Notes from Stephen Fry documentary - 'Planet word'

-The ability to speak is an innate human opetartion that's been around for 50,000 years.
-Writing allows us to speak to the past and listen to the future.
-Reading and writing is an optional extra.
-There have been hundreds of societies in the past that haven't felt the need to write things down.
-Writing lets us learn about cultures far away.
-Writing most likely started as a way to record accountancy - a record of monies in & out.
-Writing used to be a source of power as only trained scholars could do it.
-Writing allowed Rabbis and other religious figures to preserve their beliefs.
-Religion is a key influence on language change - it used to be a good example of instrumental power, though now it requires mostly influential power (I personally think due to the progress of education).
-Printing was technically invented in China, but William Caxton revolutionised it with his printing press.
-Geoffrey Chaucer,the first British printed poet wanted standardization because the English language was too diverse.
-Standardization is, to some degree evolutionary.
-Caxton's printing press made the English language more stable.
-Everyone has the right to the voices of the past.
-Technology has a colossal impact on our ability to learn new language.
-Technology nowadays has enabled the writer some scope: less pressure to be correct because they go back and change it whenever they want.
-Amazon are the biggest publisher.
-More books are printed each year.
-More people write now due to technology and wikipedia.
-Technology allows us to have immediacy, i.e blogs give us cutting-edge information.

'Drug addicts are not criminals - they're patients' AS coursework style model

Click here for a Guardian article on the concerning wage earned by Brixton's 'Ritzy cinema' workers.

Some notes & quotes on this article:

1. "both ironic and perverse" – First engagement made with the reader through use of light humour. Furthermore, regarding the context of the article this is important as it illustrates the incoherence of the opposition, and also immediately states the opinion of the writer as a fact.

2. "Hard-pressed workers" – This is a pre-modified emotive noun, and it immediately induces sympathy from the reader for the subjects of the article and offers introduces a theme.

3. Frequent use of the word "we". This demonstrates collaboration between the writer and the audience, thereby consolidating the idea that they are working together. This makes the writer’s point more agreeable with.

4. Use of statistics "5.2 million British workers are now trapped in low-paid jobs". Hard-hitting facts like this are an excellent persuasive technique because you cannot argue with facts, even though they are often a shock-factor for the reader.

5. Use of quote from a public figure "conservative writer and activist Tim Montgomerie". The quote was correctly sourced and by adding it into the article, it creates the illusion that an army of followers has already been built-up, therefore inclining the reader to agree with the writer more.

6. "Pinko-lefty commentator" – This humerous use of colloquial language softens the overall tone of the piece because it creates a change from a formal register to an informal register, to maintain a high level of engagement with the audience. No one wants to read big wordy paragraphs that drone on and on about the same thing!

7. Lots of emotive verbs: "Forced", "attack", etc. These are powerful words which provoke thought and strong imagery. The use of such potent lexis adds a touch of drama to the piece, and creates feelings in the reader.

8. Shorter sentences - "then you face the sack." – This is another powerful technique to add drama. By using shorter sentences after long, wordy ones, not only is a dramatic effect created but often it is used to sum up what has been said briefly for the reader, making an easier read.

9. "We should" – This use of deontic modal auxiliaries is a forceful way of stating an opinion. It offers no room for different opinions because it seems to the reader imperative that we do as we are told.

10. "Deficit-deniers" – More colloquial language, but what is significant about this in particular is the alliteration used. The writer has literally created a potential new slang term to label the objects of his anger – and what’s more is he has used alliteration to make it sound more catchy and to create a rhythmatic pattern for the reader, therefore making the phrase more memorable and convincing.

AS Coursework piece two - Drugs addicts are not criminals - they're patients

It is time to offer a more pragmatic approach to the growing drug problem in the UK – and here’s why

Mayor of Chicago Rahm Emanuel has declared and that anyone found with a gram or less of any controlled substance should be exonerated

It’s no secret that drug-related incidents make up a large percentage of the crime in Britain (60% according to the office of national statistics). In fact, a large portion of that is actually only possession for personal use, rather than crimes perpetrated against others.

When the phrase “drug addict” is used, immediately images of criminals and thugs are drawn up; but what about the lonely teenager from the broken home? What about the struggling, single mother? The widowed-man? Surely they cannot be condemned as ‘criminals’?

