Chapter 2 Literature review
2.5 The role of peers in children’s development
國
立 政 治 大
㈻㊫學
•
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
children started to use hao in the ideational structure at around age four. Hao in 4 year olds’ production can mark the termination of a hesitation pause. This function acknowledged the children’s ability to organize and manage their information states (cognitive states). Both 4- and 5-year-old children had the ability to manipulate hao as a turning-grabbing marker. They used hao in the exchange structure to grab the turns from other interlocutors. The evidence came from the increased frequency of overlapping in their conversations. Moreover, Mandarin speaking children at age four and five used hao to initiate elaboration questions in the information state.
Furthermore, the 5 year olds had shown the ability to manipulate two more functions of hao in the ideational structure, which were topic shifting and linking of two phases.
Generally speaking, Mandarin-speaking 3 and 4 year olds used hao mostly at the local level (i.e. the action structure and the exchange structure) while 5 year olds have shown the ability to use hao at the global level (i.e. the ideational structure).
Cross-linguistic studies have been carried out on children’s acquisition of discourse markers (Andersen et al., 1999; Berman, 1996; Jisa, 1984, 1987; Kyratzis &
Ervin-Tripp, 1999; Sprott, 1992). However, relatively less research has focused on Mandarin-speaking children’s use of discourse markers, not to mention those concerning the various functions of Mandarin discourse markers. The thesis therefore aims to investigate Mandarin-speaking children’s use of the multifunction of discourse markers in order to examine their communicative skills.
2.5 The role of peers in children’s development
Children’s development has been of interest to many researchers in various areas such as psychology, linguistics, and education. Previous studies have revealed several
• 國
立 政 治 大
㈻㊫學
•
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
factors that may influence children’s development. Earlier scholars have suggested that not only parent-child relationships play an important role in children’s development, interactions with significant others, such as siblings, out-of-home caregivers and peers, all have a potential influence on children’s development (Bandura & Walters, 1963; Mead, 1934; Piaget, 1932; Sullivan, 1953). These significant others help children develop their social skills, language abilities and cognition. Moreover, peer relations represent suitable and valuable contexts for children to have an adaptive development. Children without experiencing normal peer interactions may easily go through maladaptive development (Rubin, Coplan, Nelson,
& Lagace-Seguin, 1999).
Piaget (1932) was the most well known scholar who emphasized the importance of peer interactions in children’s development. He suggested that children’s relations with peers could be distinguished from those with adults, either in forms or functions.
Children’s relationships with parents or other adults are asymmetrical and complementary. They fall along a vertical plane of power assertion and dominance.
Children normally accept adults’ rules for obedience instead of completely understanding such rules. On the contrary, peer relations are more symmetrical and balanced. Unlike adult-child relations, peer relations fall along a more horizontal plane of dominance and power assertion. It is, Piaget claimed, the experiences of interacting with peers provide children the opportunities to examine conflicting ideas and to develop the ability to negotiate and discuss various perspectives. Not until children understand how to negotiate with others could they decide whether to compromise with or reject others’ suggestions. It is believed that one of the best and effective ways for children to solve conflicts with peers is through the cooperative exchange of questions, explanations and reasoned conversations (Rogoff, 1990).
• 國
立 政 治 大
㈻㊫學
•
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
Therefore, these interactions with peers may bring out good outcomes of the positive and adaptive development for children in many aspects, such as the abilities to understand others’ thoughts, emotions and intentions (Doise & Mugny, 1984; Selman
& Schultz, 1990). With the social understanding of other people’s minds, children were believed to be able to consider the consequences of their own or others’ social behaviors both for themselves and for other people. This ability then results in their production of socially appropriate behaviors (Dodge & Feldman, 1990).
Similar to Piaget, Mead (1934), Sullivan (1953), Bandura and Walters (1963) also pointed out the importance of peers in children’s development. Mead (1934) suggested that children’s ability of perspective taking developed from their interactions with peers. Through the participation in rule-governed activities with peers, children learned to recognize and coordinate various perspectives of others.
They then conceptualized the idea of “generalized others”, and established the systemized sense of “self”, which is comparative to “the others”. In Mead’s theory, peer interactions were essential for children’s development of both perspective-taking abilities and the organized self system.
