Interesting...

I found this article on the guardian website and it was an interesting read. This particular article addressed the difference between gender and sex and also other important issues.

A Christmas Grammar Quiz

Here is an interesting grammar quiz I found that you could take a look at and try for yourself.

This Article Caused Major Controversy...

This Guardian Article tells the story of major criticism being given to the writer of a story about Barbie which was written with intention of inspiring young girls to have careers in areas they wouldn't necessarily think about entering and also to empower them but instead made Barbie an engineer that couldn't do the job herself unless she had a man to help her. Read the article yourself and see how you feel about the issue and whether it was right that the writer of the book received major criticism from many people.

Anti-Heroes vs. Anti Heroines

Have a look at this article here. This article from the guardian simultaneously intrigued and angered me. Emma Unsworth, the writer of this article, explores anti-heroes and anti-heroines and the idea that readers are more likely to be intrigued by anti-heroes because they are more likable, mysterious, and dark all of which capture some readers even if they feel as though they must be disliked due to their actions. She then goes on to talk about anti-heroines and how readers react negatively towards them because they are likely to be characters that go against conventions of society and are unlike other female characters making them more unlikable. A great read. Made me look deeper into both my English subjects and is quite useful. Have you heard of any of the books in the list with famous anti-heroines? 

Child Language Acquisition Research Task

Even at an early age, most children learn to discriminate certain pairs of consonants and vowels. Examples of this are the syllables “pa” and “ba”. This is due to our biology, we are born with special “feature detectors” that respond to the speech in our environment. Some sounds that develop early on are “gu” and “ga”, this is because they relate to the babbling that babies do. Although in the past it was believed that there was no link between babbling and early language, recent research has shown that babbling allows them to practice sounds ready for when they begin to speak and the sounds they babble will be similar to the sounds they use in their early vocabulary.

Consonant + vowel sequences usually develop first, this is also due to their biology because the child begins to move their tongues, move their lips and just explore the use of their mouths to communicate.

There are different types of babbling that children do. One is reduplicated babbling which is where babies repeat the use of the same consonant sound. Another type is variegated babbling where there is switching between the consonants and vowels from one syllable to the next.

Once the child reaches a year old, they could potentially be able to recognise several dozen words involving a wide range of vowels and consonants but their ability to pronounce them is restricted to two or three consonants and a single vowel sound.

Some consonant sounds such as “b” and “m” are easy to create and are usually among the first sounds to develop. More complex sounds such as “ch”, “sp” and “fl” are consonant clusters and develop later on. Many vowel sounds are learned at roughly two and half and by the age of four most children know how to use them in their speech.

Based on research done with one 13 month year old, the child new three phonemes - “b”, “d” and “a”. With these phonemes the child was able to create the sound “ba” and communicate words such as “baby” and “bath”. At around 15 months, the child had acquired the phonemes “m”, “p” and “u” and with these phonemes he created “up” which enabled him to say words like “cup” where the consonant is at the end of the word which some children do not acquire until later since it is difficult. It is hard to make predictions about the order in which children will acquire new sounds and one reason for this is because of every child’s environment, each child will grow up in a different environment and will be exposed to different names such as for sibling and pets and so some children will acquire some sounds much sooner than others simply because of their exposure to those particular sounds. Some children can have favourite sounds which leads some children to changing adult pronunciations of words to enable them to use their favourite sounds. Also, some children avoid other sounds like dropping certain consonants at the ends of words which is likely to be because they find those sounds difficult to pronounce and so avoid them completely.  

Although children are likely to acquire different sounds at different times, from research we have found some of the ways children change the sounds in words in order to attempt to use them:  

• They tend to replace fricative consonants by stopping, for example “see” becomes “ti:”
• They tend to replace the velar consonants with alveolar ones e.g. “gone” becomes “dɑn” (please note that the symbol may not be correct because I couldn’t find it on the list of special characters.)
• They tend to avoid consonant clusters like they will pronounce “sky” as “kaI”
• They tend to clip consonants at the end of words so “hat” becomes “ha”
• They tend to drop unstressed syllables so they may say “nana” instead of “banana”
• Consonant and vowel harmony is found with identical or near identical syllables e.g. in dog or window

