人物专栏 | Emily Stanford博士访谈
点击上方蓝字关注我们
编者按
《理论语言学五道口站》（2021年第54期，总第188期）“人物专栏”与大家分享本站采编人员闫玉萌对Emily Stanford博士进行采访的访谈录。Emily Stanford，瑞士日内瓦大学语言学博士，兼任意大利米兰比可卡大学访学博士后研究员，目前在瑞士日内瓦大学进行博士后研究。其研究领域为成人语法和语言习得中的句法制图和局域性，尤其是典型的儿童语言发展中句法习得与句法树的几何结构关系等相关研究。
本期访谈中，Emily Stanford博士首先就儿童语言发展研究中遇到的具体问题进行了分析，其次就发育性语言障碍及注意缺陷多动障碍提出了自己的见解，随后对句法损伤的诱因进行阐述，最后为帮助家长和教师尽早分辨语障儿童提供了自己的专业建议。
人物简介
Emily Stanford博士
Emily Stanford，日内瓦大学语言学博士。兼任米兰比可卡大学访学博士后研究员，目前在日内瓦大学进行博士后研究。其研究领域为成人语法和语言习得中的句法制图和局域性，尤其是典型的儿童语言发展中句法习得与句法树的几何结构关系等相关研究。Emily一直致力于理论语言学与心理语言学的跨学科研究，热衷以形式句法原则为理论核心，来评估疑似语言障碍的单语和多语儿童的句法能力，并以此创新性地开发相应的循证补救策略。她擅长研究的疾病包括发育性语言障碍、注意缺陷多动障碍等。
Brief Introduction
Emily Stanford holds a PhD in Linguistics from the University of Geneva, with currently a visiting postdoctoral researcher at the Università degli Studi di Milano-Bicocca and ongoing postdoctoral research at the University of Geneva. She specializes in Syntactic Cartography and Locality in Adult Grammar and Language Acquisition, investigating whether the acquisition of syntax in typical development is determined by the geometry of the syntactic tree. Emily is an interdisciplinary enthusiast in theoretical linguistics and psycholinguistics. She is passionate about using formal syntactic principles to design theory-guided tools for evaluating the syntactic abilities of mono and multilingual children with suspected language impairment as well as developing innovative evidence-based remediation strategies. The pathologies with which she has specialized expertise include Developmental Language Disorder and Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder.
访谈内容
01.
闫玉萌：我们了解到，您做过很多关于儿童语言发展的研究，但有些时候，要找到合适的实验被试并非易事。请问您在寻找被试的过程中是否遇到过困难，又是如何克服它们的呢？
Emily Stanford博士：这问题很好。的确，要找到符合研究选择标准的被试可能很困难，特别是在做非典型语言发展研究时。在我看来，最大的挑战是一个潜在被试者可能会同时患有多种障碍。比如说，有一次我们想研究两个不同被试群体的句法发展情况，即患有发育性语言障碍（Developmental Language Disorder，简称DLD）的儿童和患有注意缺陷多动障碍（Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder，简称ADHD）的儿童，可是患有发育性语言障碍的儿童通常也患有注意缺陷多动障碍，反之亦然。所以，对于这种特殊的研究，我们只能尽最大努力寻找没有双重障碍的被试，即使这意味着我们要缩减样本容量。对于那些少数确有双重障碍的儿童，在我们与相关儿童言语治疗师进行交谈，并仔细研究了他们在之前的标准化测试中在句法和注意力领域的得分之后，细化了他们的档案。最终，我们就能够根据两种缺陷的严重程度，将患有双重障碍的儿童分到两组中的一组（若发育性语言障碍更严重，则分为发育性语言障碍组，反之则属于注意缺陷多动障碍组）。然而，由于障碍共存的现象并不少见，与其说是偶然，更不如说是一种常态，因此，有些人认为试图组建一个单一障碍的临床被试群体是徒劳的，甚至不能反映一般人群的情况。
关于招募被试者，尤其是招募儿童被试者，我的建议是要尽可能地展现我们的积极性和热情。我们可以主动联系学校、托管中心、教育心理学家、社会媒体、朋友等等。这个过程中千万不要气馁！
02.
