View in EDS HTML Full Text PDF Full Text

The Multifaceted Nature of Early Vocabulary Development: Connecting Children's Characteristics with Parental Input Types

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: The Multifaceted Nature of Early Vocabulary Development: Connecting Children's Characteristics with Parental Input Types
Language: English
Authors: Tilbe Göksun (ORCID 0000-0002-0190-7988), Asli Aktan-Erciyes, Dilay Z. Karadöller, Ö. Ece Demir-Lira
Source: Child Development Perspectives. 2025 19(1):30-37.
Availability: Wiley. Available from: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 111 River Street, Hoboken, NJ 07030. Tel: 800-835-6770; e-mail: cs-journals@wiley.com; Web site: https://www.wiley.com/en-us
Peer Reviewed: Y
Page Count: 8
Publication Date: 2025
Document Type: Journal Articles
Reports - Evaluative
Descriptors: Parent Participation, Parent Child Relationship, Child Language, Vocabulary Development, Language Acquisition, Native Language, Linguistic Input, Verbs, Deafness, Turkish, Sign Language, Neonates
DOI: 10.1111/cdep.12524
ISSN: 1750-8592
1750-8606
Abstract: Children need to learn the demands of their native language in the early vocabulary development phase. In this dynamic process, parental multimodal input may shape neurodevelopmental trajectories while also being tailored by child-related factors. Moving beyond typically characterized group profiles, in this article, we synthesize growing evidence on the effects of parental multimodal input (amount, quality, or absence), domain-specific input (space and math), and language-specific input (causal verbs and sound symbols) on preterm, full-term, and deaf children's early vocabulary development, focusing primarily on research with children learning Turkish and Turkish Sign Language. We advocate for a theoretical perspective, integrating neonatal characteristics and parental input, and acknowledging the unique constraints of languages.
Abstractor: As Provided
Entry Date: 2025
Accession Number: EJ1460227
Database: ERIC
Full text is not displayed to guests.
FullText Links:
  – Type: pdflink
    Url: https://content.ebscohost.com/cds/retrieve?content=AQICAHj0k_4E0hTGH8RJwT4gCJyBsGNe_WN95AvKlDbXJGqwxwEvESr_Qbe8HQHcecf_loN1AAAA4zCB4AYJKoZIhvcNAQcGoIHSMIHPAgEAMIHJBgkqhkiG9w0BBwEwHgYJYIZIAWUDBAEuMBEEDKepNy3nL29yA4WS2QIBEICBm4UFiLWWIvZxSSEn2FaYbxBUsSDEJ-jGwMYYcCImeZNX9PuAeLHf2zh3f-MBtJeljhLIomnt21X5-WvlIvhp_BJp9dmCk29n8xzlxUFVZnChYRfPVrssKZDrdv1b-Bc8HtYD2xriC1w9XQYMiN-QvOdNGWuWwwF0NFplWiuBdlYik_EDUZoHBJ_-uY36q9BuLuzSYPw_Zz4oYnXM
Text:
  Availability: 1
  Value: <anid>AN0183913195;[30rc]01mar.25;2025Mar24.06:18;v2.2.500</anid> <title id="AN0183913195-1">The multifaceted nature of early vocabulary development: Connecting children's characteristics with parental input types </title> <p>Children need to learn the demands of their native language in the early vocabulary development phase. In this dynamic process, parental multimodal input may shape neurodevelopmental trajectories while also being tailored by child‐related factors. Moving beyond typically characterized group profiles, in this article, we synthesize growing evidence on the effects of parental multimodal input (amount, quality, or absence), domain‐specific input (space and math), and language‐specific input (causal verbs and sound symbols) on preterm, full‐term, and deaf children's early vocabulary development, focusing primarily on research with children learning Turkish and Turkish Sign Language. We advocate for a theoretical perspective, integrating neonatal characteristics and parental input, and acknowledging the unique constraints of languages.</p> <p>Keywords: deaf children; gesture; multimodality; parental input; preterm children; Turkish; Turkish sign language; vocabulary development</p> <p>Babies are born ready to learn language, and with universal attentional and learning biases (Parish‐Morris et al., [<reflink idref="bib68" id="ref1">68</reflink>]). In learning their native language, typically developing children move from being universal language users to language‐specific users, tailoring the information they receive from the environment to the demands of their native language (Göksun et al., [<reflink idref="bib25" id="ref2">25</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib24" id="ref3">24</reflink>]). Multiple pathways of language development may occur as a function of the interplay between child‐ and environment‐related factors.</p> <p>In this article, we address the effects of parental overall multimodal input (amount, quality, or absence), domain‐specific input (space and math), and language‐specific input (causal verbs and sound symbols) on children's early vocabulary development. We selected these domains because children acquire these fundamental concepts early. Additionally, languages vary in how they encode spatial or causal relations that map onto these concepts (Göksun et al., [<reflink idref="bib24" id="ref4">24</reflink>]), which may require more specific input for young language learners. Variations in input can be examined more effectively with parents' use of specific vocabularies, referring to concepts and expressions specific to a language.</p> <p>Language development does not unfold the same way for all children. One significant factor is the biological characteristics children bring to the language learning environment and how multimodal input varies or is absent as a function of neonatal characteristics. Our understanding of language development is incomplete without considering data from atypically developing children, so we also draw evidence from studies of children born preterm and from deaf children born to hearing parents. Children's characteristics, such as infants' attentional skills (Dixon & Smith, [<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref5">18</reflink>]), emotion regulation, and expression (Pérez‐Pereira et al., [<reflink idref="bib69" id="ref6">69</reflink>]), are also associated with early language development, interacting with the parental input children receive (Spinelli et al., [<reflink idref="bib81" id="ref7">81</reflink>]). However, here, we focus mainly on the biological characteristics present at birth. Understanding how and whether parents provide early language input for different concepts across groups of children is necessary to formulate the exact interactions between parental input and children's vocabulary development.</p> <p>Finally, theories of children's language development need to be diversified, integrating evidence from non‐Indo‐European languages (Kidd & Garcia, [<reflink idref="bib43" id="ref8">43</reflink>]). The variability in children's early language development may also be related to the specific characteristics of the language children learn. In the following sections, we examine studies of children learning a variety of languages, focusing primarily on children who are learning Turkish and Turkish Sign Language. (For the sociodemographic characteristics of the studies reviewed herein, please see Table S1.)</p> <hd id="AN0183913195-2">EARLY VOCABULARY DEVELOPMENT</hd> <p>Regardless of the language they are exposed to, during the first year of life, infants detect the regularities in their environment (Romberg & Saffran, [<reflink idref="bib74" id="ref9">74</reflink>]), attend to sound systems of languages (Kuhl et al., [<reflink idref="bib47" id="ref10">47</reflink>]), and use multimodal cues (Abu‐Zhaya et al., [<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref11">3</reflink>]). Infants form concepts referring to objects, actions, agents, and their relations (e.g., Göksun et al., [<reflink idref="bib25" id="ref12">25</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib24" id="ref13">24</reflink>]; Mandler, [<reflink idref="bib54" id="ref14">54</reflink>]), onto which they later map linguistic labels (Mandler, [<reflink idref="bib53" id="ref15">53</reflink>]). Concepts that vary across languages may require more input and language experience than concepts that share cognitive and perceptual similarities across languages (Gentner & Bowerman, [<reflink idref="bib21" id="ref16">21</reflink>]).</p> <p>Child‐ and environment‐related sources should work in tandem longitudinally in the early language learning process (Demir & Küntay, [<reflink idref="bib15" id="ref17">15</reflink>]). Parental input, as an environmental source, is a primary factor guiding infants in learning their native language (Anderson et al., [<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref18">5</reflink>]; Rowe, [<reflink idref="bib75" id="ref19">75</reflink>]). Parents also tailor their verbal and gestural input based on their children's knowledge and needs (e.g., Kızıldere et al., [<reflink idref="bib45" id="ref20">45</reflink>]; Yurovsky, [<reflink idref="bib87" id="ref21">87</reflink>]). Here, we synthesize the accumulated evidence on how the total and specific type of input related to spatial, math, and causal concepts relates to vocabulary development. Parental input interacts with children's motor, cognitive, and social development through time (Kobaş et al., [<reflink idref="bib46" id="ref22">46</reflink>]). These interactions may vary across children following different developmental trajectories, such as in children born preterm and in deaf children born to hearing parents.