AII'll][EQUILIIIIIL ”may Michigan State University This is to certify that the dissertation entitled WORD FREQUENCY COUNT IN "SPONTANEOUS" CONVERSATIONS OF FIVE YEAR OLD KUWAITI ARABIC SPEAKING CHILDREN presented by Isea Mohammad Jasem has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for Ph.D. degeehl Teacher Education 6)? é/J/Zwém , J Major professor Roy Wesselman Dam July 20, 1984 mum-nun . . .3 m” A . ...I 012771 MSU LIBRARIES ‘3'“. RETURNING MATERIALS: Place in book drop to remove this checkout from your record. FINES will be charged if book is returned after the date stamped below. ' WORD FREQUENCY COUNT IN "SPONTANE OUS" CONVERSATIONS OF FIVE YEAR OLD KUWAIT] ARABIC SPEAKING CHILDREN by Iesa Mohammad Jasem AN ABSTRACT OF A DISSERTATION submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHIL OSOP HY Department of Teacher Education 198‘; ABSTRACT WORD FREQUENCY COUNT IN "SPONTANEOUS" CONVERSATIONS OF FIVE YEAR OLD KUWAITI ARABIC SPEAKING CHILDREN by Iesa Mohammad Jasem The purpose of the study was to identify the words most frequently used in oral conversation by five year old Kuwaiti Arabic speaking children. The study recorded spontaneous oral vocabularies of Kuwaiti Arabic speakers who are in the second year in the public kindergarten. It consisted of the following objectives: 1. identifying the words most frequently used by all subjects and determining if there are significant differences when grouped by sex, parental educational background, and chronological order; 2. identifying the types of words used by all subjects and determining if there are significant differences when grouped by sex, parental educational background, and chronological order; and 3. identifying the types of sentences most frequently used by all subjects and determining if there are significant differences when grouped by sex, parental educational background, and chronological order. The review of literature focused on three areas: I. vocabulary development with kindergarten groups and language development in "spontaneous" speech production, 2. photographic pictures as an oral language stimulant, and 3. information describing the Arabic language. —>——- -. .‘.,;._g,_ _- 3.2.3.10; .-..-.s~_' ' Iesa Mohammad Jasem A sample of 60 Kuwaiti children was selected, the p0pulation representing three groups of children from three different parental educational backgrounds: illiterate, parents who have schooling between sixth grade and the completion of twelfth grade, and parents who have schooling beyond high school. These three educational background levels represent both sexes and chronological order in the family-~an older sibling or younger sibling. The study used black and white and colored photographic pictures, size 40 x 60 centimeters, developed by the researcher, and designed to stimulate speech production. Nine cue questions were deveIOped for each of ten pictures. A pilot study was conducted to find the best five pictures for the study. The purpose of this study was to identify the words most frequently used by five year old Kuwaiti Arabic speaking children in oral communication. A multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) plus analysis of variance (ANOVA) were computed to test the nine hypotheses. The overall MANOVA revealed no significant differences for the main effect of variables of sex, parental educational background, and chronological order for all measures: nouns, verbs, particles, locals, foreign words, and nominal and verbal sentences. The interactions were subjected to a MANOVA test and revealed that sex by order was the only interaction that showed a significant difference. Younger female siblings scored higher in frequency and diversity of vocabulary than older sibling females or older or younger sibling males. DEDICATION To the children who contributed. To my mother Zanab for her love and prayers, and to my brother Ahamad and sisters Maryam, Lateafa, and Suhayla for their hopes and dreams. To my wife Fahema and my daughters Zanab and Thakryat for their love and patience. To the friends whose support made by education possible. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This work would not have been completed without the support and help of many individuals. It is with my sincerest appreciation that I acknowledge the following people: Dr. Roy Wesselman, committee chairperson, who cared and looked out for me for seven years and always will. Through modeling, he taught me the joy of being a learner and gave me the support and freedom to pursue the study in my own ways and needs. He also gave me his time, knowledge, and expertise; Dr. George Sherman, committee member, who provided great assistance and whose gentle manner and belief in me were very important; Dr. Ben Bohnhorst, committee member, who gave very useful advice and from whom I learned so much. His love, with warm hugs and caring, has nurtured my life and my career; Dr. Lois Bader, committee member, whose professional advice and encouragement provided help when I needed to complete this study; Dr. Yvonne Waskin, who offered her most genuine moral support and advice in the beginning of this study; All my gratitude to Dr. Jean LePere, bless her soul, for her support and for the faith and self-confidence she created in me; and The Kuwait Foundation for Advancement of the Sciences, who cared about the study and gave financial support when it was critically needed. iii Special thanks are extended to: l. 5. Assistant Minister, Ministry of Education, and Kindergarten Department for their understanding and permission; Principals, counselors, and teachers who gave freely of their time and themselves; Abduleghaffar El-Dammatty for his grammatical advice and Melody Pierce and Mohammad Boughath for their help and support; Randy Fotio and Rafa Kasim from the Office of Research Consultation for their statistical help and advice; and Barbara Reeves for her fine typing, revisions, and valuable advice. My great thanks and appreciation to all my friends and my family members who might not see their names on these lines. To all who are in my life and in my heart forever, to people who left behind a nice smile or a single word of faith and encouragement. TABLE OF CONTENTS List of Tables vii List of Figures ix CHAPTER I: THE PROBLEM I Need for the Study 1 Summary 3 CHAPTER II: THE REVIEW OF LITERATURE 4 "Spontaneous" Speech Production 8 Pictures as an Oral Language Stimulant 9 Information Describing the Arabic Language 12 Verbs ill Nouns 14 Particles 15 Adjectives l6 Adverbs 17 Pronouns l7 Arabic Syntax 18 CHAPTER III: RESEARCH DESIGN 19 The Population 19 Instrumentation 22 Procedure 27 Classification 30 Rating Procedures 30 Data Processing 31 Treatment of Data 31 Limitations of the Study 31 Definition of Terms 32 Summary 32 CHAPTER IV: PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS OF DATA Hypotheses and Statistical Data Hypothesis One Hypothesis Two Hypothesis Three Hypothesis Four Hypothesis Five Hypothesis Six Hypothesis Seven Hypothesis Eight Hypothesis Nine Summary CHAPTER V: CONCLUSIONS, DISCUSSION, AND RECOMMENDATIONS Introduction Conclusions Discussion Recommendations for Future Research Appendices Bibliography 70 131 LIST OF TABLES Range, Mean, and Standard Deviation of Subjects‘ Chronological Age (in months) Median, Range, Mean, and Standard Deviation of Parents' Age Parents' Occupations Number of Children in Subjects' Families Children's Positions in Their Families Results of Pilot Study of Raw Numbers of Words for Each Picture Multivariate and Univariate Analysis of Variance for Frequency of Words Used by All Subjects Means and Standard Deviations of Word Frequency for Males and Females Number of Words Frequently Used by All Groups in the Study Means and Standard Deviation of Word Frequency for Educational Background Group Means and Standard Deviations of Word Frequency for Chronological Order Groups Multivariate and Univariate Analysis of Variance for Diversity of Words Used by All Subjects Means and Standard Deviations of Diversity Words by Sex for Males and Females Number of Words Diversely Used by All Subjects Means and Standard Deviations of Diversity Words for Parents' Educational Background Levels Means and Standard Deviations of Diversity Words for Chronological Order: Older Sibling and Younger Sibling 4:" “In 20 21 21 22 22 21+ 36 37 39 1+1 42 44 46 47 1&8 49 21. 22. 23. Number of Total Running Words Used by All Subjects Multivariate and Univariate Analyses of Variance for the Types of Sentences Used by All Subjects Means and Standard Deviations of Type of Sentences for Male and Female Groups Numbers of Types of Sentences Made by All Groups in the Study Means and Standard Deviations of Type of Sentences for the Three Parental Educational Background Groups Means and Standard Deviations of Types of Sentences for Chronological Order viii 51 52 53 54 55 56 LIST OF FIGURES Comparison of the means of interaction by sex by chronological order 38 Comparison of the means of interaction of sex by chronological order #5 ix CHAPTER I THE PROBLE M There is an increasing interest in the speaking vocabulary of children. The relationship between speech development and reading achievement is evidenced either directly or indirectly from a number of significant investigations (Loban, 1963; Strickland, 1962; Cooke, 1971). Loban concluded that competence in spoken language appears to be a necessary base for competence in reading. No information or study is available about the spontaneous oral vocabulary of Kuwaiti Arabic speakers in kindergarten or other levels. There is a lack of agreement among Kuwaiti Arabian educators, textbooks, writers, and book publishers regarding the vocabulary used by preschool and early elementary school children. The oral language development of Kuwaiti children needs to be carefully assessed to provide this needed information. Need for the Study There is a great need to identify the words most frequently used by five year old Arabic speaking children in Kuwait and to determine the types of words of different groups according to their sex, parental