# data[].attributes.body
En los Estados Unidos existe una controversia entre que llamamos los hispanohablantes. Tenemos que elegir entre 'latino' y 'hispanic' cuando hablando de alguien. 'Hispanic' pueda referir solo a ellos de un fondo Espanol, pero 'latino' pueda incluir el mundo portugues, como Brazil. Tambien hay existe 'Latinx' para incluir los grupos LGBT quien no quieren estar bajo de la sexualidad.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Hispanic-Latino naming dispute - Wikipedia

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Hispanic-Latino naming dispute is an ongoing disagreement over the use of the ethnonyms " Hispanic" and " Latino" to refer collectively to the inhabitants of the United States of America who are of Latin American or Spanish origin-that is, Latino or Hispanic Americans.

# data[].attributes.headline
Policias de Inmigracion afectan el futuro de hispanohablantes

# data[].attributes.subject
Policias de Inmigracion afectan el futuro de hispanohablantes

# data[].attributes.body
Las policias de 'Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals' (DACA) y 'Temporary Protected Status' han terminado bajo de la nueva administracion presidencial. La decision afecta a muchas personas en los EEUU, muchos de paises hispanohablantes. La legalidad de esa decision esta en pregunta por grupos "watchdogs" por el beneficio de inmigrantes.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Shortly after announcing in September the phaseout of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program, the Trump administration took aim at another form of relief from deportation for certain foreign nationals: Temporary Protected Status (TPS). In quick succession, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) announced it will end the TPS designation for approximately 65,000 nationals of three countries-Haiti, Nicaragua, and Sudan-throwing their futures into limbo and setting dates certain to sunset their work authorization and protection from deportation. Further, acting Homeland Security Secretary Elaine Duke extended the designation for Honduras by just six months, the shortest period allowed under law, signaling to the 86,000 Honduran TPS holders that their lives may be about to change after nearly two decades in the United States.

Taken together, these actions have brought unprecedented attention to the future of TPS, and have unsettled the lives of many foreign nationals with deep roots in U.S. society who have grown used to a sense of stability. As with the DACA rescission, TPS terminations have generated public outcry and a flurry of bills by Members of Congress to protect the affected populations. The clock may now be ticking for 263,000 Salvadorans, the largest TPS group, as they await a January decision on their redesignation.

This Policy Beat explores the TPS programs, current countries of designation, and the dozen rescissions of TPS designations over the years, as well as the reasons for not extending those designations.
History of the Program
A feature of U.S. immigration law for more than 25 years, TPS allows nationals of certain countries to temporarily live and work lawfully in the United States if DHS determines that they are unable to safely return due to natural disaster, armed conflict, or other extraordinary and temporary circumstances. TPS can be granted for periods of six to 18 months, after which DHS, with the input of the State Department, re-evaluates the designation. If country conditions still threaten the safety of returning nationals, or if the foreign government is unable to handle returns, TPS may be extended. While nationals of some countries receive TPS for two or three years before their designation ends, others, such as Sudanese, Nicaraguans, Hondurans, and Salvadorans, have held TPS for almost two decades, and have established strong community ties in the United States. Currently, ten countries have TPS, with Salvadorans making up 60 percent of the nearly 437,000 TPS recipients (see Table 1).
Table 1. Countries Designated for Temporary Protected Status, 2017
Sources: U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, "Temporary Protected Status," accessed November 19, 2017, available online; Jill Wilson, Temporary Protected Status: Overview and Current Issues (Washington, DC: Congressional Research Service, 2017), available online.

Created under the Immigration Act of 1990, TPS grew out of humanitarian and foreign policy rationales. As a humanitarian measure, it aimed to protect people already in the United States who would face strong hardship upon return to their country of origin, but who did not otherwise meet the criteria for refugee status. While the statute does not state that foreign policy concerns should dictate whether a country is designated for TPS, such implications are inescapable in these decisions. For example, granting TPS may insulate struggling countries from the potential for further destabilization that would come with a sudden influx of deportees.

Initially, the law aimed to shield Salvadorans who had fled their country's decade-long civil war. The original statute included an 18-month grant of TPS for Salvadorans, but unlike future TPS grants, the law prohibited a renewal of this one (it was granted anew for different reasons in 2001, and has been renewed since then). The statute placed responsibility for any future determinations on the Attorney General, a role that has since shifted to the Homeland Security Secretary.

With prominent lawmakers strongly objecting to country-specific protections, the statute emphasized that TPS would be temporary in nature. To make that intent explicit, the statute requires three-fifths of the Senate to vote to even consider legislation providing permanent or any other legal status to TPS holders.

Since 1990, DHS has granted TPS to nationals of 22 countries. Only nationals who are present in the United States at the time of designation are eligible, thus TPS does not cover people who arrive subsequently. In addition, applicants must not have been convicted of serious or multiple crimes, or controlled substance offenses.

While TPS grantees can lawfully work in the United States, they are not eligible for most public benefits, as they are not considered to be present in the United States under color of law. At the federal level, they are eligible to participate in the health-care exchanges under the Affordable Care Act, but not for food stamps, Supplemental Security Income, or Temporary Assistance for Needy Families. TPS holders are eligible for Medicaid only in emergencies, though states can choose to extend coverage under Medicaid and the Children's Health Insurance Program to pregnant women and children with TPS.

Further, TPS does not independently offer a pathway to any other legal status, permanent residence, or citizenship. Those who entered the country on a visa can adjust to lawful permanent residence (getting a "green card") inside the country if they are eligible through family or employment sponsorships. However, the options for those who entered illegally are less clear-cut and depend on where they live in the country, due to a split among federal appeals courts. Normally, noncitizens who arrived unlawfully cannot receive green cards while remaining in the United States. The 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed this for TPS recipients in 2011, holding that they would need to re-enter lawfully to get a green card. However, the Sixth and Ninth U.S. Circuit Courts of Appeals ruled in 2013 and 2017, respectively, that a TPS grant constitutes admission to the United States, potentially opening a pathway for eligible TPS holders in those jurisdictions to receive green cards without leaving the country. These two court decisions cover people who live in Alaska, Arizona, California, Guam, Hawaii, Idaho, Kentucky, Michigan, Montana, Nevada, the Northern Mariana Islands, Ohio, Oregon, Tennessee, and Washington State.
TPS Terminations: Past, Present, and Future
Though President Donald Trump has not spoken about TPS, he has criticized another program with similar quasi-legal status (also known as twilight status)-DACA-as a product of executive overreach. As a result, observers anticipated the termination of at least some country designations. Though the Trump administration has announced the termination of TPS for Sudan, Nicaragua, and Haiti, it has offered beneficiaries more lead time than is typical, ending the designation in November 2018 for Sudan, January 2019 for Nicaragua, and July 2019 for Haiti. Past administrations have rarely given TPS holders more than six months to prepare for termination. Similarly, DHS unexpectedly declined to terminate TPS for Hondurans when that re-evaluation period came up, resulting in an automatic six-month extension until July 2018. The next major deadline comes in January, when DHS must decide whether to end TPS for El Salvador.

Despite the widely held perception that TPS has become a perpetual extension of temporary status, 12 countries have lost designation since TPS was established (see Table 2). Reasons for termination range from ceasefire agreements signed in civil conflicts, to the scheduling of democratic elections, and in one case, the determination that volcanic eruptions were expected to continue for the foreseeable future and therefore were no longer temporary.
Table 2. Past TPS Terminations by Country
Source: Various Federal Register notices, available via Justice Department Executive Office of Immigration Review, "Temporary Protected Status," accessed November 19, 2017, available online.

While TPS terminations overall are not rare, they are for beneficiaries who have lived in the country for prolonged periods of time-groups that happen to constitute the vast majority of current TPS holders. If the administration ends TPS for Hondurans and Salvadorans, in addition to the previous three countries, it will have done so for 95 percent of all current TPS holders.

Past administrations, both Democratic and Republican, have opted to extend TPS designations for these populations, but the Trump administration is taking a stricter view of statutory language to justify its terminations. Last year, the Obama administration extended TPS for Sudan due to continued reports of human-rights violations by the government and militias, and because of widespread and unpredictable conflict in Darfur. In contrast, the October 2017 termination notice argues that this conflict is limited to a certain geographic area, and that while human-rights violations continue, they do not prevent all nationals from returning safely.

Similarly, the 2016 renewal of TPS for Nicaragua took into consideration not only the devastation caused by the hurricane that led to the initial TPS grant in 1999, but also the compounding effects of subsequent disasters. An extensive explanation of the 2017 termination has not yet been published, but the initial DHS statement suggests that it focused only on whether the conditions caused by the original hurricane still existed, and determined that they did not.
Efforts to Preserve TPS
As threats to TPS have become more imminent, foreign governments, immigrant-rights advocates, and sympathetic Members of Congress have begun to push to maintain the current protections.
Foreign Governments
Since TPS was created, the governments of designated countries have lobbied the United States to keep the status intact for their nationals. In recent months, Haiti, El Salvador, and Honduras have all advocated for TPS to be extended. In addition to their concerns about the sudden inflow of returning nationals, countries of origin benefit from remittances sent by their nationals in the United States. According to the World Bank, remittances from nationals abroad-including from TPS holders in the United States-account for 17 percent of gross domestic product (GDP) in El Salvador, 18 percent in Honduras, and 29 percent in Haiti, where they often help struggling family members. TPS holders make up 19 percent of Salvadorans in the United States, 14 percent of Hondurans, and 9 percent of Haitians.
U.S. Congress
Lawmakers in Congress have introduced legislation that would provide legal status to TPS recipients. A bill introduced by Rep. Carlos Curbelo (R-FL) would allow TPS recipients from El Salvador, Haiti, Honduras, and Nicaragua to apply for permanent residence, as long as they have not been convicted of certain crimes. Legislation introduced by Rep. Yvette Clarke (D-NY) would create a six-year renewable status for anyone with TPS on January 1, 2017 who has been in the United States for at least five years, and would make TPS beneficiaries eligible for green cards if they can prove they would face extreme hardship if deported. Both bills have bipartisan support.

Two Democrats, Rep. Nydia Velazquez of New York and Sen. Chris Van Hollen of Maryland, have introduced much broader bills. The Velazquez bill would allow TPS recipients who have been in the United States for at least three years to apply for a green card, as long as they have not been convicted of any serious crimes. Van Hollen's bill would allow anyone who has ever held or been eligible for TPS, or is a national of a country that was ever designated for TPS, to apply for a green card, absent certain criminal convictions. These bills will have to meet the requirement for a three-fifths Senate vote to consider legislation giving permanent legal status to TPS holders, and none is likely to move forward anytime soon, given other competing legislative priorities.
An Uncertain Future
As TPS holders lose status over the next 18 months, what options do they have? Although the administration has stated it is giving TPS holders time to either prepare travel plans or adjust their immigration status, the latter will likely be difficult for most TPS holders. Most entered the United States illegally, and their options are constrained given the limited legal avenues for changing their status in the United States.

A more feasible option is to migrate to a third country, for instance Canada, and seek asylum, as thousands of Haitians and others did in summer 2017. From July through September, Canadian authorities apprehended 11,000 people crossing the border illegally-compared to 2,000 in all of 2016. After DHS announced the termination of TPS for Nicaragua, Canadian Members of Parliament, fearing a new surge, traveled to the United States to discourage Central American and Haitian TPS holders from entering Canada unlawfully.

The other two possibilities are to return to their countries of origin, or to remain in the United States. If they choose the latter and are apprehended, their legal proceedings in immigration court will likely drag on for years given the current backlogs. However, even if not apprehended, they would be living in the country unlawfully, in the shadows, with destabilizing effects on certain local labor markets and communities. If TPS holders choose to return to their country of origin, many families, especially those with mixed statuses, would face the prospect of being split. And the receiving countries would have to confront the lack of economic opportunities for returnees, combined with the loss of remittances.

As the administration makes these difficult policy decisions, it will increasingly have to come to terms with consequences that extend far beyond the immediate targets.
National Policy Beat in Brief
As Court Cases Proceed, Justice Department Continues to Pressure Sanctuary Jurisdictions. On November 15, the Justice Department sent letters to 29 states, counties, and cities, demanding they demonstrate compliance with federal immigration laws. The letters warn the jurisdictions that their laws, practices, or policies may violate Section 1373 of U.S. Code Title 8, a provision of federal law requiring information sharing between local officials and federal immigration authorities, and put them on notice that compliance is a necessary condition for receiving certain Justice Department funding.

