LANGUAGE FOCUS LANGUAGE FOCUS TERMS AND TERMS AND PRAGAMTICSPRAGAMTICS

LANGUAGE FOCUS LANGUAGE FOCUS TERMS AND TERMS AND PRAGAMTICSPRAGAMTICS

By: Livania Sa’By: Livania Sa’

BACKGROUND RESEARCH• The theory of Pragmatic Terms relate to the use

of language in social context ,or the ability to use language to get things done in the world (Berko Gleason, Mac Gibbon & Zaretsky, 2001).

• Language: a skill which is acquired over an extensive period of time through daily interaction and every day dialogue. (Ely, Berko Gleason, Mac Gibbon & Zaretsky, 2001: Beal's, 1993).

• Parents engage in explanatory talk with their children providing information about the function and the adjusting language to fit different circumstances, using pragmatic terms (Beal's, 1993; 2001).

Continue• Explanatory talk, positively relates to the

acquisition of literacy skills in young children

• The meal time conversations allows children to think and gain information about a wide variety of topics and learn the forms in which people talk about them with several topics such as words, actions, and motives. (Beginning Literacy with Language.Balesp.75-92;2001).

• Children in low income families don’t do as well as middle income children with their peers (Bales, 1993).

Gaps in research• Unfortunately to date, their has

been no examination on the use of pragmatic terms and explanatory talk by low income and middle income parents, with their children.

Purpose• This study was designed to replicate

the findings of Ely, et al ,(2001)with middle income and low income families, while simultaneously examining the use of pragmatic terms in particular explanatory talk and repetitive talk.

Research Questions• What relationship exists between

parents’ and children use of language pragmatic term within every discourse?

• To what extent does the us of pragmatic terms relate to explanatory talk?

Methods• The participants were fourteen children from

elementary schools in in New York. One represented the advanced children population from high/middle income backgrounds while the other represented the average children from low income backgrounds.

• For the purpose of this study only the transcripts of the dinner-time conversations of four families were examined, one from families with high/middle income children and one from families with low/average income children.

Design and procedure• Transcripts of the dinner time

conversations of four families were tested. One from the families with middle income children including their parents and another from the families with average/low income children including their parents.

• The transcripts were transcribed according to the Child Language Data Exchange System (CHILDES) guidelines ( Mac Whinney & Snow, 1990).

• Transcripts were coded for pragmatic terms and explanatory talk.

Coding scheme• The coding scheme was divided into

two categories :(1)Explantory talk versus repetitive talk(2)Language focus Terms (PRAGAMTIC

TERMS)

• Each category was operationally defined and focused on pragmatic terms.

Table 1Operational Definitions

Language Focused-Terms • Pragmatics Codes • Control: a speaker attempts to control if when

another person speaks or listens.• Clarification: a listener requests clarification of

what has just been said.• Elicitation: a listener elicits a narrative or other

from another speaker.• specification: a speaker specifies the contact of

what or she would like another to say.

Operational Definitions (continue)

Explanatory Talk: is a form of decontextualized discourse that often provides information but rich vocabulary.

Types of explanatory talk• Intentional/action segments: these

segments were most often discussions and actions or behavior in the immediate context of the mealtime.

Operational definition(continue)

• Repetitive Talk: tend to repeat very similar questions without necessary providing additional information.

Types of repetitive talk• Child repetitive talk –child repeats adult

exactlyChild :when it’s finished• Parent repetitive talk-adult repeats child

exactlyMother: when it’s finished

Preliminary results • Number for words in each

transcript were calculated.• Number of words in average

family dialogue=403 • Number of words in gifted family

dialogue=1,805

Explanatory Talk Versus Repetitive Talk

Parent-Child Explanatory

Low Income

HighIncome

Intentional/QuestionsSegments(IQS)

12 44

Intentional/ActionSegments(IAS)

2 3

Intentional/CommandSegments(ICS)

9 15

Definitional/Descriptive Segments(DDS)

2 15

Procedural Segments(PS)

0 2

Parent-Child Explanatory

Low Income

High Income

Child Repetitive Talk(CR)

1 0

Casual Segments(CS)

0 11

Internal States Segments(ISS)

0 5

Evidential Segments(ES)

1 6

Language Focused Terms Used By Parents

Parents language focused-terms LowIncome

HighIncome

Control(COP) 15 17

Clarification(CLP) 2 9

Elicitation(ELP) 0 3

Specification(SLP) 0 2

Language Focused Used By Children

Children language focused-terms

Low Income High Income

COP 2 3

CLP 4 13

ELP 0 2

SLP 0 2

Results

• Presently, our study has shown that parents and children within high/middle income families use more forms of explanatory talk as well as pragmatic terms than their low income peers.

Conclusion• Children from both groups are shown

to be using language focused-terms more than the average population.

• Parents and children in the high/middle income population uses more language focused-terms than the average population

References• Beals,d.e.(1993).Explanatory Talk in low-

income families’ mealtime conversations. Applied psycholiinguistics,14,489-513.

• Ely, R., Gleason, J.B., MacGibbon, A.,& Zeartsky, E.(2001).Attention to language : Lessons Learned at the Dinner Table. Social Development,10(3),355-373.

• Anthony D. Pellegrini & David F. Bjorklund (1998).Applied Child Study A Development Approach(3rd Edition p.146-166)

• David K. Dickinson & Patlon O. Tobors. Brookcs. Beginning Literacy with Language. Publishing Company (2001).

AcknowledgementsI would specially like to thank

• Dr. Roseanne L. Flores for offering guidance and being a great mentor as well as a wonderful role model.

• Mari F. Tineo and Arjan Sopoti who are my amazing colleagues for their support and suggestions throughout the extensive research process.

• My mother Lucinda DaSilva Sa’ for always pushing and supporting me.

• Dr. Sat B. the founder and director of Harlem Children Society, For making this experience possible

• The Harlem Children Society STAFF • And all of you for listening