A few weeks ago, I examined an article which deals with the importance of preserving a dying language. Today, I consider the motives for preserving traditional usage in a much more thriving language: English.
The BBC is considering appointing a language chief to oversee its reporters' grammar and usage. It wishes to protect its "reputation as a bastion of the Queen's English," which has come under attack recently due to minor usage errors on the part of several BBC reporters. In general, the usage errors are barely worth noting: minor nuances in the usage of such words as "replica," "might," and "refute." However, many people argue that BBC should make an effort to preserve the historical meanings of the words. Because so many people watch or listen to BBC programming, the programmers can affect the linguistic beliefs of a large number of people. If a BBC reporter misuses a words several times, then many of the people who hear that misusage may begin to use the word that same way. Mass media has a tremendous influence over the usage of language. Yet despite all this, some people argue that no new restrictions should be imposed on BBC reporters. They consider the idea of regulating language so strictly to be "pedantic and yesteryear" and believe that language should be permitted to morph.
If language is too immutable it falls out of date. Unable to keep up with the times, it dies and fades away. But language also loses its significance when it is too volatile--if a word does not mean the same thing today as it meant yesterday or will mean tomorrow, then its meaning is insignificant. Language must be relatively standardized so that certain words denote certain things or else those words have no meaning at all. Between making a language too immutable or too volatile, I believe that it is always best to err on the side of immutability. It is better that words have set (though slightly antiquated) meanings rather than no meanings at all. Legal settings, in particular, require strictly standardized meanings of words.
There are innumerable texts which could be considered as background reading on the subject of preservation and regularization of the English language. Some focus on grammar, others on usage; most cover both. Of these books, my favorite is probably The Elements of Style by William Strunk Jr. and E.B. White. This book, while supporting the traditional regulation of language, does so in such a thorough manner that one can clearly see why some critics would consider such regulation "pedantic and yesteryear." Does it really matter that the vast majority of the populace misuses the word "hopefully"? Or that virtually no one knows the difference between "shall" and "will"? Such rules are entertaining to know but seem to have little significance in modern society. Some rules fade into the past naturally, but the mass media should still make an effort to preserve traditional language usage in its broadcasting so that it does not actively contribute to major shifts in language usage.
Tuesday, October 30, 2007
Thursday, October 25, 2007
Federally Funded Language Program
In Ohio, Oregon, and Texas, a federally funded pilot program is experimenting with teaching preschoolers foreign languages. This seems like a good idea because language experts generally agree that people learn new languages far easier when they are very young.
Ohio hopes to set a national example of the benefits of having citizens interested in other languages and other cultures. In particular, they are interested in the economic benefits of such a program, although they also realize that having residents who understand foreign language and culture could help support positive international relations and promote national security.
An article in the Akron Beacon Journal focuses on the goals of the program in Ohio.
The article outlines the goals of the program as:
(1) "Expanding foreign-language training--from pre-kindergarten to adult-education classes" and promoting study abroad opportunities
(2)" Increasing the number of foreign-language teachers and creating Internet language courses"
(3) "Creating a one-stop shop--called the Ohio Language and Culture Service Center--where residents can locate interpretation services, study-abroad opportunities and teacher training. Companies could get help creating foreign Web sites, developing culturally appropriate ad campaigns and testing their products."
(4) "Developing a social-networking group called "Language Partnering for Life" that would organize cultural festivals, international events, study groups and trips abroad. The group also would link people, such as foreign business owners and possible investors."
Looking further into the philosophy behind the new program, I found that it will include specific tools to tell how far each student should have prgressed at any given stage. The program's goal according to http://www.dispatch.com/live/content/local_news/stories/2007/10/22/bilingual.ART_ART_10-22-07_B1_VT88EKT.html?type=rss "is to make sure that people who want to work overseas or with foreign businesses or governments can carry on a conversation." The people supporting $333,333 of government funding of the program clearly think that they will gain more than this sum worth indirectly from their education program. I read somewhere recently that by learning English, a Spanish speaker in this country gains one million dollars of lifetime salary. There is no reason this can not work the other way around as well; when the Ohioans learn new languages, they gain economic opportunities. Like all education, language education can help people to be more economically successful. Clearly, the languages we speak affect the ways we think and live our lives not simply psychologically, but also through their simple economic benefits of knowing another language.
Ohio hopes to set a national example of the benefits of having citizens interested in other languages and other cultures. In particular, they are interested in the economic benefits of such a program, although they also realize that having residents who understand foreign language and culture could help support positive international relations and promote national security.
An article in the Akron Beacon Journal focuses on the goals of the program in Ohio.
The article outlines the goals of the program as:
(1) "Expanding foreign-language training--from pre-kindergarten to adult-education classes" and promoting study abroad opportunities
(2)" Increasing the number of foreign-language teachers and creating Internet language courses"
(3) "Creating a one-stop shop--called the Ohio Language and Culture Service Center--where residents can locate interpretation services, study-abroad opportunities and teacher training. Companies could get help creating foreign Web sites, developing culturally appropriate ad campaigns and testing their products."
(4) "Developing a social-networking group called "Language Partnering for Life" that would organize cultural festivals, international events, study groups and trips abroad. The group also would link people, such as foreign business owners and possible investors."
Looking further into the philosophy behind the new program, I found that it will include specific tools to tell how far each student should have prgressed at any given stage. The program's goal according to http://www.dispatch.com/live/content/local_news/stories/2007/10/22/bilingual.ART_ART_10-22-07_B1_VT88EKT.html?type=rss "is to make sure that people who want to work overseas or with foreign businesses or governments can carry on a conversation." The people supporting $333,333 of government funding of the program clearly think that they will gain more than this sum worth indirectly from their education program. I read somewhere recently that by learning English, a Spanish speaker in this country gains one million dollars of lifetime salary. There is no reason this can not work the other way around as well; when the Ohioans learn new languages, they gain economic opportunities. Like all education, language education can help people to be more economically successful. Clearly, the languages we speak affect the ways we think and live our lives not simply psychologically, but also through their simple economic benefits of knowing another language.
Tuesday, October 23, 2007
Automatic Language Growth (ALG)
In Bangkok, Thailand, teachers are teaching the Thai language using an unconventional method called Automatic Language Growth (ALG). By this method, the teachers speak unceasingly for an hour at a time, acting out stories, using hand gestures and diagrams. They occasionally involve the students by having the students act out parts of the story as well, but the students are forbidden to speak Thai.
ALG tries to parrot the way in which very young children naturally pick up language: listening without responding. In a conventional language class, students try to pronounce words after they have only heard them pronounced correctly once or twice. They grow accustomed to their own erroneous pronunciation and that of their peers, rather than than the perfect pronunciation of a native speaker, and because of this they develop accents. Also, in a conventional language class, students have difficulty memorizing new vocabulary terms because they lack a real-world context in which to apply those words. ALG aims to overcome this by using stories which provide a context for all new words the students learn. Before they ever attempt to speak, babies spend a long time hearing language pronounced perfectly and in context by native speakers. ALG tries to replicate this method of learning.
Going to www.algworld.com, I was able to learn more about this remarkable language learning method. It is founded on the following six principles:
1. Our point of reference or comparison is the native speaker, not other students.
2. Children are teh best examples of how to learn another language
3.The adult ability to translate, memorize, and practice can NEVER produce as good of results as naturally learning a language can.
4. Practice cannot help and in fact hinders the ability to learn naturally
5. Good speaking ability grows out of a good foundation of understanding. Therefore, understanding is what must be gained, not practice speaking.
6. Exposure to understandable, interesting experiences is the key to learning another language.
The ALG teachers found that "Opposite to popular belief, it became apparent that adults could learn just as quickly and nearly as well as children." Apparently after only 700 to 800 hours of class time, students naturally gain the ability to speak. By that time their understanding of the language is more or less fluent. Considering this amount of time in terms of our own education system, I find that it is roughly equivalent to four years of studying a language in school for an hour a day (disregarding time spent doing homework outside of class). After four years using our education system, the students generally come out nowhere near to fluent, so it seems to me that the ALG method is generally a lot more effective than our own method. ALG students spend between two and seven hours a day in language class. I cannot help but wonder if it would be possible to institute this method in our own schools where we generally spend only an hour per day in class.
