24/7 Customer support here

D a) Child language acquisition

   According to Kroll (1981), the child – aged 7.10 – falls into the age bracket of the second stage of learning to write, the Consolidation Phase:
• able to write without a model to copy from;
• able to transcribe.
In just over a year, the child will enter the age bracket for the Differentiation Phase:
• able to separate the functions of speech and writing;
• beginning to develop a personal writing style.
From simply glancing at the child’s written sample, which is laid out in the form of a transcript, it is evident that she is calling on her ability to transcribe words spoken, and has decided that a transcription is the most appropriate method of writing about what she can remember from our ‘interview’. She has not used a transcription model to write this and understand that where quoting what someone else has said within her own moment of speech, she does not need to include their words as though they had been present, thus:
‘cris say two please’ Her sentences are kept brief, indicating a lack of ability to form a complex sentence. Repetition over three consecutive sentences of the introduction ‘It is’ suggests that she uses this phrase as a sort of peg upon which she can easily hang the rest of the sentence: ‘It is’ eliminates the necessity for co-ordinating conjunctions, for example a more advanced writer may have said:
‘It is on North Road and is Ј1.80 to get in’
She does, however, demonstrate a simple ability with co-ordinating conjunctions in the following sentences:
‘two go in and give it to a lady’
‘I meat (meet) my friend and talk to them’
‘Then we go to the bar and get a drink’
She is able to use this simple conjunction, which can only link two clauses of equal value, but gives no indication of knowing how to use any other.
In her speech, she frequently says ‘and’, sometimes coupling it with ‘then’ showing a method of making her spoken description progress chronologically:
‘and then (…) we dance to a few songs’ (lines 11/12)
‘and (…) then (…) we just (.) go around’ (line 12)

   While generally speech unfolds in time, while writing unfolds in space, she has selected the dimension of time as a structure around which to base both media – perhaps this is because she produced the written sample after the ‘interview’.
There are some grammatical errors in the child’s written sample that do not occur in her speech, namely identifying the necessity of verb agreement:
‘I meat (meet) my friend and talk to them’ (written)
‘I meet my friends (.) Chris (…) and Kelly and Alice’ (spoken, lines 6/7)
It seems she has unconsciously acquired this element of language knowledge, but has not yet learned to represent it in a written medium. The same lack of agreement can be seen where she writes:
‘cris say to please’ (instead of ‘says’)

   From this example, it is evident that the child has not fully realised the third stage of learning to write insofar as clearly differentiating between speech and narrative: there are no speech marks. Where she indicates that someone is speaking with the word ‘say’, the omission of appropriate punctuation suggests that she is not fully aware of how to differentiate between the two. However, this may simply be and indication of poor punctuation skills, as she often fails to include full stops or capitalisation for ending one sentence and beginning another one:
‘It is Ј1.80 to get in this boy called cris say two please’
and ending words ‘amy’, ‘disco’ and ‘dirnks’ (drinks) are not punctuated. She does not use commas at all.

D. b) Metalinguistic awareness

   There is evidence of metalinguistic development in the child’s text and speech: in her written sample she began by writing:
‘this boy say’
She crossed out ‘say’ and added some extra information:
‘called cris’
so that the corrected sentence reads:
‘this boy called cris say’
The child succeeds in being specific, indicating an awareness that the reader does not share the same background knowledge as her. The pause after she says:
‘I meet my friends’ (line 6)
before introducing their names further illustrates this metalinguistic awareness: she reminds herself that the interviewer does not have the same knowledge of the world as she does, and does not know who her friends are.
The most striking difference between both subjects’ spoken and written samples is the differing use of language. The spoken samples contain voiced and unvoiced pauses, like:
‘Well (…) erm’ (child, line 3)
‘Mmm (…)’ (child, line 18)
‘(.) and stuff (.)’ (adult, lines 27/28)
There is repetition – excluding a list-type format, as can be found in the adult’s spoken sample, lines 23-29 – where the subject is struggling for something to say or thinking about how to phrase something, or what they are going to say next:
‘get something like eight (.) eight and a half grand’ (adult, lines 17/18)
‘it’s (.) it’s one pound eighty’ (child, line 4)
‘for th- (pause) for the songs’ (child, line 21)

   When required to transfer their spoken topic into writing, however, both subjects demonstrate an awareness of the necessity to present the information in a way specific to the written medium. As mentioned earlier in this essay, the child writer has presented the topic of speaking about a disco in a transcript form, deeming this to be the most appropriate presentation because she has consciously linked the interview with her written piece.

