Language learning as language use: A cross-linguistic model of child language development.

2019 ◽  
Vol 126 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-51 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stewart M. McCauley ◽  
Morten H. Christiansen
Keyword(s):  
Language Development ◽  
Language Learning ◽  
Language Use ◽  
Child Language ◽  
Linguistic Model

Anti-representationalism in language development research: A commentary on Ambridge (2020)

2020 ◽  
Vol 40 (5-6) ◽  
pp. 592-595
Author(s):  
Melina L. Knabe ◽  
Haley A. Vlach
Keyword(s):  
Language Development ◽  
Language Learning ◽  
Child Language ◽  
Development Research ◽  
Widespread Agreement ◽  
Critical Process

Ambridge argues that there is widespread agreement among child language researchers that learners store linguistic abstractions. In this commentary the authors first argue that this assumption is incorrect; anti-representationalist/exemplar views are pervasive in theories of child language. Next, the authors outline what has been learned from this body of work, including insights into mechanisms underlying language learning. Interestingly, some of these mechanisms are at odds with counterarguments in Ambridge, such as the finding that forgetting is a critical process of language.

First language development: a usage-based perspective on past and current research

2014 ◽  
Vol 41 (S1) ◽  
pp. 48-63 ◽  
Author(s):  
ELENA LIEVEN
Keyword(s):  
Cognitive Development ◽  
Language Development ◽  
Language Learning ◽  
Child Language ◽  
First Language ◽  
Computational Modelling ◽  
Systematic Errors ◽  
The Past ◽  
Language Research ◽  
The Relationship

ABSTRACTI first outline three major developments in child language research over the past forty years: the use of computational modelling to reveal the structure of information in the input; the focus on quantifying productivity and abstraction; and developments in the explanation of systematic errors. Next, I turn to what I consider to be major outstanding issues: how the network of constructions builds up and the relationship between social and cognitive development and language learning. Finally, I briefly consider a number of other areas of importance to a psychologically realistic understanding of children's language development.

Input to interaction to instruction: three key shifts in the history of child language research

2014 ◽  
Vol 41 (S1) ◽  
pp. 117-123 ◽  
Author(s):  
CATHERINE E. SNOW
Keyword(s):  
Language Development ◽  
Language Learning ◽  
Child Language ◽  
Adult Child ◽  
Early Years ◽  
Language Research ◽  
History Of ◽  
Adequate Quantity ◽  
Language Input

ABSTRACTIn the early years of theJournal of Child Language, there was considerable disagreement about the role of language input or adult–child interaction in children's language acquisition. The view that quantity and quality of input to language-learning children is relevant to their language development has now become widely accepted as a principle guiding advice to parents and the design of early childhood education programs, even if it is not yet uncontested in the field of language development. The focus on variation in the language input to children acquires particular educational relevance when we consider variation in access to academic language – features of language particularly valued in school and related to success in reading and writing. Just as many children benefit from language environments that are intentionally designed to ensure adequate quantity and quality of input, even more probably need explicit instruction in the features of language that characterize its use for academic purposes

scholarly journals How Finnish teachers understand multilingual learners’ language learning

2020 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jenni Alisaari ◽  
Leena Maria Heikkola
Keyword(s):  
Professional Development ◽  
Social Interaction ◽  
Language Development ◽  
Language Learning ◽  
Language Use ◽  
Classroom Interaction ◽  
Home Language ◽  
Language Of Instruction ◽  
Knowledge Of Language ◽  
Teacher Groups

The number of students whose home language is different from the language of instruction is growing everywhere. Learning a new language while simultaneously learning different subjects in that language, is challenging and requires teacher support. However, research has shown that not all teachers have sufficient knowledge of language learning, how language learning influences the learning of content, or how to support multilingual learners in this context (Sullivan, 2016). In this study, Finnish teachers’ (N = 820) understandings of certain processes related to learning an additional language were examined, including whether there were differences in understandings between different teacher groups. Over 80% of the surveyed teachers were knowledgeable about the aspects related to classroom interaction and language use that can be considered as essential for being a linguistically responsive teacher: for example, they knew that social interaction supports learners’ language development. In this study, the less experience a teacher had in general, the more knowledgeable they were regarding language learning. Further, teachers of language related subjects had a better understanding of certain aspects of language learning compared to other subject teacher groups. Based on these results, professional development targeted at teachers who have been in the profession for several years is recommended.

