# data[].attributes.body
Quiero hablar sobre la hipótesis del periodo critical. El estudio de Ferman y Karni que se describe en este artículo encontró que adultos pueden recordar reglas artificiales de gramática (y otros partes de un idioma artificial) mejor que los niños. No pienso que este estudio demostró que la hipótesis del periodo critical es falso (porque esta situación es muy diferente que aprender una lengua real), pero me gusta la idea que no es imposible para adultos aprender segundas idiomas. También pienso que es importante recordar que el acento es mucho más afectada por edad que otros factores y que un acento extranjero no es intrínsecamente mal.

Citation: Ferman, S., & Karni, A. (2010). No childhood advantage in the acquisition of skill in using an artificial language rule. PloS one, 5(10), e13648.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Abstract

A leading notion is that language skill acquisition declines between childhood and adulthood. While several lines of evidence indicate that declarative ("what", explicit) memory undergoes maturation, it is commonly assumed that procedural ("how-to", implicit) memory, in children, is well established. The language superiority of children has been ascribed to the childhood reliance on implicit learning. Here we show that when 8-year-olds, 12-year-olds and young adults were provided with an equivalent multi-session training experience in producing and judging an artificial morphological rule (AMR), adults were superior to children of both age groups and the 8-year-olds were the poorest learners in all task parameters including in those that were clearly implicit. The AMR consisted of phonological transformations of verbs expressing a semantic distinction: whether the preceding noun was animate or inanimate. No explicit instruction of the AMR was provided. The 8-year-olds, unlike most adults and 12-year-olds, failed to explicitly uncover the semantic aspect of the AMR and subsequently to generalize it accurately to novel items. However, all participants learned to apply the AMR to repeated items and to generalize its phonological patterns to novel items, attaining accurate and fluent production, and exhibiting key characteristics of procedural memory. Nevertheless, adults showed a clear advantage in learning implicit task aspects, and in their long-term retention. Thus, our findings support the notion of age-dependent maturation in the establishment of declarative but also of procedural memory in a complex language task. In line with recent reports of no childhood advantage in non-linguistic skill learning, we propose that under some learning conditions adults can effectively express their language skill acquisition potential. Altogether, the maturational effects in the acquisition of an implicit AMR do not support a simple notion of a language skill learning advantage in children.

Citation: Ferman S, Karni A (2010) No Childhood Advantage in the Acquisition of Skill in Using an Artificial Language Rule. PLoS ONE 5(10): e13648. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0013648

Editor: André Aleman, University of Groningen, Netherlands

Received: September 18, 2009; Accepted: August 3, 2010; Published: October 27, 2010

Copyright: © 2010 Ferman, Karni. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

Funding: This study was supported by a grant from the Israel Ministry of Education (Chief Scientist's Office). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

Competing interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Introduction

A leading tenet is that two independent neural systems subserve long-term memory: the declarative and procedural memory systems [10]-[11]. Declarative memory has been implicated in the learning and subsequent use of knowledge about events and facts ('what'). This type of memory can be established following even a single exposure and explicitly recollected, but may be rapidly degrade. The procedural memory system has been implicated in the learning and retention of skills ('how to') and habits, and its establishment necessitates a critical amount of repetition (practice) and time [12]-[14]. The establishment of procedural memory is sometimes conceptualized as implicit learning, i.e., the acquisition of complex structured knowledge independently, to a large degree, of awareness of both the processes and products of acquisition [15]-[16]. Explicit learning, in this view, may be more intentional, conscious and reportable [10]-[11]. Verbal reporting, therefore, is considered a relatively sensitive measure for demarcating implicit and explicit memory in humans [15]-[16].

There is evidence suggesting that whereas procedural memory matures early on in childhood, declarative memory develops later during childhood and matures in adolescence [17]-[19]. It has been proposed that language, especially grammar and pronunciation, is highly appropriate for procedural (implicit) learning [5]-[6].

Much of the evidence for the notion that 'earlier is better' in language learning comes from studies showing a negative correlation between the learner's age at acquisition and the proficiency attained in a first language [20]-[21], a second language [1]-[6], [22]-[23] and sign language [24]-[25]. In second language acquisition, childhood superiority was specifically found for grammar [1]-[3], [26] and pronunciation [23], [27]-[28]. However, others have shown that some late second language learners can attain language proficiency that is equal or superior to that of early learners [4], [28]-[34] including in aspects such as grammar [29]-[32] and pronunciation [28]-[29], [34]. It has been proposed that the 'early is better' notion, in terms of speech and language achievements, may reflect environmental and cognitive factors such as the amount and duration of practice [23], [35], the level of education, quantity and quality of input [35]-[37] and interference [38]-[40] rather than sensitive period constraints. Several neuro-imaging studies also suggest that the identification of different brain activation foci for early and late second language acquisition [41]-[42] may reflect factors such as the amount and duration of experience or the nature of the language experience rather than a childhood window of opportunity [43]-[46].

Only a few studies have investigated differences in language skill acquisition as a function of maturation, under equivalent language learning conditions. A seminal study by Asher & Price [47] in which 8-, 10- and 14-year-old English-speaking children and young adults received an equivalent, albeit relatively short, learning experience in learning to comprehend Russian statements, reported a clear age effect with the adults outperforming the children. For non-linguistic skills, the notion of a highly effective skill learning capacity in adults as well as a robust capacity for experience-dependent neural plasticity is well supported [12]-[14], [ 48]-[49]. A recent study has demonstrated no childhood superiority in either learning, consolidation, or retention of a motor skill [50], although adults manifested more susceptibility to interference, i.e., they were more selective, rather than less effective, in establishing long-term memory [50]. Brain imaging studies have shown significant experience-dependent brain activation changes for language related skills in adults [51].

The aim of the current study was to test the hypothesis of childhood advantage in learning a new linguistic skill when participants of different age groups - 8- and 12-year-olds and young adults - are provided with an equivalent multi-session learning experience, controlling for factors such as the novelty of the to-be-learned task and the amount and duration of exposure and practice. Our findings support the notion of a maturational effect between childhood and adulthood in the establishment of declarative but also procedural memory when learning a complex artificial language task.

Materials and Methods

Ethics statement

The study was approved by the University of Haifa Ethics committee. A written informed consent was obtained from participants or in the case of children from both parents.

Participants

Twenty-four healthy participants, eight from each age group (four males and four females): 8-year-olds (mean 8.02 years), 12-year-olds (mean 12.03 years) and young adults (mean 21.05 years) participated in the study. All participants were healthy native Hebrew speakers from middle-class backgrounds, with no reported history of speech, language, learning or hearing difficulties.

Materials

The artificial morphological rule (AMR) was designed to be analogous to the morphological rules of Hebrew grammar. The AMR required a specific differential phonological marking for Hebrew verbs depending on whether the preceding noun (the subject) was animate or inanimate. This semantic distinction is not expressed in Hebrew; nevertheless, in some natural languages (including English) an animate inanimate distinction is made in some manner. Thus, in the AMR, the suffix/ev/was to be added to verbs used with animate nouns and the suffix/ar/was to be added to verbs used with inanimate nouns. Also, in accordance with Hebrew phonological rules, all transformed verbs underwent omission of the vowel that preceded the added suffix and hence the stress shifted to the added suffix. The AMR was applied to grammatical Hebrew noun-verb phrases (items) so that the meaning of the phrases could be easily understood by 8-year-olds. To test whether 8-year-olds can clearly distinguish between living and non-living objects, forty 8-year-olds, who did not take part in the learning study, were asked to indicate whether each item on a list of 20 common nouns was animate or inanimate. The group average score was 95%.

Stimuli

Four types of item lists were used: (1) modeling lists - each included 16 noun-verb pairs that were well constructed according to the AMR. (2) Repeated-item lists - each included the same 16 items as the modeling lists, but with each item repeated twice in a given list (32 items). These lists were used to test for the ability to learn specific items. (3) Pre-test lists - each included the 16 items from the repeated-item list. The order of the items in all lists was randomized in each presentation. (4) New-item lists - each included 16 new noun-verb pairs, with each item presented only once during the whole study. These lists were used to test for the ability to generalize the AMR to previously un-encountered items. In each list of every type, there were equal numbers of animate and inanimate nouns. Three types of stimulus sets were used: (a) Well-constructed noun-verb pairs using the artificial rule; these were used in the model list and as the correct options in the judgment task (see below). (b) Noun-verb pairs that were well constructed phonologically but illegally constructed semantically that were used as the incorrect options in the judgment task. (c) Noun-verb pairs in standard Hebrew; these were used in the production task.

Procedure

Each participant was individually trained in 10 consecutive daily training sessions (1-3 days apart) and re-tested for retention after an interval of two months ( Fig. 1a). The 8-year-olds and 4/8 of the 12-year-olds who were less than 80% correct in the production task in the 10 th session received five additional training sessions. At the beginning of the first session, in a pre-recorded introduction, each participant was told that he/she was going to learn a new language, similar to Hebrew and then instructed to listen to the modeling list in order to learn the 'new language'. Instructions on how to respond in each of the two tasks then followed. Training occurred through exposure to and use of the AMR in the performance of two tasks: (1) a judgment task wherein the participants were instructed to make a forced-choice (correct - incorrect) response by pressing one of two buttons: (2) a production task wherein the participants were instructed to produce (voice) the transformed verb in accordance with the AMR. In the judgment task the participants heard: In the new language, is it correct to say ... followed by a noun-verb pair, either well-constructed or not. The incorrect option was always a phonologically correct production that was semantically incorrect. In the production task the participants heard: In the new language, how should one say ... followed by a noun and was required to produce a verbal response: the transformed verb in accordance with the AMR. In both tasks the participants were instructed to respond as quickly as possible. A pre-recorded auditory feedback signal consisting of the word error was automatically provided following each incorrect answer in both tasks. There was no explicit instruction on the nature of the AMR at any time during the training.

(a) The overall study design - included 10 consecutive learning sessions, 1-3 days apart, and a retention test session after an interval of two months. (b) A single session design: Two item list types (repeated and new) and two tasks (judgment and production). Each block (list) of items is represented by a column with the corresponding task.

Each session included: listening to a modeling list, four blocks of repeated-item lists (two for each task), and two blocks of new-item lists (one for each task). Starting from the second session, two pre-test lists (one for each task) were administered at the beginning of each session (before the modeling list) to test between-session gains ( Fig. 1b). Rest intervals of 2-3 minutes were given between blocks. Each session lasted about one hour and included 176 repeated items (80 in each task and 16 in the model list), and 32 new items (16 in each task). The first session included the same number of new items but only 144 repeated items, because there were no pre-test lists. The order of the tasks (judgment or production first) and the order of type of items (new or repeated) within a given task were pseudo-randomized for each session. There were three versions of the order of tasks and type of items (repeated or new), with each participant trained in a given version throughout.

Apparatus and Measurements

The SuperLab software package (Cedrus Corporation, www.cedrus.com) was used to run the experimental trials and to time and log responses for each trial using a PC laptop. All stimuli and instructions were recorded by a professional radio announcer using the Goldwave software ( www.goldwave.com). The length (stimulus duration) of all items was equalized. Stimuli were presented through a headphone set. Speech production answers were recorded by a microphone placed on an adjustable stand in front of the participant and voice onset measured using a Mel Response Box (Psychology Software Tools, Inc). Accuracy (correct/incorrect) and speed (Reaction Time [RT] in ms) for both manual (judgment task) and voiced (production task) responses were logged for every single response. RT was measured as the interval between the end of the verbal test stimulus and the onset of button press for the judgment task and the onset of speech production for the production task. Only very extreme RT scores in a block (twice the mean performance) were removed; these accounted for about 0.3% of the data. The average accuracy (% correct) and speed for each block (list) and each session were calculated for each task separately. Within-session (early) gains were calculated as the difference between the first (pre-test) block and the final block of the session. Between-session gains were calculated as the difference between the final block of a given session and the first block of the following session (delayed gains).

A verbal report concerning the participants' insights on the required transformation was elicited and used to assess the explicit knowledge of the AMR. At the end of each learning session, the participants heard: You are doing very well. How did you arrive at your answer? The verbal reports were recorded using an audio tape-recording system and written down on a pre-prepared form for off-line analysis. Although the introduction of the explicit verbal reports might have affected the learning process in calling for self- awareness and encouraging introspection on the nature of the task, it is an accepted procedure in investigating the involvement of implicit versus explicit knowledge [41].

Statistical Analysis

Repeated measures ANOVAs were used to assess learning and retention with both session and block as within-subject factors and age group (8-year-olds, 12-year-olds and adults) as a between-subjects factor. This analysis was performed for each measure (accuracy; speed), in each task (judgment; production), for each type of items (repeated; new) separately. A similar analysis was performed for phonological accuracy in the production of new items. Pair-wise comparisons between levels of main effects were performed and p values were adjusted for multiple comparisons, using Hochberg's GT2 method.

Results

All three age groups tested showed robust incremental performance gains for the repeated ( Fig. 2) as well as the new ( Fig. 3) artificial morphological rule (AMR) transformed items. The adults' performance was superior to that of the children of both age groups. The 8-year-olds were the poorest performers (in terms of speed as well as accuracy) in the initial session and attained the lowest gains in producing and in judging both repeated and new items throughout the training period. The adult advantage was clear even after the 8-year-olds were given five additional practice sessions.

Group average performance in 10 consecutive practice sessions, the 15 th session, and a retention session (R) in eight-year-olds (8-y-o), 12-year-olds (12-y-o) and young adults (adults). Judgment (left panels) and speech production (right panels) tasks. Accuracy (% correct) - top panels; speed [RT (ms)] - bottom panels. Error bars  =  standard errors.