闫玉萌：很多语言学家认为儿童语言与皮钦语有很多相似之处。您怎么看待这种观点呢？您认为学习皮钦语能帮助我们进一步探索儿童语言习得的奥秘吗？
Emily Stanford博士：我得承认，我目前还没有深入考虑过这个问题，这个方面并不是我的研究领域。但是，我始终在践行跨学科研究工作（尤其是在语言习得研究方面）。我也一直在倡导在不同学科、不同语言学分支等领域之间建立联系。
03.
闫玉萌：Luigi Rizzi教授在最近提出的“生长树”（Growing Tree）理论中指出，儿童语言的习得过程严格遵循从词汇层面到功能层面的顺序。然而，不少学者提出了不同的观点，他们认为儿童语言习得顺序是从句子结构的高低层级两端开始，逐渐过渡到结构的中间层级。您更倾向于二者中的哪一观点呢？您是否可以结合您的实验研究阐述一下理由呢？
Emily Stanford博士：也许我现在做出评价还不合适，但我目前正用实验来验证“生长树”理论所得出的预测，目前来看预测还是准确无误的。敬请期待后续的研究。
04.
闫玉萌：发育性语言障碍现已成为特殊性语言障碍（Specific Language Impairment，简称SLI）的最新表述。因不明原因而无法习得母语的儿童会被判定为患有发育性语言障碍。请问您觉得发育性语言障碍和大脑认知情况有关系吗？
Emily Stanford博士：有关发育性语言障碍的儿童研究表明：尽管有可能患有发育性语言障碍的儿童有句法障碍却并未有明显的认知障碍，但是绝大多数患有发育性语言障碍的儿童在工作记忆（Working Memory，简称WM）和句法规则两方面同时存在缺陷。因此，我认为发育性语言障碍和人的大脑认知情况可能存在部分相关性。我确实认为某些研究案例中的儿童只在句法计算层面存有缺陷。但在其他案例中，儿童在句法处理和句法计算的过程都可能存在缺陷。
05.
闫玉萌：注意缺陷多动障碍可能会一直持续到成年时期。有一些成年人就患有注意缺陷多动障碍却从未被诊断出来。这种病症会影响患者的工作，家庭和人际关系。根据您的研究，注意缺陷多动障碍会对儿童时早期习得语言产生影响吗？或者这一病症对儿童使用语言有影响吗？
Emily Stanford博士：注意缺陷多动障碍患儿的身上确实容易存在工作记忆方面的缺陷，而儿童句法能力的发展也与这一方面有关，这些是毋庸置疑的。但是，我们研究的结果显示，普遍来讲，句法障碍并不是注意缺陷多动障碍的典型症状。然而，共病是临床常见现象，部分患有注意缺陷多动障碍的儿童有句法方面和注意力方面的双重障碍。
06.
闫玉萌：什么是句法损伤？这种现象产生的原因有哪些？主要表现出哪些症状？
Emily Stanford博士：Leonard(2014)指出，句法损伤是指句法能力的显著缺失，这一现象产生的原因既不能归结为听觉损失，也不能归结为非语言智商低下或者神经损伤。就这点而言，似乎许多因素都可能引发这一现象（例如，语言特定机制的缺陷、更普遍的处理限制等），学者专家尚未就单一的因果理论达成共识。句法损伤在不同语言中表现各异，但是Leonard在他2014年的书（第四章）中，针对不同语言中句法损伤的表现给出了详细的跨语言描述。
07.