Sullivan (1953) believed that children’s interactions with peers helped them develop “the concept of mutual respect, equality and reciprocity”. Moreover, he emphasized the significance of “special relationships”, such as friendship, for developing these concepts. When these concepts of mutuality became central to children’s close friendships, they started to acquire a more complex understanding of social relationships. Sullivan suggested that as children grew up, peers became more and more important in children’s personality shaping. Peers have significant influence on children’s awareness of the construction of social roles such as dominance and
• 國
立 政 治 大
㈻㊫學
•
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
deference, competition and also cooperation. The understanding of friendships turned out to have noteworthy impacts on other relationships.
Bandura and Walters (1963) proposed another theory known as the social learning theory, which has been influential to many current studies on peer interaction.
In the social learning theory, children learn about the social world around them and how to behave appropriately in such social contexts through directly taught by peers or indirectly observing others’ social behaviors and consequences. In other words, children’s interaction with peers provides a suitable environment for them to acquire knowledge about the social world and appropriate social behaviors. Peers become behavior shaping and controlling agents to each other. These social behaviors would in return help children to maintain, establish or disrupt their relations with peers.
Briefly speaking, peers are influential in children’s cognitive development, as well as their personality and social behavior shaping. They not only help each other understand others’ emotions, intentions and thoughts but also behave as social models for each other.
Previous researchers have discussed how discourse markers build up discourse coherence, what functions they serve in discourse and how children acquire these markers. These studies revealed that discourse markers are multifunctional. They may operate at more than one discourse structures at the same time and serve various functions. Developmental and contextual differences were also found in children’s acquisition of these markers. In addition, earlier research illustrated that peers play a significant role in children’s cognitive development and in shaping each other’s behavior as social models. These studies have shed light on the importance of peers in children’s development. However, few studies focused on Mandarin-speaking
• 國
立 政 治 大
㈻㊫學
•
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
children’s use of the multifunction of discourse markers, not to mention those considered peer interaction. Since the relations between peers could be distinguished from those with adults, the thesis intends to explore how Mandarin-speaking children use the two frequently appearing discourse markers, hao and dui, while interacting with peers in order to examine their communicative skills and to investigate whether it reflects the nature of peer interaction.
• 國
立 政 治 大
㈻㊫學
•
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
31 Chapter 3
Methods
3.1 Participants and data
The participants in the present study were six 5-year-old Mandarin-speaking children from the database of the Language Acquisition Lab in the Graduate Institute of Linguistics in National Chengchi University hosted by Professor Chiung-chih Huang. All of these children lived in the northern part of Taiwan and studied in the same kindergarten. Their mother tongue was Mandarin, which was also the major language they used both in their homes and kindergarten. Three of them, LIN, ANN, and ZHI (pseudonyms), were girls. The other three, CAI, NIN and JUN, were boys.
They belonged to the same class and were all acquainted friends. The data was collected in the morning sections in the kindergarten three times a week in May and June 2011. Two participants were chosen randomly each time. The two children were taken into the playroom and were asked to play whatever they want with each other.
Other children outside the playroom occasionally joined in the conversations. The researcher as an observer seldom participated in the children’s interaction. Their interaction was video-recorded using a digital camcorder. Each section was recorded for 13 to 30 minutes depended on the smoothness of the children’s interaction. Table 2 presents the subject combination and time duration of each recording section. The data used in this study consisted of 237 minutes (10 sections) of natural conversations between these participants. All of the dyads were involved in similar activities such as playing with blocks and toys. The collected data were transcribed according to the CHAT convention and analyzed by the CLAN program (MacWhinney, 2000).
•
Table 2. Subject combination and time duration of each recording section
Section Participants discourse markers in Mandarin conversations (Miracle, 1991; Chui, 2002; Tsai, 2001;
Wang et al., 2010; Yu, 2004). Based on previous studies, Schiffrin’s (1987) model of discourse, which includes five structures, was adopted as the analytical framework of the present study. The participation framework was excluded in the analysis because Mandarin children’s uses of both hao and dui in this structure were not found in the data. In addition, hao, according to earlier research, does not function in the participation framework (Huang, 2000; Miracle, 1991). The definitions of the four discourse components, which were the exchange structure, the action structure, the ideational structure and the information state, are exemplified in the following sections. Each occurrence of the two discourse markers hao ‘okay’ and dui ‘right’
was identified for the discourse structures it located. According to earlier studies, discourse markers are multifunctional. They may operate at more than one discourse structure at a certain time. When functions of the marker in different structures
• 國
立 政 治 大
㈻㊫學
•
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
appeared concurrently, such occurrence of hao and dui would be marked for its multifunction. That is, such use would be counted in the category of “exchange structure and information state”, for example. Once the discourse structure where hao and dui situated was identified, further analysis was made to look into the conversational functions of each use.
