, 35
like, 1290, 26
likely, 151, 1
limited, 106, 0
line, 298, 32
list, 133, 19
literature, 133, 0
little, 831, 6
live, 177, 15
living, 194, 1
local, 288, 2
long, 755, 13
longer, 193, 2
look, 399, 17
lost, 173, 9
lot, 127, 31
love, 232, 11
low, 196, 35
lower, 123, 16
l (medial)
almost, 432, 0
alone, 195, 7
along, 355, 2
already, 273, 0
also, 1069, 1
always, 458, 0
analysis, 108, 0
available, 245, 0
believe, 200, 2
college, 267, 3
© Jennifer Taps / SLPath.com 2007
Page 5 of 8
color, 141, 8
daily, 122, 9
island, 167, 0
knowledge, 145, 2
military, 212, 0
million, 204, 0
only, 1747, 0
police, 155, 1
policy, 222, 0
population, 136, 1
public, 438, 1
quality, 114, 1
unless, 101, 0
value, 200, 0
volume, 135, 0
l (final)
all, 3001, 25
ball, 110, 24
bill, 143, 35
call, 188, 26
cell, 106, 26
deal, 142, 29
fall, 147, 26
feel, 216, 30
full, 230, 15
hall, 157, 23
hole, 367, 31
hotel, 126, 1
pool, 111, 18
role, 139, 34
school, 492, 8
shall, 267, 13
small, 542, 5
still, 782, 17
High Frequency Word List
Key: word, frequency (100 or higher is considered high-frequency in English), density (10 or lower is considered low density, 11 or higher high density)
tell, 268, 21
until, 461, 0
wall, 160, 23
well, 897, 31
while, 680, 8
will, 2244, 34
l-blends
black, 203, 10
blew, 155, 12
blood, 121, 7
class, 207, 12
clay, 100, 10
clear, 219, 9
close, 234, 6
club, 145, 4
floor, 158, 6
place, 571, 7
plain, 162, 10
plan, 205, 8
plant, 125, 8
play, 200, 16
k (initial)
call, 188, 26
came, 622, 24
can, 1772, 35
cannot, 258, 1
cant, 170, 18
car, 274, 24
care, 162, 23
case, 362, 22
cause, 130, 10
character, 118, 0
class, 207, 12
clay, 100, 10
clear, 219, 9
close, 234, 6
club, 145, 4
coarse, 475, 16
cold, 171, 15
college, 267, 3
color, 141, 8
come, 630, 22
coming, 174, 2
common, 223, 3
company, 290, 0
congress, 152, 0
core, 146, 36
corner, 115, 2
cost, 229, 5
could, 1599, 11
country, 324, 0
couple, 122, 4
court, 230, 17
cut, 192, 25
keep, 264, 21
kept, 186, 3
kind, 313, 7
k (medial)
because, 883, 0
become, 361, 1
doctor, 100, 0
income, 109, 0
likely, 151, 1
market, 155, 1
particular, 179, 0
physical, 138, 2
record, 137, 2
second, 373, 0
working, 151, 0
k (final)
ask, 128, 8
back, 967, 32
basic, 171, 0
black, 203, 10
book, 193, 18
lack, 110, 38
like, 1290, 26
look, 399, 17
make, 794, 25
music, 216, 0
speak, 110, 11
specific, 115, 1
stock, 147, 12
take, 611, 25
talk, 154, 23
think, 433, 13
took, 426, 18
walk, 100, 15
weak, 307, 22
work, 760, 20
g (initial)
game, 123, 20
gave, 285, 18
get, 750, 21
girl, 220, 16
give, 391, 7
given, 377, 1
go, 626, 26
going, 399, 1
gone, 195, 17
© Jennifer Taps / SLPath.com 2007
Page 6 of 8
good, 807, 12
got, 482, 26
government, 417, 0
grate, 668, 21
green, 116, 13
ground, 186, 5
group, 390, 11
g (medial)
again, 578, 0
against, 626, 0
ago, 246, 3
degree, 125, 3
figure, 209, 0
together, 267, 0
g (final)
big, 360, 20
z (initial)
None found
z (medial)
business, 392, 0
design, 114, 2
easy, 125, 4