Group average performance in 10 consecutive practice sessions, the 15 th session, and a retention session (R) in eight-year-olds (8-y-o), 12-year-olds (12-y-o) and young adults (adults). Judgment (left panels) and speech production (right panels) tasks. Accuracy (% correct) - top panels; speed [RT (ms)] - bottom panels. Error bars  =  standard errors.

Repeated Items

For repeated items ( Fig. 2), the analyses showed a main effect for session [accuracy ( F 9,179  = 16.43, P<.0001; F 9,180  = 27.93, P<.0001); speed ( F 9,180  = 2.18, P = .0255; F 9,176  = 18.09, P<.0001), judgment and production tasks, respectively] and for block [accuracy ( F 2,42  = 13.46, P<.0001; F 2,42  = 24.67, P<.0001); speed ( F 2,42  = 9.53, P<.0004; F 2,42  = 3.83, P = .0295), judgment and production tasks, respectively]. Moreover, there was a significant age-group effect for session [accuracy ( F 2,21  = 12.33, P = .0003; F 2,21  = 13.5, P = .0002); speed: ( F 2,21  = 22.43, P<.0001; F 2,21  = 28.81, P<.0001), judgment and production tasks, respectively], with adults outperforming both the 12-year-olds [accuracy: ( t ₂₁  = −2.54, P = .0543); t ₂₁  = −2.29, P = .0923); speed: ( t ₂₁  = 4.7, P = .0004); t ₂₁  = 5.35, P<.0001), judgment and production tasks, respectively] and the 8-year-olds [accuracy: ( t ₂₁ = −4.97, P = .0002); t ₂₁ = −5.19, P<.0001); speed: ( t ₂₁  = −4.97, P = .0002); t ₂₁ = 7.32, P<.0001), judgment and production tasks, respectively]. The 12-year-olds outperformed the 8-year-olds on accuracy but not in speed [accuracy: ( t ₂₁  = −2.48, P = .0623); t ₂₁  = −2.95, P = .0226)]; [speed: ( t ₂₁  = 1.85, P = .2097; t ₂₁  = 2.09, P = .1361)], judgment and production tasks, respectively]. There were no significant interactions between age group and session. When the data were split by age group, there was a main effect for session in terms of accuracy in the 8-year-olds ( F 9,179  = 6.62, P<.0001; F 9,180  = 13.46, P<.0001, judgment and production tasks, respectively), 12-year-olds ( F 9,179  = 6.00, P<.0001; F 9,180  = 8.44, P<.0001, judgment and production tasks, respectively) and adults ( F 9,179  = 5.33, P<.0001; F 9,180  = 9.05, P<.0001, judgment and production tasks, respectively). There was also a main effect for session in terms of speed but only in the production task in the 8-year-olds ( F 9,176  = 3.87, P = .0002), 12-year-olds ( F 9,176  = 2.23, P<.0224) and adults ( F 9,176  = 2.79, P<.0044).

The five additional practice sessions that were given to the 8-year-olds and the four lowest achieving 12-year-olds resulted on average in improvement of speed of response ( Fig. 2). A Wilcoxon Signed Rank Test however, showed that the performance in session 10 was not significantly different from that of the 15 th session in terms of both speed and accuracy in the two tasks. A Kruskal-Wallis non-parametric analysis of variance showed a significant difference between the three age groups in the final practice session (i.e., session 15 for 8-year-olds and 4/8 of the 12-year-olds and session 10 in adults and 4/8 of the 12-year-olds) in terms of speed in both tasks, but not in terms of accuracy. Thus, eventually the children became accurate, although less than adults, but remained slower compared to adults in both tasks ( Fig. 2).

In all three age groups tested, average performance in the final practice session did not differ significantly from performance in the retention session two months later in terms of speed ( F 1,21  = 1.60, P = .2199; F 1,20  = 2.21, P = .1529; judgment and production tasks, respectively). In terms of accuracy, there was good retention in the production task ( F 1,21  = 1.3, P = .1039) but not in the judgment task ( F 1,21  = 6.49, P = .0188), although the deterioration of performance with time was very small ( Fig. 2). There was no significant interaction between age group and retention in terms of accuracy for both tasks and in speed for the judgment task; however, there was a significant interaction in terms of speed in the production task ( F 2,20  = 3.85, P = .0386), indicating that 8-year-olds showed less retention of speed gains in the production task compared to the older learners ( Fig. 2). Thus, while the 12-year-olds and adults robustly retained the speed gains in the production task, the 8-year-olds showed poor performance across the end of the retention interval.

The group average learning curves for each age group were well fitted by a power function model with R ² values ranging from 0.82 to 0.96 (p<0.0001) for both performance speed and accuracy, in both tasks. The adults demonstrated the steepest learning curves. The slopes of the regression lines for the 8-year-olds were significantly less steep compared to those of both 12-year-olds [accuracy: ( t₍₁₆₎  = 4.18, P<.001); t ₁₆  = 3.31, P<.005); speed: ( t ₁₆  = 2.23, .01<P<.025; t ₁₆  = 3.1, P<.005); judgment and production tasks, respectively] and adults [accuracy: ( t₍₁₆₎  = 2.395, .01<P<.025); speed: ( t ₁₆  = 5.18, P<.001; t ₁₆  = 16.7, P<.001); judgment and production tasks, respectively]. The slopes of the regression lines for the 12-year-olds were less steep compare to those for adults in terms of speed ( t ₁₆  = 5.07, P<.001); t ₁₆  = 6.8, P<.001) but not in terms of accuracy.

In all three age groups, some gains in performance were obtained during the intervals between sessions (delayed performance gains) ( Fig. 4). There was a significant age group effect in terms of speed for both the between-sessions gains ( F 2,21  = 4.7, P = .0206; F 2,21  = 4.88, P = .0181, judgment and production tasks, respectively) and within-sessions gains ( F 2,21  = 4.24, P = .0283; F 2,21  = 4.5, P  = .0237, judgment and production tasks, respectively), with larger between-sessions gains in 8-year-olds compared to adults and larger within-sessions gains in adults as compared to 8-year-olds. There was no significant age effect for either within- or between-sessions gains in terms of accuracy of performance.

Absolute gains in performance on repeated items attained within-sessions and between-sessions in eight-year-olds (8-y-o), 12-year-olds (12-y-o) and young adults (adults). Judgment (left panels) and speech production (right panels) tasks. Accuracy gains (% correct) - top panels; speed gains (ms) - bottom panels. Error bars  =  standard errors.

New items

For new items, all of the 8-year-olds remained at chance level (60% correct and below) in both tasks throughout the training period, i.e., they were unable to generalize the AMR to novel items ( Fig. 3). However, the majority of adults (7/8) and 12-year-olds (7/8) attained above 90% correct performance on new items in both the judgment and production tasks (Table S1). There was a main effect for session in terms of accuracy in both tasks ( F 9,178  = 2.96, P = .0026; F 9,178  = 6.9, P<.0001) and in terms of speed in the production task ( F 9,166)  = 2.87, P = .0036) but not in the judgment task ( F 9,178  = 1, P<.4431). There was also a significant age group effect [accuracy: ( F 2,21  = 13.22, P = .0002; F 2,21  = 16.08, P<.0001); speed: ( F 2,21  = 6.08, P  = .0052; F 2,21  = 7.06, P = .045), judgment and production tasks, respectively]. A significant interaction between age group and session was found for speed in the judgment task ( F 18,178  = 1.77, P = .0321) with adults showing larger gains compared to the 8-year-olds ( t ₂₁  = −4.38, P = . 0008) and to the 12-year-olds ( t ₂₁  = 3. 4, P = .008). When the data were split by age group, there was a main effect for session in terms of accuracy in the production task in 8-year-olds ( F 9,178  = 2.01, P = .0407), 12-year-olds ( F 9,178  = 3.48, P = .0006) and adults ( F 9,178  = 3.46, P = .0006) and in the judgment task in 12-year-olds ( F 9,178  = 2.15, P = .0276). In terms of performance speed, there was a main effect for session in the judgment task in 8-year-olds ( F 9,178  = 2.26, P = .0202) and adults ( F 9,178  = 1.79, P = .0728) and in the production task in 8-year-olds ( F 9,178  = 3.78, P  = .0002).

For the children who practiced 5 sessions more than the adults, a Wilcoxon Signed Rank Test showed that the performance in session 10 was not significantly different from that in session 15 in terms of both speed and accuracy in the two tasks. A Kruskal-Wallis non-parametric analysis of variance showed a significant difference among the three age groups in the final practice session (i.e., session 15 for 8-year-olds and 4/8 of the 12-year-olds and session 10 in adults and 4/8 of the 12-year-olds) in terms of speed and accuracy in both tasks ( Fig. 3). Thus, eventually, the children remained inaccurate (by chance) and slower compared to adults in judging and producing the new items ( Fig. 3).

In all three age groups tested, average performance in the final practice session did not differ significantly from performance in the retention session two months later [accuracy: ( F 1,20  = 0.01, P = .9201; F 1,20  = 0.70, P = .4127); speed: ( F 1,20  = 0.00, P = .9933; F 1,20  = 0.00, P = .9915), judgment and production tasks, respectively]. Thus, while the 12-year-olds and adults robustly retained the gains in both tasks, the 8-year-olds showed poor performance across both ends of the retention interval ( Fig. 3).

Phonological competence

Correct pronunciation of the target verbs (including the AMR determined suffixes), irrespective of semantic accuracy, was taken as a measure for phonological competence. Target verb pronunciation robustly improved in all three age groups, with all participants acquiring the phonological aspect of the AMR very early on in training ( Fig. 5a,b). The analysis showed a main effect for session ( F(9,178)  = 10.21, P<.0001) and a significant age group effect ( F 2,21  = 11.61, P = .0004) with adults outperforming the 8-year-olds ( t ₂₁  = −3.92, P = .0023) but not the 12-year-olds ( t ₂₁  = −1.23, P = .5014) and the 12-year-olds outperforming the 8-year-olds ( t ₂₁  = −2.65, P = .0438). There was also a significant interaction between session and age group ( F 18,178  = 1.91, P<. 0174), indicating that the adults' gains were larger compared to those of the 8-year-olds, irrespective of the baseline performance ( t ₂₁  = 6.47, P<.0001; t ₂₁  = 7.32, P<.0001).

a - Group average accuracy of phonological performance in 10 consecutive practice sessions, the 15 th session, and a retention session (R) in eight-year-olds (8-y-o), 12-year-olds (12-y-o) and young adults (adults). Error bars  =  standard errors. b - Accumulated percentage of participants who acquired the phonological (phon) and semantic (sem) aspects of the AMR.

The group average learning curves for phonological performance were well fitted by a power function model, with R ² values ranging from 0.75 to 0.87 (p<.0001) in all three age groups. The phonological performance gains were robustly retained as found on re-testing after a two-month interval in all three age groups ( F 1,21  = 2.44, P  = .1343).

Correct pronunciation of the target verbs, i.e., actual production of the phonological aspect of the AMR, was better and more complete compared to the verbal reports on the nature of the AMR. The participants' explicit reports on the source of their success showed that even when they pronounced the new verbs correctly (>75% phonological correct), their ability to explicitly describe their performance (i.e., describe what they were producing) was at best partial [47]. Early on in training, all individuals reported the addition of the final consonant in the artificial suffixes (/ v/or/ r/) while only 3/8 of the adults, 2/8 of the 12-year-olds, and none of the 8-year-olds reported the vowels.

Semantic aspect

At different time-points between the first and the eighth practice sessions, 7/8 of the adults and 7/8 of the 12-year-olds explicitly reported the semantic distinction (animate, inanimate) as the basis of the AMR. At that time or shortly after, accuracy on new items increased abruptly to more than 90% and 80% correct performance in the judgment and production tasks, respectively. However, none of the 8-year-olds was able to report on the semantic aspect of the AMR or to exceed 65% accuracy in the new items throughout the study (Table S1) Most adults and 12-year-olds uncovered the semantic aspect of the AMR early on in training ( Fig. 5b).

Discussion

Altogether, the current results clearly show that maturation had a positive effect on the acquisition and retention of an artificial language skill when an equivalent language experience was afforded to 8-year-olds, 12-year-olds and young adults. Young adults outperformed both groups of children and 12-year-olds outperformed the 8-year-olds. The adults' advantage over the 8-year-olds was clear even after the latter were given five additional practice sessions. The age-related advantage was expressed not only in the initial level of performance but also in the rate of improvement across the training sessions and in the effectiveness of retention at two months post-training. Furthermore, the age-related advantage was expressed in all performance parameters tested, including task aspects that were clearly implicit. This advantage was reflected not only in the ability to judge the repeated items, but also in the ability to produce them and in the ability to correctly pronounce the artificial phonological pattern when generalizing the AMR to novel items - aspects of linguistic competence that were reported to reflect a childhood advantage [23], [27]-[28]. Although training was conducted by means of exposure to and use of the AMR and there was no explicit instruction of the AMR at any time during the training, only the older learners were able to uncover the semantic aspect of the AMR through linguistic experience.

Throughout the practice sessions, the age-related advantage was reflected not only in higher accuracy of performance, but also in more fluent performance (i.e., shorter response times) in both the judgment and the production task. The finding of an advantage in fluency (speed) of production rather than an advantage in judgment and performance accuracy per se in a linguistic task is in line with recent findings in linguistic [52] and non-linguistic [53] skill learning that children are slower compared to adults.

