Response to Deb Roy's study

Fri Mar 18 18:24:37 UTC 2011

Thank you for your comment, Cathy!

I also just got to thinking that Deb's other point was that they were able to map the physical location in which learning took place. "Water" was centered in the kitchen while "bye" occurred at the door.

This makes a case for teaching a language in situ - i.e., if you are learning words about picking greens on the tundra, then you should be out in the tundra. If you are learning words for skinning a seal, then you should be skinning a seal. This might be the basis for increased funding for language camps out on the landscape, which can and should take place year-round. A classroom is an impersonal, not as socially or culturally significant, place to learn.

Again, this may already be in the literature . . .
Thanks,
Deanna

On 3/18/11 10:22 AM, "Cathy's hotmail account" <chimiskwew at HOTMAIL.COM> wrote:

I agree Deanna, I am also learning as an adult and note that that fluent speakers tend to overcorrect adults learning versus encouraging children which has a negative impact on learning. Adults rarely have a such a nurturing environment to learn and fluent speakers are unaware of their responses as to them, it should be relatively easy for us to learn! but I have also found that once a fluent speaker attempts to learn a new second language as an adult, they soon realize it is not that easy to learn to speak a language with new spoken sounds and rhythms  that unfamiliar. It takes encouragement and patience and repetition as even children must practice hearing and trying to speak words before they master it and it does take some time! When fluent speakers experience what we as second language learners go through by attempting to learn a new language, they are much more in tune with a student's perspective and learning curve.

I find that refraining from English replies and instead acknowledging they comprehend what a new speaker is attempting to say boosts confidence tremendously versus a response indicating a new speaker not have yet achieved perfect pronunciation during initial speaking attempts can be very disheartening given how long it takes to even speak simple phrases for individuals! Often new speakers are reluctant to speak again as the bar of speaking ability has been raised unreasonably high so future attempts are affected. I also find that people are far too rigid dialectically however I understand they are proud of their language but again, they do not realize the negative impact these kinds of responses have on the confidence level of a new speaker.

Confidence in speaking is a mandatory component of being able to gain speaking ability. Without confidence, an individual will remain with the ability to understand a language but never be speak it to others which is tantamount to being mute!  I don't think that either children or adults could learn to speak well if they faced negative responses every time they attempted to speak!

From: Kingston, Deanna <mailto:deanna.kingston at OREGONSTATE.EDU><mailto:deanna.kingston at OREGONSTATE.EDU>
Sent: Friday, March 18, 2011 10:51 AM
To: ILAT at LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU
Subject: Re: [ILAT] Response to Deb Roy's study

Hi all,
I am not a linguist and I do not know the literature about language acquisition, so my comment is based upon my own experience with trying to learn two different languages as an adult.  It also is based on my experience in having to teach my son in other ways due to his Asperger's Syndrome (potty training, comes to mind).

I am taking Neski's statement, which is his paraphrase of Deb Roy's point, which is while the parent is teaching the language to the child, the child is also teaching the parent how to teach the language.

Through trial and error, I have figured out the most effective ways of teaching my son, so he has taught me which methods work and which don't.

When I tried to speak the Iñupiaq to elders in my community (King Island Iñupiat) taught at UAF in the mid-90s, the elders several times would reply in English: "We don't say that. Those people up north (i.e., Barrow, which was the dialect we were being taught) say that." I was shut down and told that what I was taught through a formal education system was not right.

I contrast that with how we teach language to babies. There is constant positive encouragement and tremendous patience (i.e., six months go to from "gaga" to "water", taking into account the development of the baby's muscular development in his mouth).

As an adult, at least in my experience, I haven't received the constant positive encouragement nor patience. So, it seems to me that creating such a learning environment, with positive feedback loops, would be one key to language acquistion. I know it would help me!! : )
Deanna

On 3/17/11 2:46 PM, "Neskie Manuel" <neskiem at GMAIL.COM> wrote:

Weytk Everyone,

I disagree with parts of the  comment that was highlighted.  I think
his line of inquiry was very  useful and presented in a good way.
What Deb Roy appeared to be saying is  there are feedback loops
involved in child-caregiver in language  acquisition.