Drug addiction is not a crime – it’s an illness. These ‘criminals’, as they are so often branded, have an unwavering and impenetrable need to consume illegal substances – they need to take drugs. These people are not criminals, they are patients. We wouldn’t place someone suffering from depression into a jail cell, so what warrants us instead throwing in addicts? Depression is one of the most common causes of drug addiction. These people generally have an emptiness inside of them which they discover can only be filled by ‘getting high’. To them, drugs are a necessity not only for the body, but for the mind.

Of course not all who suffer from depression will use drugs as their escape mechanism, but it is usually funded by external factors as well, like environmental and social influences beyond our control. Broken homes, rough neighbourhoods or hanging out with the ‘wrong crowd’ all constitute, and yet we seem to collectively ignore this when discussing the morals of a drug addict.

It is always easier to fight something you don’t understand, but criminalizing addicts only exacerbates the issue. Rather than attacking the social concerns at hand we are pushing innocent people into cells and lumping them together with murderers and child rapists. We are isolating them even more so than they already feel – how can we condone this kind of social exclusion? How is this ethical?

If we as a community really want to resolve this on-going issue, we must offer a more pragmatic solution. Instead of digging up any mildly incriminating piece of evidence we can find against them, we must help them uncover the roots of their issues and eliminate their disease. Better rehabilitation centres; more advertisement to illustrate the seriousness of drug addiction, advocating a different perspective in schools and putting a halt to these negative associations: there’s so much we can do to help, so why haven’t we yet?

We must stop arbitrarily locking these lost souls in jail; stop labelling them as thugs – stop criminalizing drug addicts. It truly is the people that make a society work: as a community, we fail to work when there is a minority being forgotten and left to die. As a community, it is imperative that we stop cowering behind social tradition and stand up to aid our members who have fallen over, so that we as a community can be functional again.

It is also important to empathize as a community rather than ostracize because then we are one step closer towards the core of this problem. We won’t learn any truth about the nature of a drug addict by sticking them in a cell until they go mad from withdrawal symptoms – we can only learn by understanding.

What also must be remembered is the fact that if we turn our backs on these individuals, it is very possible that they will become a ticking time bomb of hatred for the system: incentive, distrust and rage do not equal something pretty. When we as a community cast out one of our members to the nether regions of rejection and shame - when we create pure humiliation by labelling someone ‘scum’ – we really are acting immoral, and thus essentially manufacturing our own monsters.

In the year 2000, Portugal prevented an epic war on drugs by decriminalizing possession and use. As a result the Portuguese government were able to manage dependence on drugs under the ministry of health rather than the ministry of justice: in other words, as patients rather than criminals. More recently even, Mayor of Chicago Rahm Emanuel has been fighting to instigate a movement on drugs – he has declared that the state laws should be more relaxed, and that anyone found with a gram or less of any controlled substance should be exonerated. He has rightly said that “reducing the penalties for minor drug possession would allow the city and state to focus their efforts on more violent crime”. It is clear that other parts of the world are moving forward and progressing in ideas, so surely it is about time we catch up with them.

Obviously, it is slightly more difficult to change the laws on drugs – but what we can do is evoke major social change. There is a pungent stench of stigma floating around drug users, which must be fought. Truthfully an idea worth spreading, imagine what life could be like in say five years time if we followed through? If we as a community just put that little bit more effort in, we can revive what we once were and rescue our long-lost members. By redesigning the boundaries of what once upon a time constituted as ‘sick’, we can finally start helping those who are suffering from what really is both a mental and physical illness.

I keep using the idea of community because I want to reinforce a truth that many of us appear to have forgotten: addicts are human, just like us. They eat and sleep and pray and have relationships, just like us. They want children and passions, just like us. They have secrets, doubts and fears, just like us. We are all the same and we all should share a sense of unity because we truly are a community. The only difference – the only thing that separates us is that they are sick. We need to help them. Drug addicts are not criminals – they are patients.

AS Coursework piece one - Two birds with one stone

The boy crumbles the perfect petals between his fingers and watches them flake down towards his feet. Everything around him is so serene, so unspoiled; as though all the resentment and hatred in the world had never existed.

Not a sound rises to disrupt the peace: the nirvana he has created. The boy picks up another flower and begins to rip and tear from its core structure, allowing the remains to float effortlessly through his fingers once more.

He calls this art.

The grass on which the boy lays feels warm and familiar: he has been here before.