music, 216, 0
physical, 138, 2
present, 377, 3
president, 382, 0
season, 105, 3
visit, 109, 1
z (final)
High Frequency Word List
Key: word, frequency (100 or higher is considered high-frequency in English), density (10 or lower is considered low density, 11 or higher high density)
always, 458, 0
as, 7250, 13
because, 883, 0
business, 392, 0
cause, 130, 10
does, 485, 16
has, 2439, 20
his, 6997, 17
is, 10099, 13
needs, 152, 3
news, 102, 16
rise, 102, 21
series, 130, 1
size, 138, 12
themselves, 270, 0
these, 1573, 9
those, 850, 9
times, 300, 1
use, 589, 13
was, 9816, 1
whose, 252, 16
f (initial)
face, 371, 21
fact, 447, 6
faith, 111, 11
fall, 147, 26
family, 331, 0
far, 427, 18
farm, 125, 6
father, 183, 6
fear, 127, 31
feat, 289, 24
federal, 246, 0
feed, 123, 19
feel, 216, 30
felt, 358, 13
few, 601, 12
field, 274, 9
figure, 209, 0
final, 156, 6
finally, 191, 2
find, 399, 12
fine, 161, 28
fire, 187, 22
firm, 109, 13
first, 1360, 9
fiscal, 116, 1
five, 286, 12
floor, 158, 6
food, 147, 11
for, 9855, 33
force, 230, 16
foreign, 158, 2
form, 370, 15
former, 131, 2
forth, 145, 9
forward, 115, 0
found, 536, 14
free, 260, 17
freedom, 128, 0
french, 139, 4
friend, 133, 5
from, 4369, 5
front, 221, 5
full, 230, 15
function, 113, 2
further, 218, 3
future, 227, 0
physical, 138, 2
f (medial)
after, 1070, 5
afternoon, 106, 0
beautiful, 127, 0
before, 1016, 0
defense, 167, 2
difference, 148, 1
difficult, 161, 0
effect, 213, 3
influence, 132, 0
information, 269, 0
office, 255, 3
officer, 101, 1
often, 368, 4
performance, 122, 0
professional, 105, 1
specific, 115, 1
surface, 200, 2
f (final)
chief, 119, 12
enough, 430, 1
half, 275, 18
herself, 125, 1
himself, 603, 0
if, 2199, 13
itself, 304, 0
life, 715, 20
myself, 129, 1
off, 639, 12
staff, 113, 5
wife, 228, 15
v (initial)
© Jennifer Taps / SLPath.com 2007
Page 7 of 8
value, 200, 0
various, 201, 2
vary, 830, 10
view, 186, 6
visit, 109, 1
voice, 226, 7
volume, 135, 0
v (medial)
activity, 116, 0
available, 245, 0
average, 130, 0
division, 107, 0
even, 1171, 2
evening, 133, 0
ever, 345, 6
every, 491, 2
evidence, 204, 0
given, 377, 1
government, 417, 0
having, 279, 2
heavy, 110, 3
however, 552, 1
individual, 239, 0
level, 213, 6
living, 194, 1
never, 698, 4
over, 1236, 10
private, 191, 1
provide, 216, 0
river, 165, 4
service, 315, 2
seven, 113, 2
several, 377, 1
university, 214, 0
High Frequency Word List
Key: word, frequency (100 or higher is considered high-frequency in English), density (10 or lower is considered low density, 11 or higher high density)
whatever, 112, 0
v (final)
above, 296, 1
believe, 200, 2
drive, 105, 9
five, 286, 12
gave, 285, 18
give, 391, 7
have, 3941, 17
leave, 205, 26
live, 177, 15
love, 232, 11
move, 171, 8
of, 36411, 4
serve, 107, 14
Compiled by: J. Taps, SLP
Articulation Resource Center
using the following references
on page 8:
References:
Kenyon, J.S. & Knott, T.A. (1953). A Pronouncing Dictionary of American English. Merriam-Webster.