   The child’s written sample, however, reads somewhat stiffly with repetitive ‘and’ linking almost every sentence together:
‘this boy called cris say two please & two go in and give it to a lady’
‘I meat my friend and talk to them. Then we go to the bar and get a dirnk’
Because the child is still learning how to write and without a model, she does not yet have the ability to select an appropriate tone for her intended audience.
Both writers use Standard English in their written samples. Where pronunciation of different words can be seen in the IPA versions of words, neither subject represents their accent or dialect in writing. This is basic metalinguistic awareness: both have learned to write in Standard English because of its wide accessibility. Discourse markers and pauses are almost entirely omitted. Neither use phrases particular to their dialect, suggesting an awareness of the more formal nature of writing, for example in the adult’s samples:
Spoken Written
‘you get a million pounds’ (line 16) ‘If I were to win a million pounds’

A similar element is present in the child’s samples in the form of spoken contraction, but more formally fully written:
Spoken Written
‘it’s at Roy Smith’s up (…) stairs (…) it’s on North Road’ (line 4) ‘It is at roy smiths up stiers. It is on north road.’

   Despite the noticeably more formal element both writers use in comparison to their speech, the adult indicates a more complex awareness of audience: the written sample is not over formalised because of the inclusion of perceivably subjective words and contractions such as:
‘I could easily live’
‘wouldn’t exactly have to worry’
‘I’d probably’
There is no overly complex accounting or financial jargon, showing that he knows that the reader does or may not have a thorough understanding of the field.
The child demonstrates a notion of written ‘correctness’: where the adult de-formalises numbers by writing them as ‘10%’, ‘Ј100,000’ and ‘30’, the child started by writing ‘2’ and corrected her sentence to:
‘this boy called cris say two please’.
Her spoken sample demonstrates the same metalinguistic development in terms of a notion of ‘correctness’:
‘they do them (.) those songs’ (line 20)
Evidently, both writers are consciously aware o the differences between discourse and writing, and of the required ‘standards’ that exist when writing but not when speaking. (To an extent: refer to point about them/those, child’s transcript, line 20.) By comparing the spoken and written samples of both, it is clear to see where the adult’s metalinguistic awareness is further developed in terms of confidence with the topic (or perhaps with the interviewer and the presence of a microphone?) – the adult has fewer pauses; with structure of writing – the child relied on a strict transcript model where the adult simply sat and typed a paragraph; and in selecting a tone and lexical field suitable to the intended audience.

   Suggested implications for teaching
1. It is important for teachers to differentiate between dialect and the misconception of ‘substandard’. Cultural diversity is important within the UK and there is a general consensus that teachers should not correct their students’ speech, for example pronunciation different to their own – glottal stops are most notoriously corrected by adults!
2. Children take time to develop a sophisticated and appropriate writing style, and progress through at least three stages: bla bla and bla. Teachers should be aware of the approximate age brackets for these stages as well as what the stages consist of in terms of learning and capacity.
3. Until children have naturally progressed into their next stage of learning how to write, teachers should carefully assess – in light of the stage, age bracket and individual ability of the child – to what extent they should correct their written work. To aid learning and promote progression, suggestions and alternatives may be a better approach than straight correction.
4. Promote clarity and variation in communication to move toward a sophisticated communicative ability; raise awareness or empathy or others’ knowledge of the world and their own chosen topics of discourse and writing.

1  2

BACK TO ENGLISH LANGUAGE