Children's Reading Essay Planning

Points that could be made in the essay

• Overview
• Lineation of the two texts
• Skinner - imitation, correction, positive and negative reinforcement, Nilem giving them the answers,
• Vygotsky - scaffolding
• Emphasis placed on different words - capitals, speech bubbles, exclamation marks,
• Context - classroom setting, teaching assistance not parent, giving the answer in order to not miss meaning, reading for meaning, reading for pleasure, reading schemes,  
• Context cues - Images
• Defective orthography - “bow” becomes "boo"

Paragraph
In both texts, the teaching assistant, Nilem, seems to be giving both Tom and Tania, the correct pronunciation of words such as “trusty” or even just finishing off a word that they haven’t finished saying in their utterance such as when Tania says “sher” and Nilem says “lock”. It is interesting that unlike some other caregivers, Nilem just gives the children the answer rather than letting them explore the possible answer for themselves using context cues and sounding out the words. There are many reasons why Nilem could have not scaffolded them but finished their utterance and let them imitate which may mean that the children are unlikely to remember how to pronounce those words, it could be because it is an educational environment and the teaching assistance may have little experience with helping children read and may have to read to several more children so by providing the answer it speeds up the reading process. However, it could be that by just providing the standard pronunciation it allows for the child to not lose the meaning of the story because if they were busy trying to correct themselves they would lose their place in the story and may begin to lose interest in reading and may find reading more of a chore rather than an enjoyable experience. Also, there are times during the readings where Nilem does give the children some time to figure out how to pronounce certain words and when they seem 'stuck' Nilem finishes their utterance. However, there are also times where it could be interpreted as Nilem interrupting the children and finishing their utterance because Nilem doesn't believe the child may know how to pronounce that word, maybe that particular word is harder to pronounce or Nilem knew they had difficulty pronouncing that word before.

Something on The British Library...

I was looking at this text on The British Library’s website. The reason I found this particular timeline interesting, even though there were others on the website, was because of how they decided to end the timeline. Although the last part of the timeline was "1900s - present day", many of the coinages that they included were quite old, such as "gasmasks" and "gobstoppers", and surprisingly didn't include any of the newer neologisms such as "selfie" or "duckface". However, this is likely to be the case because this aspect of the website is unlikely to be constantly updated possibly because of time which suggests this is a constraint of the text. Another reason why this text may not have included new coinages is possibly because of the audience which could possibly be older people and so newer neologisms may not have felt necessary to include and they may have given the timeline more an informal tone rather than giving the impression that the text is for informing purposes and may need to show a more formal tone. In the text I found the use of the noun "weirdo" which comes from the root word "weird" which is an adjective, the coinage seems to have come from the conversion of the root word to an adjective by affixing a non-standard suffix of “o”. This isn’t uncommon as this seems to have happened to other words too such as “sad” has become “saddo” and “psyche” has become “psycho”. This word could be evidence for both diachronic and synchronic language change because the root word’s denotations could be considered diachronic language change because when it was first coined it used to mean fantastic, bizarre and have connotations of the supernatural. Over time it seems to the adjective “weird” has become more pejorative and have connotations of “freak” and “strange”. “Weirdo” could be evidence for synchronous language change because this seems to be more of a recent coinage, and from the timeline, we can tell it happened during the 1900s.    

Shakespeare's Impact on Language - Then & Now

When Shakespeare’s impact on Language began between two major linguistic stages in the history of English - Middle English, the language written and spoken during the Middle Ages (most famously by Chaucer) and Modern English, the language in which we write and speak today. Prior to and during Shakespeare’s time, the rules of English including grammar were not standardised. At the time, Modern English was becoming flexible and this was because of the Renaissance. During this time, Language was constantly being invented which is evident in Literature at the time and Shakespeare was leading figure. At the time there was a huge inflow of other European vocabulary into the English Language as a result of Renaissance “cross-pollination” and borrowing.

Once Shakespeare’s plays became popular in the late seventeenth and eighteenth century, they helped contribute to the standardization of the English language to make it what it is today. Many Shakespearean words and phrases have become embedded in the English language, particularly through projects such as Samuel Johnson's A Dictionary of the English Language which quoted Shakespeare more than any other writer. Shakespeare expanded the scope of English literature by introducing new words and phrases, experimenting with blank verse, and also introducing new poetic and grammatical structures. One of the ways in which grammar was changing at the time was through inflectional endings (suffixes that indicated the word’s grammatical functions in the way that many modern languages still have), they were beginning to disappear which is evident today as Modern English isn't a highly inflected language as it once was. Shakespeare helped to further develop style and structure to an otherwise loose, spontaneous language. Written Elizabethan English stylistically closely followed the spoken language. The naturalness gave force and freedom since there was no formalized prescriptive grammar binding the expression. While a lack of prescribed grammatical rules at the time introduced vagueness in literature, it also expressed feelings with profound vividness and emotion which created, "freedom of expression" and "vividness of presentment". It was a language which expressed feelings explicitly. Shakespeare's gift involved using the exuberance of the language and decasyllabic structure in prose and poetry of his plays to reach the masses and the result was "a constant two way exchange between learned and the popular, together producing the unique combination of racy tang and the majestic stateliness that informs the language of Shakespeare”. Another way in which Shakespeare affected language was through conversion for example he made fool, which was a noun, into a verb within his writing. Also, in Love’s Labour's Lost Shakespeare was able to exploit multiple meanings of one word to create a sentence such as “Light, seeking light, doth light of light beguile”. In this sentence “light” has connotations of intellect, wisdom, daylight etc all connotations the word light has today. Among Shakespeare's greatest contributions to the English language, the most important must be the introduction of new vocabulary and phrases which have enriched the language making it more colourful and expressive. Warren King clarifies the number of words Shakespeare coined by saying that, "In all of his work – the plays, the sonnets and the narrative poems – Shakespeare uses 17,677 words: Of those, 1,700 were first used by Shakespeare.”