The letters came after a federal judge in Chicago issued a nationwide preliminary injunction in September that blocked the Justice Department from requiring noncompliant "sanctuary" cities to comply with certain new federal grant requirements. Similarly, a federal judge in San Francisco had permanently blocked the Trump administration from imposing additional funding conditions on unrelated grants. Neither ruling blocked the requirement for compliance with Section 1373, however. On the same day the letters were sent, another federal judge in Pennsylvania issued a similar nationwide injunction to that issued in Chicago, and in addition, found that Philadelphia was in "substantial compliance" with Section 1373.

Ninth Circuit Allows Limited Travel Ban to Proceed. The Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the Trump administration may partly move forward with the third iteration of its travel ban. The November 13 ruling allows the administration to bar the entry of nationals from six Muslim-majority countries-Chad, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Syria, and Yemen-as long as those individuals do not have family in the United States or "formal, documented" relationships with U.S. entities. The qualifying family relationships include grandparents, grandchildren, siblings-in-law, aunts, uncles, nieces, nephews, and cousins, closely mirroring those set forth by the Supreme Court in its ruling on the second travel ban. The new ruling partially reverses a lower court decision that blocked the travel ban in its entirety. The case was brought by Hawaii, which argued that President Trump did not have the authority to impose such restrictions on these six countries, though it did not challenge the ban's restrictions on nationals of North Korea and Venezuela.

This case is one of several currently being litigated on the administration's third travel ban, issued via presidential proclamation on September 24. On December 8, the Fourth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals will hear an appeal in a case brought by the International Refugee Assistance Project challenging an injunction, identical to the one the Ninth Circuit allowed to go forward, issued by a U.S. district court in Maryland. The Justice Department has asked the Supreme Court to allow the full ban to go into effect while it appeals these two injunctions in the Ninth and Fourth U.S. Circuit Courts of Appeals.

Refugees and Resettlement Agencies Sue Trump Administration Over Latest Restrictions. Refugee advocates have filed at least two cases against the Trump administration, challenging a specific restriction in the latest executive order against admitting some family members of refugees. On October 23, the day before the President issued an order resuming the refugee resettlement program, the Departments of State and Homeland Security and the Director of National Intelligence released a memo with recommendations on enhanced vetting for refugees. The policies included indefinitely suspending the admission of some spouses and minor children of refugees already in the country. Refugees and their advocates filed one case against the restriction in a federal court in Seattle, and advocates for Iranian-Americans filed another in a federal court in Washington, DC.

Trump Administration Ends Central American Refugee Program. On November 9, the State Department stopped accepting new applications for the Central American Minors (CAM) refugee program. The Obama administration launched the CAM refugee and parole programs in response to the surge in unaccompanied Central American minors arriving at the U.S.-Mexico border in 2014. In an effort to offer protection to children with legitimate refugee claims and to deter them from undertaking the dangerous journey through Mexico, it allowed certain parents lawfully present in the United States to request an in-country refugee resettlement interview for children who were nationals of El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras. The Trump administration terminated the parole portion of the CAM program in August 2017.

As of August, more than 1,500 children and eligible family members had arrived in the United States as refugees under the program. Another 2,700 had been conditionally granted parole, only to have it revoked prior to traveling to the United States once the program was terminated.

USCIS Agrees to Reconsider DACA Renewal Applications Marked as Late. U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) agreed, after a public outcry, to allow certain Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) recipients to resubmit renewal applications that had initially been rejected by the agency. Nearly 100 DACA renewal applications were rejected because they had been delayed in the mail or had not been retrieved from application lockboxes and failed to make the October 5 deadline. Initially, USCIS maintained that the decisions were final, but on November 15, the agency announced it would allow applicants to resubmit their applications if they could prove they had mailed them in a timely manner.

When the Trump administration in September announced the rescission of DACA, it set a deadline of October 5 to receive renewal applications for DACA holders whose work authorization would expire before March 5, 2018. In total, USCIS rejected at least 4,000 renewal applications because they were received after the October 5 deadline, though the policy reversal will affect just the 100 or so that were submitted in a timely manner.

President Announces Nominations for Heads of DHS, ICE. President Trump nominated Kirstjen Nielsen to head the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). Nielsen currently serves as White House Deputy Chief of Staff under John Kelly, the former Homeland Security Secretary turned Chief of Staff. Nielsen would be the first DHS head with previous experience working at the agency, where she ran the Office of Legislative Policy and Government Affairs at the Transportation Security Administration from 2002 to 2004. On November 8, lawmakers on the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee voted 11-4 to approve her nomination.

On November 14, President Trump announced his intention to nominate Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) acting Director Thomas Homan to permanently lead the agency. Homan has served at ICE for three decades, including as an immigration officer. Trump appointed Homan as acting ICE director after taking office in January.

Border Patrol Detains Young Girl with Cerebral Palsy After Surgery. U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) detained a 10-year-old girl with cerebral palsy after emergency surgery at a children's hospital in Corpus Christi, Texas. She first came into contact with the agency after the ambulance carrying her to the hospital stopped at one of the Border Patrol checkpoints north of the border. When the agents discovered that she did not have legal status, they followed the ambulance to the hospital, stood guard outside her room, and placed her in immigration custody upon her release. The girl's detention sparked protests nationwide, and inspired many lawmakers and advocates to call on CBP to let her go. After days of public pressure and a lawsuit filed by the ACLU, she was released from custody.
State Policy Beat in Brief
Juries in Washington State Barred from Considering Immigration Status. The Washington State Supreme Court on November 15 approved a rule that makes evidence of someone's immigration status generally inadmissible in all state criminal and civil courts. Immigration status will be considered only if an attorney can argue there is a compelling reason to do so. The rule takes effect in September 2018 and is believed to be the first rule of its kind nationwide. It emerged as a result of a case that went before two separate juries-the second after the state Supreme Court ordered a retrial. The first jury, which knew that the defendant was in the country illegally, reached a different decision from the jury that did not know about his legal status.

New York City Council Approves Legislation Further Limiting Cooperation with ICE. On October 31, the New York City Council passed two bills restricting immigration enforcement actions by city law enforcement officers. One bill prohibits probation officers from honoring ICE detainers-requests to hold suspected unauthorized immigrants until ICE can take custody of them-unless ICE presents a warrant signed by a judge and the noncitizen has been convicted of a violent or serious crime. This policy already applies to the city's police and corrections departments. The second bill prohibits city law enforcement agencies from entering into 287(g) partnerships with ICE that deputize police officers to serve as immigration officers. Both bills currently await the Mayor's signature.

Anti-"Sanctuary City" Bills Move through State Legislatures. A Florida House committee and a Wisconsin Senate committee have both approved legislation that would ban local governments and agencies from having "sanctuary" policies, which restrict cooperation with federal immigration enforcement agencies. The bills in both states have been introduced and failed in past legislative sessions. So far this year, four states-Georgia, Indiana, Mississippi, and Texas-have passed similar laws.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Tens of Thousands in United States Face Uncertain Future, as Temporary Protected Status Deadlines Loom

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Trump administration's announcement that it will end Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for nationals of Haiti, Nicaragua, and Sudan has brought unprecedented attention to the program and its future. Established in 1990, TPS offers work authorization and deportation relief to foreign nationals already in the United States unable to return to countries embroiled in conflict or the effects of a natural disaster.

# data[].attributes.body
Una profesora en una escuela de Cliffside Park, Nuevo Jersey fue mostrado discriminando estudiantes por hablar espanol en clase. Tres estudiantes estaban hablando sobre un juego de beisbol--los Yankees cuando la grita de "Speak American." Esa actitud es comun alrededor de los EEUU, con muchos hispanohablantes contando historias muy similares a esta.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
"We were speaking about the Yankees," she said, about the incident which took place last Thursday. The students were discussing the New York team and the baseball playoffs in Spanish, "because that's how we feel more comfortable."

The teacher, who usually teaches English but was substituting for an algebra class, wasn't having it, and she began ranting and yelling about speaking English in the classroom, Vianery said.

"I laughed, because, first of all, that's not a language," Vianery told NBC News. "I have the right to speak Spanish. I have the right to speak English. I have the right to speak whatever language I speak, and that's my right. There's no law that says that I should or I must speak English."
Related: Poll: Latinos' Racism Concerns Grow, Expectations of Trump Drop
Almost 100 students walked out of school in protest on Monday, even though the principal warned that they would be disciplined, NBC New York reported. After someone pulled a fire alarm, all of the school's 1,110 or so students walked out at about 11 a.m., the station reported.

Cliffside Park, New Jersey, High School. Google Maps

In 2016, nearly half of the student body, 49.7 percent, reported speaking Spanish at home, while 62 percent identified as Hispanic or Latino and only 32 percent reported speaking English at home, according to local school board statistics.

"She said if I wanted to speak Spanish to do it at my Spanish class," Vianery said. "It hurts, because I came to this country to accomplish my dreams, and to hear that - it's not fair."

Students staged a walkout on Monday in support of the three students who were kicked out. Vianery's mother, Eridanei Marine, said she felt that the teacher's comments weren't coming from a "good place."

"Emotionally, she feels bad," said Marine said. "My daughter has never been involved in any kind of trouble. It's a very difficult situation."

The family said that the teacher doesn't reflect how most of the staff at the school acts and that the principal has been supportive of the family. Still, they hope school administrators take action.

"She should be fired," Cabrera said. "I don't think it's fair."

Cliffside Park High School, which has said it is aware of the incident and is working with the students involved, didn't return multiple requests for comment. The Cliffside Park School District had no comment.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Students walk out after teacher orders: Speak 'American'

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
"We were speaking about the Yankees," she said, about the incident which took place last Thursday. The students were discussing the New York team and the baseball playoffs in Spanish, "because that's how we feel more comfortable."

# data[].attributes.headline
Porcentaje de Hispanos que hablan espanol

# data[].attributes.subject
Porcentaje de Hispanos que hablan espanol

# data[].attributes.body
Este articulo muestra el porcentaje de hispanos en los Estados Unidos que hablan espanol. Sorprendemente, el porcentaje ha bajado 5 puntos por el medio. Relevante a nosotros aqui en UT, los regiones de Austin/Round-Rock y San Antonio/New Braunfels bajaron 5 y 9 puntos. Pero no sabemos las influencias alrededor de la sur de Texas causando esto.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
More than 37 million Latinos in the U.S. speak Spanish at home, making it the country's most common non-English language. But while the number of Latinos who speak Spanish at home continues to increase due to the overall growth of the Latino population, the share of Latinos who speak the language has declined over the past decade or so: 73% of Latinos spoke Spanish at home in 2015, down from 78% in 2006, according to a Pew Research Center analysis of Census Bureau data.

The national decline in Spanish use among Latinos extended to all of the top 25 U.S. metro areas with the largest population of Latinos ages 5 and older. The San Antonio-New Braunfels and Phoenix-Mesa-Scottsdale metro areas had some of the largest declines, with the shares who spoke Spanish in each declining by 9 percentage points. Some of the smallest declines came in the Washington-Arlington-Alexandria, McAllen-Edinburg-Mission, Sacramento-Roseville-Arden-Arcade and Miami-Fort Lauderdale-West Palm Beach metro areas, where the share who spoke Spanish at home declined by about 2 percentage points each from 2006 to 2015. ( Click here for a sortable table of Spanish use by metro area.)

Despite this drop-off in use, most Latinos agree that speaking Spanish is a vital skill. In a 2011 Pew Research Center survey, nearly all Latinos said it was important that the next generation of Latinos in the U.S. speak Spanish. Yet many Latinos (71%) say it's not necessary to speak Spanish to be considered Latino, a 2015 survey found.

About half of all Latinos who spoke Spanish at home in 2015 lived in the 10 metro areas with the largest populations of Spanish-speaking Latinos. These metro areas accounted for about 18.5 million Latino Spanish speakers. (Just three states - California, Texas and Florida - included 57% of Spanish-speaking Latinos in the U.S.)

The use of Spanish by Latinos can vary greatly by metro area, in part because immigrants are much more likely to speak Spanish than those born in the U.S. The large presence of immigrants in the Miami metro area, for example, helps explain why a far greater share of Latinos there speak Spanish than in metro areas like Denver-Aurora-Lakewood, where the vast majority of Latinos are U.S. born.