educational background, and chronological order. The study can contribute to the language development of children in general. Hopefully, it will prove to be of value to those who produce and use written materials for early elementary aged children. Vocabulary selection largely determines the content and organization of a language manual for beginners. It may be possible to draw conclusions concerning the extent to which the textbooks and other instructional materials used in schools contain vocabulary that is within the reach of the students or whether it is beyond their usual understanding. The teaching of language as a static thing, as something that has a single form, and as something apart from the social language development of the child has often occurred in underdeveloped countries such as Kuwait. "Research evidence strongly supports the viewpoint that the quality of a child's early linguistic environment is the most important external factor affecting the rate of language development" (Carroll, 1960, p. 749). Thus, word frequency data can be of assistance in evaluating the usage of particular words in teaching language in schools. It is also useful in the selection of a basic vocabulary list which is common to children regardless of their backgrounds. It may help teachers to organize their vocabulary knowledge and language comprehension curriculum for their students. "A systematic examination of the semantic variable of word frequency offers much promise for increasing reading comprehension and for developing instructional strategies to teach reading to children" (Marks, Doctorow, 6c Wittrock, 1974, p. 259). Frequency word data can often be of assistance in evaluating the usage of particular words. It is clearly related to the appraisal of readability level, of difficulty of reading materials for measurement of readability, and will be useful for diagnosing reading problems and for remediation plan for disabled students in reading (Klare, 1968; Graves, 1980). In summary, information on the growth of vocabulary in the early years of Kuwaiti children is needed. This study concerns itself with the oral vocabulary production of five year old Kuwaiti children. Factors selected for study were sex, parents' educational background, and chronological order. The study consists of these objectives: 1. identifying the words most frequently used by all subjects and determining if there are significant differences when grouped by sex, parental educational background, and chronological order; 2. identifying the types of words used by all subjects and determining if there are significant differences when grouped by sex, parental educational background, and chronological order; and 3. identifying the types of sentences most frequently used by all subjects and determining if there are significant differences when grouped by sex, parental educational background, and chronological order. Summary In this chapter, the problem, need for the study, and objectives of the study were presented. In Chapter II, literature related to the study as well as pertinent research will be reviewed. Chapter 111 comprises a description of the methodology and design used in the study. Chapter IV presents the analysis and findings of the study; and in Chapter V, conclusions, discussions, and recommendations for future research will be presented. CHAPTER II THE REVIEW OF LITERATURE Growth in the speech of young children has been studied by a number of investigators in this country and other parts of the world. One of the early speaking vocabulary studies was done by Modorah Smith in 1926. She found the speaking vocabulary to consist of 876 words at three years to 2,562 at six. Her findings have been widely applied. In the 19505 Loban found that at kindergarten level, subjects varied in vocabulary from 180 to about 3000 words with 2000 words as the average of most studies (Loban, 1963). Children have tremendous practice with spoken language, and they have developed much vocabulary before they receive any formal instruction. By the time the children start school, they have already mastered oral language, to a great extent by using the correct sound system, grammar, and extensive vocabulary. Studies by Loban and Strickland confirm that language patterns of children are largely set by the time they reach school. Some children have had a rich language environment and many experiences, while others have had poor backgrounds. Some talk in a grown-up manner and others have immature speech. Speaking, listening, reading, and writing are interrelated, and these skills are developed as the child participates in many varied activities thoroughout the day at home as well as at school. Leeper (19M) and Crosby (I964) believe that speaking serves as a base for reading and writing and furnishes a rich background of meaning for written and printed symbols. In considering speaking as one of the language arts, the speech is considered crucial and an important aspect for research. Speech is a barometer ll of the maturation of a child's linguistic skills, and is considered to be a prerequisite to all other language activities (Cooke, I971; Lasky 6c Klopp, 1982). A number of researchers indicate that oral language development serves as the underlying base for the development of reading and writing achievements, the child's ability to comprehend written materials through reading and an understanding of sentence structure, therefore expressing him/herself through written and verbal communication (Sanford, 1942; Weir, 1962; Cowe, 1970; Cooke, 1971; Leeper, 1971+; Groff, 1982). Language development appears directly related to the child's maturity in the speaking and listening phases of language development. "A systematic examination of the semantic variable of word frequency offers much promise for increasing reading comprehension and for developing instructional strategies to teach reading to children (Marks, Doctorow, dc Wittrock, 197%. In a non-linear way, comprehension often depends upon knowing specific words in sentences, words that have important, integral messages within themselves. Researchers need to study the vocabulary of students who do poorly as compared to those who do well in school (Graves, Boettcher, Peacock, 6c Ryder, 1980; Groff, 1982). Research evidence supports that there are some external factors which play an important role in the development of quality and quantity to geographical differences within the language community and to differences in socioeconomic status (Smith, 19%; Carroll, 1960, 1967; Dickie 6c Bagur, 1972). "Research evidence also strongly supports the viewpoint that the quality of a child's early linguistic environment is the most important external factor affecting the rate of language development" (Carroll, 1960, p. 7N9). The teaching of language as a static thing, as something that has a single form, and as something apart from the social, language development of the child has too often occurred in underdeveloped countries such as Kuwait. Sanford's report (194142) pointed out that verbalizations reveal consistent and repeating patterns of behavior from day to day and that personality is reflected in the manner of speaking as well as in the content of the speech. The speech patterns of the child from less-favored economic or cultural environments are different from and often conflict with language in the school (Leeper, Dale, Skipper, 6c Witherspoon, 19M). Some countries spend more money to support research and programs for children from low-income families because the language used by these children as language usage skills are considered a prerequisite for school success. Other researchers question properly the school program in contrast to the child's language. "The child's natural language often dynamic, descriptive and forceful is frequently not the language of acceptability in the school. Aware of the rejection of his natural language, the child is nevertheless unskilled and inexperienced in using the standard, informal English of the school" (Crosby, 1964, p. 5). Therefore, language programs need to consider the child's natural language and the influence of the environment on the child's language development. Teaching a native language is not the same as teaching a foreign language to a child. Early language development is influenced by environment, especially by family influence. Comparison among children from different family backgrounds reveals that children from more favored environments use more words meaningfully at earlier ages. Templin (1957) found consistent differences in the language performance of children from upper and lower socioeconomic levels. Loban (1963) pointed out that it is entirely possible that language proficiency may be culturally determined. "If children at the least-favored socioeconomic levels experience a restricted language environment that stresses only limited features of their language potential, they might be at a disadvantage in school and in the world beyond school" (Loban, 1963, p. 89). Robbins' (1971) study compared the language abilities of children from upper and lower socioeconomic levels on elements other than those found in standard English. His findings support the view that there are no significant differences between the language abilities of low and high socioeconomic children when nonstandard language criteria are used. A. D. Edwards (1982) revealed that language use is socially determined and that language style and form can never be separated from the social context in which language is being used. But over the studies as a whole, there was no statistically significant social class difference in range of vocabulary or grammatical complexity, and the few differences that do appear were reduced or vanished when the task constraints were most stringent. Differences in the same children's speech across a range of communicative tasks were far greater than differences between groups, and the lower working class children made no less adjustment to the tasks requiring more precise and verbally-explicit forms of