Category: Language

The development of language is a fascinating chapter in the analysis of culture and its components. Language often helps us understand the nuances of ethnicity and ethnic identity among different peoples. With this in mind, it is important to analyze the development of important words that are indicators of a culture’s social identity. This paper thus, analyzes the word “Boricua” form the Puerto Rican people. It does this to help understand its history, socio-cultural significance and context as well as giving personal insight to its importance in my self-actualization.

Historical Context and Meaning

To begin with, “Boricua” is a Puerto Rican word that is a description of the People of Puerto Rico. Its etymology begins with the original inhabitants of the Islands the Taino people who named it “Boriken”. However, the arrival of European settlers on the island diminished the original inhabitants because of miscegenation and the diseases brought by them.

Its development beyond colonialism occurred in the 16th century with the importation of African Slaves by the Spanish. Due to the transatlantic trade, many Spanish settled on the island permanently establishing dominion on the island. According to Lauria-Perricelli (363) by the 18th and 19th centuries, the population of the island had changed significantly because of the influx of runaway slaves and the intermixing of local populations creating the Canarian people.

The word “Boricua” is thus a Spanish version of the original Taino version because of the historical nature of Puerto Rican occupation by the Spanish. Steward (109) outlines that its identity stems from both local and international power. Puerto Rico was under colonial rule from 1493-1898 and after that, has become a territory of the United States. Because of this, locals ascribe to using this word to describe themselves to maintain their heritage.

In addition to this, the word is also a form of defiance to the United States norms which encourage English as the national language. Spanish is the most widely spoken language in Puerto Rico. Transnational issues between the United States and the self-governing island have forced the country’s people to become keener on their cultural identifiers in protest to what the locals view as the greater United States’ occupation of the territory, without granting them adequate rights and representation. The word Boricua is thus a description of the people of Puerto Rico that is used as an Identity word by them for patriotic purposes and has a deeper meaning beyond identifying native Puerto Ricans.

Socio-Cultural Relevance

Secondly, Ardener (117) posits that the study of languages is based on the adaptation of people to their environments. Over a long period, language becomes shaped by the importance that a community imparts on certain aspects of it. As people evolve, so too does their language and meaning assigned to certain events and issues. In this context, the word “Boricua” is an evolved version of the original Taino version. Furthermore, the word is deeply influenced by its Spanish roots from the colonial actions of the Spanish. The Spanish colonized a large part of the Americas and thus have influenced language over an entire continent.

Sociocultural relativism is thus existent throughout the Americas because of the influence of the colonial masters. Although Spanish is now a mainstay of the continent, “Boricua” is solely an identifier of the Puerto Ricans. Because it comes from the original inhabitants of the island, it does not reflect in other Spanish speaking countries. It is thus, a singular identifier of Puerto Ricans and people of this origin.

However, because it is a Spanish version of the original, it has value to other cultures because of how languages evolve. Other people from Spanish speaking countries recognize its relevance and, thus, do not use it in their descriptions. Its development thus helps in the understanding of cultural relativism, and the concept of universalism as its development and use are integral to the creation of identity. Although cultures may develop in a close-knit way, and some languages are universal in application, there are nuances in language that separate cultures. Puerto Ricans are t free to use this word because it is one of the few identifies of their sovereignty, history and cultural identity.

Personal Connection

Lastly, my connection to this word is the importance it has in describing my heritage. As a native Puerto Rican born in Mayaguez, it is an identification that I am proud of. Identifying a Boricua is important to me because my family moved from Puerto Rico to Florida when I was eight months old. Our ethnic identities are the degree to which an individual feels like they are part of an ethnic group (Ardener 71). Cultural identity is thus important to a person’s self-concept because they encompass issues regarding ethnicity and their interpretation of ethnicity. Thus, personally, identifying as a Boricua is an important part of my definition as a person. This is further bolstered by the fact that I am not a resident of the territory but have relatives who I visit often. This word gives me pride and is a big contributor to my exploration of self-conceptualization.

Furthermore, my identity does not decolonize the concept of otherhood in America, especially when one analyzes Spanish speakers in the country and the overall attitude of the country towards immigrants. Although I am a full American, my identity is often related to immigrants from other parts of the Americas. The country has a problem with immigration and thus, often discovers means to put people into cultural identifiers. Although my identity is that of a typical American, because of my heritage and the country’s issues with race and race relations, I often find myself put into an immigrant subgroup. Although there is nothing inherently wrong with being an immigrant, it is the country’s attitude towards them and the Spanish language that contributes towards stereotypes, misconceptions and characterizations. However, I wear my Puerto Rican heritage proudly because it is part of who I am, at the same time embracing the duality of cultures by being an American.

In summation, ethnicity is a big part of an individual. As human beings, we all belong to a subgroup of people that gives us an ethnic identity. Within this group, exists the development of language and words that not only help the group get together but also acts as a cultural identifier for external people. Thus, the word “Boricua” has a lot of meaning to people of Puerto Rican origin because it defines our history and identity. It is a gender-neutral word that is one of the last vestiges of Puerto Rican originality, coming from the native Taino people, without the affectation of the Spanish language or any other external factor.

Scientific language is unique and like every other language it does not come without its challenges. It is full of complex terminology, semitechnical and dual meanings of words, logical connectives, passive voices, diagrams, pictures, mathematics, and of course not forgetting chemical symbols and formulae. This struggle with scientific language is a major issue that has become an important topic for review by education researchers. It clear that it is not just a difficulty experienced by students with a low socioeconomic status or for students of which English is another language (EAL), it is in fact an issue that strikes at the heart of science learning for all students. An important epistemological view of science is that it is the cognitive thinking of physical ideals in which the aim is to explain them through a state of exploratory talk – a language concept of asking and answering questions (Mercer & Dawes, 2008). To quote Albert Einstein the goal of education is in fact to produce “independent thinking and acting individuals” (Calaprice, 2013). Playing such a vital role in pupils learning, it is thus always a duty in teaching to think about utilising dialogic models in a science classroom to ensure it is a home in producing diversely skilled and motivated future scientists. The aim of this essay is to establish the link between theoretical frameworks of language presented by Mortimer & Scott (2006) and the communicative approaches undertaken by science teachers.

Reasoning and constructive argumentation is the basis of all science communication. Argued by many, this language barrier in the science classroom could potentially inhibit the development of scientific ideas (Ford & Peat, 1988). Many analogies of the modes of dialog used in science classroom and their effectiveness in helping students learn suggest that the pivotal role for the successful use of language in the science classroom is played by the teacher (Mortimer & Scott, 2006; Osborne, 2002; Michaels & O’Connor, 2012). Hoffmann (1988) suggested that the choice of the language of instruction used in schools by the teachers was of the utmost importance, an ideal is also supported by Marlene Thier (2002), who suggested that the effective teaching is inextricably linked to strong language skills. As such teachers who struggle to create a range of communication approaches in their classrooms may not provide students with the skills to independently think and act as excelling scientists.

The complexity of the topic of the language used in science classrooms stems to the difficulty of categorising the dialogic interactions that occur and when to appropriately use different modes of communicative approach throughout the science curriculum. Mortimer & Scott (2006) have effectively defined a framework into four specific classes of communicative approach in which all dialogic interactions between teachers and students can be placed; interactive/dialogic, noninteractive/dialogic, interactive/authoritative and noninteractive/authoritative. The framework is based upon two key aspects, the interaction and persona. The interactive and noninteractive part of the classification determines the involvement of the number of participants in the discussion. For example, interactive involves more than one participant – the teacher and the students, and noninteractive involves only one participant – usually the teacher. The dialogic/authoritative part of the classification determines the specificity of the answers the teacher is looking for and the nature in which is it sort after. Dialogic refers to the acquisition of information from and with others, focusing on exploring a range of ideas in an open-ended chain pattern. Authoritative is usually where the teacher is solely focused on one scientific point of view and delivers the information in a closed chain pattern, with any answers not related to this specific point of view ignored. Quite simply: interactive/dialogic occurs when both teachers and students participate to consider a range of ideas in an explorative manner; noninteractive/dialogic occurs when the teacher, as the only participant to the interaction, speaks about different points of view; interactive/authoritative occurs when a teacher focuses on one specific point of view and leads the students through a question and answer routine using very narrow probing questions with the aim of establishing and consolidating one point of view; and finally noninteractive/authoritative occurs when the teacher alone presents a specific point of view. Five linked aspects of teacher role and teaching focus help to clearly place dialogic interactions observed in the science classroom into these classifications. Mortimer & Scott (2006) show that teaching purpose, content, communicative approach, teacher interventions, and finally patterns of interaction, provide a perspective of how the teacher works with students to develop their own ideas in an explorative way as budding scientists in the classroom – the key ideology from the views of Mercer (2008).

A datum, in the form of observations, was recorded as a sequence of episodes during a year 9 lesson on atom structure for subsequent analysis on the language used in a secondary science classroom.

This episode took place as an initial introductory activity to the topic being covered over the next few lessons. It involved a slide displaying different elements with their atomic numbers and masses and the big question, “what do these numbers mean?”. The purpose of the activity was for the teacher to assess what the students could remember of this new topic based on previous years of education by inviting all students into an open discussion about the topic of atom structure. Students were asked to think, pair and share based on the question (a ‘talk-move’ expressed by Micheals & O’Connor (2012)) before being randomly selected to initiate the first discourse in this science classroom (see appendix 1, episode 1).

During this first episode the teacher adopted a neutral stance, not offering any evaluative comments, only prompting students to present their own ideas – allowing the students a window of free rein to think, elaborate and justify their own ideas as described by Mercer (2008). This freedom that the teacher provided, for a less experienced teacher may seem daunting without knowledge of what the students will suggest, but is essential to building students efficacy with this type of talk where there is no wrong answer only ideas that may be challenged – the basis of scientific discoveries. The pattern of interaction from this teacher, followed a very open approach whereby the teacher initiates the scientific discourse to obtain a response and then follows on obtaining more responses from only prompting students with minor utterances to give her more information each time. This elicitation discussion is an example of interactive/dialogic discourse in the science classroom whereby the teacher has encouraged the full participation of all students in presenting their own wide range of views about the atom structure. Such dialogic teaching at the very start of a lesson has a key focus in raising students engagement in the topic by considering their own thoughts and ideas, an ideal supported by Calcagni & Lago (2018).

Another episode took place as the next activity. But this task involved the students thinking independently in order to problem solve which element this picture of an atom represented in the periodic table based only on what the students had identified and discussed previously (see appendix 1, episode 2).

This second episode shifted to an interactive/authoritative communicative approach. After capturing and inspiring the students to relate and intrinsically motivate themselves to understand topic through the initial open discourse, this shift provides students with the specific sense of direction to the accepted views of the scientific ideology of atom structure that they need to know. This episode becomes a teacher-centred whole group interaction where the participation from students occurs after questions are scaffolded to produce a specific desired scientific point of view. The teacher even aids students listening to one another through rephrasing prompts and gets students to think deeper through getting them to defend their answers (Micheals & O’Connor, 2012). The pattern of interaction, question-answer-evaluation an example of the triadic IRE commonly found in authoritative approaches, creates the academic productive talk about atom structure the teacher desired in order to clarify and improve the students’ understanding through the evaluations of the students answers.

It is interesting to notice that these views are probably not limited to science learning and understanding but can be considered as an ideal in all classrooms. Such complexity in the language of instruction used in science classrooms shows that even for experienced teachers who master many communicative approaches, as shown above by this teacher, it still hard to reach a suitable balance between dialogic and authoritative discourse as suggested by Mortimer & Scott (2006). A particular important issue that was raised to me, and picked up on in episode 2, is the necessity to deal with words which science inherited from everyday language. When teachers are introducing new language they should strongly consider four questions; is the word important? does it add to the students understanding? does the student have to know the word now? would insisting on the word be useful? An example displayed well in episode 2 with regards to the scientific word shells in atom structure. Science curriculum, like that for any other subject area, should be designed for enabling all students to develop critical independent thinking and acting. As such, teachers should know the curriculum and be able to identify areas where certain communicative approaches could exemplify a child overcoming the language barriers science learning faces and inevitably improve their attainment.

References

1. Calaprice, A. (2013). The Ultimate Quotable Einstein. Oxford: Princeton University Press.
2. Calcagni, E., & Lago, L. (2018). The three domains for dialogue: A framework analysis dialogic approaches to teaching and learning. Learning, Culture and Social Interaction, 1-12.
3. Ford, A., & Peat, D. (1988). The role of language in science. Foundations of Physics, 1233-1242.
4. Hoffman, E. (1988). Practical suggestions for oral language development. In J. Reyhner, Teaching the India Child: A biligual multicultural approach (pp. 86-96). Montanna: Eastern Montana College.
5. Mercer, N., & Dawes, L. (2008). The Value of Exploratory Talk. In N. Mercer, & S. Hodgkinson, Exploring Talk in School – Inspired by the Work of Douglas Barnes (pp. 55-71). London: SAGE Publications.
6. Micheals, S., & O’Connor, C. (2012). Talk Science Primer. Cambridge, MA: Teacher Education Resource Centre (TERC).
7. Osbourne, J. (2002). Science without literacy: A ship without a sale? Camrbidge Journal of Education, 203-218.
8. Scott, P., & Mortimer, E. (2006). The tension between authoritative and dialogic discourse: A fundamental charteristic of meaning making interactions in high school science lessons. Wiley Interscience, 605-631.
9. Thier, M. (2002). The new science literacy: using language skills to help students learn science . Rethinking science technology education to meet the demands of future generations in a changing world. (pp. 422-432). Brazil: International Organisation for Science Technology Education (IOSTE).

Words, thoughts, and discourses are critical for teachers to consider when developing oral language in students. These faucets to oral language cannot be separated but rather need to be addressed as a whole because as they intersect and intertwine students grow and develop. How then can teachers develop these faucets in unison? Oral language development can be a challenge for teachers, however, they can create concrete experiences using positive social interaction that incorporates the Zone of Proximal Development and the more knowledgeable other (MKO).

Exposure to a language is critical; learners need to listen and practice the language to acquire competency in the language. According to Bahktin (1986) “we know our native language- its lexical composition and grammatical structures- not from dictionaries and grammars but from concrete utterances that we hear and that we reproduce in live speech communication with people around”. This supports the need for social interaction between the learner and the ‘More Knowledgeable Other (MKO)’ as proposed by Vygotsky (1978). The teacher in the classroom is the MKO who can interact with the learner through modeling and demonstrating the language. The teacher cannot only speak ‘to’ the student but rather ‘with’ the student creating socio-cultural interactions and ultimately allowing the learner to experience the language in authentic situations. Bahktin (1986) purported that ‘Language is realized in the form of individual concrete utterances (oral and written) by participants in the various areas of human activity’, and that learning to speak requires the construction of utterance. As learners speak, they develop various speech genres for diverse purposes. This informs teachers on creating concrete experiences such as teaching in context and not in isolating words and sentences and exposing learners to various speech genres. Subsequently, language learning should not be based on simply identifying parts of speech in sentences but rather the learner using and listening to these language structures in purposeful conversations and discussions. The learner needs to be able to respond to the utterances of the teacher, therefore ‘addressability’ of the teacher’s utterances is important. The utterance must address someone and have the characteristic of ‘answerability’ which invites a response (Bakhtin, 1986, p. 95). The top-down approach of the teacher telling and talking without offering the opportunity for students to respond hinders the learning of language and suffocates language development. Classrooms should be filled with rich conversations and discussions which allow for the usage of the English language as well as provide opportunities to critically respond to ideas within a context.

Bahktin (1986) pointed out “thoughts are shaped in the process of interaction and struggle with others’ thought;” this implies that the more the classroom teacher engages in dialogues the more the students will be able to practice the language and eventually acquire the phonological, semantic, and syntactic component of oral language to the level of automaticity. Hence, collaborative dialogues are encouraged because it enables both the speaker and listener to take both roles and respond to each other consequently developing thoughts. Across the curriculum, the engagement of collaborative dialogues can be incorporated in all lessons and not limited only to the language arts. For example, in math class instead of only explaining how to calculate simple interest, the students can be engaged in discourses that examine the effects and implication of interest rates and how it affects the economy, bargaining power and standards of living. Subsequently, developing a greater understanding of the mathematical concept and allowing for the construction of one’s own understanding of knowledge by expanding vocabulary, meaning and contextual language. The Social Interaction Theory claimed that learning precedes development as stated: “Every function in the child’s cultural development appears twice: first, on the social level, and later, on the individual level; first, between people (inter-psychological) and then inside the child (intra-psychological)” (Vygotsky L. , 1978). This means that the learner learns through a process that involves socially interacting with others, making sense of new words, and understanding meanings based on usage. They internalized the components of the language while at the same time practicing and purposefully using it. The learning environment because it is non-threatening allows them to freely make errors and self-correct themselves and learn through real and authentic experiences.