Shakespeare added a considerable amount of words to the English Language when compared to additions made at other times. He is also well known for borrowing words from classical literature and foreign languages. Some of the words Shakespeare coined which are still present in Modern English include: laughable, assassination, advertising and gossip. As well as coining new words, Shakespeare coined phrases some of which are still embedding in Modern English today. Phrases include: “it’s Greek to me”, “green eyed jealousy”, “laughed yourself into stitches” and “breaking the ice”.

One interesting word that Shakespeare coined was “swag” which is interesting because some people believe that “swag” is a relatively new addition to the dictionary and not one which people would believe to be that old or to have been used a long time ago. Shakespeare first used the term in Othello saying “I will wear my heart upon my sleeve for daws to peck at, for thy beauty swags the heavens for I am not what I am”. By looking at the context which the term is being used it seems as though it has kept its denotation from many years and it doesn't seem as though it has undergone broadening in order for it to mean what it does today.

Language Change Research Task - The Feminist Movement

The feminist movements of the nineteenth and the early twentieth century consisted of promoting equality between the sexes. From this political movement, we have seen coinages and neologisms enter our language, most of which are still part of our everyday vocabulary. As well as new words, the feminist movements led to words broadening and narrowing in meaning, also some words have undergone amelioration and pejoration.

The word “feminism” is credited to have been coined by Charles Fourier, a French Philosopher, in 1837.  Before this, in 1872 the terms “feminist” and “feminism” first appeared in France and the Netherlands. The words were introduced to Britain in the 1890s and 1910 in the USA. The term “feminism” has three meanings: it is the doctrine advocating social, political, and all other rights of women equal to those of men, it is an organized movement for the attainment of such rights for women and it can also mean a feminine character. It can be argued that the term “feminism” has undergone narrowing as the last denotation attributed to “feminism” is one that is unlikely we would associate with today. However, if we look at other denotations of the word, such as the ones found on Urban Dictionary, it seems that “feminism” may have undergone broadening to an extent. Part of the Urban Dictionary’s denotation states that “Feminism… embraces the belief that all people are entitled to freedom and liberty within reason-including equal civil rights-and that discrimination should not be made based on gender, sexual orientation, skin color, ethnicity, religion, culture, or lifestyle.” The ending suggests a broadening of the denotations of the word “feminism” in that in the future we may see it to have more associations with other groups in society that deserve equality and not just women. It can be argued that through diachronic language change, the term “feminism” has undergone pejoration because some people may associate feminism with negative connotations possibly because of views and actions of radical feminists which may have had a negative impact on the feminist perspective and views as a whole.

The term “herstory” originated around the mid 1970s. The detonation of this noun is that it means the same as history but it was coined in feminist literature and in women’s studies as an alternative form in order to distinguish and emphasise the particular experiences of women. The term was coined by taking the noun “history” and splitting it as if it were a compound word into two separate morphemes, “his” and “story” and then by changing the “his” to “her” and placing the two morphemes back together it creates a new compound word meaning history from her perspective. This coinage has led to the broadening and the possible pejoration of the word “history” as it can be viewed as a word associated with androcentrism rather than a term that simple is knowledge of past events.

The term “feminazi” is a term used by the radio talk show host Rush Limbaugh in the 1990s and he credits the term being coined by Tom Hazlett. The term is a portmanteau of the words “feminist” and “Nazi”. This term is obviously a pejorative term used to describe feminists that can or have been perceived to be extreme or radical. Ironically, the Nazis were under the rule of Hitler who was against the feminist movement, so by coining a word which is a portmanteau of “feminist” and “Nazi” can almost be considered an oxymoron although the intention of the coinage was to show how some feminists were just as radical and extreme as the Nazis.

Bibliography

• Wikipedia
• Cambridge Free English Dictionary
• Dictionary.com
• Urban Dictionary

Media Text - Redraft of the Beginning

Secret Teacher: Are boys losing the battle of the sexes?

Debates about female language has led to the voices of men being completely sidelined. Now we have to deal with the damage society and the media has left behind.

• More from The Secret Teacher

The stereotypes placed upon does affect our language, not just the girls but the boys too. Photograph: Aleutie/Shutterstock

Angelica King

Friday 23 January 2015 12.00 GMT

Almost 100 years ago, grammarian Otto Jespersen stated that male language was the “norm” and that anything that wasn't male language was deficient by default. However, a recent longitudinal study has been released suggesting that “girls do better in school than boys” and that the biggest gender divide can be seen in language. But to some of us this is not new information. Recent claims of a “boy crisis” within schools is now seen as inaccurate, as in reality this has been going on for over 100 years. So, is male language now being viewed as “deficient” within our schools? There is a suggestion that over time we have come recognise common female speech techniques, such as being cooperative with others during conversation, as being vital in order to succeed in education and that competitive language techniques, usually attributed to boys, may be considered obsolete.

Language & Gender Article

There are plenty of articles about Language & Gender as long as you know where to look (or what to type into Google etc.) and here is another one. I think my goal now is to find one that relates more to male language rather than articles about females wanting to change our still very sexist language (not that I'm being cynical and that I do not agree with the writer because I do to an extent.)

Fuel For a Language Debate

There has always been discussion on the topic of texting and whether the connotations of which are correct when they say that people who cannot spell. Here's an article that may either "preach to the converted" if you already agree with the writer's view or hopefully sway you.