What I heard Deb Roy say is something like, my  statement.

The parent is teaching the language to the child, and the  child is
teaching the parent how to be a teacher of the  language.

What are all the details behind this I don't know and I don't  really
care.  I just want to know the important parts.  I think  us as
Secwepemc people knew this and expressed it in the statement  'children
are the closest to the creator'.  As secwepemc people we had  something
to learn from children.  This was our feedback loop we  created.

Different pedagogies produce different feedback loops, some  are better
at others, all require energy and work to keep them  going.

When I hear the word feedback loop, I think of differential  equations
and large scale dynamical and chaotic systems.  Here I want  to perform
a thought experiment.   Let's say you could  mathematically model
language acquisition with some set of differential  equations and you
want language acquistiion to increase.  This set of  differential
equations will behave something like weather, in that it will  be
sensitive to initial conditions, and boundary values.

What this  says to me is that we have to pay close attention to the
initial conditions  we find ourselves in an what is going on in the
environment around language  acquisition.

I like your two questions Susan.  I think a  "mathematical" look might
be helpful.  I would like to respond to them  now, but I have to run
off.

On Thu, Mar 17, 2011 at 11:40 AM, Susan  Penfield
<susan.penfield at gmail.com> wrote:
> A comment from Rex  Sprouse ( in italics and posted elsewhere) is worth
> considering in  this context.
>
>      Less than 5 minutes  ago: Deb Roy appears to equate the acquisition of a
> word with the  first (or with the consistent?) production of an adult-like
>  pronunciation of the   word. However, words are much more  complex mental
> objects, relating an abstract representation of sound,  grammatical category
> (noun, verb, etc.), morpho-syntactic features,  semantic features, pragmatic
> features, etc. No matter how  sophisticated the technology used for recording
> the child's speech,  data about production alone can tell us about only one
> (and I must  say, for me, the least interesting) aspect of this cognitively
> complex  process.
>
>        On a broader  level, what I found disappointing about the talk is that
> it was  difficult to identify anything like a clear research question behind
>  the collection of massive     amounts of data. This  is a very central and
> very divisive matter within current linguistics:  Recent technology has made
> it easier to amass huge amounts of  linguistic data. However, in the absent
> of theoretically motivated  research questions, it is difficult for me to buy
> into the notion that  this represents genuine progress.
>
> -My thoughts: What I find  interesting, considering the ILAT audience, is how
> very little we  still know about language acquisition (first and second)  in
> the  context of revitalization.
>  I would like to know about any  targeted research studies that would be
> aimed at better understanding  the process.  We have teaching methods
> (immersion,  Master-Apprentice) which we all know are working in some
> contexts --  but how, specifically?  And, what might we learn from more
>  focused studies, that raise clear questions, which actually might improve  or
> help us better understand what it takes to help people learn  in
> non-traditional, less formal, contexts?
>
> Just trying  to wrap my thoughts around all of this...
>
> S.-
>  **********************************************************************************************
>  Susan D. Penfield, Ph.D.
>
> Research Coordinator, Center for  Educational Resources in Culture, Language
> and Literacy  (CERCLL),
> Faculty affiliate in English,  Linguistics, Language,  Reading and Culture
> Second Language Acquisition and Teaching Ph.D.  Program (SLAT),
> American Indian Language Development Institute  (AILDI)
> The Southwest Center
> University of Arizona,
>  Tucson, Arizona 85721
>
>
>

--
Neskie  Manuel
http://neskiemanuel.ath.cx
Tel: (250)  679-2821
SIP: mac at sip.ca2.link2voip.com
Skype: neskiemanuel
Twitter:  @neskiem
Identi.ca: http://identi.ca/neskie

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/ilat/attachments/20110318/bb905002/attachment.htm>