The silence has lured him into a trap. It is here in his own personal Garden of Eden that he often ventures to escape.

As he turns his head away from the sun, the boy notices a small blue jay threading through the leaves of the tree he is sitting under. Its innocence unnerves him.

He reaches into his left pocket and pulls out a broken piece of mirror he had once obtained from a long forgotten family dispute. There has not been a time since the age of 11 that he has not carried this with him. The boy is now 17 – his smile has turned south for good and wrinkles of fear have been carved into his face by unwelcome thoughts.

He is focusing intently on the shard in his hand, hoping for a clue. All that answers back through the reflection is a pair of large, modest emerald eyes.

“You gonna save anyone today then, pal?”

The voice emits from the reflection like a ripple across a tranquil lake, immediately violating the solitude. The boy does not respond.

The blue jay has poised itself on a limp branch directly above him. Its sweet melody echoes through his mind like a persistent bell. How dangerous, he thinks, sitting there beautifully without a worry.

Despite his struggle, the boy’s attention is once again pulled back to the shard in his hand. He waits, composed and ready for whatever the ugly reflection wants to say next.

“You can’t hide from me. Not even here in the Garden of Eden.”

The boy shifts uneasily. Tiny beads of sweat begin racing each other down his palms: his eyelids force shut as he wrestles with the thoughts bombarding his mind.

The bird’s song is now heavier on his ears.

“You are so ugly on the inside.” is what the reflection says next.

The boy shakes his head in disagreement – although he knows what is true. He knows how ugly he is. He knows he can never be as beautiful as the blue jay or its impeccable melody. That is what he has been taught and that is what he believes.

It is not possible to look away from the mirror. Something warns him that it is a part of him and he craves the answers the reflection bears. Why won’t it deliver?

The sun is quiet and the grass is now cold. The song of the blue jay is piercing the boy’s thoughts just as a cruel word pierces a pleasant moment, ripping through the peace with its voice.

The boy is becoming desperate; he is cradling his precious piece of mirror between his knees and his hands suffocate his ears in a futile attempt to block out all noise. His sanctuary has been stained with unwanted commotion, though he is equally unprepared to give it up as he is to fight for it.

The frost is becoming overwhelming on his skin. There is no room for free movement anymore because everything is closing in: the vicious voice, the intrusive innocence of the blue jay.

His stomach feels as though it has been ignited and something solid is crawling up his throat. The pressure perverts every aspect of him as he grows smaller and smaller inside of himself, looking up only momentarily to see that the blue jay has become trapped between branches.

No matter how hard he tries he cannot seem to ignore his surroundings. His garden is turning sour and he feels weaker as it does. All is darkened when he dares to open his eyes, although he can’t work out why. The air is turning tempestuous as the light falls victim to an insidious oppression. Darkness pervades every inch of the boy’s haven, slowly dragging itself by the claws to where he cowers. He can feel it edging its way up his arms and into his hair, the noise banging on and on and on…

In a split moment, the boy forces his hand up through the murk towards the blue jay directly above him. Eyes still closed but masked behind tears, he pulls the bird back down close to his chest. He clasps his right hand around the sharp piece of mirror and brings it around to meet his torso. The boy’s eyes momentarily rest on the stomach of the blue jay, until one swift movement and –

Done.

Everything is calm again and the darkness is gone. The reflection has halted its words. No more invasion of his safe place to be detected.

The boy is staring down at his deed. His palms open to reveal his work. The body is cold against his fingertips, yet he is feeling a glowing warmth from within. He has rescued this naïve little product of nature from the harsh realities of living and restored the peace he so desperately craves – two birds with one stone.

The moment tastes bittersweet.

The boy peers down at his reflection once more almost invitingly. He knows he is untouchable. He is the higher power and he fully understands this now. No one can disturb him anymore. He gazes at the abrupt expression written across the bird’s blackened eyes, knowing that the beauty is dead and he is the one who has killed it. Looking carefully at the exposed gut of the creature, he swallows the lump sitting in his throat.

Nothing but blood escaping the bird, he now realizes that the blue jay is ugly on the inside too.

And the new word of 2014 is...'vape'?