At the age of 4, all vowel sounds and diphthongs may have been used but consonants, on the other hand, are likely to be first used correctly at the beginning of words. Consonants used at the end of words are likely to emerge later. Even after children have reached 4, they may still be experiencing the fis phenomenon (for example, pronouncing that as dat) as it is very difficult to learn due to a child’s biology and the way they use their mouths to create certain sounds. More complex consonant clusters develop later, children may say “stwing” instead of “string”. Children may also have a preference for “w” and “j” phonemes rather than “l” and “r”, some children will say jeg instead of leg because they prefer that phoneme or because they find “l” more difficult to produce.

Reduplication occurs in the second year and children say things like “wow” (water) and “bubu” (bottle). Children even reduplicate words that are monosyllabic, they might say “bobo” instead of “ball”. Reduplication could occur because they want to play with language but it is more likely done so that the child can cope with hard pronunciation of words. Children learn to master words in stages by using a phonetic outline and then perfect the word over time.

Bibliography:

• Crystal, D.C., 2006. How Language Works. London: Penguin Books
• Crystal, D.C., 2010. The Cambridge Encyclopedia of Language. Third Edition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Ministry of Education, 2000. Speech Sound Development. [online] Available at: <http://www.kidshealth.org.nz/speech-sound-development>. [Accessed 3 November 2014]

Child Language Acquisition - Analysis of a Transcript

In terms of activity, Z starts off in the beginning of the recording drawing a banana in his pad which H, the caregiver, uses to help stimulate a conversation using open questions. H uses 15 open ended questions in the transcript compared to 14 closed questions. Although there is little difference in the usage of both open and closed questions, some of the questions which I categorized as closed could be considered tag questions such as “we had some banana, didn’t we?” maybe used to get Z to interact more rather than for power. Also, some of the questions could be considered as just utterances H used to ask herself questions out loud that she didn’t need Z to respond to such as “(quietly) you think it goes there?”. These are a just a few reasons as to why there is little difference between the amount of times an open ended question is used in comparison to a closed question. So by taking these uses into account, it would highlight the difference in usage more clearly. This would prove the hypothesis that caregivers will ask more open ended questions to children rather than closed questions in order to stimulate more child speech.

Zone of proximal development (ZPD) was a concept introduced by Vygotsky which describes the difference between what a learner can and cannot do with help and in the case it is what the child can and cannot do in terms of language and their development. One way H scaffolds Z’s language development is by asking him questions like, “what are you drawing (.) Zach?” because by asking them H is making Z answer her and describe to her what he is doing even though he knows she can see what he’s doing and therefore he is expanding his use of language.  

HR Magazine Article Extract

Employers Etiquette - Why you should value different types of speech in the workplace

Angelica King, 05 October 2014

It is inevitable that the workplace will be composed of people from a variety of backgrounds, so why would we expect them to all speak the same? http://www.housingea.co.uk/new_course_equality_diversity_for_contractors_getting_it_right

For years, employees and employers have been told that in order to work together they must “speak the same language” despite our (gender) differences. However, this article should help battle the common misconceptions of speech and help make employers understand that “different” doesn't equal bad.  

Ladies First

Studies into gender differences in language has led to theories being produced that could be applied to the workplace which has highlighted issues, especially in terms of communication - thank you Robin Lakoff. One major difference in communication, inside and out of work, is between men and women. It’s the age old story; boy meets girl, girl likes boy, boy and girl cannot understand each other. This arguably biological variation has meant that for years the genders have not been able to communicate effectively which can be seen in your workplace - if you look hard enough. This is a major contributing factor to why there is a perceived gender based power inequality in the workplace, one which men have the advantage. A classic example being women’s use of tag questions. Theory suggests that women’s use of them is to convey avoidance of commitment, that the speaker is unsure of their opinions, that they are looking for confirmation from the listener and possibly have no views of their own. However, there are serious flaws in this theory. One, male readers will no doubt realize that they also use tag questions in their speech and research has shown that they even use them more women do at times. Secondly, tag questions can be used to  help involve others in discussion which can be a helpful tool for company discussion and help make dialogue more cooperative and could potentially lead to more changes for the better and more diverse voices being heard within the organisation.      