Since, the social interaction creates the authentic experience the teacher can incorporate Vygotsky’s theory which, conceptualized learning from the ‘More Knowledgeable Other’ (MKO), which refers to someone who knows more about the content than the learner. Through interaction, the learner will develop the required knowledge or skills because learning is not one-directional but rather a result of social interaction with an older person or peers within a social and cultural environment. Speech is considered a cultural tool that allows a child to communicate needs but eventually, it is internalized, and this leads to higher learning. Through social interaction, the behavior is modeled, demonstrated and instructions given so collaborative dialogue is evident. Additionally, Vygotsky Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD) as defined as ‘the discrepancy between a child’s actual mental age and the level he reaches in solving a problem with assistance” (Vygotsky L. , 2012, p. 198) is relevant because it provides the opportunity for the child to learn more of the language than possible alone. There is a zone of what the child can learn without the aid of another person and beyond that is the zone representing what the learner can learn with adult or peer assistance. When a student is learning a task, their accomplishment and growth will be greater if they are assisted by someone who is much more knowledgeable and will enable language development beyond their singular abilities. For this to occur, the person assisting needs to be much more knowledgeable than the learner, there must be social interaction and activities to scaffold learning (McLeod, 2019). Scaffolding, according to Bradley & Bradley (2004), are contextual activities that help, guide, and assist the learner as they embark on a learning experience. As the learner works within his zone, activities are given that provide instructions, and directions to help the child navigate the learning zone and acquire the elements of the language. Scaffolds are like crutches that offer support to learning the language but as competency improves, the scaffolds are gradually removed so that the learner may practice the speech and internalize the ideas independently.

This can be applicable in Belizean classrooms which is most cases are populated with students who are learning English as a second language primarily because of the immense cultural diversity that exists in the country, however, many times that is ignored because Belize is an English-speaking nation only on paper. Recognizing this misconception suggests that classroom teachers should utilize ideas that develop oral language and speech in schools and not assume that children can develop it naturally. Non-speakers of a language tend to not want to speak in class in fear of making errors, therefore, teachers need to create a supportive environment. This environment can capitalize on the cultural and linguistic wealth that students bring to the classroom. The supportive learning environment can include persons who know the language to help the non-speaker to scaffold the language and acquire more of the discourses that he is immersed in. Additionally, the home language can be used as the springboard for the acquisition of the new language. Piaget in McLeod (2019) believed that language can be learned through assimilation and accommodation, therefore the student can use their acquired language, in this case, Spanish or Kriol, to assimilate new language structure that the More Knowledgeable Other is assisting with as he navigates through the zone of proximal development. Furthermore, the primary discourse of the student can accommodate phonology, syntax, and semantics of English since some similarities existed between these languages. For example, many of the words in Kriol are English words pronounced similarly, but their meanings differ such as the word ‘ignorant’ which is a known word in both languages but differ in meaning in Kriol and English, the students can then assimilate and accommodate the new meaning to their existing schema through the assistance of the adult.

Abstract

Transgender individuals are disproportionately affected by psychological distress, resulting in a prevalence of depression, anxiety, suicide, and substance use within this population. Research consistently shows that resilience among this community correlates to lower levels of distress, however its moderating effect has yet to be confirmed. Literature compiled from the search terms transgender and resilience yielded 14 relevant peer-reviewed articles including one book, one literature review, three qualitative articles and nine quantitative articles. Preliminary findings indicate numerous factors of resilience, the most pivotal being social support and age. Youth are the most at-risk for psychological distress and suicide, thus it is imperative that early-intervention to promote resilience is implemented through increased peer and familial support.

Introduction

The socioemotional well-being of English Language Learner’s (ELL’s) requires careful consideration, as it is only when such needs have been addressed that an optimal state for learning can be established.

Internalizing and Externalizing Behaviors

Negative internalizing and externalizing behaviors exhibited by ELL’s have been correlated to lower academic achievement and specifically slower and increasingly labored second language acquisition (Gottfried, Le, & Datar, 2016; Niehaus & Adelson, 2014; Vera et al., 2018; Waxman, Rivera, & Powers 2012; Winsler, Kim, & Richard, 2014). ELL students that keep social or emotionally impactful events to themselves, such as being bullied for their accent or shame for not understanding the lesson, often experience a profound sense of isolation which inhibits their participation in classroom language instruction (Vera et al., 2018, Winsler, Kim, & Richard, 2014). When a student exhibits externalizing behaviors such as impulsivity, disturbs ongoing activities, or argues, the entire class, and more specifically the ELL student, loses valuable language instructional minutes (Gottfried, Le, & Datar, 2016, Niehaus & Adelson, 2014). An ELL student that is distracted or busy distracting others, is unable to attend to instruction (Waxman, Rivera, & Powers (2012).

All 4 quantitative and 1 mixed-methods studies examined the socioemotional effects on ELL’s language proficiency however, they are not of equal quality or utility for my study purposes. The high-quality mixed-methods study by Vera et al. (2018), permitted an in-depth descriptive account from participants while still providing detailed numerical analysis of variables. The study solely focused on the socioemotional experiences of its participants versus the other studies that examined additional variables. This provided dedicated insight of the specific internalizing behaviors such as, fear and externalizing behaviors such as, impulsiveness and their effects on language acquisition. However, being a retrospective study where the adult participants recount past events, it is possible that memory may be skewed or corrupted. Additionally, a voluntary sample was taken where participants self-selected into a survey. Perhaps, participants with higher socioemotional issues are more prone to responding to such inquiries.

Another study by Winsler, Kim, & Richard (2014), also had a weakness in the sample population; the teachers reporting the data were typically high school graduates. High quality teaching is often associated with proper teacher education. Conceivably, teachers did not possess the skills to make accurate assessments of student behavior. Both studies from Gottfried, Le, & Datar (2016) and Niehaus & Adelson (2014), provided valuable longitudinal data on the effect of internalizing and externalizing behaviors on language acquisition they included additional variables such as parental involvement and kindergarten entry-age, that were not as useful for my specific topic. Finally, Waxman, Rivera, & Powers, (2012), found a correlation between externalizing behaviors (distraction) and lower reading scores but fell short when they used teacher nomination to identify students for study categories. This is especially worrisome because researchers suggested in the discussion that perhaps teachers don’t know their students well enough.

Self Confidence as a Mediator

Students that with higher levels of self-confidence and are more likely to acquire second language proficiency than students with low self-confidence (Diaz, Cochran, & Karlin, 2016; Guglielmi, 2012; Halle, Hair, Wandner, McNamara & Chien, 2011; Ingraham & Nuttall, 2016). Students with higher proficiency in their heritage language, thus higher self-confidence, performed better academically (Guglielmi, 2012). Conversely, students with weak heritage language proficiency had lower math and reading scores, and reported lower self-esteem in general (Halle et al., 2011). One key indicator of student success in language proficiency was confidence (Ingram & Nuttall, 2016). Students routinely took part in risk-taking events, such as contributing to an open-ended story, and developed confidence in their abilities to change and learn new things. A striking departure from this phenomenon is that when ELL’s performed similarly academically to their non-ELL counterparts, they still had a lowered self-perception of competence (Diaz, Cochran, & Karlin, 2016).