speech" (p. 515). Several studies indicate that single and older children in the family seem to have the advantage probably because of greater opportunity for association with adults. Cowe (1970) recorded the conversation of kindergarteners in nine activities and found that adult participation, a concrete topic of conversation, and physical arrangements seem to influence the children. There is no overriding theory related to the sibling relationship because sibling relationships are intense, complex, and of infinite variety. There are more than a few simple factors which might affect sibling interactions: sibling sex, birth order, age differences, number of children, number of adults in the family, and others (Templin, 1957; Leeper, Dale, Skipper, a Witherspoon, 1974; Cowe, 1970). The number of children in the family affects the growth of vocabulary. "The experiences of children living in larger families that offer richer possibilities for cross-age alliances may not be comparable to those of sibling dyads" (Norman 6: Jackson, 1982, p. 357). Other studies (Cicirelli, 1967; Abramovitch, Corter, 6c Lando, 1979; Abramovitch, Corter, dc Pepler, 1980) revealed other trends indicating that younger children imitate much more than older ones and that later-born children benefit from the stimulation of older siblings. In other studies, Cicirelli (1967, 1973), Lamb (1978), and Abramovitch, Corter, and Pepler (1980) found that the younger children observe their older siblings, particularly in language. Scores were enhanced by the presence of a female sibling. Older sisters would be more likely to act as models than older brothers. Most of the studies comparing males and females in speech (Smith, 1926; Templin, 1957; Olson, 1965; Cameron, 1980) showed a slight difference in favor of females. Olson, in comparing the growth curves in language for boys and girls from the same family, found that age for age, the girls regularly exceeded the boys. Templin found differences between the sexes less pronounced. Many believe today that the differences are not due only to sex or maturity but also to environmental influences. "Spontaneous" Speech Production Researchers of speech production commonly refer to speech elicited by some stimulate provided by the researcher as spontaneous speech production. Studies on spontaneous speech production used different kinds of methods and techniques with their subjects, and most researchers encouraged conversations by using a variety of conditions including pictures, film, toys, stories, or the playground. Some recorded conversation between their subjects and others, such as parents, teachers, and peers (Smith, 1926; Jones a Wepman, 1966; Garvey 6c Dickstein, 1972; Garcia-Salas, 1977; Esposito, 1979). Garcia-Salas (1977) used the technique "show and tell." Children would bring objects or share experiences with their classmates and other adults. The researcher used a leading question if the subject's conversation seemed to lose strength. Jones and Wepman (1966) used the Thematic Apperception Test in their study "Spoken Word Account to Adults." Smith (1926) recorded the 88 children during an hour of free active play with other children. Pictures as an Oral Language Stimulant For the purposes of this study, pictures were used to elicit oral speech production. Pictures are as old as history. Pictures have been as common as the wheel and fire in the past, and today they are more common than ever--in magazines, textbooks, outdoors, as signs and advertisements, and in our homes as entertainment. Pictures are important for economics, science, communication, and education. Pictures give us information, let us recognize details, and are more meaningful than the language that describes them (Amen, 1941; Kennedy, 1974). Pictures are aesthetic or expressive and more useful for telling the observer about the location, shape, color, size, and details of an object or scene. Pictures can be attractive and provocative; that is, they can give pleasure and give the viewer a sense of awe. Pictures can fascinate and stimulate imagination. We tell stories about photographs. We use pictures in books to attract the reader's attention, to inform the reader about the content, give him/her an efficient way to recall content, and to enable a background of associations about it (Aliotti a Blanton, 1969: Kennedy, 1974; Stewing, 1975). Ilb. .. 10 Pictures are used as subjects or as methods in many investigations, as discussed by Gibson (1954), Smith (1958), Smith and Smith (1961), Travers and Alvarodo (1970), Higgin (1978), and Silvern (1978). This study will use pictures to elicit speech production. Pictures are used in a number of tests such as the Murray Thematic Apperception Test, in connection with the study of personality differences revealed in apperceptive responses, and in projective methods for the study of personality. The pictures were prepared not as items for the measurement of mental ability, but with the purpose of providing materials relevant to an "individual's private world of meanings, significance, pattern, and feelings." Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test gives more general ideas of a child's functioning verbal IQ quickly and without the child's needing to talk. Brody and Legenza (1979) found that parents and teachers frequently remark that their children can see things in a picture of which an adult would never think, and parents have found that children enjoy seeing and recognizing the same pictures again and again. Children in the two to seven year age range represent a large proportion of the wider population of children for whom pictures and picture books are especially significant and toward whom the bulk of pictorial products are directed. Pictures are an excellent means for introducing children to a wide range of experiences; they are tangible, can be discussed in details, and children have a desire to devote time to sit and look at them with thoroughness and intensity (Stewing, 1975). For a long time, the expressive skills of children or their preferences for one kind of design or another were the topics that attracted research and especially a sudden rise in the interest in children's perceptions of pictures. Most studies (O'Connor 6c Hermelein, 1961; Hochberg 6: Brooks, 1962; Stone dc Church, 1973; Hoffman, 1971; Kennedy, 1974; Perssley, 1977) believe that recognition of pictures requires no instruction in any specific form of ll representation, and it does not require advanced practice to see the meaning and spatial relations in two or more dimensional representations and displays. Hoffman (1971) found that diversity of the content in individual pictures did not confuse the objects; Kennedy's (1974) observations of two year olds supported Hoffman's conclusion. The observations of anthr0pologists have been supplemented by helpful research studies; some support the view that untrained subjects are puzzled by the pictures. Others believe that primitive people are puzzled and curious about artifacts of modern society, but not because the subjects find them totally incomprehensible or that they indicate a complete lack of understanding. Nadel's (1938) results suggest widely different cultures recognize pictures in common ways and they are universal. Children from different cultures never had any difficulty, and all groups identified photographs of familiar animals (Deregowski, 1968). Hudson (1960) used line drawings to test many different groups of subjects in South Africa. His subjects were white and black and ranged from being illiterate to being educated or attending school. He found the animals and humans in the pictures were all fairly consistently identified by all subjects, in all of his various groups. Elkind (1962) studied the abilities of preschool and school-starting children from economically poor homes in the United States trying to find the variety of pictures in the homes which diversely affected the children's abilities. They performed as well as children from homes rich in pictures. The same held true for American black children from poor urban homes as Kennedy found: The common core to picture perception-~across poor Americans, nomadic Bedouins, South African labourers and well-schooled children--seems to be recognition of objects. People seem to recognize objects in colored or black and white photographs and in line drawings without trouble (1974, p. 79). 12 Some studies showed children's preferences of pictures were for the more realistic and much more colorful. Color in pictures proves satisfying to the child in prOportion to its success in increasing the impression of realism or likeness. Pictures contain high distinctive cues which make them more discriminable than their labels, and this discriminability enhances memory for pictures compared to their labeled words (Rudisill, 1952; French, 1952; Travers 6c Alvarado, 1970). Information Describing the Arabic Language The Arabic language belongs to the Semitic group of languages, and the living languages of this group are modern Hebrew and Amharic. Among the dead language of this group, the most important is Biblical Hebrew; others include Akkadian, Bablonian and Assyrian, Syriac, and Ethiopian (Haywood 6c Nahmad, 1965; Beeton, 1968). Arabic has a wealth of literature, both medieval and modern. It is a living language for 100 million Arabian people and for almost 400 million non-Arabian Muslims in the world. The countries which use the Arabic language are, first, the League of Arab States--Egypt, Libya, Algeria, Tunisia, Morocco, Sudan, Iraq, Jordan, Lebanon, Syria, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Kuwait, Bahreen, Qatar, and United Emarit. Second, the main non-Arab Muslim countries are Afghanistan, Indonesia, Iran, Malaysia, Pakistan, and Turkey. A great number of Muslims live in Africa and Southeast Asia; a lesser number live in Russia, the Balkan Peninsula, and China. Only recently, since the Second World War, have American colleges and universities paid serious attention to the importance of modern languages other than German, French, and