CRITICAL JOURNAL REVIEW

WHAT YOUNG CHILDREN THINK ABOUT THE

RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN LANGUAGE VARIATION AND
SOCIAL DIFFERENCE

YUDHA PRATAMA NOVARIZAL

1502050204

FACULTY OF TEACHING AND TRAINING EDUCATION

UNIVERSITY OF MUHAMMADIYAH NORTH SUMATERA
2017
 FOREWORD

Praise and gratitude we thank God Almighty for blessing and grace so that we are
still given the opportunity to complete this review with a critical journal titled
“WHAT YOUNG CHILDREN THINK ABOUT THE RELATIONSHIP
BETWEEN LANGUAGE VARIATION AND SOCIAL DIFFERENCE”. Critical
review journals we created to meet the completion of tasks in the course of
development of the syllabus, hopefully this critical review journal can add insight
and knowledge for the readers.
In the critical writing of this review journal, I certainly cannot solve it myself
without the help of others. Therefore, I would like to thank the lecturer, Sir
Mandra Saragih S.Pd. M. Hum.
We realize that critical review journals are still far from perfect word because
there are still many shortcomings. Therefore, we are humbly apologizing and
expecting constructive criticism and suggestions for improvement and refinement
in the future.
Last but not least, I wish to read and hope that the material in critical review
journal in the form of this paper can be useful as it should for the readers.

Medan, March 2019

Yudha Pratama Novarizal

 CHAPTER I
PRELIMINARY

All children encounter tremendous: variation in the language spoken around them.
These differences include: (1) individual variation in language (e.g., each person
has a distinct, recognizable voice); (2) a rich array of differences in register
associated with the speaker's social group (e.g., gender or occupation), social role
(e.g., subordinate), or social context (e.g., school vs. playground); (3) dialect
differences reflecting regional origin or social class of the speaker; and ( 4)
differences in language itself (e.g., English vs. Spanish). Clearly, knowing how an
individual speaks is informative of the sort of person that individual is.
Conversely, knowing the sort of person an individual is provides reliable evidence
about the way that individual is likely to speak.
In this article we examine the associations that young children draw between
differences in language and social kind status. It it plausible that children learn to
map differences in speech and language onto differences in social status through
direct observation; they encounter different kinds of people and different social
statuses among those kinds and note that these differences correlate reliably with
differences in the way people speak.
 CHAPTER II
SUMMARY

A. IDENTYTY OF JOURNAL
TITLE
What Young Children Think About the Relationship Between Language
Variation and Social Difference

RESEARCHER
Lawrence A. Hirschfeld & Susan A. Gelman

AUTHOR INSTITUTION
University of Michigan

B. SUMMARY OF JOURNAL

All children encounter tremendous: variation in the language >:poken around

them. These differences include: (1) individual variation in language (e.g., each
person has a distinct, recognizable voice); (2) a rich array of differences in register
associated with the speaker's social group (e.g., gender or occupation), social role
(e.g., subordinate), or social context (e.g., school vs. playground); (3) dialect
differences reflecting regional origin or social class of the speaker; and ( 4)
differences in language itself (e.g., English vs. Spanish).
Given the range of associations between vanat10n in speech and social kind
status, one major task for children is to determine which features of language are
relevant to which kinds of social distinctions.
In this article we examine the associations that young children draw between
differences in language and social kind status. It it plausible that children learn to
map differences in speech and language onto differences in social status through
direct observation; they encounter different kinds of people and different social
statuses among those kinds and note that these differences correlate reliably with
differences in the way people speak. It is also possible that this process is
facilitated, particularly for contrasts that are rarely encountered, by other, possibly
domain-specific principles.