The current findings suggest that learning to apply an AMR to repeated (specific) items as well as to fluently produce the phonological patterns required by the AMR when applied to novel items, demonstrate key characteristics of procedural learning [54]. Competence in these aspects of the task was acquired implicitly, with power-law like group average gains in speed and accuracy [13]-[14], [48]-[49], [55], no speed accuracy trade-off [56]-[57] and robust long-term retention of the gains [12]-[14], [55]-[56] ( Fig. 2). The current results also show that some of the gains in both the judgment and production of repeated items evolved between sessions, i.e., in the post-training intervals, rather than concurrently with practice ( Fig. 4). These delayed ("off-line") gains, occurred in both the 8- and the 12-year-olds as well as in the course of learning the AMR in adults. Delayed gains in task performance were proposed to reflect procedural memory consolidation processes in a number of perceptual and motor skill learning paradigms [13]-[14], [48]-[49], [56], [58]. Thus, the results of the current study provide a behavioral indication for a consolidation phase in linguistic learning in pre-adolescent children as well as in young adults. This phase, we propose, may correspond to the procedural memory consolidation phase as recently reported, for children and young adults in a motor sequence learning task [50]. Thus, our results are not consistent with a simple version of the proposal that procedural memory, per se, is less effective in adults compared to children [5]-[6].

The older participants may have also benefited from better working memory resources, more mature problem solving strategies [59], as well as from their previous, more extensive linguistic experience, including with morphological rules. Although the stimuli were artificial, the phonological features were compatible with the participants' native language, and the AMR was akin to typical morphological rules in Hebrew. Older participants may therefore have been more familiar with the notion that semantic distinctions can be conveyed through phonological patterns.

It has been proposed that a childhood advantage in language rule acquisition, if present, is related to the dominance of implicit (procedural) learning mechanisms [5]-[6]. According to this view, there is an inherent advantage contingent on the immaturity of the explicit memory system in children. Our results however, may be taken as support for the notion that effective explicit learning abilities may in fact be helpful in learning (artificial) language rules and therefore, children being largely limited to implicit learning are at a disadvantage rather than an advantage [17]-[19], [59]. Older children and adults who presumably possess a more mature declarative memory system were superior to the younger children in acquiring the implicit (procedural) aspects of the language task as well as in discovering the underlying semantic distinction, both implicitly (as expressed in actual performance) and explicitly (overt report).

The current results, however, suggest an age-related improvement (between ages 8 and young adulthood) not only in the explicit discovery of the semantic aspect of the AMR, but also in the procedural learning of language aspects, including phonology. Several previous studies have already suggested that procedural memory for linguistic skills may not be fully developed in childhood; these include studies on language attrition [60] second language acquisition [28]-[34], [44], [46] and children with cochlear implants [61], where comparable learning conditions were available to older and younger learners. Our results, therefore, are in line with recent evidence suggesting that the procedural memory system may undergo maturation across childhood and well into adulthood in humans [17]-[19], [50], [59] and animals [62]. Recent studies using the AMR and training paradigm as in the current study, showed that some, but not all, 8-year-olds were able to acquire the semantic aspect of the AMR and to generalize it to new items when the semantic aspect was made more salient in the training conditions. Nevertheless, even under these conditions, the younger children were outperformed by older participants, with the adults gaining superior fluency and accuracy (Ferman & Karni, "The effect of age and type of training material on the ability to learn an AMR", Proceedings of the 27 th World Congress of ILAP, 2007, Copenhagen, E-address: www.ialp.info; Ferman & Karni, submitted).

Our results do not support the notion that while language abilities in children evolve slowly, children outperform adults in the long run [3], [22], [63]. We followed the AMR learning process intensively for over 3 months (5-6 weeks of multi-session training and a retention test given 9 weeks after the termination of training), and adults were superior in both attainments and learning rates. However, given that the current language task was only applicable in the laboratory, our results cannot be construed as incompatible with the notion that given continuous exposure, children may excel in the task in subsequent months and years.

It was recently proposed [50] that while there is no childhood advantage in the acquisition, consolidation, and retention of motor skills, the consolidation of procedural memory for such skills may be less prone to interference by subsequent experience before puberty. In adults, the establishment of new skills may, under some conditions, be interfered with even by subsequent experience with a previously acquired well-established skill. Thus, it may be the case that in situations in which interference is minimized or absent, the adults' performance and learning advantages can become apparent, whereas in situations in which interference is ubiquitous, the adults' potential for learning cannot be fully expressed. One would hypothesize that an instance of the former type of conditions would be 'immersion' in a new language, in which case an adult advantage would be expected. However, whenever the exposure to a new language is closely followed by exposure to a previously well-established language, one would predict that adults would be disadvantaged relative to children. Rather than a simple notion of an irreversible loss of plasticity in adults, this proposal may provide an alternative explanation for the apparently conflicting results regarding the ability of children and adults to acquire linguistic skills. Thus, the adult 'disadvantage', found in some conditions, may reflect an inability to establish long-term memory given the specific structure of the learning experience. Other mechanisms, such as proactive interference, whereby previously established knowledge may compete and even interfere with subsequent learning, may also be at work in late learners and in some instances result in an early learning advantage [50].

This proposal may establish a correspondence between linguistic and non-linguistic skill acquisition; in the latter case, there is ample evidence for highly effective procedural memory in adults, including experience-dependent neuronal changes in low-level processing areas [13]-[14], [48]-[49]. Effective skill acquisition in adulthood was also shown in animal studies [62]. There is evidence suggesting, therefore, that rather than an irreversible loss of plasticity in adults, adult skill learning may be more strictly controlled than (but as effective as) skill acquisition before puberty [17]-[19], [50].

In this study we used a laboratory artificial language paradigm in laboratory settings. The advantages of doing so reside in the ability to ensure that the material to be learned is equally new for all learners and that the exposure to input, instructions, and tasks are identical. Furthermore, the constrained design of an artificial language makes it possible to isolate specific language features from the complex interactions found in natural language, and to manipulate them in order to study them separately [64]-[65]. Laboratory settings afford fine-grained data collection, in real time, that cannot be achieved in real life language learning situations [66]-[67]. On the other hand, one may argue that, the simplified language and laboratory environment in artificial language paradigms cannot and do not express the complexity neither of natural language nor of real-life learning conditions. This needs to be taken into account in the translation of any laboratory intervention to 'real-life' learning.

Our laboratory approach was based on similar experiments in which the acquisition of perceptual or motor skills was studied (in humans or animals) [12-14, 48-50 55-56]. The claim is not that laboratory settings mimic real-life situations; in fact, the conditions are often chosen so as to represent 'novel' experiences in the tested domain. The underlying assumption is, however, that memory mechanisms engaged in the laboratory are the same mechanisms available in natural settings - that is, the same basic learning mechanisms should be at work. The drawing of theoretical and practical implications from the present laboratory study, however, should be cautious; broader, ecologically valid data, are needed in order to understand when and under what conditions this potential for language learning can be effectively expressed at different stages of development.

Altogether the current findings may be interpreted to reflect an age-related maturation, between childhood and adulthood, of both the declarative and the procedural memory systems in the context of acquiring a new linguistic skill. Under our laboratory conditions, maturation or accumulated experience, or both, between childhood and adulthood had a positive effect on the ability to learn each and every aspect of the language task.

We propose that the current data support the availability of effective language skill learning mechanisms in adults. Our laboratory settings, however, cannot address the possibility that adults' potential to learn new language skills may not be fully or partially expressed in many natural settings, as well as in specific laboratory conditions, because of factors other than the loss of skill learning abilities per se [50]. The implication, which is empirically testable, is that in some conditions, adults are expected to manifest advantages in language skill acquisition, while in other conditions, they may do worse than children. The apparent childhood advantages, reported in many studies, may therefore reflect the effect of structural aspects of everyday language learning experiences that afford less than optimal conditions for adults to fully express their competence in skill (implicit) acquisition and procedural memory.

Supporting Information

Individual accuracy performance gains in the new items. Percent correct performance of each individual participant (I.P.) for the new items in the judgment (jud) and production (pro) tasks in the 10 initial sessions, at the 15th session and in the retention session (R), in 8-year-olds (S1a), 12-year-olds (S1b) and adults (S1c).
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0013648.s001
(0.14 MB DOC)

Author Contributions

Conceived and designed the experiments: SF AK. Performed the experiments: SF. Analyzed the data: SF AK. Contributed reagents/materials/analysis tools: SF. Wrote the paper: SF AK.

Subject Areas

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here.

We want your feedback. Do these Subject Areas make sense for this article? Click the target next to the incorrect Subject Area and let us know. Thanks for your help!

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
No Childhood Advantage in the Acquisition of Skill in Using an Artificial Language Rule

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A leading notion is that language skill acquisition declines between childhood and adulthood. While several lines of evidence indicate that declarative ("what", explicit) memory undergoes maturation, it is commonly assumed that procedural ("how-to", implicit) memory, in children, is well established. The language superiority of children has been ascribed to the childhood reliance on implicit learning.

# data[].attributes.headline
Capítulo 1: Gramática y Alumnos Secundarios

# data[].attributes.subject
Capítulo 1: Gramática y Alumnos Secundarios

# data[].attributes.body
Me encanta esta lección de TED-Ed sobre la diferencia entre de reglas prescriptivas y descriptivas. Voy a estar una maestra secundaria de literatura inglés y pienso que, muchas veces, mucho concentración en gramática prescriptiva es un resulto de inseguridad del maestro y un deseo de poder en el salón de clase. Pienso que es muy importante que alumnos secundarios estudian lingüísticas y entienden que gramática prescriptiva no es mejor que gramática descriptiva (no hay correcto o incorrecto methods hablar), pero el conocimiento de reglas prescriptivas es un indicador de clase y de educación y es importante para cosas como pruebas estandarizadas.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Use engaging videos on TED-Ed to create customized lessons. You can use, tweak, or completely redo any lesson featured on TED-Ed, or create lessons from scratch

# data[].attributes.headline
Capítulo 1: Ejemplo de Gramática Prescriptiva

# data[].attributes.subject
Capítulo 1: Ejemplo de Gramática Prescriptiva

# data[].attributes.body
En este video, Steven Pinkler dice una historia sobre gramática prescriptiva en nuestra cultura. Pienso que alumnos secundarias encontrarían las historias muy cómicas y atractivas.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Hilarious examples of awful language usage - Steven Pinker

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Excerpted from his lecture at the Royal Institution: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OV5J6BfToSw Steven Pinker is a professor in the Department of Psychology at Harvard University. He conducts research on language and cognition and has authored ten books, including: The Language Instinct How the Mind Works The Blank Slate The Stuff of Thought The Better Angels of Our Nature and most recently, The Sense of Style: The Thinking Person's Guide to Writing in the 21st Century.

# data[].attributes.body
Este video es sobre Washoe y Koko, los chimpancés quién pueden usar American Sign Language (ASL). Para mi, este video complica la lista de rasgos “específicos del lenguaje humano” el nuestro libro porque es obvio que ellas pueden hablar sobre el futuro y el pasado (desplazamiento) y pueden decir mentiras (prevaricación). Un ejemplo es cuando Washoe está hablando con su entrenador sobre su bebé muerto. Estoy de acuerdo que el ASL de Washoe y Koko no tiene lo mismo capacidad que lenguaje oral de humanos, pero pienso que la habilidad usar ASL es mucho más que “trucos que aprendan los animales de circo” (p. 18, según “muchos lingüistas,” Hualde).

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Washoe, Koko, and the social exchange of language.

# data[].attributes.headline
Capítulo 1: Ejemplo de Gramática Descriptiva

# data[].attributes.subject
Capítulo 1: Ejemplo de Gramática Descriptiva

# data[].attributes.body
En este video, Steven Pinkler habla sobre como personas interactúan con y usan lenguaje en una circunstancia cómica.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Steven Pinker tells a "F*cking Brilliant" story about profanity & the law

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Steven Pinker is a professor in the Department of Psychology at Harvard University. He conducts research on language and cognition and has authored ten books, including: The Language Instinct How the Mind Works The Blank Slate The Stuff of Thought The Better Angels of Our Nature and most recently, The Sense of Style: The Thinking Person's Guide to Writing in the 21st Century.

# data[].attributes.body
En este video, una mujer habla con las fonemas de muchos idiomas diferentes, pero con palabras galimatías. Me encanta este ejemplo porque, para mi, es casi posible oír las fonemas de mis idiomas (español y inglés) objetivamente cuando las palabras son galimatías y están en una mixta con otros idiomas. Es muy interesante oír las fonemas muy familiares a ti como una persona afuera del idioma-- por ejemplo, el [ r ] de inglés sonido muy fuerte.

# data[].attributes.body
Estos dos videos me ayudó entender la asimilación del /n/ y /s/. Podemos encontrar asimilación en nuestro libro en página 74 para /s/ y página 78 para /n/. Voy a preguntar en clase si otras consonantes cambie (asimilar) como así. Los videos no mencionan la tema de aspiración, pero en este caso la /s/ se pronuncia como una fricativa laríngea sorda [h]. Pienso que este cambio (/s/ aspiración) no está en todos los dialectos de español. Necesitamos tener cuidado con los fonemas /n/ y /s/ durante los transcripciones de la prueba.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Spanish Pronunciation: Assimilation of /n/

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
What happens to the /n/ sound in Spanish before certain consonants? Website: http://mexicanspanish.com Twitter: http://twitter.com/mexicanspanish

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Spanish Pronunciation: Assimilation of /s/

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
What happens to the /s/ sound in Spanish before certain consonants? Website: http://mexicanspanish.com Twitter: http://twitter.com/mexicanspanish

# data[].attributes.body
La parte en el video sobre diptongos en español comenzó a 5:26. Un diptongo es cuando dos sonidos vocálicos están en la misma syllaba. Un hiato es cuando dos sonidos vocálicos seguidas están en sílabas separadas. También leí en nuestro libra (página 91) sobre los diptongos crecientes (semivocal + vocal) y decrecientes (vocal + semivocal). Los semivocales son /i/ y /u/ en combinación con un vocal fuerte: /a/, /o/, /u/. Cuando dos vocales fuertes o débiles son en juntos o cuando los débiles (altas) (/u/ o /i/) tiene un tilde.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
EU Spanish Pronunciation Video 2: Spanish Vowels

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
This is the second of a three-part series on European Spanish pronunciation. The goal is to quickly familiarize you with the sounds of Spanish and the IPA symbols for those sounds. You'll then be able to learn them faster, either through your own studies or through my pronunciation trainers. Enjoy!