All four studies highlighted the role of self-confidence in academic achievement and second language proficiency; however, Ingram & Nuttall’s 2016 qualitative study presented the strongest evidence and examples of this effect. The champion mindset in an Arts Integration school revealed how ELL’s drew confidence from areas of strength to persevere in areas of weakness. A student who needs help in the classroom with writing draws upon his confidence on the stage, because he is a “master” of the stage. Confidence in interwoven in the fabric of this school; everyday interactions between students are governed by shared principles. Students are reminded to make eye contact when addressing each other because they have been taught it is an important way to demonstrate confidence and respect. This collective mindset allows students to navigate a new language with enthusiasm. Although this study adds depth to my claim that self-confidence is integral to second language acquisition, as with all qualitative studies generalization cannot be established. The population is merely one school and sample size is small. Additional research utilizing a larger sample is needed.

While both Guglielmi (2012) and Halle et al. (2011) quantitative studies offer larger sample sizes, 27,000 and 19,000 respectively, the former specifically examined math and science achievement of ELL’s and the latter did not address the level of English proficiency achieved. Finally, Diaz, Cochran, & Karlin’s (2016) mixed-methods study offered an ironic perspective that was in contrast to the previous research; however, it’s validity could not be confirmed because only the qualitative part of the study was included in the paper. For the purposes of my review all four articles add value but must be considered in context.

Environmental Factors: Emotional Scaffolding

Emotionally scaffolded instruction creates an optimal environment for ELL’s to acquire second language proficiency (Lopez, 2012; Park, 2014; Pereira & Gentry, 2013; Wilcox, 2013). Creating such an environment is intricate balance of combining emotion and cognition (Park, 2014). When teachers combine both aspects; the student not only communicates using language but also nonverbal language such as tone, facial expressions, gestures, and eye contact (Park, 2014; Wilcox, 2013). These nuances paint a picture of how the student is interpreting the content and their mental state. These non-verbal cues are especially important for ELL’s because they may not possess the language to express themselves sufficiently. For educators, staying cognizant of these emotions and their cues can have a powerful effect on improving learner engagement and confidence (Wilcox, 2013). Children with teachers who routinely respond to students with the highest need, thus demonstrating emotional cognizance, yield higher reading scores than students with less responsive teachers (Lopez, 2012). Additionally, the high-potential ELL’s in Periera and Genry (2013), noted that the most salient attributes of their instruction was the positive interactions with peers and teachers (e.g. academic engagement and feelings of being welcome).

Lopez (2012) provided the strongest argument for the implementation of emotional scaffolding of instruction and its benefits. The sample was large, 1041 participants in 4th and 5th grades, and included students who attended dual language immersion and dual bilingual education programs. This quantitative study contributed to the limited literature on socioemotional outcomes of ELL’s by finding that teachers emotional support in instruction is a key factor in reconciling educational disparities.

In contrast Park (2014), presented a descriptive qualitative study that supported the validity of emotional scaffolding, yet the sample was a mere 15 students that attended preschool. It is difficult to relate such findings when the characteristics of the sample are so limited. Both Pereira & Gentry, 2013; and Wilcox, 2013; offered high quality contributions to the literature by addressing the emotional supports of academically higher performing ELL’s; a population that needs additional inquiry.

Summary

The themes discovered throughout the literature review of socioemotional outcomes of ELL’s when acquiring a second language include: the internalizing and externalizing behaviors they often exhibit, self-confidence as a mediator of language acquisition, and the emotional climate of their instruction. Negative internalizing and externalizing behaviors frequently inhibit second language acquisition to the extent that students either withdraw from instruction or act out in ways that disrupt learning altogether. The student falls further and further behind which prompts more negative behaviors. In turn self-confidence is a mediator of second language acquisition. Students that feel more confident in themselves and excel in at least one area are more willing to take educational risks and don’t view failures as inhibiting. Finally, ELL’s that receive emotionally scaffolded instruction fare much better academically. Teachers that consider student emotional states as well as cognitive can elicit greater second language proficiency.

Discussion

The literature within this review is of high quality with primarily large sample sizes from relevant populations. Five of the thirteen studies gathered longitudinal data which allowed researchers to track participants over time. However, there are obvious limitations when dealing with qualitative research and the smaller sample sizes that come with it.

Socioemotional outcomes are not static entities and not easily categorized. The rich descriptive nature of the qualitative studies I have chosen, outweigh the limitations inherent in the methods. The be clear, the strength of the longitudinal samples does not negate the weakness of the purposive and snowball samples and cross-sectional designs of the studies included in this review, rather the value of the data must be viewed in context with the nature of my research topic. With that being said, it is difficult to extricate socioemotional outcomes from the environment in which they occur. Consequently, no causal relationships can be drawn and generalization to the broader population can not be made. Current research on socioemotional outcomes provides vital indications for the academic well-being of ELL’s attempting to master a second language. Further and continual research on this constantly changing population is needed.

Implications

The literature discussed within this review offers a glimpse into the socioemotional worlds of ELL’s. Examined collectively, a fuller picture of the optimal learning environment of ELL’s becomes evident. The research contends that the socioemotional outcomes for ELL’s plays a role in the development of second language acquisition and academic achievement in general. The implications for students and educators alike are immense. If social-emotional skills play a large role in the academic success of ELL’s then explicit and deliberate instruction in these skills would be a logical evolution of such knowledge. The factors outlined in this review provide a good starting point yet, additional research is needed to identify what are the most relevant socioemotional outcomes. Once this is established. resources can be allocated for support services. Further, teacher education and school induction programs must account for the special needs of this growing population. Specialized training is needed to properly serve such a diverse and changing population of ELL’s.

Suggestions for Future Research

Findings from the studies indicate that there is a lack of current research on specific social-emotional skills that directly affect academic achievement and second language acquisition. Further research is needed to identify the specific skills that are most pertinent to the ELL population. Additionally, some studies included in this review utilized either a self-nomination or teacher nomination process to categorize participants language proficiency or socioemotional traits, such as resilience. ELL’s have a propensity to underestimate their abilities and teachers bias may affect their decisions (Diaz, Cochran, & Karlin’s (2016). Further research should seek to eliminate this potential bias.

Finally, a majority of research included in this review examines ELL’s through a deficit model lens. The negative behaviors and less than positive environments are the ones under scrutiny. Research that examines the socioemotional outcomes and environments of high-achieving ELL’s and the circumstances under which they flourish may yield more significant data.

Reference

1. Wilcox, K. (2013). A Socioecological view of higher-performing diverse elementary schools. Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk (JESPAR), 18(2), 101-127. doi: 10.1080/10824669.2013.781845

Ever since the inception of human existence on the planet, language has been the indispensable nature of human life. Language has provided and served numerous wants and desires of incalculable lives not only of humans but also of other ecological inhabitants. One of the distinctive and superior features that language has ever promulgated is the ‘species specification’, giving humans a position far above the realms of animals. The fact of language as omnipotent sovereign has also been share by Shelly Shah (n.d) in her essay ‘Language and its Importance to Society’:

Language is a constituent element of civilization. It raised man from a savage state to the plane which he was capable of reaching. Man could not become man except by language. An essential point in which man differs from animals is that man alone is the sole possessor of language. No doubt animals also exhibit certain degree of power of communication but that is not only inferior in degree to human language, but also radically diverse in kind from it. (Shah, n.d).

According to the recent research carried out by Simon (2019), there are, at present, 7,111 distinct living languages worldwide of which many do not have written forms, and Bhutan, although a tiny nation, also contributes, according to Driem (1998), nineteen different languages into the record. Languages in Bhutan may not be as old as other foreign languages but hold its own uniqueness and significance exclusively associated and well featuring the “Bhutanese’. Out of nineteen languages, only four languages in Bhutan are dominant, namely; Dzongkha, spoken in western Bhutan, Tshanglakha, spoken in eastern Bhutan, Lhotshamkha, spoken in southern Bhutan and Bumthangkha, spoken in central Bhutan. Amongst these four major languages only Dzongkha and Lhotshamkha have written forms. However, of all the languages available in Bhutan, Dzongkha is the national language of Bhutan officially recognized during the reign of the third king Jigme Dorji Wangchuk.