Here is an article on the word of 2014 - 'vape'. Oxford dictionary has added 'vape' to their dictionary and nobody knows what it means - well, excluding stoners in America, where 'to vape' is to go and smoke weed (here in the UK we like to 'blaze').
This article supports the idea that lanuage is changing in relation to new technology being created. The verb 'to vape' apparently means to take a puff on an electronic cigarette - it was created due to the rise in popularity of e-cigs.
This new word in our lexicon was brought about by new technology, so this illustrates just how often and quickly language changes.

Ted talks: Txting is killing language. JK!!!

In this TED talk (click here), John McWhorter confronts the common fear that new technology is destroying our language. According to him, the contrary is in fact true.
He says we speak how we write so we write how we speak. We text not thinking about grammar rules because we do not think about it when speaking - why would we?
Now however, technology has given us smartphones, and it's actually easier to click the predicted word than use an abbreviation - so now we have less 'text talk'!
McWhorter also goes on to say that nothing has changed since 100 years ago to today. There will always be students who struggle with reading and writing, but texting and new technology (such as simply having a dictionary on your phone) is actually helping kids to better their literacy skills.

Summary notes on Stephen Fry documentary 'Planet word'

-Prescriptive attitudes are often used for control.
-Political correctness also has some element of control.
-Any society will have taboo words, including reclusive tribes in the most remote parts of the world.
-Professor Stephen Pinker says that the source of our obscenities generally tend to be topics surrounded by negative connotations/emotions. For example, a lot of our own swears stem from sexism. Our taboo language reflects the patriarchal society we live in.
-Sex has actually given us our most used swear - 'fuck'.
-According to research, taboo language is actually marked by parts of the brain.
-Swearing helps to relieve pain. However it is only most effective when the person in pain is not a regular swearer.
-Taboo language is only given power by the taboo we put on it.
-The acceptability of taboo language has changed over the last 100 years.
-In terms of taboo language, sexual language has lost its impact due to contextual factors - sex was a much more taboo subject when your grandparents were kids than it is now! - but any kind of prejudicial language is still extremely powerful.
-Politeness is euphanistic language. In older times women would 'powder their nose', whereas now they might proudly 'go for a piss'.
-We use euphanisms to protect delicate ears (i.e, children). We have euphanistic language to be less direct with children.
-Latinate lexis - Language from Latin - is used throughout a range of subjects, such as medicine, history, philosophy, science, and just academic subjects in general. This indicates that Latin at one point (perhaps even still to this day) was the language of power, because you would have to be educated to an extremely high level to be able to study these subjects, and this often was linked with wealth as well. This is why Latin was a compulsory subject in schools years ago; it is the language of power.
-Death and sex appear to harbour the most euphanisms, most likely as they are the two most sensitive topics to touch upon.
-Semantic shifts are forever occuring throughout history. For example, the term 'trolling' once meant cruising, whereas now it means to be abusive. In the same way the phrase 'to sex up' has become a way for politicians to exaggerate something.
-Studies show that non-standard English bonds people together. In fact, slang empowers young people (perhaps because it is the most subtle form of rebellion).
-Hip-hop (full of slang) is influential as it acts as the voice of the disinfranchised.
-Does language really have a 'right' or a 'wrong' or is this dictated purely by the context in which is it used?
-Lanuage seems to circulate: once you put it out there other people will pick it up.

Is gender-segregation good for the attainment of our children?

Click here. In this article, Belinda Parmar details her findings from trips to various schools, both co-ed and gender-segregated. After visiting many different schools she has concluded that gender-segregation is ultimately better for young women. Gender-segregated schools offer females the chance to excel without pressure to conform to gender stereotypes.

Is texting stopping children from excelling in literacy?

This article discusses research done by Coventry university, which concluded that children who use 'text speak' or 'textisms' have a higher phonological awareness. It even goes on to say that texting creates a space where children can be creative with language.
The research also explores the origins of textism and abbreviations, etc. Surprisingly - rather than it being put down to time-clipping, it is put down to the importance of an accurate self-representation online.

Confessions of a reformed grammar nazi

Here is an article written by what is known as a 'Grammar Nazi' - someone who will correct the smallest grammar mistake rather than allow it to go by unnoticed. In this article, the ex-grammar nazi says that in a 'world of hurried messaging and autocorrect', we ought to give people the benefit of the doubt when small grammatical errors are committed.

Bristol University's grammar exercises!

Click here for Bristol University's page filled with tons of grammar exercises - all dedicated to helping you perfect your grammar skills!

An article on gender differences in communication

Click here for the article.

