Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Infant Directed Speech And Its Affects
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
From the moment an infant is born, it is bombarded with sounds that the brain attempts to categorize. Within the first year of life alone, infants already show preferences for phonologically legal structures in their native language when compared to illegal consonant structures (Friederici et al., 1993). While a personal lexicon is not developed until later in childhood, the early stages, primarily the recognition of word segmentation, begins within the first year of life. The topic of what the important factors are in babies perceiving speech and building a preference to their own language, however, is shrouded in mystery. For instance, Friedrici et al.’s study on phonotactic knowledge of word boundaries gave results that indicate the combination of simple context cues as well as the use of infant directed speech (IDS) allows babies to recognize phonotactically legal structures by nine months. However, McMurray et al.’s results directly contrast those findings by arguing that IDS simply causes a slower rate of speech but does not highlight contrasts between segmented sounds, nor does it enhance phonetic cues. Infant directed speech is a “speech register characterized by simpler sentences, a slower rate, and more variable prosody” (McMurray et al., 2012). While there is controversy regarding the beneficial factors of infant directed speech, most studies indicate that this register is extremely beneficial for infant speech perception in the first year of life.
In Cooper et al.’s study on newborn and one-month-old infants, he investigated infant preference for IDS as opposed to adult directed speech (ADS). The experimenters tested this by placing an infant in between two identical checkerboards. When the infant looked in one direc...
... middle of paper ...
...o they had just seen and the other was a novel face. The people in the videos were each Caucasian women and each actress did a video speaking in IDS register and in ADS register. Each infant heard only one of the two registers and it was randomly selected which actress and which voice register was used in the video. Results indicated that infants looked longer at the face, showing familiarity and preference, of the woman in the video after she spoke to them using IDS. However, infants actually showed a preference for the novel face when compared with the face of the woman who spoke in an ADS register. These results once again showcase how important infant directed speech is to directing infant attention and therefore enhance learning. This also shows that IDS has a social aspect that allows infants to feel they want to recognize IDS speakers more than ADS speakers.
In an adult interaction, the child I observed was more engaged with the people around him through infant-directed speech. His mom and I were basically called his name by rhythm, and he responded to us by smiling and excited. As I observe in terms of turn-taking, I realize Manden responds to the people around him after everyone is done talking to him. For example, he looked at the person who he believed was talking to him. After the person is done, he will smile or laugh.
This experiment is similar to a correlational design, however, the subjects in this experiment were chosen specifically because of the language they had been predisposed to; their characteristics were extremely similar. Moon compared preexisting “treatments,” the languages they were exposed to before birth. This research design gives a real world sense in terms of how a baby would react if they were to hear a language they had not been exposed to prior. This is a major strength of the natural experiment design. Although, Moon still determined a relationship between the variables; the variables being the language babies were susceptible to before being born and how they reacted to the vowels in each. A limitation of the natural experiment is that the findings may be caused by things other than the language they were exposed to. Moon states that “Additional studies will be necessary to examine whether the results reported here can be generalized to other vowels and languages” (2013). The findings of this research article support the hypothesis that babies are familiar with the language they are predisposed to. Moon writes, “The effect of language experience was significant (F1,75 = 4.95, p = 0.029), with a greater number of sucks overall during the non-native (MNon-native = 7.1, SD = 2.9) than during the native language (MNative = 6.5, SD = 3.3). The results show that the native prototype and its variants received fewer sucking responses than the non-native prototype and its variants” (2013). This supports the idea that babies understand language. They have already started the process of learning language. The news article does report that it is important to keep in mind that the language we speak to a pregnant belly affects the language foundation of the baby. Mann’s article correctly presents the information of the research article. We must keep in mind that babies are aware of language they are
Especially for infants and children, loss of hearing at such a young age can be detrimental for a developing child (Williams & Jacobs, 2009). The first two years of life are the most important as they hold critical milestones of language acquisition (Zumach, Chenault, Anteunis, and Gerrits, 2011). If these milestones are not met, then the subsequent ones will be harder and take longer to learn. The loss of hearing in young individuals can alter the perception of words and sounds, and this can lead to a difficulty in learning language (Williams & Jacobs, 2009). For example, the child will not be able to determine the difference between similar sounds, which negatively affects speech perception, which then leads to the inability to interpret and acquire language later on (Williams & Jacobs,
This research is intended to analyze the transcript of a child’s speech. The target child is a female named Majorie who is 2 years and 3 months old. The transcript is from The Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology. The linguistic aspects that will be examined are the phonological processes of the child including speech errors, syllable shapes, and her phonetic inventory consisting of manner and place of articulation. Included in the analysis will be her stage and development of lexical knowledge and what words she uses.
The question as to whether television is a good way to teach children has always been hotly debated. There has been studies conducted that demonstrate that school age children can benefit from educational programs geared toward their age range. Some elementary schools in the United States have implement educational shows into their daily classes; even high schools and colleges use educational videos as part of their lectures and many say they are beneficial. Yet there is a new trend that seems to be sweeping across America; infant targeted media products. These new shows are now targeting children as young as 12 months, telling parents that it will help their child develop faster and ahead of their peers. It’s an appeal that no parent could pass up because everyone what’s their child to be the next Einstein. The question however is do these products actually work? This is the question DeLoache et al. (2010) and Krcmar, Grela, and Lin (2007) attempt to answer in their research into media and infant learning. Both studies focus on infant related media shows vs patent interaction, which learning style works the best, and if the claims by marketers about the effectiveness of their shows hold some or any validity.