闫玉萌：根据Christopulos & Kean (2020)的研究，小学学龄早期的儿童语言障碍的患病率大概是7%—12%。尽管儿童语言障碍较为普遍，但仅有18%的患病儿童得到确诊并接受治疗。对于教师而言，他们很难在课堂上分辨出孩子的表现是由于语言障碍还是其他因素造成的。您能否给教师与家长提供一些建议，帮助他们区分患有语言障碍的儿童和正常儿童呢？
Emily Stanford博士：我认为区分语言障碍与其它语言问题，比如具体的学习问题，对教师来说并不容易。然而，我也并不觉得这是教师或家长的工作，因为他们并没有接受过相应的培训。对于那些能感觉到儿童语言困难或语言发育迟缓的教师和家长，我所能给出最好的建议是尽早去咨询专业人士（例如言语治疗师或教育心理学家），因为我们知道治疗越早，效果越好。但是需要注意一点，即使是训练有素的临床医生也可能犯错误，尤其是涉及到双语儿童时，这些儿童可能会被过度诊断为语言障碍，或诊断不足未能确诊。当面对这些双语儿童时，我建议去拜访一些熟悉双语儿童和语言障碍最新科研文献的专家。这些专家还要熟悉目前的最佳实践方案和一系列评估工具（双语的标准化测试（如果可行）、动态评估、问卷调查、即兴演讲等）。
[1] Christopulos, T. T., & Kean, J. (2020). General Education Teachers' Contribution to the Identification of Children With Language Disorders. Perspectives of the ASHA Special Interest Groups, 5(4), 770-777. https://doi.org/doi:10.1044/2020_PERSP-19-00166
[2] Friedmann, N., Belletti, A., & Rizzi, L. (2020). Growing trees: The acquisition of the left periphery. https://ling.auf.net/lingbuzz/005369
[3] Giusti, G. (2006). Parallels in clausal and nominal periphery. In Phases of Interpretation (pp. 163-186). https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110197723.3.163
[4] Stanford, E., & Delage, H. (2019). Complex syntax and working memory in children with specific learning difficulties. First Language, 40(4), 411-436.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0142723719889240
English Version
01.
Yumeng Yan: We know that you have done many researches on children’s language development, but sometimes it is not so easy to find proper experiment participants. Did you encounter any difficulties in finding participants and how to solve it？
Dr. Emily Stanford: This is a good question. Yes, it can be difficult to find participants who meet the inclusion criteria for a study, especially when doing work on atypical language development. I think the greatest challenge is when a potential participant is diagnosed with more than one difficulty. For example, for one of our studies we wanted to investigate the development of syntax in two different populations: children with developmental language disorder (DLD) and children with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD). However, it is often the case that a child diagnosed with DLD has comorbid ADHD and vice versa. For this particular study, we did our very best to find participants without a double diagnosis, even if it meant limiting our sample size. For the few children who did have a double diagnosis, a much more detailed participant profile was developed, which involved conversations with the relevant children’s speech-language therapists and taking a close look at previous scores on standardized tests in the domains of both syntax and attention. Ultimately, we were able to assign the children with a double diagnosis to one of the two groups based on which deficit appeared to be dominant. However, as the coexistence of disorders seems to be the rule rather than the exception, one could argue that the attempt to assemble a homogenous group of clinical participants is a futile task, and one which is not even reflective of the general population.
As for recruiting participants in general, in particular child participants, my advice is to simply be as proactive and enthusiastic as possible. Contact schools, daycares, educational psychiatrists, social media groups, friends etc. Don’t get discouraged!
02.
Yumeng Yan: Many linguists think that children's language has some similarities with Pidgin. How do you think about this view? Do you think that studying Pidgin is helpful to further exploring the mystery of children's language acquisition?
Dr. Emily Stanford: I have to admit that this is not something I have thought much about, and it is not my specialization. However, in general, I am a firm believer in interdisciplinary work (especially when it comes to language acquisition research!)and would always encourage building bridges between disciplines, branches of linguistics etc.
03.
Yumeng Yan: Professor Rizzi’s recent research "Growing Tree" holds that children's language acquisition strictly follows the acquisition sequence from lexical level to functional level. However, some scholars have put forward different views, holding that children's language acquisition tends to start from the top and bottom of sentence structure, and gradually approach the middle level. Which view do you prefer? Can you explain the reason for us based on your own research?
Dr. Emily Stanford: I’m not the best person to comment on this, but I’m currently running an experiment to test the Growing Trees predictions and the results at this stage are positive. Stay tuned!
04.