3.2.1 The exchange structure
According to Schiffrin (1987), the exchange structure consists of “the outcome of the decision procedures by which speakers alternate sequential roles and define those alternations in relation to each other” (Schiffrin, 1987, p. 24). It is also where adjacency pairs, such as question-answer or greeting-greeting, are established. When the discourse markers hao and dui were used in a conversation exchange or formed an adjacency pair with other discourse units uttered by the other interlocutor, they were identified as operated in the exchange structure of discourse. For instance, as illustrated in example 1, hao in LIN’s utterance was an answer to CAI’s question. The two adjacent utterances formed a question-answer pair. Similarly, dui in example 2 also served as an answer to the previous question. Therefore, the two markers were identified as functioning in the exchange structure.
Example 1: Hao in the exchange structure 1
*CAI: 你 可不可以 幫 我 拼?
ni kebukeyi bang wo pin
You can help me make
Can you help me make (it)?
1 The examples in the whole paper are presented in a 4-‐line gloss with Line 1, Chinese characters;
Line 2, the pinyin Romanization; Line 3, word-‐by-‐word translation; and Line 4, a free translation.
•
Example 2: Dui in the exchange structure
*NIN: 開 車 從 這 邊 然後 走
(We) drive cars on this side, and walk on that side, right?
*LIN: +^ 對. ß
dui right Right.
3.2.2 The action structure
In Schiffrin’s (1987) model of discourse coherence, the action structure is where speech acts are situated. This structure considers about the speakers’ identities, social settings and the linear order of actions. When discourse markers were used to mark speech acts, they were identified as functioning in the action structure. For instance, in example 3, hao served as a declaration of directives, which showed CAI’s intention to make his listener to do something. Similarly in example 4, hao functioned as a declaration of the closure of CAI’s physical action, which is putting the block onto the toy in JUN’s hand. These two usages of hao as speech acts of declaration therefore were recognized as locating in the action structure of discourse. However, dui in the current data was not found in the action structure.
•
Example 3: Hao functions as a declaration of directives.
*CAI: 好 換 你 了. ß
hao huan ni le
good change you ASP
Okay, it’s your turn.
Example 4: Hao functions as a declaration marking the completion of a physical act.
*CAI: 我 知道 怎麼 用.
wo zhidao zeme yong
I know how use
I know how to do it.
*CAI: 這樣 [% 將一個積木成功裝上 JUN 手中玩具].
zheyang [% successfully put a block onto the toy in JUN’s hand]
this
The ideational structure is a structure, which concerns the organization of ideas within the discourse (Schiffrin, 1987). It includes three types of relations between propositions or ideas: cohesive relations, topic relations and functional relations.
When hao and dui were used to signal relations between ideas, they were identified as operating in the ideational structure. Example 5 and 6 illustrate the use of discourse markers hao and dui in the ideational structure. In example 5, the child E (5;2) and the observer I were involving in a pretend play in which E was the teacher and I the student. E used hao as a topic transition marker to end the present topic that the student is teaching the teacher, and start the following topic that the class is to begin.
•
In example 6, the marker dui was used by CAI to switch the current topic, building up the house, to a new one, which is playing the xylophone. It signaled the relations between topics and also made the discourse cohesive.
Example 5: Hao functions in the ideational structure (Huang, 2000, p. 82-83).
I: 撇 一 下.
Why is the student teaching his teacher?
E: 什麼!
We are going to have our class now!
•
Example 6: Dui functions in the ideational structure.
*CAI: /ho/ 你 一直 蓋 這個!
%sit: CAI found a xylophone
*LIN: 我們 做 一 個 房. management of both speaker and hearer’s knowledge and meta-knowledge. It focused on the interactions between the speaker’s and the hearer’s cognitive states. When the use of discourse marker hao and dui was associated with the information exchange
• 國
立 政 治 大
㈻㊫學
•
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
between the speaker and the hearer, it was identified as functioning in the information state. In example 7, hao indicated LIN’s positive evaluation and acknowledgement of NIN’s information. Likewise, in example 8, dui was used by NIN to confirm the truthfulness of JUN’s information that it was nighttime in the Unite States when they were playing.