Klatt, D.H. (1979). Speech perception: A model of acoustic-phonetic analysis and lexical access. Journal of Phonetics, 7, 279-312.
Kucera, H. and W.N. Francis. 1967. Computational Analysis of Present-Day American English. Brown University Press, Providence
R.I.
Morrisette, M. L., & Gierut, J. A. (2002). Lexical organization and phonological change in treatment. Journal of Speech, Language,
and Hearing Research, 45, 143-159.
Nusbaum, HC.; Pisoni, DB.; Davis, CK. Research on Spoken Language Processing Report No 10. Speech Research Laboratory,
Indiana University; Bloomington, IN: 1984. Sizing up the Hoosier mental lexicon; pp. 357–376.
Sommers, M. (n.d.). Speech & Hearing Lab Neighborhood Database. Retrieved October 10, 2006 from Washington University in St.
Louis Web site: http://128.252.27.56/neighborhood/Home.asp
Storkel, H. L., & Morrisette, M. L. (2002). The lexicon and phonology: Interactions in language acquisition. Language, Speech and
Hearing Services in Schools, 33, 24-37.
© Jennifer Taps / SLPath.com 2007
Page 8 of 8
Percent Phonemes Correct (PPC) and Percent Consonants Correct (PCC) on the GFTA2
Gloss
Target
Transcription
house
hAUs
tree
tri
window
wIndoU
telephone
tEl´foUn
cup
k√p
knife
nAIf
spoon
spun
girl
gŒ’l
ball
bAl
wagon
wQg´n
shovel
S√v´l
monkey
m√Nki
banana
b´nQn´
zipper
zIp‘
scissors
sIz‘z
duck
d√k
quack
kwQk
yellow
jEloU
vacuum
vQkjum
watch
wAtS
plane
pleIn
swimming
swImIN
watches
wAtSIz
lamp
lQmp
car
kAr
blue
blu
rabbit
rQbIt
carrot
kErIt
orange
çrIndZ
fishing
fISIN
chair
tSEr
feather
fED‘
pencils
pEns´lz
this
DIs
Child's Production
PPC Correct
PPC
Incorrect
PCC Correct
PCC
Incorrect
Gloss
Target
Transcription
bathtub
bQTt√b
bath
bQT
ring
rIN
finger
fINg‘
thumb
T√m
jumping
dZ√mpIN
pajamas
p´dZQm´z
flowers
flAUw‘z
brush
br√S
drum
dr√m
frog
frAg
green
grin
clown
klAUn
balloons
b´lunz
crying
krAIjIN
glasses
glQsIz
slide
slAId
stars
stArz
five
fAIv
Child's Production
PPC Correct
PPC
Incorrect
PCC Correct
GRAND TOTAL
PPC Calculation: Number Correct/(Number Correct + Number Incorrect) x 100 = _____________
PCC Calculation: Number Correct/(Number Correct + Number Incorrect) x 100 = _____________
PCC Severity Rating:_____________________
PCC
Incorrect
Substitution Patterns
Child Name:
Subj#:
Phase:
Researcher:
#____
m
n
N
p
b
t
d
k
g
f
v
T
D
s
z
S
Z
tS
dZ
l
r
w
j
h
V____V
____#
Cluster Correct Incorrect
mj
pl
pr
bl
br
bj
tr
tw
dr
kl
kr
kj
kw
gl
gr
fl
fr
fj
Tr
sw
sm
sn
Substitutions
sp
st
sk
sl
spl
spr
str
skr
skw
Sr
vj
(Averil Coxhead’s) High-Incidence Academic Word List (AWL) – Alphabetical Order
Words of highest frequency are followed by the number 1
abandon
8
abstract
6
academy
5
access
4
accommodate 9
accompany
8
accumulate
8
accurate
6
achieve
2
acknowledge
6
acquire
2
adapt
7
adequate
4
adjacent
10
adjust
5
administrate
2
adult
7
advocate
7
affect
2
aggregate
6
aid
7
albeit
10
allocate
6
alter
5
alternative
3
ambiguous
8
amend
5
analogy
9
analyse
1
annual
4
anticipate
9
apparent
4
append
8
appreciate
8
approach
1
appropriate
