Toksvig Article: Sandi Toksvig finds linguistic treasures in the 'Urban Dictionary'
Throughout the article it is clear that Sandi Toksvig has a very descriptive attitude and it is communicated well through the text. She cleverly manages to express her descriptive view through the text, so that it suits the GRAPE.
As a newspaper, especially the Telegraph, you may assume that the articles that are published will be serious and will have a very prescriptive attitude; Toksvig expressing a descriptive attitude seems like it shouldn't fit, due to the audience most likely being people with prescriptive attitudes, but it does. She uses informal phrases like "a funny old thing" which suits the genre and audience. Along with this the phrase isn't criticising language, and isn't saying if something is right or wrong. She's suggesting that language is a bit unpredictable and that that is good, it's just the way that it goes. She also does this when she writes about a complaint she received from a woman at a Q&A. The woman appeared to have a very prescriptive attitude to language compared to Sandi Toksvig. And when Toksvig doesn't criticize her, it shows her descriptive attitude.
Later on she states that language is always evolving and "has never been one person's preserve". She says that as it is always evolving, it will never stay the same and she sows this when talking about the Oakland School Board in 1996. It shows that there's increasingly more words being added to languages and dialects, and even in this case, new languages/ dialects.
Another way that she suits the GRAPE is by adding humour to the article. She talks about a joke website which changes language into a comical language, which definitely suits the purpose to entertain; along with keeping the audience interesting. She also adds humour by including all of the different languages for "Merry Christmas and Happy New Year", then she ended on a humorous end by wishing the audience "Merry Christmas" in Danish.
One point in her article that could be considered questionable is when she talks about the Urban Dictionary. It is a very modern idea and also very descriptive which could make the audience not want to read it. The Telegraph newspaper doesn't usually talk about things like the Urban Dictionary and so it is questionable as to whether it is suitable. Personally, I think it is okay as she is talking about a topic which links to the purpose of the article.
Tuesday, 8 March 2016
Monday, 7 March 2016
Prescriptive attitudes to language change
Using the words 'like', 'wait' and 'speak', I have found some similarities and differences between online dictionaries.
- The first similarity that I found in all the dictionaries that I looked at is that there was a phonetic spelling of the words, which is there to help the reader to pronounce the word.
- There are adjectives like 'archaic' next to the words to help to describe whether they are still used in modern day or if they are no longer used.
- In all dictionaries the word 'informal' is used to describe the formality that the word is used in. For example in the Oxford Online Dictionary, when looking at the word 'like', it is used when describing 'like' as a conjunction and then gives an example of the word in the phrase: "people who change countries like they change clothes". However it isn't just 'informal' used, 'British informal' is used in the same dictionary. It uses the phrase 'like anything' and then has 'British informal' next to it to explain to readers that it is only used in Britain as a informal phrase.
- Other conventions that it used is putting the word class next to the word, before the example of the word being used in that word class. An example would be that in all dictionaries when searching the word 'wait' it has the word classes, "noun" and "verb".
Monday, 29 February 2016
Attitudes to Language Change
Attitudes to Language Change, Prescriptive and Descriptive
In the article linked at the bottom of this post, it explores the idea that fashion is like language. It's interesting as it suggests that where fashion has it's phases that come and go like "beards", language too has phases, like when people in the 2000's were saying "sick" and in the 90's "wicked" was the word everyone said. Another more modern example is how teenagers from last year started saying "fleek" and "bae", the fashion trend was having "ombre" hair. The article had a very descriptive attitude, exploring the different attitudes and why they may have changed.
However it then explained that fashion and language do differ from each other. This is because in fashion, trends come back, where as it is unlikely for language trends to come back, like with the example the article gave: "hotsy totsy". It ended up explaining that language differs from fashion because language is a practical tool, not just a form of expression.
Even though clothes are practical, fashion is an aspect of clothing that can be changed to suit a person's taste. Language has parts that aren't essential to what is being communicated. It has a purpose to do that is essential for us to live. Fashion, although good as it is, doesn’t have an important purpose. If there was an emergency and you had to explain something to an emergency team, fashion wouldn’t help in that situation, words will.
Another person who has an interesting view on language is Jean Aitchison. She is a Professor of Language and Communication and created metaphors to describe prescriptive views to language change. The metaphors included: the damp spoon metaphor, the crumbling castle metaphor and the infectious disease assumption metaphor.