This article says that the communication style of women tends to be more 'emotional' than men. Whereas women seem to focus on feelings and building relationships, men appear to focus on power and status. This is particularly clear in problem solving, where men often take a straightforward approach as opposed to women who first establish intimacy and show empathy. In addition, women usually take a cooperative approach, whereas men often take a competitive approach.

Guardian article - 'The hyperbole we love to hate'

Click here for an article on hyperboles. The author discusses different hyperboles and how they are consuming the English language.

Click here for an article on TAU research regarding the effects of mixed-sex classrooms. It is said that 'more girls' in a classroom is better for everyone - including the girls. The study shows that levels of acadmic achievment are frequently higher in mixed-sex classrooms.

A summary of research done on the benefits of mixed-gender classes

Click here
This article includes important ideas regarding gender differences and CLA, based on research done across various classrooms. In this article there are notes on the different gender-specific qualities seen in boys and girls. It concludes that although there are advantages and disadvantages of single-gender classes, a mixed-gender class is ultimately more operative and advantageous for both male and female children.

David Crystal - How is the internet changing language today?

In this short interview, David Crystal (English language expert) states how technology always changes language. From the creation of printing to telephones, technology evokes new styles, spellings and punctuation systems, not to mention new patterns of dialogue. He concludes with the idea that language has become expressively richer as a result of the internet. Click here for the youtube clip.

David Crystal's theory on the development of the English language

BBC television program 'It's only a theory' with David Crystal: Expert on linguistic evolution David Crystal explains why he believes texting is good for teenagers. His studies show that only 10% of words in text messages are abbreviated, and that abbreviations actually date back hundreds of years - despite the myth that teenagers created them. According to Crystal, the earlier you get a mobile phone and the more you text, the better your literacy will ultimately be. Click here for youtube clip.

Ted Talks: What makes a word real?

Is the internet degrading the English language? Social networking sites allow you to 'defriend' someone - is 'defriend' even a real word? New words like 'hangry' (hungry and angry) are evolving every day, but just how real are these slang words? This is explored in this TedTalk given by Anne Curzan. She concludes that dictionaries are human and not timeless, yet we tend to treat them as though they have no author. There is no objective dictionary force out there: if a community is using a word and knows what it means then the word is 'real', because it is we who make it real. Click here for the Ted Talk!

Stages of children's linguistic development

Different types of language

1. Instrumental: Language used to satisfy material needs.
2. Regulatory: Language used to control others.
3. Interactional: Language with no actual meaning as such - e.g, fillers during awkward silences.
4. Personal: Emotional language which releases stress, involuntary responses to pain, fear, beauty, etc. As well as expressing 'the self'.
5. Heuristic: Language seeking information.
6. Imaginative: Language of creative writing, etc.
7. Language which communicates information or ideas.
8. Performative: Language used to control others.

Development milestones

1. Firstly, kids all over the world learn language at roughly the same speed regardless of sex, race, culture or mother tongue (and there are some pretty major differences in attitudes towards teaching children across the globe).
2. Logical mistakes
3. Exceptions: one of the most convincing arguments against the imitation theory is that children who can't speak, but can hear, acquire normal understanding of speech. Eric Lennenburg (1962) researched the case of a boy like this who, for neuromuscular reasons was unable to speak.
4.Critical period - Chomskyis right in that we are born with LAD; Skinneris right in that your caregivers must reinforce and stimulate it - and Lennenburgis also right in saying this must be before a certain age.

The three stages of CLA (learn this as a guideline in the exam)

Stage one - holophrastic (one word):
Age: 12-18 months
What happens: The child utters their first word. She/he then builds a vocabulary of holophrases (single words used to convey meaning). They convey all the meaning of a phrase/sentence through body language, inotation and volume.

Stage two - Two words a.k.a - the emergence of grammar. This supports Chomsky's LAD. Two word phrases like "all gone!". It is the beginning of structure.

