LINGUIST List 12.2448

Wed Oct 3 2001

Review: Nelson et al, Children's Lang, vol 10 (2nd rev)

Editor for this issue: Terence Langendoen <terrylinguistlist.org>


What follows is another discussion note contributed to our Book Discussion Forum. We expect these discussions to be informal and interactive; and the author of the book discussed is cordially invited to join in.

If you are interested in leading a book discussion, look for books announced on LINGUIST as "available for discussion." (This means that the publisher has sent us a review copy.) Then contact Simin Karimi at siminlinguistlist.org or Terry Langendoen at terrylinguistlist.org.


Directory

  • Julia Gillen, Review: Nelson et al. Children's Language Vol. 10

    Message 1: Review: Nelson et al. Children's Language Vol. 10

    Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2001 08:10:42 EDT
    From: Julia Gillen <j.gillenmmu.ac.uk>
    Subject: Review: Nelson et al. Children's Language Vol. 10


    Nelson, Keith, Ayhan Aksu-Ko�, and Carolyn E. Johnson, ed. (2001) Children's Language, Volume 10: Developing Narrative and Discourse Competencies. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, hardback ISBN 0-8058-3293-9, xx+175pp, $45.00 ($22.50 prepaid).

    Julia Gillen, Institute of Education and Centre for Human Communication, Manchester Metropolitan University, UK

    [Another review of this book can be found at http://linguistlist.org/issues/12/12-1300.html --Eds.]

    The chapters in this volume deal with discourse development, with an emphasis on narrative, from ages 1 1/2 to 10, and ranging over seven languages. They were developed from 7 of the 276 presentations of the Seventh International Congress of the International Association for the Study of Child Language (IASCL) in Istanbul, Turkey, in July 1996.

    It is worth quoting the first paragraph of the editors' introduction, as a succinct account of the aims and coverage of this book. This reviewer might have preferred the insertion of a careful "some" as the seventh word:

    "The chapters in this volume reflect recent directions of thinking in the area of children's discourse development, with an emphasis on narratives. Each contribution shows that empirical work in the last decade has focused on finer distinctions regarding the effects on development of discourse genres, different elicitation techniques and communicative contexts, literacy and schooling and, of course, age, language, and culture. Each chapter addresses issues concerning the interrelations between social, cognitive, and affective capacities and processes in discourse. Finally, each raises theoretically challenging questions regarding how and when new representations are constructed to support new complexities in narrative and discourse more generally. A comprehensive theoretical frame calls for a conceptualization of discourse as an interactional space that promotes the development of higher level metalinguistic, metarepresentational, and metapragmatic operations." (p. xi)

    After spending months with this book, this reviewer has decided that writing at the end of this review an overall evaluation of the book, that is stating to what degree the promises above are kept, would not be the most appropriate response to this undoubtedly key text. The editors were enabled to leave the audience unspecified, for this series is probably known to most child language researchers, especially those with a strong psycholinguistic background. The book, as the famous curate's egg, is 'good in parts'. I feel that most readers would concur with that opinion, although which parts are good and which less good, will not receive general agreement. Such judgements will depend upon the reader's own theoretical and methodological assumptions. Dealing with each chapter I endeavour to give information and evaluation that is explicit in its subjectivity. I aim to enable the reader to judge not only whether the field of investigation is relevant to their own interests, but the nature of the underlying paradigm operationalized by the author. All chapters are competent examples of their kind; no lack of painstaking work or sloppiness in presentation is discernible, but judgements as to the ultimate worth or value of the endeavour will, I believe, vary from reader to reader. In my opinion, the area of child language research would benefit from greater engagement with cognate areas in the social sciences that encourage reflexivity: from the 'new sociology of childhood' (see e.g. Christensen and James, 2000) to cultural psychology (e.g. Cole, 1996) to more general re-examinations of interpretive research concerning children, (e.g. Hatch, 1995; Graue and Walsh, 1998). More specifically perhaps about the orientation of the editors of this particular work, I might ask, ' why the emphasis on different elicitation techniques? Why not more examination of spontaneous language? Recognising that corpora lack contextual information, why not use them for certain, limited and appropriate purposes?' But these are very general arguments about the current condition of child language research, beyond the scope of a book review. I shall turn to a careful perusal of the chapters, endeavouring to keep the needs of different potential audiences in mind as I do so.