Spanish (Ziadeh ck Winder, 1957; Bishai, 1971). The Arabic language is classified as Classical Arabic, Modern Literary Arabic, and Modern Spoken or Colloquial Arabic. Classical Arabic dates from 13 the Sixth Century, A.D., and it is the language of the Quran. The modern literary language is the language or radio, newspapers, and texts. It varies in vocabulary from the classical, but the differences are infinitesimal compared with changes in the European languages over the same period of time. The grammar of Sixth Century Arabic still applies largely to modern written Arabic (Naywood 6c Nahmad, 1965; Abdul-Rouf, 1975). Colloquial Arabic dialects include the daily spoken language in the street, and there are several dialects in different parts of the Arabic world. For convenience, we will divide each part into geographical areas, each with its own general characteristics and pecularities, but within each area there is considerable diversity in sub-dialects--lower Egypt dialect; upper Egypt and Sudan dialect; Tunisia, Algeria, Morocco dialect; Syria and Lebanon dialect; Iraq dialect; and the Arabian Peninsula dialect including Kuwait. The differences between classical and colloquial Arabic are in three areas--phonology, grammar, and vocabulary. These dialects have certain features and tendencies in common and are understandable to all Arabians. Arabic language did not divide into separate languages as Latin did; Latin developed into different languages, such as Italian, French, and Spanish. The reason is that Arabic is the language of a religion and government, and the colloquial speech did not diverge widely (Haywood & Nahman, 1965; Chejne, 1969). The characteristic feature of Semitic languages is their basis of consonantal roots, mostly triliteral. Variations in shade of meaning are obtained first by varying the vowelling of the simple root, and secondly by the addition of prefixes, suffixes, and in-fixes. Word forms derived from the triliteral roots and relating to the three basic consonants are associated with meaning patterns (Bishai, 1971). Arabic grammarians recognize eight parts of speech: nouns, verbs, adjectives, adverbs, pronouns, conjunctions, prepositions, and l4 interjections. The concept of a noun and a verb are the same in Arabic as in English; adjectives, adverbs, and pronouns are generally classified as nouns; and conjunctions, prepositions, and interjections are considered particles (Bateson, 1967; Wickens, 198 0). Arabic is poor in verb tenses; Arabic verbs have only two tenses, perfect and im perfect--more precisely, perfective and imperfective. In reality these are not tenses, for the distinction between them is not basically that of time. Rather, they indicate whether an action is complete or not. The perfect denotes completed action, and the imperfect denotes incom pleted action-~irre5pective of time. It is usually the case that the Arabic perfect is equivalent to the English past, and the Arabic imperfect is equivalent to the English present or future; but exact equivalents must be determined by context. If Arabic is poor in verb tenses, it has a rich and flexible verb derived system which extends or modifies the meaning of the root form of the verb, giving many exact shades of meaning. This is a common feature of the Semitic language which perhaps reaches its greatest extent in Arabic. The simple or root form of the verb is called M ‘ Jfi‘J l --the stripped or naked verb, while the derived forms are said to be 4.3.111 l-—increased. The most common nine derived forms are made by adding prefixes, affixes, and infixes to these forms (Haywood 6r Nahmad, 1965; Bateson, 1967; Beeston, 1968; Wickens, 1980). m In Arabic, nouns like verbs are distinguished by the wealth of derivatives from the root; e.g., “5 kataba "write" are formed to “jg katib "writer," VA maktub " written," 1, [5 kitabah "writing," U [5 kitab "book," UJSA maktab "office," m maktabah "library," and L3 is“ 15 maktabah ','library," and L3 jg” mukatabah "correspondence." Haywood and Nahmad found that there are three types of nouns, having regard for their possible derivation: l. primitive nouns: such as o3 l "ear," “3+! "house" or tent, J": "ox"; these simple nouns which describe everyday objects are similar in primitive society, with nouns adapted from foreign language; e.g., ”.5? "species" or "race" from the Greek genos; 2. de-verbal nouns: there are numerous noun forms derived from verbs; e.g., w "killing," from 11.11:"to kill," 0.1.» "session," or council, from gala: "to sit"; and 3. de-nominal nouns: these nouns are derived from other nouns; e.g., 15119) "patriotism," from ole, "homeland"; also, modern Arabic has compared nouns such as d LJ 11.1.,"capital" or "head of wealth" (Ziadeh 6c Winder, 1957; Ashraf, 1974). Particles Particles include prepositions, conjunctions, and interjections. Prepositions There are two types of prepositions in the Arabic language: inseparable and separate. Inseparable prepositions are called attached prepositions, consisting of one letter always attached to the word following it; e.g., -: "by," 3 "and," and 3 "and." Separate prepositions stand alone and are either true particles or nouns in the accusitive case; e.g., DJ 1 "to, into, until," L,2». "up to, as far as," "over, on, against" (Bateson, 1967; Hashim, 1974; Abboud et a1., 1975). 16 Conjunctions Whereas in English it is considered bad style to commence a sentence with §_r_1_c_1_, in Arabic to do so is the rule rather than the exception. Sentences are continually linked by .5 a 3 "and" and less frequently by "then." Only at the end of a paragraph or where there is a definite change of tOpic is the conjunction omitted. Conjunctions may be either inseparate-attached (joined to the first word of the sentence they introduce) or separate (Haywood 8c Nahmad, 1965; Hashim, 1974). Interjections An interjection is considered from the point of view that it represents a sentence which has been reduced to its minimal expression. It is usually stressed by a special tone quality in the mission of the voice. Most of its value is generally obtained by context alone. It may express negation or affirmation of something happening, doubt, surprise, and for religious expressions: ah! oh! 0 sorrow! fie! far from it! bravo! hall to thee! hither, welcome, 0 God! if God wills! (Haywood 6c Nahmad, 1965). Adjectives It is not possible to give a linguistically adequate definition of the Arabic adjective in purely functional terms; adjectives are classed as nouns. Ziadeh and Winder (1957) consider the adjective only a noun used to describe, not a separate part of speech. In contrast to the role of adjectives in English, adjectives in Arabic may be considered as attributive nouns modifying other preceding nouns-- a function which may be compared in a broad sense to the function of nouns in opposition to other nouns. As modifiers, adjectives agree with modified nouns in number, gender, case, and determination in definiteness and non-definiteness (Ziadeh a Winder, 1957; Beeston, 1968; Bishai, 1971; Abboud et al., 1975). l7 Adverbs Adverbs are considered as nouns in the Arabic language. Arabic has few true adverbs, such as 1.11:: "here," CN 1 "now," 14-3-5 "only," and u») "yesterday." Adverbs are invariable in form. The function of adverbs is to a great extent performed by nouns and adjectives in the accusative case and with nunation; e.g., 31, I "first, firstly," L3-"'really" or "indeed, truly," L; L;- I "sometimes," "3d ‘9 "usually," "very," and 1’95 "a lot, often." Arabic adverbs are divided into various types: adverbs of time, adverbs of place, adverbs of manner or circumstance, adverbs of kind, and adverbs of purpose (Chejne, 1969; Bishai, 1971a; Abbord et a1., 1975). Pronouns Pronouns are for the most part analogous to English pronouns and have approximately the same amount of inflection. The Arab grammarians have traditionally treated the pronouns with the nouns rather than with the particles, because of their roles in sentences and because they reflect the obligatory categories of the noun--case, gender, and number. However, they resemble the particles in lying outside the root system, and they indicate gender and number differently, often by vowel contrasts: )5 huwa "he" versus Ufihiya "she." The pronouns are separate or attached. Separate or Independent Pronouns Separate or independent pronouns are whole words; that is, they are not attached to other words as suffixes. They correspond, broadly speaking, to the English words I, ou, h_e, etc. They have functions that are best understood in terms of Arabic itself. First and most importantly, they replace a noun as a subject of a nominal sentence. Secondly, these independent pronouns may be 18 used in nominal sentences as dividers between subject and predicate. Thirdly, these independent pronouns are used for special emphasis, particularly in verbal sentences where the subject is implied in the verb. Attached Pronouns Attached pronouns are not whole words, but are short suffixes attached to verbs, nouns, and prepositions. They correspond to the English words r_n_g, _r_n_y, him, DE, etc., but their function is different than in English (Beeston, 1968; Bateson, 1967; Abboud et a1., 1975). Arabic Syntax Arabic sentences (syntax) are of two types: verbal sentences and equational or nominal sentences. The predominant type of verbal sentence is one introduced by a verb; for example, "Reads Mary the book," not "Mary reads the book." Sentences not containing verbs are equational or nominal. They consist of two parts, a subject ‘43-“ mobtada and predicate 1'35 kabar. Nominal sentences result from the fact that the present tense of the verb "to be" is not used and that Arabic has no verb corresponding to "to have." "The man is tall" would be expressed as "the man tall." Nominal sentences have no verb by definition, but only a subject and predicate (Ziadeh 6c Winder, 1957; Abboud et a1., 1975)./”The subject may be any kind of noun or pronoun. While the predicate may be either of those, as well as adjective, adverb, or prepositional phrases (Atiyeh Abdo, 