baby, thx sto si mi obratila pazju (ovo zaista mislim, nije provokacija).
moja komunikacija na srpskom je prilično ogranicena,retko da komuniciram na srpskom osim pojedinih komentara na tim (fb). ovde dodjem da predahnem što se odrazava na stilistici.
a izgleda da se malo zanesem kada razmišljam na L2 preko L3 pokusavajuci doslovce prevesti na srpski.
„kontenta” je bukvalan prevod sa eng-content, kao i „kontrira”- contra.
da u pravu si da sam mogla drugacije da se izrazim.

(ali opet, zar nije vaznije šta, nego na koji način je receno?)

ja sam ambivalentna kada dodje do chomskog, njegovu teoriju sam spomenula u kontekstu evolucione psihologije koju vanderbilt spomenu. konkretno zelela sam reci kako jedna ideja ima vise tumacenja u raznim disciplinama.
chomski je prilično popularan na mojoj katedri jer je jedan nas profesor bio njegov doktorand pa tako.
inače ja sam sociolingvista, sa usmerenjem na pragmatiku.

danasnji dan je kao uklet, sve neke negativne vibracije,provokacije.

baby, ne znam gde si, i da li znaš, ali juli, 2013, je kongres lingvista u zenevi (u cast 100 god smrti- saussure-a) „the interface lanuage cognition” gde je pocasni gost chomsky.

kod nas je neurolingvistiska prilično jaka,dosta se istrazuje na temu „specific language impairment”, npr „children with language disorders + gestures= semantic development”. nettelbladt, ulrika (nije kod nas,lund) je dosta aktivna u ovoj disciplini primera radi, istrazuje dosta o language disorders kod dece, pragmatic development etc.

jao barili; nisam sigurna da sam bas naj naj ukapirala tvoje pitanje, ali ti ipak odgovaram (uz project runwey) sa par „koemntara” a ti pitaj ako te nešto konkretno interesuje:
elem:
neurolingvistika-proucava delom mozdane strukture koje kontrolisu sposobnost da se razume i producira jezik, delom kako neuroloska ostecenja uticu na ove strukture, i „cilj” je da opise funkcionalnu i neuralnu arhitekturu jezika pomoću studiranja kako normalnih tako i ostecenih funkcija.

neurolingvistika se može opisati i kao mix tri discipline, tako da kao teoretski ram neurolingvistika uzima teorije iz filozofije, psihologije i lingvistike. disciplina ne studira (grubo receno) samo „ jezik i mozdane strukture” već i neverbalnu komunikaciju.inotonaciju, prosodiju,gestikulacija,itd.

veliki deo studija danas se fokusira na poremecaje jezika kao npr autisam, dislexija (koje se smatra urođenim poremecajem); stecenih poremecaja kao sto su afazija, agrafija i još jedan kojeg ne mogu da se setim, studije koje uglavnom baziraju na semantickim i pragmatiskim teorijama i modelima.
ne verujem da si zainteresovana za konkretno koje teorije već te sigurno vise interesuje tipovi poremecaja. navescu par:

- specifican poremecaj: zove se i primaran poremecaj (SLI, specific language impairment).- jezik je primarni problem kod deteta koje inače ima „normalnu” inteligenciju. da bi se definisalo koji poremecaj konkretno, analiziraju se delovi/nivoi jezika; fonologija, semantika, gramatika, pragmatika kao i razumevanje.
- poremecaj u fonologiji: dete ima probleme sa npr pojedinim zvukovima
- poremecaj u sinatksi: dete ima problem sa deklinacijom,poteskoce sa redom u recenici.
- Impresivan poremecaj- dete ima poteskoce da razume reci /recenice ili oboje,
- expresivan poremecaj: dete ima poteskoce sa fonologijom, synatxom..