Children's Understanding of the Relation between Language and Social

Variation
The mapping between language differences and variations among people is
complex and potentially conflicting. Some social groups are slrongly associated
with unique languages (e.g., South Asians and Hindi). Other social groups are
associated with distinctive styles of speech but not unique languages (e.g., older
vs. younger speakers, males vs. females).
Several studies have found that young children understand that different speech
styles are related to variation in context and the social status or social group
membership of speakers and listeners (see Becker, 1982; Sachs & Devin, 1976,
for reviews).
In addition to this knowledge about within-language variation, children
understand that people speak different languages. It is unclear, however, when this
knowledge emerges. We know that even quite young children are sensitive to a
variety of language differences. However, the evidence described above does not
tell us whether children can reflect on their knowledge or can recruit it to make
inferences.
Taken together, this literature indicates that children map language onto certain
social group differences. By preschool age, children map within-language
variation (such as register) onto social group differences (e.g., Andersen, 1990;
Corsaro, 1979). In contrast, children do social group differences until roughly 6
years of age. However, the latter results must be viewed with caution, because two
of the studies examining language differences used categories that children may
not know much about (i.e., nationstates) (Jahoda, 1963; Piaget & Weil, 1951 ).
Clearly, young children's knowledge of language and social kinds is theory-like to
the extent that they can use knowledge of social kind to predict linguistic behavior
and vice versa. A vast literature also suggests that children's knuwlt::dgt: of social
kinds coheres into a rich conceptual system.
Hirschfeld ( l 989b) sketches an explanation of why knowledge of social kinds
and knowledge of language differences may become linked. Reviewing the
literature on such mappings, he proposed that the awareness of multiple languages
derives from knowledge of intrinsic social differences. According to his argument,
the awareness of multiple languages does not emerge out of the child reflecting on
linguistic evidence alone.
In summary, there is ample evidence that during the late preschool years there are
important developments in the several areas of knowledge reviewed above.
First, children become increasingly aware that language variation can predict
variation in a range of social statuses, and vice versa. Second, toward the end of
the preschool years children begin to show a reliable awareness that multiple
languages exist. Third, during this same period children's naive understanding of
society emerges and undergoes substantial development. Fourth, there is anecdotal
support for the claim that by age 5 children can closely articulate their
understanding of language difference with their understanding of social kinds like
nationality and race.

METHOD
Participants

Thirty-six children in three groups participated in the experiment (Group 1: ages

2;7 to 3;4, M = 3;0; Group 2: ages 3;6 to 4;5, M = 4:0; Group 3: ages 4;8 to 5;4, M
= 5;0). All children attended one of two university-affiliated preschools. An
additional 9 children (3;6 to 4;4, M = 4;0) participated in a pretest of the materials.
Twenty-two undergraduates attending an introductory anthropology course also
participated. Information regarding participant race was not obtained. However,
participants were recruited from schools representative of a mid-western
community that is predominantly white.

Materials.
Prior to the main task each participant was presented with a pair of color
drawings depicting a cow and a little boy. In the main task, each participant saw
14 picture sets, each consisting of a pair of color drawings that contrasted on one
of four dimensions.

Discussion
For all three contrasts, participants in all age groups reliably mapped language
differences onto the social contrasts tested (race, clothing, and dwelling). The
results of the control task suggest that 4- and 5-year-olds and adults were not
using a simple strategy of matching nonEnglish to a noncanonical picture (e.g.,
unfamiliar speech [Portuguese] goes with unfamiliar picture [tepee]), because they
were as likely to attribute English as Portuguese to the backward facing pictures
(which are anomalous poses for a portrait). Children in the youngest age group, in
contrast, were more likely to attribute Portuguese to the backward facing person,
and thus we cannot rule out the possibility that they were relying on a simple
strategy for mapping noncanonical items with a foreign language. On the other
hand, one possible n~ason that the 3-year-olds consistently linked language to
front/back on the control task is that they may have some initial understanding
that someone turned away from the listener is less likely to produce intelligible
speech than someone facing the listener. We also do not know if children
distinguish between sorts of social kinds when mapping differences in language to
differences in social kind. Studies 2A and 2B further explore the basis for
children's judgments.
 CHAPTER III
DISCUSSION

a. Implication between theory

The topic of this journal with the author's expertise is very interrelated.
Because, as teachers, we must be able to understand student thinking about
language variations.
Previous work suggests that preschoolers understand that members of
some social groups (e.g .. based on occupation or gender) speak in distinct
ways. But do not understand that members of other social groups (e.g ..
based on race, culture, or nationality) speak different languages. In these
four studies we explored preschool children's inferences about language
and social group membership. In Smdy 1 we found that preschoolers
believed that minority race individuals, people wearing unfamiliar
clothing, or people living in unfamiliar dwellings were more likely to
speak an unfamiliar foreign language than to speak English.

