Table 2.

Summary of Fabiano-Smith and Barlow (2010) interpretations and reinterpretation.

Original interpretations	Reinterpretations under translanguaging
The phonetic inventories of the bilingual children were equivalent to that of their monolingual peers in both languages.	This finding suggests that there is an overlap in the linguistic repertoires of the bilingual and monolingual groups.
The findings from this study that demonstrated the same bilingual children possess phonetic inventories that are like monolingual speakers of either language is evidence that a slower rate of development of one phonological skill does not indicate a slower rate of development for all phonological skills in bilingual children.	Bilingual speakers are utilizing different phonetic features in their linguistic repertoire that still fit in the phonemic parameters thus not changing the meaning of the word. Because they are selecting a different feature relative to their monolingual peers, it appears as if they are experiencing a slower rate of appearance.
That is, it may be that if a 3-year-old bilingual child demonstrates a sparse phonetic inventory in both languages, he or she may present with a speech disorder. Conversely, if a bilingual 3-year-old demonstrates phonological accuracy levels slightly lower than his or her monolingual peers, he or she may not require intervention services.	Under the scope of translanguaging, a speech-language service provider may look at phonetic inventory as a whole unified system rather than two separate phonologies. In other words, assessing what features are available that allow for functional communication. Through translanguaging lens, the focus would be on what phonetic features the child selects and if it is functional for their communication, not if the accuracy levels they achieve relative to monolingual levels.
The results from the analysis of inventory typology indicated that bilingual children organize their two speech sound systems in the same hierarchical fashion as monolingual speakers of English and Spanish.	A translanguaging approach would suggest that bilingual children organize their linguistic repertoire in a hierarchical fashion based on typology. Typology is recognized as a feature in a linguistic repertoire; therefore, the linguistic repertoire (i.e., phonetic inventory) can be organized according to this feature. Additionally, this organization is unique and, under a translanguaging approach, cannot be compared to that of monolingual repertoires.
Evidence of separation between the two languages of bilinguals was found through the examination of the levels of complexity in both English and Spanish. Most bilingual children were at Level D in Spanish but at Level E in English, demonstrating separation between their two phonological systems.	There is evidence that children deploy certain phonetic features in a given context over the other. The children of this study may have more experience utilizing certain phonetic features over others given their sociolinguistic contexts outside of the study. This would not be evidence of separation of phonologies but, through a translanguaging lens, evidence of the influence frequency of production of specific phonetic feature has on speech sound production in a given linguistic repertoire
Although these levels of complexity are similar, they are not identical; thus, bilingual children seem to recognize which phonological elements belong to Spanish and which belong to English and to organize them in a systematic but mostly separate manner.	These typologies are not identical, but the differences of productions based on typology are the result of the child's lived experience using their linguistic repertoire in their sociolinguistic environments. For example, these children may deploy sounds in more marked categories at higher frequency because those are the features shared by them and their interlocutor. In other words, the levels of complexity differ not due to separation of named languages, but rather the frequency at which they deploy the phonetic features.
Evidence of separation is clinically important in assessment and intervention because assessment and treatment of one phonological structure does not necessarily indicate assessment and treatment of that structure in the bilingual child's other language.	Separation of languages does not follow the perspectives of a translanguaging approach. Using the translanguaging approach, identifying a phonological system as unitary and unbound suggests that clinicians must look at the entire linguistic repertoire and its function in communication. Translanguaging bypasses the need to assess two separate systems and embraces the entire repertoire giving the child the opportunity to utilize their full linguistic system without boundaries.
During assessment, if a child possesses a sound his or her English phonetic inventory, it does not indicate that that same child possesses that sound in his or her other language.	This interpretation separates phonetic features into named English and Spanish. Through a translanguaging lens, a child may have, as well as deploy, a phonetic feature that is useful for their linguistic environment. Therefore, clinically, if the feature is used across contexts without breaking phonemic parameters, then this feature is available for functional communication.
In this study, evidence of transfer was found between English and Spanish in the phonetic inventories of bilingual children, indicating interaction between the two languages of bilinguals. Specifically, Spanish sounds were sometimes observed in the children's English inventories (e.g., Child B02: (b)) and English sounds were sometimes found in their Spanish inventories (e.g., Child B08: (a)).	It was found that children utilize phonetic features in a variety of contexts that allow the feature to be utilized without disrupting the communication signal. In other words, children were observed to have selected and deploy a specific phonetic feature from their linguistic repertoire that was functional for the given context.
These findings indicate that although bilingual children maintain separation for the majority of their phonological structures, there is a very low level of interaction between their two languages (see also Fabiano & Goldstein, 2005).	Interaction does not occur as it assumed delineation of language systems (i.e., two separate phonologies). Instead, these findings indicate that children have the ability to allocate phonetic features where they see fit. Better said, children were observed to use different phonetic features based on whom they speak to and the linguistic repertoires they know they share with the other interlocutor.