- poremecaj u pragmatici se pokazuje tako što dete ima problem sa jezikom u socijalnim susretima.sam termin semantic/pragmatic disorder se,pre možda nekih 15-ak godina koristio da opise decu koja nisu spadala u spektar autizma ovaj poremecaj danas je usko povezan sa Asberger´s syndrom kao i autismom. osnovne karakteristike; dete ne razume koncept dijaloga (turn-taking), problem sa svakodnevnim jezikom.
- semantika : dete ima problem da uci kao i poteskoce da razume znacenje reci, problem u razumevanju apstraktnih pojmova.

u proceni kao i u lecenju poremecaja jezika treba se obratiti logopedu.

mnogi roditelji se pitaju da li ucenje dva (ili vise) jezika utice samo procesiranje jezika. da li ih i kako dete drzi odvojeno? postoje tri vrste dvojezicnosti:1)compound-Language 1 i Language 2 se uce istovremeno; 2) coordinated L2 se uci pre puberteta obično u kucnom ambijentu; L3)subordinated tj L1 je dominantan jezik ali L2 je jezik komunikacije, individua razmišlja na L1 ali prevodi na L2.
studije pokazuju da pokazuju da dete generalno kasni sa razvojem jezika, ali su razlike između dvojezicnog i kontrolnog, jako male.

vanderbilt thx,ja pišem - preko L2 - na L3 i vidim da mi se omakne pokoja cudna/smesna/ sintakticki nekorektna konstrukcija.vrlo bitno. zar nije vaznije šta je receno od dlake u lingvistickoj konstrukciji?

al ´ajd, de; onaj ko je shvatio shvatio je,ko nije - nije ni bitno.
ko želi da provocira neka- izvol´te, a oni koji žele da ispravljaju gramaticke greške bujrum!
nadam, što se i pokazuje da ima i kvalitetnih diskutanata koje cene i poznaju koncept kvalitetnog dijaloga.

barili, usudila bih se reći da je to kategorija 1) compound- gde se L1 i L2 uce istovremeno. tako je i kod nas kuci. ja sam konsekventna (fanaticki) da komuniciramo iskljucivo na srpskom, i mom sinu (5god) je L1 definitivno dominantniji,(bolja sintaxa, pragmatika, fond reci etc) ALI - dete ima imput L2 preko druzenja sa L2 grupom dece, vrtica, medija (tv).
kretanjem u skolu L2 će prevladati sto je i razumljivo jer se uce reci pojmovi u drugim sferama. vremenom, ako je roditelj konsekventan i uporan, L1 i L2 bi se trebali ponovo izbalansirati i „izjednaciti”. ti pozuri sa pitanjima ja pocinjem sa predavanjima u martu, pa neće biti bleya na tim kao do sada. (hehe)

Malo duzi text (power point) koji sam koristila na jednom predavanju (ontogeneza decijeg jezika) pre koju godinu. Vrlo koncizno, pregledno ali na engleskom.

Critical Period
1 What is a Critical Period?
- In learning, a critical period (or sensitive period) is a limited period of time in which learning must take place. If learning does not take place then (misses the window), it will not take place (in the normal way).
- Children are exposed to language early in life and proceed in a particular way. - Would they proceed in the same way if they were exposed to language later in life? Not possible (ethical) to investigate experimentally in humans.

-Relevant to issue of innateness of language learning ability, interaction of nature and nurture ! if language-learning proceeds differently given same input, what does that say about the biological basis for learning?

1.1 Non-human animals
• Imprinting: if ducklings aren’t exposed to an adult duck from infancy, take another animal (even-human) to be their „adult”
• Barn Owls: barn owls locate their prey by matching visual input (movement of the mouse) with-auditory input (rustling sound). If either vision or audition is impaired shortly after birth (within-100 days), owl will adjust its degree of head turning (toward sound or visual input) to compensate.
The later the impairment, the less the owl adjusts. If impairment is removed before 200 days of life-(sexual maturity), owl will readjust; again, the earlier the impairment (and the later the removal of-impairment), the more difficult the readjustment. (Knudsen and Knudsen, 1990)

1.2 Humans & Language
Lenneberg (1967):
• noticed that deaf children who had been able to hear language at an early age (before becoming deaf)-were better able to learn to speak than deaf children who had never heard language at all (deaf from-birth).
• Also noticed that children who suffered aphasia (language loss) were better at overcoming their aphasia-than adults who suffered similar loss.
• suggested that there is a critical period for language learning: early toddler years to puberty.