The Damp Spoon:
This is the metaphor that suggest that language change is because of laziness. She said that "there's a trade off between smooth, fast speech and slow careful speech. Faster speech involves more words per minute, and cannot be classed as ‘laziness’." When we speak faster, we will most likely use more words than if we spoke slower. When we speak slower, we miss out words that we as irrelevant. For example: People may now say "Went Asda" instead of "I went to Asda." This could also link to the idea of technology and text speak, creating initialisms because we can't be bothered to say "be right back" so we say "BRB".
The Crumbling Castle:
This metaphor is about language crumbling and that it needs to be preserved. She said, "…implies that the language of English was gradually and lovingly assembled until it reached a point of maximum splendour at some unspecified time in the past. Yet no year can be found when language achieved some peak of perfection, like a vintage wine.” She suggested that we use new uses of older forms of words, EG: "shoot up", "shot up" and "shooted up."
The Infectious Disease Assumption:
She stated, "The wholesale spread of corruption may surely be ascribed to mere infection, to the careless, unthinking assimilation of the floating germs which envelop us." The changes in language aren't random and hold on if language is moving in a specific direction.
Bibliography:
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/may/06/language-fashion-weather-speak
http://a2englishlanguagestringer.blogspot.co.uk/
https://aggslanguage.wordpress.com/jean-aitchesons-language-change-progress-or-decay/
In the article linked at the bottom of this post, it explores the idea that fashion is like language. It's interesting as it suggests that where fashion has it's phases that come and go like "beards", language too has phases, like when people in the 2000's were saying "sick" and in the 90's "wicked" was the word everyone said. Another more modern example is how teenagers from last year started saying "fleek" and "bae", the fashion trend was having "ombre" hair. The article had a very descriptive attitude, exploring the different attitudes and why they may have changed.
However it then explained that fashion and language do differ from each other. This is because in fashion, trends come back, where as it is unlikely for language trends to come back, like with the example the article gave: "hotsy totsy". It ended up explaining that language differs from fashion because language is a practical tool, not just a form of expression.
Even though clothes are practical, fashion is an aspect of clothing that can be changed to suit a person's taste. Language has parts that aren't essential to what is being communicated. It has a purpose to do that is essential for us to live. Fashion, although good as it is, doesn’t have an important purpose. If there was an emergency and you had to explain something to an emergency team, fashion wouldn’t help in that situation, words will.
Another person who has an interesting view on language is Jean Aitchison. She is a Professor of Language and Communication and created metaphors to describe prescriptive views to language change. The metaphors included: the damp spoon metaphor, the crumbling castle metaphor and the infectious disease assumption metaphor.
The Damp Spoon:
This is the metaphor that suggest that language change is because of laziness. She said that "there's a trade off between smooth, fast speech and slow careful speech. Faster speech involves more words per minute, and cannot be classed as ‘laziness’." When we speak faster, we will most likely use more words than if we spoke slower. When we speak slower, we miss out words that we as irrelevant. For example: People may now say "Went Asda" instead of "I went to Asda." This could also link to the idea of technology and text speak, creating initialisms because we can't be bothered to say "be right back" so we say "BRB".
The Crumbling Castle:
This metaphor is about language crumbling and that it needs to be preserved. She said, "…implies that the language of English was gradually and lovingly assembled until it reached a point of maximum splendour at some unspecified time in the past. Yet no year can be found when language achieved some peak of perfection, like a vintage wine.” She suggested that we use new uses of older forms of words, EG: "shoot up", "shot up" and "shooted up."
The Infectious Disease Assumption:
She stated, "The wholesale spread of corruption may surely be ascribed to mere infection, to the careless, unthinking assimilation of the floating germs which envelop us." The changes in language aren't random and hold on if language is moving in a specific direction.
Bibliography:
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/may/06/language-fashion-weather-speak
http://a2englishlanguagestringer.blogspot.co.uk/
https://aggslanguage.wordpress.com/jean-aitchesons-language-change-progress-or-decay/
Wednesday, 24 February 2016
Etymology and the stages of semantic development of 'Like'
'Like'
Etymology:
'Like' originally came from the Old English verb: lician, which meant "to please, be sufficient," similarly to the Proto-Germanic word, "likjan" where the "lik" meant: "body, form; same." The base meaning was "to be like". 'Like' and 'dislike' originally wasn't structured out the way we do today, originally it was: "It likes me" where as we now say "I like it". Our modern structure started to begin in late 14c.
