8-1

Reading and Resources7.html

Required Resources

Library Article:  How Social Contexts Support and Shape Language Development Erika Hoff discusses what is required for language development and how social and environmental contexts can influence those requirements.

Article:  Linguistic Relativity On this page, go to Wolff, P., & Holmes, K. (2010). Linguistic Relativity. WIREs Cognitive Science. (PDF Format).

In this article, the authors provide new insights on the Whorfian hypothesis--whether people who speak different languages think differently. 

Library Article:  Myths About Early Childhood Bilingualism Genesse examines the common misconceptions associated with dual language learning and the importance for the theories underlying second language acquisition. 

Library Article:  Early Home Learning Environment Predicts Children’s 5th Grade Academic Skills This article examines whether the early learning environment predicts a child’s fifth-grade skills by testing the mediating roles of children’s pre-kindergarten skills. 

Video: How Language Shapes the Way We Think (14:03) This video explores linguistic diversity. The speaker gives examples of language that illustrate this diversity. 

Article: My Two Minds This article explores the effects of speaking a second language on cognitive abilities. 

Module Overview18.html

Language in Context

After learning about the basic structure and principles governing language, we can now begin to examine the more complex way that language influences cognition. Consider your use of language—do you ever feel constrained by it? Are you able to express all your thoughts and ideas using language? Does language change or shape your perceptions of the world?

One such example of the complexity of speech is illustrated when looking at indirect versus direct speech. In indirect speech, speakers do not say what they mean; rather, they expect the listener to “catch the drift.” Although this type of communication might seem inefficient, it is often used to maintain social relationships and politeness. Lee and Pinker (2010) conducted several experiments to test and develop the strategic speaker theory. According to this theory, the use of indirect speech is a strategy used to negotiate uncertainty between the speaker and listener. For example, in the case of bribes, a listener can accept or deny a bribe. If indirect speech is used, an uncooperative listener can deny the bribe without being too oppositional or disagreeable. However, when direct speech is used, the bribe might be more likely to upset the listener. One of their experiments looked specifically at sexual propositions between the speaker and listener. Results indicated that using indirect speech for a sexual proposition was perceived as allowing the speaker and listener to be more likely to return to their previous relationship if the request is denied. Overall, Lee and Pinker’s (2010) experiments indicate that the strategic speaker theory can explain the use of indirect speech in a number of social settings. As a result, the theory can help us understand why indirect speech is used and it can help in explaining social dynamics. Lee and Pinker (2010) point out that social situations often exist because of unspoken agreements about status and roles between individuals. Individuals looking to change the agreements can test the boundaries of social interactions by using indirect speech. This allows them the opportunity to make gains from individuals who are willing to cooperate, while minimizing losses from antagonists. For example, students and teachers have defined roles. However, certain teachers might go beyond those roles and help students in different ways. A student looking to capitalize on this could test a teacher’s willingness by making a request using indirect speech.

We can also learn a great deal about language by studying the brain. Much of what we know about language and its neurological components has been learned by studying individuals with brain damage. Two of the most noted structures in the brain for processing language are Broca’s area and Wernicke’s area. These areas are found in the left hemisphere and are responsible for speech expression (Broca’s area) and speech comprehension (Wernicke’s area). The discovery of these areas of the brain was first introduced to you in Module Two and helped to establish the idea of brain localization in cognitive neuroscience. However, after the initial discovery of these areas, scientists have been able to identify many more areas of the brain that function in language, suggesting that the process is not as localized as we once thought. For example, in an examination of the McGurk effect (introduced in Module Seven), Erickson et al. (2014) found activation in the superior temporal sulcus during perception of the McGurk effect. Additionally, the connectivity of the left angular gyrus (located in the posterior parietal lobe) to Wernicke’s area and visual areas has been found to be decreased in individuals with dyslexia (Horwitz, Rumsey, & Donohue, 1998). Areas of the right hemisphere have also been linked to important contributions in the processing of emotional components of language (Grimshaw, Seguin, & Godfrey, 2008). Taken together, these results indicate that language relies on a variety of brain structures throughout the brain located in both the right and left hemisphere. By studying the larger system of brain structures, we can begin to understand how and why language disorders exist. Moreover, an understanding of the larger language system and its connections will further explain the relationship between language and cognition.