# data[].attributes.body
No enfocamos en entonación o melodía, pero es divertido pensar sobre estas cosas un poco con este ejemplo. En este video, muchos cantantes poner sus propios idiomas en una canción española, “Despacito.” Es muy interesante oír las artists combinar las fonemas de sus lenguas distintos con un ritmo creado por fonemas españolas. También es interesante oír fonemas distintas en idiomas como el árabe y el chino.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Despacito - Multi Language Cover version (16 Languages)

# data[].attributes.headline
Capítulo 3: Palabras que Rompe las Reglas de Género  

# data[].attributes.subject
Capítulo 3: Palabras que Rompe las Reglas de Género  

# data[].attributes.body
Esta lista me ayuda mucho con sustantivos que no siguen las reglas normal de terminaciones y géneros. Hay muchos sustantivos que terminan en -a, pero son masculinos. Este artículo dice que muchos de estas palabras tienen raíces griegos.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Spanish nouns that end with -o are masculine, and ones that end with -a are feminine, right?

Yes, usually. But there are plenty of exceptions to this gender rule, of which the two best known are mano, the word for hand, which is feminine, and día, the word for day, which is masculine.

Key Takeaways

Most Spanish nouns ending in -o are masculine, and most ending in -a are feminine, but there are exceptions.

Some of the exceptions occur because of how the words were treated in other languages, such as Latin and Greek.

Many nouns that refer to jobs or roles of people can be either masculine or feminine depending on the person they refer to.

6 Ways in Which the Rule Is Broken

Exceptions to the a-is-feminine- o-is-masculine rule fall into six categories:

Words that are shortened versions of other words. For example, la foto (photograph) is feminine because it's short for la fotografía.

Words that end in -ista as the equivalent of the English "-ist." For example, dentista can be either masculine or feminine depending on whether the dentist referred to is a man or woman. A few words with other endings, such as modelo for a human model, are treated the same way.

Words whose meanings vary depending on the gender. For example, un cometa is a comet, but una cometa is a kite.

Some masculine words that come from Greek and end in -a (often -ma). Most of these words have English cognates.

A few compound nouns, which are traditionally masculine, even when the noun portion comes from a feminine noun.

Words that are just exceptions, such as mano and día. Usually these exceptions come from the way the words were treated in Latin.

List of Words Violating the Gender Rule

Here are the most common words violating the a/o rule, although there are dozens of others:

Gender for Names of Occupations and Other Roles

Most words that refer to people's jobs or roles, many ending in -ista or -eta, that can be either masculine or feminine are not listed above. Most have English cognates. Among the abundance of words that fit that category are:

Feminine Nouns That Use El

Also not included in the top list are combinations such as (water) and el águila (eagle)-feminine words that begin with a stressed a- or ha- and are immediately preceded by el (rather than la) in the singular form only.

With these words, el doesn't indicate gender but is used instead for ease of pronunciation. It is similar to the way in which English substitutes "an" for "a" in front of some nouns, as the rule applies to the opening sound of the word, not how it's spelled.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
47 Nouns That Break the Main Gender Rule of Spanish

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Spanish nouns that end with -o are masculine, and ones that end with -a are feminine, right? Yes, usually. But there are plenty of exceptions to this gender rule, of which the two best known are mano, the word for hand, which is feminine, and día, the word for day, which is masculine.

# data[].attributes.body
Conjugación es mi enemigo número uno cuando estoy hablando en espanol porque no he tomado un clase formal en espanol en 4 años. Tengo algunos verbos útiles y sus conjugaciones en mi memoria (como querer, tener, poder, decir) pero con estos excepciones, solo puedo hablar en la indicativa presente. Estuve buscando algo para enseñarme y ayudame con los paradigmas flexivos (página 144) y encontré millones de vídeos cómicos hecho de estudiantes secundarias sobre conjugar en el pretérito, imperfecto, subjuntivo. Voy a enseñar secundaria después de graduarme y estuve riendo a estos videos mucho. Pero también pienso que es importante pensar si mucho, mucho attention en gramática y morfología sea el opción mejor enseñar secundaria. Me enamore con espanol porque de hablar, no porque de gramática.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
My Spanish 5 students made this video to help remember how to use and form the present subjunctive. Lyrics follow: ¿Qué?

# data[].attributes.body
Nominalización es cambiar un parte de una palabra para cambiar el tipo de palabra. Es posible cambiar sustantivos a otros sustantivos (denominal), adjetivos a sustantivos (deadjetival), verbos a sustantivos (deverbal), y mucho más! Comenzar a 1:19, este video da muchos ejemplos de sufijos que hacen sustantivos de otras tipos de palabras.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Created using PowToon -- Free sign up at http://www.powtoon.com/youtube/ -- Create animated videos and animated presentations for free. PowToon is a free tool that allows you to develop cool animated clips and animated presentations for your website, office meeting, sales pitch, nonprofit fundraiser, product launch, video resume, or anything else you could use an animated explainer video.

# data[].attributes.body
Me encanta esta lista de palabras compuestas porque hay traducciones a inglés :) Qué divertido! Como la palabra “tragahombres” que significa “bully” porque “he/she swallows men.”

# data[].attributes.headline
Capítulo 4: Información Básica de Análisis 

# data[].attributes.subject
Capítulo 4: Información Básica de Análisis 

# data[].attributes.body
Este video es un resumen de análisis sintáctico. Es un explanación básico de las temas más importantes y explica dos tipas de diagramas. La profesora enseña sobre las partes de una oración y cómo identificar los núcleos del sujeto y el predicado. Aprendí estos significantes de las signos de sintaxis en este video: información

O, oracion

SN, sintagma nominal

SV, sintagma verbal

SPrep, sintagma preposicional

CD, complemento directo. Pienso que es la función de una sintagma preposicional?

Det, determinante

# data[].attributes.headline
Capítulo 4: Las Diagramas Árboles en Ingles 

# data[].attributes.subject
Capítulo 4: Las Diagramas Árboles en Ingles 

# data[].attributes.body
Este sitio web me ayudó con las diagramas árboles. Yo sé que no vamos a necesitar aprender como crear las diagramas para la prueba, pero me ayuda pensar sobre los constituyentes sintagmáticos.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
I've talked previously about all the different possibilities for what constitutes a syntax tree, but not about how you get from "here's how you're supposed to represent things" to actually drawing a tree yourself. And that's a pity, because I've actually got a really nice series of steps that I've developed from teaching, TAing, and tutoring.

Here are the steps in a nutshell: I'm going to go through them one at a time.
1. Label parts of speech
2. Label main constituents Step 1: Label parts of speech
3. Draw tree
Note: I recommend doing all of these steps by hand if at all possible. You'll see from the photos and gifs below that it was easier for me to break out the paper and markers than to try to represent this electronically. If you want to type up your tree later, here are some tools for doing so, but it'll be much easier to type up from an existing handwritten draft rather than try to do the thinking and the typesetting as part of the same step. Pencil or even a chalkboard/whiteboard is often a good idea for tree-drafting, and you'll get better at figuring out spacing as you practice more.

So what do these steps look like in practice? Note that rather like learning to ride a bicycle, the extended description looks long and complicated, but with practice many of the steps become automatic with time.

You're going to start with your sentence just written out normally - feel free to use the version that you get printed on your test or assignment, or write it out for yourself on scrap paper. If you're writing it out yourself, it's a good idea to leave extra space between the words, for the sake of the next step.

Now label each word with its part of speech (also called lexical or grammatical category). Start with the easy, obvious ones: label the nouns as N, label the verbs as V, label the adjectives (A or Adj), prepositions (P), and adverbs (Adv). Now move on to the less obvious ones, determiners (D or Det), auxiliaries (Aux), degree words (Deg), and complementizers (C ). (I've also seen degree words referred to as Mod for modifier, although I find this confusing because entire phrases can also be used to modify things.)

Possible tricky bits in this step: Some words can belong to multiple categories! For example, play can be a noun (going to a play), a verb (play tennis), or even an adjective (a play banana, as opposed to a real one). Fortunately, while play in isolation is ambiguous, it should be clear from context what category it belongs to in a particular sentence. Your course materials should include some tests for part of speech, or you can refer to these notes, these lists (but note that there are adverbs that don't end in -ly, such as often), or this set of examples.

One easy way to keep track of parts of speech is to learn a keyword or two that unambiguously belongs in each category, and then when you're trying to figure out whether another word belongs to that category, you can say "could I replace it with this other word that I know the lexical category of?" Here's a sample list:

Noun - cat, happiness
Verb - see, laugh
Adjective - blue, happy
Adverb - quickly
Preposition - in
Determiner - the
Complementizer - if, whether
Auxiliary - could
Degree word - very, nearly

(Note: do not use "that" as a keyword, because it can be a determiner, as in "that cat", or a complementizer, as in "I saw that the cat was purring". Compare what happens when you substitute them: "the cat" but not "*if cat", "*whether cat", and "I saw whether the cat was purring" but not "*I saw the the cat was purring". "Be" and "have" are sometimes verbs as in "I am/have a cat", sometimes auxiliaries, as in "I was laughing/have laughed" and your course may have particular conventions distinguishing them from modal auxiliaries like can, could, may, might, shall, should, will, would.)
Step 2: Label main constituents
In general, this step is going to end up with essentially the same results regardless of what theory your course is using. Apart from the auxiliaries and degree words/modifiers things, the only other part where I'd expect variation is depending on how your course treats pronouns and maybe proper names, so just check whether you're using NP, N, D, etc for them.

Why are we doing this step? Rather than rushing into drawing a tree right away, this step will make sure you get all the labels for each node correct and don't forget anything. Move on to step 2 once all words are labelled.

Here's a image of step 1: I labeled the words starting with the more obvious content words and then adding in the less obvious function words, but you can do it in any order that makes sense.

Once you've gotten everything labelled, you want to figure out the constituents and the main relationships between various parts of the sentence. Your goal for this step is to get every head inside its own phrase: for every N, you need to figure out what its NP is, for every V, you figure out its VP, etc. If you're doing bar levels, you might label a couple of those at this step if you've got ambiguity or a whole lot of stuff inside a particular phrase, but for the routine bar levels you can just put them in at the next step.

There are two main ways to tackle this problem, bottom-up and top-down. They're not mutually exclusive though: just alternate between them, doing whichever is easiest until you've got all your heads inside their respective phrases.

BOTTOM-UP: Start by identifying the easy phrases that only have a word or two in them: AdjPs, AdvPs, and NPs are often fairly small. Then move on to slightly larger constituents, including PPs and more elaborate NPs (and DPs if you're using them), then VPs and finally IPs and CPs, if necessary.

TOP-DOWN: Start by identifying the verb(s): if you're drawing a sentence, there should be at least one of them.

Now, every verb has a subject, and they often have an object as well, maybe even two. You can identify these by asking questions about the sentence: the answer to "who is verbing?" is the subject, and the answer to "who is being verbed?" is the object. (The answer to "who is the object being verbed to?" is the indirect object.) And there might be other stuff that relates to the verb as well, such as an adverb or prepositional phrase.

So your subject, including associated words like determiners, adjectives, PPs, etc, needs to form an NP (or maybe a CP or DP) all by itself, while your object, also including associated words, is an NP, CP, or DP that's inside the VP. Also inside the VP (but not inside the object) might be some extra stuff, adverbs and PPs. You can indicate this with brackets around the VP, or another thing you might want to do for maximum clarity is underline the subject and object, and use arrows to point them to their verbs.

What did YouTube do? [show that the cat played the piano] - VP

What did YouTube show? [that the cat played the piano] - CP

What did the cat do? [play the piano] - VP

What did YouTube show the cat played? [the piano] - NP

What was played? [the piano] - NP

Where did the cat play the piano? [YouTube] - NP

Where did the cat play the piano? *[YouTube showed] -not a constituent

Who played the piano? [the cat] - NP

This is also the point where, if there's any movement that's going on, you'll want to "restore" the affected word(s) back to their original position(s). You may be able to do this with the same questions that you used to figure out subject and object, or if you're dealing with a question, try answering it ("What did the cat play?" → "The cat (did) play the piano", so your restored sentence is "The cat did play what?").

YouTube showed that the cat played the piano, and Vimeo did __ too. ( __ = show that the cat played the piano - VP)

YouTube showed it (it=that the cat played the piano - CP)

The cat played the piano, and the dog did __ too. ( __ = play the piano - VP)

YouTube showed that the cat played it. (it = the piano - NP)

It showed that the cat played the piano. (it = YouTube - NP)

YouTube showed that s/he played the piano (s/he = the cat - NP)

How do we know what's inside each of our phrases, besides the head? There are certain non-head words that typically go with certain types of heads: degree words with adjectives, prepositions, or adverbs, determiners with nouns (it's a bit more complicated if you're using DPs), auxiliaries with verbs (unless your course is putting them at I). But for phrases within other phrases, you'll have to figure it out, and that's the tricky bit.

Fortunately, there are a series of questions you can ask in order to figure out which phrases contain other phrases, and they're known as constituency tests. Your course may give you a list of constituency tests - if not, here are two not-very-overlapping lists. Two very common types are questions and substitution. I'll demonstrate them both below for various constituents in the sentence "YouTube showed that the cat played the piano."

Questions:

Substitution:

When you figure out that some string of words is a constituent, put square brackets around it and label what kind of constituent it is (NP, PP, VP, etc). I like to do this by hand because I can make the square brackets of different sizes or colours to keep track of them all. If you find it helpful, you can also use underlining, highlighting, or circles to group other elements. (Here's an example of particularly enthusiastic colour usage.)