2
approximate
4
arbitrary
8
area
1
aspect
2
assemble
10
assess
1
assign
6
assist
2
assume
1
assure
9
attach
6
attain
9
attitude
4
attribute
4
author
6
authority
1
automate
8
available
1
aware
5
behalf
9
benefit
1
bias
8
bond
6
brief
6
bulk
9
capable
6
capacity
5
category
2
cease
9
challenge
5
channel
7
chapter
2
chart
8
chemical
7
circumstance
3
cite
6
civil
4
clarify
8
classic
7
clause
5
code
4
coherent
9
coincide
9
collapse
10
colleague
10
commence
9
comment
3
commission
2
commit
4
commodity
8
communicate
4
community
2
compatible
9
compensate
3
compile
10
complement
8
complex
2
component
3
compound
5
comprehensive 7
comprise
7
compute
2
conceive
10
concentrate
4
concept
1
conclude
2
concurrent
9
conduct
2
confer
4
confine
9
confirm
7
conflict
5
conform
8
consent
3
consequent
2
considerable
3
consist
1
constant
3
constitute
1
constrain
3
construct
2
consult
5
consume
2
contact
5
contemporary
8
context
1
contract
1
contradict
8
contrary
7
contrast
4
contribute
3
controversy
9
convene
3
converse
9
convert
7
convince
10
cooperate
6
coordinate
3
core
3
corporate
3
correspond
3
couple
7
create
1
credit
2
criteria
3
crucial
8
culture
2
currency
8
cycle
4
data
1
debate
4
decade
7
decline
5
deduce
3
define
1
definite
7
demonstrate
3
denote
8
deny
7
depress
10
derive
1
design
2
despite
4
detect
8
deviate
8
device
9
devote
9
differentiate
7
dimension
4
diminish
9
discrete
5
discriminate
6
displace
8
display
6
dispose
7
distinct
distort
distribute
diverse
document
domain
domestic
dominate
draft
drama
duration
dynamic
economy
edit
element
eliminate
emerge
emphasis
empirical
enable
encounter
energy
enforce
enhance
enormous
ensure
entity
environment
equate
equip
equivalent
erode
error
establish
estate
estimate
ethic
ethnic
evaluate
eventual
evident
evolve
exceed
exclude
exhibit
expand
expert
explicit
exploit
export
expose
external
extract
facilitate
factor
feature
federal
2
9
1
6
3
6
4
3
5
8
9
7
1
6
2
7
4
3
7
5
10
5
5
6
10
3
5
1
2
7
5
9
4
1
6
1
9
4
2
8
1
5
6
3
8
5
6
6
8
1
5
5
7
5
1
2
6
fee
file
final
finance
finite
flexible
fluctuate
focus
format
formula
forthcoming
foundation
found
framework
function
fund
fundamental
furthermore
gender
generate
generation
globe
goal
grade
grant
guarantee
guideline
hence
hierarchy
highlight
hypothesis
identical
identify
ideology
ignorance
illustrate
image
immigrate
impact
implement
implicate
implicit
imply
impose
incentive
incidence
incline
income
incorporate
index
indicate
individual
induce
inevitable
infer
infrastructure
inherent
6
7
2
1
7
6
8
2
9
1
10
7
9
3
1
3
5
6
6
5
5
7
4
7
4
7
8
4
7
8
4
7
1
7
6
3
5
3
2
4
4
8
3
4
6
6
10
1
6
6
1
1
8
8
7
8
9
Academic Word List – Alphabetical
inhibit
initial
initiate
injure
innovate
input
insert
insight
inspect
instance
institute
instruct
integral
integrate
integrity
intelligence
intense
interact
intermediate
internal
interpret
interval
intervene
intrinsic
invest
investigate
invoke
involve
isolate
issue
item
job
journal
justify
label
labour
layer
lecture
legal
legislate
levy