About nine-in-ten Hispanics spoke Spanish at home in Miami (90%) and McAllen (90%), the highest rates in the nation among the top 25 Latino metro areas. The Latino population in Miami had the highest share of immigrants (64%) among the nation's largest metro areas. In McAllen, immigrants made up only 32% of Latinos, though the metro area's shared border with Mexico helps explain the widespread use of Spanish there.

By contrast, in the Denver metro area, 57% of Latinos spoke Spanish, the lowest share among the metro areas analyzed. Sacramento and San Antonio also had low shares, with about 60% of Latinos speaking Spanish at home in each metro area. These areas had some of the lowest immigrant shares among their Latino populations - 29% in Denver, 30% for Sacramento and 16% in San Antonio - which helps account for their low Spanish-speaking shares.

Spanish use has also become less widespread among Latinos in the nation's two largest metro areas by Latino population. In Los Angeles-Long Beach-Anaheim, home to more than 5.5 million Latinos ages 5 and older, 80% spoke Spanish at home in 2015, a decline of 3 percentage points from 2006. New York-Newark-Jersey City (3.6 million Latinos ages 5 and older) saw an even larger decline, with the share who spoke Spanish dropping from 85% in 2006 to 80% in 2015.

Spanish language use in major U.S. metro areas

Spanish speaking at home has declined in top 25 metros with largest Hispanic population

Topics: Language, Hispanic/Latino Identity

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Use of Spanish declines among Latinos in major U.S. metros

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
More than 37 million Latinos in the U.S. speak Spanish at home, making it the country's most common non-English language.

# data[].attributes.body
Este artículo habla del fenómeno lingüística a través del internet.  Muestra los estadísticos detrás de la utilización de español en el mundo electrónico.  El uso de 'slang' como "tkm" significa "te quiero mucho."  Es una cosa nueva, como la distribución de teléfonos celulares aumenta y también el número de personas que interactúan por el internet.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
NICOLÁS AZNÁREZ

¡Últimas noticias! A lo largo de los últimos años la situación de nuestra lengua en Internet ha ¿mejorado?, ¿empeorado?, ¿variado significativamente?, ¿ganado o perdido sectores clave? La noticia es que no lo sabemos bien...

Repitámoslo: en el principal terreno en el que hoy en día nos relacionamos, compramos, vendemos, nos informamos, leemos, escribimos o estudiamos, estamos lamentablemente carentes de estudios sobre su situación. ¿Es creíble que sobre un sector económico y cultural de primera importancia sólo tengamos informaciones sesgadas, interesadas o incompletas? Pues esa es la realidad. Las razones de esta insuficiencia de conocimientos son la complejidad de la materia, su policentrismo, la carencia de una auténtica política digital en los países hispanohablantes, y la falta de un liderazgo claro entre ellos, como el que Francia ejerce entre la francofonía.

Conocer el español en la Red abarca no sólo el uso de nuestra lengua en ordenadores o en tabletas, sino en artefactos que, como los que aún llamamos impropiamente teléfonos, están en todos los bolsillos, y los que pronto estarán en muchas muñecas. Estamos inmersos en nuestra lengua materna, y tan natural es su uso cotidiano que no nos damos cuenta de que es nuestra principal interfaz: la usamos para buscar una información en Internet, para dar una orden a nuestro teléfono móvil, para traducir un artículo, y ese uso digital moviliza un conjunto inmenso de disciplinas y técnicas, y compendia los saberes que han destilado millones de datos acumulados. Por otro lado, una lengua geográficamente tan extendida como el español se manifiesta digitalmente en un espacio que no pertenece a ninguna nación. Éste lo constituyen por una parte los habitantes de países oficialmente hispanohablantes (que, no lo olvidemos, tanto en España como en América son en una gran proporción bilingües), pero además, está la población emigrada que utiliza su lengua materna en el seno de comunidades extranjeras. Es el caso del español en Estados Unidos, pero también del árabe marroquí dentro de España. Hasta aquí, podemos tener datos de censos de población, que nos dan sin embargo muy poca información sobre el uso real que se hace de las lenguas. Además, está la población dispersa que utiliza por motivos empresariales o académicos una lengua que no es la suya: por ejemplo, los hispanistas estadounidenses o los estudiantes de español de Alemania. No: la ciudadanía lingüística no coincide necesariamente con la política, y cada vez coincidirá menos.

Estas poblaciones, con comportamientos lingüísticos heterogéneos, tienen un acceso diferencial a la Red. En primer lugar, y aunque muchos parecen olvidarlo, no todo el mundo está conectado a Internet. Tampoco todos los que lo están tienen el mismo tipo de acceso ni dispositivo. Es muy diferente la persona con móvil y una cuenta limitada de datos del que dispone de tableta y un ordenador de sobremesa con fibra óptica: pueden hacer cosas muy distintas. Los datos sobre acceso y su modalidad no son uniformes en todos los países hispanohablantes: disponemos sólo de los que proporcionan los Gobiernos o compañías, y pueden estar sesgados por motivos comerciales o políticos. E incluso los más fiables cuantitativamente son poco finos: ¿los usuarios utilizan el 3G para ver el fútbol en sus móviles, o como herramienta de trabajo?

Y estos hablantes de español como primera o segunda lengua además hacen un uso de los medios digitales muy variado. No sólo escriben correos electrónicos y crean documentos y presentaciones; también se relacionan con sus amigos en una red social (aunque no necesariamente todos utilizan la misma en todos los países), para navegar por la Web utilizan buscadores (y, de nuevo, pueden no ser los mismos según los lugares), hablan con sus conocidos utilizando voz por IP, leen periódicos, pero también revistas o blogs; consultan enciclopedias y diccionarios; compran libros; se matriculan en moocs, acuden a webinars, escuchan lecciones por podcast, debaten en foros, participan en videoconferencias, estudian lenguas en sitios web y tienen tutores remotos por Skype; los más activos de ellos además escriben, tuits, blogs o colaboraciones en la Wikipedia, cuelgan vídeos y fotos en distintas redes sociales. Detrás de cada una de estas acciones hay tanto opciones culturales como implicaciones empresariales; los numerosos servicios gratuitos obtienen retornos a través de la publicidad, cada vez más dirigida y segmentada por lo mucho que la Red sabe de nosotros, o mediante la explotación de nuestros datos.

Querríamos saber cuántos hispanohablantes utilizan cada uno de estos servicios, y cómo, pero, ¡ay!: estamos ya en el dominio de empresas privadas, de corporaciones a veces gigantescas y con intereses comerciales planetarios, que no van a desvelar su funcionamiento. Determinadas iniciativas tienen políticas de transparencia envidiables, como la Wikipedia, que es precisamente una mina de datos sobre las lenguas en que está escrita. Pero es la excepción. Otros servicios pueden rastrearse para analizar sus datos, y gracias a eso sabemos, por ejemplo, que el español es la tercera lengua más seleccionada por los usuarios de Twitter (es decir: la lengua de su interfaz; no necesariamente la lengua en que más tuitean o leen).

Por otra parte, es difícil saber cuánto material en español hay en la Web. Por supuesto, no conoceremos los contenidos de la llamada "Web oculta" (protegidos por claves o inaccesibles). Pero los buscadores tampoco indizan todo lo que está visible, porque la Web ha adquirido una magnitud inmanejable, y deben limitarse a rastrear un subconjunto de ella, que comprende los sitios más visitados, que por supuesto estarán en las lenguas dominantes en poder, producción científica... Es decir, los buscadores favorecerán los sitios en inglés. Sí: puede haber datos de cuántos servidores (los ordenadores que constituyen la Internet) hay en cada país hispanohablante, pero no sabremos bien cuántos sitios web contiene cada uno, y además puede haber servidores con contenidos en español en otros lugares. Por otro lado, la lengua que las estadísticas atribuyen a una web suele ser la de su portada, que quizá no refleje los contenidos de su interior.

Dado este complejo conjunto de infraestructuras, servicios y contenidos que definen el español en la Red es más explicable que, pese a su gran importancia, ningún país individual ni organismo transnacional haya abordado su análisis. Pero ¿podría éste llevarse a cabo? Al menos puede intentarse reunir críticamente los distintos indicadores existentes y extrapolar los que faltan, para llegar a resultados coherentes que creen un marco de comparación para evoluciones futuras. Esto lo ha hecho para el francés la organización para la diversidad lingüística Maaya (http://maaya.org), por encargo de la Organización Internacional de la Francofonía. Y la buena noticia es que dos de sus miembros, Daniel Pimienta y Daniel Prado, están preparando un documento con las bases metodológicas para el español, que verá pronto la luz. Del borrador que hemos consultado se desprende que el español estaría entre la tercera y la cuarta posición entre las lenguas en la Red, por factores como su extensa demografía y la cobertura de población con acceso, pero sus mayores fortalezas estarían en el uso de redes sociales y la descarga de archivos: es decir, se trataría de un espacio lingüístico consumidor, muy rico en relaciones internas, pero con notables carencias en contenidos.

Como recoge el Libro de los Proverbios hacia el siglo IV antes de Cristo, versificó el poeta persa Ferdusí en el siglo XI y repitió Francis Bacon en el XVII, "conocimiento es poder". Ojalá haya nuevos esfuerzos en el abandonado terreno del análisis de nuestra lengua en Internet y así se puedan llevar a cabo las acciones, institucionales y privadas, para darle el lugar que podría tener.

José Antonio Millán publicó en 2001 el primer libro sobre una lengua y la Red: Internet y el español.

Puedes seguir EL PAÍS Opinión en Facebook, Twitter o suscribirte aquí a la Newsletter.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Tribuna | El lugar del español en Internet

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
¡Últimas noticias! A lo largo de los últimos años la situación de nuestra lengua en Internet ha ¿mejorado?, ¿empeorado?, ¿variado significativamente?, ¿ganado o perdido sectores clave? La noticia es que no lo sabemos bien... Repitámoslo: en el principal terreno en el que hoy en día nos relacionamos, compramos, vendemos, nos informamos, leemos, escribimos o estudiamos, estamos lamentablemente carentes de estudios sobre su situación.

# data[].attributes.headline
Habilidades de Americanos para hablar una otra idioma

# data[].attributes.subject
Habilidades de Americanos para hablar una otra idioma

# data[].attributes.body
Este artículo describe en detalle los problemas en el sistema de educación sobre el aprendizaje de idiomas.  Muchos Americanos no tienen la habilidad de hablar más que inglés y ellos que hacen eligen idiomas no tan importantes.  Por ejemplo, muchos estudiantes sacaron francés que tiene una población de 95 millones.  Menos estudiantes eligieron Bengali, que tiene una población de 193 millones.  Es una discusión que las escuelas necesitan tener sobre los programas que ofrecen.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Budget cuts, low enrollments, and teacher shortages mean the country is falling behind the rest of the world.

# data[].attributes.body
Este video da ejemplos de voces alrededor de latinoamérica.  La influencia de diferencias geográficas, tiempo y población nativa ha cambiado el español desde la regla de los conquistadores.  Como dicho en clase el acento caribeño tiene un fondo en la sur de España, influido por los musulmanes.  De un punto de visto lingüística podríamos descubrir conexiones entre el mundo caribeño y árabe.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
10 Latin American accents in Spanish (women voices)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
because latinos do not speak the same kind of spanish.

# data[].attributes.body
Esta mapa muestra la distribución de hispanohablantes en los Estados Unidos.  Es importante para entender las implicaciones sociales que la refleja.  Podemos combinar esta mapa con información más específica como el país de origen o edad de persona para hacer un censo de la población.  Es interesante ver los conexiones entre lenguaje y ocupación. Por ejemplo, la region fuerte en Washington State es una area agricultural. Podemos decir que muchos trabajadores migrantes han mudado a esta area.

# data[].attributes.body
En esta entrevista el chico describe el significado de pragmática.  El sarcasmo es usado para significar algo irónica o chistoso mientras diciendo algo serio.  La pragmática es algo importante por la cultura y humor de muchas personas.  Personalmente, yo uso esto tipo de humor cada día, así para verlo como un sujeto estudiado por los lingüísticas es satisfactorio.