If we have an extra modifier of some sort, we can use the same tests to figure out what it modifies. For example, we can add several different prepositional phrases beginning with "in" to the sentence above:

YouTube showed that the cat played the piano in a blue shirt.
YouTube showed that the cat played the piano in high definition.
YouTube showed that the cat played the piano in the living room.

But [in something] doesn't necessarily modify the same thing each time, so we need to ask questions about it:

What was in a blue shirt? The cat (playing), not YouTube or the piano.
What was in high definition? YouTube's showing, not the cat or the piano.
What was in the living room? The piano (or maybe the cat playing) but not YouTube.

And based on the answers to these questions, we can mark up the sentence as follows:

YouTube showed that the cat [ played the piano in a blue shirt ]VP
YouTube [ showed [ that the cat played the piano ]CP in high definition ]VP
YouTube showed that the cat played [ the piano in the living room ]NP

Why are we doing this step? This step is where most of the thinking happens: the goal is to know exactly what you're putting in your tree before any of the tree-drawing actually happens. Otherwise it's tempting to just draw a general shape that looks kind of like the trees you've seen before without fully examining what each part is contributing, which will end up as a mess. No really. It will.

Proceed onto the next step when: all heads (N, V, P, Adj, Adv, C, and, if you're using it, D) are inside their respective phrases (NP, VP, PP, AdjP, AdvP, CP and maybe DP). Make sure you know what the subject(s) and object(s) is/are. Also make sure that for any AdjP, AdvP, or PP that you know what it modifies and how to indicate this in the structure.

As you get more practised at drawing trees, this step will take less time and you can skip over the easy parts if you want. For example, if parts of speech are 100% intuitive to you, you may be able to go right to labeling the constituents. Or you may not need to draw brackets around all the AdjPs and NPs, you can just figure out the subject and object and any ambiguities. But even once you're fairly good at tree-drawing, if you're ever faced with an unexpectedly daunting sentence to draw, you can always fall back on step 1: label the words and step 2: label the constituents. Or, if you're drawing a really high-stakes tree, for a test or an assignment, you may still want to proceed as methodically as possible to reduce your chances of making a silly mistake.

Note that I have not gotten into sentence-level projections (i.e. S or IP or TP, whichever you're using). There's a reason for that: first of all, that's where there's the most variance between course conventions. Secondly, this is the type of projection that may not have an obvious head (unless you have an Aux and your course is treating Aux as an I head). And thirdly, you automatically need an S/IP/TP to contain your entire sentence, so it's not a particularly informative constituent to add since it will literally just contain the whole sentence. BUT, and this is important, you also need another S/IP/TP for every additional verb that you have in your sentence, because any verb and associated words (subject, object, etc) could also be a sentence by itself.

For example:

YouTube showed that the cat played the piano.

Contains two verbs, "showed" and "played" and thus two clauses, each of which could be a sentence with minor modifications:

The main (or matrix) clause: "YouTube showed..."

The subordinate (or embedded) clause: "That the cat played the piano"

So we also need to split these up. We know that "that" is a complementizer ©, so it creates a CP (or S' if you're using it), but inside the CP is an S/IP/TP (directly inside every CP, in the position of sister to the C, is an S/IP/TP).

[S/IP/TP YouTube showed [CP that [S/IP/TP the cat played the piano ] ] ]

However, if you only have one verb in your sentence, then you also only have one clause, the main clause, so you can skip this part.
Step 3: Draw tree
Here's a gif of step 1+2: I start by labelling the words as in step 1, and then add labels for various constituents (here I am using a strict X-bar theory with IPs). I worked bottom-up from smaller to bigger groups, but you could also do a top-down approach, whatever works for you. Notice the brackets getting bigger and bigger, which is an advantage of handwriting. Leaving lots of space around the words will help fit in all the brackets, but you definitely don't need to be as pretty as I'm being here.

And here's a static image of the final result (note that I've labelled both sides of the brackets for extra clarity, but you don't have to):

Now, finally, we get to draw the tree!

A lot of people think that this is the step that you start at, but unless you're dealing with a really, really easy sentence and you already have practice drawing trees, jumping right into drawing a tree will just leave you confused and not sure what to put where. It's a lot better to be confused at the previous step, where you can pause and try a couple things and figure it out, rather than at this step, where you'll be tempted to just draw something that looks basically like a tree and think "eh, good enough". Trust me, despite the fact that the rules may look confusing and arbitrary to you when you're starting out, they make good sense to your prof or TA, and it will be very obvious to them if you do that.

I'm going to point out at this stage that syntax trees are not something you can bs. However, this is in fact a great and wonderful thing, because it means that you can, with enough effort, check your own work and prove that your tree is correct (or fix it if it's not), and you are not at the mercy of dubious judgement calls and whether or not the prof likes you. A correct syntax tree is correct, a wrong (portion of a) syntax tree is wrong, and although there are a few fudgey bits in the realm of "how much do we care that this thing is wrong?", it is entirely possible to get a score of 100% in a syntax course or unit.

Syntax (and in fact linguistics in general, actually) is not one of those subjects where the prof artificially caps the maximum score at 80 or 85: if you draw a completely correct tree, or in general demonstrate a very thorough understanding of the topic, you will get full marks, and for every mark you lose, there is something very specific that you should have done differently, and most profs and TAs will tell you exactly what answer they were looking for. It's very satisfying. (I mean, until you get to high-level courses where you realize that what a syntax tree should even look like is still a matter of theoretical debate, but in an intro course there is definitely still a right answer.)

But enough with the pep talk: how do you take your now-thoroughly-marked-up sentence and make it into a tree?

You're going to start at the top. As tempting as it may be to draw your sentence along the bottom of the page and draw up from there, this is not how syntax trees are conventionally drawn. Why? Well, starting from the top gives you more symmetrically-sized branches rather than long branches on one side and cramped, tiny, hard-to-read ones on the other, as well as more space for movement arrows. It's also how the vast majority of syntax trees are drawn, and it's easier for everyone to interpret each other's trees if we follow a few basic formatting conventions.

If you're worried about spacing, note that English trees will branch more on the right than on the left, so starting your S/IP/TP about a third of the way over on the left side of the page at the very top is generally better than starting it in the middle. Or just find an empty classroom and practise on a large whiteboard/chalkboard where you don't need to worry about wasting paper. Thanks to the miracles of modern technology, you can even take a photo of your whiteboard tree when you're finished, which was definitely not a thing when I was an undergraduate.

(Related: do not, for the love of Chomsky, draw your syntax trees upside-down. That is, do not write the sentence along the top of the page and draw branches down from it. I've gotten one or two of these in every stack of syntax assignments I've marked, and while I do always try to mark it as much as possible, it takes me about three times as long to figure out what's going on and hence makes me grumpy. And you don't want a grumpy person marking your assignment. If you want to instead make your marker especially happy, I have gotten some delightfully entertaining drawings from students on tests and assignments over the years, so you know, feel free.)

So you're going to start at the top of the page with your maximal sentence projection, S or IP or TP (that's S' or CP if you've got a question), and proceed down from there.

What's in your subject? Put it all under that subject position.

Make sure to include bar levels if your course is using them.

Do you have anything modifying your verb? Put it under the VP (V' if you're using them).

What's in your object? Put it all directly sister to your V.

Include bar levels again if relevant.

Do you have any embedded clauses? You've figured out what they're embedded under in the previous step, now put them there. Be sure to include a CP (S') and S/IP/TP before going into the subject, verb, etc of the embedded clause.

Is anything ambiguous? If you figured out an ambiguity in the previous step, there are a couple ways to proceed. If your course or assignment has mentioned ambiguity as an option, you should probably draw both trees and indicate which meaning each one corresponds to. If there's a technical ambiguity but one interpretation is way more plausible than the other, and you haven't been told to find ambiguities, you may be able to get away with just drawing the most plausible interpretation (although in that case, feel free to include a note to the marker). Draw ambiguities on separate trees though, not the same one.

If you need to draw movement, make sure you represent the original position and the moved position using whatever conventions your course is using (arrows, traces, etc).

If you're using S, S will branch into an NP (subject) and a VP (containing V, the object NP, and maybe more) plus maybe other things.

If you're using IP or TP, IP or TP will branch into NP (subject) and I' or T', which will branch into I or T and VP (containing V, the object NP, and maybe other things). (Or these NPs might all be DPs, if you're using the DP hypothesis. If you've never seen a DP, just ignore everything I'm saying about them.)

1. Did you include all the words from the target sentence in your tree?

2. Does the tree, left to right, read in the same order as your target sentence? (After any movement has happened.) If this is not the case, you need to fix something.

3. Do all the words have their part of speech labels that you established at the beginning? (Double-check the tests you used at the labelling step if you want to be really careful.)

4. Is each head inside its corresponding maximal projection? (N inside NP, V inside VP, etc.)

5. If you're doing strict X' theory, do you have at least one bar level between each head and its maximal projection? (N' between N and NP, V' between V and VP, etc.)

6. Do you have any triangles? (Your instructor may use triangles. This is why you should not.)

Anyway, this first part is pretty much always the same for any sentence, which is why we didn't really bother map out this top projection in the previous step.

1. If you have more than one verb, is each verb inside its own VP which is inside its own S/IP/TP? Is each non-matrix verb's S/IP/TP inside its own S'/CP?

2. Is there any movement? If it's a question, what would the statement version sound like? If there are multiple verbs, what would each mini clause sound like separately? If there is passive, what would the active version sound like?

3. What complements do you have, if any? Especially complements of PPs (generally NPs/DPs), or NPs and AdjPs (often PPs beginning with "of"). Are they in the right positions? (In X' theory, a complement is sister to the head, so complement of a noun → sister to N, complement of an adjective → sister to Adj, etc. In a theory without bar levels, a complement is simply inside the phrasal level, so complement of a noun → inside its NP, complement of a verb → inside its VP, etc.)

4. What modifiers do you have, if any? AdjPs, AdvPs, PPs...what does each modifier modify? Is it in the right position to do so? (In X' theory, a modifier is sister to the bar level of the modified element, so modifying a noun → sister to its N', modifying a verb → sister to its V', etc. In a theory without bar levels, a modifier is simply inside the phrasal level of the modified element, so modifying a noun → inside its NP, modifying a verb → inside its VP, etc. Note that if you don't have bar levels, there is no difference between a complement and a modifier.)

5. If you're in X' theory, another way of phrasing the previous two questions is: for every PP, is it a complement or a modifier? Is it in the appropriate position for which one it is? (AdjPs are almost always modifiers, unless they're after a verb: "the blue shirt" = modifier; "the shirt is blue" = complement. I can't think of any examples where an AdvP would be a complement and not a modifier, but you may want to double check just in case. And an AdvP might modify several different things, so especially check that part.)

6. What's the subject (including modifiers & complements) of each verb? Is it in the appropriate subject position that your course is using? (Under S or sister to I' are the most likely.)

7. What's the object (including modifiers & complements) of each verb? Is it sister to the verb?

8. Do you have any ambiguity? If so, have you represented it clearly?

Now you're going to take the constituents that you figured out in the previous step and get them into the tree:

When you think you've finished your tree, here are a few common errors that you can check:

Basic errors:

More specific errors:

Here's a gif of drawing the tree, again assuming you're using a strict X-bar theory with IPs (note that the colours correspond to the colours of the brackets I used at the previous step - this is for your ease in following, it's not a thing you need to do in drawing your own trees, as switching ink colours this often will probably make it harder).

And here's the final tree as a still image:
This is part 8 of a series on how to draw syntax trees. If you're confused about why I keep referring to different course conventions rather than giving a specific answer, check out the remainder of the series below.
Lastly, here are the brackets and the tree side-by-side, just for fun.

Notice that subjects are in spec, IP (sister to I') of their respective IPs, and objects are in complement position of their respective verbs (sister to V). These trees assume you're doing a strict X' theory structure: if you're using TPs or DPs, feel free to substitute them instead, and if you're doing basic phrase structure rules, substitute S for IP and delete all the bar levels (just move everything up to attach directly to the phrase).

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
How to Draw a Syntax Tree, Part 8: A step-by-step tree-drawing guide, with gifs

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
I've talked previously about all the different possibilities for what constitutes a syntax tree, but not about how you get from "here's how you're supposed to represent things" to actually drawing a tree yourself. And that's a pity, because I've actually got a really nice series of steps that I've developed from teaching, TAing, and tutoring.

# data[].attributes.body
Este sitio tiene mucho information en inglés sobre las partes de oraciones en espanol. Lei específicamente la parte sobre la diferencia entre de adjetivos entre las sintagmas nominales (atributivos) y en las sintagmas verbales (predicados). Pero hay mucho más información en este sitio, como sobre complementos objetos y complementos subjetos. Voy a poner mas videos de la misma profesora del otro sitio para explicar “complementos” en mi Padlet también.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.keywords[]
spanish language dialects historical variation varieties latin america phonology pronunciation old spanish latin diachronic syntax

# data[].attributes.headline
Capítulo 4: El complemento directo vs. el complemento indirecto

# data[].attributes.subject
Capítulo 4: El complemento directo vs. el complemento indirecto

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Diferenciar el complemento directo del complemento indirecto

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Si quieres practicar lo que has aprendido en este vídeo puedes descargarte ejercicios con sus soluciones en http://www.unprofesor.com/los-numeros-decimales/diferenciar-el-complemento-directo-del-complemento-indirecto-119.html - Además podrás hacer preguntas al profesor que ha hecho el vídeo. En este vídeo os explicaré las principales diferencias entre el complemento directo (CD) y el complemento indirecto (CI).