ALG tries to parrot the way in which very young children naturally pick up language: listening without responding. In a conventional language class, students try to pronounce words after they have only heard them pronounced correctly once or twice. They grow accustomed to their own erroneous pronunciation and that of their peers, rather than than the perfect pronunciation of a native speaker, and because of this they develop accents. Also, in a conventional language class, students have difficulty memorizing new vocabulary terms because they lack a real-world context in which to apply those words. ALG aims to overcome this by using stories which provide a context for all new words the students learn. Before they ever attempt to speak, babies spend a long time hearing language pronounced perfectly and in context by native speakers. ALG tries to replicate this method of learning.
Going to www.algworld.com, I was able to learn more about this remarkable language learning method. It is founded on the following six principles:
1. Our point of reference or comparison is the native speaker, not other students.
2. Children are teh best examples of how to learn another language
3.The adult ability to translate, memorize, and practice can NEVER produce as good of results as naturally learning a language can.
4. Practice cannot help and in fact hinders the ability to learn naturally
5. Good speaking ability grows out of a good foundation of understanding. Therefore, understanding is what must be gained, not practice speaking.
6. Exposure to understandable, interesting experiences is the key to learning another language.
The ALG teachers found that "Opposite to popular belief, it became apparent that adults could learn just as quickly and nearly as well as children." Apparently after only 700 to 800 hours of class time, students naturally gain the ability to speak. By that time their understanding of the language is more or less fluent. Considering this amount of time in terms of our own education system, I find that it is roughly equivalent to four years of studying a language in school for an hour a day (disregarding time spent doing homework outside of class). After four years using our education system, the students generally come out nowhere near to fluent, so it seems to me that the ALG method is generally a lot more effective than our own method. ALG students spend between two and seven hours a day in language class. I cannot help but wonder if it would be possible to institute this method in our own schools where we generally spend only an hour per day in class.
Thursday, October 18, 2007
Globalizing URLs
According to an article in The Globe and Mail, "Today, the U.S. organization in charge of overseeing and regulating domain names online, is to launch 11 test sites in languages that don't use the Roman alphabet." This would make the internet far more international by allowing people in other countries to use their native alphabets to type URL addresses. As things stand, people typing in Russian, Japanese, or Arabic still have to type roman character suffixes (like .com) at the end of their addresses--although since 2003, they have been able to use their own scripts for the rest of the addresses. Also, there is currently no way of typing diacritical marks over the Roman characters; when typing URLs, French people are unable to use the accents which appear over their "e"s.
Although many people who speak languages other than English are glad of this attempt toward internationalization, some are frustrated because it means that they will have to pay for an additional domain name for their businesses. Instead of simply paying for the current Roman-character name, they will have to pay for the name using another alphabet as well, or else another company could create a competing site using the other alphabet. Despite this, it seems to me that this internationalization of the internet will be beneficial in the long run, making the internet easier to use for many people around the world.
The test pages in non-Roman scripts "will allow Internet users to establish subpages, leave comments and test how well the IDNs link to their pages, according to a statement from ICANN. The organization expects to begin offering working addresses that use non-Roman suffixes toward the end of 2008." ICANN, the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers, a US nonprofit organization has been working to shift the internet to other scripts since the year 2000, but according to the Globe and Mail article, this shift has never been one of ICANN's top priorities.
Looking into the background of ICANN, I found that it is a California based organization founded in 1998. Its primary concern is the introduction of top-level domains. (A top level domain is a suffix such as .com) According to ICANN's own website "ICANN is responsible for the global coordination of the Internet's system of unique identifiers. These include domain names (like .org, .museum and country codes like .UK), as well as the addresses used in a variety of Internet protocols. Computers use these identifiers to reach each other over the Internet. Careful management of these resources is vital to the Internet's operation, so ICANN's global stakeholders meet regularly to develop policies that ensure the Internet's ongoing security and stability." This would suggest that although ICANN has been a bit slow at shifting its top-level domains to use non-Roman scripts, its delay has been caused by caution rather than insouciance. In adapting the internet to new languages, the ICANN must be careful to avoid compromising the stability of the internet. Nevertheless, it must strive to convert to other scripts as quickly as possible to avoid creating international tensions; although it is US based, it must avoid appearing as overly favoring to US interests or else it will offend the global community. In general, people find it extraordinarily offensive to have foreign languages forced upon them, and few people in foreign countries would gladly be made to use English. Many view the US's refusal to relinquish control over the internet as an act of US vanity and refusal to participate as an equal in world affairs. By developing other languages on the internet, the ICANN as a US company, helps to lessen some of these international tensions.