liberal
licence
likewise
link
locate
logic
maintain
major
manipulate
manual
margin
mature
maximise
mechanism
media
mediate
medical
medium
mental
method
6
3
6
2
7
6
7
9
8
3
2
6
9
4
10
6
8
3
9
4
1
6
7
10
2
4
10
1
7
1
2
4
2
3
4
1
3
6
1
1
10
5
5
10
3
3
5
2
1
8
9
5
9
3
4
7
9
5
9
5
1
migrate
6
military
9
minimal
9
minimise
8
minimum
6
ministry
6
minor
3
mode
7
modify
5
monitor
5
motive
6
mutual
9
negate
3
network
5
neutral
6
nevertheless
6
nonetheless
10
norm
9
normal
2
notion
5
notwithstanding 10
nuclear
8
objective
5
obtain
2
obvious
4
occupy
4
occur
1
odd
10
offset
8
ongoing
10
option
4
orient
5
outcome
3
output
4
overall
4
overlap
9
overseas
6
panel
10
paradigm
7
paragraph
8
parallel
4
parameter
4
participate
2
partner
3
passive
9
perceive
2
percent
1
period
1
persist
10
perspective
5
phase
4
phenomenon
7
philosophy
3
physical
3
plus
8
policy
1
portion
9
pose
10
positive
2
potential
2
practitioner
8
precede
precise
predict
predominant
preliminary
presume
previous
primary
prime
principal
principle
prior
priority
proceed
process
professional
prohibit
project
promote
proportion
prospect
protocol
psychology
publication
publish
purchase
pursue
qualitative
quote
radical
random
range
ratio
rational
react
recover
refine
regime
region
register
regulate
reinforce
reject
relax
release
relevant
reluctance
rely
remove
require
research
reside
resolve
resource
respond
restore
restrain
restrict
retain
reveal
revenue
6
5
4
8
9
6
2
2
5
4
1
4
7
1
1
4
7
4
4
3
8
9
5
7
3
2
5
9
7
8
8
2
5
6
3
6
9
4
2
3
2
8
5
9
7
2
10
3
3
1
1
2
4
2
1
8
9
2
4
6
5
reverse
revise
revolution
rigid
role
route
scenario
schedule
scheme
scope
section
sector
secure
seek
select
sequence
series
sex
shift
significant
similar
simulate
site
so-called
sole
somewhat
source
specific
specify
sphere
stable
statistic
status
straightforward
strategy
stress
structure
style
submit
subordinate
subsequent
subsidy
substitute
successor
sufficient
sum
summary
supplement
survey
survive
suspend
sustain
symbol
tape
target
task
team
technical
technique
technology
temporary
7
8
9
9
1
9
9
8
3
6
1
1
2
2
2
3
4
3
3
1
1
7
2
10
7
7
1
1
3
9
5
4
4
10
2
4
1
5
7
9
4
6
5
7
3
4
4
9
2
7
9
5
5
6
5
3
9
3
3
3
9
tense
terminate
text
theme
theory
thereby
thesis
topic
trace
tradition
transfer
transform
transit
transmit
transport
trend
trigger
ultimate
undergo
underlie
undertake
uniform
unify
unique
utilise
valid
vary
vehicle
version
via
violate
virtual
visible
vision
visual
volume
voluntary
welfare
whereas
whereby
widespread
8
8
2
8
1
8
7
7
6
2
2
6
5
7
6
5
9
7
10
6
4
8
9
7
6
3
1
8
5
8
9
8
7
9
8
3
7
5
5
10
8
Sound
Title
Ride a purple pelican
Author
Jack Prelutsky
Target
p
p
Six sick sheep 101 tongue twisters
Joanna Cole
p
Hop on Pop
Dr. Seuss
p
Boats
Byron Barton
b
More bugs in boxes
David A. Carter
b
The baby beebee bird
Dian Redfield Massie
b
Digging up dinosaurs
Aliki
d
Harry the dirty dog
Gene Zion
d
Dinorella: A prehistoric fairy tale
Pamela Duncan Edwards
d
My truck is stuck
Kevin Lewis & Daniel Kirk
k
Duck's key where can it be?
