Maternal Input Analysis: Factors that Aid Function Word Acquisition for Children with Hearing Loss Restricted; Files Only
Hazel, Cho (Spring 2025)
Abstract
Despite extensive research on language development, function word acquisition in children with hearing loss (HL) remains underexplored. Function words are critical for grammar, category learning, and word segmentation (Shi & Marquis, 2012), yet HL children face unique challenges due to reduced auditory access. Building on prior research “Quantity and Quality: Function Word Acquisition in Children Ages 13 to 36 Months with Hearing Loss,” showing how HL children gradually closed the gap with their typically developing (TD) peers, this study investigates the mechanisms behind this progress, focusing on maternal input factors: distributional frequency, acoustic saliency, and syntactic complexity.
This research addresses the main question: what aspects of maternal input aid HL children’s function word learning? Using longitudinal data from the Ambrose corpus in CHILDES, this study analyzes function word frequency, phonetic saliency ([ði] vs. [ðə], [ej] vs. [ə]), and maternal mean length of utterance (MLU). Statistical analyses, including t-tests and correlation models, assess their impact on HL and TD groups.
Results indicate HL children do not rely on distributional cues but benefit from enhanced acoustic saliency, especially for “a.” Additionally, higher maternal MLU correlates with increased function word use, suggesting syntactic richness supports HL children’s linguistic development. By emphasizing acoustically salient function words and optimized syntactic input, this study aims to contribute to our understanding of function word acquisition in HL children and inform early intervention strategies.
Table of Contents
I. Introduction
1.1. Role of Input on Language Acquisition
1.2. Distinguished Language Acquisition approach of HL children
1.3. Extensive Pilot Study
1.4. Current Project
II. Participants
2.1. Ambrose Corpus : CHILDES
2.1.1. Hearing Loss Group (HL)
2.1.2. Typically Developing Group (TD)
III. Study
3.1. Distributional Cue
3.1.1. Methodology
3.1.2. Result
3.1.3. Discussion
3.1.4. Comparison with the TD Group
3.2. Acoustical Cue
3.2.1. Methodology
3.2.2. Result
3.2.3. Discussion
3.2.4. Comparison with the TD Group
3.3. Syntactic Cue
3.3.1. Methodology
3.3.2. Result
3.3.3. Discussion
3.3.4. Comparison with the TD Group
IV. Conclusions
V. References
About this Honors Thesis
School | |
---|---|
Department | |
Degree | |
Submission | |
Language |
|
Research Field | |
Palabra Clave | |
Committee Chair / Thesis Advisor | |
Committee Members |

Primary PDF
Thumbnail | Title | Date Uploaded | Actions |
---|---|---|---|
![]() |
File download under embargo until 23 May 2026 | 2025-04-07 16:36:52 -0400 | File download under embargo until 23 May 2026 |
Supplemental Files
Thumbnail | Title | Date Uploaded | Actions |
---|