Semantic Development:
Later on the verb broadened to become an adjective in Middle English, meaning "having the same characteristics or qualities". It could have been taken from the Proto-Germanic word: "galika" which meant "having the same form".
In 1200c 'like' became a noun meaning "a similar thing" to something else. Also at this time 'like' was used as a preposition with nouns and pronouns, for example: "It was only five o' clock, but it seemed like the middle of the night."
In modern day 'like' has become a discourse marker in, most commonly, teenager's speech. It can be used along with 'um', 'uh' and 'erm'. For example: "I, like, don't know where I'm going."
It is also used in modern day (although originally first used in 1778 then not used as much until much later) as part of speech that is from a particular dialect, EG: "I didn't do anything, like."
With the introduction of technology there has been the increase in social networks, including Facebook. As part of Facebook you can 'like' something, by clicking on the 'like' button. This then changes the 'like' from a semantic verb to a dynamic verb. An example would be "I saw you liked my Facebook status."
I think that with the increase of social network sites like Facebook, Twitter and Youtube there will always be new developments in language and new meanings to words. I think what could also be a factor in changing language recently is the media EG: newspaper articles, which frequently create blend words of celebrity couples. Along with this there's the ever growing film industry and new generations which create new meanings to words.
Examples:
It can be used as a synonym to 'enjoy' and 'be pleased by'.
'I like sweets' and 'I like skiing in winter.'
It can mean 'to prefer' and 'maintain' something as a regular habit or activity.
'We like to go to the dentist every six months.' and 'I like going to the gym every week.'
Another use of it is 'To come near' and 'to avoid with difficulty'
"He liked to have been too late."
It also means to find someone attractive, for example:
"I really like ... but don't know how to tell him."
Bibliography:
http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=like
http://www.bbc.co.uk/worldservice/learningenglish/grammar/learnit/learnitv156.shtml
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/like#Etymology_1
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Like
Etymology:
'Like' originally came from the Old English verb: lician, which meant "to please, be sufficient," similarly to the Proto-Germanic word, "likjan" where the "lik" meant: "body, form; same." The base meaning was "to be like". 'Like' and 'dislike' originally wasn't structured out the way we do today, originally it was: "It likes me" where as we now say "I like it". Our modern structure started to begin in late 14c.
Semantic Development:
Later on the verb broadened to become an adjective in Middle English, meaning "having the same characteristics or qualities". It could have been taken from the Proto-Germanic word: "galika" which meant "having the same form".
In 1200c 'like' became a noun meaning "a similar thing" to something else. Also at this time 'like' was used as a preposition with nouns and pronouns, for example: "It was only five o' clock, but it seemed like the middle of the night."
In modern day 'like' has become a discourse marker in, most commonly, teenager's speech. It can be used along with 'um', 'uh' and 'erm'. For example: "I, like, don't know where I'm going."
It is also used in modern day (although originally first used in 1778 then not used as much until much later) as part of speech that is from a particular dialect, EG: "I didn't do anything, like."
With the introduction of technology there has been the increase in social networks, including Facebook. As part of Facebook you can 'like' something, by clicking on the 'like' button. This then changes the 'like' from a semantic verb to a dynamic verb. An example would be "I saw you liked my Facebook status."
I think that with the increase of social network sites like Facebook, Twitter and Youtube there will always be new developments in language and new meanings to words. I think what could also be a factor in changing language recently is the media EG: newspaper articles, which frequently create blend words of celebrity couples. Along with this there's the ever growing film industry and new generations which create new meanings to words.
Examples:
It can be used as a synonym to 'enjoy' and 'be pleased by'.
'I like sweets' and 'I like skiing in winter.'
It can mean 'to prefer' and 'maintain' something as a regular habit or activity.
'We like to go to the dentist every six months.' and 'I like going to the gym every week.'
Another use of it is 'To come near' and 'to avoid with difficulty'
"He liked to have been too late."
It also means to find someone attractive, for example:
"I really like ... but don't know how to tell him."
Bibliography:
http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=like
http://www.bbc.co.uk/worldservice/learningenglish/grammar/learnit/learnitv156.shtml
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/like#Etymology_1
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Like
Monday, 25 January 2016
Language Change
Language Change Articles
I found these articles from the Guardian which I thought were really interesting about Language Change.