Although many people who speak languages other than English are glad of this attempt toward internationalization, some are frustrated because it means that they will have to pay for an additional domain name for their businesses. Instead of simply paying for the current Roman-character name, they will have to pay for the name using another alphabet as well, or else another company could create a competing site using the other alphabet. Despite this, it seems to me that this internationalization of the internet will be beneficial in the long run, making the internet easier to use for many people around the world.
The test pages in non-Roman scripts "will allow Internet users to establish subpages, leave comments and test how well the IDNs link to their pages, according to a statement from ICANN. The organization expects to begin offering working addresses that use non-Roman suffixes toward the end of 2008." ICANN, the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers, a US nonprofit organization has been working to shift the internet to other scripts since the year 2000, but according to the Globe and Mail article, this shift has never been one of ICANN's top priorities.
Looking into the background of ICANN, I found that it is a California based organization founded in 1998. Its primary concern is the introduction of top-level domains. (A top level domain is a suffix such as .com) According to ICANN's own website "ICANN is responsible for the global coordination of the Internet's system of unique identifiers. These include domain names (like .org, .museum and country codes like .UK), as well as the addresses used in a variety of Internet protocols. Computers use these identifiers to reach each other over the Internet. Careful management of these resources is vital to the Internet's operation, so ICANN's global stakeholders meet regularly to develop policies that ensure the Internet's ongoing security and stability." This would suggest that although ICANN has been a bit slow at shifting its top-level domains to use non-Roman scripts, its delay has been caused by caution rather than insouciance. In adapting the internet to new languages, the ICANN must be careful to avoid compromising the stability of the internet. Nevertheless, it must strive to convert to other scripts as quickly as possible to avoid creating international tensions; although it is US based, it must avoid appearing as overly favoring to US interests or else it will offend the global community. In general, people find it extraordinarily offensive to have foreign languages forced upon them, and few people in foreign countries would gladly be made to use English. Many view the US's refusal to relinquish control over the internet as an act of US vanity and refusal to participate as an equal in world affairs. By developing other languages on the internet, the ICANN as a US company, helps to lessen some of these international tensions.
Tuesday, October 16, 2007
The Stuff of Thought
According to an article in The Times, a new book by Steven Pinker called The Stuff of Thought considers the connections between language and the ways we think. Pinker point out that language is an imperfect way of representing what we perceive in the world about us, and because of this, it is provides wonderful insight into our manners of perception.
One element of thought which Pinker focuses on is the use of metaphors. He considers phrases which compare love to a journey, political allegiance to physical bonds, or intellectual argument to an act of war. These metphors provide insight into our psychology by suggesting that perhaps we really do consider many abstract concepts through the visor of more concrete metaphors.
Apparently, there's been a fair bit of research on the connection between metaphor and psychology. A Google search for "psychology" and "metaphors"--two terms which I would certainly not have expected to occur in the same sentence--returns 2,240,000 hits. I found that many famous thinkers, including Giambattista Vico, Johann Wolfgang von Goethe, Jean Paul, Gustav Gerber, Alfred Biese and Friedrich Nietzsche have all contributed to this field. One article from Nottingham University called "Mind, Meaning and Metaphor: the philosophy and psychology of metaphor in 19th century Germany" seems to have a similar philosophy to that of Pinker's book. It's abstract tells how it "explores a German philosophy of metaphor, which proposed a close link between the body and the mind as the basis for metaphor, debunked the view that metaphor is just a decorative rhetorical device and questioned the distinction between the literal and the figurative."