</p> <hd id="AN0183913195-3">PARENTAL OVERALL MULTIMODAL INPUT</hd> <p>Children's language development is significantly influenced by language quantity (i.e., the total number of words, utterances, or phrases directed at the child) and quality (i.e., the complexity and diversity of the language input they receive from their parents; Hoff & Naigles, [<reflink idref="bib31" id="ref23">31</reflink>]; Rowe, [<reflink idref="bib75" id="ref24">75</reflink>]). The quantity of input is especially influential at earlier ages, whereas the quality affects children's learning of specific words (Anderson et al., [<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref25">5</reflink>]; Bergelson et al., [<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref26">6</reflink>]).</p> <p>Gestural input in the forms of pointing to objects or iconic gestures referring to objects and actions can also provide opportunities for learning vocabulary. These multimodal patterns of input predict and shape children's later vocabulary development (Iverson et al., [<reflink idref="bib34" id="ref27">34</reflink>]; Pan et al., [<reflink idref="bib67" id="ref28">67</reflink>]; Rowe et al., [<reflink idref="bib76" id="ref29">76</reflink>]). For instance, in one study, encouraging North American parents to use pointing gestures with their 10‐month‐olds increased parents' use of intentional gestures to direct attention to objects and events when their children were 12 months, which was later associated with children's word comprehension at 18 months (Choi et al., [<reflink idref="bib11" id="ref30">11</reflink>]). Moreover, the characteristics of multimodal input directed at children are intricately tied to the context of parent–child interactions (e.g., Rowe & Weisleder, [<reflink idref="bib77" id="ref31">77</reflink>]). Studies of children learning Turkish have demonstrated changes in multimodal language input over time and across contexts (e.g., Aktan‐Erciyes & Göksun, [<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref32">4</reflink>]; Küntay & Slobin, [<reflink idref="bib48" id="ref33">48</reflink>]; Özdemir et al., [<reflink idref="bib66" id="ref34">66</reflink>]; Ünlütabak et al., [<reflink idref="bib84" id="ref35">84</reflink>]). For example, in a study of book reading, the more parents produced gestures with questions that labeled items in the pictures, the more toddlers responded to these questions (Ünlütabak et al., [<reflink idref="bib84" id="ref36">84</reflink>]).</p> <p>Input children receive from parents does not unfold in isolation of children's characteristics. One way to examine interactions between different children's characteristics and parental input is to focus on children who are born with different constraints and varying neural and environmental circumstances. Preterm children and deaf children born to hearing parents present interesting test cases since they face unique challenges that can shed light on mechanisms of language development. While children born preterm have differing biological profiles, deaf children born to hearing parents have varying environmental/input profiles. Both groups tend to fall behind in their language development and vary more in their language developmental trajectories than do typically developing children. Analyzing the benefits of overall, concept‐specific, and language‐specific input, as well as the lack of parental multimodal input, in these groups may illuminate preventive strategies to help parents provide input to their children.</p> <hd id="AN0183913195-4">Input for preterm children</hd> <p>As a group, preterm children (i.e., those born before the 37th week of gestation) fall behind their full‐term peers in early communication and language development (e.g., Ionio et al., [<reflink idref="bib33" id="ref37">33</reflink>]; Sansavini et al., [<reflink idref="bib79" id="ref38">79</reflink>]). These disparities may be attributed to preterm children's weaker preverbal and verbal skills, reduced activity or responsiveness in parental interactions, and poorer co‐regulation ability (e.g., Bozzette, [<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref39">8</reflink>]; De Schuymer et al., [<reflink idref="bib13" id="ref40">13</reflink>]; Salerni et al., [<reflink idref="bib78" id="ref41">78</reflink>]; Sansavini et al., [<reflink idref="bib79" id="ref42">79</reflink>]). Although interest in parents' role in preterm children's neurocognitive development is growing (Nelson & Demir‐Lira, [<reflink idref="bib61" id="ref43">61</reflink>]), we know little about how parents' multimodal input is associated with preterm children's early language development.</p> <p>Positive environmental influences like parent–child interactions may affect preterm children's developmental trajectories more than those of full‐term children since enriched experiences can serve as supplementary tools for neurocognitive development (DeMaster et al., [<reflink idref="bib14" id="ref44">14</reflink>]; Demir‐Lira & Göksun, [<reflink idref="bib17" id="ref45">17</reflink>]). Hence, preterm children may benefit more from parental multimodal input than do full‐term children. In a longitudinal study, parents of Turkish‐learning preterm children used fewer words and pointing gestures when their children were 14 months than did parents of full‐term children when their children were the same age. Parents' pointing gestures were concurrently related to infants' vocabulary. However, parents' pointing gestures when children were 14 months predicted infants' vocabulary at 20 months only for the preterm group, highlighting the importance of parental input for language delays (Doğan et al., [<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref46">19</reflink>]).</p> <hd id="AN0183913195-5">Absence of input</hd> <p>Deaf children born to hearing parents also vary considerably in communication ability and the role of input. Given equal opportunities for language exposure, deaf children's language development trajectories parallel those of hearing children (e.g., Marentette & Mayberry, [<reflink idref="bib55" id="ref47">55</reflink>]; Newport & Meier, [<reflink idref="bib64" id="ref48">64</reflink>]; Pizzuto & Volterra, [<reflink idref="bib71" id="ref49">71</reflink>]). However, only 5% of deaf children have deaf parents and receive sign language input following birth; most deaf children, who have hearing parents (Mitchell & Karchmer, [<reflink idref="bib58" id="ref50">58</reflink>]), are not exposed to sign language or spoken language in their early years (Lillo‐Martin et al., [<reflink idref="bib52" id="ref51">52</reflink>]; Lillo‐Martin & Henner, [<reflink idref="bib51" id="ref52">51</reflink>]), even if they wear hearing aids (Hall et al., [<reflink idref="bib29" id="ref53">29</reflink>]). These children usually receive their first language input in sign language after starting schools that are geared to deaf children and interacting with other deaf children (Karadöller et al., [<reflink idref="bib38" id="ref54">38</reflink>]).</p> <p>Delayed exposure to sign language has profound consequences for language development, which persist into adulthood for complex sentence structures (Mayberry et al., [<reflink idref="bib57" id="ref55">57</reflink>]) or spatial descriptions (Karadöller et al., [<reflink idref="bib40" id="ref56">40</reflink>]). Still, studies comparing the language development of deaf adolescents with delayed sign language input to the language development of deaf babies exposed to sign language from birth show comparable developmental trajectories for certain language milestones, such as using two‐word combinations (Berk, [<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref57">7</reflink>]). Scholars have proposed several reasons for this lack of differences despite impoverished input for some domains but not others (Goldin‐Meadow, [<reflink idref="bib27" id="ref58">27</reflink>]; Henner & Robinson, [<reflink idref="bib30" id="ref59">30</reflink>]). For instance, the ability to convey needs and ideas in gestural communication systems used in the household (i.e., homesign systems; Goldin‐Meadow, [<reflink idref="bib26" id="ref60">26</reflink>]) may help deaf children form an initial system of communication (Goldin‐Meadow, [<reflink idref="bib27" id="ref61">27</reflink>]). Thus, despite the impoverished input received by most deaf children with hearing parents, later achievements in language development should be considered together with potential dependence on longitudinal connections of multiple communicative interactions.