In the first article the writer talks about how English Language is evolving quickly recently because of social media and instant messaging. John Sutherland, a professor of English, discovered that the majority of parents today are confused as to what their children are saying to their peers when using "text speak" terms. He explores terms like ICYMI ( which means: in case you missed it) and modern terms like "fleek" and "bae". They surveyed 2,000 people to see if they knew what these terms meant, and the results were very low.
From the study they came to the conclusion that that there is a "seismic gap" between younger and older generations when talking about modern use of informal language. They found that the case of this was from the limitation barrier created by old mobile phones which was when the acronyms "M8" and "GR8" were created. However, the article mentioned that these terms are now "extinct" from language use as it is considered an old use of language. He then went on to explain how emojis are becoming the new form of language.
http://www.theguardian.com/science/2015/may/01/icymi-english-language-is-changing-faster-than-ever-says-expert
The second article is called: 8 pronunciation errors that made the
English language what it is today. In he article, the writer starts of by
explaining that he heard a story from someone about a professor who
pronounced 'awry' wrong. He said that she had pronounced like that her
whole life and never realised until that point that she ad been saying it
wrong. He then went on to explain that there are many word that we pronounce
incorrectly but have used the incorrect version for so long that we don't know
any better.
One example he gave was that some words start with letter that when
pronounced sounds like it would have been on the preceding word. He explained
that many words began with the letter 'n' but now don't because of the
elimination from the word, for example: 'adder' was 'nadder' and 'apron'
was 'napron'. He mantions that linguists call this 'rebracketing'.
He also explains about when sounds disappear, swap around and when sound
intrude.
Friday, 22 January 2016
CLA Research
CLA Research task:
1. The stages of child language acquisition in order:
Cooing, Babbling, Holophrastic, Two word, Telegraphic and Post-Telegraphic.
2. Theorists and theories:
Chomsky- Nativist,
Piaget- Cognitive,
Skinner- Behaviourist,
Bruner- Interactional,
Lenneberg- Critical Period
3. A child refers to apples, oranges and grapefruit as 'ball'. What process is at work and what might be the reasons for this?
The process is overextension, the reason why this happens is because they are the same shape, children assume they are the same.
4. A child refers to her boots as 'shoes' but will not use this term to describe any other shoes, apart from her own. What process is at work and what might be the reason for this?
The process is under extension and the reason for it is because that they look the same or maybe that they learnt it through modelling. So, if her parents/ carer calls them shoes she will then call them shoes. It could also be that they can't relate it to any other word that they know.
5. A child says 'I falled over' or 'I runned away'. What process is at work and what might be the reason for this?
The process is called overgeneralisation and is because the child has learnt 'run' and 'fall', and so recognises adding 'ed' on verbs but uses it in a non-standard way.
6. A child says 'Daddy go work' as his father leaves for work. At what stage of development might we suggest the child is and which clause elements has the child used and which are missing?
The stage of development that the child is at is the Telegraphic stage. The clause elements that the child used the verb 'to go'. However, they've left out 'is' and 'to' which would change it to 'Daddy is going to work.'
7. A child says 'Me like ice cream'. In what way is she using some elements of grammar correctly and in what ways is she making errors?
The child is using language correctly by getting the words in the correct order and even using the pronoun 'me' and recognising what it means. However, she is making some errors like using 'me' instead of the personal pronoun 'I'.
8. A child says 'timney' instead of 'chimney'. What process is at work and what might be the reason for this?
The process that is at work is substitution. The reason for this is because it's easier to pronounce for the child.
9. A child says 'ca' instead of 'cat'. What process is at work and what might be the reason for this?
The process that is at work is deletion. This is because again it's easier to pronounce for the child.
10. A child says 'nana' instead of 'banana'. What process is at work and what might be the reason for this?
The process at work is deletion of an unstressed syllable. This would make it easier for the child to say.
11. Hallidays functions:
Instrumental- When the child uses language to express their needs.
Regulatory- Where language is used to tell others what to do.
Interactional- Where language is used to make contact with others and for relationships.
Personal- The use of language to express feelings, opinions and individual identity.
Heuristic- When language is used to gain knowledge about the environment.
Imaginative- When language is used to tell stories and jokes, and to create an imaginary environment.
Representational- The use of language to convey facts and information.
12.What are 'wugs'? Who researched them? What did she discover?
