Hostname: page-component-7b7567c8c-wxvwp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-14T14:18:18.768Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Maternal speech: strategy or response?*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 September 2008

Linda Smolak and
Marsha Weinraub
Linda Smolak
Affiliation:
Kenyon College
Marsha Weinraub
Affiliation:
Temple University
Get accessRights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The existing data concerning the effects of maternal speech on child language development are so conflicting that it is difficult to draw even tentative conclusions about this relationship. One potential contributor to this problem is our lack of information concerning the determinants of maternal speech. The present study was designed to separate those elements of maternal speech which are heavily influenced by child language levels from those that seem to represent the mother's consistent style or strategy for ‘teaching’ language. Syntactic, discourse, and communicative functions of mothers' speech were examined. Mothers of high-and low-level language children were compared when talking to their daughters and to another girl the same age as their daughter. Analysis indicated a striking amount of similarity and consistency in high vs. low mothers' speech to both their daughters and the other child. Those elements of maternal speech that did show differences tended to be features that are fairly easily monitored by mothers or are directly tied to child utterances.

Information

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Child Language , Volume 10 , Issue 2 , June 1983, pp. 369 - 380
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1983

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

Footnotes

[*]

An earlier version of this paper was presented at the Biennial Meeting of the Society for Research in Child Development, Boston, 1981. We are grateful to Joanne Budney and Kathy Feuermen for their assistance. Our deepest appreciation is due to Marlyce's father for permitting her to participate in this project. Address for correspondence: Linda Smolak, Kenyon College, Department of Psychology, Gambier, Ohio 43022.

References

REFERENCES

Bates, E., Benigni, L., Bretherton, I., Camaioni, L. & Volterra, V. (1979). The emergence of symbols: cognition and communication in infancy. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Bellinger, D. (1980). Consistency in the pattern of change in mothers' speech: some discriminant analyses. JChLang 7. 469–87.Google ScholarPubMed
Clarke-Stewart, K. A. (1978). Popular primers for parents. AmPsych 33. 359–69.Google Scholar
Cross, T. (1977). Mothers' speech adjustments: the contributions of selected child-listener variables. In Snow, C. E. & Ferguson, C. A. (eds), Talking to children: language input and acquisition. Cambridge: C.U.P.Google Scholar
Cross, T. (1978). Mothers' speech and its association with rate of linguistic development in young children. In Waterson, N. & Snow, C. (eds), The development of communication. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Furrow, D., Nelson, K. & Benedict, H. (1978). Mothers' speech to children and syntactic development: some simple relationships. JChLang 6. 423–42.Google Scholar
Labov, W. (1972). Language in the inner city. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
McDonald, L. & Pien, D. (1982). Mother conversational behaviour as a function of interactional intent. JChLang 9. 337–58.Google ScholarPubMed
Nelson, K. (1973). Structure and strategy in learning to talk. Monogr. Soc. Res. Ch. Devel. 38. (Serial No. 149).Google Scholar
Nelson, K. (1981). Individual differences in language development: implications for development and language. DevPsych 17. 170–87.Google Scholar
Newport, E., Gleitman, L. & Gleitman, H. (1977). Mother, I'd rather do it myself: some effects and non-effects of maternal speech style. In Snow, C. E. & Ferguson, C. A. (eds), Talking to children: language input and acquisition. Cambridge: C.U.P.Google Scholar
Olsen-Fulero, L. (1982). Style and stability in mother conversational behaviour: a study of individual differences. JChLang 9. 543–64.Google ScholarPubMed
Retherford, K. S., Schwartz, B. C. & Chapman, R. S. (1981). Semantic roles and residual grammatical categories: who tunes into whom? JChLang 8. 583–608.Google ScholarPubMed
Schachter, F. F. (1979). Everyday mother talk to toddlers: early intervention. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Shatz, M. (1982). On mechanisms of language acquisition: can features of the communication environment account for development? In Wanner, E. & Gleitman, L. (eds), Language acquisition: the state of the art. Cambridge: C.U.P.Google Scholar
Smolak, L. (1980). Motherese from the mother's perspective. Paper presented at the Eastern Psychological Association,Hartford,Connecticut.Google Scholar
Wells, G. (1980). Adjustments in adult–child conversation: some effects of interaction. In Giles, H., Robinson, W. P. & Smith, P. M. (eds), Language: social psychological perspectives. Oxford: Pergamon.Google Scholar
Wells, G., Barnes, S., Gutfreund, M. & Satterly, D. (1983). Characteristics of adult speech which predict children's language development. JChLang 10.Google Scholar
Wolfe, D. & Gardner, H. (1979). Style and sequence in early symbolic play. In Smith, N. R. & Franklin, M. B. (eds), Symbolic functioning in childhood. Hillsdale, N.J.: Erlbaum.Google Scholar