</p> <hd id="AN0183913195-6">SPECIFIC TYPES OF INPUT FOR SPACE AND MATH</hd> <p>In addition to general input or lack of input, parents also use specific types of input for concepts like space and math. The frequency of spatial and math words in parental input can significantly influence children's acquisition of these linguistic elements (e.g., Levine et al., [<reflink idref="bib50" id="ref62">50</reflink>]; Pruden et al., [<reflink idref="bib73" id="ref63">73</reflink>]), over and above the overall input, which may also interact with child‐related characteristics.</p> <hd id="AN0183913195-7">Spatial input</hd> <p>During the first 2 years of life, as children learn languages, they start to form concepts of spatial relations in their minds and later map relevant words in their language to these concepts (e.g., Johnston & Slobin, [<reflink idref="bib36" id="ref64">36</reflink>]). In these early years, parents provide input to their children concerning the spatial location of objects and their relations to other objects or landmarks in the environment.</p> <p>Studies investigating the relations among spatial input in speech, speech‐gesture combinations, and English‐learning children's spatial language development suggest that they are positively related (e.g., Cartmill et al., [<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref65">10</reflink>]; Levine et al., [<reflink idref="bib49" id="ref66">49</reflink>]; Pruden et al., [<reflink idref="bib73" id="ref67">73</reflink>]; Wu et al., [<reflink idref="bib85" id="ref68">85</reflink>]). In more recent studies, researchers have investigated the potential characteristics brought into this equation in children learning English (Pruden & Levine, [<reflink idref="bib72" id="ref69">72</reflink>]) and Turkish (Kısa et al., [<reflink idref="bib44" id="ref70">44</reflink>]; Kobaş et al., [<reflink idref="bib46" id="ref71">46</reflink>]). In Turkish, the frequency of parents' spatial verbal input, but not their overall verbal or gestural input, increased as a function of children's age between 16 and 21 months and was positively related to children's early spatial word comprehension. In addition, parents' specific type of spatial input when their children were 19 months predicted Turkish‐learning children's object word comprehension at 25 months, irrespective of children's early fine motor abilities at 14 months (Kobaş et al., [<reflink idref="bib46" id="ref72">46</reflink>]). Thus, how parents talk about object‐specific properties can be associated with children's later vocabulary development for objects beyond their motor skills.</p> <p>What is the role of specific input for children with atypical developmental trajectories? In a study of English‐learning preterm and full‐term preschool‐aged children, participants received similar verbal and gestural spatial input in a puzzle play setting (Clingan‐Siverly et al., [<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref73">12</reflink>]). Studies of deaf children who received either early or late input demonstrated an interesting pattern for developing linguistic forms to encode spatial relations. Although learning to encode linguistic terms to encode space is challenging for hearing children learning spoken languages, especially for left–right relations (Abarbanell & Li, [<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref74">1</reflink>]; Karadöller et al., [<reflink idref="bib42" id="ref75">42</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib38" id="ref76">38</reflink>]), early exposure to sign language allowed deaf children to encode spatial relations (i.e., classifier constructions; Perniss et al., [<reflink idref="bib70" id="ref77">70</reflink>]) earlier than hearing children (Sümer, [<reflink idref="bib82" id="ref78">82</reflink>]; Sümer et al., [<reflink idref="bib83" id="ref79">83</reflink>]). This earlier encoding of space was attributed to linguistic forms' iconic and body‐anchored nature in sign language (see Karadöller et al., [<reflink idref="bib38" id="ref80">38</reflink>]). Regardless, deaf children who lacked conventional sign language input lagged behind hearing children in their spatial expressions (Gentner et al., [<reflink idref="bib22" id="ref81">22</reflink>]). After 2 years of exposure to sign language, they still lagged behind early‐exposed deaf children, and these effects persisted into adulthood (Karadöller et al., [<reflink idref="bib39" id="ref82">39</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib40" id="ref83">40</reflink>]; Karadöller, Sümer, et al., [<reflink idref="bib41" id="ref84">41</reflink>]; Newport, [<reflink idref="bib62" id="ref85">62</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib63" id="ref86">63</reflink>]).</p> <hd id="AN0183913195-8">Math input</hd> <p>Symbolic numerals refer to the precise human‐invented representations of numerical values, such as number words or Arabic numerals (Cantlon & Brannon, [<reflink idref="bib9" id="ref87">9</reflink>]; Xu & Spelke, [<reflink idref="bib86" id="ref88">86</reflink>]). Children show wide individual variability in their symbolic numerical skills even before formal schooling. Early experiences with numbers, specifically in informal interactions with parents, contribute to this variability (e.g., Gunderson & Levine, [<reflink idref="bib28" id="ref89">28</reflink>]). In studies measuring these interactions via parental questionnaires assessing the frequency of parent–child numerical activities (e.g., counting) or direct observations of parents' number talk, parental input related significantly to children's numerical skills, even when parents' socioeconomic status or overall language input was controlled (Glenn et al., [<reflink idref="bib23" id="ref90">23</reflink>]; Mutaf‐Yıldız et al., [<reflink idref="bib60" id="ref91">60</reflink>]). In a study of how parents of 26‐month‐old Turkish‐learning preterm and full‐term children used numbers and accompanying gestures (e.g., showing the total number of objects with fingers; Karadöller, Demir‐Lira, et al., [<reflink idref="bib37" id="ref92">37</reflink>]), multimodal math input, as opposed to speech‐only math input, was uniquely associated with gestational status, expressive vocabulary, and the interaction between the two. Full‐term children with lower expressive vocabulary scores received more multimodal input, but no such association was found for preterm children. These findings again highlight that input about specific concepts might interact with children's vocabulary knowledge and neonatal characteristics.</p> <hd id="AN0183913195-9">LANGUAGE‐SPECIFIC INPUT</hd> <p>Variations in input may also be assessed by examining parents' use of words and expressions specific to a language. Parents' use of these language structures can enhance children's vocabulary knowledge of certain word types, such as causal expressions and sound symbolic input. Languages vary in expressing cause‐effect relations or sounds with transparent links to words. Some languages, like Turkish, provide regular, consistent, and overt cues to represent these linguistic structures.</p> <hd id="AN0183913195-10">Causal input</hd> <p>Languages vary in how they encode cause‐effect relations (Shibatani & Pardeshi, [<reflink idref="bib80" id="ref93">80</reflink>]). Some languages, like English, express causes only as lexical verbs (e.g., throw). Others, like Turkish, along with lexical causal verbs, can use verb suffixes for making causal verbs (e.g., morphological causal verbs ‐<emph>ye</emph> "to eat," becomes <emph>ye</emph>‐DIR "to feed" by adding the suffix ‐DIR). In one study, researchers assessed parents' different uses of causal input during free‐ and guided‐play sessions when their infants were 14 and 19 months (Aktan‐Erciyes & Göksun, [<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref94">4</reflink>]). Although parents produced more lexical causal verbs than morphological ones at both time points, only the composite score of parents' morphological causal verb production was associated with children's causal verb knowledge at 36 months, assessed by a verb production task. Hence, hearing language‐specific causal cues overtly and regularly over time assists children's learning of causal verbs. In another longitudinal study, researchers compared lexical versus morphological causal input for Turkish‐learning preterm and full‐term children at 14, 20, and 26 months via semi‐structured play sessions (Özdemir et al., [<reflink idref="bib66" id="ref95">66</reflink>]). Parents mainly produced lexical causal verbs across all time points. Overall, the use of causal input increased from 20 to 26 months, regardless of the group, possibly due to parents' assumptions that children would have a better sense of cause‐effect relations as they grew older.</p> <hd id="AN0183913195-11">Sound symbolic input</hd> <p>Sound symbols, such as <emph>woof</emph> for a dog or <emph>crash</emph> for the sudden noise of a collision, refer to non‐arbitrary connections between speech sounds and their meanings, which provide more effective learning opportunities by linking the perceptual properties of the referents to the word meanings (Imai & Kita, [<reflink idref="bib32" id="ref96">32</reflink>]). Although many languages have sound symbolic words, some, like Japanese and Turkish, feature these word types more than others and use them flexibly in different forms (Demircan, [<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref97">16</reflink>]; Imai & Kita, [<reflink idref="bib32" id="ref98">32</reflink>]). In Turkish, several verbs may be derived from the same sound symbolic roots with different suffixes, providing children overt attentional cues during word learning (e.g., <emph>pat</emph> "hitting of an object with a loud sound," pat‐<emph>la</emph> "to explode" and pat<emph>‐ır</emph> "to bang").