Stage three - Telegraphic:
Age: 2-2 and a half years
What happens: The child begins to use sentences of up to four words in length.
-Sentences with gaps in them where the non-lexical words (those without a 'dictionary meaning') like 'but', 'and', 'if' (conjunctions) 'the', 'a' (articles), 'is', 'has' (auxiliary verbs), as well as endings such as 'ing' are often omitted.
-Children combine 3-4 words in a variety of grammatical constructions: declarative syntax, interrogative syntax (for adjacency pairs - to teach chaining), and imperative syntax (because they lack politeness strategies).
-After age three, children's language advances in leaps and bounds.
-Although massive developments happen simultaneously and are linked together.
-Grammar: The structure of the language (word order, sentence types, word endings, tenses, using negatives, passives and conjunctions).
-Semantics: The meaning of words (the usage, growth and comprehension of vocabulary).
-Phonology: The sounds of the language (inotation, stress, pitch, tone, pronunciation). -Pragmatics: Everything else. Or, the ability to use language that is appropriate to the situation, the rule of conversation (turn-taking, politeness, terms of address), initiate a conversation, how to keep it going, how to keep someone's attention, how to get someone to do what you want and make them feel like it was their idea, and so on.

Article on fox-p-2 being inserted into mice: what they found

Click here - Recently German scientists have successfully implanted a 'humanized' version of the fox-p-2 gene into mice. Remarkably, they discovered that it actually helped them learn faster.

Emma Watson UN speech on gender equality

Click here for Emma Watson's compelling speech recently made at the United Nations. Six months ago Watson was appointed as goodwill ambassador and is now leading a movement called 'heforshe', which aims to put a stop to gender inequality once and for all. In this speech she talks about commonly used gender-specific terms and labels (i.e, 'bossy'), and discusses different ways in which some language can advocate sexist attitudes.

Notes on documentary 'The hardest thing you'll ever do'

-We talk to babies as if they can understand
-Sense of sight VITAL in CLA
-At 18 months - 50 words in the lexicon, mostly nouns; few politeness strategies
-Girls get positive reinforcement ("clever girl") but boys get none: sexist presumption that boys should do well but girls need help
-Use of onomatopoeia - reinforced through play
-At two and a half years old, children begin to get to grips with adjacency pairs, turn taking and chaining
-They only use simple syntax - NOT complex. They're getting used to conversation but they don't initiate it - only respond to it
-Nursery rhymes & children's books are used teaching them complex syntax
-At three years old children know possessive pronouns
-At three/four they can tell a story with the past tense, but still make virtuous errors.
-Remarkably they will never use the simple past with nouns (e.g, yesterday we 'beached', etc) - Evidence for fox-p-2
-After simple syntax comes compound syntax (joining two simple sentences with a connective)
-At five years old children are more aware or external influences
-100,000 words as an adult - mainly context driven though.

Transcript of conversation between Lou and Ruby (from class)

