Psycholinguistic Assignment A study of children language development

Introduction
Interest in language especially of the children has become a central concern of contemporary psychology. This interest is somewhat surprising, because everyone recognizes the enormous complexity of language use and language development in the child. In spite of a widespread recognition that there is little hope of having a complete theory of these matters at any time in the near future, a general air of activity and in some cases of optimism prevails about the progress being made. For example, it is now possible to cite a fairly large number of references in the literature on almost any aspect of language development in the child, ranging from phonology to semantic comprehension, with probably the largest number of studies being on the syntactical or grammatical development of children’s language. It is surely in this area that the most progress has been made over the past decade or decade and a half.
I have been involved in several such grammatical studies myself (Suppes, Smith, & Léveillé, 1990)’ and I believe in the intrinsic merit of the diversified work that is going on all over the world. On the other hand, I do feel that too great an emphasis has been placed on grammar or syntax, and too little on semantics. I want to try to help redress the balance by making the case for an intensive study of the semantics of children’s speech. I shall be especially concerned to argue that there are as many conceptual and technica1 tools available for semantically analysis as there are for syntactical analysis, but as yet these tools are less familiar to psycholinguists and to psychologists in general than is the concept of a generative grammar.
Moreover, psychologists have developed a habit of listening to the latest word from linguists on syntactical matters, and to some extent this has transferred to semantics. Part of my paper is that while linguists have had little of interest to say about semantics, there is a deep and conceptually rich tradition in logic and philosophy that can be used for the semantically analysis of children’s speech and that can provide a body of methods and concepts appropriate to the task. Based on Frege (1992) in semantically sometime the parent implies have a divide meaning. Parents always make a children confuse about altogether learn two word.
Children always learn a new word as noun combining with color as adjective. Whereas, word and color very different in formed. But the relationships between word and color very close because children will understand a new word that introduce to them. Many parents as a teacher that influencing development of children language always use this format for teach vocabulary for children. If the parents use flash card, they always take a relationship between colors and word that want to introduce to their children. So based on the reasons the writer want to analyze the way of parents introduce a new word to their children use flash card because Treat children as if they are conversationalists, even if they are not yet talking. Children learn very early about how conversations work (taking turns, looking attentively, using facial expressions, etc.) as long as they have experiences with conversing adults. Of course this paper will use Frege semantic Theory too to analyze a meaning.





Analysis
Parents need to remember that language in the great majority of individuals develops very efficiently. Adults should try not to focus on "problems," such as the inability to pronounce words as adults do (for example, when children pronounce r's like w's). Most children naturally outgrow such things, which are a tiny segment of the child's total repertoire of language. However, if a child appears not to hear what others say to her; if family members and those closest to her find her difficult to understand; or if she is noticeably different in her communicative abilities from those in her age range, adults may want to seek advice from specialists in children's speech, language and hearing.
Understand that every child's language or dialect is worthy of respect as a valid system for communication. It reflects the identities, values, and experiences of the child's family and community.
Treat children as if they are conversationalists, even if they are not yet talking. Children learn very early about how conversations work (taking turns, looking attentively, using facial expressions, etc.) as long as they have experiences with conversing adults. For example:
M : ini nak, warna apa?
P : warna ku..ku..
M : warna apa? Warna ku..kuning..
Ini ini..
P : apa ini nak?
M : apa ini?
D : anjing.
M : anjing. Kaya punyae siapa seh anjingnya? Ha? Itu kaya punyae siapa? Situ ya? Situ ya? Orang depan situ ya?
P : kaya punyae tante ya. Warnae apa anjing itu?
M : iya, anjinge warna apa?
D : putih.
Encourage interaction among children. Peer learning is an important part of language development, especially in mixed-age groups. Activities involving a wide range of materials should promote talk. There should be a balance between individual activities and those that nurture collaboration and discussion, such as dramatic play, block-building, book-sharing, or carpentry. If we notice, usually, adults always give achievement when children learn a new language. For example:
Example 1
A : nanti Daffa kalo mau dikasih ini (showing a gift).
F : hayoo..warnanya apa?
A : maen dulu..hayoo main dulu..
M : ini warna apa? Pusnya warna apa?
F : co..
D : coklat.





Example 2
F : Horee..Daffa pinter. (clap his hands with others did the same).
M : ini warna apa?
D : item.
M : pinter.
F : (clap his hands) pinter..

Remember that parents are the chief resources in language development. Children learn much from their, but adults are the main conversationalists, questioners, listeners, responders, and sustainers of language development.
After we analyze how parents teach a child a new language, we will analyze semantically imply of the parents, if the parents combining a new word and color, at the reality parent want teach color or new word because child can confusing about imply of parent. For example
Example 1
M : ini apa sich? Jawab aja lo warna apa?
F : da...dasi
D : dasi
M : warnanya?
D : coklat
Example 2
M : nah, ini lho le..le..ini ini apa neh?
P : itu apa tuh?
D : meong.
M + F : warnanya?
D : item.
M : mana item nak ah? He dilihat lo..daffa..
Many people always use this combining of color and new word although that way can make a children confuse. Semantically way of the parents divided into two teach about a color and teach about a new word as noun. So if the parents want to teach children, they must divide what they want to share to children about color or new word as noun.
Conclusion
For teach a new word for children we always know about a habit of the children because if we know about that we can teach a new language easily. Parents it self are the chief resources in language development. Children learn much from their, but adults are the main conversationalists, questioners, listeners, responders, and sustainers of language development. Usually, adults always give achievement when children learn a new language. A reason of this way is when a child gets achievement from their parents from their effort the will feel happy and keep they moving on to learn the new language.
In semantic, parent must divide the aim of teach a new word. because if the parent teach a children color as adjective and word as a noun a child will confusing about the material. If the parents was divided the way to teach, the children will understands what a parents imply very easily and a children can understand a new word easily.