Jez Alborough
k
Caps for sale
Esphyr Slobodkina
k
Good dog, Carl
Alexandra Day
k
Pancakes for breakfast
Tomie dePaola
k
I went walking
Sue Williams
k
One duck stuck
Phyllis Root
k
Cows can't fly
David Milgrim
k
Shark in the park
Phil Roxbee Cox
k
Ducks in muck
Lori Haskins
k
Bark, George
Jules Feiffer
k
Kiss the cow!
Phyllis Root
k
Who took the cookes from the cookie jar?
Lass and Sturgis
k
Cars, cars, cars!
Maccarone
k
C is for Clown
Berenstain
k
Cold little duck, duck, duck
Peters
k
Goodnight moon
Margaret Wise Brower
g
Grandfather twilight
Barbara Helen Berger
g
Mr. Gumpy's outing
John Burningham
g
Shut the gate
Devons and Raynor
g
Goodnight gorilla
Rathmann
g
Goodnight, goodnight
Rice
g
Boo to a goose
Fox
g
Gobble, growl, grunt
Peter Spier
g
b
d
k
g
m
Is your mama a llama?
Deborah Guarino
m
Six sick sheep 101 tongue twisters
Joanna Cole
m
n
Six sick sheep 101 tongue twisters
Joanna Cole
n
Sound
f
v
T
D
s
Title
Fix-it
Author
David McPhail
Target
f
Old MacDonald had a farm
Pam Adams
f
One fine day
Nonny Hogrogian
f
Don't forget the bacon!
Pat Huchins
f
Four famished foxes and fosdyke
Pamela Duncan Edwards
f
The foot book: Dr. Seuss's wacky book of opposites
Dr. Seuss
f
The very busy spider
Eric Carle
v
Fix-it
David McPhail
v
Who says that?
Arnold L. Shapiro
T
This is my world
Rozanne Lanczak Williams
T
Tyler Toad and the thunder
Robert L. Crowe
T
King Bidgood's in the bathtub
Audrey Wood
T
Thump, thump, rat-a-tat-tat
Baer
T
I thought I heard
Baker
T
Little Rabbit's loose tooth
Bale
T
Over, under and through
Hoban
T
The Bear's toothache
McPhail
T
This is my world
Rozanne Lanczak Williams
D
Would you rather…
John Burningham
D
Just me and my little sister
Golden Books
s
Arthur's eyes
Marc Brown
s
Some smug slug
Pamela Duncan Edwards
s
Double decker, double decker, double decker bus
Wolcott
s
Fox in socks
Dr. Seuss
s
Millions of cats
Gag
s
Possessives: Monkey's Banana…Monkey's Bananas…
Hanson
s
Sam's teddy bear
Lingren
s
Who's sick today?
Cherry
s
Whose footprints?
Coxe
s
Whose mouse are you?
Kraus
s
Here comes a bus
Ziefert
s
Who hops?
Davis
s
Ten black dots
Crew
s
Who is the beast?
Baker
s
I see, you saw
Karlin
s
Suddenly!
McNaughton
s
Brown Bear, Brown Bear, What do you see?
Martin
s
Sound
z
S
h
tS
dZ
l
Title
A zoo for Mister Muster
Author
Arnold Lobel
Target
z
Scar, scary Halloween
Eve Bunting
z
Arthur's nose
Marc Brown
z
The stupids have a ball
Harry G. Allard Jr.
z
Max
Rachel Isadora
z
Millions of cats
Gag
z
Possessives: Monkey's Banana…Monkey's Bananas…
Hanson
z
The rose in my garden
Lobel
z
Sam's teddy bear
Lingren
z
Who says that?
Cherry
z
Whose footprints?
Coxe
z
Whose mouse are you?
Kraus
z
Sheep on a ship
Nancy Shaw
S
Sheep in a jeep
Nancy Shaw
S
Six creepy sheep
Judith Ross
S
Shhh!
Sally Grindley
S
Shark in the park
Phil Roxbee Cox
S
Short train, long train
Asch
S
Whose shoe?