Dzongkha is officially the national language of the kingdom of Bhutan. It is the native language of eight of the twenty districts of Bhutan such as; Thimphu, Punakha, Paro, Wangdi Phodrang, Gasa, Ha, Dagana and Chukha in western Bhutan, but Dzongkha is spoken as a lingua franca across the country. Dzongkha is derived from the local vulgate of Old Tibetan through many centuries of independent linguistic evolution on Bhutanese land. Linguistically, Dzongkha can be qualified as the natural modem descendant in Bhutan of the ancient language of which Classical Tibetan or a Choke is the literary proponent, the language in which sacred Buddhist texts, medical and scientific treatises and, indeed, all learned works have been written. The status of Dzongkha as the language of the royal court, the military elite, educated nobility, government and administration is firmly rooted in Bhutanese history at least as far back as the twelfth century.

The first syllable /dzo/ refers to fortress which is the backformation of the word ‘Dzong’, and the second syllable /kha/ refers to language, and this blended word “Dzongkha’ gives the meaning of ‘Language spoken in Dzong (Fortress)’. These Dzongs perched on the mountainous landscape of Bhutan from east to west and have traditionally used as both centers of military and political power as well as centers of learning. More specifically, Dzongkha is the refined form of the native language of western Bhutan, the inhabitants of which as well as their language have traditionally been known as ‘Ngalong’. A widespread folk etymology for the term ‘Ngalong’ is that it means ‘the first to wakeup’ to the teachings of Buddhism in the land.

Although since the twelfth century, Dzongkha was widely spoken in Bhutan and was considered ‘similarly different’ form Tibetan language, the written form existed as same as that of Tibetan written language. Driem (1998) in his book titled ‘Dzongkha’ has deliberated on how both spoken and written form of Dzongkha have close relation to Tibetan language:

Dzongkha is said to have an old literary tradition in the sense that Classical Tibetan or Choke is to Dzongkha as Latin is to Portuguese, and the process of vernacularisation currently in progress in Bhutan has numerous parallels with the linguistic situation in the mediaeval Romance world. Just as Latin used to exercise and continues to exercise great influence on the vocabulary of the Romance languages and even English, so too Choke, the language of learning and liturgy, continues to strongly influence modern spoken and written Dzongkha. (Driem, 1998, pP-4-5).

Until 1971, although Dzongkha was recognized as the national language of Bhutan in 1961 upon the royal decree issued by the third king Jigme Dorji Wangchuk, there was no written form, it was in Choekay (Tibetan written language), and even in schools there was no independent written form of Dzongkha. In Driem’s book (1998), how Bhutan, before 1970 used Hindi (Indian language) and Choke as medium of instruction is clearly mentioned;

When the first two secular schools were opened in Bhutan during the reign of the first King Ugyen Wangchuk (1907-1926), Hindi was chosen as the medium of instruction because of the ready availability of inexpensive textbooks in Hindi from neighboring India. Although Hindi is neither an international language nor a language of Bhutan, the language seemed a useful one. Choke of course remained the medium of instruction in the lamasery schools. During the reign of King Jigme Wangchuk (1926-1952), the number of secular school system was expanded to five. In the 1950s, under the reign of King Jimi Doji Wangchu 1952-1972), a nationwide school system was set up with 61 secular schools, at which instruction was also provided in Choke and English in addition to Hindi. (Driem, 1998, p. 7-8).

A consequence of the royal decree of 1961 was that new English-medium textbooks were specially developed for Bhutanese schools, and these new course books replaced the Hindi textbooks in 1964. In 1960s, the term ‘Dzongkha’ was still primarily used to denote not the spoken language of western Bhutan, but the literary exponent thereof, Choke. Because Choke was considered to be the literary form of Dzongkha, the liturgical language and the spoken tongue were not popularly perceived as being two distinct languages. The first efforts at vernacularisation undertaken in 1961 were therefore described as attempts to modernize the national language. The deeply rooted liturgical tradition naturally made vernacularisation a slow process, and from 1961 to 1971 the Dzongkha which was taught as a written language in the schools was actually Choke. Since 1971, attempts have been made to bring the written language ever closer to the living language.

The written language for Dzongkha started to take shape only after 1971. According to Driem (1993), in the book ‘The Grammar of Dzongkha’, Lopen Pemala and Lopon Sangga Tendzi wrote and published a book titled ‘New Method Dzongkha Hand book’ that was intended to introduce and promote Bhutanese style of writing Dzongkha to replace Choke, the one that belonged to Tibet language. The principal reason for adopting Dzongkha as the national language as stated by Lopen Nado (1982) in his paper presentation at Oxford, England, was that:

Except for a few differences of accent, spelling and grammar, Dzongkha maintains the basic standard set by Choeke and lends itself readily to written standardization. The initial problems of choosing the most convenient written form for Dzongkha were solved about four decades ago by the Dzongkha Division, and now textbooks written in Dzongkha are used by students in schools throughout the country. In each school, Dzongkha is taught from Classes I to XII. (Nado, 1982).

Now having mentioned about the history of Dzongkha and its challenges. It is to be understood that Dzongkha, the national language of Bhutan was there since the twelfth century. It has been used as the medium of communication especially in Dzongs (fortresses) amongst monarchs, leaders, monastic body and the citizens. Only towards the late twentieth century, the written language of living Dzongkha came into existence. Although, at present, written Dzongkha language is deemed to be Bhutan specific, it is not totally delinked from Choke, which was used as written language in Bhutan for many years in the past. Without Choke as the basis, introducing written form for Dzongkha language would have been impossible, thus, one cannot deny the fact that Choke still plays the prominent role in what Bhutan calls it as ‘different’ linguistic from of Dzongkha.

Dzongkha to be the national language of Bhutan was neither influenced by any external forces nor compelled by the insiders. It just sprung form the necessity to be recognized in the face of development and modernization. The reasons for the declaration of Dzongkha as the national language was because: first; it was the language used in the Dzongs for administrative and monastic purposes. Second; Dzongkha is one of the Bhutanese languages that had originated within Bhutan. Third; it is the only language that has the written form of communication other than Nepali. Therefore, these components of the language gave its prominence and superiority over other languages, and finally got official identity upon the royal decree of the third king Jigme Dorji Wangchuk. Now, the language has not only provided Bhutanese citizens to communicate and make a livelihood, it has given Bhutan the identity of independent nation.

References

1. Driem, G, V. (1993). The grammar of Dzongkha. (2nd Ed. p. 1). Leiden University, The Netherlands. CNWS publications.
2. Driem, G, V. (1998). Languages of Bhutan. Dzongkha (p. 1). Leiden University, The Netherlands. CNWS publications.
3. Shah, S. (n.d). Language and its Importance to Society. Retrieved on 20/04/2019 form http://www.sociologydiscussion.com/essay/language-and-its-importance-to-society-essay/2176.
4. Simons, G. (2019). Ethonologue, languages of the world (22 ed.). Retrieved on 17/04/2019 from https://www.ethnologue.com/ethnoblog/gary-simons/welcome-22nd-edition.
5. Nado. (1982). Development of language in Bhutan. In A. K. Narain (Eds.). The journal
6. of the international association of Buddhist studies. Retrieved on 18/04/2019 from https://journals.ub.uni-heidelberg.de/index.php/jiabs/article/viewFile/8579/2486.

A human child is capable of many things in early childhood. One of these capabilities is being able to learn languages. From age five all the way back to birth, children are honing their language skills day by day. From birth to six months, babies learn to recognize their parents’ voices and turn toward sounds that are familiar to them. Babies learn to grunt, chuckle, whimper and gurgle and learn to gain others attention by using their voices. One of the most common examples of how babies use their voices to grab their parent’s attention is by crying. By crying babies can convey that they are tired, hungry or scared. They are also able to express and vocalize excitement and pleasure by laughing and squealing. These small babblings are common in babies all around the world. Similar to what John Locke wrote, babies are a table rasa, a blank slate and are capable of learning any language. This ability is only shown in humans as babies because by age five it becomes harder for children to learn a new language. The social interactions between babies and their surroundings form during birth to six months.

During the period from 6 months to a year, children begin to intently listen to sounds because they begin to have an active interest in the conversations around them. Around this time, babies learn to address their parents as dada and mama. Other babies also have already learned to say bye-bye. Babies progress from simple babble and sounds and learn to use their tongues to change the sounds in their mouth. This time of age is a very crucial age for learning during language development for babies. During toddler stages between 15 and 18 months they can understand up, down, and hot, and they usually know 10 to 20 words. When they reach 18 months to 24 months children now understand there are words for everything leading to a strong increase in momentum for their language development. Toddlers can follow two step instructions, know body parts, and can hum and sing. After several months of slower development kids often form an explosion of new words. After age two children and adolescents add about nine new words a day to their vocabularies. Between ages three to five children can understand most if not all of what they hear, have between 900 and 2,500 words in their vocabulary, and can tell stories on topic. Most kids can talk constantly, know all vowels and consonants, and correct their own grammar and errors by school age (five or six) and can read about age seven.