Commentary

In the extract from my article on diverse speech I used the phrase “(gender) differences” in the strap line because the whole article would discuss different types of people and their different types of speech but I wanted to make it apparent that gender differences would feature mostly in the article and that it would be the first issue that would be discussed in the article. I made this explicit by putting the word “gender” in parentheses, hopefully conveying to the audience that although there are other differences, e.g. your racial background, gender is still a hot topic in terms of “differences” especially when linked to the working environment. Also, in some companies sexism may still evident but more covert today so by focuses on gender employers would be more likely to read the article because it could give them some advice about women in the workplace linguistically speaking.

Also, I decided in my article not to gloss the term “tag question” because I think that my target audience of employers and employees, although they may not be linguistic experts, may know what the term means. I thought that if I tried to explain the term, I might be patronizing the readers. Also, even if glossing the term “tag question” would not patronize the audience, it is unlikely that they will need to know the term so glossing in unnecessary. However, in the re-drafting process I might find out that the term “tag question” is not actually self-explanatory and I will change the article so that the first time the term is mentioned there is information afterwards in parenthesis so that everyone reading the article will understand what is being discussed in the article.

Sample Data

Sample Data

This data was collected by Judith Baxter from an experiment which am I am going to recreate for my investigation but with some changes. Her experiment involved having two separate groups, a girls group and a boys group and then gave them both the same stimulus which was a task involving ordering objects by usefulness if they were all you had and you were stranded on a desert island. The speakers in Baxter’s study were between the ages of 14-15 and at first I was thinking of doing a younger year group but I think participants of the age range she used would give significant data however the risk of the observer’s paradox would be greater.

Group A

S: wouldn’t you need the sunglasses?

C: yeah, that’s what I think

S: because it would be really hot and protect yourself from the sun and you’d be able to see more

G: yeah, but if you’re trying to live, does it matter [whether you can see?

C: [you could go blind

G: exactly, but if you’re trying to survive, does it really matter?

C: (sounding irritated) I wouldn’t [want to go blind

S: [it does, because if you were blind you wouldn’t be able to see what you were doing and you would end up dying anyway. You’d have less chance of surviving anyway.

G: yeah, but you’re not likely to go blind unless you’re looking right up into the sun.

Group B

C: (pointing) right, what did you put?

M: compass

C: (pointing) what did you put?

T: I put sunglasses

C: right, I put the parachute (gives long explanation for choosing it)

Other voices: mirror, mirror… the torch

C: and you could use a gun, couldn’t you? You could shoot-

H: you could shoot the pilot

C: right. So has anyone changed their mind? (pointing) What do you think?

H: I say compass

T: I say sunglasses are quite important because you have to be able to see what it says on the compass for a start (laughter from the group)

H: you could just go like that (mimes shading eyes) shut your eyes for a moment

C: right. You go (pointing) Say why you thought the first aid kit.

Judith Baxter just looked to see which of the groups cooperated and which competed more. From the results I get in my experiment I intend to look at all the aspects of Deborah Tannen’s Difference Pairs that include cooperative and competitive speech. From Baxter’s data it could be said that Group B shows more status because speaker C is directing everyone in the group, however it could be argued that he is not trying to gain status but is trying to be supportive and that Group A is trying to establish status because all the speakers within that group are arguing and being competitive in order to gain status. Speaker C in Group B seems to be giving orders to the others which is common in male conversation according to Tannen. Group A seems to have the most conflict because in their conversation they seem to overlap competitively the most whilst in Group B the speaker C who had the most air time was only interrupted once. Contrastingly, Group B seems to comprise more because the dominant speaker seems to allow everyone to state their opinion and reasoning behind it and then allow them to change their mind after hearing what everyone else had to say.

I am hoping to do a mini investigation myself soon in order to find out whether my investigation idea will work and give me good evidence to analyse for my coursework and whether there are any pitfalls I need to fix before I do the real experiment.

Practice Methodology - Language Change

I was looking at Language Change in the lesson and my practice methodology is based on the hypothesis that the Language used in children’s books has changed over time. My chosen corpus of data would be the works of Hans Christian Andersen and particularly the works that are aimed at children. I would do a Longitudinal study. In the data I would be looking for changes in the use of phonology, lexis and grammar. I would also look at the frequency of particular words in relation to social context. I would also look at the use or absence of stereotypes in his work because many of his pieces are fairy tales so they may or may not be evident in his writing. To sample the data I would systematically choose every 3rd text when all of the texts are ordered chronologically. All the texts in my pool of data would be texts with a primary audience of children. If any significant pieces in my final sample that may affect my results then I will study them but I may exclude them from my final results and explain the reasons why in my evaluation and analysis. The comparability factors are that all the data in my pool are written by the same author and for the same audience. It might be hard to operationalise what texts are considered to be written for a primary audience of children so I might hand out a list of my sample data and ask the general public in a questionnaire which pieces are more suitable for children in order to help overcome this issue however more issues could arise e.g. some people may not have come across certain texts in my corpus of data. My data pool is large because Andersen has plenty of texts suitable for my investigation so even if there are anomalies it should not affect the rest of the data. There are no ethical issues with this investigation since Andersen's work is open to the public and informed consent is not necessary.

An Idea For My Language Investigation

One idea that I have for a Language Investigation is based on an experiment that I read about in the book, "The Myth of Mars and Venus". The experiment done, by someone whose name escapes me, was in short, a focus into the Language & Gender of children by getting them in two small groups, one a boys group and one a girls. The researcher then provided each group with a stimulus which was a list of items that each group had to order in terms of necessity in order to survive on a desert island. The researcher wanted to find out whether the boys would be competitive about how to order the list and whether the girls would be much more understanding of each other and be more tentative in the discussion. The researcher’s results however were quite the opposite and the researcher also conducted interviews with the children and the teacher who was present to find out why the girls were so argumentative and why the boys were quite co-operative. I would like to re-create this experiment in order to find out whether this was just an anomalous incident or whether our beliefs of gendered conversation are wrong and that the previous evidence is proof that genders do not follow stereotypes in language. I would also like to conduct to a questionnaire in order to find out what people think the evidence that I will collect and look at their answers in comparison to the data I’ve collected. I would like to do an investigation into Deborah Tannen’s Difference Pairing in Gendered Conversation and I hope my proposed research will shed some light onto this topic.

RIFE Survey

The magazine RIFE (written for young people by young people) have created a survey to find out about people's opinions, especially young people, and their responses to different posters that advise us, their target audience, about issues such as relationships and sex. The survey doesn't take long to fill out and their ideas for posters are really interesting. You can also comment your opinions on any and all the posters anonymously.

surveymonkey.com/s/stuffsurvey 

Something to discuss...

I came across this article which I found interesting. Not only does it refer to a discussion we had in class a while ago but it also contains people's responses to the language of lyrics and the messages it in especially in this song it is lyrics that suggest the writer thinks rape is okay (from this comment people may be able to guess which infamous song I am referring too.) This think this particular article links to power, gender and technology and maybe even language change.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/robin-thicke-mercilessly-trolled-after-askthicke-publicity-stunt-goes-horribly-wrong-9575740.html?dkdk

Inspirational Advert

Everyone should watch this advert, not only does it link to language and discussions we've had in class because it's similar to the advert we looked at about words we associate with women and not men but it really does open your eyes to something I hadn't really noticed before.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XjJQBjWYDTs 

Oxford English Dictionary Terms

Oxford English Dictionary Terms

What do you learn about the reasons that new words come into the English language and how?

From the article I have learned that some of the new terms that we now have in the OED are as a result of borrowing, an example of this is the word cushy which means easy was borrowed from Urdu and was first used by Rudyard Kipling.

Another example is that the word cootie (meaning body louse) originated in the trenches of 1917 but research has shown that coot means “louse” and cooty means “infested with lice” which was used earlier in the war. All these terms ultimately relate to a bird called a coot that is known to be infested with lice and there is a phrase called “lousy as a coot” which dates back to the 19th Century.

Germany was largely the source of loanwords referring to weapons and vehicles such as minenwerfer.
What I found interesting in the text was that although soldiers borrowed words from Germany they mispronounced common French expressions which were informal that they picked up in the frontline.