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Si quieres practicar lo que has aprendido en este vídeo puedes descargarte ejercicios con sus soluciones en http://www.unprofesor.com/programacion-lineal/los-complementos-verbales-115.html - Además podrás hacer preguntas al profesor que ha hecho el vídeo. En este vídeo explicaré los diferentes complementos que puede tener el verbo en una oración.El Predicado puede constar de diferentes complementos.

# data[].attributes.headline
Capítulo 5: Los cambios fonológicos del latín al español 

# data[].attributes.subject
Capítulo 5: Los cambios fonológicos del latín al español 

# data[].attributes.body
Estuve curiosa sobre los cambios vocálicos entre de latín y español. Esta presentación PowerPoint tiene muchas tablas sobre la evolución de Latin a español y francis-- la parte más relevante comienza a página 30. La presentación dice que latín clásico tenía diez vocales y más tarde el latín tardío tenía siete vocálicos, como italiano. Es muy interesante que algunos de los vocálicos en latín tardío se convierten a diptongos en español, el [ie] y [ue]. La presentación tiene mucho también sobre las consonantes. Habla sobre las consonantes geminadas y las fricativas.

# data[].attributes.body
Este video explica los sonidos originales del latín. Dos partes son muy interesante a mi: la parte que dice que nuestro alfabeto fue creada para latín, no para idiomas germánicos, y este es porque nuestra ortografía en inglés es muy difícil! Interesante. También es interesante que el metro poético nos ayudó saber como se pronuncia las palabras en latín.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
What Latin Sounded Like - and how we know

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Classical Latin went extinct, yet we still know how to pronounce it. Proof! Subscribe for language: https://www.youtube.com/subscription_center?add_user=NativLang Become a direct supporter: https://www.patreon.com/user?u=584038 Take a trip with me back to Catholic school, then back even further to old Rome. We'll see what Latin pronunciation did - and did NOT - sound like in the mouths of the Romans.

# data[].attributes.headline
Capítulo 5: Comparación de los idiomas románicos (y latín)

# data[].attributes.subject
Capítulo 5: Comparación de los idiomas románicos (y latín)

# data[].attributes.body
Es muy interesante ver ejemplos de estructuras paralelas en latín, italiano, francés, español, y rumano (por ejemplo, página 74). Un ejemplo interesante es que muchos idiomas románticos tienen sistemas de conjugación fuerte como latín, pero todos no. Por ejemplo, en francés, solo tiempo es indicada en las conjugaciones de palabras, no número o modo.

# data[].attributes.body
He aprendido un poco sobre náhuatl y otros idiomas indígenas porque cuando viví en Guatemala oí idiomas Mayas en todas partes, especialmente kaqchikel porque es el idioma indígena de Antigua, la ciudad donde viví. Hay más que 23 idiomas indígenas en Guatemala y están VIVAS-- hay mucho gente quien no necesitan hablar en espanol porque todos en sus vidas hablan idiomas Mayas. Me encanta el sentimiento que hay raíces indígenas en algunas palabras españolas y que es importante tener orgullo en estos raíces indígenas.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
We speak Nahuatl and don't even know it-Mexica Movement

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
After 500 years of genocide, it is amazing how we still manage to inject our Nahuatl words into the Spanish that we speak as Mexicans and Central Americans.

# data[].attributes.body
Podemos ver los idiomas románicos y como grande son.

# data[].attributes.headline
Capítulo 6: Es chistoso romper las máximas 

# data[].attributes.subject
Capítulo 6: Es chistoso romper las máximas 

# data[].attributes.body
Pienso que este video es interesante porque la cosa chistosa es que los caracteres animados rompen las máximas de hablar. Por ejemplo, la respuesta a “My spoon is too big” es “I am a banana.”

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Rejected - Best Oscar Award Winner Movie

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Rejected - Best Oscar Award Winner Movie

# data[].attributes.body
Esta presentación es muy básico, pero es un resumen útil de los roles semánticos. Define la diferencia entre del agente y experimentante que pensé fue un poco difícil entender. El experimentante esta usada con verbos de percepción y cognición porque el sujeto no tiene un opción hacer el accion.

# data[].attributes.body
Este video es muy chistoso  y útil! Habla mucho sobre los actos ilocutivos, pero la cosa más interesante es que usan los directivos, expresivos, declaraciones con personas desconocidas y (muchas veces) sin contexto, entonces también están demostrando cómo romper el principio de cooperación porque no están siguiendo las máximas.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Uploaded by Donella Lalas on 2017-04-28.

# data[].attributes.body
Esta mujer es muy chistosa-- ella habla sobre palabras que tiene una significa inocente en un país y una sexual en otro. Es un buen ejemplo de cómo la pragmática del discurso es diferente dependiente en donde estas.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
10 (Accidental) Spanish Curse Words - Joanna Rants

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
YES!!! Joanna Rants & Flama merch is finally HERE: Flama store: https://www.teepublic.com/user/TheFlama Joanna Rants shirt: https://www.teepublic.com//t-shirt/248561-joanna-rants "You say potato and I say...penis." Watch what you say in Spanish because what can mean something innocent in one country can mean something...very very dirty in another.

# data[].attributes.body
Este video es interesante porque las concursantes están pensando en los acentos de las personas en los videos, pero también de las palabras que usan. Y las personas en los videos hablan sobre las palabras es común usar en su país. Por ejemplo, solo personas en México dice “orale.” Yo se que este es más una cosa de pragmática, pero es interesante porque pienso que en español y en inglés, usamos palabras un poco más de acentos identificar de dónde son personas nuevas. Como “y’all” en ingles.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
ARGENTINOS HACEN EL RETO DE LOS ACENTOS | PILO

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Seguinos en instagram!! http://bit.ly/instagramvideospilo ¡Dale click en "Me Gusta" y compartilo con tus amigos! Instagram de nico y zepet: http://bit.ly/nicodallib http://bit.ly/elzepet Suscribite acá: http://bit.ly/Pilosuscribirse Si querés participar de un video, podés escribirnos a quieroestarenpilo@gmail.com. Twitter: http://bit.ly/twittervideospilo Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/VideosPilo Descripcion Del Video ▶Más videos!

# data[].attributes.headline
Capítulo 7: Lenguaje culto vs. lenguaje popular

# data[].attributes.subject
Capítulo 7: Lenguaje culto vs. lenguaje popular

# data[].attributes.body
Los ejemplos aquí están de lenguaje culto vs. lenguaje popular. En ingles, podemos explicar las diferencias como “proper” lenguaje y “slang” lenguaje. El libro no dice mucho sobre este tema específicamente, pero habla sobre registro, cual es la variedad lingüística situacional. Por ejemplo, el lenguaje culto en este video es más cerca a acrolecto (de variedad educada oral) y el lenguaje popular es más cerca a basilecto. También este video es un poco problemática porque la mujer hablando basilecto está limpiando todo el video. Pienso que las fronteras de que es apropiada estan diferente en otros países.

# data[].attributes.body
Los dialectos de españa tienen mucho contacto con varias lenguas, como basque, gallego, catalán, y mas. Es cómico porque el narrador tiene acento fuerte del norte de españa-- con la distinción de “z, ce, ci, y” se pronuncia como [θ].

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Suscríbete si aún no lo estás: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCe0BznWQ5hh5W9Violxcx0g?sub_confirmation=1 Nos vemos en el siguiente vídeo.

# data[].attributes.headline
Capítulo 7: El contacto del español a ingles

# data[].attributes.subject
Capítulo 7: El contacto del español a ingles

# data[].attributes.body
Pienso que es muy relevante pensar sobre la variedad de contacto (p 396) de méxico a texas porque hay palabras como “lunche” en vez de “almuerzo” que ha cambiado porque de este contacto. En francia hay un edificio del gobierno solo para proteger el idioma francés a ingles. He oida una historia que un equipo de profesionales de la lengua francés usaron dos meses para decidir si el ipod fue masculino o femenino.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
EL CONTACTO DEL ESPAÑOL CON EL IDIOMA INGLÉS EN ESTADOS UNIDOS

# data[].attributes.headline
Capítulo 8: Un conversación con mi abuela

# data[].attributes.subject
Capítulo 8: Un conversación con mi abuela

# data[].attributes.body
Cuando hablé con mi abuela sobre su vida en Carrizo Springs, que es muy cerca de la frontera con México, ella me dijo, “Debíamos tener aprender cómo hablar español, pero estábamos ignorantes y no teníamos bastante respeto para los mexicanos y su idioma. Yo sé mejor hoy en dia, pero todos estaban racistas cuando era niña.” Pienso que este comentario es muy interesante y podemos ver la misma cosa hoy en día. También en nuestra conversación, aprendí que estaba un campo se llama “Crystal City Alien Enemy Detention Facility” muy cerca de donde mi abuela vivía. A el tiempo, nadie sabían que estaba pasando en el campo. Pongo arriba un video de nuestro presidente hablando con palabras muy similares a la propaganda del WWII que intenta rompa las reputaciones de los japonés. Voy a poner fotos de la propaganda para ir con el clip de Trump. Según a mi abuela, actitudes como así están porque no hay más idiomas en mi familia antes de mi. Actitudes aislacionistas y xenófobos.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
In between his efforts to strip 20 million Americans of access to healthcare and find ways to pardon his dumb ass, on Tuesday night our beloved president delivered a 2020 campaign speech in Youngstown, Ohio, in which he characterized undocumented immigrants as psychopathic serial killers.

"And you've seen the stories about some of these animals," Trump said of undocumented immigrant gang members-thereby effectively stereotyping all undocumented immigrants as gang members. "They don't want to use guns, because it's too fast and it's not painful enough. So they'll take a young, beautiful girl-16, 15 and others-and they slice them and dice them with a knife because they want them to go through excruciating pain before they die. And these are the animals that we've been protecting for so long. Well, they're not being protected anymore, folks."

Oh, and he also said this: "With the exception of the late, great Abraham Lincoln, I can be more presidential than any president that's ever held this office."

Right, ok. Speaking of which-remember when the media called this racist, xenophobic piece of shit "presidential?"

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Trump Calls Undocumented Immigrants 'Animals' Who 'Slice' and 'Dice' Beautiful Teen Girls

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
In between his efforts to strip 20 million Americans of access to healthcare and find ways to pardon his dumb ass, on Tuesday night our beloved president delivered a 2020 campaign speech in Youngstown, Ohio, in which he characterized undocumented immigrants as psychopathic serial killers.

# data[].attributes.headline
Propaganda asquerosa de WWII sobre el japonés 

# data[].attributes.subject
Propaganda asquerosa de WWII sobre el japonés 

# data[].attributes.headline
Propaganda asquerosa de WWII sobre el japonés numero dos

# data[].attributes.subject
Propaganda asquerosa de WWII sobre el japonés numero dos

# data[].attributes.headline
Capítulo 8: El idioma del sitio de web del gobierno de los Estados Unidos

# data[].attributes.subject
Capítulo 8: El idioma del sitio de web del gobierno de los Estados Unidos

# data[].attributes.body
Estoy pensando sobre instituciones y su poder sobre el respeto que los idiomas tienen en los Estados Unidos. Porque mucha gente en los Estados Unidos hablan español, la administración de Obama pusieron información en su sitio de web en los dos idiomas-- español y ingles. Pero hoy en dia solo es en ingles. Esta acción implica que el español no es bienvenido en los Estados Unidos.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Shortly after Donald Trump's inauguration on Friday, the White House introduced several changes to its website - among them: it is now an "English only" site.

"Sorry, the page you're looking for cannot be found," is the message Internet users get when trying to access www.whitehouse.gov/espanol.

The Spanish version of the White House page was created in the months following President Barack Obama's swearing in in 2009. Up until Jan. 20, the site also had a blog dedicated to issues considered of interest for the Hispanic community.

The majority of the Spanish content, however, can still be found at ObamaWhiteHouse.gov, a site with an archive of Obama-era materials and resources.

According to EFE, the new Trump administration also has ordered the shutdown of other communication resources in Spanish such as @LaCasaBlanca account on Twitter and La Casa Blanca Facebook page.

The move is consistent with President Trump's criticism of the widespread use of Spanish in the United States.

In September 2015, he blasted former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush - a former rival who is speaks Spanish fliently and did so many times during the campaign - saying he should "set an example and speak English while in the United States."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
White House takes down all Spanish-language content from its website

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Shortly after Donald Trump's inauguration on Friday, the White House introduced several changes to its website - among them: it is now an "English only" site. "Sorry, the page you're looking for cannot be found," is the message Internet users get when trying to access www.whitehouse.gov/espanol.

# data[].attributes.headline
Capítulo 8: Calcos en traducciones a dichos 

# data[].attributes.subject
Capítulo 8: Calcos en traducciones a dichos 

# data[].attributes.body
Increible este video! Es muy chistoso traducir los dichos mexicanos a inglés. Pero me gusta la parte en que ellos explican el mensaje del dicho porque todos son universales.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
EUGENIO DERBEZ: DICHOS MEXICANOS AL INGLES - Katia Nabil

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
¿Cuál quieres que te traduzca? Comenta aquí abajo y responderé las mas chistosas. *Sin duda fue uno de los días mas emocionantes de mi vida, Eugenio empezó con los modelos de sketch en la televisión, fue su comedia lo que me animó a iniciar mi carrera en youtube* #VivanlosLatinos ♥ COMPARTE Y SUSCRIBETE AQUI: http://www.youtube.com/c/katianabil?sub_confirmation=1 Eugenio Derbez ►Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/user/EugenioDerbezTV ►Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/ederbez/ Follow me!

# data[].attributes.headline
Capítulo 8: Las definiciones de y las diferencias entre de argot y jerga y calos

# data[].attributes.subject
Capítulo 8: Las definiciones de y las diferencias entre de argot y jerga y calos

# data[].attributes.body
Comienza cerca del fin de la página.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Indiscutiblemente, uno de los elementos básicos de la comunicación es el mismo que comprende el conjunto de símbolos (verbales y no verbales) que utiliza una comunidad o nación para transmitir sus impresiones.