Language production consists of four strategic steps that explain the process. The first step is conceptualizing. During this step we figure out what we want to say. There hasn’t been much figured out about this step. It has been studied but not much information has been formed on this. The next step is where we put our thoughts together in terms of language also known as a linguistic plan. This step has been studied indefinitely and has had a lot of information found about it. Slips of the tongue play a large role in our linguistic plans. There are eight categories to tongue-ties. Shift is where one part of our words moves from where it should be placed and ends up somewhere else e.g. “I was walk (walking) to the storing (store).” When two parts of our words exchange places it is called exchange e.g. “Would you like some fries (ketchup) with your ketchup (fries)?” Another category is called anticipation, which is when something from the end of our sentence is said earlier in the sentence but does not leave the end of the sentence e.g. “Bats frorage (forage) for fruit in the Spring.” Perseveration is the exact opposite of anticipation e.g. “The choir started singing the stong (song).” Another category is called addition where something is added to the sentence without necessity e.g. “I need to unthaw (thaw) the meat.” Deletion is the exact opposite of addition where something is left out e.g. “I need to hearse (rehearse) my lines.” The next one is called substitution and it is the most uncommon tongue tie e.g. “Where is my tennis bat (racquet)?” The final and most common slip of the tongue is called blend where two words are smushed into one when they are both being thought of for use e.g. “Not in the sleast (slightest/least).” The third step to the process of language production is when we articulate our linguistic plan. It has been shown that slips of the tongue can happen at any linguistic level: phoneme, morpheme, or word. Finally, self-monitoring is where we keep track of what we are saying and whether the message and tone came across the way we wanted it to come across. It is unclear of whether we actually edit what we have already said. People often engage in self-repair which is where we stop ourselves to fix what we have said wrong. Usually we interrupt ourselves when we hear error in something we said or we use “um, oh wait, or sorry” to fix in our mind what we were about to say. Internal monitoring is the inner speech version of what is going to be said and external monitoring is the act of hearing what we are really producing. Internal mechanism will catch what are about to be said, and if they do not the external system will catch it and fix it.

Language comprehension has been studied much less than language production. It assesses single words, relating two named objects, agents and actions, clausal constituents, attributes, noun phrases, locative relations, verbs and thematic role assignment, vocabulary, and complex grammar interference. This process is done by giving children questions and they answer by pointing to objects or replacing/moving them. Points are awarded for right answers and then points are scaled to get a final grade.

Language production and comprehension can really affect childhood learning and cognition. Without language production children’s learning abilities would not be half as strong as they are. Language comprehension is a key factor in the way babies’ brains develop. All the information that is taken in just by hearing and forming words is immense. The way their brains form from birth to age six is very drastic. The processes of language production and development are one of the biggest learning skills all humans go through in life. All over the world babies are learning languages from one to multiples. Some babies learn more than one language when they are growing up. Mexican families are known well for this ability. Some children learn English as their main language but also know Spanish just as fluently to be able to communicate with their family members. There is still a lot to learn about the way human brains work when it comes to language. There are some areas that have not been studied as much as others or they have not been able to find as much information. For them being our own brains, we still have much more to learn about them, ourselves, and our abilities to do or learn things.

References

1. Alic, M. (n.d.). Language Development. Retrieved from Encyclopedia of Children’s Health: http://www.healthofchildren.com/L/Language-Development.html
2. Robinson-Reigler, B. &.-R. (2008, 2012, 2017). Cognitive Psychology Applying the Science of the Mind. New York: Pearson Education, Inc.
3. Simlesa, S. &. (2017, January). The Role of Executiv Functions in Language Comprehension in Preschool Children. Retrieved from Scientific Research An Academic Publisher: https://www.scirp.org/Journal/PaperInformation.aspx?PaperID=73731

As being as a complex symbolic system; language has its own designs and styles to be used in different stages of age, occasions and even in social statuses. And what is appropriate at one time or place may not be at another. As a teacher, I do not want inappropriate word choice to get in the way of teaching and try to create awareness of what is or is not appropriate. This essay covers the understanding of appropriate usage of language.

Appropriateness as an optimal mapping between context and speech, or as ‘natural speech’, is also connected intrinsically with the socio-cultural notions of politeness and impoliteness. Frequently polite speech acts are seen as appropriate speech acts, and impolite speech acts are seen as inappropriate speech acts. When students are not taught how to deal with the differences in status there can be strange consequences. One is that learner may search for a means of expressing respect and choose an inappropriate one and use of informal language which should be restricted to peers. Teenagers have always had a sort of private language, loosely based around slang and popular culture, and it has a firm role in development of both self and of language in general. In fact, the evolution of a vibrant language in any culture involves adopting and adapting elements of street talk into more formal speech.

However, casual social interaction really should have no place in a formal learning environment, in which correct speech, respectful choice of vocabulary, and an emphasis on clarity and appropriate communication should reign. The most obvious reason for this is that both spoken and written English are effectively a reflection of a student’s linguistic ability – and their capacity to read a situation and to speak, write and behave in a manner that is appropriate to it. This is an essential skill in the workplace, so getting it right – teaching it, in fact – is paramount to the long-term success of this generation of students. But there is more. Creating a formal learning environment – one in which students understand their role and the expectations held for them – is associated with improved student performance and productivity.

There has always been “street speak” – forms of language specific to social groups, including teenagers – and there is no doubt that this enforces a sense of community, belonging, and identity. However, peppering language with so many diminutives of words and using this “private” language in social and public situations does nothing towards maintaining important standards and aiding communication. Correct speech, including choice of vocabulary, syntax and grammar, is very much the mainstay of successful communication between communities, age groups and cultures. In many languages speaker encounters with a specific grammar and vocabulary choice according to the status of the person whom talking to.

An inability to communicate with all ages and sectors of society is bound to put the speaker at a serious disadvantage when it comes to long-term achievement. It’s not “old-fashioned” to know when to use socially acceptable language; it’s a life-skill that should be nurtured.

A high school teacher and a student who are talking to each other in an English speaking country may both use the same polite phrases. Even though both speakers are of a different social status, the key factor in the appropriateness of language they use is their level of politeness. The polite English phrases an employee uses when they leave work might be the same phrases spoken by their boss back to them. Language teaching has traditionally been concerned with linguistic accuracy. Relating language to the situation involves making inferences which are essential for more than very basic communication. And then, perhaps, we’ll find that common ground of acceptable communication that is so necessary to self-presentation and understanding.

Concluding from all above written appropriateness in context has shown that both context and appropriateness are relational concepts, and that appropriateness cannot be defined without the explicit accommodation of context.

ABSTRACT

This research is aimed to find out the lexical meaning and connotative meaning of Balinese language. Balinese language is one of the traditional language in Indonesian country which an unique thing because of the historical of these language are had been influenced not only by the Balinese language itself, but there are an influenced from Sundanese language and also Javanese language, so there will be several meaning or words which has the same meaning but difference pronunciation or the difference meaning but has the same pronunciation. The researcher not only analyzed the lexical meaning of it, but the researcher also compared those meaning with Sundanese language. To analyze the connotative meaning, the researcher used the connotative semiotic theory by Roland Barthes. Based on the theory the researcher also input the history of Balinese language itself.

RESEARCH BACKGROUND

Language is a system that consists of the development, acquisition, maintenance and use of complex systems of communication, particularly the human ability to do so; a language is any specific, example of such a system. The scientific study of language is called linguistic. Many definition of language have been proposed. Henry Sweet, an English stated: “Language is the expression of ideas by means of speech-sounds combined into words. Words are combined into sentences, this combination answering to that of ideas in thoughts.” The American linguists Bernard Bloch and George L. Trager formulated the following definition: “A language is a system of arbitrary vocal symbols by means of which a social groups cooperates.” Most people, when asked what language is for, reply that the function of language is to express and communicate meanings. Certainly this ability to express meaning is an indispensable aspect of language. Most of other functions of language would scarcely be available to us if our utterance were not capable of carrying meaning.

