Crosslinguistic and crosscultural approaches to pragmatic development

Küntay, Ayli̇n C.; Nakamura, Keiko; Şen, Beyza Ateş

doi:10.1075/tilar.10.18kun

Cited by 31 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 121 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Therefore, bearing in mind that children learning different languages are socialized to use language in varied ways (Küntay, Nakamura, & Ateş-Şen, 2014), we took into consideration the fact that production of an equivalent version of a tool testing early developmental stages of communication/language use would necessitate not only the tool translation but also its sociocultural, functional, and metric adaptation (see Peña, 2007). Specifically, the adapted items of the measure need to tap the same sociocultural meaning(s) for the given cultural linguistic group (sociocultural equivalence), examine the same target construct(s) (functional equivalence), and involve the same level of difficulty (metric equivalence).…”

Section: Our Approach To the Adaptation Of The Lui-polishmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ratunku! or Just Tunku! Evidence for the Reliability and Concurrent Validity of the Language Use Inventory–Polish

Białecka‐Pikul

Filip

Stępień–Nycz

et al. 2019

J Speech Lang Hear Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: To date, there is no tool for assessing early pragmatic development of Polish-speaking children. This study aimed to adapt to Polish a standardized parent report measure, the Language Use Inventory (LUI; O'Neill, 2009, in order to enable cross-cultural comparisons and to use the LUI-Polish to screen for pragmatic development in children 18-47 months of age. We concentrated on the sociocultural and functional adaptation of LUI and aimed to demonstrate its reliability, developmental sensitivity, and concurrent validity. Method: Parents completed an online version of LUI-Polish, longitudinally at 3 time points (when the child was 20, 32, and 44 months old). In addition, parents completed the Polish adaptations of the Questionnaire for Communication and Early Language at 22 months and the Language Development Survey at 24 months. Children's spontaneous speech was assessed at 24 months, and their expressive and receptive vocabulary was assessed at 36 months. Results: All 3 parts of the LUI-Polish (Gestures, Words, and Sentences) showed very good levels of internal consistency at each time point. Significant correlations were observed between all parts of the LUI-Polish at all 3 measurement time points. The expected developmental trajectory was observed for boys and girls providing evidence of its developmental sensitivity for children between the ages of 2 and 4 years: an increase with age in the total score (due to an increase in Words and Sentences) and a decrease in Gestures. Supporting concurrent validity, significant correlations were found between children's performance on (a) the LUI-Polish at 20 months and the Questionnaire for Communication and Early Language at 22 months as well as the Language Development Survey and spontaneous speech measures at 24 months and (b) the LUI-Polish at 32 months and the 2 measures of vocabulary comprehension and production at 36 months. Conclusion: The Polish adaptation of the LUI demonstrated good psychometric properties that provide a sound basis for cross-cultural comparisons and further research toward norming of the LUI-Polish. Moreover, the expected developmental trajectory in the pragmatic development of Polish children was observed.

show abstract

Section: Our Approach To the Adaptation Of The Lui-polishmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ratunku! or Just Tunku! Evidence for the Reliability and Concurrent Validity of the Language Use Inventory–Polish

Białecka‐Pikul

Filip

Stępień–Nycz

et al. 2019

J Speech Lang Hear Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Researchers (e.g., Küntay, Nakamura, & Sen, 2014) agree that the pragmatic skills involved in confrontational situations are language and culture dependent, but only a small number of studies in the field are based on diverse populations. Indeed, despite the important contributions of previous studies to the knowledge of early discourse development, it should be noted that they concentrate only on middle income and mostly English-speaking children.…”

Section: Stance-taking In Spanish-speaking Preschoolers' Argumentativmentioning

confidence: 99%

Stance-taking in Spanish-speaking Preschoolers’ Argumentative Interaction

Shiro

Migdalek

Rosemberg

2019

Psychology of Language and Communication

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this study is to determine what linguistic resources are used for stance-taking in confrontational interactions. For this purpose, we analyze 70 argumentative sequences in spontaneous peer conversations during play situations of 4 dyads (2 mid and 2 low socio-economic status backgrounds) of 4 to 7-year-old Argentinian children. Stance-taking relies on the use of evaluative language, understood as the markers of speaker’s attitude (reference to internal states such as attribute, cognition, emotion, intention, and reported speech, [Shiro, 2003]); and the use of evidential markers, understood as speaker’s reference to the status of the information in the utterance (causality, concession, capacity, deontic and epistemic modality, and inference, [Shiro, 2007]), including markers of politeness which serve to mitigate (or intensify) the confrontation (Watts, 2003). Our findings describe the evaluative resources used for stance-taking strategies produced by children at this early age in confrontational interactions with their peers.

show abstract

“…Such contextual work has been done in the culturally and linguistically diverse area of (im)politeness research Küntay et al (2014) and Duranti et al (2012) define politeness as ways of maintaining social and communicative concord and avoiding social discord. Further, Brown and Levinson (1987) define politeness as showing awareness of another person's public self-image, or face, for example, by avoiding imposition on others or showing solidarity with others.…”

Section: Children and Directivesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Directives in Sinhala: Children’s Speech and Adult Child-Directed Speech

Abesooriya

Perera

2019

OUSL Jnl

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Directives is an important area of study in child language development and language socialization since it illustrates children's ability to affect the behavior of others around them by using language. However, we have no account of directives by children in Sinhala. A study of Sinhala directives by children is important given that research on diverse languages contribute to significant changes in our knowledge of both the typology and the linguistic resources used for directives in general. The main aim of this study is to record the forms of directives used by children speaking Sinhala as a first language. Sinhala, the dominant language of Sri Lanka, is little studied in terms of pragmatics. Therefore, a secondary purpose of this study is to contribute to the knowledge of Sinhala pragmatics. Using recorded data and observation from children and their caregivers, this paper studies the use of Sinhala directives by middle class children and their adult caretakers in Sri Lanka. The study shows that children from 2-4 years of age are able to use directives appropriate to their pragmatic function. It also shows surprising findings on children's use of (im)polite language, an area that needs more research.

show abstract

Crosslinguistic and crosscultural approaches to pragmatic development

Cited by 31 publications

References 121 publications

Ratunku! or Just Tunku! Evidence for the Reliability and Concurrent Validity of the Language Use Inventory–Polish

Ratunku! or Just Tunku! Evidence for the Reliability and Concurrent Validity of the Language Use Inventory–Polish

Stance-taking in Spanish-speaking Preschoolers’ Argumentative Interaction

Directives in Sinhala: Children’s Speech and Adult Child-Directed Speech

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About