1962; Beeston, 1970; Abboud et a1., 1975). CHAPTER III RESEARCH DESIGN The purpose of this study was to identify the words most frequently used by five year old Kuwaiti Arabic speaking children in oral communication. The study recorded spontaneous oral vocabularies of Kuwaiti Arabic speakers who are in the second year in public kindergarten. The study consisted of the following objectives: 1. identifying the words most frequently used by all subjects and determining if there are significant differences when grouped by sex, parental educational background, and chronological order; 2. identifying the types of words used by all subjects and determining if there are significant differences when grouped by sex, parental educational background, and chronological order; and 3. identifying the types of sentences most frequently used by all subjects and determining if there are significant differences when grouped by sex, parental educational background, and chronological order. The Population A sample of 60 Kuwaiti Arabic speaking children was selected for the study. This population represents three groups of children from three different parental-educational backgrounds: (a) illiterate, (b) parents who have schooling between sixth grade and completion of twelfth grade, and (c) parents who have schooling beyond high school. These three educational background level groups represent both sexes, male and female, and chronological order in the family-- older sibling and younger sibling. The population was five year old children drawn from the public sector from schools supported by the government. The groups studies were represented by equal cells: 19 20 L1 (Low) L2 (Middle) L3 (High) Q i Q X 9 X Male 5 5 5 5 5 5 Female 5 5 5 5 5 5 Totals: 10 10 10 10 10 10 = 60 The population was selected from different schools which represented a wide range of geographic zones in the country. Information about the subjects was obtained from cumulative files in schools at the time of the investigation (see Appendix A). The children ranged in age from 53 to 69 months as of November 16, 1982. The range, mean, and standard deviation of the chronological age for the subjects are shown in Table 1. Table 1 Range, Mean, and Standard Deviation of Subjects' Chronological Age (in months) _M_al£s Females _T;c>_ta_ls Range 56-69 53-68 53-69 Medium 64 65 65 X 63.3 63.7 63.33 S.D. 3.43 3.44 3.67 N 30 30 60 All these children came from homes were Arabic was the only language spoken. Information of medians, ranges, means, and standard deviations of occupations, educational backgrounds (see Table 2) and ages of parents (see Table 3) as well as 21 the zone of schools where the subjects' residences were located can be found in Appendix A. Table 2 Median, Range, Mean, and Standard Deviation of Parents' Ages Fathers Mothers Median 36 30.5 Range 25-70 20-45 X 39.07 29.90 S.D. 10.40 5.23 N 60 60 60 Table 3 Parents' Occupations Occupations Fathers Mothers Professional 10 3 Teachers, principals 10 17 Office worker -- 2 Technicians 4 2 Laborer 5 -- Retired 5 -- Housewife -- 32 Civil servant 20 4 Military 1 .. Self employed 5 -- TOTAL: 60 60 22 The majority of the subjects (43) came from families having 2-6 children, and 11 subjects came from families having 7-13 children. Six subjects were the only children in their families (see Table 4). Table 4 Number of Children in Subjects' Families Number _M_al§_s Females _T_ot_al§ l 5 1 6 2-3 17 19 36 4-6 4 3 7 7-13 4 7 ll The sibling order consisted of the following: 30 children (50% of subjects) were first-born siblings, 10 children were last born, and 20 children were middle- born in positions between second and thirteenth in their families (see Table 5). Table 5 Children's Positions in Their Families Position Males Females Totals First 15 15 30 Middle 10 10 20 Last 5 5 10 Instrumentation The study used black and white and colored photographic pictures, size 40x60 centimeter, deve10ped by the researcher and designed to stimulate speech production. 23 The selection of 10 pictures for conducting the pilot study had three main phases. First, the observation phase included interviews with parents, teachers, amateur and professional photographers who specialize in working with children. The researcher also observed children in painting, games, playing, and studying situations. This phase gave a wide range of information in many aspects of children's interests, activities, hobbies, school curriculum, surroundings, environment, and culture. The following were the main subjects identified as categories for selecting 10 pictures: 1. family interactions; 2. pets and children; 3. people's actions and interactions; 4. playing and games; 5. surroundings and some aspects of local environment, especially camping and sea activities; 6. parties and celebrations, such as birthday and wedding parties; 7. activities related to children's senses; 8. different kinds of moods, especially happiness and sadness; 9. school activities and human relationships, as students with teachers; and 10. unknown and ambiguous subjects or objects. The second phase was collecting as many pictures as possible that met the previous categories. Pictures were taken from private and governmental photographic departments and committees, and pictures were taken and developed by the researcher. The third phase was selecting 10 pictures from those collected according to the previously-mentioned categories (see detail and picture description in Appendix D). These pictures were used to elicit speech production from the 24 subjects. The pictures varied in content. Some had a maximum of details; another had a minimum of details. The theme in another was vague and incomplete in content; in another picture the theme was clear and complete in its activities. Pictures were posted on construction paper and numbered. Approximately nine cue questions were developed for each of the 10 pictures. The pictures and their questions were tested to select the five most stimulating pictures for eliciting speech production. The test was conducted with the same procedure as described in the actual study. Cue questions were tested with the same picture. In this way it was found which types of cue questions were most effective with a given picture. This procedure was tested with 12 children from different parental backgrounds and sexes. The pictures were numbered from 1 to 10. The selection of five final pictures was based on the result of raw numbers of words produced by 12 children (see Table 6). Table 6 Results of Pilot Study of Raw Numbers of Words for Each Picture l 2 22 ééZ§219T9tal Males 383 226 384 374 662 551 531 193 493 755 Females 426 235 348 386 390 388 386 123 417 637 TOTALS: 809 461 732 760 1052 939 917 316 910 1392 The highest five pictures were numbers 5, 6, 7, 9, and 10. (For more details, see result of pilot study in Appendix C.) The questions were restated and added to meet the needs of this study: 25 @estions for Picture Number Five This is a beautiful picture. Look at it, and tell me the story of the little deer. What happened to this beautiful little deer? How did it injure its leg? What was the deer's reaction when it injured its leg? What did the deer's mother say? Did you ever hurt yourself? Tell me what happened. How did you or your parents solve your problem? Do you like deer? Why? What is your advice to the little deer to keep from hurting itself again? Questions for Picture Number Six This is a familiar picture to you. Tell me what you see in this nice picture. ‘ What are the children doing? Why do children go to school? Do you like to go to school? Tell me why. Tell me what you see on the classroom walls. Is this classroom better than yours? Why? Do you like your teacher and classmates? Why? Who do you like best? What are you going to do when you grow up? Why? What is your favorite thing to do in school? Why? Questions for Picture Number Seven I'm sure you are going to like this picture. Look at it really well, and tell me what you see. Tell me what the children are doing. 26 Are those children happy? Would you like to be with them? Why? Why do peOple like to go to the sea? Have you going to the sea with your family? Tell me about it. What did you see there? What good things come to people when they live by the sea? What is the strange shape that appears in the picture behind the children? Do you know why it's there? Questions for Picture Number Nine This is a beautiful picture. You will like it. Tell me what you see in this picture. What are the children doing? What is the occasion for the celebration? Why do you think that? What other occasions do we celebrate? What is your favorite? What do you think is in some of the boxes the children are holding? Why do we give gifts to each other on this occasion? Would you like to give a gift to one of your friends or someone in your family? Why? What is the man doing? Questions for Picture Number Ten This is a beautiful picture, and it is very close to our hearts. Tell me what you see in the picture. What is this child doing? What is the mother doing? Do you think this mother likes her child? How do you know that? Who is living in your home? 27 6. What do you do with your family in your home? 7. Do you watch television together? What is your favorite program? 8. Do you help your parents in the house? How? 9. Do your parents love you? What do you do to make them love you? These questions were used as a guide. Often, by the nature of the initial question, subsequent questions would be answered before they were asked. In this case, the interviewer used his own discretion in the succeeding questions. In other cases, the answers to questions would dictate the wording of later questions, so that the interviewer did not follow this list of questions verbatim. Procedure The objective in this study was to record the spontaneous conversations of five year old children attending kindergarten. A letter was sent to the Kindergarten Department, Ministry of Education, to get permission to conduct the study and to solicit that department's help. The letter explained the purpose and importance of the study. The schools in Kuwait open in September. At that time, cumulative record folders were examined to obtain information necessary to determine parents' educational background levels, and sex, chronological order, and age of the children. The subjects were selected from a group of five year olds from homes where Arabic was the primary spoken language. The interviewers first visited the subjects in their schools to acquaint themselves with the children and to determine the language spoken in their homes. The interviewers told each child they were interested in what s/he thought about some pictures to be shown on the next visit. A second visit was made to interview each subject individually. The interviewers talked informally with the children in a quiet room away from the noisy areas of the school. The 28 interviewers kept the atmosphere as relaxed as possible. The subjects sat next to a tape recorder with the micrOphone in front of them. The pictures selected for the study were shown one at a time to each child while the interviewer asked the child specific questions deve10ped for each picture, with a four second pause for each child's response between questions. The interviewer showed all five pictures to each child and asked all the specific questions to each subject. The directions and questions were repeated to a child whenever repetition seemed necessary to prompt the child to answer. Since the schools in Kuwait open near the end of September, it was imperative that data be collected soon thereafter. During November and December of 1982 and January of 1983, the researcher visited 20 schools located in 12 various zones in Kuwait. He selected 60 children from nine schools because their complete cumulative record folders were available. School principals in different schools allowed the researcher to examine the cumulative record folders, making it easier to obtain the information necessary to determine needed information--parents' educational background levels and ages. Special rooms and assistance from principals or social workers were made available at all times. The children were told that the purpose of the interview was to obtain a sample of their speech, and anything they wanted to talk about would be accepted. It was interesting to notice that all children enjoyed the pictures and seemed stimulated into conversation by them. One child refused to talk and was replaced by another child. A situation where every subject used an exactly proportionate amount of time was not possible to provide. The objective was to keep the subject in conversation for a maximum of 30 minutes. The rationale for this was to arrive at a standard measure for all subjects. To maintain a subject in conversation for a minimum of 20 to a maximum of 30 minutes was possible by 29 the use of extraneous questions and inferences. A careful scrutiny of all 60 recordings of conversations obtained showed that conversations ranged from 20 to 30 minutes in length. All recordings included in the study comply with the following criteria: (a) represent speech production of five year old children, (b) belong to subjects for whom Arabic is the mother tongue, and (c) use all five pictures with all nine questions at a maximum length of 30 minutes. A verbatim transcription was prepared from each tape-recorded session. A guideline was established to deve10p a level of agreement among three subjects' transcriptions. All speech production was transcribed in conventional notation exactly as said, including repetitions, Speech sounds, and vocal gestures such as "eee" £8821 "ooh" ”)1 and "offf" 13.5.51 . Punctuation was added to transcripts on the basis of subjective judgment. It was limited to periods, question marks, and exclamation points. When a short pause occurred within a sentence, a comma was inserted. A pause following a closed, completed word sequence was marked by a period. Use of questions marks and exclamation points was determined by intonation and context. Repetition of words in speech was not a problem; all repetitions were transcribed. Accuracy in the transcription was established previously with a pilot study that the researcher conducted and transcribed with 100% accuracy. Accuracy in the transcription was done from two other Kuwaiti perspectives: kindergarten teachers and people working at the Curriculum Research Center of the Kindergarten Department. These individuals were very familiar with local dialect. When compared, the words were found to be exactly the same in each transcription. There were some disagreements in relation to transcribing the local words used; for the purpose of the study, each transcript was read for any unreadable words. The researcher listened to the recorded speech, and corrections were made whenever necessary. 3O Classification To determine the number of words used according to the part of speech, it was necessary to classify the words appearing in each transcript. Each of the transcripts was carefully analyzed to determine different parts of speech. The children's speech production was examined from three different perspectives. First, a lexical analysis was done to indicate the most frequent words used by the children included in the study. The size of vocabulary was considered here to determine whether there were any differences in speaking vocabulary used by children in various groups. The second perspective was a grammatical classification of the speech production. This classification recognized five categories: (a) nouns, (b) verbs, (c) particles, (d) local, and (e) foreign. Third, a syntactical classification of sentences was done, recognizing two types of sentences: (a) verbal and (b) nominal. The goal of this classification can best be illustrated by the examination cited in Chapter 11. Rating Procedures Raters of the transcripts discussed how to code words and sentences. These symbols were used: _N_ for nouns, V for verbs, P for particles, 1: for locals, _F_ for foreigns, _NJ for complete nominal sentences, NJ for single word nominal sentences, V1 for complete verbal sentences, and V2 for single word verbal sentences. The raters rated sample transcripts and discussed their differences. Sample transcripts continued to be rated and discussed until inter-rater reliability was established. The raters used two Arabic dictionaries for the purpose of grammatical classification and determining the root of unfamiliar words: (a) Al-Mongend by Lois Ma'aloof (Beirut: Catholicity Press, 1976) and (b) Lisan Al-Arab Al-Muheet by Ibn Mazur and Youssef Khayat (Beirut). The 31 children's work was then divided among the raters equally for rating. The researcher rated every tenth page of each set of ratings and tested again for reliability. Data Processing All data processing was performed by the researcher manually since no computer was available to input and output the Arabic alphabet. The objectives of data processing were (a) to determine all vocabulary used by all subjects in the study, and (b) to see if words were ordered according to frequency of occurrence, after which different types of sentences were determined. Treatment of Data A multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) was performed on the data obtained in the study. The MANOVA was utilized to determine significant differences among sexes, educational background, and chronological order groups on the number of words the children used, the frequency with which they used certain kinds of words, and the type of sentences they used. Differences among variables were accepted as significant if the alpha was less then .10. Results will be discussed in Chapter IV. Limitations of the Study This study had certain limitations. The first was that the population selected were only Kuwaitis, only five year olds, and only drawn from public kindergartens in Kuwait. The second limitation referred to the procedure used in data collection. Speech production samples were collected by recording dialogues of the individuals while the researcher used pictures with specific questions as stimulation to elicit the speech. 32 The third limitation referred to the presence of a word that could be evidence of the child's knowledge, but its absence does not necessarily mean that such a word is unknown to the child. Therefore, the findings are not exhaustive. Definition of Terms Frequency refers to the number of actual occurrences of the same word. Public sector or public kindergartens are schools supported by the government where no fees are required. Spontaneous speech refers to the speech production given in response to selected pictures and researcher's questions. However, the tradition of research on speech production has been to refer to speech elicited by stimulus provided by the researcher as "spontaneous" speech production. Summary This chapter offered a description of the methodology involved in conducting the study. The population was selected from nine kindergartens belonging to the public sector in Kuwait. Pictures and questions were developed for stimulating the children's conversation for Phase I of the study. In Phase 11, recordings were made of the spontaneous conversation of 60 children. All tested children were chosen for the study. After typescripts of the conversations were made, a grammatical classification of the speech production was made. A multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) was used to obtain information regarding the most frequent Arabic words used by five year old Kuwaiti children. Parents' educational background, sex, and chronological order of children were the variables considered. CHAPTER IV PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS OF DATA The purpose of this study was to identify the words most frequently used by five year old Arabic speaking Kuwaiti children and to determine if there were differences in their use of language when they were grouped according to sex (gender), chronological order, and parents' educational background. The data were also used to discover the types of words and sentences most frequently recurring in children's conversations. Procedures for collection and classification of data were described in the previous chapter. In this chapter statistical analyses, as related to hypotheses, will be presented. Hypotheses and Statistical Data A multivariate analysis of variance was performed on the data obtained for all hypotheses from one to nine. The Statistical Package for the Social Studies (SPSS) program, version 3.8, was used at the Michigan State University Computer Center to affect the MANOVA design. A total of running words and sentences used by the subjects was arranged by sex, chronological order, and parents' educational level. Three aspects--frequency of word occurrence, word diversity, and type of sentences-—were considered to determine use by children in the various groups studied. A multivariate analysis of variance was performed on the data obtained for the first part of the study which comprised Hypotheses One, Two, and Three. A standard level for repeated words was established to analyze Hypotheses One, 33 34 Two, and Three which test frequency of occurrences. Words spoken three or more times formed the repeated words level for testing frequency of occurrence in subjects' speech production (see Table 7). All subjects produced 23,160 running words, including 11,566 nouns (49.9%), 4,111 verbs (17.8%), and 4,659 particles (20%) consisting of 20,336 standard Arabic words (87.8%), 2,519 local words (10.8%), and 305 foreigns (1.32%) or a total of 2,824 local and foreign words (12%). This was an average of 386 running words per child. All subjects produced 11,646 different words which amounted to 50% of the total of 23,160 running words in the study. There were 1,221 different words repeated with a frequency of three or more times which contributed 10.48% to the total of 11,646 different words, 1,278 different words repeated only twice which contributed 10.9% to the total of 11,646 different words, and 9,147 different words spoken only once which contributed 78.54% to the total of 11,646 different words, for an average of 152 different words per child. All subjects used 5,366 different nouns (47%), 3,433 different verbs (29.47%), 1,030 different particles (8.84%), amounting to a total of 9,829 different standard Arabic words (84.39%), 1,507 different local words (12.94%), and 310 different foreign words (2.66%) or a total of 1,817 different local and foreign words (15.6%). All subjects produced 1,221 different words with a frequency of use of three or more times, including 444 nouns (36.3%), 206 verbs (16.8%), 337 particles (27.6%), constituting a total of 887 standard Arabic words (72.6%), 216 local words (17.6%), and 18 foreign words (1.47%). Results of the statistical analysis concerning variables under consideration and hypotheses formulated will be explained in this chapter. 35 Hypothesis One Frequency of occurrence will not be significantly different in speech production of five year old Kuwaiti children when grouped according to gender (sex)--females and males. The statistical results from the multivariate analysis of variance test for frequency of occurrence for males and females' speech production tested at the .10 alpha level. Seven measures were examined: nouns, verbs, particles, standard Arabic total, locals, foreigns, and frequency total. Total number of words for frequency of occurrence level was established as words repeated three or more times in all seven measures. When the data were subjected to a multivariate analysis of variance test, it was found that, overall, the main effect of sex was not significant (Sign of F .225), although there were no differences that could be considered significant for all seven measures (see Table 7). A closer examination of Table 8 shows that the means and standard deviations for females are generally higher than for the males. The past studies generally showed a slight difference in favor of the females (Smith, 1926; Templin, 1957; Olson, 1965; Kools dc Berryman, 1971). In comparing the growth curves in language for males and females from the same family, Olson found that age for age, the females regularly exceeded the males. The MANOVA results of the present study seem to agree with part of the earlier findings since the sex differences found in the group of children under investigation were not significant. Interactions among variables were explored; MANOVA tests showed that there was a significant difference only when sex interacted with chronological order in all seven measures (sign of F .009) (see Table 7). The younger sibling females produced more word frequency than older sibling females and older and younger sibling males (see Figure 1 for more detail). 36 mmm. «mo. N Poe. NwN. N owe. voo.m N mwN. mmN._ N Nom. ovm. . New. cmm. N NNN. mmo. F mmmm .a co mwm_wmmm Nam. mmo._ N moo. _Pv. N Nmo. wa.q N mmm. —oo. N mmo. mvv.q — mNo. ONN.N N NNP. MNm._ P .zo_n .a co mpeooD muumnnsm pp< >5 vow: mace: Co xocmacmca cob mocewce> Co m_mx_ec< mue_ce>w:= use mue_co>wa~:z NNc. pmm. N Non. wmo._ N Npo. mom.o N moN. omN. N N—N. Poo._ — mmN. mmN.~ N NmN. mem.~ p .zo_m .a mm pauoN.aacm0\\400u00 Frequency of Nouns younger / , older / .- ~/; I ‘ N. older | younger 1 1 Males Females Frequency of Particles 01 51 younger O / 5 older , / .o: - \ ~51 >3 0 / ‘\ 5: / x 0! older Si younger 0' Males Females ‘ Frequency of Foreigns 1 older 1 . I \ younger i \ / , 1 younger / 1" 1 I ' older 1 Males Females Figure 1. .38 Frequency of Verbs 6.0 5.5- - youn er 5.0 , g 4. ’ 4.8 older 3.5 ‘ N. / ’ 3.0 ,,> r a \ 2.5 / \N 2-0 ' older 1.5 younger 1.0 Males Females Frequency of Locals 6.0 . 5.5 , younger 5.0 / ’ 4.5 / 4.0 3.5 older / 3.0 Pr ~ 2 \ ‘ 2.5 ‘ ‘ ~ -. 2'0 younger older 1.5 1.0 Males ’Females . Frequency of Total 32: 30 '°younger 28' 26 24 ’ 22‘ older / / 201 \ \ / 18 ' ‘ ‘ a \ 121 , ‘ .1... 121 younger Males Females Comparison of the means of interaction by sex by chronological order. 39 Table 9 Number of Words Frequently Used by All Groups in the Study Stand. Local or Arabic Foreign Varib. Nouns Verbs Part. Total Locals Forgn. Total Total Sex Males 193 90 161 444 91 10 101 545 Females 251 116 176 543 125 8 133 676 Total 444 206 337 987 216 18 234 1221 Chronological Order Older 189 91 159 439 82 11 93 532 Younger 255 115 178 548 134 7 141 689 Total 444 206 337 987 216 18 234 1221 Parental Educational Bad mcaoz mo_. NNN.N N mam. mNo._ N N¢_. _Nm._ N No_. emN.N N woo. mmm.m F Nmo. _Nm.e _ eeN. saN. N CNN. mm_. N se_. amm._ _ emN. Nme._ _ omo. Nee.N N NNo. ame.N N oNN. NNo. _ oN_. _eo._ _ .ammw mm mm 4mmmw .wm om mammmm _Nsaflqamc<.esm muuwhnzm N mNm. Noo._ N N ¢o_. on.N N _ N_o. Om_.o _ N moo. oo_. N _ voN. MN_._ _ N ooo. omv.N N — on. ooo._ _ a an a a somccw :_az _.< )5 6mm: mecoz Co Au_mcm>_o LoC mo:e_cc> Co m_m>_e:< mue_ce>_:: pee mue_ce>_ppzx No mpnmp cove: .:o;:o an .ecoxm .ozeu No xmm meco .:oczo >9 .eaoxm .uzuN cmuco couco xo xmm .eLONN . UDUw x5 xmm Lovco .cocco .econ .oseN xom muczqw Diversity of Nouns 110 ,. younger 105 ,’ 100 , 95 older / 90 ~- \ ,’ 85 I’V\\‘ gg .r/ x " older 70 i younger 65 60 1 55 1 ' Males Females I Diversity of Particles 211 $8 1 older younger 18 1 ‘ ~ ‘ g , ' 17: J" *\\ 16 ‘ - ,5 ; younger older Males Females Diversity of Foreigns 8i ; older 71 6 I “\.\ , ,. younger 5‘ ””I,\ ' ’ older 4 1 younger 3; ‘ Males Females Figure 2. Comparison of the Means of 1&5 Diversity of Verbs 80 75 . younger 70 .5” 65 older / 6O . / 55 ‘> c 50 , ’ ~ 2 ‘. 45'! ' 4 0 Lvyounger Males older Females Diversity of Locals 34 32 3O , . younger 28 older , , 26 .\ , ’ M .I“‘\ 22 younger \ a 20 “' older Males Females Diversity of Total 250 240 230 220 / ’ 210 older / 200 . / 190 ‘ < 180 / ‘N 170 . ' ‘ x . 160 younger 150 //‘ younger older Males Females Interaction of Sex by Chronological Order. 46 were 11,646 different words with a frequency of once or more used by all subjects in the study which was 50.28% of all running words. There were 1221 words used three times or more, or 5.27% of all running words in the study (see Tables 14 and 17). Table 13 Means and Standard Deviations of Diversity Words by Sex for Males and Females Males Females Source of Variation Means S.D. Number Means S.D. Number Nouns 34.8667 33.3154 30 94.0000 39.1672 30 Verbs 52.4667 21.6393 30 61.6000 34.2331 30 Partic. 17.7000 6.0352 30 17.3000 6.6392 30 Stand. Arabic Total 149.6667 63.3460 30 173.3667 77.3124 30 Locals 24.8667 12.4256 30 25.3667 13.1293 30 Foreigns 5.3333 3.6230 30 5.0000 2.9711 30 TOTALS: 183.8667 71.0152 30 203.3000 89.1133 30 Hypothesis Five The mean measure of vocabulary diversity for three distinct educational background groups will not be significantly different. The same seven measures that were considered for previous hypotheses were studied. subjected differences background groups (see Table 12.) in all to the MANOVA test, there were no statistically When analyzing diversity of vocabulary when the data were significant measures among the three distinct parent educational 47 Table 14 Number of Words Diversely Used by All Subjects Stand. Local 6c Arabic Foreign Varib. Nouns Verbs Part. Total Locals Forg n. Total Total Sex Males 2546 1574 511 4631 746 160 906 5537 Females 2820 1859 519 5198 761 150 911 6109 Total 5366 3433 1030 9829 1507 310 1817 11,646 Chronological Order Older 2545 1619 511 4675 689 167 856 5531 Younger 2851 1814 519 5154 818 143 961 6115 Total 5396 3433 1030 9829 1507 310 1817 11,646 Parental Educational Background Level Low 1540 975 304 2819 416 81 497 3316 Middle 1964 1249 384 3597 588 105 693 4290 High 1862 1209 342 3413 503 124 627 4040 Total 5366 3718 10 30 9829 1508 309 1816 11,646 When the means and standard deviations were examined, it was found that both were higher for the subjects in the middle and high educational background groups than for the low educational background group. The middle educational background group had slightly higher means and standard deviations than the high educational background group did, but means for foreign words were slightly higher for the high educational background group (see Table 15). 