El lenguaje, es el medio de comunicación entre los seres humanos a través de signos orales y escritos que poseen un significado. En un sentido más amplio, es cualquier procedimiento que sirve para comunicarse. Algunas escuelas lingüísticas entienden el lenguaje como la capacidad humana que conforma al pensamiento o a la cognición.

Una lengua desaparece cuando muere el último integrante del grupo social que la habla. En estos casos, falla la transmisión intergeneracional a través de la cual los mayores enseñan la lengua materna a sus hijos. La desaparición de la lengua implica una pérdida importantísima e irrecuperable de conocimientos: por eso la diversidad lingüística es tan relevante.

Se estima que hay más de 6.000 lenguas en el mundo . es el continente con mayor diversidad lingüística ya que existen numerosos grupos aborígenes que defienden su lengua nativa. En otras regiones del mundo, en cambio, una lengua dominante se ha impuesto sobre el resto. Ese es el caso, por ejemplo, de Estados Unidos de América, donde el inglés llevó a la desaparición de las lenguas de la mayoría de los pobladores nativos.

Por lenguaje, se considera a los procedimientos realizados por cualquier animal con el fin de comunicarse. Esto incluye al ser humano, quien posee el lenguaje más sofisticado entre los animales. Sin embargo, hay escuelas lingüísticas que consideran al lenguaje como único del hombre. Lo importante, más allá de definiciones, es saber que hay importantes diferencias entre nuestro lenguaje y el de los demás animales. Estas diferencias que nos separan son:

- Dos sistemas gramaticales: oral y gestual

- Tiene un objetivo

- El discurso puede hablar de otros tiempos: pasado, presente o futuro

- Se transmite de generación en generación

- Separa el contenido y su forma

- El discurso hablado, es intercambiable con lo que se escucha

- Advierte sucesos nuevos

La y la se encargan del estudio del lenguaje. La ontogenia se ocupa de analizar el proceso por el cual el ser humano adquiere ese lenguaje, y la filogenia se encarga de estudiar la evolución histórica de una lengua.

Existen unos requisitos mínimos que debemos cumplir para que se dé el lenguaje. Estos factores indispensables son de tipo fisiológico, gramatical y semántico: debemos tener los medios físicos para emitir sonidos o gesticular lo que queremos decir, necesitamos generar una estructura donde se ampare nuestro discurso, y tenemos que ser capaces de entenderlo.

A pesar de su aparente homogeneidad, el lenguaje puede subdividirse en tipologías, atendiendo a sus características. Considerando el grado de artificialidad y convencionalidad que interviene en la construcción de símbolos o signos del lenguaje, éste puede ser, únicamente, natural o artificial.

El Lenguaje Natural y Artificial

El lenguaje natural, también llamado lenguaje ordinario, es el que utiliza una comunidad lingüística con el fin primario de la comunicación y se ha construido con reglas y convenciones lingüísticas y sociales durante el período de constitución histórica de esta sociedad. Es el lenguaje que hablamos todos. El individuo, por el hecho de nacer en sociedad, acepta normativamente el lenguaje de su propia comunidad lingüística; el influjo que el individuo puede ejercer sobre el lenguaje, pasa únicamente por el hecho de hablarlo, por el habla.

Son ejemplos de lenguaje natural el castellano, el catalán, el vasco o el gallego, en España, y cualquier otro idioma que se hable en alguna parte del mundo. El lenguaje natural se considera un instrumento sumamente adaptado a la comunicación de la vida ordinaria, pero ambiguo y vago si hemos de atender al punto de vista de la comunicación científica.

El lenguaje artificial, en oposición al natural, tiene como finalidad evitar -justamente- los inconvenientes de ambigüedad y vaguedad de los lenguajes naturales u ordinarios y, por ello, presenta un grado de artificialidad y convencionalidad mucho mayor por lo que se refiere a la construcción de símbolos y al significado que se les asigna. Símbolos y significados no pertenecen a ninguna comunidad natural de hablantes, sino a grupos de hablantes relacionados por objetivos científicos o técnicos. El lenguaje artificialmente construido se divide en técnico y formal.

El lenguaje técnico utiliza el lenguaje natural, pero previamente definido en gran parte de sus términos, de manera que las palabras adquieren técnicamente un significado propio y adecuado a los fines de la comunidad que las utiliza. Así, el lenguaje técnico de la física, por ejemplo, define el sentido en que utiliza términos, también propios del lenguaje ordinario, como son fuerza, masa, velocidad, espacio, etc., y el lenguaje técnico de la medicina, oscuro para los profanos, es sumamente útil para la práctica médica.

El lenguaje formal, a su vez, es una clase de lenguaje artificial en el que no sólo se construyen artificial y convencionalmente los símbolos propios del lenguaje, sino también sus reglas de construcción y sus reglas de transformación, convirtiéndose en la práctica en un cálculo. Los lenguajes formales, si adoptan además una interpretación, se convierten en lenguajes plenamente formalizados.

Tipos de Lenguaje y sus Funciones

El lenguaje tiene dos funciones: la cognoscitiva , dirigida hacia la adquisición, desarrollo y razonamiento del conocimiento, y la comunicativa , enfocada a exteriorizar pensamientos y emitir mensajes. Ambas funciones se realizan principalmente a través del lenguaje fonético, quinésico, proxémico e icónico o pictográfico.

Lenguaje fonético

El lenguaje fonético está integrado por un grupo de sonidos convencionales, esto es debido a que la raíz de las palabras tiene un significado y gramática exclusiva en cada área geográfica o región, de tal forma que las palabras son interpretadas en forma similar por los integrantes de una región.

Cada grupo social aprende el lenguaje fonético del contexto sociocultural en el que se desenvuelve; es de suponer que al ir evolucionando la sociedad, las palabras también sufren modificaciones; algunas, porque los objetos desaparecen; otras, porque surge la necesidad de asignar nombre a las nuevas tecnologías, inventos, ideologías, etc. Lo importante es saber que el lenguaje fonético, al igual que los otros tipos de lenguaje, va evolucionando, por ello necesitamos reconocer que las palabras son arbitrarias, debido a que pueden tener más de un significado, de ahí la necesidad de estudiar y practicar constantemente este lenguaje, hasta lograr la habilidad para emitir mensajes claros, lo cual se alcanzará utilizando las palabras adecuadas en el momento propicio, es decir, considerar al hablar las diferencias culturales.

Los diferentes mecanismos que entran en funcionamiento en el aparato fonador son registrados, controlados y dirigidos por el sistema nervioso, específicamente por el cerebro. Sabemos también que la laringe es el aparato productor de la voz, la estación terminal a través de la cual la persona que habla exterioriza su manera de ser, su cultura, sus condicionamientos, su biotipo y su personalidad.

Los elementos básicos del sistema fonético del lenguaje son los llamados fonemas. Estos elementos que vienen a ser las unidades sonoras básicas del lenguaje hablado, desempeñando un papel decisivo en la discriminación del significado de las palabras y, también, en las diferencias de idioma a idioma.

Estos fonemas o sonidos elementales del habla se dividen en dos grupos:

Como sabemos, las vocales son la /a/, /e/, /i/, /o/, /u/. Estos fonemas se forman cuando el aire que hace vibrar las cuerdas vocales pasa libremente por la boca, sin otra modificación que una mayor o menor abertura de ésta. Lo único que se produce en estas emisiones vocálicas es simplemente un moldeamiento adecuado de la boca, la lengua, el velo del paladar, la mandíbula y otros, produciéndose los diferentes sonidos que corresponden clara y distintivamente a cada una de las cinco vocales.

Cada vocal se genera por un número diferente de vibraciones de las cuerdas vocales. Así, el número de vibraciones para la producción de la /u/ es mayor que para cualquier otra; luego en un orden decreciente le sigue la /o/, la /a/, la /e/ y, con un número menor de vibraciones la /i/.

Ahora veamos cómo se forman las consonantes: /b/, /c/, /d/y /z/. En primer lugar, cabe señalar, que la pronunciación de estos fonemas no se puede hacer sin el concurso de las vocales. Estas consonantes se clasifican principalmente tomando en cuenta dos aspectos:

La articulación de las consonantes se genera por la aproximación del órgano inferior (móvil) al superior (rígido e inmóvil), dando lugar a la clasificación de dichos fonemas en función de los puntos de articulación que a continuación señalamos:

Bilabiales: Por aproximación de los labios (/b/, /p/, /m/).

Labiodentales: Cuando se pronuncia con el labio inferior sobre los dientes, tal como ocurre con la /f/.

Interdentales: Cuando se pronuncia con la punta de la lengua entre los dientes superiores e inferiores /z/.

Linguodentales: Cuando se pronuncia con el ápice de la lengua sobre los dientes /t/, /d/.

Linguoalveolares: Cuando se pronuncia con el ápice de la lengua sobre el alveolo /s/, /l/, /r/, /rr/, /n/.

Linguopalatales: Cuando se pronuncia con el predorso de la lengua sobre el paladar /ch/, /y/, /ll/, /ñ/.

Linguovelares: Cuando se pronuncia con el dorso de la lengua sobre el paladar, tal como ocurre con la /k/, /g/,/j/.

Cabe señalar, además, algunas particularidades como las que siguen:

Las consonantes /m/, /n/ y /ñ/ pertenecen al grupo indicado como consonantes nasales.

La /s/, además de alveolar (linguoalveolar), es sibilante o silbante.

La /h/ es una consonante muda. Las palabras como "hombre", "Huacho", "huevo", etc., se pronuncian como "ombre", "uacho", "uevo".

La /z/, considerada académicamente como interdental, es alveolar para los hispanoamericanos, pues, la pronunciamos como /s/.

La /l/ y /r/ son consonantes líquidas cuando van precedidas inmediatamente por la consonante denominada licuante. Por ejemplo: Braulio, blanco, el bravo torero, brindo por todos. Observamos aquí que la licuante y la líquida son pronunciadas en una misma articulación.

Lenguaje kinésico

Para lograr una comunicación afectiva se requiere saber que al hablar se producen movimientos que acompañan a la palabra (se mueven la cabeza, brazos, manos, etc.) y que apoyan la intencionalidad del mensaje, este conjunto de movimientos es lo que forma el lenguaje kinésico. Los movimientos, las posturas del cuerpo consciente o inconscientemente conforman el sistema kinésico, comunicando o matizando los discursos. También incluye los movimientos aprendidos, de percepción visual, audiovisual y táctil, que ligados a las combinaciones lingüística y paralingüística poseen valor comunicativo. Se cree que es uno de los más antiguos, probablemente se desarrolló antes que el lenguaje verbal. Varía dependiendo de los factores étnicos y culturales.
Por ejemplo, los japoneses e ingleses lo utilizan en mínimas ocasiones, mientras que los africanos y árabes es frecuente su uso.
Este lenguaje sirve para ilustrar lo que se va diciendo, debido a que los movimientos "marcan" las partes del discurso, se podrían considerar como una especie de "sistema de puntuación" que sirven para ampliar o complementar la intención de comunicación; también indican estos motivos (como ansiedad, tensión, nerviosismo, etc.) y mantienen el flujo de la conversación.

Del cuerpo, el rostro constituye la región más importante en el plano expresivo y comunicativo; constituye el canal preferido para la expresión de las emociones; manifiesta las actitudes interpersonales y produce señales importantes de interacción.

La kinésica diferencia los gestos, las posturas y las maneras:

1. Gestos: Los gestos son los movimientos con la cabeza, la cara, las extremidades, las miradas, ya sean conscientes o inconscientes, o dependientes o independientes del sistema paralingüístico, que se conjugan o alternan con el lenguaje verbal.

2. Maneras: Toser, comer, hablar, son ejemplos de las maneras de cada región. Sean conscientes o dinámicas, son aprendidas socialmente según cada contexto situacional, las cuales se alternan o conjugan con el discurso.

3. Posturas: Las posturas pueden ser estáticas, tienen un factor consciente o inconsciente y se pueden ritualizar, al igual que las maneras. También se utilizan menos en la comunicación.

Para obtener la fluidez cultural no verbal, es necesario dominar éstas tres categorías. Se necesita aprender las maneras y las posturas para añadirlo a los gestos y así poder comunicarnos debidamente. Las tres categorías pueden ser libres o trabadas, esto quiere decir que sólo participan los órganos del emisor de forma independiente, sin contactos con otros ni con recursos objetuales o que los órganos que participan se traban entre sí o entran en contacto con partes del cuerpo con otras personas.

Lenguaje Proxémico

Lo suelen denominar Proxémico o del espacio próximo. El propio nombre lo dice: trata sobre lo que afecta el espacio físico en las relaciones interpersonales y en el individuo en sí mismo.

El objetivo del lenguaje proxémico es variar las actitudes espaciales y las distancias interpersonales en el acto comunicativo. Estas distancias tienen significados culturales determinados, ya que la emisión verbal de ideas y sentimientos puede intensificar o aminorar el sentido del mensaje, de acuerdo a una distancia cercana, media o lejana.

El espacio se divide en dos categorías:

* Fijo: Es el espacio que está marcado por estructuras que no se pueden mover.

* Semifijo: Es el espacio alrededor del cuerpo. Dentro de los diferentes tipos de Espacio se encuentran una serie de Distancias.

Hall, clasifica cuatro tipos de distancia de interacción humana:

1. Íntima: de 46 cm de separación, se utiliza en conversaciones privadas entre amigos cercanos.

2. Personal: de 46 cm a 1.20 m de separación, se usa en conversaciones casuales.

3. Social: de 1.20 m a 3.60 m de separación, se usa en conversaciones impersonales.

4. Pública: más de 3.60 m de separación, se usa en cualquier otro tipo de conversación.

Dependiendo de la cultura, estas distancias pueden variar, siendo más cortas en culturas latinas y más largas en culturas nórdicas.