Which words did you look up and what did they mean? How did they enter the language?

War to end all wars - A war regarded as making other wars unnecessary. It entered our language during the first world war because it was believed that this war would be the one to end all war. It was a slogan that the Allies had and had to stick to it.

Camouflage - Used to disguise or conceal an object. Many soldiers and aeroplanes etc. all used camouflage to keep them from being defeated by the enemy.

Shellshock - Is a psychosomatic disorder identified in the Soldiers of the First World War. The term coined because it is believed the disorder was caused by exposure to shell-fire and the disorder was characterised by severe anxiety attacks and nervous ticks.

Triple Entente - An informal alliance of three powers: Great Britain, France and Russia. They formed the Allied powers of the First World War.

Big Bertha - Soldiers name for a German gun used in the war of 1914 named after Madame Krupp von Bohlen.

Flanders Mud - The muddy conditions which characterise the trenches and battlefields of the First World War and it now symbolises the suffering of the soldiers. It is called Flanders mud because it is a place in Flanders. The war poem “In Flanders Fields” is set in the Flanders mud where the poppies grew which are now a flower that symbolises the Great War.

War Effort - The actions and behaviour of a nation at work. The military and civilians viewed as collectively helping out in the war especially the women how made weapons for the war whilst the men fought.

White Feather - A symbol of cowardice. During the war, white feathers were posted through the mailboxes of those men who did not enlist to help out in the war and the whole neighbourhood knew if you were not enlisted and it was done to embarrass them for not wanting to fight the good fight and die for your country.

Conscription - Compulsory for civilians to take part in the military. This had to be introduced because too many soldiers were dying and not enough people were volunteering to join so it had to be made compulsory.

Aussie - First coined for Australian Soldiers in the First World War.

Propaganda film - A film created to promote the cause of the war and to persuade more men to join the war. This was used before conscription.

Home Front - Civilians at home who took part in the war were considered as fighting on the home front by allowing their husbands and sons to go and fight the war and for creating weapons and keeping morale high.

What do you notice about how the Oxford English Dictionary (OED) editors have organised the list (look at the sub-headings, amount/range of included words etc.)?

The different sub-headings that the OED editors have used are: Names for the war, Military Strategy and Terminology, Life in the Trenches (this list is repeated twice and I’m not sure whether or not this is just a typing error or not but I think it might be an error), Domestic and Civilian Life, The War of Remembrance, The International War, Aerial Warfare, Soldiers speaking French, Military Slang and Political History.The different headings might have been used in this way to help identify which types of people at the time would have used those different terms such as the soldiers would know more of the terminology related to the lexis of warfare rather than just war like those who fight on the home front and there are also headings for different groups of words which would relate to everyone like Names for the war and other groups are likely to represent words that appeared much later like The War of Remembrance.   

What could you use this corpus (collection of words/texts) to investigate?

Using these terms that were first popularised during the first world war, it would be interesting to do an investigation using a questionnaire and asking people which terms they recognise, if they can define them and, if ever, how often do they used different terms in everyday conversation. I have come across many of these terms when I studied GCSE History so it would be interesting to see how other people have come across any terms in the list. Another possible investigation could be to look at texts that people at the time would have produced and look at the frequency in which certain words turned up such as in diary entries from civilians at the time.

What could you link this to or what did it inspire you to go off and read?

The terminology would be interesting to look at in terms of represented speech created in TV Shows or Film Scripts because they may use these terms to help portray to their audience this particular moment in history and by using the terminology coined at the time it may make the programme more realistic. It would also be good to look at if there are any times in which certain words are used in represented speech to explore why through context and to see how they are using the words and for what purpose.    

Phonetically Transcribed Quote

So I have decided to practice my phonetic transcription skills by transcribing one of my favourite quotes into phonetic symbols, comment what you think the quote is below this post. 

bi ðə tʃendʒ ju wɑnt tu si ɪn ðə wərld - məhɑtmə gɑndi 

Editing Transcripts

Using new transcription conventions I have learnt I have used them to transcribe the two texts that I looked at previously more effectively. 