Example 7: Hao functions in the information state.
*NIN: 記得 要 過 喔.
jide yao guo o
remember have pass PRT Don’t forget to go through (the road).
*LIN: 好 ß
hao okay Okay.
Example 8: Dui functions in the information state.
*JUN: 美國 現在 是 晚上 喔?
meiguo xianzai shi wanshang o
Unite States now be nighttime PRT It is nighttime now in the Unite States?
*NIN: +^ 對! ß
dui right Yes!
• 國
立 政 治 大
㈻㊫學
•
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
39 Chapter 4
Results
The results presented in this chapter comprise three sections. First of all, the distribution of the two discourse markers, hao and dui, in different structures of discourse is shown in section 4.1. Afterward Mandarin-speaking children’s use of hao and dui in peer interaction are illustrated in section 4.2 and 4.3 respectively.
4.1 Hao and dui in different structures of discourse
Table 3 demonstrates the distribution of hao and dui for discourse structures in Mandarin-speaking children’s conversation with peers. The results showed that Mandarin children used hao in three discourse structures, which were the information state, the exchange structure and the action structure. The children’s use of hao in the ideational structure was not found in the current data. In the data, Mandarin-speaking children used 155 tokens of hao. Each token of hao functioned simultaneously in the information state. In other words, all of the use of hao was multifunctional. Among the total 155 tokens, hao was found mostly in the exchange structure. It appeared 96 times (61.94%) in the exchange structure, and 50 times (32.26%) in the action structure. Moreover, hao in both the action and exchange structures accounted for 5.8% (9 times) in Mandarin-speaking children’s peer conversation.
In addition to hao, dui ‘right’ was also found in different discourse structures in speaking children’s peer conversation. As seen in Table 3, Mandarin-speaking children used dui in three discourse structures when interacting with peers, which were the exchange structure, the ideational structure and the information state.
• 國
立 政 治 大
㈻㊫學
•
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
Dui in the current data was not found in the action structure. Among all 64 tokens, dui was used 56 times (87.5%) in the exchange structure, 8 times (12.5%) in the ideational structure. Moreover, each token of dui in the present data functioned simultaneously in the information state. That is to say, all of the dui was multifunctional in the information state and another structure, such as the exchange structure or the ideational structure.
Table 3. Distribution of hao and dui in different structures of discourse
Structure of discourse Hao Dui
N % N %
Action and information state 50 32.26
Exchange and information state 96 61.94 56 87.5
Ideational and information state 8 12.5
Action, exchange and information state 9 5.8
Total 155 100 64 100
The result suggested that Mandarin-speaking children used hao in the information state, the action structure and the exchange structure of discourse when interacting with their peers. All the use of hao functioned simultaneously in the information state. Moreover, other than the information state, Mandarin-speaking children used hao most frequently in the exchange structure. The frequency in the exchange structure was nearly twice as that in the action structure. On the other hand, Mandarin-speaking children also used dui in three discourse structures, which were the information state, the exchange structure and the ideational structure. All tokens of dui were found concurrently in the information state and the other structure.
Besides the information state, Mandarin-speaking children used dui predominately in the exchange structure. Meanwhile, they have the ability to use dui in the ideational
• 國
立 政 治 大
㈻㊫學
•
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
structure to manage the organization of the propositional content in discourse. When comparing the two markers, they both appeared in the information state and the exchange structure. However, only hao was found in the action structure and dui in the ideational structure. Also, only hao served the multifunction in three structures, which were the action structure, the exchange structure, and the information state.
Such multifunction in more than two discourse structures was not found in Mandarin children’s use of dui. The results also indicated that Mandarin-speaking 5-year-olds had the ability to manipulate the multifunction of hao and dui in different structures.
Nevertheless, their uses of the two markers demonstrated both similarities and differences. In-depth analysis of the various functions of hao and dui in these structures would be illustrated in the following sections respectively.
4.2 Hao in different structures of discourse 4.2.1 Hao as a marker in the information state
Because of the original meaning of hao as a stative verb indicates the speaker’s positive assessment toward the information provided, it is considered as functioning
Because of the original meaning of hao as a stative verb indicates the speaker’s positive assessment toward the information provided, it is considered as functioning