Lou: shall we take your jacket off Pronoun 'we' shows collaboration
Ruby: it's not a jacket it's a coat
Lou: oh (.) sorry (.) shall we take your COAT off then 'COAT' - Convergence
Ruby: mmm
Lou: are you going to be a bossy boots all morning 'Bossy boots' typically for females - pre-modified noun
Ruby: [nods & laughs] (3.0) what's up wiv Felma Use of longer pauses to reflect on what to say/Struggles with CC'th'
Lou: Thelma [questioning inotation] (1.0) oh (.) she's been a silly girl (1.0) she's been fighting 'Thelma'-Correcting Ruby
Ruby: what did it (.) what what was it (.) em Simba bitted by a dog 'Bitted'-Applied regular simple past to an irregular past
Lou: Simba got bitten by a do::g [questioning inotation] oh no is he all right 'Bitten' - Repeats correctly
Ruby: yeh
Lou: yes
Ruby: he's better now
Lou: is he better now (.) the vet looked after him [questioning inotation](2.0)
Ruby: no we took him to the bets two times but he's better 'Bets' - Error-means 'vets'
Lou: he's better [questioning inotation] oh that's good (.) Thelma's getting better
Ruby:Interruption shows excitement Sim (.) Simba slept on my (2.0) Fergal and Simba slept on my bed
Lou: oh (.) last night [questioning inotation]
Ruby: yeh
Lou: is there room on your bed for two pussy cats and you
Ruby: yes
Lou: is there (.) do they not get (.) do you not get pushed out of bed every night by two big pussy cats
Ruby: no
Lou: they're almost as big as you your cats (1.0) shall we have some jam on toast Sidetracked here
Ruby: yes
Lou: would you like some apple juice as well
Ruby: yes
Lou: what would you like first
Ruby: apple juice
Lou: apple juice (.) a little glass [questioning inotation]
Ruby: yes
Lou yes (1.0)
Ruby: big girls have glass don't they Ruby has missed out an indefinite article/'Big girls' - Pre-modified noun
Lou: yes (.) big girls have glasses (.) it's all I've got (.) glasses (2.0)
Ruby: grandma has glass and cups
Lou: grandma has glass and cups does she (.) and what do you have at grandma's (1.0)
Ruby: apple juice and orange Highlights importance of conversation and they're both interested
Lou: apple juice and orange (.) there we go (.) where are you going to sit to have this (.) do you want to sit at the table
Ruby: I'll sit (.) I want to sit in the room No awareness of please and thank you/'I'll sit'-Can do future simple
Lou: oo:: no (.) not with your apple juice
Ruby: only wiz my toast (2.0) Again struggles with the consonant cluster 'th'
Lou: sit here and I'll move my things out of the way
Ruby: only in (.) only wiz my toast
Lou: okay (.) there you go (1.0) can you manage
Ruby: Mummy got (3.0) Mummy's moved a bed
Lou: Mummy's moved her bed or your bed [questioning inotation] (2.0)
Ruby: her bed (.)
Lou: right (.) where's she moved it to
Ruby: (3.0) that (.) bit [pointing left]
Lou: that bit [laughs]
Ruby: then the baby's mattress is (.) on that bit [pointing right]
Lou: a::h I see:: (1.0) so Mummy's moved her bed so she can fit the bed in for the baby (.)you excited about the baby [questioning inotation] Repition of the word 'mummy' - Convergence
Ruby: (2.0) it's coming after Christmas
Lou: (.) after Christmas (.) is Father Christmas going to bring it
Ruby: no (.) Mummy's made it
Lou: [laughs] Mummy's made it has she (.) she's clever your Mummy isn't she
Ruby: we don't know how she made it cos the books shows us (.) how's it (.) she made it
Lou: oh right (.) has she read the book with you (1.0) ir are you getting a book
Ruby: (2.0) we haven't got a book about the baby we getting a book
Lou: are you looking forward to the baby (.) di you want a baby brother or a baby sister
Ruby: (3.0) I want a girl
Lou: a girl (2.0)
Ruby: I want to call it Dora 'I want to call it Dora' - Context
Lou: [laughs] Dora (.) after Dora the Explorer
Ruby: and when she gets bigger (.) she (.) she can explorer [laughs] 'Explorer' - Error
Lou: [laughs] when she gets bigger she can be an explorer
Ruby: no (.) Mum said when we at Sun (.) Sunday dinner (.) she'll be adorable [laughs]
Lou: adorable (.) that's clever isn't it

Two main theories on language aquisition

1957- Behaviourism - B.F Skinner wrote a book called 'Verbal behaviour'. He decided that children aquire language based on positive reinforcement. He said that we are all born as 'tabula rasa' (meaning blank slate), and that children learn language by receiving positive reinforcement when they communicate with words correctly. Skinner called this the 'Operant conditioning theory'. Children (according to Skinner) learn language through a simple process of imitation and reinforcement, and he claimed that no complicated internal mechanisms were needed for language and that a child learning language was no different from a rat learning to press levers (he enjoyed experimenting with rodents).

1965 - Cognitivism/Universal grammer - Chomsky opposed Skinner's idea with the theory of Universal grammer: the innate biological properties of the human brain which are responsible for children's rapid and overwhelmingly successful aquisition of a native language - without any obvious effort during the first few years of life.

Click here for an article with further information on the topic.

Notes from Stephen Fry documentary

-Children speak from the age of two years old. They begin with consonant vowel construction ("ta, da, ba").
-They have a heightened semantic awareness but a lessened phonological awareness.

-Animals are unable to make complex sounds - their vocal abilities aren't flexible enough. Some animals however have been taught sign language, (to some extent) successfully.
-The University of Columbia conducted an experiment with a Chimp called 'Nimchimpsky': they raised him as a child and attempted to teach him sign language. To their amazement they discovered Nimchimpsky was able to construct simple sentences but not to initiate conversations - no linguistic creativity, only able to build imperative requests.
-There are only TWO differences between the amino acids in Fox-P-2 (language gene) between humans and chimps.

But where did language originally come from?

-It is thought that as language developed in the early ages it was biologically the woman's job to ensure social cohesion and to keep the tribe/village together (maternal instincts).
-Something in a woman's DNA which makes them more cooperative (dating back 1000s of years).

