Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-v9fdk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-08T09:21:46.540Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Explanatory talk in low-income families' mealtime conversations

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 November 2008

Diane E. Beals
Diane E. Beals*
Affiliation:
Washington University
*
Department of Education, Washington University, Campus Box 1183, St. Louis, MO 63130
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The purpose of this article is to outline the types and frequency of explanatory talk that occur in naturalistic conversations of low-income families of preschoolers. Thirty-one families participated in the study, tape-recording family mealtimes when their children were 3, 4, and 5 years old. A total of 75 transcripts were collected and analyzed for the presence of nine categories of explanatory talk, including intentional, causal, evidential, definitional/descriptive, procedural, and consequential. Explanatory talk consisted of conversation concerning some connection between objects, events, concepts, and/or conclusions that one speaker is pointing out to another. The most frequent type of explanations fell into intentional categories, which accounted for more than half of all segments of explanatory talk.

Type
Articles
Information
Applied Psycholinguistics , Volume 14 , Issue 4 , October 1993 , pp. 489 - 513
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1993

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Barbieri, M. S. (in press). The origin of explanations. Contributi di Psicologia, Padova, Italy: CLUEP.Google Scholar
Barbieri, M. S., Colavita, F. & Scheuer, N. (1990). The beginning of the explaining capacity. In Ramsden, G. Conti & Snow, C. (Eds.), Children's language (Vol. 7, pp. 245–272). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Beals, D. E. (1991). “I know who makes ice cream”.: Explanations in mealtime conversations of low-income families of preschoolers. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
Beals, D. E. (1993). Patterns of participation in explanation: A study of conversations in families of preschoolers. Manuscript submitted for publication.Google Scholar
Bernstein, B. (1962). Social class, linguistic codes and grammatical elements. Language and speech, 5, 31–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bernstein, B. (1972). Social class, language, and socialization. In Giglioli, P. P. (Ed.), Language and social context (pp. 157–178). Harmondsworth: Viking Penguin.Google Scholar
Bloom, L. & Capatides, J. B. (1987). Sources of meaning in the acquisition of complex syntax: The sample case of causality. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 43,112–128.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Castro, Campos F., (1988, 09). Dialogic basis for justification constructions in linguistic development [poster]. Presented at the annual conference of the Developmental Section of the British Psychological Society, Coleg Harlech.Google Scholar
Coleman, J. S., Campbell, E., Hobson, C, McPartland, J., Mood, A., Weinfeld, F. & York, R. (1966). Equality of educational opportunity. Washington, DC: U.S. Office of Education, National Center for Educational Statistics.Google Scholar
Dickinson, D. & Tabors, P. (1991). Early literacy: Linkages between home, school and literacy achievement at age 5. Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 6(1), 30–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Donaldson, M. L. (1986). Children's explanations: A psycholinguists study. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hemphill, L. (1986). Context and conversational style: A reappraisal of social class in speech. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Harvard Graduate School of Education, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
Hood, L. (1977). A longitudinal study of the development of expression of causal relations in complex sentences. Unpublished doctoral thesis, Columbia University, New York, NY.Google Scholar
Hood, L. & Bloom, L. (1979). What, when, and how about why: A longitudinal study of early expressions of causality. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 44(6).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keenan, E. & Schieffelin, B. (1976). Topic as a discourse notion: A study of conversation in children and adults. In Li, C. N. (Ed.), Subject and topic (pp. 337–384). New York: Academic.Google Scholar
Landis, J. R. & Koch, G. G. (1977). The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics, 33, 159–174.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
MacWhinney, B. & Snow, C. E. (1990). The Child Language Data Exchange System: An update. Journal of Child Language, 17, 457–473.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McCabe, A. & Peterson, C. (1985). A naturalistic study of the production of causal connectives by children. Journal of Child Language, 12, 145–159.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mish, F. C. (Ed.) (1986). Webster's ninth new collegiate dictionary. Springfield, MA: Merriam-Webster.Google Scholar
National Assessment of Educational Progress (1981). Reading, thinking, writing: A report on the 1979-80 assessment. Denver: NAEP.Google Scholar
National Assessment of Educational Progress (1985). The reading report card: Progress toward excellence in our schools. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.Google Scholar
Piaget, J. (1928). Judgement and reasoning in the child. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
Ricard, R. E. & Snow, C. E. (in press). Language use in and out of context: Evidence from children's picture descriptions. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology.Google Scholar
Sigel, I. E. (1981). Social experience in the development of representational thought: Distancing theory. In Sigel, I. E., Brodzinsky, D. M. & Golinkoff, R. M. (Eds.), New directions in Piagetian theory and practice (pp. 203–217). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Sigel, I. E.(1982). The relationship between parental distancing strategies and the child's cognitive behavior. In Laosa, L. M. & Sigel, I. E. (Eds.), Families - Research and Practice: Vol. 1. Families as learning environments for children (pp. 47–86). New York: Plenum.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sigel, I. E. & McGillicuddy-Delisi, A. V. (1984). Parents as teachers of their children: A distancing behavior model. In Pellegrini, A. D. & Yawkey, T. D. (Eds.), The development of oral and written language in social contexts (pp. 71–92). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
Snow, C. E. (1991). The theoretical basis for relationships between language and literacy development. Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 6, 5–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Snow, C. E., Cancino, H., Gonzalez, P. & Shriberg, E. (1989). Giving formal definitions: An oral language correlate of literacy. In Bloome, D. (Ed.), Classrooms and literacy (pp. 233–249). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
Snow, C. E. & Dickinson, D. K. (1987). A proposal to the Ford Foundation. Unpublished manuscript, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
Snow, C. E., Dickinson, D. K. & Tabors, P. O. (1989). Home-School Study of Language and Literacy Development: A continuation proposal. Unpublished manuscript, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar