Child Language Acquisition Essay

Linguistically, both of these infants be at incompatible stages of their language development. The lexical choices made by each tiddler can show what stage they are at in create their language and applying it to situations and conversations. Sophies part of the pronounce Bissie, meaning biscuit shows that she hasnt instead a been able to pronounce the sound therefore makes an alternative word up that sounds similar, that is understandable by the kidskins carer/parent, but is easier to hypothesise than biscuit.Other lexical choices Sophie uses, tend to be commanding run-in, such as me want No. As the child is young, she realises to get what she wants she has to withdraw for it and by using the commanding delivery, she is airing the fact that she wants something to her parent/carer. check to Hallidays functions, this language is regulatory, as well as being instrumental. She is despotic the behavior of others (telling Fran that she doesnt want to tidy the dolls house) and she is obtaining material needs (wanting a biscuit).Katharine has grasped the concept of pronouns. She uses the personal pronoun I to refer to herself Now Ill do Jason, and she can even use we as the collective term for her and her mamamy together We do Jason again shall we? Sophies sentences return basic corpse structure to them, as she voices what she needs to say, in the simplest way to say it. They are quite short, and to the point. Her language acquisition is at the stage where she knows how to communicate, speak and use words in a simple sentence to voice what she wants.Mary keep down me, meaning Can Mary come and play with me, is a very simple form of the sentence, but lock up communicates to her mum what she wants to do. She uses me instead of I to refer to herself. This confusion of pronoun usage is common among young children. Some of the words she uses, she omits the prefixes of the sounds, such as nother instead of another. This makes it easier to say, and s hortens what she says. Katharine on the other hand, who is convoluted in an activity, is communicating with her mum using more structured sentences.Her mum is constantly speculative what she is doing (Skinners theory of reinforcement and imitation ( receipt)) Wheres his body? then Katharine replies Deres his legs, touching his mouf. The pronunciation of the words isnt as important as the fact that she is constructing sentences and eventing questions herself. A word such as there has a consonant cluster at the offshoot which is hard to say for young children, therefore they change the pronunciation, so it still sounds like there but is easier to pronounce.She understood the question her mum was asking, and genuinely understood it was a question, maybe because of the intonation her mum wouldve had in her voice. This shows that she is undefended enough with language to turn take, in a small conversation with her mum, talking about a subject/activity. This shows that her language acquisition is close to more ripe than Sophies, as Sophie doesnt turn take, she doesnt answer questions either, she asks them and is at the stage of using wherefore as a questioning word.Sophies conversation with her mum doesnt flow like Katharines, it is dependable of statements and commands rather than a question answer structure. Turn taking is likely in both these conversations as the parents are initiating the conversation and getting the children to talk, do no interruptions. Sophies utterance lengths are longer than Katharines on average, but the fact that Katharine is involved in an activity has an affect on her utterances, due to concentration. Comparing the utterance lengths, Katharines are more advanced with the syntax structure, as her sentences make more grammatical sense than Sophies.This doesnt make Sophie incorrect in her structure, she is just at a several(predicate) stage of language acquisition than Katharine, and she is in the middle of developing her se ntences. get along isnt a factor in language development, as each child is different. Katharines mother uses tag questions, such as isnt it? This upholds Katharine to answer her mum. Katharine does also use tag questions herself, to get a response from her mum, shall we. She has probably learnt how to use tag questions from listening to the way her mum speaks.This is quite advanced for a child as it shows they use a different way of getting a response, rather than just saying why or using commands. She also uses encouraging sounds, which is back channel behaviour uhuh and mmhu, to show she is listening and taking in what Katharine is saying. Sophies carer/parent just doesnt use tag questions and neither does Sophie. The conversation between the child and parent/carer is very simple and uses statements rather than questions, encouraging Sophie to talk.It is just a short conversation, with Sophie controlling it, rather then the parent/carer trying to encourage her to talk and say things. Of course, the pragmatics behind the conversations are for the parents/carers to get the children to speak and foster their knowledge and understanding of the language. It is merely to get them to practice speaking, so they usurp language. There is a large difference between the two conversations, as they are in different environments (the contexts are different), with the children taking part in different situations.This is a factor which affects their language use and the way they use it in the context. After considering all of the factors to do with both conversations, I have come to the conclusion that Katharine is more linguistically developed and seems to be at a more advanced stage of language acquisition than Sophie. Katharine has a wider knowledge of the language and applies it to a conversation better than Sophie, as her sentences are constructed better and flow well.