'Wugs' are imaginary creatures created for the 'Wug Test' made up by psychologist Jean Berko Gleason. It was a test made to test children and see their ability to apply linguistic rules. She found that children younger than 4 years old couldn't apply the rules, but children aged 4 and 5 could apply the plural 'wugs' without ever hearing the word before hand. It proved to her that language isn't memorised.
13.Out of the average child's first 50 words, the most common word class will probably be what? Why might this be?
The most common word class are nouns, most likely concrete nouns. This is because nouns are the most common item that are around the child.
14. In what ways might turn-taking be established between a carer and a child?
It would be established by the parent asking them questions in a conversation so the child then would answer.
15. List the ways in which a parent or carer can make their use of language easier for a child to understand. What might this type of language be termed?
Using a simplified vocabulary, for example saying 'monkey' instead of 'Orangutan.
16. Who was Genie and what might she prove?
Genie was a 'feral' child found by social workers. She was 13 and limited to about 20 words. She's often used to prove Bruner's Interactional theory and Lenneberg's Critical Learning Period.
17. Who was Jim and what did he prove?
Jim was a boy who was born to deaf parents and was made to sit in front of a TV in the hope that he would pick up language. His language was damaged and is used to prove the Interactional Theory.
18. Apart from the main theorists mentioned above, which other researchers could you refer to when talking about child language?
Another researcher used when talking about child language is David Crystal.
19. What do the initials L.A.D stand for?
L.A.D stands for Language Acquisition Device.
20. At the telegraphic stage, children often combine content words in the correct sequence (syntax) but miss out certain grammatical words. Give two word classes (and an example of each) that children often omit.
Children often leave out determiners, for example: the, and auxiliary verbs, for example am running.
1. The stages of child language acquisition in order:
Cooing, Babbling, Holophrastic, Two word, Telegraphic and Post-Telegraphic.
2. Theorists and theories:
Chomsky- Nativist,
Piaget- Cognitive,
Skinner- Behaviourist,
Bruner- Interactional,
Lenneberg- Critical Period
3. A child refers to apples, oranges and grapefruit as 'ball'. What process is at work and what might be the reasons for this?
The process is overextension, the reason why this happens is because they are the same shape, children assume they are the same.
4. A child refers to her boots as 'shoes' but will not use this term to describe any other shoes, apart from her own. What process is at work and what might be the reason for this?
The process is under extension and the reason for it is because that they look the same or maybe that they learnt it through modelling. So, if her parents/ carer calls them shoes she will then call them shoes. It could also be that they can't relate it to any other word that they know.
5. A child says 'I falled over' or 'I runned away'. What process is at work and what might be the reason for this?
The process is called overgeneralisation and is because the child has learnt 'run' and 'fall', and so recognises adding 'ed' on verbs but uses it in a non-standard way.
6. A child says 'Daddy go work' as his father leaves for work. At what stage of development might we suggest the child is and which clause elements has the child used and which are missing?
The stage of development that the child is at is the Telegraphic stage. The clause elements that the child used the verb 'to go'. However, they've left out 'is' and 'to' which would change it to 'Daddy is going to work.'
7. A child says 'Me like ice cream'. In what way is she using some elements of grammar correctly and in what ways is she making errors?
The child is using language correctly by getting the words in the correct order and even using the pronoun 'me' and recognising what it means. However, she is making some errors like using 'me' instead of the personal pronoun 'I'.
8. A child says 'timney' instead of 'chimney'. What process is at work and what might be the reason for this?
The process that is at work is substitution. The reason for this is because it's easier to pronounce for the child.
9. A child says 'ca' instead of 'cat'. What process is at work and what might be the reason for this?
The process that is at work is deletion. This is because again it's easier to pronounce for the child.
10. A child says 'nana' instead of 'banana'. What process is at work and what might be the reason for this?
The process at work is deletion of an unstressed syllable. This would make it easier for the child to say.
11. Hallidays functions:
Instrumental- When the child uses language to express their needs.
Regulatory- Where language is used to tell others what to do.
Interactional- Where language is used to make contact with others and for relationships.
Personal- The use of language to express feelings, opinions and individual identity.
Heuristic- When language is used to gain knowledge about the environment.
Imaginative- When language is used to tell stories and jokes, and to create an imaginary environment.
Representational- The use of language to convey facts and information.
12.What are 'wugs'? Who researched them? What did she discover?
'Wugs' are imaginary creatures created for the 'Wug Test' made up by psychologist Jean Berko Gleason. It was a test made to test children and see their ability to apply linguistic rules. She found that children younger than 4 years old couldn't apply the rules, but children aged 4 and 5 could apply the plural 'wugs' without ever hearing the word before hand. It proved to her that language isn't memorised.
