Semantic Rules--Language Content

The Child must determine which referents belong within a Symbol's umbrella of meaning.

Chomsky's Language Acquisition Device and Classical Conditioning Theory may explain Symbolic Acquisition.

B. F. Skinner proposed a theory of Operant Conditioning to account for Language Acquisition

Vygotsky suggests that much can be learned through the Context of language.

Motherese is a technique parents use to facilitate language development, but the big gun is READING to your child.

Although it has potential for good, Television is now the Evil Empire against Language Development.

Symbols can have two types of meaning--Denotative and Connotative.

The Human sentence is subject to the constraints of Semantic Rules.

Each Word in a sentence is like a piece of a puzzle and must match the other pieces in order to fit correctly.

If words that do not match are combined in a sentence, the overall meaning may be sacrificed

But so much for the literal meaning of things. Often what we really mean flaunts in the face of the semantic meaning of the words. "You slay me sometimes...." is a good example. Am I really setting myself up to be executed by my listener! Or am I saying something else. This is the domain of PRAGMATICS, which we shall look at next.

Semantic Rules--Language Content

Morphemes are the smallest unit of a language that can carry meaning. But how do they get that meaning? Its through the interaction of the symbol and the environment.

Initially, when the child is almost a year old they begin to receptively associate a Symbol (S) with an Referent (R). It might be a shoe, for example or a pet dog. Often, this association is very concrete.

That means, the symbol "dog" refers to that one dog and no others.

Ironically, that is reality, because there are no two things alike in the world. Children, perhaps, see it as it really is.

Reality, however, is not very efficient, and the child soon becomes aware that other referents can be associated with the same symbol.

The Child must determine which referents belong within a Symbol's umbrella of meaning.

Now the struggle begins for the child to determine just which referents are to be included within the umbrella of the symbol.

Their first inclination is to over generalize and name anything that walks on for legs a dog.

Hence, a cat, a goat, a horse and a cow may all be called "dog" by the two year old.

Then comes a process of refinement as parents read to, and correct the child's communication errors.

I can think of at least five different processes that may account for the development of these Referent-Symbol associations.

Their roles may vary depending upon the stage of language development the child has reached.

Chomsky's Language Acquisition Device and Classical Conditioning Theory may explain Symbolic Acquisition.

1. The Language Acquisition Device (LAD): Chomsky proposed a special neurological system in the human brain that facilitates language development.

He called this the Language Acquisition Device (LAD). It is possible that this system provides the human brain with the capacity to make the referent-symbol association with minimal stimulation and little effort.

This certainly comes to mind as one observes the two and a half year old child pickup words with dazzling speed.

2. Classical Conditioning: In one of Pavlov's experiments in learning, he rang a bell when he fed a dog.

The bell in Pavlov's experiment became associated with food and the dog salivated at just the sound of the bell alone. In this case, the bell was a sign--a call to action.

The learning process for symbols, however, would be the same. Mother says, "Daddy," to the child each time Dad comes in the room. The child learns to associate the sound "Daddy" with the person.

B. F. Skinner proposed a theory of Operant Conditioning to account for Language Acquisition

3 Operant Conditioning: In some instances the behavior of children is shaped by the consequences of their actions. A complex theory of language Development based on this premise was developed by B. F. Skinner.

The baby, in the process of making vocal sounds, hits by chance upon the combination "da-da." Dad, upon hearing this immediately picks him up, swings him around and makes a fuss.

Without actually being consciously aware of the effort, the child increases the incidence of this vocal behavior (i.e., saying "da-da"), particularly in the presence of the dad.

Vygotsky suggests that much can be learned through the Context of language.

4 Language in Context: Vygotsky and Piaget carried on a famous debate in the literature in regards to the development of concepts. Piaget suggested that concepts preceded Language.

Motherese is a technique parents use to facilitate language development, but the big gun is READING to your child.

In Motherese, the mother (dad) repeats and/or slightly expands upon what a child has just said, using, perhaps a different but related word in the process.

For example, the child may say, "I want to eat." The parent may reply, "Oh you want to eat--You(tm)re hungry."

A huge source of vocabulary, of course, is provided through the reading process! Show me a child whose parents read to him/her every night (starting at age 3 mos.) and I will show you a child with a very lusty vocabulary (not to mention an impressive grammatical competence).

Television doesn't do it, because the language on television is more often than not a simplified discourse.

This seems particularly true in the abundant mindless cartoons and sitcoms, which typically provide a meager vocabulary in comparison to books.

Although it has potential for good, Television is now the Evil Empire against Language Development.

Unfortunately, television is like a visual cocaine, which provides effortless and instant gratification.

It is the Evil Empire because it quickly becomes strongly addictive and will seriously erode a child's desire to engage in the more mentally strenuous and beneficial activity of reading or being read to.

If you want a child with good language skills, put the TV in your closet!

5 Language Development through Verbal Instruction: Parents, teachers and books constantly provide new vocabulary and concepts though verbal explanation.

For example they tell us that atoms are made up of electrons, neutrons and protons etc.

These five processes, then develop the symbol/referent bonds. But there are actually two types of bonds that can result: Connotative and Denotative bonds.

Symbols can have two types of meaning--Denotative and Connotative.

Denotative Meaning is the meaning of an symbol that is shared by a group of people. If you say the word,"dog," most English speakers will point to the same type of animal. Denotative meaning is what makes symbols work for communication.

Connotative Meaning is the meaning of a symbol that is personal to an individual and not shared. For example, when I was a young child, my father was the warden of a small 3 cell prison located in the Montana wasteland near the Canadian border.

The two prison guards, who were generally bored would invite me to play "King" for a day.

I would sit in their chair and then they would put this wired helmet (they called it a crown) on me and then flip this little switch. It was a shocking experience.

Consequently now, when people say to me, "Would you like a chair," I am majorly disgusted. "What's the matter?" they say, "Its only a chair."

The Human sentence is subject to the constraints of Semantic Rules.

Denotatively, they are correct, when they call it a chair, but Connotatively, they miss the point. To me, a chair is a very unpleasant word that I even hate to mention.

Connotative meanings, then, are not helpful for the communication process. Notably, the symbolic communication of many Autistic children is often highly connotative.

An autistic child may say, "Throw the baby out the window," and simply mean, "Time for lunch."

Distinctive Features: We have remarked about the awesome power that the ability to combine words into a sentence gives to the communication process.

Inseparable from the human sentence are the constraints of grammar. There are , however, further constraints at the Semantic level.

Each Word in a sentence is like a piece of a puzzle and must match the other pieces in order to fit correctly.

I have noticed lately that the radiator of my car is losing fluids too rapidly. If I say to my mechanic, "My radiator appears to be drooling," the intent of the communication my be lost in the ridicule.

What's wrong with the word "drooling" here. It means to loose fluids doesn't it?

Yes but, each Symbol in a sentence is like a piece of a puzzle and must match the other pieces in order to fit correctly.

Whereas the pieces of a puzzle have distinctive shapes, each word has a set of distinctive features which much be matched.

The distinctive features of words includes, for example, such notions as to whether (+) or not (-) the word relates to animate objects.

If words that do not match are combined in a sentence, the overall meaning may be sacrificed

In the case of the word ?radiatorÁ, we have a minus animate (-animate) distinctive feature. But for the word "drool," we have a plus animate (+animate) feature.

"Radiator" with "Drool" is clearly a mismatch allowable only in the animated world of Disney.