    Berman, Ruth A. "Setting the Narrative Scene: How Children Begin to Tell a Story." (pp. 1 - 30).

    This is not an examination of early developments in spontaneous narrative but rather an examination of initial elements in narratives elicited from children aged 3, 5 and 9 in two conditions: (a) with the aid of a picture book; and (b) concerning personal experiences. These data are supplemented by others gained from elicited stories by older children and adults. There are detailed analyses against age, of setting strategies, story openers, transition markers, tense and aspect shifts.

    My sociocultural perspective - very different from the author's - leads me to perceive an internal contradiction in Berman's approach.

    To me, she seems to use an implied deficit model when examining children's communicative competencies that could fruitfully be interrogated more deeply than it is here. Berman appears to regard certain ways of introducing a narrative as desirable and comments on "abilities" such as "the ability to encode rhetorical alternations between background setting and foreground plot elements." (p. 20) A developmental story is posited, with certain features - e.g. the introduction of allusion to motivation - belonging to the more mature speakers. At the same time Berman's broad investigations lead her, wisely, from drawing back from assumptions that the most "developed" strategies necessarily belong to adults. In a telling comment she reflects "some adults tell stories as straight-forwardly informative and well structured as school children's, while other adults devote as much as 50% of their texts to background before proceeding to the onset of the action." (p. 25). This leads me to suspect that the "abilities" being examined might owe more to results of schooled learning than to linguistic developments as such, were it possible to extricate one from the other. Yet just because that extrication is not possible (see Scribner and Cole, 1981; Vygotsky, 1987) one should surely not disregard any consideration of the effect of schooling as such upon changes in performance across time.

    This is where my understanding departs most fundamentally from Berman's making me, I freely admit, not the most intellectually empathetic reviewer of this work. I would see the data she compiles as being situated, produced in particular cultural and historical settings. Consideration of the data would for me have to include review of the impact of the experimental condition upon the child. Yet although Berman in her conclusion joins the editors in claiming that attention to what they call "crosslinguistic and crosscultural differences" is developing and should do further, I find this aim to be wholly subjugated to a search for universals in linguistic development. The search for uniformity by its nature obscures actual textures.

    Berman's most revealing statement is as follows: "The bulk of the analyses are from texts produced by speakers of Israeli Hebrew, on the assumption that the language in which they are constructed has little effect on the quality and narrative function of setting elements, when speakers share similar literate, western-type cultural backgrounds of the kind considered here." If this statement resonates with your own theoretical assumptions, you can skate along with her and will find much to gain from her painstaking traces of patterns. While welcoming the strong feature of this book overall that so much data appears from languages other than English, I find the particularity of situations in which language is used to require attention in any empirical study.

    Bator�o, H.J. and Faria, I.H. "Representation of Movement in European Portuguese: A Study of Children's Narratives." (pp. 31 - 54)

    This work examines spatial reference in narratives by young children and adults produced in elicitations relating to picture stories. Foci are "analysis of nominal reference to determine the linguistic realizations of figure and ground;" and "verbal reference to define relations between figure and ground."

    The study is given a broad reach through its location amid (a) recent findings disturbing earlier proposals of universals in acquisition of particular spatial cognitive understandings, as evidenced linguistically in diverse languages, and (b) considerations of European Portuguese along a hypothesised word order-morphological continuum of significance as to cues in language acquisition.

    Bator�eo and Faria begin with reference to their theoretical assumption that "early acquisition is based not only on universal sensorimotor concepts but also on the particular language being acquired." Their investigations uncover considerable competencies. The paper is illuminating as a study of children's cognitive, linguistic and social development and also a useful contribution to the positioning of Portuguese.

    Bamberg, M. "Why Young American English-Speaking Children Confuse Anger and Sadness: A Study of Grammar in Practice" (pp. 55 - 72)

    Bamberg examines the discursive practices of children aged 4 to 10 divided into two groups by age, producing elicited anger and sadness accounts in three conditions. The first is the genre of personal experience narrative, the second a third person narration and the third a generalised explanation. He seeks to comprehend why, for the younger children "anger" and "sadness" could be confused, by means of a close examination of linguistic constructions in the first person and explanatory genres.

    The author endeavours (with some bravery, in my opinion), to bring discursive psychology to bear upon child language research. Indeed at times he comes close to a post-structuralist sensitivity to how "discourse worlds the world." He faces a challenging task in having to set out his theoretical assumptions in considerable detail before being "allowed" as it were to turn to the data (c.f. discussion of Berman, above; Reeder, below).

