For the purpose of my data analysis, I will be particularly focusing upon and applying the research on holophrastic functions, conducted by Greenfield and Smith (1976). They looked at the meaning of holophrases and how they may alter over a period of time. From their research, they believed that children have some control when producing holophrases and that they are used by them for a communicative purpose. The functions of the holophrase were split into 5 groups. These five functions will be key when I am analysing my data. I will be looking to see if the groups can be applied successfully to my findings or if there are, in fact, some holophrases found that don’t fit into their defined groups.
A Table To Show Holophrastic Functions, As Proposed By Greenfield And Smith (1976)
Bloom (1973) claimed that relational terms, for example, “more” and “up”, are most commonly used and dominate the child’s language before 1.6 years of age. After this, he believed that nouns are used significantly more than any other word class/type. In contrast to this, Greenfield and Smith found that before the age of 1.6 years, children were more likely to use indicative and volitional expressions. From this research, I can look at if there are any of these expression examples within my data.
Children’s initial declarative utterances can be about shared, specific referents and aimed at focusing the listeners attention on something new, that has not been previously mentioned. This is from the egocentric child point of view, (Greenfield and Smith 1976.) The communicative function of the utterance can give a strong idea of the child’s aspect of reality, for example, imperative and interrogative functions. They may not be well differentiated from a referential-type utterance. (Ninio 1992). Early one word utterances therefore a holistic, communicative intention of which often possesses the same, or a similar communicative purpose as adult expressions, which it is likely it was learnt from. (Ninio 1992).
Many early holophrases are rather idiosyncratic and they are inconsistent, in that their usage by the child can change and develop over a period of time. The functions of holophrases can also adapt a more stable manner. As shown below, holophrases can also be categorised into different function groups (Tomasello 1998) Although this table is useful I will not be categorising my data under these functions, instead focusing upon Greenfield and Smith’s headings. They are however, useful indicators of the potential function a holophrase may have and have some overlap with Greenfield and Smith.
A Table To Show The Functions Of Holophrases In Children Around The World (Tomasello)
Methodology
As previously stated, I will be using the CHILDES (Childs Language Data Exchange System) database in order to answer my question. The database includes downloadable audio and video, with a transcript of the conversation included at the side to accompany the video. I think that it is important to know the context of the situation the child is in when looking at one word utterances. This is because the context may play a crucial part into why the utterance is being produced, such as situational factors and cues that are in the child’s environment that will prompt the utterance. The videos on the CHILDES database will allow me to view the contextual situation and see if this plays any part in the use of the holophrastic utterance that is produced by the child.
I will be looking at English-UK data. There are various options of language to study, such as Germanic, but I feel English-UK will allow me to analyse the data most successfully. I will be looking at Mike Forrester’s video and transcripts, looking at a girl called Ella. The videos/transcripts are arranged as Ella grows older and her language use develops. I will need to find out what the MLU (Mean Length of Utterance) is within individual transcripts in order to find examples of holophrases, and save me looking through each transcript individually. The MLU command will calculate the mean length of her utterances based on the number of utterances Ella produces in each transcript. A switch will need to be used within the command so that only Ella’s utterances are included within the calculation. I will use the following command to work out when she is at the one word stage:
mlu +t*ELL 077.cha
The final part of the command (0.77.cha in the example) is the individual file name of the transcript I am working on, therefore will change as I look at the MLU for each transcript.
After running this command, I will be able to identify which can be used to gather examples of Ella’s one word utterances.
When working through the transcripts I have identified as useful to my results, I will run a command that allows me to see all the words used by Ella and the frequency of which they are used. The command I will use to do this is:
freq +t*ELL 085.cha
This will help me to answer the question in that frequently used words can be identified, from which I can look at their function and see whether they show any similarities with Greenfield and Smith’s results.
I will note down many examples of the one word utterances used by Ella, in transcripts which MLU indicates she is at the one word stage. Following this, I will conduct a thorough analysis of my results and identify what the holophrases are used by Ella to accomplish.
Results and Analysis
Below is a list showing some examples of clear, one word utterances that Ella produced in transcript 0.85 on the database.
The context of the transcript was “A mealtime talk between father and daughter.” The video showed Ella in her highchair, sat at the table. Her father is sat with her, giving the opportunity for lots of child directed speech, which was shown throughout the transcripts. It is obvious from the list above that some of the words are linked to a kitchen environment, for example “Salt.”
The FREQ command tool identified that some utterances were produced various times. The table below shows this:
I have produced a table to show if and how, the functions of each of the 20 utterances given in the first table are the same as those found by Greenfield and Smith.
Many of the utterances that she produced were a result of the situation she was in and what she was experiencing. For example, when trying her food she said “hot.” She looked out the window, saw her mother outside and said “Mummy.”
She holds out a biscuit to her Father and says “Money.” The function of this is action/state of object as she is talking about an object although there is either humorous play or confusion going on. “Music” falls under the volition function as she is swaying her head from side to side as she says it, suggesting she likes and wants music.
There were some examples of Ella making sounds before or whilst producing an action. This was especially common during her early holophrastic stage. For example, “m:: m↑ih [!]” immediately before pointing to the kitchen worktop and “hhh ∆e↑ow∆ [!]” before she “suddenly retracts her egg” and makes pointing gesture. This fits into the Performatives use that Greenfield and Smith stated.
Conclusion
As my results show, a significant proportion of my data shows the same functions that Greenfield and Smith found in their analysis. The most common function found in my data fell under the “Indicative Objects” category that they proposed, in that Ella frequently labelled things that were in the environment around her. Indeed, the context in which the videos were recorded and transcripts produced greatly influenced the functions of the holophrases that she produced. Many of the holophrases found were objects that were in her environment, so functionally she was labelling them. The feedback received from her caregivers will encourage her to do this so often. Ella shows examples of the volition function, in wanting something, such as “dinner.” Functionally, she also shows understanding of people carrying out actions under the “Action/state of agent” category such as “eat.” Although most of my data fits into Greenfield and Smith’s research, there are some instances in which it doesn’t. In “Yeah” she is answering a question but this doesn’t fall into any of the categories. The examples that don’t fit into their research tend to be either words that fall into the personal/social semantic-function category or when the holophrase is functionally about some general nominals such as “baby.” Holophrases are obviously a crucial part of language acquisition and I noticed that as Ella progressed, she was combining holophrases to enter the two word stage.
In conclusion, the CHILDES database proved a most useful tool in gathering my data. The functions that Greenfield and Smith found seemed to be accurate as to the functions that Ella had when producing her holophrase. However, their function categories do not cover all types of functions that a child may possibly produce during the one word stage.
2235 Words
References
Bloom (1973) In The Handbook of Child Language (1996) by Fletcher, P. And MacWhinney, B. Blackwell Publishing
Fraser, C, Bellugi, U. and Brown, R. (1963) Control of grammar in imitation, comprehension, and production, 121-135.
Greenfield, P.M., and Smith, J. H.,(1976) The structure of communication in early language development. New York: Academic Press
Ingram, D. (1972), The Development of Phrase Structure Rules. Language Learning
Ninio, A. (1992). Journal of Child Language, 19, 87-110
Tomasello(1998) In Handbook of Child Psychology, Volume 2, Cognition, Perception, and Language, 6th Edition by William Damon (Editor), Richard M. Lerner (Editor), Deanna Kuhn (Editor), Robert S. Siegler
- Accessed January 2011