</p> <p>Children acquire sound symbolic words before learning arbitrary words (e.g., Massaro & Perlman, [<reflink idref="bib56" id="ref99">56</reflink>]). Parents use many different sound symbolic words with children learning English (Motamedi et al., [<reflink idref="bib59" id="ref100">59</reflink>]) or Korean (Jo & Ko, [<reflink idref="bib35" id="ref101">35</reflink>]), which decreases as children grow older. In one study, of Turkish‐learning children, both the quantity and quality of sound symbolic parental input decreased from 14 to 20 months during semi‐structured play sessions (Kızıldere et al., [<reflink idref="bib45" id="ref102">45</reflink>]); this input positively scaffolded infants' vocabulary development at 14 months. Parents adjusted their sound symbolic input based on children's vocabulary levels. Children with lower word knowledge at 14 months received more sound symbolic input at 20 months. In a follow‐up study, researchers demonstrated similarities in sound symbolic input for preterm and full‐term infants at 20 months (Esmer et al., [<reflink idref="bib20" id="ref103">20</reflink>]). Preterm parents tended to use sound symbolic adverbs when considering children's verb knowledge at 14 months. Additionally, the specific type of input presented in highlighting the verbs in adverb form (e.g., <emph>pat pat</emph> yürümek "to walk <emph>pat pa</emph>t; clomping") related to children's motion verb production at 48 months, but only for the full‐term group. These findings highlight the contribution of commonly used sound symbolic input to children's vocabulary learning, which may be useful for full‐term children.</p> <hd id="AN0183913195-12">CONCLUSION AND LOOKING AHEAD</hd> <p>Infants' early vocabulary development involves a reciprocal and dynamic exchange between child‐ and parent‐related factors. Although children go through well‐described, common steps in their vocabulary development, there is also immense individual variability in their developmental trajectories. Individual‐based analyses of neurodevelopmental changes in children learning non‐Indo‐European languages have contributed to our understanding of early language development. In this article, we have emphasized variations in early vocabulary development as a result of differences in input quantity, type, and parental adjustments based on children's needs and neonatal conditions.</p> <p>More research is needed on the predictive effects of the interactive child–parent processes on children's reasoning of space, math, and cause‐effect relations. Additionally, few studies have examined neural (e.g., Nguyen et al., [<reflink idref="bib65" id="ref104">65</reflink>]; Zivan et al., [<reflink idref="bib88" id="ref105">88</reflink>]) and behavioral synchrony in parent–child dyads (Abney et al., [<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref106">2</reflink>]) using functional near‐infrared spectroscopy, electroencephalogram, and head‐mounted eye‐tracking. Researchers should investigate how these interpersonal neural and behavioral responses change over time and lead to specific vocabulary outcomes. For example, do preterm and full‐term children focus on and follow their parents' multimodal cues (e.g., eye gaze, gestures, words) similarly for different concepts? How would their attentional patterns synchronize behaviorally and neurally based on the responses of their parents? Do these synchronization patterns predict later outcomes in reasoning about different concepts? Focusing on distinct neurodevelopmental trajectories longitudinally can offer new insights into preventive strategies to achieve the best outcomes for language interventions.</p> <hd id="AN0183913195-13">ACKNOWLEDGMENTS</hd> <p>Tilbe Göksun is supported by the James S. McDonnell Foundation Human Cognition Scholar Award (https://doi.org/10.37717/220020510). We thank the current and former members of the Language & Cognition Lab at Koç University for their work and invaluable discussions.</p> <p>GRAPH: Table S1.</p> <ref id="AN0183913195-14"> <title> REFERENCES </title> <blist> <bibl id="bib1" idref="ref74" type="bt">1</bibl> <bibtext> Abarbanell, L., & Li, P. (2021). Unraveling the contribution of left‐right language on spatial perspective taking. Spatial Cognition & Computation, 21 (1), 1 – 38. https://doi.org/10.1080/13875868.2020.1825442</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib2" idref="ref106" type="bt">2</bibl> <bibtext> Abney, D. H., Suanda, S. H., Smith, L. B., & Yu, C. (2020). What are the building blocks of parent–infant coordinated attention in free‐flowing interaction? Infancy, 25 (6), 871 – 887. https://doi.org/10.1111/infa.12365</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib3" idref="ref11" type="bt">3</bibl> <bibtext> Abu‐Zhaya, R., Seidl, A., & Cristia, A. (2017). Multimodal infant‐directed communication: How caregivers combine tactile and linguistic cues. Journal of Child Language, 44 (5), 1088 – 1116. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0305000916000416</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib4" idref="ref32" type="bt">4</bibl> <bibtext> Aktan‐Erciyes, A., & Göksun, T. (2023). Early parental causal language input is associated with later child causal verb understanding. Journal of Child Language, 50 (1), 177 – 197. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0305000921000805</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib5" idref="ref18" type="bt">5</bibl> <bibtext> Anderson, N. J., Graham, S. A., Prime, H., Jenkins, J. M., & Madigan, S. (2021). Linking quality and quantity of parental linguistic input to child language skills: A meta‐analysis. Child Development, 92 (2), 484 – 501. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.13508</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib6" idref="ref26" type="bt">6</bibl> <bibtext> Bergelson, E., Soderstrom, M., Schwarz, I.‐C., Rowland, C. F., Ramírez‐Esparza, N., Hamrick, L. R., Marklund, E., Kalashnikova, M., Guez, A., Casillas, M., Benetti, L., van Alphen, P., & Cristia, A. (2023). Everyday language input and production in 1,001 children from six continents. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 120 (52), e2300671120. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2300671120</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib7" idref="ref57" type="bt">7</bibl> <bibtext> Berk, S. (2003). Sensitive period effects on the acquisition of language: A study of language development [Ph.D. dissertation thesis, University of Connecticut].</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib8" idref="ref39" type="bt">8</bibl> <bibtext> Bozzette, M. (2007). A review of research on premature infant‐mother interaction. Newborn and Infant Nursing Reviews, 7 (1), 49 – 55. https://doi.org/10.1053/j.nainr.2006.12.002</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib9" idref="ref87" type="bt">9</bibl> <bibtext> Cantlon, J. F., & Brannon, E. M. (2006). Shared system for ordering small and large numbers in monkeys and humans. Psychological Science, 17 (5), 401 – 406. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467‐9280.2006.01719.x</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Cartmill, E. A., Pruden, S. M., Levine, S. C., & Goldin‐Meadow, S. (2010). The role of parent gesture in children's spatial language development. In K. Franich, K. M. Iserman, & L. L. Keil (Eds.), Proceedings of the 34th annual Boston University conference on language development (pp. 70 – 77). Cascadilla Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Choi, B., Wei, R., & Rowe, M. L. (2021). Show, give, and point gestures across infancy differentially predict language development. Developmental Psychology, 57 (6), 851 – 862. https://doi.org/10.1037/dev0001195</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Clingan‐Siverly, S., Nelson, P., Göksun, T., & Demir‐Lira, E. (2021). Spatial thinking in term and preterm‐born preschoolers: Relations to parent‐child speech and gesture. Frontiers in Psychology, 19, 923 – 938. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.651678</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> De Schuymer, L., De Groote, I., Beyers, W., Striano, T., & Roeyers, H. (2011). Preverbal skills as mediators for language outcome in preterm and full‐term children. Early Human Development, 87 (4), 265 – 272. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.earlhumdev.2011.01.029</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> DeMaster, D., Bick, J., Johnson, U., Montroy, J. J., Landry, S., & Duncan, A. F. (2019). Nurturing the preterm infant brain: Leveraging neuroplasticity to improve neurobehavioral outcomes. Pediatric Research, 85 (2), 166 – 175. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41390‐018‐0203‐9</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Demir, Ö. E., & Küntay, A. C. (2014). Cognitive and neural mechanisms underlying socioeconomic gradients in language development: New answers to old questions. Child Development Perspectives, 8 (2), 113 – 118. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdep.12069</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Demircan, Ö. (1996). Türkçede yansımaların özüne doğru [Towards the essence of onomatopoeias in Turkish]. Journal of Linguistics Research, 7, 175 – 191.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Demir‐Lira, Ö. E., & Göksun, T. (2024). Through thick and thin: Gesture and speech remain as an integrated system in atypical development. Topics in Cognitive Science, 1 – 19. https://doi.org/10.1111/tops.12739</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Dixon, W. E., & Smith, P. H. (2000). Links between early temperament and language acquisition. Merrill‐Palmer Quarterly, 46 (3), 417 – 440. <ulink href="http://www.jstor.org/stable/23093739">http://www.jstor.org/stable/23093739</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Doğan, I., Kobaş, M., Kızıldere, E., Aktan‐Erciyes, A., Demir‐Lira, E., Akman, İ., & Göksun, T. (2023). Parental multimodal input on language development in preterm and full‐term infants [Manuscript submitted for publication]. Department of Psychology, Koç University.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Esmer, Ş. C., Kızıldere, E., & Göksun, T. (2023). Smashing verb learning through parental sound symbolic input in preterm and full‐term children. Language Acquisition, 1 – 22. https://doi.org/10.1080/10489223.2023.2257177</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Gentner, D., & Bowerman, M. (2009). Why some spatial semantic categories are harder to learn than others: The typological prevalence hypothesis. In J. Guo, E. Lieven, S. Ervin‐Tripp, N. Budwig, S. Özçalışkan, & K. Nakamura (Eds.), Cross‐linguistic approaches to the psychology of language: Research in the tradition of Dan Isaac Slobin (pp. 465 – 480). Erlbaum. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203837887‐51</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Gentner, D., Özyürek, A., Gürcanli, Ö., & Goldin‐Meadow, S. (2013). Spatial language facilitates spatial cognition: Evidence from children who lack language input. Cognition, 127 (3), 318 – 330. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2013.01.003</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Glenn, D. E., Demir‐Lira, Ö. E., Gibson, D. J., Congdon, E. L., & Levine, S. C. (2018). Resilience in mathematics after early brain injury: The roles of parental input and early plasticity. Developmental Cognitive Neuroscience, 30, 304 – 313. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dcn.2017.07.005</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Göksun, T., Aktan‐Erciyes, A., Hirsh‐Pasek, K., & Golinkoff, R. (2017). Event perception and language learning: Early interactions between language and thought. In N. Ketrez, A. C. Küntay, Ş. Özçalışkan, & A. Özyürek (Eds.), Social environment and cognition in language development: Studies in honor of Ayhan Aksu‐Koç (pp. 179 – 198). Trends in Language Acquisition Research (TiLAR) Series, John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/tilar.21.12gok</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Göksun, T., Hirsh‐Pasek, K., & Golinkoff, R. M. (2010). Trading spaces: Carving up events for learning language. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 5 (1), 33 – 42. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691609356783</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Goldin‐Meadow, S. (2013). Homesign: When gesture is called upon to be language. In C. Müller, A. Cienki, E. Fricke, S. Ladewig, D. McNeill, & S. Tabendorf (Eds.), Handbooks of linguistics and communication science (HSK) (pp. 113 – 125). De Gruyter Mouton.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Goldin‐Meadow, S. (2019). The resilience of language: Homesign. In P. Hagoorts (Ed.), Human language: From genes and brains to behavior (pp. 221 – 234). The MIT Press. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/10841.003.0020</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Gunderson, E. A., & Levine, S. C. (2011). Some types of parent number talk count more than others: Relations between parents' input and children's cardinal‐number knowledge. Developmental Science, 14 (5), 1021 – 1032. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467‐7687.2011.01050.x</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hall, M. L., Hall, W. C., & Caselli, N. K. (2019). Deaf children need language, not (just) speech. First Language, 39 (4), 367 – 395. https://doi.org/10.1177/0142723719834102</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Henner, J., & Robinson, O. (2023). Crip linguistics goes to school. Language, 8 (1), 48. https://doi.org/10.3390/languages8010048</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hoff, E., & Naigles, L. (2002). How children use input to acquire a lexicon. Child Development, 73 (2), 418 – 433. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467‐8624.00415</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Imai, M., & Kita, S. (2014). The sound symbolism bootstrapping hypothesis for language acquisition and language evolution. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, B: Biological Sciences, 369 (1651), 20130298. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2013.0298</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Ionio, C., Riboni, E., Confalonieri, E., Dallatomasina, C., Mascheroni, E., Bonanomi, A., Sora, M. G. N., Falautano, M., Poloniato, A., Garera, G., & Comi, G. (2016). Paths of cognitive and language development in healthy preterm infants. Infant Behavior and Development, 44, 199 – 207. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infbeh.2016.07.004</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Iverson, J. M., Capirci, O., Longobardi, E., & Caselli, M. C. (1999). Gesturing in mother‐child interactions. Cognitive Development, 14 (1), 57 – 75. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0885‐2014(99)80018‐5</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Jo, J., & Ko, E.‐S. (2018). Korean mothers attune the frequency and acoustic saliency of sound symbolic words to the linguistic maturity of their children. Frontiers in Psychology, 9, 2225. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02225</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Johnston, J. R., & Slobin, D. I. (1979). The development of locative expressions in English, Italian, Serbo‐Croatian, and Turkish. Journal of Child Language, 6 (3), 529 – 545. https://doi.org/10.1017/s030500090000252x</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Karadöller, D. Z., Demir‐Lira, E. Ö., & Göksun, T. (2023). Full‐term children with lower vocabulary scores receive more math input multimodally than preterm children [Manuscript submitted for publication]. Department of Psychology, Koç University.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Karadöller, D. Z., Sümer, B., Ercenur, Ü. N. A. L., & Özyürek, A. (2022). Sign advantage: Both children and adults' spatial expressions in sign are more informative than those in speech and gestures combined. Journal of Child Language, 1 – 27. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0305000922000642</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Karadöller, D. Z., Sümer, B., & Özyürek, A. (2017). Effects of delayed language exposure on spatial language acquisition by signing children and adults. In G. Gunzelmann, A. Howes, T. Tenbrink, & E. Davelaar (Eds.), Proceedings of the 39th annual conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 2372 – 2376). Cognitive Science Society.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Karadöller, D. Z., Sümer, B., & Özyürek, A. (2021). Effects and non‐effects of late language exposure on spatial language development: Evidence from deaf adults and children. Language Learning and Development, 17 (1), 1 – 25. https://doi.org/10.1080/15475441.2020.1823846</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Karadöller, D. Z., Sümer, B., Ünal, E., & Özyürek, A. (2023). Late sign language exposure does not modulate the relation between spatial language and spatial memory in deaf children and adults. Memory & Cognition, 51 (3), 582 – 600. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421‐022‐01281‐7</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Karadöller, D. Z., Ünal, E., Sumer, B., Göksun, T., Özer, D., & Özyürek, A. (2019, November 7–10). Children but not adults use both speech and gesture to produce informative expressions of left‐right relations [Paper presentation]. 