b. Argumentation the writer in introduction

The introduction in this journal is very clearly. The writer explain about all
of the difference in the language, and examine the associations that young
children draw between differences in language and social kind status. How
children match up language and social variation has implication for the
kinds of inferences they make about the diversity in language that they
confront daily.
In this article the writer examine the associations that young children draw
between differences in language and social kind status. It it plausible that
children learn to map differences in speech and language onto differences
in social status through direct observation; they encounter different kinds
of people and different social statuses among those kinds and note that
these differences correlate reliably with differences in the way people
 speak. It is also possible that this process is facilitated, particularly for
contrasts that are rarely encountered, by other, possibly domain-specific
principles.

c. Scope from the theory

Scope from this journal just focus about the language variation and social
difference and how children think about these mappings is informative
both of their understanding of the scope and nature of variation in
language but also the scope and nature of different social kinds.
Several studies have found that young children understand that different
speech styles are related to variation in context and the social status or
social group membership of speakers and listeners In addition to this
knowledge about within-language variation, children understand that
people speak different languages. It is unclear, however, when this
knowledge emerges. We know that even quite young children are sensitive
to a variety of language differences.
In their work, preschool children understood that not all people speak the
same way that animals, plants, and vehicles neither talk like nor speak the
same language as the child; and even that people who speak the same
language may talk differently from one another. However, it was not until
age six that children consistently inferred that people from a different
culture would speak a different language.

d. Method

The writer conducted four studies in order to explore these questions. In

contrast to earlier studies, we focused on younger, preschool-age children.
To clarify the task, the writer used actual speech samples in an unfamiliar
foreign language. In Study l we asked preschoolers to infer the language
 spoken by people varying in race, clothing, and dwelling. Studies 2A and
2B are control studies, examining the limits regarding which social
differences are mapped onto language. Study 3 demonstrates that the
effects of Studies 1, 2A, and 2B cannot be attribute to the intelligibility of
the foreign speech samples. Finally, Study 4 explores whether children
believe that languages and social kinds share a fundamental property that
might account for the robust nature of the cross-domain mappings.

e. Framework of thinking

The writer concerns when children begin to associate distinct languages

reliably with social group differences. Distinct languages are enduring
characteristics, and so provide an opportunity to assess children's beliefs
concerning social groups that are especially stable. A second open issue
concerns the scope of children's understanding. Specifically, which social
categories do children associate with language differences, and to what
extent do children appropriately limit the range of these associations? A
third issue involves which properties of language children rely on when
linking linguistic and social variation. Finally, we do not know what
aspects of language and social kinds children may recruit in mapping
differences in one onto differences in the other.

f. Conclusion and suggestion

In summary, there is ample evidence that during the late preschool years
there are important developments in the several areas of knowledge
reviewed above.
First, children become increasingly aware that language variation can predict
variation in a range of social statuses, and vice versa. Second, toward the end of
the preschool years children begin to show a reliable awareness that multiple
languages exist. Third, during this same period children's naive understanding of
society emerges and undergoes substantial development. Fourth, there is anecdotal
support for the claim that by age 5 children can closely articulate their
understanding of language difference with their understanding of social kinds like
nationality and race.
 CHAPTER IV
CONCLUSION

A. CONCLUSION
Children's responses were scored for whether they reasoned in accord with
the "nature" or "nurture" hypotheses. Participants received a 1 each time
they chose the language that matched the language of the birhth parents,
and 0 each time they chose the other language. If children's inductions are
not governed by an expectation that the language a child will speak is
fixed at birth, they should reason that the child will speak the language of
her adoptive parents. Conversely, if they expect that language spoken is a
natural property fixed at birth, they should infer that the child will come to
speak the language of her birth parents. By 5 years of age, children clearly
favor the ''nature" hypothesis, with over 2/3rds of these older preschoolers
choosing the language of the birth parents (M = .69, t(3 l) = 2.25, p < .05).
Three-year-olds, in contrast, chose at random (M = .41).
These results provide a potential explanation for the early willingness to
map language onto race and cultural groups (as marked by climbing and
dwelling). Young children may treat all of these as "natural" groupings. As
already observed, a hallmark feature of a naturalized kind is the
expectation that the essential character= of the kind is fixed at birth and
largely impervious to environmental conditions. Older preschoolers'
expectation that children will speak the language of their biological
parents despite being raised from birth by another couple that speaks
another language, accord with the claim that children believe that language
is also natural (i.e., fixed at birth and impervious to many environmental
influences).