# data[].attributes.body
Me fascina estas, las máximas de Grice.  Este sitio describe en detalle todas las categorías, es comprensivo.  Para mí lo explica que vistamos en clase por el parte de Sheldon del Big Bang Theory.  Que consideramos normal, Grice ha declarado como reglas sociales humanos.  Esta llama en cuestión el significado de parcialidad por culturas diferentes; las reglas sociales son diferentes.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Data d'edició: 27 de Febrer de 2012
Data d'actualització: 11 de Abril de 2014

Las máximas de Grice son cuatro principios pragmáticos establecidos por el filósofo inglés Paul Grice:

* Máxima de cantidad
* Máxima de calidad
* Máxima de pertinencia o relevancia
* Máxima de modo o manera

Estos principios establecen un vínculo entre lo que se dice efectivamente y lo que se infiere de las palabras pronunciadas, es decir, entre lo que efectivamente decimos y lo que queremos decir.

Contenidos
Explicación Transgredir las máximas Conceptos relacionados Bibliografía básica Bibliografía complementaria
Explicación

Las máximas estructuran el denominado principio de cooperación (Cooperative Principle), de acuerdo con el cual en los intercambios conversacionales se sigue la siguiente instrucción: Adecue su contribución conversacional, en el estadio en que tenga lugar, a los requisitos que marque el propósito o la dirección del intercambio que usted sostenga" (Grice 1975: 516). Este principio es el fundamento del éxito de todo intercambio comunicativo.
Los hablantes damos por supuesto que nuestros interlocutores son cooperativos, esto es, que siguen las normas que conforman cada una de las máximas. De este modo, cuando mantenemos una conversación, cuando leemos un texto que alguien nos ha dirigido u oímos hablar a una persona, damos por sentado que nuestro interlocutor nos va a dar la información justa que necesitamos (máxima de cantidad), que esta será verdadera (máxima de calidad), relevante (máxima de pertinencia) y que será expuesta de manera clara y ordenada (máxima de modo).

Las cuatro máximas se desglosan a su vez en varias subcategorías:

Máxima de cantidad: Da la cantidad necesaria de información (ni más ni menos).

I. Da tanta información como sea precisa.
II. No des más información de la que sea necesaria.

Máxima de calidad: Intenta que tu contribución sea verdadera

III. No digas nada que creas que es falso
IV. No digas nada si no tienes pruebas suficientes de su veracidad
Máxima de pertinencia o relevancia
V. Sé relevante

Máxima de modo o de manera: Sé perspicuo, es decir, claro

VI. Evita la oscuridad en la expresión
VII. Evita la ambigüedad
VIII. Sé breve
IX. Sé ordenado

Transgredir las máximas (Flouting the maxims)

Si alguno de estos principios conversacionales se rompe, siguiendo el principio de cooperación, el hablante inferirá una información no explicitada: las máximas generan implicaturas. Así, cuando en una situación comunicativa, alguien dice una obviedad y su interlocutor dice "Vaya lince", transgrediendo de este modo la máxima de calidad, se infiere que el hablante que empleó la palabra "lince" estaba siendo irónico. La ironía, pues, viola de modo explícito la máxima de calidad a fin de comunicar unos efectos expresivos concretos. De manera similar, algunos chistes basados en juegos de palabras se saltan deliberadamente la máxima de modo para despertar, a partir del ingenio, la sonrisa del público:

-¿Sabes cómo se llama la monja más fuerte del mundo?
-No.
-Sor Senáguer.

-¿Qué? ¿Se suda?
-Y tú cabezota.

De manera análoga, si alguien contesta a una pregunta nuestra de manera no pertinente, interpretaremos que del mensaje que nos transmite podemos entresacar la respuesta a nuestra pregunta. Por ejemplo, en un intercambio conversacional como el siguiente:

-¿Qué hora es?
-Tu madre acaba de llamar por teléfono

la respuesta Tu madre acaba de llamar por teléfono no parece una respuesta pertinente para la pregunta previa. Ahora bien, si la madre del primer interlocutor siempre llama, pongamos, a las ocho de la noche, la respuesta cobra toda relevancia.

En casos como los señalados, frecuentes en la conversación cotidiana, en los que se transgrede alguna de las máximas, se genera una implicatura conversacional que permite reinterpretar lo dicho y así obtener un nuevo contenido significativo que no entre en contradicción con el principio de cooperación. Es decir, las implicaturas permiten salvar la distancia que media entre lo que se dice y lo que se quiere decir.

Si se infringe alguna de las máximas sin que subyazca intención comunicativa alguna, el hablante recibirá la sanción social correspondiente. Así, aquel que dé más información de la requerida, será considerado un charlatán o un rollero o un palizas. Aquel que, sabiéndolo, dé información que no sea cierta será tachado de mentiroso. A aquel que dice cosas que no vienen a cuento se le considerará inapropiado. Por último, de aquel que no es claro en su exposición diremos que no se le entiende.

Críticas

Las críticas a las máximas tienen que ver con las diferencias culturales, ya que no en todas las culturas los principios que rigen las máximas tienen por qué ser idénticos. Así, en la lengua malgache (lengua hablada en Madagascar) no se sigue la máxima de cantidad tal y como se formula en Grice.
Otra cuestión que debe ser tenida en cuenta es que las máximas no constituyen normas que deban ser seguidas por los oradores en sus discursos, sino que describen los rasgos que caracterizan a los intercambios comunicativos.
Las expresiones metafóricas también ponen en entredicho las máximas de Grice. Concretamente, la máxima de calidad, la metáfora supone emplear un término en una acepción diferente a la habitual o literal.

Conceptos relacionados

Bibliografía básica

Yule, G. (1996), Pragmatics, Oxford, Oxford University Press.

Bibliografía complementaria

Portolés, J. (2004), Pragmática para hispanistas, Madrid, Síntesis.
Bach, Kent (2006)," The Top Misconceptions about Implicature", en Birner, B.J. y Ward, G. (eds.), Drawing the Boundaries of Meaning: Neo-Gricean Studies in Pragmatics and Semantics in Honor of Laurence R. Horn, New York-Amsterdam, John Benjamins.
Bach, Kent (2006),Ten more misconceptions about Implicature (handout)
Frederking, R. E. (1996),Grice's Maxims: "Do the Right Thing", presentado en el Computational Implicature workshop en el AAAI-96 Spring Symposium Series, Stanford.
Grice, Paul H. (1975), " Logic and Conversation", en Grice, Paul (1989), Studies in the Way of Words, Harvard University Press, 22-40.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Data d'edició: 27 de Febrer de 2012 Data d'actualització: 11 de Abril de 2014 Las máximas de Grice son cuatro principios pragmáticos establecidos por el filósofo inglés Paul Grice: * Máxima de cantidad * Máxima de calidad * Máxima de pertinencia o relevancia * Máxima de modo o manera Estos principios establecen un vínculo entre lo que se dice efectivamente y lo que se infiere de las palabras pronunciadas, es decir, entre lo que efectivamente decimos y lo que queremos decir.

# data[].attributes.body
Este sitio describe chistes diferentes que tienen calidades ambiguosos.  Son chistosos por esta calidad.  Por ejemplo, "Flying planes can be dangerous" tiene ambigüedad.  Aunque también considerado parte de Capítulo 4, el significado aspecto de esto lo pone en este sección.  Esto chiste puede decir que el acto de volando aviones podría ser peligroso, también que los aviones mudando rápidamente a través del aire son peligrosos.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Some time ago a friend shared the following with me. What I find interesting about this question is that it is ambiguous, with the ambiguity neither grammatical (structural) nor lexical. The question is, I think, pragmatically ambiguous.

A bit of background: Linguists, philosophers, and others have long discussed different sources of ambiguity in ordinary language. Lexical ambiguity is caused when two words have the same form (homonymy or homophony) or when a word has more than one meaning (polysemy).* A classic example of lexical ambiguity involves the word(s) bank.

1. I went to the bank.

Sentence 1 is ambiguous because the word bank can mean either a type of financial institution or an area of land next to a river.

Structural ambiguity results when an utterance might have more than one grammatical structure.

2. Flying planes can be dangerous.

Sentence 2, from Noam Chomsky's (1965) Aspects of the Theory of Syntax, is ambiguous since the phrase flying planes might refer to the activity of flying or to the machines, planes, when they are flying. In the first case the sentence means nearly the same thing as "Flying planes is dangerous", while in the second it means something like "While flying, planes are dangerous." These two meanings reflect two different grammatical structures, but on the surface the sentences look and sound alike.

Jokes often exploit ambiguity. Linguist and humor scholar Victor Raskin, for example, includes homonymy/polysemy and syntactic ambiguity among the Semantic Mechanisms of Humor (1984). Often both words and syntactic structure are manipulated to force an ambiguous reading, as in the following (with apologies for the groans they will probably evoke).

How do you make a turtle fast?
Take away his food.

A: I saw a man-eating shark at the aquarium.
B: That's nothing. I saw a man eating herring at the deli

(I'll spare you the syntactic analysis. If you're truly curious, you can see my 1997 MA thesis in which the jokes are mentioned.)

"Pragmatic ambiguity" is sometimes understood as a quality of utterances whose speech act (Austin 1962, PDF here) is unclear. Philosophers of language have also discussed pragmatic ambiguity in sentences whose truth value hinges on listener presupposition or speaker intent.

The joke my friend sent me features neither lexical nor structural ambiguity, yet the joke hinges on understanding the question in more than one way.

If the question is taken as literally and logically complete (a somewhat odd approach that is itself the subject of jokes), it cannot be answered. "If you choose an answer at random, what is your probability of being correct?" Given the nearly infinite number of potential answers to potential questions or problems, there is no way to calculate an answer.

But as philosopher H. Paul Grice (1975) pointed out, we don't take utterances as logically complete; we assume that people we interact with are cooperating with us. Accordingly, we assume that the things they say are (among other things) relevant and complete. Thus a reasonable person might fill in the necessary limits from context and understand the question to mean, "If you choose an answer to this question at random from a list of four possible answers, what is your probability of being correct?" In that case, we can calculate an answer: 25%.

But wait! Two answers, A and D, are both "25%". We could instead understand the question to mean, "If you choose an answer to this question at random from the list of four possible answers below in which "25%" appears twice, what is your probability of being correct?" In that case the correct answer is "50%", but only if the correct answer is 25%. This is a paradox, and thus (potentially) humorous.

* It is difficult to say in principle whether a form and two meanings constitute one word or two. Attempts to define polysemy versus homophony are complex, as my friend Susan Windisch Brown illustrates ( PDF here).

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Some time ago a friend shared the following with me. What I find interesting about this question is that it is ambiguous, with the ambiguity neither grammatical (structural) nor lexical. The question is, I think, pragmatically ambiguous. A bit of background: Linguists, philosophers, and others have long discussed different sources of ambiguity in ordinary language.

# data[].attributes.body
Este sitio muestra los tipos de deixis por otros definiciones que hemos visto por el textbook.  Por ejemplo, lo habla de un deixis social/catafórica/anafórica.  Aunque diferente, es interesante como otros interpretan el fenómeno en el campo de lingüística.  Estos tipos diferentes tratan de cosas en conversaciones casuales, referidos por cada ocasión.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
La deixis es un aspecto de la semántica que es usada para referirse a elementos de una oración como puede ser una persona, anima, objeto, situación, tiempo o lugar, el uso de la deixis se hace mediante ciertos componentes conocidos también como "deícticos", a su vez este término tiene su origen del griego "deiktikós" que quiere decir "que indica o señala".

Para entender mejor este concepto las palabras "tú, hoy, aquí, esto" entre otras similares son consideradas expresiones deícticas y sirven para hacer referencia a los elementos mencionados antes, las deixis se dividen en los siguientes tipos:

Deixis personal: Es aquella en la que las expresiones deícticas se usan para señalar el rol que tiene un individuo, puede usarse de forma singular o plural.

Deixis social: Además de hacer referencia a un individuo, tiene la función de hacer énfasis en el estatus social de la persona o la relación que existe entre las personas que interactúan.

Deixis de lugar: En este tipo de deixis se hace mención al lugar en el que una persona está hablando, dando también una referencia de la distancia entre dicha persona y el interlocutor.

Deixis de tiempo: Hace referencia a un momento específico, para ello se vale de la circunstancia en la cual se expresa el mensaje para dar idea del tiempo.

Deixis catafórica: Se usa para indicar un punto del tema que se habla pero que aún no se ha mencionado pero que se hará.

Deixis anafórica: Contrario a la anterior es aquella en que se refiere a un tema ya hablado, se conoce simplemente como anáfora.