1.2.1 Extreme cases: Genie, Chelsea
Genie (Curtiss, 1977, 1988)
• not exposed to language until age 13 (kept in isolation).
• able to learn lexical items, some limited knowledge of syntax (e.g. NP ! (det) (adj) N, *NP ! N-(adj); PP ! P NP, *PP ! (det) V; V+ing, *N+ing)
• often ungrammatical word order, inconsistent use of morphology (no modals, auxiliaries)
• able to communicate non-linguistically but never learned social conventions like How are you?, Well,
Please, etc.
(1) Applesauce buy store
„Buy applesauce at the store”
(2) Man motorcycle have
„The man has a motorcycle”
(3) Genie full stomach
„I have a full stomach”
(4) Mama have baby grow up
„Mama has a baby who grew up”
(5) Father hit Genie cry long time ago
„When my father hit me, I cried, a long time ago”

Genie did respect verb argument structure in large part:
ball fall floor but not *ball fall book-also she never produced *Genie run Curtiss or *Genie throw-Chelsea (Curtiss, 1988)
• profoundly deaf from birth, assumed by family to be mentally retarded/impaired, so never exposed to-language until age 32.
• when discovered, fitted with hearing aid/amplifier, now able to hear somewhat
• with instruction learned lexical items, some social conventions (hi, how are you?, well, etc.)
• never acquired syntax, even lexical categories; utterances not even semantically clear
• function words present in speech but totally unprincipled
2
• use of extra arguments (didn’t adhere to verb argument structure: airplane fly headache)
• good intonation
(6) The small a the hat
(7) Orange Tim car in
(8) I Wanda be drive come
(9) Breakfast eating girl
(10) They are is car in the Tim

1.2.2 Less extreme cases: deaf populations
Newport (1991) describes studies of deaf signers of ASL who were first exposed to ASL at different ages.group age of first exposurenative learners infancy (parents are deaf)early learners ages 4–6 (at school for the deaf)late learners after puberty (at school for the deaf)
Administered various tests of signing ability to subjects; at test time all had had at least 30 years of daily useof ASL. All signers mastered basic word order, but only native signers mastered morphology. Late signers:inconsistent use of morphology, used whole-word signs with no morphological structure, frozen forms. Earlysigners used morphology better than late signers, but not as well as native signers.

1.3 Second Language
Critical period effects also seen in adult learners of a second language. Johnson and Newport (1989) studiednative Chinese & Korean speakers who had learned English through immersion; immersion occurred fromages 3 to 39. All subjects proficient in English at time of testing.
Age of immersion significantly affected performance on grammaticality judgments task: decline in abilitywhen immersion occurred after age 7 to age 17, then uniformly low. Even late learners mastered word order,
use of -ing (with verbs, not other categories), cf. Genie.

2 Why Does Learning Ability Decline?
Two ideas about why critical period effects occur:
1. The learning mechanism itself changes over time; maturationally declines
(The learning mechanism follows the same declinational curve as learning ability,given age at onset of exposure)
2. The learning mechanism does not decline; other abilities are increasing with age and begin to interfere with efficacy of the learning mechanism in question (e.g. language)

Newport cites evidence in favor of (2): „less is more” ! adult L2 learners appear to be able to handle larger, more complex chunks of language at a time (in repetition tasks, for example), whereas children proceed morpheme-by-morpheme. But adults have trouble breaking down the large chunks into the smaller parts. Adults can handle more at once but this actually blocks them from acquiring all the smaller pieces of grammar. Children can’t handle as much at once so start small; this lets them build up the whole system.
3
References
Curtiss, Susan. 1977. Genie: A psycholinguistic study of a modern-day ‘wild-child’ . New York: Academic
Press.
Curtiss, Susan. 1988. Abnormal language acquisition and the modularity of language. In Linguistics: The
cambridge survey ii. linguistic theory: Extensions and implications, ed. Frederick Newmeyer. Cambridge
University Press.
Emlen, S.T. 1969. The development of migratory orientation in young indigo buntings. Living Bird 8:113–
126.
Johnson, J., and Elissa Newport. 1989. Critical period effects in second language learning: The influence of
maturational state on the acquisition of english as a second language. Cognitive Psychology 21:60–99.
Knudsen, E.I., and P.F. Knudsen. 1990. Sensitive and critical periods for visual calibration of sound localization
by barn owls. Journal of Neuroscience 10:222–232.
Lenneberg, Eric. 1967. Biological foundations of language. New York: Wiley.
Marler, Peter, and S. Peters. 1987. A sensitive period for song acquisition in the song sparrow, melospiza
melodia: A case of age-limited learning. Ethology 76:89–100.
Newport, Elissa. 1991. Contrasting concepts of the critical period for language. In The epigenisis of mind:
Essays on biology and cognition, ed. Susan Carey and Rochel Gelman, 111–130. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum Associates.
4