Lec 5 Flashcards
1
Q
- 4 main theories of how children learn language
- x
- behaviorist → what do they say?
- the 4 spectrums
- sociocultural context - 2 types
- individual diff → 2 types
- Active child → 2 types
- behaviourist on the 4 spectrum
A
Theories: how do children learn language? (Dodds)
- 1 Behaviorist account
- Caregivers support language learning through reinforcement
- Ex. kids say I want cookie -> given cookie -> reinforced
- Parents correct children when they make mistakes
- Parents reward child when they are correct
- -ve punishment: absent of what they want
- +ve punishment: presence of aversive shit
- +ve r: presence of what they want
- -ve r: absent of what they hate
- Do parents actually teach children this way?
- Not really
- Ex. You hv coffee -> bb said juice -> parents are still happy
- X
- 4 spectrum:
- Nature vs nurture
- Sociocultural context: egocentric, sociocentric
- Indiv diff: homo vs heterogeneity
- Active child: passive vs active
- x
- Nature vs nurture: behaviorist = nurture (extreme)
- Sociocultural context = sociocentric
- Indiv differences = heterogeneity
- Each child has diff amount of reinforcement (ex. strict vs lousy parents)
- Active Child = middle
- Child has to internalize these experiences (rewards, punishments)
- Parents
- Caregivers support language learning through reinforcement
2
Q
- nativist:
- 2 main arguments
- L1 vs L2 activation patterns: same or different
- nativist and the 4 spectrums
A
- 2 Nativist account
- Rebuttal to behaviorist
- 1 These are neutral structure for language (ex. Broca’s, Wernicke’s)
- 2 Universal grammar: if we have innate structures for language, then all human languages have something in common
- Most lang have nouns and verbs, and interact similarly across languages
- Some rare languages do not
- Noam Chomsky: founder
- x
- All normally developing children acquire language
- At neural lv, L1 (native language) looks diff from L2 (2nd language) at neural lv
- i.e. different activation patterns
- x
- Nature vs nurture: nature (extreme)
- Seed is there, but still needs water; language genes are there, but still needs teaching
- Sociocultural context: egocentric, sociocentric = egocentric
- Indiv diff: homo vs heterogeneity -> homo
- Active child: passive vs active = passive
3
Q
- define connectionist account
- 2 main ideas
- 1 criticism
- connectionist & 4 spectrums
A
- 3: connectionist account (usage-based account/ info processing account)
- Children learn language the same way they learn everything else (general purpose learning mech)
- Computer simulations show that language can be learnt w/ repetitive input
- More input -> better output
- Counterargument: computers can’t produce and understand pragmatics (tone of language, may indicate mood)
- Home assistance/Alexa: argue for and against connectionist approach
- They speak, but no pragmatics
- Home assistance/Alexa: argue for and against connectionist approach
- Nature vs nurture: somewhat Nurture
- But child still need systems/biological to speak
- Sociocultural context (egocentric, sociocentric): both
- Input and output in Alexa are both important
- Indiv diff (homo vs heterogeneity): somewhat heterogeneity
- Depends on amount of input (more input, better output)
- Active child (passive vs active): active
- Detect input -> produce output
4
Q
- 3 main arguments on social interactionist
- social interactionist and 4 spectrums
A
- 4: social interactionist account
- Some initial bias to learn language at birth (i.e. child’s desire to be social)
- Biological bias: follow pointing, parent’s voice
- Initial bias is more elaborated by experience
- Parents teach language
- These rs focus on how children learn words (less on grammar)
- x
- Nature vs nurture: Somewhat nurture
- Sociocultural context: egocentric, sociocentric = sociocentric
- Indiv diff: homo vs heterogeneity = heterogeneity
- Active child: passive vs active = middle
- Child needs to care about the cues
- Also are passive receptors
- Some initial bias to learn language at birth (i.e. child’s desire to be social)
5
Q
- 4 false beliefs on bilinguals
- Main argument on why billinguals aren’t dumber
A
- Common false myths about bilingualism
- These are all wrong
- 1 To be bilingual, you must acquire both languages at the same time
- Simultaneous bilingual: learn together
- Sequential bilingual: L1 then L2
- Early sequential: both earlier on
- Late sequential: L1 early on; L2 when they are in school
- 2 Bilinguals mix their 2 languages b/c they are confused
- Code switching
- Ex. speak w/ parents: half, half
- Ex. siblings: mainly Eng
- 3 Bilinguals hv lower vocab than monolinguals do
- Vocab size: only refers to 1 language
- Bilingual (Eng and French) vs monolingual
- For Eng vocab only, bilingual has more vocab
- 4 Bilinguals hv non-linguistic cog disadv compared to monolinguals
- Rs: think bilinguals hv info overload, so they suck
- Not true tho
- Bilinguals are maybe better at certain cog tasks (mixed results)
- 1 To be bilingual, you must acquire both languages at the same time
- These are all wrong
- Two languages at once
- More than half of the world is bilingual
- Children growing up bilingual reach dev language milestones at roughly the same time as monolingual kids do
- Ex. onset of speaking, vocab size, word choice
6
Q
types of billingualism
- early bilingualism
- simultaneous bilingualism
- sequential billingualism
- x
- how often do bilinguals code switch
- 2 main reasons why they code switch
- x
- equal bilingualism vs language dominance
- which is more common
- dominant language and accent
- Dupoux et al 2010
- method
- 3 gps
- what is being tested
- prediction
- Result
- implication
- method
A
Early and late bilingualisms
- Early bilingualism: learn language early on
- Simultaneous bilingualism: learn 2 languages at the same time (from birth)
- Sequential bilingualism: L1 then L2
- Both are successful if started early in life
Code switching
- Bilinguals often switch language b/w sentences or even mid-sentence
- Dad I want to go to 公園
- Code switching
- Bilinguals are not confused when they code switch
- Norm
- More efficient; May prefer code switch
- 1 Younger bilinguals may not have translation equivalence for all words
- 2 If parents don’t speak Eng, you are forced to speak their language -> retain that language
Language dominance
- Even early bilinguals may be dominant in one of their 2 languages
- Ex. Parts of Montreal both Eng and French are dominant -> equal bilingualism, still rare
- In 1 language, a child may hv
- Larger vocab
- Higher performance on cog burdensome linguistic task
- Being dominant in one language does not mean that a bilingual will always have an accent in other language
- X
- Dupoux et al 2010 tested 3 gps
- Spanish monolinguals
- French monolinguals
- French-Spanish bilinguals
- X
- Tested on a Spanish linguistic distinction that does not exist in French
- Prediction: Spanish perfect > French-Spanish > French shit
- Results
- French monolinguals shit
- Spanish monolinguals did well
- Some bilinguals did well, some shit
- This depends on where they were from 0-2 yp
- Black = Spanish = good
- White = French = shit
- The bilinguals
- Show same distribution in Spanish and French monolinguals
- If they lived in Spain as infants -> did good
- If they lived in French as infants -> shit
- Shows how early env/context/input matters