This cause me to wonder: is there any real connection between the literal and the figurative? Do we need concrete ideas to understand the abstract? Or do we simply use concrete nouns to help clarify abstract concepts or to make them more understandable to young children? Is the idea of joy as a sense of lightness something which is found across the world in all different languages or is it something which is specific to our own particular culture? When people are angry we English speakers represent this abstract emotion with the concrete sense of temperature, saying that they are hot-headed. Are people's heads actually hotter when they are angry than when they are calm? Do English speaker's heads get hotter than the heads of people who speak languages without a metaphorical connection between anger and heat? It seems like an interesting, though largely unexplored, field of study.
One element of thought which Pinker focuses on is the use of metaphors. He considers phrases which compare love to a journey, political allegiance to physical bonds, or intellectual argument to an act of war. These metphors provide insight into our psychology by suggesting that perhaps we really do consider many abstract concepts through the visor of more concrete metaphors.
Apparently, there's been a fair bit of research on the connection between metaphor and psychology. A Google search for "psychology" and "metaphors"--two terms which I would certainly not have expected to occur in the same sentence--returns 2,240,000 hits. I found that many famous thinkers, including Giambattista Vico, Johann Wolfgang von Goethe, Jean Paul, Gustav Gerber, Alfred Biese and Friedrich Nietzsche have all contributed to this field. One article from Nottingham University called "Mind, Meaning and Metaphor: the philosophy and psychology of metaphor in 19th century Germany" seems to have a similar philosophy to that of Pinker's book. It's abstract tells how it "explores a German philosophy of metaphor, which proposed a close link between the body and the mind as the basis for metaphor, debunked the view that metaphor is just a decorative rhetorical device and questioned the distinction between the literal and the figurative."
This cause me to wonder: is there any real connection between the literal and the figurative? Do we need concrete ideas to understand the abstract? Or do we simply use concrete nouns to help clarify abstract concepts or to make them more understandable to young children? Is the idea of joy as a sense of lightness something which is found across the world in all different languages or is it something which is specific to our own particular culture? When people are angry we English speakers represent this abstract emotion with the concrete sense of temperature, saying that they are hot-headed. Are people's heads actually hotter when they are angry than when they are calm? Do English speaker's heads get hotter than the heads of people who speak languages without a metaphorical connection between anger and heat? It seems like an interesting, though largely unexplored, field of study.
Thursday, October 11, 2007
Emergency Communication
According to a recent ABC 15 news announcement at http://www.wpde.com/news/viewarticle.asp?view=7062 "fighting fires and fighting health emergencies also means fighting a language barrier." Many emergency workers are having difficulties trying to help people who do not speak English.
Apparently, the rescue associations have singled out Spanish as a the primary non-English language to focus on. "To try to break through the language barrier, rescuers take spanish [sic] classes, they have a spanish [sic] program on their computer and they carry around a mini-spanish [sic] guide, but it's still a significant problem." Yet, even with their Spanish training, many rescue workers must result to simple hand signals to figure out what ails a patient.
The workers must have even greater difficulties in areas where multiple foreign languages are prevalent. I suppose in such places the rescue workers are forced to simply speak English with a lot of gestures and hope that the patient is calm and sensible enough to point to where it hurts.
Of course, in such an important field as emergency communication--where lives all too often hang on the line--much research has been done to ensure that interlinguistic communication is as smooth as possible. An article in the British Journal of General Practice titled "Improving Communication Between Physicians and Patients who Speak a Foreign Language" outlines a study done on communications between francophonic physicians and allophonic patients (with a francophonic patient control group). Before and after the study, the physicians and patients both filled out surveys concerning their satisfaction with care given and recieved and with communication during consultation. The ratings given by the allophones improved slightly from one consultation to the next, but the ratings given by physicians remained the same. The conclusion which the scientists produced at the end of their study was that "[t]he quality of communication as perceived by allophone patients can be improved with specific training aimed at primary care physicians."
In other words, studies such as this one have shown that physician-patient communication can be improved by training the physicians, even if they do not speak the language of the patients. Perhaps this is simply because both parties developed better methods of sign language during the study, perhaps the patients grew more relaxed around the doctors and were inclined to rate them more highly, perhaps each learned a little of the other's language, or perhaps it is caused by some other unidentified factor. Whatever the cause, it seems important that physicians, particularly emergency personnel, be provided with training which allows them to more effectively communicate with patients speaking foreign languages.