44th annual Boston University conference on language development, Boston, MA.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kidd, E., & Garcia, R. (2022). How diverse is child language acquisition research? First Language, 42 (6), 703 – 735. https://doi.org/10.1177/01427237211066405</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kısa, Y. D., Aktan‐Erciyes, A., Turan, E., & Göksun, T. (2019). Parental use of spatial language and gestures in early childhood. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 37 (2), 149 – 167. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjdp.12263</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kızıldere, E., Esmer, Ş. C., & Göksun, T. (2022). From woof woof to dog: Interactions between parents' use of sound symbolic words and infants' vocabulary development. Infancy, 27 (5), 972 – 996. https://doi.org/10.1111/infa.12490</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kobaş, M., Aktan‐Erciyes, A., & Göksun, T. (2021). Fine motor abilities and parental input of spatial features predict object word comprehension of Turkish‐learning children. Infant and Child Development, 30 (4), e2243. https://doi.org/10.1002/icd.2243</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kuhl, P. K., Conboy, B. T., Padden, D., Nelson, T., & Pruitt, J. (2005). Early speech perception and later language development: Implications for the "critical period". Language Learning and Development, 1 (3–4), 237 – 264. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15473341lld0103&4_2</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Küntay, A., & Slobin, D. I. (2014). Listening to a Turkish mother: Some puzzles for acquisition. In M. Bamberg & J. Reilly (Eds.), Social interaction, social context, and language (pp. 265 – 286). Psychology Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Levine, S. C., Ratliff, K. R., Huttenlocher, J., & Cannon, J. (2012). Early puzzle play: A predictor of preschoolers' spatial transformation skill. Developmental Psychology, 48 (2), 530 – 542. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0025913</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Levine, S. C., Suriyakham, L. W., Rowe, M. L., Huttenlocher, J., & Gunderson, E. A. (2010). What counts in the development of young children's number knowledge? Developmental Psychology, 46 (5), 1309 – 1325. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0019671</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Lillo‐Martin, D., & Henner, J. (2021). Acquisition of sign languages. Annual Review of Linguistics, 7, 395 – 419. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev‐linguistics‐043020‐092357</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Lillo‐Martin, D., Smith, N., & Tsimpli, I. (2020). Age of acquisition effects in language development. In G. Morgan (Ed.), Understanding deafness, language and cognitive development: Essays in honour of Bencie Woll (pp. 93 – 113). John Benjamins Publishing Company. https://doi.org/10.1075/tilar.25.06lil</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Mandler, J. M. (2000). Perceptual and conceptual processes in infancy. Journal of Cognition and Development, 1 (1), 3 – 36. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327647jcd0101n_2</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Mandler, J. M. (2012). On the spatial foundations of the conceptual system and its enrichment. Cognitive Science, 36 (3), 421 – 451. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1551‐6709.2012.01241.x</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Marentette, P. F., & Mayberry, R. (2000). Principles for an emerging phonological system: A case study of early ASL acquisition. In C. Chamberlain, J. Morford, & R. I. Mayberry (Eds.), Language acquisition by eye (pp. 71 – 90). Erlbaum.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Massaro, D. W., & Perlman, M. (2017). Quantifying iconicity's contribution during language acquisition: Implications for vocabulary learning. Frontiers in Communication, 2, 4. https://doi.org/10.3389/fcomm.2017.00004</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Mayberry, R. I., Hatrak, M., Ilbasaran, D., Cheng, Q., Huang, Y., & Hall, M. L. (2023). Impoverished language in early childhood affects the development of complex sentence structure. Developmental Science, 27 (1), e13416. https://doi.org/10.1111/desc.13416</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Mitchell, R. E., & Karchmer, M. (2004). Chasing the mythical ten percent: Parental hearing status of deaf and hard of hearing students in the United States. Sign Language Studies, 4 (2), 138 – 163. https://doi.org/10.1353/sls.2004.0005</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Motamedi, Y., Murgiano, M., Perniss, P., Wonnacott, E., Marshall, C., Goldin‐Meadow, S., & Vigliocco, G. (2020). Linking language to sensory experience: Onomatopoeia in early language development. Developmental Science, 24 (3), e13066. https://doi.org/10.1111/desc.13066</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Mutaf‐Yıldız, B., Sasanguie, D., De Smedt, B., & Reynvoet, B. (2020). Probing the relationship between home numeracy and children's mathematical skills: A systematic review. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 2074. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.02074</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Nelson, P. M., & Demir‐Lira, Ö. E. (2023). Parental cognitive stimulation in preterm‐born children's neurocognitive functioning during the preschool years: A systematic review. Pediatric Research, 94, 1 – 13. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41390‐023‐02642‐x</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Newport, E. L. (1988). Constraints on learning and their role in language acquisition: Studies of the acquisition of American sign language. Language Sciences, 10 (1), 147 – 172. https://doi.org/10.1016/0388‐0001(88)90010‐1</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Newport, E. L. (1990). Maturational constraints on language learning. Cognitive Science, 14 (1), 11 – 28. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog1401_2</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Newport, E. L., & Meier, R. P. (1985). Acquisition of American sign language. In D. Slobin (Ed.), The cross‐linguistic study of language acquisition (Vol. 1, pp. 881 – 938). Erlbaum. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315802541‐12</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Nguyen, T., Schleihauf, H., Kayhan, E., Matthes, D., Vrtička, P., & Hoehl, S. (2021). Neural synchrony in mother‐child conversation: Exploring the role of conversation patterns. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, 16 (1–2), 93 – 102. https://doi.org/10.1093/scan/nsaa079</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Özdemir, S. C., Aktan‐Erciyes, A., & Göksun, T. (2023). Parental use of causal language for preterm and full‐term children: A longitudinal study. Journal of Child Language. https://doi.org/10.1017/s030500092300048x</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Pan, B. A., Rowe, M. L., Singer, J. D., & Snow, C. E. (2005). Maternal correlates of growth in toddler vocabulary production in low‐income families. Child Development, 76 (4), 763 – 782. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467‐8624.00498‐i1</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Parish‐Morris, J., Mahajan, N., Hirsh‐Pasek, K., Golinkoff, R. M., & Collins, M. F. (2013). Once upon a time: Parent‐child dialogue and storybook reading in the electronic era. Mind, Brain, and Education, 7 (3), 200 – 211. https://doi.org/10.1111/mbe.12028</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Pérez‐Pereira, M., Fernández, P., Resches, M., & Gómez‐Taibo, M. L. (2016). Does temperament influence language development? Evidence from preterm and full‐term children. Infant Behavior & Development, 42 (February), 11 – 21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infbeh.2015.10.003</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Perniss, P. M., Zwitserlood, I., & Özyürek, A. (2015). Does space structure spatial language? A comparison of spatial expression across sign languages. Language, 91 (3), 611 – 641. https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2015.0041</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Pizzuto, E., & Volterra, V. (2000). Iconicity and transparency in sign languages: A cross‐linguistic cross‐cultural view. In K. Emmorey & H. Lane (Eds.), The signs of language revisited (pp. 234 – 255). Psychology Press. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781410604972‐24</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Pruden, S. M., & Levine, S. C. (2017). Parents' spatial language mediates a sex difference in preschoolers' spatial language use. Psychological Science, 28 (11), 1583 – 1596. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797617711968</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Pruden, S. M., Levine, S. C., & Huttenlocher, J. (2011). Children's spatial thinking: Does talk about the spatial world matter? Developmental Science, 14 (6), 1417 – 1430. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467‐7687.2011.01088.x</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Romberg, A. R., & Saffran, J. R. (2010). Statistical learning and language acquisition. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Cognitive Science, 1 (6), 906 – 914. https://doi.org/10.1002/wcs.78</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Rowe, M. L. (2012). A longitudinal investigation of the role of quantity and quality of child‐directed speech in vocabulary development. Child Development, 83 (5), 1762 – 1774. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467‐8624.2012.01805.x</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Rowe, M. L., Leech, K. A., & Cabrera, N. (2017). Going beyond input quantity: Wh‐questions matter for toddlers' language and cognitive development. Cognitive Science, 41 (S1), 162 – 179. https://doi.org/10.1111/cogs.12349</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Rowe, M. L., & Weisleder, A. (2020). Language development in context. Annual Review of Developmental Psychology, 2, 201 – 223. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev‐devpsych‐042220‐121816</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Salerni, N., Suttora, C., & D'Odorico, L. (2007). A comparison of characteristics of early communication exchanges in mother‐preterm and mother‐full‐term infant dyads. First Language, 27 (4), 329 – 346. https://doi.org/10.1177/0142723707081654</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Sansavini, A., Pentimonti, J., Justice, L., Guarini, A., Savini, S., Alessandroni, R., & Faldella, G. (2014). Language, motor and cognitive development of extremely preterm children: Modeling individual growth trajectories over the first three years of life. Journal of Communication Disorders, 49 (May–June), 55 – 68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcomdis.2014.02.005</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Shibatani, M., & Pardeshi, P. (2002). The causative continuum. In M. Shibatani (Ed.), The grammar of causation and interpersonal manipulation (pp. 85 – 126). John Benjamins Publishing Company. https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.48.07shi</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Spinelli, M., Fasolo, M., Shah, P. E., Genovese, G., & Aureli, T. (2018). The influence of early temperament on language development: The moderating role of maternal input. Frontiers in Psychology, 28 (9), 1527. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01527</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Sümer, B. (2015). Acquisition of spatial language by signing and speaking children: A comparison of Turkish Sign Language (TİD) and Turkish [Doctoral dissertation, Radboud University Nijmegen]. https://repository.ubn.ru.nl/bitstream/handle/2066/140304/140304.pdf</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Sümer, B., Perniss, P. M., Zwitserlood, I. E. P., & Özyürek, A. (2014). Learning to express "left‐right" & "front‐behind" in a sign versus spoken language. In P. Bello, M. Guarini, M. McShane, & B. Scassellati (Eds.), Proceedings of the 36th annual meeting of the cognitive science society (pp. 1550 – 1555). Cognitive Science Society.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Ünlütabak, B., Aktan‐Erciyes, A., Yılmaz, D., Kandemir, S., & Göksun, T. (2022). Parental input during shared book reading and toddlers' elicited and spontaneous communicative interactions. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 81 (July–August), 101436. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appdev.2022.101436</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Wu, D., Li, H., & Degotardi, S. (2022). Early spatial language development and education: A scoping review. SN Social Sciences, 2 (2), 20. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43545‐021‐00260‐0</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Xu, F., & Spelke, E. S. (2000). Large number discrimination in 6‐month‐old infants. Cognition, 74 (1), B1 – B11. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0010‐0277(99)00066‐9</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Yurovsky, D. (2018). A communicative approach to early word learning. New Ideas in Psychology, 50 (August), 73 – 79. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.newideapsych.2017.09.001</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Zivan, M., Gashri, C., Habuba, N., & Horowitz‐Kraus, T. (2022). Reduced mother‐child brain‐to‐brain synchrony during joint storytelling interaction interrupted by a media usage. Child Neuropsychology, 28 (7), 1 – 20. https://doi.org/10.1080/09297049.2022.2034774</bibtext> </blist> </ref> <aug> <p>By Tilbe Göksun; Aslı Aktan‐Erciyes; Dilay Z. Karadöller and Ö. Ece Demir‐Lira</p> <p>Reported by Author; Author; Author; Author</p> </aug> <nolink nlid="nl1" bibid="bib68" firstref="ref1"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl2" bibid="bib25" firstref="ref2"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl3" bibid="bib24" firstref="ref3"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl4" bibid="bib18" firstref="ref5"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl5" bibid="bib69" firstref="ref6"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl6" bibid="bib81" firstref="ref7"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl7" bibid="bib43" firstref="ref8"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl8" bibid="bib74" firstref="ref9"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl9" bibid="bib47" firstref="ref10"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl10" bibid="bib54" firstref="ref14"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl11" bibid="bib53" firstref="ref15"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl12" bibid="bib21" firstref="ref16"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl13" bibid="bib15" firstref="ref17"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl14" bibid="bib75" firstref="ref19"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl15" bibid="bib45" firstref="ref20"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl16" bibid="bib87" firstref="ref21"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl17" bibid="bib46" firstref="ref22"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl18" bibid="bib31" firstref="ref23"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl19" bibid="bib34" firstref="ref27"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl20" bibid="bib67" firstref="ref28"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl21" bibid="bib76" firstref="ref29"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl22" bibid="bib11" firstref="ref30"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl23" bibid="bib77" firstref="ref31"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl24" bibid="bib48" firstref="ref33"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl25" bibid="bib66" firstref="ref34"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl26" bibid="bib84" firstref="ref35"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl27" bibid="bib33" firstref="ref37"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl28" bibid="bib79" firstref="ref38"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl29" bibid="bib13" firstref="ref40"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl30" bibid="bib78" firstref="ref41"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl31" bibid="bib61" firstref="ref43"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl32" bibid="bib14" firstref="ref44"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl33" bibid="bib17" firstref="ref45"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl34" bibid="bib19" firstref="ref46"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl35" bibid="bib55" firstref="ref47"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl36" bibid="bib64" firstref="ref48"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl37" bibid="bib71" firstref="ref49"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl38" bibid="bib58" firstref="ref50"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl39" bibid="bib52" firstref="ref51"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl40" bibid="bib51" firstref="ref52"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl41" bibid="bib29" firstref="ref53"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl42" bibid="bib38" firstref="ref54"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl43" bibid="bib57" firstref="ref55"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl44" bibid="bib40" firstref="ref56"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl45" bibid="bib27" firstref="ref58"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl46" bibid="bib30" firstref="ref59"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl47" bibid="bib26" firstref="ref60"