Miller
S
Shoes, shoes, shoes
Schereiber
S
Hiccup
Mercer Mayer
h
Hattie and the fox
Mern Fox
h
Hester
Byron Barton
h
Cha-cha chimps
Julia Durango
tS
Ah-choo
Mercer Mayer
tS
Chicken soup with rice
Maurice Sendak
tS
Sheep in a jeep
Nancy Shaw
dZ
Bark, George
Jules Feiffer
dZ
Lyle, Lyle, Crocodile
Bernard Waber
l
There's an alligator under my bed
Mercer Mayer
l
London Bridge is falling down
Peter Spier
l
Leo the late bloomer
Robert Kraus
l
Listen to the rain
Bill Martin Jr. & John Archambault
l
I love mud and mud loves me
Stephens
l
It looked like spilt milk
Shaw
l
Look at me in a funny hat
Johnson
l
I like it when…
Murphy
l
Little white dog
Godwin
l
Zoo looking
Fox
l
The luckiest leprechaun
Korman
l
Granny, let me in
Barnes
l
Sound
r
s-blends
Title
Author
Target
In my room
Jeremy Lee
r
Here are my hands
Bill Martin Jr. & John Archambault
r
Who says that?
Arnold L. Shapiro
r
Dinosaur Roar
Paul & Henrietta Stickland
r
Bear wants more
Karma Wilson & Jane Chapman
r
Mary wore her red dress
Merle Peek
r
A boy, a dog, and a frog
Mercer Mayer
r
Frog on his own
Mercer Mayer
r
Good dog, Carl
Alexandra Day
r
Gregory, the terrible eater
Mitchell Sharmat
r
Fire! Fire!
Gail Gibbons
r
Squirrels
Brian Wildsmith
r
Spiders, spiders everywhere
Rozanne Lanczak Williams
r
Rosie's Walk
Pat Hutchins
r
Rotten Ralph
Jack Gantos
r
Rude Ramsay & the Roaring Radishes
Margaret Atwood
r
Frog and toad together
Mercer Mayer
r
Rotten Ralph
Jack Gantos
r
Arthur's first sleepover
Marc Brown
r
No roses for Harry!
Gene Zion
r
Animalia
Graeme Base
r
George and Martha one fine day
James Marshall
r
Rain makes applesauce
Julian Scheer
r
Miss Nelson is Missing!
Harry Allard
r
Sheep on a ship
Spiders, spiders everywhere
My truck is stuck
Snake in, snake out
The snowy day
The stupids step out
Aaaarrgghh! Spider!
Some smug slug
Six sticks
The very busy spider
I spy little animals
The snake that sneezed
The big sneeze
Stand back, said the elephant, I'm going to sneeze!
I know an old lady who swallowed a fly
Each peach pear plum
Dots, spots, speckles, and stripes
The visit
Sleepy book
Pets a pizza
I need a snake
Sit still!
Can you spot the spotted dog?
Why is Stella standing still?
Big bear, small bear
Hide and snake
My truck is stuck
Nancy Shaw
Rozanne Lanczak Williams
Kevin Lewis & Daniel Kirk
Linda Banchek
Ezra Jack Keats
Harry G. Allard Jr.
Lydia Monks
Pamela Duncan Edwards
Molly Coxe
Eric Carle
Jean Marzollo
Leydenfrost
Brown
Thoma
Westcott
Ahlberg
Hoban
Wolkstein
Zolotow
Stegi
Jonell
Carlson
Rowe
Bassemir
Berenstain
Baker
Kevin Lewis & Daniel Kirk
s-blends
s-blends
s-blends
s-blends
s-blends
s-blends
s-blends
s-blends
s-blends
s-blends
s-blends
s-blends
s-blends
s-blends
s-blends
s-blends
s-blends
s-blends
s-blends
s-blends
s-blends
s-blends
s-blends
s-blends
s-blends
s-blends
s-blends
Sound
Title
Author
Target
tr
My truck is stuck
Kevin Lewis & Daniel Kirk
tr
rhymes
vowels
The very hungry caterpillar
If you see a kitten
Eric Carle
John Butler
rhymes
vowels