13.Out of the average child's first 50 words, the most common word class will probably be what? Why might this be?
The most common word class are nouns, most likely concrete nouns. This is because nouns are the most common item that are around the child.
14. In what ways might turn-taking be established between a carer and a child?
It would be established by the parent asking them questions in a conversation so the child then would answer.
15. List the ways in which a parent or carer can make their use of language easier for a child to understand. What might this type of language be termed?
Using a simplified vocabulary, for example saying 'monkey' instead of 'Orangutan.
16. Who was Genie and what might she prove?
Genie was a 'feral' child found by social workers. She was 13 and limited to about 20 words. She's often used to prove Bruner's Interactional theory and Lenneberg's Critical Learning Period.
17. Who was Jim and what did he prove?
Jim was a boy who was born to deaf parents and was made to sit in front of a TV in the hope that he would pick up language. His language was damaged and is used to prove the Interactional Theory.
18. Apart from the main theorists mentioned above, which other researchers could you refer to when talking about child language?
Another researcher used when talking about child language is David Crystal.
19. What do the initials L.A.D stand for?
L.A.D stands for Language Acquisition Device.
20. At the telegraphic stage, children often combine content words in the correct sequence (syntax) but miss out certain grammatical words. Give two word classes (and an example of each) that children often omit.
Children often leave out determiners, for example: the, and auxiliary verbs, for example am running.
Thursday, 5 November 2015
Evie Mini Investigation
How far does Evie's Grandma's Language support Skinner's
Theory?
Introduction:
Skinner's Theory suggests this: that children acquire
language based on “behaviourist reinforcement” by linking meanings to words.
For example if a child says the word “Dog” and their mother smiles or behaves
positively then they will continue to link that word to the same meaning. I
expect to find evidence that supports this like if her Grandma praises her or
tells her "no" if she's done something wrong.
The data that I have collected are two transcript and are
from the same people, which makes it
reliable. The only difference is that they are talking about a different topic
and she's 5 months apart in age. This could influence it's reliability but I
will consider this in my evaluation. Also, the data was from 2004, which is
over a decade ago but I don't think that it would affect the analysis at all.
Analysis:
From looking at the two transcripts I can see that there are
a lot of positive behaviour reinforcement in the texts. The table below shows
the amount of positive and negative reinforcements.
|
Behaviour
Reinforcements:
|
Amount:
|
Does Evie
respond?
|
|
Transcript 1
|
|
|
|
Positive
|
11
|
11
|
|
Negative
|
1
|
1
|
|
Transcript 2
|
|
|
|
Positive
|
4
|
4
|
|
Negative
|
0
|
0
|
In the Table above Transcript 1 is the 'All the things'
transcript and Transcript 2 is the 'Castle' transcript.
In the transcripts, Evie doesn’t really reply to her
grandma's positive reinforcement however she didn't question it, so I counted
that in my quantifications as her responding because she didn’t seem confused
as to why her grandma was praising her.
I also counted her grandma repeating what Evie said as positive
reinforcement as she was reinforcing what Evie was saying as correct.
I find it interesting that Evie's grandma didn't use much
negative behaviour reinforcement.
In fact the only negative reinforcement that she used on Evie was telling her:
"go on then you find the bath (.) no not that
bath the house bath (4) oh yeah that’s it (.) who wants to go in the bath do
you think?"
However, this was only a
miscommunication and not really something that Evie did wrong. Something else
that I found interesting was how the Grandma recovered the negative
reinforcement. This is evidence that supports Skinner's theory about behaviour
reinforcement.
She also quickly changed from sort-of telling her
off to asking her a question that's linked to get her to talk. I think that
this is also evidence of child-led discourse which could also support Skinner's hypothesis that children's language
is influenced by the environment around them.
However, there is no way
that I could know whether it worked or not. This is because I have no other
data from later on in Evie's life that would show whether her Grandma's
language has affected her's.
Conclusion:
So, in conclusion, I think that my chosen theory supports my
data to an extent. The reason that I found what I found is because I had two transcripts
with the same people and so reliable data. I also think that I found it
limiting because I only had two instead of more
which could have helped me to either prove or disprove more clearly than
I did. In the future, I think I need more reliable data and so more data which
would improve my analysis and final conclusion.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)