And human language is arguably the single most remarkable characteristic that we have, the one that most truly sets our species apart. Our faculty of languages, which has usually take for granted, exhibits a number of properties which are remarkable, even astonishing. Without language, we could hardly have created the human world we know. Our development of everything from music to warfare could never have come about in the absence of language. More than any other single characteristic, then, language is what makes us human. And human language is unique. One of those languages which has an unique thing is Balinese language which will be analyze by the researcher. Balinese language is one of the traditional languages in Indonesian country which had been maintained by the ethics of Bali. Balinese language as the mother tongue or first language for most of the people in Bali, it is widely used as a communication tool in the several activities indoors and also outdoors in social activities in Balinese people.

Based on the explanation above, the purpose of this study is to analyze the lexical meaning from several words on Balinese language which has the same pronounce but has the different meaning. In this research the researcher also explained about the historical of Balinese language, it is because Balinese language had been influenced by Javanese language. Understanding the difference between denotation and connotation is important to understanding definitions and how concepts are used.

The data for this paper were gained by library research by collecting the sources of information about the history of Balinese language and also the words which will be analyze by the researcher. The researcher point of view or opinion about the presented data and information, comparative study between Balinese language and Sundanese language which has several similar meaning of those words.

THEORITICAL FRAMEWORK

Semiotics the word semiotics is derived from the Greek, semion, which means “sign” or seme which means “sign interpreter”. Semiotic basically result from classical study and scholastic on logical, rhetorical and poetic art. However, sign according to old time definition still means a thing that denotes another thing. If the sign is implemented in language, number, word and sentence will not have meanings in themselves. Signs just have meaning (significant) correlating to its reader. The reader himself connects the sign to what is signified (signifie) according to the convention in language system. Semiotic is a science or analysis method that is used for studying signs. Signs are a tool which we use for finding the way in this world, in the middle of human life and together with the human life. Semiotic in Barthes definition, semiology, basically tries to learn how humanity signify things. To signify, in this case, can’t be associated with to communicate. To signify means that objects is not only bringing the information, but also constituting the structural system form signs.

A sign signifies other thing beyond itself and meaning is a relationship between an object and idea with the sign. This basic concept is held up together with many other theories that correlate with symbol, language, discourse, non-verbal shapes and theories that explain how sign connect to its meaning and how sign is arranged. A sign is any physical form that has been imagined or made externally (through some physical medium) to stand for object, event, feeling, that is known as referent, or for class of similar (or related) object, event, feeling etc., Known as referential domain. In human life, sign serve many functions. They allow people to recognize pattern in thing. Connotation is thus context-dependent. Signs are more “polysemic” – more open to interpretation in their connotations than their denotations. Denotation is sometimes regarded as a digital code and connotation as an analogue code (Wilden 1987, 224). As Roland Barthes noted, Saussure’s model of the sign focused on denotation at the express of connotation and it was left to subsequent theorists (notably Barthes himself – drawing on Hjelmslev) to offer an account of this important dimension of meaning (Barthes 1967a, 89ff). in analyzing the realist literary text Barthes came to the conclusion that connotation produces the illusion of denotation, the illusion of the medium as transparent and of the signifier and the signified as being identical (Barthes 1974, 9).

Thus denotation is just another connotation. Such a process leads to the powerful illusion that denotation is a purely literal and universal meaning which is not at all ideological, and indeed that those connotations which seem most obvious to individual interpreters are just as natural. Connotation and denotation are often described in terms of levels of representation or levels of meaning. Roland Barthes adopted from Louis Hjelmslev the notion that there are different orders of signification (Barthes 1957, 124; 1961; 1967a, 84 – 94; 1976b, 27ff; Hjelmslev 1961, 114ff). Connotation is a second order of signification which uses the denotative sign (signifier and signified) as its signifier and attaches to it an additional signified. Connotation is not a purely paradigmatic dimension, as Saussure’s characterization of the paradigmatic dimension as ‘associative’ might suggest.

Denotation is when you meant what you say, literally. Connotation is created when you meant something else, something that might be initially hidden. The connotative meaning of a word is based on implication, or shared emotional association with a word.

From this understanding it can briefly concluded that semiotic is a branch of linguistics regarding study of sign. Therefore the researcher intends to present a study of the concept of lexical meaning and connotative meaning from several words in Balinese language.

METHOD

Research Design

In this research the researcher focuses and analyzes on the lexical meaning of Balinese language. The researcher used descriptive qualitative for this research. Qualitative research has its deep roots in the study of culture in anthropology. Qualitative research is concerned with in-depth understanding of the issue under examination. It relies heavily on individuals who are able to provide rich accounts of their experiences. For this reason it usually works best with small numbers of individuals. Qualitative research aims to examine a ‘process’ or the ‘meanings’ that people give to their own social situation. It does not require a generalization of the findings as in positivist science (Hesse – Biber & Leavy 2005, p.70).

Descriptive analysis research described about Balinese language connotative meaning on the several words which has the same pronounce but different meaning with the other language, one of them the researcher choose Sundanese language to compare with Balinese language.

Data Collection

The researcher collected the data in the following step. First, the researcher reading all data sources. Second, selected the appropriate sources for this research. Next, choose several words of Balinese language in the Dictionary of Balinese language. The last, the data to be arranged systematically in accordance with the research focuses. To arranged the data, the researcher defined about lexical meaning.

FINDING AND DISCUSSION

Balinese language has an influenced of Balinese culture which remains sustainable and thrives in Bali. We can see from the number of speakers, the influenced of Balinese language has been approximately half a million people and has a written tradition, so Balinese language is the largest regional language from several traditional languages in Indonesia. Balinese language has variation which is little bit difficult from the other language because there are “sor – singgih” or in English language its meant politeness which had been created by the speakers. Generally, we could differentiate the variation of Balinese language into three aspects as regional, social, and temporal. The temporal aspect has given the indication to the historical and development of languages itself, although in general meaning or restricted meaning. As temporal aspect, Balinese language has been distinguish into two model, the first one is Ancient Balinese language and the second one is Mula Balinese language or Aga Balinese language, tengahan Balinese language or Kawi Balinese language, and Kepara Balinese language which has been called Baru Balinese language or Balinese Modern language. As regional aspect, Balinese language divided into two dialects are Aga Bali (Dialek Pegunungan) and Dataran Bali (Dialek Umum) which has their own dialect. And as social aspect, there are two systems which had an impact in the level speech of development of historical in Bali itself.

Language is a complex and important feature in every day life, it is how we as humans communicate to one another, how we express our needs and emotions and how we get the attention of our peers. How does language begin to develop in children? They are not born speaking the words adults use around them and they do not have a meaningful understanding of the deeper meanings behind the vocabulary we use in our every day life. The best way to understand the development of language in children is to first look at the beginnings, infancy.

When a child is born, they cannot speak words that we all understand as adults such as, “I am hungry” or “please hug me”, instead they will cry when hungry or in need and the way their caregiver responds to that are the first moments of communication. When looking at the development of language, it is easy to simply approach it through a scientific approach- when children are encountering something new with experiences or words, synapses occurs which then transfers to links called to neural pathways (Ryan, 2008). The first 3 years for a child are most important and the responsibility of developing language really falls on the environment provided to the child, not just through scientific definition.

An environment that promotes language includes vibrant displays, caregivers should maintain eye contact with the child and elaborate on items of interest to the infant. This means that as the infant grows and becomes more aware of their surroundings, the items should be kept stimulating, short picture books and stories should be available, sensory items that are soft or light up should be accessible and the whole time the parent should engage their child’s own babbles and noises with warmth and words associated with their surroundings (NIDCD, 2010). Simply talking to your infant while feeding such as, “it is time to eat, I can hear you and you are saying ‘I’m hungry’ “, encourages the development of language within the child.