Ejemplos de deixis:

Los visitantes han llegado aquí buscando:

deixis

Deixis ejemplos

deixis lingüística ejemplo

deixis personal ejemplos

ejemplo de deixis

ejemplos de deixis personal espacial y temporal

Por: Angel Levano Guardado en Lengua y Literatura

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
La deixis es un aspecto de la semántica que es usada para referirse a elementos de una oración como puede ser una persona, anima, objeto, situación, tiempo o lugar, el uso de la deixis se hace mediante ciertos componentes conocidos también como "deícticos", a su vez este término tiene su origen del griego "deiktikós" que [...]

# data[].attributes.body
Pew Research Center muestra el futuro de los hispanohablantes en los EEUU.  Su investigación dice que la cuota de personas que hablan español va a crecer por 2050 así el país es el uno que contiene hispanohablantes.  Viviendo en contacto cerca, el inglés y español van a crecer juntos támbien, usando vocabulario y slang de la otra.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
With more than 37 million speakers, Spanish is by far the most spoken non-English language in the U.S. today among people ages 5 and older. It is also one of the fastest-growing, with the number of speakers up 233% since 1980, when there were 11 million Spanish speakers. (The number of Vietnamese speakers grew faster, up 599% over the same period).

As Spanish use has grown, driven primarily by Hispanic immigration and population growth, it has become a part of many aspects of life in the U.S. For example, Spanish is spoken by more non-Hispanics in U.S. homes than any other non-English language and Spanish language television networks frequently beat their English counterparts in television ratings.

But what's the future of Spanish?

According to a 2011 paper by U.S. Census Bureau Demographers Jennifer Ortman and Hyon B. Shin, the number of Spanish speakers is projected to rise through 2020 to anywhere between 39 million and 43 million, depending on the assumption one makes about immigration. Most of these Spanish speakers will be Hispanic, with Ortman and Shin projecting between 37.5 million and 41 million Hispanic Spanish speakers by 2020.

Ortman and Shin provide two other projections, both of which highlight the changing demographics of the nation's Hispanic population and the rising importance of U.S. births rather than the arrival of new immigrants to Hispanic population growth.

Today, three-fourths of all Hispanics ages 5 and older speak Spanish. However, that share is projected to fall to about two-thirds in 2020. The share of Hispanics that speak Spanish reached 78% in the 2000s.

As the share of Hispanics who speak Spanish falls, the share that speaks only English at home is expected to rise. About a third (34%) of Hispanics will speak only English at home by 2020, up from 25% in 2010, according to Ortman and Shin.

The story of the Spanish language in the U.S. is still unfolding. Whether it follows the same pattern of decline in use as other non-English languages, such as Italian, German or Polish, remains to be seen. ( The number of Italian, German and Polish speakers in the U.S. declined 55.2%, 32.7% and 25.9% between 1980 and 2010, even though the number of Americans who trace their ancestry to Germany, Poland or Italy grew over the same period.)

Nonetheless, the path that Spanish takes could be different. A 2012 Pew Research Hispanic Trends Project report showed 95% of Hispanic adults-including those born in the U.S.-said it is important that future generations of Hispanic speak Spanish. And today's young Hispanics are more likely than their parents to say they hear messages about the importance of speaking Spanish. But among Hispanics, use of English when consuming news media, television entertainment, music or speaking it is on the rise.

Topics: Hispanic/Latino Demographics, Hispanic/Latino Identity, Language

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
What is the future of Spanish in the United States?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
With more than 37 million speakers, Spanish is by far the most spoken non-English language in the U.S. today among people ages 5 and older. It is also one of the fastest-growing, with the number of speakers up 233% since 1980, when there were 11 million Spanish speakers.

# data[].attributes.body
Este sitio muestra un visto pequeño a la influencia de la lengua arábica ha tenido en el español.  Algunas palabras que usamos cotidiana tiene este origen diferente que latín. La  mayoría de esas palabras son de arábica directamente, pero a través de los años la ortografía ha cambiado para reflejar la fonética de español.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Spanish Grammar Articles and Lessons | SpanishDictionary.com

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Expert articles and interactive video lessons on how to use the Spanish language. Learn about 'por' vs. 'para', Spanish pronunciation, typing Spanish accents, and more.

# data[].attributes.body
Aunque el narrador es literalmente un robot, este podcast es informativo en describiendo el español viejo.  Describe cosas más importantes sobre la lingüística que hace español diferente que otras idiomas.  De este observación de español viejo podemos aprender más de la idioma moderna.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Old Spanish, also known as Old Castilian or Medieval Spanish , is an early form of the Spanish language that was spoken on the Iberian Peninsula from the 10th century until roughly the beginning of the 15th century, before a consonantal readjustment gave rise to the evolution of modern Spanish.The poem Cantar de Mio Cid , published around 1200, remains the best known and most extensive work of literature in Old Spanish.

# data[].attributes.body
Este sitio describe la evolución del Latín a través de cambios históricos.  La formación del Imperio Romano y la diáspora de la lengua muestran la fundación por todas las lenguas romances.  El español está construido por el latín, así la historia de los Romanos es por lo tanto la historia de España.  Aunque el latín está muerto, se vive a través de las lenguas romances de hoy.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Latín, castellano y lenguas romances - El léxico latino - Latín 2º

# data[].attributes.body
Un ejemplo del rol de sintaxis en lenguaje es prominente en el uso del voz activa o pasiva.  Estas dos maneras de decir la misma cosa tienen efectos en la percepción por el parts de la audiencia.  El voz activa esta visto como fuerte y confidente mientras el pasivo a veces se parece débil e inseguro.  Los dos tienen usos, pero mucho depende en la situación y propósito de la frase.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Se llaman voz activa y voz pasiva a los fenómenos de construcción lingüística que permiten diferenciar la acción del sujeto en la oración.

Esta división se define de la siguiente manera:

1.- Voz activa.- En este tipo de oraciones, la voz activa expresa la acción del sujeto en la oración, así en la oración " Fernando pasea al perro", la acción de cortar el pasto la realiza Fernando por medio del verbo pasear.

2.- Voz pasiva.- En este tipo de oraciones, la voz pasiva expresa una acción pero no la realiza directamente el sujeto, sino que el verbo se aplica al predicado así en la oración " El perro es paseado por Fernando ", la acción del verbo recae en el predicado que en este caso es el perro.

30 ejemplos de oraciones en voz activa y voz pasiva

La mesera sirve mesas (Voz Activa).
Las mesas son servidas por la mesera (Voz Pasiva)

El café está bien preparado hoy (Voz Activa)
Hoy está bien preparado el café (Voz Pasiva)

Citado APA: (A. 2011,09. Ejemplo de Voz activa y voz pasiva. Revista Ejemplode.com. Obtenido 09, 2011, de http://www.ejemplode.com/12-clases_de_espanol/1870-ejemplo_de_voz_activa_y_voz_pasiva.html)

¡Ayúdanos a ayudarte! Por favor comparte este artículo.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Se llaman voz activa y voz pasiva a los fenómenos de construcción lingüística que permiten diferenciar la acción del sujeto en la oración. Esta división se define de la siguiente manera: 1.- Voz activa.- En este tipo de oraciones, la voz activa expresa la acción del sujeto en la oración, así en la oración " Fernando pasea al perro", la acción de cortar el pasto la realiza Fernando por medio del verbo pasear.

# data[].attributes.body
Esta imagen muestra como hacer una frase árbol.  El propósito de una frase árbol es dividir la frase en partes para observar la sintaxis y gramática.  Los árboles están compuestos de 'sintagmas;' hay sintagmas nominales, verbales, adjetivales, adverbiales y preposicionales.  Estos partes diferentes tienen funciones específicos de cada parte de una frase.

# data[].attributes.body
Según este sitio, la ambigüedad está definido como "una situación en la que la información se puede entender o interpretar de más de una manera." Así hay diferentes tipos de ambigüedad: léxica/polisémica, sintáctica, fonética y semántica.  Abajo de la sección relevante a este capítulo, nos vemos el ejemplo de "Compró los libros baratos." Qué son baratos, los libros o el precio del mercado?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
El uso de palabras polisémicas implica que el autor deba aclarar el contexto, y en ocasiones deba dar más detalles sobre su significado específico (en cuyo caso, se debería usar un término menos ambiguo). El objetivo de la comunicación clara y concisa es que el receptor no tenga ninguna equivocación sobre lo que se quería transmitir.

# data[].attributes.body
Una palabra polisémica es una que tiene muchos significados.  La palabra aparece la misma de cualquier sentido, pero el contexto al dentro del frase determina que significa.  Por ejemplo, como dicho el video, "vino" puede significa el bebido alcohólico o que alguien ha venido.  La polisemia puede crear confusión entre los hablantes no nativos.

# data[].attributes.body
Alrededor del siglo X había una influencia grande de los territorios Árabes en la costa sur de la península Ibérica sobre el lenguaje de Español.  Muchas palabras hoy llevan significados y y morfemas de esta influencia.  Cuando los Castellanos han conquistado todo el territorio de España presente las influencias de los Árabes se permaneció.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Influencia del árabe en el español - Wikipedia, la enciclopedia libre

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
La influencia árabe en la lengua española ha sido significativa, especialmente en el nivel léxico, debido a la prolongada presencia arabófona en Hispania entre los años 711 y 1609 (fecha de la expulsión de los moriscos).

# data[].attributes.body
Este video explique en detalle el resumen de morfemas.  Habla de los raíces, flexivos y derivativos, dando ejemplos de todos. Aunque el video solo tiene cincuenta miradores, lo hace un buen trabajo de describiendo las diferencias entre cada parte de una palabra.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Uploaded by escueladelmarquesado on 2016-09-28.

# data[].attributes.headline
Morfemas del Lenguaje de Signos Americanos

# data[].attributes.subject
Morfemas del Lenguaje de Signos Americanos

# data[].attributes.body
Este articulo describe el uso de morfemas en el lenguaje de signos Americanos.  Como cada otra idioma, la usa las morfemas para añadir detalle y cambiar el significado de una palabra.  Los hablantes de ASL (acrónimo en Inglés) mueven la boca en maneras diferentes en conjunción con movimientos de las manos para crear morfemas.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
In sign language linguistics, mouth morphemes are units (affixation) to signed words to create a specific meaning.

# data[].attributes.body
Esta página muestra la definición de una morfema seguido por clasificaciones como prefijos/sufijos, y flexivos como modo, tiempo y aspecto.  El sitio dice que una morfema es "la unidad mínima de una palabra capaz de expresar un significado gramatical."  Así hay una fundación básica de cada palabra.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Web didáctica de Gramática con definiciones, ejemplos, ejercicios y juegos de Adverbios, Oraciones Subordinadas, Conjunciones, Complementos, etc.

# data[].attributes.body
Este video muestra las cuerdas vocales de una chica cantando varias notas y el Himno Nacional del EEUU.  La manera en que las cuerdas están estiradas determina que tipo de sonido está producido.  El aire se pasa través de la garganta, las cuerdas vibrando crea el sonido.  Cuando las cuerdas están largas la chica está haciendo una nota alta.  Por el opuesto, cuando están cortas hay una nota baja.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Vocal fold movement when singing the US National Anthem

# data[].attributes.body
Este video muestra un 'beatboxer' produciendo sonidos que están observados por una máquina de resonancia magnética.  Es fascinante para ver los partes en acción, y es un ejemplo real de las entradas de antes. Aunque no vemos un lenguaje, pero 'beats', los principios aplican todavía. El "MC" crea sonidos como tambores electrónicos en el estilo de hip hop.

# data[].attributes.body
Una tabla que muestra los principales alófonos de las consonantes en español.  Incluye dialectos de alrededor del mundo, como la 'theta' de España.  El lado izquierda tiene la manera en que los sonidos están producidos.  El otro lado tiene el lugar dónde están producidos en la boca y el cuello.

# data[].attributes.body
Esta imagen muestra los órganos articulatorios que necesitamos para crear cada tipo de sonido por lenguaje.  Corresponde con la tabla de alófonos más arriba.  Lo muestra la anatomía que mueve y toca junta durante la producción de sonido. Hablantes de idiomas otras usan partes diferentes con más frecuencia, es como los Japonés no pueden pronunciar la /r/ de Inglés.

# data[].attributes.body
Está pagina describe la habilidad innato de humanos para adquirir lenguaje cuando están creciendo.  El periodo critical de adquisición es dónde un niño tiene la habilidad de aprender cada lenguaje, pero el ambiente en que viven determina que aprenden

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Language acquisition is the process by which humans acquire the capacity to perceive and comprehend language (in other words, gain the ability to be aware of language and to understand it), as well as to produce and use words and sentences to communicate.