    The most fundamental points to his argument may be (overly-) simply stated as follows: (1) Language is not a transparent 'window' on human experience - including events, and emotional states - but rather a rendering of them, necessarily from a subjective point of view. (2) Each of us learns language through being socialised into the cultural practices of a community, including its discourses. Thus, just as with the colour spectrum we appropriate ways of perceiving our physiological responses. Our ways of feeling, in turn, are likely to be highly influenced by learned interpretative predispositions. (3) Language is dialogic. So, for example, even when talking to a researcher we orient to our interlocutor. As Bamberg writes: "accounts of emotion situations typically work up the aesthetics, judgements and morality involved in such situations" (p. 59).

    I find the discussion of data rather truncated but nevertheless successfully constructed. It is a pity that Bamberg claims that ethnomethodological (anthropological, perhaps?) work that stresses "the situatedness and cultural contextualization of emotion talk... have mostly gone unheard" (p. 58) - perhaps this is a reflection of the company he keeps! I agree that "the approach presented in this chapter bears heavily on the notion of development: In [sic] contrast to mapping out changes over time of children's uses of words (semantic structures) or children's linguistic applications of conceptual structures, and claiming that this is what develops, we see the issue of development much more closely tied to the issue of participating in (linguistic) practices. (p. 60; emphases removed)

    Wigglesworth, G. and Stavans, A. "A Crosscultural Investigation of Australian and Israeli Parents' Narrative Interactions with their Children" (pp. 73 - 91)

    Sixty parent-child dyads in 6 groups were selected to read together a picture book. Three groups were monolingual Hebrew speakers in Israel; 3 groups were monolingual English speakers in Australia. Children were aged 3, 5 and 7.

    Quantitative analyses of the data were conducted in order to compare the "story-interaction styles". Results include: "at ages 3 and 5 there was relatively even matching of parent-child exchanges but at 7 children made substantially more contributions than those solicited." There were differences in style between the two cultural groups at age 3 and 7 but not at age 5. It is suggested this could be because age 5 marks the onset of schooling and a particularly important period of cognitive development.

    This study is valuable to those interested in child language development in two particular aspects: (a) as an example of painstaking quantitative analysis of data of dyadic interactions by a considerable number of subjects; (b) for those interested in this field of study conceived narrowly, the literature review is very purposeful and well integrated and the study clearly contributes to a specific current of work.

    For this reviewer the absence of quotations from transcripts was a source of some frustration. I also noted that the parents were "professional, middle class" and wondered if this characteristic might be more significant than "crosscultural" difference.

    Nakamura, K. "The Acquisition of Polite Language by Japanese Children" (pp. 93 -112).

    At the beginning of the paper the author offers a useful explanation of the four interwoven types of 'keigo' or verbal politeness in Japanese that would be of interest to sociolinguists not already familiar with this phenomenon. Her research questions, relating to children's learning of 'keigo', are contrasted with those of American investigations. Data, from a larger project, were gathered from 30 children aged 1' to 6' during monthly visits mostly over the course of a year. A wide range of activities was recorded, with a particular effort made to facilitate pretence role-play. Findings are illustrated by copious examples and supported by discussion.

    This is a fascinating study, beautifully written. A complex subject for English-speaking readers is elucidated skillfully. Data are contextualised and supported by commentary regarding input. Modelling appears to be significant, but also highly influential are the opportunities presented for the development and practice of register in pretence play (see Andersen, 1990). Also highly significant is the part played by routinised, fixed expressions. In this study, culture is perceived not as a 'variable' but rather as suffusing identity and language, inextricable from either. A particular merit of this article is a rejection of any tendency to see a national group as homogeneous in any linguistic practice, or any language as static rather than constantly shifting. The paper is a model in many respect, not least in the highly skilful and non-reductionist way of approaching complex issues.

    Veneziano, E. "Interactional Processes in the Origins of the Explaining Capacity" (pp. 113 - 141).

    This paper concerns the analysis of oppositional moves in conversation as occurring during longitudinal study of 2 mother-child dyads. The children are French speaking, aged 1' !8" - 2' 7" and 1' 3" - 2' 2". The total duration of recordings is about 16 hours for each child. The analysis of interactions stemmed from a procedure, carefully explained, of identifying oppositions - moves within which were carefully categorised and counted. Examples of categories are illustrated by quotations.