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl48" bibid="bib50" firstref="ref62"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl49" bibid="bib73" firstref="ref63"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl50" bibid="bib36" firstref="ref64"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl51" bibid="bib10" firstref="ref65"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl52" bibid="bib49" firstref="ref66"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl53" bibid="bib85" firstref="ref68"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl54" bibid="bib72" firstref="ref69"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl55" bibid="bib44" firstref="ref70"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl56" bibid="bib12" firstref="ref73"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl57" bibid="bib42" firstref="ref75"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl58" bibid="bib70" firstref="ref77"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl59" bibid="bib82" firstref="ref78"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl60" bibid="bib83" firstref="ref79"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl61" bibid="bib22" firstref="ref81"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl62" bibid="bib39" firstref="ref82"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl63" bibid="bib41" firstref="ref84"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl64" bibid="bib62" firstref="ref85"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl65" bibid="bib63" firstref="ref86"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl66" bibid="bib86" firstref="ref88"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl67" bibid="bib28" firstref="ref89"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl68" bibid="bib23" firstref="ref90"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl69" bibid="bib60" firstref="ref91"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl70" bibid="bib37" firstref="ref92"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl71" bibid="bib80" firstref="ref93"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl72" bibid="bib32" firstref="ref96"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl73" bibid="bib16" firstref="ref97"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl74" bibid="bib56" firstref="ref99"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl75" bibid="bib59" firstref="ref100"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl76" bibid="bib35" firstref="ref101"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl77" bibid="bib20" firstref="ref103"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl78" bibid="bib65" firstref="ref104"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl79" bibid="bib88" firstref="ref105"></nolink>
Header DbId: eric
DbLabel: ERIC
An: EJ1460227
AccessLevel: 3
PubType: Academic Journal
PubTypeId: academicJournal
PreciseRelevancyScore: 0
IllustrationInfo
Items – Name: Title
  Label: Title
  Group: Ti
  Data: The Multifaceted Nature of Early Vocabulary Development: Connecting Children's Characteristics with Parental Input Types
– Name: Language
  Label: Language
  Group: Lang
  Data: English
– Name: Author
  Label: Authors
  Group: Au
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Tilbe+Göksun%22">Tilbe Göksun</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0190-7988">0000-0002-0190-7988</externalLink>)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Asli+Aktan-Erciyes%22">Asli Aktan-Erciyes</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Dilay+Z%2E+Karadöller%22">Dilay Z. Karadöller</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Ö%2E+Ece+Demir-Lira%22">Ö. Ece Demir-Lira</searchLink>
– Name: TitleSource
  Label: Source
  Group: Src
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="SO" term="%22Child+Development+Perspectives%22"><i>Child Development Perspectives</i></searchLink>. 2025 19(1):30-37.
– Name: Avail
  Label: Availability
  Group: Avail
  Data: Wiley. Available from: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 111 River Street, Hoboken, NJ 07030. Tel: 800-835-6770; e-mail: cs-journals@wiley.com; Web site: https://www.wiley.com/en-us
– Name: PeerReviewed
  Label: Peer Reviewed
  Group: SrcInfo
  Data: Y
– Name: Pages
  Label: Page Count
  Group: Src
  Data: 8
– Name: DatePubCY
  Label: Publication Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2025
– Name: TypeDocument
  Label: Document Type
  Group: TypDoc
  Data: Journal Articles<br />Reports - Evaluative
– Name: Subject
  Label: Descriptors
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Parent+Participation%22">Parent Participation</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Parent+Child+Relationship%22">Parent Child Relationship</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Child+Language%22">Child Language</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Vocabulary+Development%22">Vocabulary Development</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Language+Acquisition%22">Language Acquisition</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Native+Language%22">Native Language</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Linguistic+Input%22">Linguistic Input</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Verbs%22">Verbs</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Deafness%22">Deafness</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Turkish%22">Turkish</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Sign+Language%22">Sign Language</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Neonates%22">Neonates</searchLink>
– Name: DOI
  Label: DOI
  Group: ID
  Data: 10.1111/cdep.12524
– Name: ISSN
  Label: ISSN
  Group: ISSN
  Data: 1750-8592<br />1750-8606
– Name: Abstract
  Label: Abstract
  Group: Ab
  Data: Children need to learn the demands of their native language in the early vocabulary development phase. In this dynamic process, parental multimodal input may shape neurodevelopmental trajectories while also being tailored by child-related factors. Moving beyond typically characterized group profiles, in this article, we synthesize growing evidence on the effects of parental multimodal input (amount, quality, or absence), domain-specific input (space and math), and language-specific input (causal verbs and sound symbols) on preterm, full-term, and deaf children's early vocabulary development, focusing primarily on research with children learning Turkish and Turkish Sign Language. We advocate for a theoretical perspective, integrating neonatal characteristics and parental input, and acknowledging the unique constraints of languages.
– Name: AbstractInfo
  Label: Abstractor
  Group: Ab
  Data: As Provided
– Name: DateEntry
  Label: Entry Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2025
– Name: AN
  Label: Accession Number
  Group: ID
  Data: EJ1460227
PLink https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=eric&AN=EJ1460227
RecordInfo BibRecord:
  BibEntity:
    Identifiers:
      – Type: doi
        Value: 10.1111/cdep.12524
    Languages:
      – Text: English
    PhysicalDescription:
      Pagination:
        PageCount: 8
        StartPage: 30
    Subjects:
      – SubjectFull: Parent Participation
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Parent Child Relationship
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Child Language
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Vocabulary Development
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Language Acquisition
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Native Language
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Linguistic Input
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Verbs
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Deafness
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Turkish
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Sign Language
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Neonates
        Type: general
    Titles:
      – TitleFull: The Multifaceted Nature of Early Vocabulary Development: Connecting Children's Characteristics with Parental Input Types
        Type: main
  BibRelationships:
    HasContributorRelationships:
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Tilbe Göksun
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Asli Aktan-Erciyes
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Dilay Z. Karadöller
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Ö. Ece Demir-Lira
    IsPartOfRelationships:
      – BibEntity:
          Dates:
            – D: 01
              M: 03
              Type: published
              Y: 2025
          Identifiers:
            – Type: issn-print
              Value: 1750-8592
            – Type: issn-electronic
              Value: 1750-8606
          Numbering:
            – Type: volume
              Value: 19
            – Type: issue
              Value: 1
          Titles:
            – TitleFull: Child Development Perspectives
              Type: main
ResultId 1