-VICTOR, a child found had been living alone and as an animal for some years (a ferile child). He was essentially a 'blank slate', and the doctor who took him had to teach him everything. Victor was NEVER able to talk - evidence that there is a critical aquisition period. We must be stimulated linguistically.

-Children associate lexis with context (e.g, water)
-The WUGtest supports Chomsky's LAD - we are born with the apparatus to use language and grammar. Even with nonsense made-up words, children apply grammatical laws that they've somehow absorbed.
-The amount of language that parents provide kids before school is crucial.
-Never negate the importance of visuals in CLA - children sometimes need to look at who they're talking to.

Language and power

Instrumental power - Commanding speech: 'Sit down'
Influential power - Persuasive speech: 'Could you sit down please' Both exert power in speech in two different ways.
-Parents have instrumental power by setting the agenda in the conversation, HOWEVER depending on the context they may use influential power.
-Instrumental power has a declarative syntax structure whereas influential has imperative syntax structure.
-Norman Fairclough talks about synthetic personalisation.

Notes on language and gender

-Emotive language is more common with females
-Men interrupt woman a lot - a trait of male language is that they appear to be less polite compared to women
-As a result males often dominate the coversation

-Language is partiarchal:
-Political correctness dictates that we should not change the gender of language for women (HIStory, etc)
-The 'S' is the suffix which denotes the gender - 'headmistreSS', 'lioneSS', etc
-Women's language is defficient compared to men's - it's less assertive; less powerful.
-Women CO-OPERATE whereas men COMPETE
-'Handsome' VS 'Pretty' - why do we use specific words for each gender?

-Men are more likely to use coloquial language (slang)
-Men also seem to converge more (adopt language for its audience)

Top ten 'sweariest' places in Britain

Here you will find a list of the 'sweariest' towns in Britain. This research carried out by scientists at the Centre for Advanced Spatial Analysis (Casa) at UCL lists the ten 'sweariest' towns in Britain - and also the five least sweary, including higher class places like Oxford and Westminster. Could this be a direct result of better education in the richer areas of Britain in contrast with that of the North? Or is it just down to culture?

Notes on 'Horizons'

Unfortunately couldn't find a link to the BBC documentary 'Horizons'.

-Named 'the speech home project', in this documentary you can see that babies begin with gibberish, then progress into single words which in turn develop into requests. Gradually an infant learns to speak.
-The experiment also illustrates how you need positive reinforcement (what some might call a 'baby voice') when communicating with your child so that they are encouraged when talking - this suggests that we all have the innate ability to use language but it must be stimulated at a young age.
-It also appears that parents simplify their speech subconsciously by elonging their pauses - they simplify their lexis and their syntax. This is called CONVERGENCE (adopting language for the audience).
-Furthermore, children will listen to the phonological features - at first, a child's phonological awareness outweighs their semantic awareness. They listen to the SOUNDS first.
-As the child's own speech develops, parents will use longer sentences - mirroring their development. By the time a child is 5, they know 5000 words - mostly nouns and verbs. At certain stages they don't have the nouns so instead they use determiners ("this one, that one, this one!")
-As they grow up they will learn 3000 new words each year.
-This documentary also answers some more fundamental questions by demonstrating how we have a laryx deep in our throat which causes our vocal tracts to be longer - whereas animals have high ones disabling them from making complex speech sounds.
-The left part of the brain is for language, the front is for speaking and the back is for understanding. After studying a man with severe brain damage, doctors noticed that nouns appeared to come before actions (for example, he could name the cat in the picture but not what it was doing).

Ted talks: Dr. Deb Roy discusses the experiment he conducted with his son (placing surveillance all around his home in order to capture the 'birth of a word')

Click here!

Youtube - Debate on the use of drugs for learning languages in the future (consider the ethical implications).

Click here!

Guardian article on nature Vs nurture

Click here! - Link to a Guardian article illustrating how learning a language is more about nurture than nature. It discusses the importance of bilinguality in employment today and investigates how achievable it actually is - concluding with the idea that motivation from employers will strengthen the incentive of the learner. (Employers need to take a more "active role")

Article on duolingo (language learning app)

Click here! -Link to Guardian article on Duolingo (mobile app for learning languages based on repition, listening, reading and writing phrases). Duolingo is clear support for the notion that we 'pick up' a language.

Click here! - Link to AQA resources