    This study is potentially of interest to any reader considering the accomplishment of human intersubjectivity. These research subjects are very young humans of course, and yet what stands out in the findings is their agency. For example, "already with their early justifications, children seem to forestall their mothers' objections rather than simply reacting to them." (p. 138)

    Reeder, K. "Children's Attributions of Pragmatic Intentions and Early Literacy" (pp. 143 - 163)

    The author's interests, as stated at the beginning of the chapter, are admirably broad: "This chapter explores the links between underlying pragmatic attribution ability, children's consciousness of that ability, and the early development of narrative and expository-descriptive writing." (p. 143) This study, part of a larger research project, was conducted among 42 English-speaking children in Canada, aged from 6 to 9-years-old. The three steps of data collection were as follows:

    "1. Presentation of a puppet-based communication scenario. "2. Administration of a brief interview designed to probe children's attributions of the puppet-speaker's communicative intent and children's understanding and identification of the source of their attributions. "3. Administration of two writing tasks in two genres, narrative, and expository-descriptive." (p. 149)

    Recognising that this review necessarily skirts over the details of the author's reasoning, it is probably most useful to quote him on his research question:

    "The general form of the hypothesis being evaluated in each analysis was: There should be a greater contrast between 7 and 8 years in quality, quantity, and structural features in both the expository-descriptive and narrative writing samples for the children demonstrating higher quality of pragmatic attributions compared to children in the lower pragmatic attribution group."

    The problem this reviewer has with this study stems from its apparent non-problematic equivalence of certain competencies in children, with their actual performance in the specific task in the specific context it was demanded. There is little or no consideration of the impact of the nature of the research intervention on the performances. I agree with Graue and Walsh (1998, p.78) that "interactions with participants, whether they are adults or children, are framed in part by the tacit role enacted by the researcher." Nor is there investigation of the cultural practices, most particularly schooling, that might impact upon the children's performances. (Such considerations, by the way, might do much to illuminate the different results of earlier studies that appear to be puzzling the author in the literature review.) Then, across the study, correlations are over-interpreted, almost seen as necessarily causal. In reflecting upon this piece of work, I was reminded of the cautionary words of Hatch, (1995, p. 138):

    "We can learn something from such efforts, but what we learn is severely limited by the distance between the operationalization of the construct, which must be narrow to be technically defensible, and the construct as lived by children, which is inherently complex. The examples provide measures of something, but those somethings are tangential at best to children's friendship, their abilities to interact socially, or their curiosity. Researchers rarely mention the limitations of their efforts, and they talk as though they have actually studied such complex entities as the phenomenon in the examples."

    Perhaps I am being unfair drawing upon Hatch's holistic, educational perspective to bear upon a 'scientific' endeavour? Is children's language as complex and rich a phenomenon as the aspects of their social existences at the forefront of Hatch's mind as he wrote that piece? I believe that the examples of children's language quoted by Reeder himself (pp. 152 - 154), Nakamura in her chapter and elsewhere in this book, show that it is.

    References

    Andersen, Elaine Slosberg, (1990) Speaking with Style: the sociolinguistic skills of children, London, Routledge.

    Christensen, P. and James, A. (eds) (2000) Research with Children: Perspectives and Practices. London: Falmer Press.

    Cole, Michael (1996) Cultural Psychology: a once and future discipline. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.

    Graue, M.E. and Walsh, D. (1998) Studying Children in Context: theories, methods, and ethics. Thousand Oaks/London: Sage Publications.

    Hatch, J.A. (ed.) (1995) Qualitative Research in Early Childhood Settings, Westport, CT, Praeger.

    Scribner, S. and Cole, M. (1981) The Psychology of Literacy. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Vygotsky, L. S. (1987) 'Thinking and Speech' in Rieber, R. and Carton, A. (eds) The collected works of L. S. Vygotsky. vol. I Problems of general psychology, including the volume 'Thinking and speech' trans. N. Minick. New York: Plenum Press.

    Julia Gillen is Senior Research Fellow at the Institute of Education, Manchester Metropolitan University and Visiting Lecturer, Centre for Human Communication, Manchester Metropolitan University. She is currently researching into the discourses of young children utilising information and communication technologies, including the telephone.