Language acquisition involves structures, rules, and representation. The capacity to use language successfully requires one to acquire a range of tools including phonology, morphology, syntax, semantics, and an extensive vocabulary. Language can be vocalized as in speech, or manual as in sign. Human language capacity is represented in the brain. Even though human language capacity is finite, one can say and understand an infinite number of sentences, which is based on a syntactic principle called recursion. Evidence suggests that every individual has three recursive mechanisms that allow sentences to go indeterminately. These three mechanisms are: relativization, complementation and coordination.

Linguists who are interested in child language acquisition have for many years questioned how language is acquired. Lidz et al. state "The question of how these structures are acquired, then, is more properly understood as the question of how a learner takes the surface forms in the input and converts them into abstract linguistic rules and representations."

Language acquisition usually refers to first-language acquisition, which studies infants' acquisition of their native language, whether that be spoken language or signed language, though it can also refer to bilingual first language acquisition (BFLA), which refers to an infant's simultaneous acquisition of two native languages. This is distinguished from second-language acquisition, which deals with the acquisition (in both children and adults) of additional languages. In addition to speech, reading and writing a language with an entirely different script compounds the complexities of true foreign language literacy. Language acquisition is one of the quintessential human traits.

Some early observation-based ideas about language acquisition were proposed by Plato, who felt that word-meaning mapping in some form was innate. Additionally, Sanskrit grammarians debated for over twelve centuries whether humans' ability to recognize the meaning of words was god-given (possibly innate) or passed down by previous generations and learned from already established conventions: a child learning the word for cow by listening to trusted speakers talking about cows.

Proponents of behaviorism argued that language may be learned through a form of operant conditioning. In B. F. Skinner's Verbal Behavior (1957), he suggested that the successful use of a sign, such as a word or lexical unit, given a certain stimulus, reinforces its "momentary" or contextual probability. Since operant conditioning is contingent on reinforcement by rewards, a child would learn that a specific combination of sounds stands for a specific thing through repeated successful associations made between the two. A "successful" use of a sign would be one in which the child is understood (for example, a child saying "up" when they want to be picked up) and rewarded with the desired response from another person, thereby reinforcing the child's understanding of the meaning of that word and making it more likely that they will use that word in a similar situation in the future. Some empiricist theories of language acquisition include the statistical learning theory. Charles F. Hockett of language acquisition, relational frame theory, functionalist linguistics, social interactionist theory, and usage-based language acquisition.

Skinner's behaviorist idea was strongly attacked by Noam Chomsky in a review article in 1959, calling it "largely mythology" and a "serious delusion." Arguments against Skinner's idea of language acquisition through operant conditioning include the fact that children often ignore language corrections from adults. Instead, children typically follow a pattern of using an irregular form of a word correctly, making errors later on, and eventually returning to the proper use of the word. For example, a child may correctly learn the word "gave" (past tense of "give"), and later on use the word "gived". Eventually, the child will typically go back to using the correct word, "gave". Chomsky claimed the pattern is difficult to attribute to Skinner's idea of operant conditioning as the primary way that children acquire language. Chomsky argued that if language were solely acquired through behavioral conditioning, children would not likely learn the proper use of a word and suddenly use the word incorrectly. Chomsky believed that Skinner failed to account for the central role of syntactic knowledge in language competence. Chomsky also rejected the term "learning", which Skinner used to claim that children "learn" language through operant conditioning. Instead, Chomsky argued for a mathematical approach to language acquisition, based on a study of syntax.

Victor of Aveyron

Herbert S. Terrace conducted a study on a chimpanzee known as Nim Chimpsky in an attempt to teach him American Sign Language. This study was an attempt to further research done with a chimpanzee named Washoe, who was reportedly able to acquire American Sign Language. However, upon further inspection, Terrace concluded that both experiments were failures. While Nim was able to acquire signs, he never acquired a knowledge of grammar, and was unable to combine signs in a meaningful way. Researchers noticed that "signs that seemed spontaneous were, in fact, cued by teachers", and not actually productive. When Terrace reviewed Project Washoe, he found similar results. He postulated that there is a fundamental difference between animals and humans in their motivation to learn language; animals, such as in Nim's case, are motivated only by physical reward, while humans learn language in order to "create a new type of communication".

In another language acquisition study, Jean-Marc-Gaspard Itard attempted to teach Victor of Aveyron, a feral child, how to speak. Victor was able to learn a few words, but ultimately never fully acquired language. Slightly more successful was a study done on Genie, another child never introduced to society. She had been entirely isolated for the first thirteen years of her life by her father. Caretakers and researchers attempted to measure her ability to learn a language. She was able to acquire a large vocabulary, but never acquired grammatical knowledge. Researchers concluded that the theory of a critical period was true; Genie was too old to learn how to speak productively, although she was still able to comprehend language.

A major debate in understanding language acquisition is how these capacities are picked up by infants from the linguistic input. Input in the linguistic context is defined as "All words, contexts, and other forms of language to which a learner is exposed, relative to acquired proficiency in first or second languages". Nativists such as Chomsky have focused on the hugely complex nature of human grammars, the finiteness and ambiguity of the input that children receive, and the relatively limited cognitive abilities of an infant. From these characteristics, they conclude that the process of language acquisition in infants must be tightly constrained and guided by the biologically given characteristics of the human brain. Otherwise, they argue, it is extremely difficult to explain how children, within the first five years of life, routinely master the complex, largely tacit grammatical rules of their native language. Additionally, the evidence of such rules in their native language is all indirect- adult speech to children cannot encompass all of what children know by the time they have acquired their native language.

Other scholars, however, have resisted the possibility that infants' routine success at acquiring the grammar of their native language requires anything more than the forms of learning seen with other cognitive skills, including such mundane motor skills as learning to ride a bike. In particular, there has been resistance to the possibility that human biology includes any form of specialization for language. This conflict is often referred to as the " nature and nurture" debate. Of course, most scholars acknowledge that certain aspects of language acquisition must result from the specific ways in which the human brain is "wired" (a "nature" component, which accounts for the failure of non-human species to acquire human languages) and that certain others are shaped by the particular language environment in which a person is raised (a "nurture" component, which accounts for the fact that humans raised in different societies acquire different languages). The as-yet unresolved question is the extent to which the specific cognitive capacities in the "nature" component are also used outside of language.

Emergentist theories, such as Brian MacWhinney's competition model, posit that language acquisition is a cognitive process that emerges from the interaction of biological pressures and the environment. According to these theories, neither nature nor nurture alone is sufficient to trigger language learning; both of these influences must work together in order to allow children to acquire a language. The proponents of these theories argue that general cognitive processes subserve language acquisition and that the result of these processes is language-specific phenomena, such as word learning and grammar acquisition. The findings of many empirical studies support the predictions of these theories, suggesting that language acquisition is a more complex process than many have proposed.

Although Chomsky's theory of a generative grammar has been enormously influential in the field of linguistics since the 1950s, many criticisms of the basic assumptions of generative theory have been put forth by cognitive-functional linguists, who argue that language structure is created through language use. These linguists argue that the concept of a language acquisition device (LAD) is unsupported by evolutionary anthropology, which tends to show a gradual adaptation of the human brain and vocal cords to the use of language, rather than a sudden appearance of a complete set of binary parameters delineating the whole spectrum of possible grammars ever to have existed and ever to exist. On the other hand, cognitive-functional theorists use this anthropological data to show how human beings have evolved the capacity for grammar and syntax to meet our demand for linguistic symbols. (Binary parameters are common to digital computers, but may not be applicable to neurological systems such as the human brain.)

Further, the generative theory has several constructs (such as movement, empty categories, complex underlying structures, and strict binary branching) that cannot possibly be acquired from any amount of linguistic input. It is unclear that human language is actually anything like the generative conception of it. Since language, as imagined by nativists, is unlearnably complex, subscribers to this theory argue that it must, therefore, be innate. Nativists hypothesize that some features of syntactic categories exist even before a child is exposed to any experience - categories on which children map words of their language as they learn their native language. A different theory of language, however, may yield different conclusions. While all theories of language acquisition posit some degree of innateness, they vary in how much value they place on this innate capacity to acquire language. Empiricism places less value on the innate knowledge, arguing instead that the input, combined with both general and language-specific learning capacities, is sufficient for acquisition.

Since 1980, linguists studying children, such as Melissa Bowerman and Asifa Majid, and psychologists following Jean Piaget, like Elizabeth Bates and Jean Mandler, came to suspect that there may indeed be many learning processes involved in the acquisition process, and that ignoring the role of learning may have been a mistake.

In recent years, the debate surrounding the nativist position has centered on whether the inborn capabilities are language-specific or domain-general, such as those that enable the infant to visually make sense of the world in terms of objects and actions. The anti-nativist view has many strands, but a frequent theme is that language emerges from usage in social contexts, using learning mechanisms that are a part of an innate general cognitive learning apparatus. This position has been championed by David M. W. Powers, Elizabeth Bates, Catherine Snow, Anat Ninio, Brian MacWhinney, Michael Tomasello, Michael Ramscar, William O'Grady, and others. Philosophers, such as Fiona Cowie and Barbara Scholz with Geoffrey Pullum have also argued against certain nativist claims in support of empiricism.

The new field of cognitive linguistics has emerged as a specific counter to Chomsky's Generative Grammar and to Nativism.

Statistical learning

Some language acquisition researchers, such as Elissa Newport, Richard Aslin, and Jenny Saffran, emphasize the possible roles of general learning mechanisms, especially statistical learning, in language acquisition. The development of connectionist models that when implemented are able to successfully learn words and syntactical conventions supports the predictions of statistical learning theories of language acquisition, as do empirical studies of children's detection of word boundaries. In a series of connectionist model simulations, Franklin Chang has demonstrated that such a domain general statistical learning mechanism could explain a wide range of language structure acquisition phenomena.

Statistical learning theory suggests that, when learning language, a learner would use the natural statistical properties of language to deduce its structure, including sound patterns, words, and the beginnings of grammar. That is, language learners are sensitive to how often syllable combinations or words occur in relation to other syllables. Infants between 21 and 23 months old are also able to use statistical learning to develop "lexical categories", such as an animal category, which infants might later map to newly learned words in the same category. These findings suggest that early experience listening to language is critical to vocabulary acquisition.

The statistical abilities are effective, but also limited by what qualifies as input, what is done with that input, and by the structure of the resulting output. Statistical learning (and more broadly, distributional learning) can be accepted as a component of language acquisition by researchers on either side of the "nature and nurture" debate. From the perspective of that debate, an important question is whether statistical learning can, by itself, serve as an alternative to nativist explanations for the grammatical constraints of human language.

The central idea of these theories is that language development occurs through the incremental acquisition of meaningful chunks of elementary constituents, which can be words, phonemes, or syllables. Recently, this approach has been highly successful in simulating several phenomena in the acquisition of syntactic categories and the acquisition of phonological knowledge.

Chunking theories of language acquisition constitute a group of theories related to statistical learning theories, in that they assume that the input from the environment plays an essential role; however, they postulate different learning mechanisms.

This approach has several features that make it unique: the models are implemented as computer programs, which enables clear-cut and quantitative predictions to be made; they learn from naturalistic input-actual child-directed utterances; and attempt to create their own utterances, the model was tested in languages including English, Spanish, and German. Chunking for this model was shown to be most effective in learning a first language but was able to create utterances learning a second language.

The relational frame theory (RFT) (Hayes, Barnes-Holmes, Roche, 2001), provides a wholly selectionist/learning account of the origin and development of language competence and complexity. Based upon the principles of Skinnerian behaviorism, RFT posits that children acquire language purely through interacting with the environment. RFT theorists introduced the concept of functional contextualism in language learning, which emphasizes the importance of predicting and influencing psychological events, such as thoughts, feelings, and behaviors, by focusing on manipulable variables in their own context. RFT distinguishes itself from Skinner's work by identifying and defining a particular type of operant conditioning known as derived relational responding, a learning process that, to date, appears to occur only in humans possessing a capacity for language. Empirical studies supporting the predictions of RFT suggest that children learn language through a system of inherent reinforcements, challenging the view that language acquisition is based upon innate, language-specific cognitive capacities.