Yumeng Yan: Developmental Language Disorder (DLD) is the new term to replace Specific Language Impairment (SLI). Developmental Language Disorder is diagnosed when children fail to acquire their own language for no obvious reason. Do you think DLD has anything to do with brain cognition？
Dr. Emily Stanford: Research on children with DLD shows that despite the possibility of syntactic impairment occurring in the absence of broader cognitive deficits in a subgroup of children with DLD, the vast majority of these children demonstrate dual deficits in both WM and syntax. So, my answer would be both yes and no. In some cases, I do think a child can have a discrete deficit in syntax at the computational level, while in others both processing and computation may be affected.
05.
Yumeng Yan: Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) can last into adulthood. Some adults have ADHD but have never been diagnosed. The symptoms can cause difficulty at work, at home, or with relationships. According to your study, whether children with ADHD affect language acquisition in their early childhood or does it have any effect on language use?
Dr. Emily Stanford: While it is true that children with ADHD do tend to have working memory (WM) weakness and WM has been linked to the development of syntax, the results from our studies show that in general, difficulties in syntax are not a typical symptom of ADHD. However, as comorbidity is the norm, a number of children with ADHD may have dual deficits in both syntax and attention.
06.
Yumeng Yan: What is syntactic impairment and what factors lead to this phenomenon? What are the main manifestations of syntactic impairment?
Dr. Emily Stanford: According to Leonard (2014), syntactic impairment is a significant deficit in syntactic ability that cannot be attributed to hearing loss, low nonverbal IQ or neurological damage. At this point, it seems that a number of factors lead to this phenomenon (e.g., deficits in language specific mechanisms or more general processing limitations) and researchers are yet to agree on a single causal theory. The manifestations of the impairment vary from one language to another, but Leonard’s (2014) book (chapter 4) offers a detailed cross-linguistic description of what syntactic impairment looks like across languages.
07.
Yumeng Yan: According to Christopulos & Kean (2020), the estimated prevalence of language disorders in early elementary school-age children is 7%–12%. Despite its prevalence, only 18% of children are identified and receive treatment. It is difficult for teachers to tell the difference between language breakdowns and other causes of struggle in the classroom. Could you give some suggestions for teachers and parents to distinguish children suffering from language disorders from others?
Dr. Emily Stanford: I do think it’s difficult for teachers to distinguish language weakness and other difficulties, such as specific learning difficulties. However, I also don’t feel this is the job of teachers or parents as they haven’t been trained to do so. The best advice I can give is for teachers and parents who feel a child may be demonstrating language difficulties or delay to see a professional (e.g., a speech-language therapist or an educational psychologist) as early as possible as we know that early intervention is associated with the best outcomes. But it should be noted that even trained clinicians can make mistakes, in particular when it comes to bilingual children who can be both over- and under-diagnosed with language impairment. In the case of bilingual children, I would recommend seeing a specialist who is familiar with recent scientific literature on bilingual children and language impairment, current best practices guidelines and who uses a range of assessment tools (standardized tests in both languages if possible, dynamic assessment, questionnaires, spontaneous speech etc.).
References
[1] Christopulos, T. T., & Kean, J. (2020). General Education Teachers' Contribution to the Identification of Children With Language Disorders. Perspectives of the ASHA Special Interest Groups, 5(4), 770-777. https://doi.org/doi:10.1044/2020_PERSP-19-00166
[2] Friedmann, N., Belletti, A., & Rizzi, L. (2020). Growing trees: The acquisition of the left periphery. https://ling.auf.net/lingbuzz/005369
[3] Giusti, G. (2006). Parallels in clausal and nominal periphery. In Phases of Interpretation (pp. 163-186). https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110197723.3.163
[4] Stanford, E., & Delage, H. (2019). Complex syntax and working memory in children with specific learning difficulties. First Language, 40(4), 411-436.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0142723719889240
往期推荐
Noam Chomsky | Mind Your Language
本文版权归“理论语言学五道口站”所有，转载请联系本平台。
编辑：闫玉萌 赵欣宇 雷晨 聂简荻 郭思源 丁子意
排版：闫玉萌 赵欣宇 雷晨
审校：李芳芳 田英慧