The most popular method for educators at the centre to build on children’s comments and conversations is by talking with them, particularly by talking through processes or experiences as they are happening. With infants this process of talking through experiences and processes seems more like narration. Spending time in the infant room feels solidary as I talk to myself for most of the day, however it is important to remind myself that the child is learning through my one-sided conversations. Baby’s language develops socially, they listen to those speaking around them and then begin to internalise the words that are high frequency (Clarke, 2004). As they develop their vocabulary grows as they build their repertoire through socialisation. Research
Denis Burnham is a professor and Director of the MARCS Auditory Laboratories at the University of Western Sydney. This research article focuses primarily on Infant-Directed Speech (IDS) and Pet-Directed Speech (PDS). Dr. Burnham hypothesized that humans speak in manners specific to their intended audience and that mothers, in most languages, hyperarticulate vowels to assist their babies in attaining native language vowels. In this study the pitch, affect, and vowel hyperarticulation of twelve mothers was investigated via the use of a lapel microphone. The mothers were asked to play with the words of three provided toys (sheep, shoe, and shark). They directed this speech in fifteen minute increments throughout their day to their infant, pet, and an adult. Dr. Burnham was investigating the similarities and differences that existed in pet-directed, infant-directed, and adult-directed speech. The results of the test proved that infant and pet directed speech are indeed similar and yet quite different from adult-directed speech. Mothers hyperarticulate vowels when speaking with their infants and not when speaking with their pets. Dr. Burnham believes that this occurs because mothers take into consideration both the linguistic and emotional needs of their audience during discourse.
“Hello, Welcome to Build-A-Baby Workshop where we help you build the perfect baby. Here is where you can choose the child’s gender, eye and hair color, height, and much more. Let’s get started!”
After having read Mercer, the textbook, and six other sources, I agree with the argument that baby talk or infant direct talk is beneficial for language development. Baby talk is natural and naturally occurs when in the presence of a child. I am not sure on baby talk being detrimental or slowing down language development. No source actually stated that baby talk slowed down development but prefer caregivers to use adult direct talk with infant to increase vocabulary. Furthermore, my teenage years I was able to grow up with infants, my nieces, and their parents, my parent, and even me unknowingly used baby talk. As well, as my nieces aged their language followed supporting what Mercer was stating that language follows age and baby talk will
Child Directed Speech What is Child Directed Speech? It is the theory of language development of young children aged between 1 year old and 4 years old. There are three key features in the development of child speech: Phonological: · Speak slower, clearer pronunciation · More pauses, especially between phrases and sentences · Higher pitch · Exaggerated intonation and stress Lexis: · Simpler, more restricted vocabulary · Diminutive forms (e.g. 'doggie') · Concrete language, referring to objects in the child's immediate environment Grammar: · Simpler constructions · Frequent use of imperatives · High degree of repetition · Frequent questions · Use of personal names instead of pronouns (e.g. 'Mummy' not 'I'). The effects of child speech; phonological development is used as a way to progressively build up a child speech development, simple constructions and vocabulary gradually increase a child's need to speak.
When infants are acquiring their first language, adults speak to them differently than they would speak to other adults. This kind of speech is formally named “Infant-Directed speech”, but is also referred to as “baby talk” and “motherese”. Infant-Directed (ID) speech has several properties that distinguish it from Adult-Directed (AD) speech. There is a debate over whether or not ID speech helps infants acquire language or is a hindrance in their language acquisition process Several experiments have been performed to test the effect of ID speech on infants’ language learning. These experiments all used different properties of ID speech. Overall, the experiments have proved that ID speech helps infants acquire language better than AD speech for different reasons. Further studies can be performed on ID speech to learn more about its effects on second language acquisition and on different ages.
There are three main theories of child language acquisition; Cognitive Theory, Imitation and Positive Reinforcement, and Innateness of Certain Linguistic Features (Linguistics 201). All three theories offer a substantial amount of proof and experiments, but none of them have been proven entirely correct. The search for how children acquire their native language in such a short period of time has been studied for many centuries. In a changing world, it is difficult to pinpoint any definite specifics of language because of the diversity and modification throughout thousands of millions of years.
Babies begin to develop language skills long before they embark on speaking. The foundation for learning language begins before birth by the baby listening and recognizing his/her mother’s heartbeat and voice in the womb. “In a study, researchers played a 2-minute recording of a popular Chinese poem to 60 pregnant women and their unborn babies while monitoring total heart rates. Heart rates rose while the babies listened to their own mother's voice, but they fell and stayed lower while the stranger recited. Obviously, the babies were paying close attention, leading the researchers to suspect they were not only recognizing morn, but beginning to learn the ins and outs of language” (Dawidowska and Harrar (2003))....
Still today, it is the commonly held belief that children acquire their mother tongue through imitation of the parents, caregivers or the people in their environment. Linguists too had the same conviction until 1957, when a then relatively unknown man, A. Noam Chomsky, propounded his theory that the capacity to acquire language is in fact innate. This revolutionized the study of language acquisition, and after a brief period of controversy upon the publication of his book, Aspects of the Theory of Syntax, in 1964, his theories are now generally accepted as largely true. As a consequence, he was responsible for the emergence of a new field during the 1960s, Developmental Psycholinguistics, which deals with children’s first language acquisition. He was not the first to question our hitherto mute acceptance of a debatable concept – long before, Plato wondered how children could possibly acquire so complex a skill as language with so little experience of life. Experiments have clearly identified an ability to discern syntactical nuances in very young infants, although they are still at the pre-linguistic stage. Children of three, however, are able to manipulate very complicated syntactical sentences, although they are unable to tie their own shoelaces, for example. Indeed, language is not a skill such as many others, like learning to drive or perform mathematical operations – it cannot be taught as such in these early stages. Rather, it is the acquisition of language which fascinates linguists today, and how it is possible. Noam Chomsky turned the world’s eyes to this enigmatic question at a time when it was assumed to have a deceptively simple explanation.
· Children respond physically to spoken language, and adult learners learn better if they do that too.