Unlike other approaches, it emphasizes the role of feedback and reinforcement in language acquisition. Specifically, it asserts that much of a child's linguistic growth stems from modeling of and interaction with parents and other adults, who very frequently provide instructive correction. It is thus somewhat similar to behaviorist accounts of language learning. It differs substantially, though, in that it posits the existence of a social-cognitive model and other mental structures within children (a sharp contrast to the "black box" approach of classical behaviorism).

Syntax, morphology, and generative grammar

As syntax began to be studied more closely in the early 20th century in relation to language learning, it became apparent to linguists, psychologists, and philosophers that knowing a language was not merely a matter of associating words with concepts, but that a critical aspect of language involves knowledge of how to put words together; sentences are usually needed in order to communicate successfully, not just isolated words. A child will use short expressions such as Bye-bye Mummy or All-gone milk, which actually are combinations of individual nouns and an operator, before they begin to produce gradually more complex sentences. In the 1990s, within the principles and parameters framework, this hypothesis was extended into a maturation-based structure building model of child language regarding the acquisition of functional categories. In this model, children are seen as gradually building up more and more complex structures, with lexical categories (like noun and verb) being acquired before functional-syntactic categories (like determiner and complementizer). It is also often found that in acquiring a language, the most frequently used verbs are irregular verbs. In learning English, for example, young children first begin to learn the past tense of verbs individually. However, when they acquire a "rule", such as adding -ed to form the past tense, they begin to exhibit occasional overgeneralization errors (e.g. "runned", "hitted") alongside correct past tense forms. One influential proposal regarding the origin of this type of error suggests that the adult state of grammar stores each irregular verb form in memory and also includes a "block" on the use of the regular rule for forming that type of verb. In the developing child's mind, retrieval of that "block" may fail, causing the child to erroneously apply the regular rule instead of retrieving the irregular.

A Merge (linguistics)-based Theory

In Bare-Phrase structure ( Minimalist Program), since theory-internal considerations define the specifier position of an internal-merge projection (phases vP and CP) as the only type of host which could serve as potential landing-sites for move-based elements displaced from lower down within the base-generated VP structure - e.g., A-movement such as passives (["The apple was eaten by [John (ate the apple)"]]), or raising ["Some work does seem to remain [(There) does seem to remain (some work)"]])-as a consequence, any strong version of a Structure building model of child language which calls for an exclusive "external-merge/argument structure stage" prior to an "internal-merge/scope-discourse related stage" would claim that young children's stage-1 utterances lack the ability to generate and host elements derived via movement operations. In terms of a Merge-based theory of language acquisition, complements and specifiers are simply notations for first-merge (= "complement-of" [head-complement]), and later second-merge (= "specifier-of" [specifier-head], with merge always forming to a head. First-merge establishes only a set {a, b} and is not an ordered pair-e.g., an {N, N}-compound of 'boat-house' would allow the ambiguous readings of either 'a kind of house' and/or 'a kind of boat'. It is only with second-merge that order is derived out of a set {a {a, b}} which yields the recursive properties of syntax-e.g., a 'house-boat' {house {house, boat}} now reads unambiguously only as a 'kind of boat'. It is this property of recursion that allows for projection and labeling of a phrase to take place; in this case, that the Noun 'boat' is the Head of the compound, and 'house' acting as a kind of specifier/modifier. External-merge (first-merge) establishes substantive 'base structure' inherent to the VP, yielding theta/argument structure, and may go beyond the lexical-category VP to involve the functional-category light verb vP. Internal-merge (second-merge) establishes more formal aspects related to edge-properties of scope and discourse-related material pegged to CP. In a Phase-based theory, this twin vP/CP distinction follows the "duality of semantics" discussed within the Minimalist Program, and is further developed into a dual distinction regarding a probe-goal relation. As a consequence, at the "external/first-merge-only" stage, young children would show an inability to interpret readings from a given ordered pair, since they would only have access to the mental parsing of a non-recursive set. (See Roeper for a full discussion of recursion in child language acquisition). In addition to word-order violations, other more ubiquitous results of a first-merge stage would show that children's initial utterances lack the recursive properties of inflectional morphology, yielding a strict Non-inflectional stage-1, consistent with an incremental Structure-building model of child language.

Generative grammar, associated especially with the work of Noam Chomsky, is currently one of the approaches to explaining children's acquisition of syntax. Its leading idea is that human biology imposes narrow constraints on the child's "hypothesis space" during language acquisition. In the principles and parameters framework, which has dominated generative syntax since Chomsky's (1980) Lectures on Government and Binding: The Pisa Lectures, the acquisition of syntax resembles ordering from a menu: the human brain comes equipped with a limited set of choices from which the child selects the correct options by imitating the parents' speech while making use of the context.

An important argument which favors the generative approach, is the poverty of the stimulus argument. The child's input (a finite number of sentences encountered by the child, together with information about the context in which they were uttered) is, in principle, compatible with an infinite number of conceivable grammars. Moreover, rarely can children rely on corrective feedback from adults when they make a grammatical error; adults generally respond and provide feedback regardless of whether a child's utterance was grammatical or not, and children have no way of discerning if a feedback response was intended to be a correction. Additionally, when children do understand that they are being corrected, they don't always reproduce accurate restatements.[dubious ] Yet, barring situations of medical abnormality or extreme privation, all children in a given speech-community converge on very much the same grammar by the age of about five years. An especially dramatic example is provided by children who, for medical reasons, are unable to produce speech and, therefore, can never be corrected for a grammatical error but nonetheless, converge on the same grammar as their typically developing peers, according to comprehension-based tests of grammar.

Considerations such as those have led Chomsky, Jerry Fodor, Eric Lenneberg and others to argue that the types of grammar the child needs to consider must be narrowly constrained by human biology (the nativist position). These innate constraints are sometimes referred to as universal grammar, the human "language faculty", or the "language instinct".

The Comparative Method of Crosslinguistic Research applies the Comparative method used in Historical linguistics to psycholinguistic research. In historical linguistics the comparative method uses comparisons between historically related languages to reconstruct a proto-language and trace the history of each daughter language. The comparative method can be repurposed for research on language acquisition by comparing historically related child languages. The historical ties within each language family provide a roadmap for research. For Indo-European languages, the comparative method would first compare language acquisition within the Slavic, Celtic, Germanic, Romance and Indo-Iranian branches of the family before attempting broader comparisons between the branches. For Otomanguean languages, the comparative method would first compare language acquisition within the Oto-pamean, Chinantecan, Tlapanecan, Popolocan, Zapotecan, Amuzgan and Mixtecan branches before attempting broader comparisons between the branches. The comparative method imposes an evaluation standard for assessing the languages used in language acquisition research.

The comparative method derives its power by assembling comprehensive datasets for each language. Descriptions of the prosody and phonology for each language inform analyses of morphology and the lexicon, which in turn inform analyses of syntax and conversational styles. Information on prosodic structure in one language informs research on the prosody of the related languages and vice versa. The comparative method produces a cumulative research program in which each description contributes to a comprehensive description of language acquisition for each language within a family as well as across the languages within each branch of the language family.

Comparative studies of language acquisition control the number of extraneous factors that impact language development. Speakers of historically related languages typically share a common culture that may include similar lifestyles and child-rearing practices. Historically related languages have similar phonologies and morphologies that impact early lexical and syntactic development in similar ways. The comparative method predicts that children acquiring historically related languages will exhibit similar patterns of language development, and that these common patterns may not hold in historically unrelated languages. The acquisition of Dutch will resemble the acquisition of German, but not the acquisition of Totonac or Mixtec. A claim about any universal of language acquisition must control for the shared grammatical structures that languages inherit from a common ancestor.

Several language acquisition studies have accidentally employed features of the comparative method due to the availability of datasets from historically related languages. Research on the acquisition of the Romance and Scandinavian languages used aspects of the comparative method, but did not produce detailed comparisons across different levels of grammar. The most advanced use of the comparative method to date appears in research on the acquisition of the Mayan languages. This research has yielded detailed comparative studies on the acquisition of phonological, lexical, morphological and syntactic features in eight Mayan languages as well as comparisons of language input and language socialization.

Language acquisition has been studied from the perspective of developmental psychology and neuroscience, which looks at learning to use and understand language parallel to a child's brain development. It has been determined, through empirical research on developmentally normal children, as well as through some extreme cases of language deprivation, that there is a " sensitive period" of language acquisition in which human infants have the ability to learn any language. Several researchers have found that from birth until the age of six months, infants can discriminate the phonetic contrasts of all languages. Researchers believe that this gives infants the ability to acquire the language spoken around them. After this age, the child is able to perceive only the phonemes specific to the language being learned. The reduced phonemic sensitivity enables children to build phonemic categories and recognize stress patterns and sound combinations specific to the language they are acquiring. As Wilder Penfield noted, "Before the child begins to speak and to perceive, the uncommitted cortex is a blank slate on which nothing has been written. In the ensuing years much is written, and the writing is normally never erased. After the age of ten or twelve, the general functional connections have been established and fixed for the speech cortex." According to the sensitive or critical period models, the age at which a child acquires the ability to use language is a predictor of how well he or she is ultimately able to use language. However, there may be an age at which becoming a fluent and natural user of a language is no longer possible; Penfield and Roberts (1959) cap their sensitive period at nine years old. The human brain may be automatically wired to learn languages, but this ability does not last into adulthood in the same way that it exists during childhood. By around age 12, language acquisition has typically been solidified, and it becomes more difficult to learn a language in the same way a native speaker would. Just like children who speak, deaf children go through a critical period for learning language. Deaf children who acquire their first language later in life show lower performance in complex aspects of grammar. At that point, it is usually a second language that a person is trying to acquire and not a first.

Assuming that children are exposed to language during the critical period, acquiring language is almost never missed by cognitively normal children. Humans are so well-prepared to learn language that it becomes almost impossible not to. Researchers are unable to experimentally test the effects of the sensitive period of development on language acquisition, because it would be unethical to deprive children of language until this period is over. However, case studies on abused, language-deprived children show that they exhibit extreme limitations in language skills, even after instruction.

Prelinguistic language abilities that are crucial for language acquisition have been seen even earlier than infancy. There have been many different studies examining different modes of language acquisition prior to birth. The study of language acquisition in fetuses began in the late 1980s when several researchers independently discovered that very young infants could discriminate their native language from other languages. In Mehler et al. (1988), infants underwent discrimination tests, and it was shown that infants as young as 4 days old could discriminate utterances in their native language from those in an unfamiliar language, but could not discriminate between two languages when neither was native to them. These results suggest that there are mechanisms for fetal auditory learning, and other researchers have found further behavioral evidence to support this notion. Fetus auditory learning through environmental habituation has been seen in a variety of different modes, such as fetus learning of familiar melodies (Hepper, 1988), story fragments (DeCasper & Spence, 1986), recognition of mother's voice (Kisilevsky, 2003), and other studies showing evidence of fetal adaptation to native linguistic environments (Moon, Cooper & Fifer, 1993).

Prosody is the property of speech that conveys an emotional state of the utterance, as well as the intended form of speech, for example, question, statement or command. Some researchers in the field of developmental neuroscience argue that fetal auditory learning mechanisms result solely from discrimination of prosodic elements. Although this would hold merit in an evolutionary psychology perspective (i.e. recognition of mother's voice/familiar group language from emotionally valent stimuli), some theorists argue that there is more than prosodic recognition in elements of fetal learning. Newer evidence shows that fetuses not only react to the native language differently from non-native languages, but that fetuses react differently and can accurately discriminate between native and non-native vowel sounds (Moon, Lagercrantz, & Kuhl, 2013). Furthermore, a 2016 study showed that newborn infants encode the edges of multisyllabic sequences better than the internal components of the sequence (Ferry et al., 2016). Together, these results suggest that newborn infants have learned important properties of syntactic processing in utero, as demonstrated by infant knowledge of native language vowels and the sequencing of heard multisyllabic phrases. This ability to sequence specific vowels gives newborn infants some of the fundamental mechanisms needed in order to learn the complex organization of a language. From a neuroscientific perspective, neural correlates have been found that demonstrate human fetal learning of speech-like auditory stimuli that most other studies have been analyzing (Partanen et al., 2013). In a study conducted by Partanen et al. (2013), researchers presented fetuses with certain word variants and observed that these fetuses exhibited higher brain activity in response to certain word variants as compared to controls. In this same study, "a significant correlation existed between the amount of prenatal exposure and brain activity, with greater activity being associated with a higher amount of prenatal speech exposure," pointing to the important learning mechanisms present before birth that are fine-tuned to features in speech (Partanen et al., 2013).