Apparently, the rescue associations have singled out Spanish as a the primary non-English language to focus on. "To try to break through the language barrier, rescuers take spanish [sic] classes, they have a spanish [sic] program on their computer and they carry around a mini-spanish [sic] guide, but it's still a significant problem." Yet, even with their Spanish training, many rescue workers must result to simple hand signals to figure out what ails a patient.
The workers must have even greater difficulties in areas where multiple foreign languages are prevalent. I suppose in such places the rescue workers are forced to simply speak English with a lot of gestures and hope that the patient is calm and sensible enough to point to where it hurts.
Of course, in such an important field as emergency communication--where lives all too often hang on the line--much research has been done to ensure that interlinguistic communication is as smooth as possible. An article in the British Journal of General Practice titled "Improving Communication Between Physicians and Patients who Speak a Foreign Language" outlines a study done on communications between francophonic physicians and allophonic patients (with a francophonic patient control group). Before and after the study, the physicians and patients both filled out surveys concerning their satisfaction with care given and recieved and with communication during consultation. The ratings given by the allophones improved slightly from one consultation to the next, but the ratings given by physicians remained the same. The conclusion which the scientists produced at the end of their study was that "[t]he quality of communication as perceived by allophone patients can be improved with specific training aimed at primary care physicians."
In other words, studies such as this one have shown that physician-patient communication can be improved by training the physicians, even if they do not speak the language of the patients. Perhaps this is simply because both parties developed better methods of sign language during the study, perhaps the patients grew more relaxed around the doctors and were inclined to rate them more highly, perhaps each learned a little of the other's language, or perhaps it is caused by some other unidentified factor. Whatever the cause, it seems important that physicians, particularly emergency personnel, be provided with training which allows them to more effectively communicate with patients speaking foreign languages.
Monday, October 8, 2007
Preserving Inuit Culture and Inuktitut Language
Canadian Native Americans are working to establish an Inuktitut institute to preserve native language and culture. They are basing their plans on similar efforts by the Faroese Language Committee in the Faroe Islands. According to the Nunatsiaq News, the Faroese committee "provides individuals, businesses and government institutions with advice and information about the Faroese language, and helps come up with new words and expressions. It also answers questions about personal names, place names and other names."
If a similar institute were founded for Inuktitut, it could help to preserve the existence of Inuktitut language, and in doing so, it would protect ancient Inuktitut culture.
Looking further into the background of Inuktitut, I found that it is spoken by about 65,000 people in Siberia, Greenland, Alaska, and Canada--especially in the Nunavut territory, which is 85% Inuit. Early Northern Canadian settlers recognized the importance of Inuktitut to such a degree that they translated the bible into Inuktitut, recorded the Inuktitut grammar, and created an "Eskimo-English" dictionary. To show how developed the language is, I've included a diagram of the Inuktitut syllabary below:
If a similar institute were founded for Inuktitut, it could help to preserve the existence of Inuktitut language, and in doing so, it would protect ancient Inuktitut culture.
Looking further into the background of Inuktitut, I found that it is spoken by about 65,000 people in Siberia, Greenland, Alaska, and Canada--especially in the Nunavut territory, which is 85% Inuit. Early Northern Canadian settlers recognized the importance of Inuktitut to such a degree that they translated the bible into Inuktitut, recorded the Inuktitut grammar, and created an "Eskimo-English" dictionary. To show how developed the language is, I've included a diagram of the Inuktitut syllabary below:
(http://www.omniglot.com/writing/inuktitut.htm)
However, Inuktitut will need far more than its own syllabary if its going to survive. It will need to come up with new words to adapt to the rapidly changing world. To come up with new words and to standardize spelling across regions would be one of the main purposes of the Inuktitut institute if it were founded. It would unite people so that they could preserve their language and culture as they progress together into the modern world.
I think that the preservation and updating of their languages is one of the most important steps native peoples can take if they are to preserve their cultures while thriving in the modern world.
Thursday, October 4, 2007
Forensic Linguistics
According to an article published in The Star on October second, linguistic forensics was recently used as evidence leading to conviction in a high-profile South African court case.