As infants grow and become toddlers, they will begin to mimic the sounds around them using short one syllable words, often a child’s first words will me “ma” or “da” (mom or dad), and as their caregivers continue to provide a language rich environment, the sounds, speech and vocabulary will widen over time. Children can practice their language through flash cards with parents that have colors or shapes. When a child is being put in to an ELC there will be opportunities for further enhancement with peers as they interact with each other and the environment. The most important practice however, comes from the child’s ability to mimic the caregivers around them, through the different formations of the mouth, tongue movement and ears. Without any practice or exposure to this, language development becomes harder as infants and toddlers get older (Oswalt, 2019).

From working within a pre-k classroom and a toddler room, I get to see the different stages of development of language within children. In the toddler room, there is a 2.5 year old boy that when he first started only used a one word way to communicate such as “mine” or “ball”, within a month of him being around other peers, some further along in speech than he is, he was beginning to use more elaborate pairings and communicating much more clearly than before, so instead of just “ball” it was “want blue ball” and “play the dinosaur”. When children are exposed to language environments where they can associate words with objects that can be touched, heard, and played with they can better associate the connection between word and object. By caregivers singing, engaging the children not just in words but stimuli and allowing for social interactions between peers and other adults followed with responsiveness to needs, language is acquired, practiced and develops quickly in children.

References

1. NIDCD. (2018, October 4). Speech and Language Developmental Milestones. Retrieved from https://www.nidcd.nih.gov/health/speech-and-language.
2. Oswalt, A. (2019). Gulf Bend MHMR Center. Retrieved September 27, 2019, from https://www.gulfbend.org/poc/view_doc.php?type=doc&id=10114&cn=28.
3. Poglitsch, M. (Director), & Ryan, K. O. (Producer). (2008). Cognitive Development [Video file]. Learning Seed. Retrieved from Academic Video Online: Premium database.

First of all, language impairment is a controversial issue which triggers a great deal of heated debate among the language and the brain. Moreover, one other language impairment is dyslexia, due to the seriousness of the problem that it causes. In addition, it must be pointed out that, dyslexia has been recognized as a serious problem for both older and younger children. Besides this, it is important to be mentioned that, dyslexia should be treated experienced experts. Another factor that, it is crucial that, the parents of the child who has dyslexia, should be instructed and advised about the right behavior that they should lead towards the child. Additionally, another language impairment is the Specific language impairment, concerning young children at younger ages. Nowadays, a lot of children suffer from Specific language impairment which is a severe problem and sometimes it can be detrimental. These children face great difficulty in communicating with others, expressing themselves and generally be understood. Moreover, these children must be faced with great care and attention. They should be given specific lessons how to communicate with others and be socially accepted. Unfortunately, they are faced by the community as problematic people or people who suffer from a mental disorder.

Furthermore, this is of paramount importance to mention that, language impairment is language and brain and through them are the aphasia and dyslexia. More specifically, this is widely known that, the brain is separated in two hemispheres. Firstly, the left hemisphere is the front part of the brain and this is called Broca’s area in which dominate the speech and this is also responsible for the language and especially for the reading (investigative thinking, speech, logic). Secondly, the right hemisphere is called Wernicke’s area, which dominate understanding of language and the right hemisphere is established for special activities (entire thinking, genius and music). On the one hand, Broca’s area has the potential to produce Broca’s aphasia, which could means broken speech and on the other hand Wernicke’s area has to change to produce Wernicke’s aphasia, which is known as jumpled speech. In addition, the brain of people with dyslexia is related with the right hemisphere and the frontal lobe does not provide immediate help to the brain, when the person reads a word and as a result, these person face this situation with more difficulty. However, the person who try to improve reading with more consideration and attention, then person should be used the left hemisphere to make it easier for him. Nevertheless, this is importance to mention that, dyslexia is associated with Broca’s area.

Additionally, this is undisputable fact that, dyslexia is a dramatically rising wave of this nowadays. Moreover, this is widely known that, an ever growing number of people are facing the so-called dyslexia, which is an important pathology and learning disorder, that many people are affected by this disorder, about reading, writing, spelling and speaking. However, this is essential to mention that, children who have dyslexia are clever, energetic and sociable. This is considered that, dyslexia certainly affects 1 to 5 people. For instance, more and more people face difficulties to slow reading, trouble spelling or mixing up words. In addition, this has been proven that, the phenomenon of dyslexia many times is revealed in younger ages by school, or even in older ages, when they still get older. Last but not least about dyslexia, this is fact that dyslexia could come from the heavy disorder of the brain. Besides this, this cannot be denied that, the root of the problem lies in the fact that, many scientific researches that have been conducted in the field of dyslexia be able to occurs as a family historical symptom. Furthermore, this must be pointed out that, this has been proven by various specialists, who are exploring for dyslexia that this is very likely to detect dyslexia, when children learn to read and write. To be more specific, children confuse the letters in a word or cut the letters into words, then the child has the phenomenon of dyslexia.

Moreover, this is often called by special doctors and educators that, dyslexia is not cured. However, according to scientific surveys has been proven that, there is a proportion of treatments for under aged children and adult humans. For example, this would indeed appear that, people should have to contact with some specific and therefore, specific who will be able to make to them special psychological tests, which would include different techniques about hearing and vision. Needless to say that, people who have dyslexia must be supported by their family and specifics, this is significant for them because people have the opportunity to acquire positive emotions and thinking and therefore, they could become more optimistic and could maintain their self-esteem and self-confident to some extent. In contrast, there are those who claim that, the issue boils down to same problem that, people have dyslexia in early years and as a result, they do not have positive results. Last but not least, this must be admitted that, children have the change to be graded in their lessons orally than writing due to the dyslexia.

Moreover, this is widely known that, dyslexia has many commons with specific language impairment. More specifically, Bethesda (2011) claims that, specific language impairment (SLI) is a language disorder that delays the domination of language abilities in children who have no hearing loss or other developmental lags. The specific language impairment is also the developmental language disturbance, language problem, or enriching dysphasia. In addition, this cannot be denied that, this is the most importance adolescence learning impairment, that be able to involve 7 to 8 amount of children in early ages. Besides that, this is an undisputable fact that, the causes of Specific language impairment have not been yet identified by the scientists. However, not only these surveys have been taken place about causes, but this also, has been proven that, this has a strong genetic link. In other words, this is necessary to mention that, children with Specific language impairment have nonverbal IQ amounts and as a result, children are faced different problems. Equally, Paul (2001) argued that, when they practice the oral language in which refers the Specific language impairment, children is very likely to find some difficulties, such as, in semantics and syntax. Moreover, this is of paramount importance to mention that, children with Specific language impairment face problems about the phonological proceeding and in reading words. In addition, Snowling et al. (2000) claims that, have been studied that, there is dyslexia in children with Specific language impairment, in high percentages.

Additionally, this is significant to make sense for the symptoms and measures should be taken to solve the problem for the existence of Specific language impairment. First of all, the problem is quite well known that, children who are faced with SLI have serious difficulties in speaking at a very young age. In particular, when some children are 2 years old cannot talk or other children who are 3 years old can talk but may not be understood. Obviously, children with SLI at older ages will find it difficult to make a conversation, because of, the difficulty they will surely have on verbs and therefore, this phenomenon becomes known as an important symptom of the SLI. The fact that, If a child does not say ‘He ate the cookie’, but he says that ‘He eat the cookie’, then this fact shows that this child has SLI. Nevertheless, it is essential to mention some measures, which would have the opportunity to show positive improvement in children with SLI. To be more specific, this cannot be denied that, the main factor of SLI is the school because this is capable for the recognition of children with SLI, and as a result, teachers receive activates measures from the first signs. Particularly, teachers include special programs that provide reading, writing and spelling to children. Moreover, create activate games, which children find them interesting and games that have relationship with different methods and an interesting vocabulary. Beside this, many parents have the preference their children to be watched by a speech-language pathologist who can give useful information to parents about the behavior that children have at home.

Taking all this consideration, to begin with dyslexia is a dissimilar problem for everyone and some people have a delicate form of dyslexia but other people have more complicated form. In addition, this is understood that, the diagnosis of dyslexia is neither easy nor simple procedure, because of, the experience and the great care that specialists must have to a large extent, about dyslexia. This fact has proven that, the issue boils down to the same problem that, dyslexia cannot deal with, but special educators and doctors have the potential to help them to fight dyslexia, up to a point. Specific language impairment is an also major problem and this must be deal with, immediately.