I am currently analysing a child's language sample using the type-token ratio. The child produced some animal sounds (wof wof, kuku etc). Shall I take such productions into consideration?
Surely conventionally recognized animal sounds are words? Just as "table" refers (more or less) to a raised structure on which things can be placed, "woof" refers to a sound made by a dog. However, imagine the following scenario: one child in your research speaks in full sentences with only occasional recourse to animal sounds and demonstrates a reasonably rich vocabulary for someone of his or her age; another barely makes sentences and has a generally limited vocabulary but produces such a broad range of animal sounds that his or her type-token ration is actually better than the first student. This speaks for the need to use qualitative research methods alongside quantitative ones such as type-token ratio.
Thanks for your reply. Yes, in fact that's what happened. The child's type-token ratio came age-appropriate, however the child's vocabulary is quite limited. Which qualitative method is recommended to use?