Transcription Conventions
(.) - micro pause
(2) - the number indicates how long a pause
[_] - unsure of what was said
(_) - paralinguistic features
↓ - falling intonation
↑ - rising intonation
_: - speaker
/ - overlap
[...] - omitted material 
so:::: - length of sound produced

Transcript 1 - Why women should not be allowed to vote video

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0_8PPc6FPL4 

1:35 seconds

J: it’s your friend J the preacher here (adjustment of glasses) (.) uh:: why women should not be allowed to vote↓ (2) number one (.) just because it would get ‘em angry (.) these feminists need to be outraged by men (.) uh: these women are out of control (.) they’re out of their place there there are some Godly holy women i’m not talking about them (2) i’m talking about the rest of the 99 per cent of the other that um:: (2) rebellious uh:::: just uh:: (.) loud mouth outspoken (2) uh they think they’re in control they think they’re equal with a man (2) God’s place uh is for a woman uh::: to be on submission (hand gestures towards the left and laughs) but to end point number one is (.) is uh it’s it’s worth telling women they shouldn’t vote just to see them go (gasps dramatically to imitate that of a woman’s reaction and holds for 4 seconds) and and you know if they do that long enough uh::: (2) i told a female a couple of times (2) they were staring their mouth was open (gasps dramatically again but for a second) (.) and if you do that (.) another 45 seconds (.) you’ll break the world’s record for a woman being quiet (chuckles) (.) call the new york times (.) hallelujah↓ (2) uh so it’s worth it just to see the look on their face and then number two they need to be told no (3) most women aren’t told no so it’s a good thing↓ (.) secondly though the bible’s place for a woman is to be in submission i know there was queens and all that but that’s (.) that’s the exception folks in fact in the new testament church (.) says a woman has to be silent in the assembly i know that puts a jab into you a feminists (.) so it’s worth saying it twice (.) so women are to be silent in the assembly [first readings 1434] they don’t have to give a testament or even have to ask a question the bible says [...]

Transcript 2 - Friends: The one with the Male Nanny

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9hmWCH3JXqU

2:33 seconds

Sandy: i really do understand how hard it’s gotta be to leave your child at home with another person (2) i mean (.) it’s like leaving behind a piece of your heart↓

Rachel: Sandy (2) that’s exactly what it is

Ross: Are you gay↑

Rachel: Ross↑ (3) i’m sorry that’s our Ross (.) he’s just mr shoots straight from the hip (mimics the sound effect of guns firing whilst pretending to hold two guns)

Sandy: it’s okay i get that a lot doing what i do (.) but i am straight (.) uh: I’m engaged actually (.) her names Deliah/

Rachel:/ oh that’s pretty

Ross: so you’re you’re just like a: (2) guy who’s a nanny

Sandy: i realise how (.) it’s a bit unorthodox for some people (.) but (2) i really believe that the most satisfying thing you can do with your life (.) is take care of a child↓

Ross: oh okay:::

Sandy: like at my last job (2) i met Daniel (.) when he was three weeks old (.) and i got to watch him grow into this awesome person (3) when i left i said (.) i’ll see you soon (.) and he said to me (2) scdandy↓ (3) that was his name for me/

Rachel:/ oh okay

Sandy: i’ll see you everyday (.) right (.) in (.) he (starts crying)

Ross: yeah:: (.) kids say all kinds of crap

(Emma starts crying)

Rachel: oh God (.) she must she must need her diaper changed

Sandy: oh i can i can take care of it (.) if you want

Rachel: oh oh that would be great

Sandy: uh:: (.) just so you know (.) these dinosaur toys (.) aren't really age appropriate

Ross: they’re mine↓

Sandy: oh:: (3) also not (.) age appropriate

Rachel: i love him i love him i (.) love:: him

Ross: oh come (.) Rach (2) he’s a guy

Rachel: so↑ (2) he’s smart (.) he’s qualified (.) give me one good reason why we shouldn’t try him out↑

Ross: because (2) it’s (.) weird↑

Rachel: why↑ (Ross babbles) wow::: (2) i never looked at it that way↑

Ross: what what what kind of job is that for a man (.) a nanny↑ (2) i mean it’s like if a woman wanted to be a/

Rachel: /yes↑

Ross: king↑