Q. 1
The method discussed in the reading is Mean Length of Utterance (MLU). It is a measure of linguistic competence in children. MLU is typically calculated by collecting the number of utterances spoken by a child and dividing the total number of morphemes by the number of utterances in the sample. Before calculating a child's MLU from the transcripts, the adequate sample size must be obtained for measuring the child's MLU. Besides, the transcripts and coding ought to be checked for consistency. MLU is a reliable matching test between specific language impairment (SLI) and younger comparisons.
Q. 2
Mean Length of Utterance (MLU) is a good measure of morphosyntactic development. This is simply because it correlates dependably with other measures of morphosyntactic complexity. Apart from measuring morphosyntactic development, MLU can also be used to measure linguistic productivity across different age spans. Furthermore, MLU is an unwavering linguistic development index and therefore is highly handy for language level matching in studies of children with specific language impairment (SLI).
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Q. 3
Calculating MLU in words or morphemes as the basis for matching should be vigilantly considered if grammatical morphemes are the target structure of interest. Moreover, how representative an MLU is a child's morphosyntactic development is dependent on the quality of that child's language sample. Therefore it is important for the researcher to be careful of the procedural steps and concerns when calculating MLU.
Differences in the degree and type of questions asked by the researcher can result in differences between individual children's MLUs. Some questions also result into a yes/no response and therefore if the interlocutor's discourse includes too many questions that demand a minimal response, the resulting child's MLU will be miserable.
When testing children at the age of development, MLU is not a meaningful index of language development because MLUs in spontaneous speech tend to level at older ages. This means that MLUs might have a reduced ability to be a measure of morphosyntactic development among older children.
If the MLUs of the experimental group of children with SLI can only be matched by typically developing (TD) children very much younger, the cognitive immaturity of the TD younger group might be a confound in the study.
Furthermore, a difference in MLUs can be as a result of different transcriber's interpretations in how repetitions are counted or of where utterance boundaries are. Mean Length of Utterance may also only be reasonable for researchers working on less-studied languages for which no standardised instruments are available
Lastly, in some studies, the focus may demand a different matching criterion to be used.
Q. 4
MLU may be the only alternative for researchers working on less-studied languages for which no standardised instruments are available. This is because MLU does not involve the costs associated with purchasing a graded test.
MLU is a consistent linguistic developmental which is highly useful for language level matching in studies of children with specific language impairment (SLI).