Esta clasificación obedece a que la seguridad al hablar varía dependiendo del espacio en el que se emita el mensaje.

Por ejemplo, algunos emisores se encuentran incómodos en la interacción pública (en un escenario) o en la social (en una comida con muchos comensales); otros, no soportan el contacto físico.

De acuerdo a la distancia, es la reacción de los sentidos: en una distancia íntima, el calor, el olor y el tacto pueden transmitir información; pero su eficacia disminuye con el aumento de la distancia: a mayor distancia se usa la vista y el oído.

Se ha demostrado que el hombre prefiere la cercanía de individuos que le agradan, como los amigos (en caso contrario, se opta por mayor distancia), esta tendencia se puede explicar por el hecho de que una fuerte cercanía física constituye un modo de invasión del "territorio" del individuo, es por lo que tienden a ser excluidas las personas consideradas hostiles, antipáticas, o con las que se mantienen relaciones exclusivamente formales

La proximidad física es importante con relación a la intimidad y al dominio, como en el caso de la cercanía en el ascensor, por el hecho de ser forzada no contiene significado alguno; mientras que sí lo tendrá, si una persona escoge un lugar cercano a otra, cuando hay otros espacios disponibles.

En resumen, el Lenguaje Proxémico es el lenguaje no verbal que utiliza el espacio físico que les rodea para expresar un mensaje: emisor y receptor organizan sus encuentros y con esas distancias definen su relación interpersonal.

Lenguaje icónico o pictográfico

El lenguaje pictográfico es el que se expresa a través de las imágenes o símbolos, puede representar personas u objetos, pero también ideas o mensajes.

Existen los símbolos convencionales fijos, muchos de ellos tienen significado universal, otros, son exclusivos de las diversas disciplinas, culturas o usos sociales. En matemáticas, los llamados símbolos, son en realidad signos, porque se utilizan a partir de una convención social; el signo = (representa igual), o < > (para indicar mayor y menor que).

Este tipo de lenguaje ha estado presente en las grandes culturas como la olmeca, egipcia, china, etc., incluso algunos símbolos son comunes entre ellas.

Determinados símbolos del lenguaje pictográfico tienen carácter universal, porque sin conocer la lengua se puede emitir mensajes breves por medio de imágenes o gráficos, como en aeropuertos, carreteras, estaciones ferroviarias, etc.

Cualquier signo puede ser clasificado como signo icónico o bien como signo digital. Un signo icónico o no-arbitrario, o representacional o visual es aquel que, como las imágenes, modelos y mapas comparte algún atributo criterial con su referente, la mayoría expresado a través de un isomorfismo del contorno visual. Por el contrario un signo digital o arbitrario, o no representacional o verbal es aquel que no comparte atributos criteriales con los miembros de sus categorías referentes; es arbitrario. Las palabras (lenguaje verbal), números, código Morse y semáforos son ejemplos de ellos. Para interpretar el signo el receptor debe conocer el código.

Variaciones de la Lengua

Como ya se había indicado, una de las funciones de la comunicación es intercambiar con claridad pensamientos o ideas, esto sólo se logra en la medida en que se conozcan los elementos que intervienen en este proceso. Sin duda, uno de ellos, son las variantes que presenta la lengua.

Estas variantes surgen a partir del habla de diversas comunidades sociales, mismas que tienen la necesidad de utilizar vocablos con significado exclusivo en un determinado contexto cultural, a saber:

Un dialecto es una variedad de una determinada lengua que se distingue claramente de aquellas que se emplean en otras zonas geográficas. Es un sistema lingüístico que deriva de otro pero que no exhibe una diferenciación suficiente respecto a otros de origen común. Los dialectos, por lo tanto, suelen ser considerados con relación a un conjunto de varios sistemas lingüísticos de un tronco común o que se encuentran en un mismo límite geográfico. Otra definición de dialecto hace referencia a la estructura lingüística que no alcanza la categoría social de lengua.

Los dialectos están vinculados a la variedad lingüística y, por lo tanto, a la diversidad lingüística. Pese a que se suele considerar al dialecto como una especie de sistema de menor categoría o más simple que una lengua, los dialectos son, en realidad, formas particulares de hablar o de escribir una determinada lengua.

En este sentido, los dialectos pueden surgir por la variedad geográfica. En el caso del castellano, por ejemplo, el dialecto que se habla en España utiliza palabras como "ordenador" o "cerillas", mientras que en América Latina esos términos no se usan (son reemplazados por "computadora" y "fósforos").

Por ejemplo, los habitantes de las islas Canarias suben a la guagua igual que los chilenos, en tanto que los hablantes del español en la península Ibérica lo hacen al autobús. Entre aquellos que hablan el mismo dialecto geográfico, existen otras variedades lingüísticas que dependen de situaciones específicas.

Son palabras y frases de carácter expresivo que emplean en la conversación personas de igual rango o condición, cuyo origen más frecuente suele ser la asociación con otras palabras o la yuxtaposición de imágenes; generalmente tienen una vida más corta que las expresiones habituales del coloquio.

El argot suele ser el fruto de la actividad de un subgrupo social y cultural que está socialmente integrado, lo que lo distingue de la germanía. Son candidatos a crear tanto un argot como una jerga los grupos profesionales, como por ejemplo policías, profesionales de la medicina o de la informática, el deporte o el periodismo; sin embargo aparece un argot con más frecuencia entre minorías sociales diferenciadas como los soldados, los jóvenes, los drogodependientes, los gitanos, los integrantes de cualquier sociedad secreta o secta, e incluso entre los miembros de una confesión religiosa (por ejemplo, los católicos crean el término cardenal para nombrar las manchas moradas de la piel, por ser del mismo color que las ropas que lleva ese alto cargo eclesiástico).

El argot proporciona infinidad de sinónimos para lo más cercano al individuo en su vida común y corriente, por ejemplo, el dinero ( duros, pavos, talegos, pelas, lana, morlacos, pasta o plata, parné, tela, quita, marmaja, mosca, pipiolo, cuartos, reales, pachocha), las partes del cuerpo (cabeza: coco, cholla, melón, coca, calabaza, chola, casco, tatema, calamorra, chirimoya), o la comida ( papa, pipirín, manduca, pitanza, condumio).

Es un lenguaje que emplea un determinado grupo social o profesional y que sólo entiende parcialmente el resto de la comunidad lingüística. Cabe bajo la denominación de jerga o lenguaje específico el léxico que se utiliza en la medicina, el derecho, la banca, la ciencia, la técnica, la enseñanza, los deportes, los espectáculos y el mundo militar.

Las expresiones patología, hematoma y amaurosis son palabras técnicas de la medicina para nombrar la enfermedad, la inflamación y la ceguera respectivamente; cargo, abono, y pliego de condiciones son propias de la economía y las finanzas. Otras actividades, como el deporte o la pesca, tienen expresiones específicas que no están incluidas en el nivel culto de la lengua, aunque sean técnicas y específicas como por ejemplo, larguero o arrastre, una técnica de pesca.

En algunos ambientes delictivos o marginales se utiliza una lengua, llamada también germanía, que suele estar considerada como una jerga y a su vez está vinculada al argot. Palabras como bofia o tira (para nombrar a la policía en España y México, respectivamente), trena o bote (cárcel), tronco o cuate (amigo), parné o lana (dinero), cantoso o balcón (llamativo), son ejemplos que demuestran cómo algunos términos y expresiones llegan a la lengua coloquial y, en general, todo el mundo las comprende.

Son palabras o ideas que tienen significado exclusivo en cada región. Los modismos es algo muy característico de cada país. Son expresiones orales espontáneas que están referidas a una situación en particular.

Es una costumbre lingüística que tiene la función de ahorrar tiempo. Los modismos están presenten en el habla de todo ser humano, y están vigentes en todas las lenguas y países.

Hay quienes a veces confunde modismo con refrán (dicho sentencioso y agudo, de uso común). Para no caer en la confusión hay tres puntos a tener en cuenta:

1. El refrán generalmente tiene rima. Un ejemplo es: juego de manos, juego de villanos.

2. El modismo no educa, el refrán tiene sentido pedagógico.

3. El refrán no tiende a conjugarse mientras que el modismo si.

Ahora veamos algunos ejemplos:

apoliyar - dormir

bulla - hacer ruido

carajo - es un reproche, un llamado de atención

ojo al piojo - tener cuidado

chico - niño

chinita- es una niña, mujer joven

como bola sin manija- es una persona desubicada, que está desorientada

dar más vueltas que un perro para echarse - es una persona que demora mucho para ejecutar una acción, o tomar una decisión

diay papi - un saludo: hola como estás

esta chala - es estar bien

no es soplar y hacer botella - es que lleva trabajo lograrlo: hacerlo, no es fácil

gauchada- es hacer un favor a alguien

lenteja - es una persona lenta en sus acciones

no hagas bulla al pescado - es disimular una situación, no divulgar, no comentar

mecha - cabello

meta - estar de acuerdo, OK

pailas - orejas

palangana - es una persona que le gusta aparentar lo que no tiene o lo que no es

pedigüeño - es una persona que pide todo, y con mucha frecuencia

pichichi - está bien, OK, muy bueno

piola - es guardar un secreto, guardar silencio

susana- joven afeminado, en forma graciosa

Son expresiones de origen dudoso por la imprecisión del significado. El caló ( zincaló o romaní español) es una lengua variante del romaní utilizada por el pueblo gitano, fundamentalmente en España, que no tiene una distribución territorial fija. Encuadrada dentro del grupo septentrional, subgrupo ibérico / occidental del idioma romaní.

Debido a la convivencia, palabras del caló se han incorporado al vocabulario español. El caló puede incluir groserías o "malas palabras", pero también juegos de palabras o disfraces, es decir, claves secretas para que otros no entiendan lo que decimos con otro hablante de caló. Más o menos es el equivalente al slang en inglés.

Ejemplo: Pásame la luz.

La trascendencia del uso de estas formas de expresión es vital cuando se establece comunicación con personas que no pertenecen al mismo grupo cultural o a la misma área geográfica.

Otros ejemplos son:

gachó (de gadjó, "hombre"),

chaval (de chavalé, vocativo de chavó, "chico", originalmente "hijo")

parné ("dinero")

chorar ("robar")

currelar o currar ("trabajar")

fetén ("excelente")

molar ("gustar")

pinrel (de pinré, "pie")

biruji ("frío")

piltra ("cama")

churumbel ("niño, bebé")

sacais ("ojos")

pitingo ("presumido")

camelar ("querer")

chola ("cabeza")

lache ("vergüenza")

galochi ("corazón")

chante, cantón, jaula ("casa")

chupe, pomo ("bebida alcohólica)

nave ("automóvil)

lana, varo, cambio ("dinero)

LEÓN Mejía Alma, Estrategias para el desarrollo de la comunicación profesional, p 11

RICCI Bitti, Pío y Bruna Zani, La comunicación como proceso social, Grijalbo, México, 1994, p 23

VERDERBER Rudolph F., Comunícate, p 91

"Lenguaje." Microsoft® Encarta® 2009 [DVD]. Microsoft Corporation, 2008.

"Argot." Microsoft® Encarta® 2009 [DVD]. Microsoft Corporation, 2008.
http://lengua.laguia2000.com/general/los-tipos-de-lenguaje http://lengua.laguia2000.com/general/el-lenguaje-concepto-y-definicion http://definicion.de/diversidad-linguistica/ http://sisbib.unmsm.edu.pe/bibvirtual/libros/linguistica/leng_ni%C3%B1o/los_elem_fone_leng_verb.htm http://dai2-lenguajenoverbal.blogspot.com/2008/10/leguaje-proxmico.html http://www.network54.com/Forum/20500/message/1158010911/Lenguaje+Proxemico http://www.losrecursoshumanos.com/contenidos/7608-lenguaje-kinesico.html http://www.network54.com/Forum/20500/message/1158010439/lenguaje+iconico http://floresde.wordpress.com/2009/04/13/formas-de-hablar-del-mexicano-el-calo/ http://blogidiomas.com/los-modismos-y-ejemplos-i/ http://blogidiomas.com/los-modismos-y-ejemplos-ii/ http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cal%C3%B3 http://definicion.de/dialecto/

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
El lenguaje: Tipos de lenguaje y variaciones de la lengua

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
El Lenguaje Indiscutiblemente, uno de los elementos básicos de la comunicación es el lenguaje, mismo que comprende el conjunto de símbolos (verbales y no verbales) que utiliza una comunidad o nación para transmitir sus impresiones. El lenguaje, es el medio de comunicación entre los seres humanos a través de signos orales y escritos que poseen un significado....

# data[].attributes.headline
Capítulo 8: El árbol genealógico lingüística de mi familia 

# data[].attributes.subject
Capítulo 8: El árbol genealógico lingüística de mi familia 

# data[].attributes.body
Me

Hannah (born in Austin, Texas)- English dominant Spanish bilingual

Parents

Deborah (born in Portland, Oregon)- English monolingual

Steven (born in Georgetown, Texas)- English monolingual

Paternal Grandparents

Julianne (born in Carrizo Springs, [South] Texas)- English monolingual

James (born in Doucette, [East] Texas)- English monolingual

Maternal Grandparents

Marilyn (born in Burundi, Africa)- English monolingual, grew up speaking some Kirundi, now only English

Harold (born in Portland, Oregon)- English monolingual

Notes:
1. My dad’s side of the family has been in Texas for about 6 generations. To my grandmother's knowledge, they have all been English monolinguals
2. Marilyn's parents were missionaries so she lived in Africa until she was 12. She remembers a few words in Kirundi
3. Harold's grandpa was from Norway, but he only spoke to Harold in English