You’ve got to crack a few eggs to make an omelette. Linguistic complexity and instruction in SLA

2019 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Rick De Graaff
Keyword(s):  
Second Language Acquisition ◽  
Language Learning ◽  
Language Use ◽  
Teaching Practice ◽  
Task Complexity ◽  
Language Performance ◽  
Linguistic Complexity ◽  
Language Pedagogy ◽  
Instructed Second Language Acquisition ◽  
The One

In this epilogue, I take a teaching practice and teacher education perspective on complexity in Instructed Second Language Acquisition. I take the stance that it is essential to understand if and how linguistic complexity relates to learning challenges, what the implications are for language pedagogy, and how this challenges the role of the teacher. Research shows that differences in task complexity may lead to differences in linguistic complexity in language learners’ speech or writing. Different tasks (e.g. descriptive vs narrative) and different modes (oral vs written) may lead to different types and levels of complexity in language use. On the one hand, this is a challenge for language assessment, as complexity in language performance may be affected by task characteristics. On the other hand, it is an opportunity for language teaching: using a diversity of tasks, modes and text types may evoke and stretch lexically and syntactically complex language use. I maintain that it is essential for teachers to understand that it is at least as important to aim for development in complexity as it is to aim for development in accuracy. Namely, that ‘errors’ in language learning are part of the deal: complex tasks lead to complex language use, including lexical and syntactical errors, but they are a necessary prerequisite for language development.

Foundations of Language Development in Deaf and Hard-of-Hearing Infants

2020 ◽  
pp. 19-32
Author(s):  
Dani Levine ◽  
Daniela Avelar ◽  
Roberta Michnick Golinkoff ◽  
Kathy Hirsh-Pasek ◽  
Derek M. Houston
Keyword(s):  
Language Development ◽  
Language Learning ◽  
Cochlear Implants ◽  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Hard Of Hearing ◽  
Social Processes ◽  
Effective Interventions ◽  
Hearing Devices ◽  
Language Input ◽  
Hearing Children

Copious evidence indicates that, even in the first year of life, children’s language development is beginning and is impacted by a wide array of cognitive and social processes. The extent to which these processes are dependent on early language input is a critical concern for most deaf and hard-of-hearing (DHH) children, who, unlike hearing children, are usually not immersed in a language-rich environment until effective interventions, such as hearing aids or cochlear implants, are implemented. Importantly, some cognitive and social processes are not dependent on the early availability of language input and begin to develop before children are fitted for hearing aids or cochlear implants. Interventions involving parent training may be helpful for enhancing social underpinnings of language and for maximizing DHH children’s language learning once effective hearing devices are in place. Similarly, cognitive training for DHH children may also provide benefit to bolster language development.

Deutsch als schwächere Sprache bei deutsch-polnisch bilingualen Kindern: Studie zur Negation- und Verbstellung

2020 ◽  
Vol 48 (2) ◽  
pp. 269-297
Author(s):  
Aldona Sopata ◽  
Kamil Długosz
Keyword(s):  
Second Language Acquisition ◽  
Language Development ◽  
Language Use ◽  
The Other ◽  
Bilingual Children ◽  
Striking Difference ◽  
Final Position ◽  
Development Characteristic ◽  
Processing Mechanisms ◽  
Constrained Input

AbstractThis article examines the acquisition of German as the weaker language in the cases of German-Polish bilingual children. Focusing on negation and verb position, phenomena that have frequently been taken as diagnostic when distinguishing between the course of language development characteristic for first (L1) and second language acquisition (L2), we analyse experimental and productive data from six simultaneously bilingual children. Due to the constrained input, German is their weaker language. The results in Forced Choice and Grammaticality Judgements tasks are compared with the results of monolingual children. We show that in the area of negation the acquisition of German as the weaker language resembles L1, and in the area of inversion and verb final position the development of the weaker language is delayed. The striking difference between bilinguals’ results in the experimental vs. productive tasks points to specific processing mechanisms in bilingual language use. In narrative contexts of the production tasks the language of the performance is activated, while the other is inhibited, which leads to a target-like performance. Structural properties of the stronger language tend to be activated, however, in the experimental tasks involving the weaker language, resulting in non-target-like responses.

scholarly journals Variations in the Home Language Environment and Early Language Development in Rural China

2021 ◽  
Vol 18 (5) ◽  
pp. 2671
Author(s):  
Yue Ma ◽  
Laura Jonsson ◽  
Tianli Feng ◽  
Tyler Weisberg ◽  
Teresa Shao ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Language Development ◽  
Child Language ◽  
Language Skills ◽  
Rural China ◽  
Home Language ◽  
Early Language ◽  
Early Language Development ◽  
Language Environment ◽  
Conversational Turns ◽  
Home Language Environment

The home language environment is critical to early language development and subsequent skills. However, few studies have quantitatively measured the home language environment in low-income, developing settings. This study explores variations in the home language environment and child language skills among households in poor rural villages in northwestern China. Audio recordings were collected for 38 children aged 20–28 months and analyzed using Language Environment Analysis (LENA) software; language skills were measured using the MacArthur–Bates Mandarin Communicative Developmental Inventories expressive vocabulary scale. The results revealed large variability in both child language skills and home language environment measures (adult words, conversational turns, and child vocalizations) with 5- to 6-fold differences between the highest and lowest scores. Despite variation, however, the average number of adult words and conversational turns were lower than found among urban Chinese children. Correlation analyses did not identify significant correlations between demographic characteristics and the home language environment. However, the results do indicate significant correlations between the home language environment and child language skills, with conversational turns showing the strongest correlation. The results point to a need for further research on language engagement and ways to increase parent–child interactions to improve early language development among young children in rural China.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document