References

Erickson, L. C., Zielinski, B. A., Zielinski, J. E. V., Liu, G., Turkeltaub, P. E., Leaver, A. M., & Rauschecker, J. P. (2014). Distinct cortical locations for integration of audiovisual speech and the McGurk effect. Frontiers in Psychology, 5, 1–12.

Grimshaw, G. M., Seguin, J. A., & Godfrey, H. K. (2008). Once more with feeling: The Effects of emotional prosody on hemispheric specialization for linguistic processing. Journal of Neurolinguistics, 22(4), 313–326.

Horwitz, B., Rumsey, J. M., & Donohue, B. C. (1998). Functional connectivity of the angular gyrus in normal reading and dyslexia. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science, 95, 8939–8944.

Lee, J. J., & Pinker, S. (2010). Rationales for indirect speech: The theory of the strategic speaker. Psychological Review, 3, 785–807.

Graduate Discussion Rubric.html

Graduate Discussion Rubric

Overview

Your active participation in the discussions is essential to your overall success this term. Discussion questions will help you make meaningful connections between the course content and the larger concepts of the course. These discussions give you a chance to express your own thoughts, ask questions, and gain insight from your peers and instructor.

Directions

For each discussion, you must create one initial post and follow up with at least two response posts.

For your initial post, do the following:

• Write a post of 1 to 2 paragraphs.
• In Module One, complete your initial post by Thursday at 11:59 p.m. Eastern.
• In Modules Two through Ten, complete your initial post by Thursday at 11:59 p.m. of your local time zone.
• Consider content from other parts of the course where appropriate. Use proper citation methods for your discipline when referencing scholarly or popular sources.

For your response posts, do the following:

• Reply to at least two classmates outside of your own initial post thread.
• In Module One, complete your two response posts by Sunday at 11:59 p.m. Eastern.
• In Modules Two through Ten, complete your two response posts by Sunday at 11:59 p.m. of your local time zone.
• Demonstrate more depth and thought than saying things like “I agree” or “You are wrong.” Guidance is provided for you in the discussion prompt.

Discussion Rubric

Criteria	Exemplary	Proficient	Needs Improvement	Not Evident	Value
Comprehension	Develops an initial post with an organized, clear point of view or idea using rich and significant detail (100%)	Develops an initial post with a point of view or idea using appropriate detail (90%)	Develops an initial post with a point of view or idea but with some gaps in organization and detail (70%)	Does not develop an initial post with an organized point of view or idea (0%)	20
Timeliness	N/A	Submits initial post on time (100%)	Submits initial post one day late (70%)	Submits initial post two or more days late (0%)	10
Engagement	Provides relevant and meaningful response posts with clarifying explanation and detail (100%)	Provides relevant response posts with some explanation and detail (90%)	Provides somewhat relevant response posts with some explanation and detail (70%)	Provides response posts that are generic with little explanation or detail (0%)	20
Critical Thinking	Draws insightful conclusions that are thoroughly defended with evidence and examples (100%)	Draws informed conclusions that are justified with evidence (90%)	Draws logical conclusions (70%)	Does not draw logical conclusions (0%)	30
Writing (Mechanics)	Initial post and responses are easily understood, clear, and concise using proper citation methods where applicable with no errors in citations (100%)	Initial post and responses are easily understood using proper citation methods where applicable with few errors in citations (90%)	Initial post and responses are understandable using proper citation methods where applicable with a number of errors in citations (70%)	Initial post and responses are not understandable and do not use proper citation methods where applicable (0%)	20
Total:	100%