The vocabulary that the caregiver uses is likely to be simplified and far more restricted than used in adult conversation. Lexical overextension to a particular word may be used for ease. A commonly used example of this is “doggie” relating to any breed of dog. There is a greater emphasis on content words related to the situation the child is in rather than grammatical constructions.
Diminutive forms are a common feature of motherese language such as “doggie.” Also, far less personal pronouns are used than in adult conversation. They are replaced by personal names of people they are familiar with such as “Mummy.”
The “scaffolding” of language (Bruner, 1979) is a key part of the caregiver in assisting and developing the child’s language acquisition. This may involve prompting the child to expand on an utterance via a tag question. A common tag questions is “Isn’t it?” that could be added by the caregiver at the end of an utterance to encourage the child to participate in the conversation. The simplified register that the utterance is likely to take also supports the scaffolding idea.
Social interaction approaches to language acquisition, such as Bruner (1979) believe that motherese is a vital element in language acquisition and that the utterances and negotiation the child receives with their primary caregiver shapes their language development a great deal. He coined the idea of a LASS (Language Acquisition Support System), this is closely linked with motherese in that he believes parents are the main facilitators of language acquisition. Motherese allows the child to develop in their own social linguistic community. From birth, this community is present in the child’s environment meaning they are able to hear conversations around them and are spoken to although they do not yet possess the ability to respond.
When a child cries, they are signalling their emotions/discomfort as they cannot yet communicate them through speech. This is a common opportunity for motherese language to be used by the caregiver in an attempt to sympathise with the child and to comfort them.
Repetition is commonly used, often to place an emphasis on new words. The caregiver may place the word in different contexts to reinforce the child’s learning. “That’s a…..” and “Where’s the….” are examples of two structures used by caregivers when presenting a new word to a child (Peters, 1983) The caregiver will often repeat a vocalisation that the child has made. This has been found to be a successful technique in engaging the child with the utterance (Locke 1983) It is very common for peoples names that they come into regular contact to be repeated to reinforce that they are important people in the child’s life. Motherese language may also include the use of more imperatives such as “Tell Mummy” and interrogatives such as “What’s that?” to direct the child and involve them within the conversation, which could be a key factor to them benefiting from motherese.
The utterances used by the caregiver are shorter than in adult conversation and often consist of no more than four words. However, these utterances are well-constructed and are likely to include the emission of fillers, overlapping and false starts that are all found in everyday adult speech. As the child’s language rapidly becomes more complex, usually at around eighteen months, their utterances will become significantly longer and consequently their caregivers shorter. The caregiver does this naturally in subconscious response to the child’s language and cognitive development. When a child reaches the holophrastic stage of language acquisition they will produce one word utterances. The caregiver will often use the words the child says as a feature of their motherese language to the child.
Young children can learn much about the discourse of conversations through their caregiver. As most conversations are structured into adjacency pairs and the use of turn taking, the child can become used to the format when their carer talks. During times of role play with the adult, especially around the age of three, the child can also gather a lot about the discourse structure a conversation is likely to use.
Any grammatical mistakes that the child makes within their utterances are often not emphasised by the adult, instead positive reinforcement is given and there is generally a rewarding atmosphere, for example if the child uses a new word unprompted. A virtuous error may commonly be made by a child, this is an error made by the child were they use incorrect language within a sentence. A frequently used virtuous error is “I runned”, this shows some understanding regarding regular past tense of verbs with the inflection “ed”. However if the child says this, it is clear that irregular verbs are not yet understood. The response that the adult gives to a child’s utterance is more likely to express approval or disapproval to what the child actually said rather than correct a grammatical aspect of the speech (Brown and Hanlon, 1970) Adults are also more likely to repeat ungrammatical than grammatical sentences. (Hirsh-Pasek et al, 1984)
The environment of the child often provides a strong basis for motherese language to be displayed, this is known as “Concrete Language,” were the stimuli for conversation is in the immediate area. In particular, the use of the child’s toys can provide a solid, interactive basis for conversation to occur. (O’Brien & Nagle, 1987) These can be used in many different ways by an adult to engage the child using language and introduce the child to new words and possibly interactive language experiences via role play and fun games.
Motherese is seen as a rewarding process for both caregiver and child. The child is obviously the main focus of attention at the time and the caregiver has the opportunity to spend time and “bond” with the child. Mothers are more likely to use features of motherese than fathers and have been found to have a higher median frequency and greater range of frequencies when speaking to young children. (Remick, 1971)
To conclude, motherese seems an important factor in the much-discussed topic of child language acquisition. Motherese allows the child crucial interactions in which to practice their language learning and communication with others, which is crucial for the rest of their lives. It is also an opportunity for relationships to be established between the caregiver and child and allows bonding experiences to take place and for the child to realise that language can be used to communicate facts and feelings to others. The unique linguistic register adapted by motherese is used in a similar way around the world, proving that motherese is seen as a natural way in which to communicate to the child prior to them actually being able to speak. However, there is no clear evidence to show that motherese language and it’s linguistic features have a direct impact upon language development and it is possible that language acquisition occurs as a result of an innate language acquisition device.
1508 words
Bibliography
Brown, R., & Hanlon, C. (1970). Derivational complexity and order of acquisition in child speech. In J. R. Hayes (Ed.), Cognition and the Development of Language. New York: Wiley.
Bruner. J (1979), From Communication to Language: A psychological perspective. In V.Lee (ed.), Language Development. New York: Wiley
Fernald, A (1985) "Four-month-old Infants Prefer to Listen to Motherese." Infant Behavior and Development 8, pp. 303-306.
Fernald, A., (1994). Human maternal vocalizations to infants as biologically relevant signals: An evolutionary perspective. In P. Bloom (Ed.), Language acquisition: Core readings. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Hirsh-Pasek, K., Treiman, R., & Schneiderman, M. (1984). Brown and Hanlon revisited: Mothers' sensitivity to ungrammatical forms. Journal of Child Language, 11, 81-88.
Locke, J, (1983). The Child’s Path to Spoken Language, Harvard University Press
O’Brien, M., & Nagle, K. (1987). Parents’ speech to toddlers: The effect of play context. Journal of Child Language, 14, 269-279
Peters, A. (1983). The units of language acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Remick, H (1971) The intonational environment of linguistic development. In: Doctoral dissertation, University of California, Davis (1971).
Thorne, S. (1997) Mastering Advanced English Language, Palgrave Macmillan