Transcript
Daffa and mom
D: daffa
M: mom
F: father
A: aunty
D : merah muda.
M : mana? Merah muda sama apa?
D : hijau.
M : mana hijau? Ini hijau. Yang ini ini ini warna apa? Ha?
D : merah muda.
M : ini nak, warna apa?
P : warna ku..ku..
M : warna apa? Warna ku..kuning..
Ini ini..
P : apa ini nak?
M : apa ini?
D : anjing.
M : anjing. Kaya punyae siapa seh anjingnya? Ha? Itu kaya punyae siapa? Situ ya? Situ ya? Orang depan situ ya?
P : kaya punyae tante ya. Warnae apa anjing itu?
M : iya, anjinge warna apa?
D : putih.
M : nah, ini ayam apa le?
D : ayam jago.
M : kaya punyae sapa? Mbak sapa? Ha?
D : (play with a biscuit in his hand)..
M : ini kaya punyae sapa? Ayam jagonya kaya punyae sapa? Sapa? Yang di Ngawi mbak sapa?
P : yang di Ngawi sapa namanya?
U : om iwan.
D : om iwan.
M : nah, ini lho le..le..ini ini apa neh?
P : itu apa tuh?
D : meong.
M + F : warnanya?
D : item.
M : mana item nak ah? He dilihat lo..daffa..
F : warnanya apa?
M : warnanya apa? Hei hei ini loo..
F : wah, gitu yo dikei panganan.
A : nanti Daffa kalo mau dikasih ini (showing a gift).
F : hayoo..warnanya apa?
A : maen dulu..hayoo main dulu..
M : ini warna apa? Pusnya warna apa?
F : co..
D : coklat.
M : coklat.
F : Horee..Daffa pinter. (clap his hands with others did the same).
M : ini warna apa?
D : item.
M : pinter.
F : (clap his hands) pinter..
M : ne apa neh? Ha?
M : ini apa? Ini apa le?
D : kalong
M : kalong...kok kalong sih
F : warnanya merah
M : hah..warnanya apa? (take the biscuit from daffa)
F : warnanya apa?
M : hah...warnanya apa?
F : apa?
D : coklat
M : warna coklat
M : ini gambar apa?
F : rok
D : rok
M : rok
D : roknya mba ani
M : kalau yang ini
D : baju
M : warnanya apa?
D : biru
M : biru
M : ini...ini
F : warnanya apa? Itu warnanya apa?
D : kursi
M : kok kursi dek...
F : tas itu lo bukan kursi...tas ya
D : tas
F : warnanya apa?
A : tas pinggang
D : coklat
M : ini?
D : baju merah
F : itu?
M : ini?
D : baju
M : baju...warnanya apa?
F : bingung
D : bingung
All : (laugh)
F : hore tepuk tangan (clap hands)
F : sama ayah..sama ayah
A : sama mama aja
M : o sama mama aja...
M : ini gambar apa?
D : kodok
A : bison
F : bison
D : bison
M : ini…kaya gambarnya apa?
F : di liat gambarnya
D : payung
M : kok payung
F : da…
M : ini apa sich? Jawab aja lo warna apa?
F : da...dasi
D : dasi
M : warnanya?
D : coklat
F : coklat hore (clap hands)
M : ini?
D : itu
M : hah?
D : kepiting
M : kepiting
A : kepiting pinter
M : ini,,,ini opo yo?
F : trenggiling
D : trenggiling
M : ini nak?
A : burung
D : burung
M : iya burung apa? Hantu
D : hantu
F : pinter hore (clap hands)
D : hore…(clap his hands)
M : ini…ini?
F : apa itu?
F : gak tau dia
M : sandal
D : sandal
A : trompah
F : klopen
M : ini?
A : salamander
D : buaya
M : kok buaya sich
A : salamander
M : salamander
D : selemendel
ALL : salamander (laugh)
M : ini?
D : baju
M : warna apa?
D : biru muda
M : ow biru muda
M : ini nak...ikan apa?
D : ikan burung
All : ikan burung (laugh)
M : ikan pari
M : ini..ini...ini
F : ini apa?
D : rusa
A : makan apa?
M : makan apa rusa e?
D : rumput.



References
 FREGE, G. Begrifschrift: Eine der arithmetischen nachgebildepe Formalsprache des reinen Denkentls. Halle, Germany. L. Nebert, 1992.
 Suppes, Smith, & Léveillé, 1990 the French syntax and semantic of Philippe Part I: Noun phrases. Tech. Rep. 195, Institute for Mathematical Studies In the Social Sciences. Stanford University. Stanford, Calif.