(see_http://www.iol.co.za/index.php?set_id=1&click_id=15&art_id=vn20071002001320177C866364 for the complete article.)
Apparently, because each person makes unique language errors when speaking a language (especially a secondary language), forensic linguistic analysts can use these errors to link suspected criminals to crimes. In addition to these errors, the analysts also use instances of concomitant words to connect texts. Because the probability of anyone using any three given words in the same sentence is remarkably low, if the same three words are used in two different sentences in two different texts, analysts take this as evidence that the two texts were written by the same author. In the field of forensics, this new method is considered far more reliable than the old method of handwriting analysis.
Personally, I found the concept of linguistic forensics particularly intriguing because I had no idea that manners of speech really varied so much from person to person. Linguistic forensics is evidence that no two people really speak the exact same language, but that we all have our own unique idiolects.
Looking into the background of the field, I found that linguistic forensics is still not widely accepted. Apparently, a man named Robert W. Shuy wrote a book focusing largely upon difficulties he had encountered in trying to convince judges of the reliability his forensic linguistic evidence. When compared with the precision of DNA evidence, linguistic forensics looks shady at best—based on probability rather than concrete evidence—yet when compared to other abstract forensics, forensic linguistics seems more reliable. It is based on probability and is thus far more mathematical and precise than observation based forensics such as handwriting analysis. Yet because linguistic forensics is a relatively new field, it will still be some time before it gains acceptance in the broader field of forensics.
I also found that the field of written forensic linguistics is far more reliable than its oral component. I encountered one document from the
Monday, October 1, 2007
Infant Sign Language
On 28 September 2007, the Albany Democrat-Herald ran an article on the developing methods of baby sign language.
To sum up the article, it said that babies at various childcare agencies are being taught to sign, beginning when they are about six months old (before they learn how to speak), so that they can communicate their wants to childcare providers and are thus less likely to cry. Although some people worried that by teaching sign language to infants they would slow down the infants’ development of verbal skills, one study showed that learning sign language actually helps infants to develop verbal language sooner and can even cause a slight boost in their IQs.
I thought baby sign language sounded interesting, so I Googled it to find out more. Apparently there is a whole baby-signing industry. Companies sell instructional DVDs and books, and there is even an online baby-signing dictionary with video links for various words.
Although the use of sign language may cause an infant to develop verbal skills earlier, http://baby.families.com/blog/baby-sign-language-good-or-bad rightly points out that it’s also necessary for the parents to speak to their babies while they sign if the babies are to progress with their development of verbal skills. The writer on this site is inclined to regard baby sign language as a “baby bandwagon” and insists that the most important thing a parent can do to help his or her child’s development is to speak to that child frequently, whether with sign language or not. However, “bandwagon” or not, sign language clearly helps infants to communicate their wants and thus reduces the number of tantrums they have.
According to the Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis from the
At http://www.babies-and-sign-language.com/baby-sign-benefits.html, I found the following list of perceived benefits of baby sign language:
- Promotes the development of language skills
- Reinforces language skills already developed
- Reduces frustration at not being able to express needs
- Increase [sic] speed of spatial reasoning development
- Develops understanding of language for communication of emotions
- Creates feelings of satisfaction and accomplishment
- May increase IQ
- Increases creative thinking
- Teaches a 2nd language that is formally recognized (ASL)
- Reduces unexplainable emotional outbursts
- Increases early literacy skills
- Teaches baby how to start (and participate in) a conversation
If all this is true, it’s a wonder more people don’t teach their children to sign. Perhaps this is because many parents are afraid that signing would be detrimental to their children’s verbal skills development, or perhaps because baby-signing remains as of yet a widely unknown method.
----
On a wholly unrelated note, I also thought that the September 25 NPR report about Congressman José Serrano learning to speak English by listening to Sinatra was interesting because I used a similar method when I taught myself French. (I instead listened to Phantom of the Opera.) Listening to music is a wonderful way to learn a new language, not only because singers often enunciate their words very carefully, but also because songs can be listened to over and over again without becoming exceedingly boring, and because the tonality of music is a wonderful mnemonic aid. I highly recommend the use of music to anyone taking up a new language.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)