The phases of language acquisition in children

Learning a new word, that is, learning to speak this word and speak it on the appropriate occasions, depends upon many factors. First, the learner needs to be able to hear what they are attempting to pronounce. Also required is the capacity to engage in speech repetition. Children with reduced ability to repeat non-words (a marker of speech repetition abilities) show a slower rate of vocabulary expansion than children with normal ability. Several computational models of vocabulary acquisition have been proposed. Various studies have shown that the size of a child's vocabulary by the age of 24 months correlates with the child's future development and language skills. A lack of language richness by this age has detrimental and long-term effects on the child's cognitive development, which is why it is so important for parents to engage their infants in language. If a child knows fifty or fewer words by the age of 24 months, he or she is classified as a late-talker, and future language development, like vocabulary expansion and the organization of grammar, is likely to be slower and stunted.

Two more crucial elements of vocabulary acquisition are word segmentation and statistical learning (described above). Word segmentation, or the ability to break down words into syllables from fluent speech can be accomplished by eight-month-old infants. By the time infants are 17 months old, they are able to link meaning to segmented words.

Recent evidence also suggests that motor skills and experiences may influence vocabulary acquisition during infancy. Specifically, learning to sit independently between 3 and 5 months of age has been found to predict receptive vocabulary at both 10 and 14 months of age, and independent walking skills have been found to correlate with language skills at around 10 to 14 months of age. These findings show that language acquisition is an embodied process that is influenced by a child's overall motor abilities and development. Studies have also shown a correlation between socioeconomic status and vocabulary acquisition.

Children learn, on average, ten to fifteen new word meanings each day, but only one of these can be accounted for by direct instruction. The other nine to fourteen word meanings must have been acquired in some other way. It has been proposed that children acquire these meanings through processes modeled by latent semantic analysis; that is, when they encounter an unfamiliar word, children use contextual information to guess its rough meaning correctly. A child may expand the meaning and use of certain words that are already part of its mental lexicon in order to denominate anything that is somehow related but for which it does not know the specific word. For instance, a child may broaden the use of mummy and dada in order to indicate anything that belongs to its mother or father, or perhaps every person who resembles its own parents; another example might be to say rain while meaning I don't want to go out.

There is also reason to believe that children use various heuristics to infer the meaning of words properly. Markman and others have proposed that children assume words to refer to objects with similar properties ("cow" and "pig" might both be "animals") rather than to objects that are thematically related ("cow" and "milk" are probably not both "animals"). Children also seem to adhere to the "whole object assumption" and think that a novel label refers to an entire entity rather than to one of its parts. This assumption along with other resources, such as grammar and morphological cues or lexical constraints, may help aid the child in acquiring word meaning, but conclusions based on such resources may sometimes conflict.

Although it is difficult to determine without invasive measures which exact parts of the brain become most active and important for language acquisition, fMRI and PET technology has allowed for some conclusions to be made about where language may be centered. Kuniyoshi Sakai has proposed, based on several neuroimaging studies, that there may be a "grammar center" in the brain, whereby language is primarily processed in the left lateral premotor cortex (located near the pre central sulcus and the inferior frontal sulcus). Additionally, these studies have suggested that first language and second language acquisition may be represented differently in the cortex. In a study conducted by Newman et al., the relationship between cognitive neuroscience and language acquisition was compared through a standardized procedure involving native speakers of English and native Spanish speakers who all had a similar length of exposure to the English language (averaging about 26 years). It was concluded that the brain does in fact process languages differently, but rather than being related to proficiency levels, language processing relates more to the function of the brain itself.

During early infancy, language processing seems to occur over many areas in the brain. However, over time, it gradually becomes concentrated into two areas - Broca's area and Wernicke's area. Broca's area is in the left frontal cortex and is primarily involved in the production of the patterns in vocal and sign language. Wernicke's area is in the left temporal cortex and is primarily involved in language comprehension. The specialization of these language centers is so extensive that damage to them can result in aphasia.

Kelly et al. (2015: 286) comment that "There is a dawning realization that the field of child language needs data from the broadest typological array of languages and language-learning environments." This realization is part of a broader recognition in psycholinguistics for the need to document diversity. Children's linguistic accomplishments are all the more impressive with recognition of the diversity that exists at every level of the language system. Different levels of grammar interact in language-specific ways so that differences in morphosyntax build on differences in prosody, which in turn reflect differences in conversational style. The diversity of adult languages results in diverse child language phenomena that challenge every acquisition theory.

One such challenge is to explain how children acquire complex vowels in Otomanguean and other languages. The complex vowels in these languages combine oral and laryngeal gestures produced with laryngeal constriction [ʔ] or laryngeal spreading [h]. The production of the laryngealized vowels is complicated by the production of tonal contrasts, which rely upon contrasts in vocal fold vibration. Otomanguean languages manage the conflict between tone and laryngeal gesture by timing the gesture at the start, middle or end of the vowel, e.g. ʔV, VʔV and Vʔ. The phonetic realization of laryngealized vowels gives rise to the question of whether children acquire laryngealized vowels as single phonemes or sequences of phonemes. The unit analysis enlarges the vowel inventory but simplifies the syllable inventory, while the sequence analysis simplifies the vowel inventory but complicates the syllable inventory. The Otomanguean languages exhibit language-specific differences in the types and timing of the laryngeal gestures, and thus children must learn the specific laryngeal gestures that contribute to the phonological contrasts in the adult language.

An acquisition challenge in morphosyntax is to explain how children acquire ergative grammatical structures. Ergative languages treat the subject of intransitive verbs like the object of transitive verbs at the level of morphology, syntax or both. At the level of morphology, ergative languages assign an ergative marker to the subject of transitive verbs. The ergative marking may be realized by case markers on nouns or agreement markers on verbs. At the level of syntax, ergative languages have syntactic operations that treat the subject of transitive verbs differently from the subject of intransitive verbs. Languages with ergative syntax like K'iche' may restrict the use of subject questions for transitive verbs but not intransitive verbs. The acquisition challenge that ergativity creates is to explain how children acquire the language-specific manifestations of morphological and syntactic ergativity in the adult languages. The Mayan language Mam has ergative agreement making on its transitive verbs but extends the ergative marking to both the subject of intransitive verbs and the object of transitive verbs yielding transitive verbs with two ergative agreement markers. The contexts for extended ergative marking differ in type and frequency between Mayan languages, but two-year-old children produce extended ergative marking equally proficiently despite vast differences in the frequency of extended ergative marking in the adult languages.

Children acquire language through exposure to a diverse variety of cultural practices. Local groups vary in size and mobility depending on their means of subsistence. Some cultures require men to marry women who speak another language. Their children may be exposed to their mother's language for several years before moving in with their father and learning his language. Language groups have diverse beliefs about when children say their first words and what words they say. Such beliefs shape the time when parents perceive that children understand language. In many cultures children hear more speech directed to others than to themselves and yet children acquire language in all cultures.

Documenting the diversity of child languages is made more urgent by the rapid loss of languages around the world. It may not be possible to document child language in half of the world's languages by the end of this century. Documenting child language should be a part of every language documentation project, and has an important role to play in revitalizing local languages. Documenting child language preserves cultural modes of language transmission and can emphasize their significance throughout the language community.

Some algorithms for language acquisition are based on statistical machine translation. Language acquisition can be modeled as a machine learning process, which may be based on learning semantic parsers or grammar induction algorithms.

Prelingual deafness is defined as hearing loss that occurred at birth or before an individual has learned to speak. In the United States, 2 to 3 out of every 1000 children are born deaf or hard of hearing. Even though it might be presumed that deaf children acquire language in different ways since they are not receiving the same auditory input as hearing children, many research findings indicate that deaf children acquire language in the same way that hearing children do and when given the proper language input, understand and express language just as well as their hearing peers. Babies who learn sign language produce signs or gestures that are more regular and more frequent than hearing babies acquiring spoken language. Just as hearing babies babble, deaf babies acquiring sign language will babble with their hands, otherwise known as manual babbling. Therefore, as many studies have shown, language acquisition by deaf children parallels the language acquisition of a spoken language by hearing children because humans are biologically equipped for language regardless of the modality.

Deaf children's visual-manual language acquisition not only parallel spoken language acquisition but by the age of 30 months, most deaf children that were exposed to a visual language had a more advanced grasp with subject-pronoun copy rules than hearing children. Their vocabulary bank at the ages of 12-17 months exceed that of a hearing child's, though it does even out when they reach the two-word stage. The use of space for absent referents and the more complex handshapes in some signs prove to be difficult for children between 5 and 9 years of age because of motor development and the complexity of remembering the spatial use.

Other options besides sign language for kids with prelingual deafness include the use of hearing aids to strengthen remaining sensory cells or cochlear implants to stimulate the hearing nerve directly. Cochlear Implants are hearing devices that are placed behind the ear and contain a receiver and electrodes which are placed under the skin and inside the cochlea. Despite these developments, there is still a risk that prelingually deaf children may not develop good speech and speech reception skills. Although cochlear implants produce sounds, they are unlike typical hearing and deaf and hard of hearing people must undergo intensive therapy in order to learn how to interpret these sounds. They must also learn how to speak given the range of hearing they may or may not have. However, deaf children of deaf parents tend to do better with language, even though they are isolated from sound and speech because their language uses a different mode of communication that is accessible to them: the visual modality of language.

Although cochlear implants were initially approved for adults, now there is pressure to implant children early in order to maximize auditory skills for mainstream learning which in turn has created controversy around the topic. Due to recent advances in technology, cochlear implants allow some deaf people to acquire some sense of hearing. There are interior and exposed exterior components that are surgically implanted. Those who receive cochlear implants earlier on in life show more improvement on speech comprehension and language. Spoken language development does vary widely for those with cochlear implants though due to a number of different factors including: age at implantation, frequency, quality and type of speech training. Some evidence suggests that speech processing occurs at a more rapid pace in some prelingually deaf children with cochlear implants than those with traditional hearing aids. However, cochlear implants may not always work.

Research shows that people develop better language with a cochlear implant when they have a solid first language to rely on to understand the second language they would be learning. In the case of prelingually deaf children with cochlear implants, a signed language, like American Sign Language would be an accessible language for them to learn to help support the use of the cochlear implant as they learn a spoken language as their L2. Without a solid, accessible first language, these children run the risk of language deprivation, especially in the case that a cochlear implant fails to work. They would have no access to sound, meaning no access to the spoken language they are supposed to be learning. If a signed language was not a strong language for them to use and neither was a spoken language, they now have no access to any language and run the risk of missing their critical period.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Language acquisition is the process by which humans acquire the capacity to perceive and comprehend language (in other words, gain the ability to be aware of language and to understand it), as well as to produce and use words and sentences to communicate. Language acquisition involves structures, rules, and representation.

# data[].attributes.body
Esto video muestra un sobreviviente de un accidente cerebrovascular charlando con una mujer. Él tiene Wernicke's Afasia, un condición en que personas no pueden expresarse mientras inconsciente del condición. Las personas con Wernicke's Afasia hablan sin sentido pero mantienen la habilidad de conversar con un ritmo normal

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Uploaded by Instant Neuro on 2016-06-30.

# data[].attributes.body
En una historia tan triste, Susan Curtiss describe la vida temprana de una niña descubrió sin lenguaje. Fue abusada y aislada de la sociedad por trece años.  Por resulto, ella no adquirió la habilidad de hablar Ingles.  Por el campo de la lingüística fue la situación más interesante para que pasa cuando un niño no está sometido al comunicación más profundo por humanos.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The harrowing case of a young girl subjected criminally to privation - presented in Key Study format on the web site of leading UK SocioPsychologist Keith E Rice

# data[].attributes.body
Experto de lingüística Charles F. Hockett creó unas reglas para distinguir lenguaje y otras formas de comunicación (cómo entre perros y humanos o abeja a abeja.)  Aunque aparece que muchos animales pueden hablar a otros, no es verdad. En lugar usan procesos instintivos para comunicar.  Eso crea la distinción que lenguaje de humanos es especial.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
In the 1960s, linguistic anthropologist Charles F. Hockett defined a set of features that characterize human language and set it apart from animal communication. He called these characteristics the design features of language. Hockett originally believed there to be 13 design features.