48 Table 15 Means and Standard Deviations of Diversity Words for Parents' Educational Background Levels Low Educ. Backgrd. Middle Educ. Bkgrd. High Educ. Backgrd. we M6222 SA Means SQ m S_D- Nouns 77.0000 35.9707 98.2000 35.4529 93.1000 36.9560 Verbs 48.2000 26.5263 62.4500 29.8425 60.4500 29.1502 Partic. 15.2000 5.0534 19.2000 5.2073 18.1000 7.8331 Stand. Arabic Total 134.1000 69.7725 179.8000 67.4136 170.6500 71.0458 Locals 20.8000 11.8526 29.4000 12.2535 25.1500 13.0153 Foreigns 4.0 500 3.2683 5.2500 2.7606 6.2000 3.5924 TOTALS: 164.3000 73.6393 214.4500 79.6152 20 2.0000 83.1834 The findings of the present study showed that there were 3316 different words used by the low educational background group, contributing a total of 14.31% of the total of 23, 160 running words used by all subjects; in the middle educational background group, there were 4290 different words, or 18.52% of the total running words; and in the high educational background group, there were 4040 different words, or 17.44% of the total 23,160 running words. All three educational background groups produced 11,646 different words or 50.28% of the total of 23,160 running words in all subjects' speech production (see Tables 14-17 for additional detail). Hypothesis Six The mean measures of vocabulary diversity for chronological order in the family--older or younger--will not be significantly different. 49 The same seven measures that were considered for previous hypotheses were studied when analyzing diversity of vocabulary. When the data were subjected to a MANOVA test, the results for all seven measures were not statistically significant between the older sibling group and the younger sibling group (see Table 12). When the table of means and standard deviations was examined, it was found that the means and standard deviations for the younger sibling group were higher than for the older sibling group in six of the seven measures. Foreign words was the only measure which showed higher means and standard deviations for the older sibling group (see Table 16). Table 16 Means and Standard Deviations of Diversity Words for Chronological Order: Older Sibling and Younger Sibling Older Siblings Younger Siblings 292.292 419.3% §._D_- M28123 §_-_D_:. Nouns 84.8333 29.5216 94.0333 42.0931 Verbs 53.9667 21.30 64 60.1000 34.7834 Particles 17.0333 6.0827 17.9667 6.5679 Standard Arabic Total 151.2667 58.9049 171.7667 81.1991 Locals 22.9667 11.8365 27.2667 13.3130 Foreigns 5.5667 3.8118 4.7667 2.6741 TOTALS: 183.3333 64.4645 203.8333 93.8436 5O Interactions among variables were examined. According to the results reported in Table 12, a MANOVA test showed that there was a significant difference (sign. of F .017) only when order interacted with sex in six of seven measures in the study. The younger females scored higher than older sibling males or females and younger sibling males. The findings of the present study showed that there were 5531 different words used by the older sibling group, or 23.88% of the total of 23,160 running words; in the younger sibling group, there were 6115 different words or 26.40% of the total number of running words. Both the older sibling and younger sibling groups produced 11,646 different words or 50.88% of the total number of running words in all subjects' speech production (see Tables 14-17 for details). Hypothesis Seven There will be no significant differences in the type of sentences used by females when compared with males in the same sample. Verbal and nominal sentences were two measures considered for Hypotheses Seven, Eight, and Nine. They were studied when analyzing the type of sentences that had been used by all subjects in the study. When the data were subjected to a multivariate analysis of variance, MANOVA, it was found that the main effect of sex was not statistically significant, but there was a significant difference between males and females when sex interacted with chronological order (sign. of F .069) (see Table 18). The younger females scores higher than younger males or older males and females in both verbal and nominal sentences. In general, the means and standard deviations in Table 19 showed that females had higher scores than males for complete nominal and verbal sentences (NSA 1 — VSA 2). Table 19 showed that males made more nominal sentences of single words (NSA 2), but females made more verbal sentences of single words (VSA 2) than males. 51 Table 17 Number of Total Running Words Used by All Subjects 134$ biggies Sex Males 5435 Females 6131 Total 11,566 Chronological Order Older 5313 Younger 6253 Total 11,566 Parental Educational Background Level Low 3375 Middle 4235 High 3956 Total 11,566 Verbs 1914 2197 4111 1901 2210 4111 1152 1481 1478 4111 Stand. Arabic Part. Total 2113 9462 2546 10,874 4659 20,336 2183 9397 2476 10,939 4659 20,336 1308 5835 1736 7452 1615 7049 4659 20,336 Local 6: Foreign Locals Forgn. Total 1162 163 1325 1357 142 1499 2519 305 2824 1189 158 1347 1330 147 1477 2519 305 2824 673 71 744 1033 121 1154 813 113 926 2519 305 2824 Total 10,787 12,373 23,160 10,744 12,416 23,160 6579 8606 7975 23,160 52 Table 18 Multivariate and Univariate Analyses of Variance for the Types of Sentences Used by All Subjects Source of Variations Sex Nominal sentences Verbal sentences Chronological order Nominal sentences Verbal sentences Educational levels Nominal sentences Verbal sentences Sex by chronological order Nominal sentences Verbalsentences Sex by educational level Nominal sentences Verbal sentences Chron. order by educat. Nominal sentences Verbal sentences Sex by chron. by educ. Nominal sentences Verbal sentences 1 .361 .698 1 .651 .424 1 J87 .668 l .685 .509 l .681 .413 l .009 .924 2 1.474 .216 2 .028 .972 2 L181 .316 1 2.828 .069 1 .5631 .022 1 [L289 .044 2 .348 .872 2 .153 .859 2 .429 .653 2 L021 .400 2 1.806 .175 2 1.921 .157 2 .899 .467 2 .080 .923 2 .457 .636 Degree of freedom within cells = 48 53 The findings of the study showed that males made 1312 nominal sentences and 1344 verbal sentences, a total of 2656 sentences or 47.43% of the total 5600 sentences made by all subjects in the study (see Table 21). Table 19 Means and Standard Deviations of Type of Sentences for Male and Female groups 7 Mal—es Females m m LB.- M ég NSA 1 40.7000 21.1222 46.7000 31.6752 NSA 2 4.0333 5.6841 3.7333 4.6252 VSA 1 44.3000 18.0022 46.4667 28.0157 VSA 2 .8333 1.2617 1.2333 2.1445 NSA 1 = complete nominal sentences NSA 2 = single word nominal sentences VSA l = complete verbal sentences VSA 2 = single word verbal sentences In the female group, there were 1513 nominal sentences and 1431 verbal sentences for a total of 2944 sentences or 52.57% of the total of 5600 nominal and verbal sentences used by all subjects in the study (see Table 21). Hypothesis Eight There will be no significant differences in the type of sentences used when three distinct educational background groups are compared. The same two measures that were considered for Hypothesis Seven were studied when analyzing type of sentences used. When the data were subjected to 54 a MANOVA test, the results showed no statistically significant differences among all three educational background groups in both measures. Table 21 Numbers of Types of Sentences Made by All Groups in the Study Nominal Sentences Verbal Sentences Comp. Sing. Comp. Sing. C.S. Sent. Varib. Sent. Sent. Total Sent. Sent. Total Total Sex Males 1221 91 1312 1319 25 1344 2656 Females 1401 112 1513 1394 37 1431 2944 Total 2622 203 2825 2713 62 2775 5600 Chronological Order Older 1233 107 1340 1341 33 1374 2714 Younger 1389 96 1485 1372 29 1401 2886 Total 2622 203 2825 2713 62 2775 5600 Parental Educational Background Level Low 860 84 944 818 27 845 1789 Middle 913 35 948 1051 6 1057 2005 High 849 84 933 844 29 873 1806 Total 2622 203 2825 2713 62 2775 5600 55 The interactions between the educational background groups and other variables were subjected to MANOVA. There were no statistically significant differences for both measures. The means and standard deviations of educational background groups (see Table 22) showed that the middle educational background group produced more complete nominal and verbal sentences. The low and high educational background groups made more single-word sentences. Table 22 Means and Standard Deviations of Type of Sentences for the Three Parental Educational Background Groups Low Educ. Group Middle Educ. Group High Educ. Group 59%:— M .5812; @332 ° S_D_- m 522 NSA 1 43.0000 31.9308 45.6500 28.5287 42.4500 23.7342 NSA 2 4.7000 6.5462 1.7500 1.8602 4.2000 4.4081 VSA 1 41.4000 18.1786 52.5500 28.1957 42.2000 22.1231 VSA 2 1.350 1.8715 .3000 .5712 1.4500 2.2118 NSA 1 = complete nominal sentences NSA 2 = single-word nominal sentences VSA 1 = complete verbal sentences VSA 2 = single-word verbal sentences The findings of the present study showed that the low educational background group made 944 nominal sentences and 845 verbal sentences for a total of 1789 sentences or 31.95% of the total 5600 sentences made by all subjects in the study. The middle educational background group used 948 nominal sentences and 1057 verbal sentences for a total of 2005 sentences or 35.80% of the total sentences used by all subjects in the study (see Table 21). 56 The high educational background group used 933 nominal and 873 verbal sentences for a total of 1806 or 32.25% of the total 5600 sentences used by all subjects in the study (see Table 21 for details). Hypothesis Nine There will be no significant differences in the types of sentences used by two chronological order sets in the family: older sibling and younger sibling. The same two measures considered for Hypotheses Seven and eight were studied when analyzing the type of sentences used by all subjects in the study. When the data were subjected to a MANOVA test, results showed that the main effect of chronological order did not produce statistically significant differences for both measures. The means and standard deviations were higher for the younger sibling group than for the older sibling group in complete nominal sentences (see Table 23). Table 23 Means and Standard Deviations of Type of Sentences for Chronological Order Older Siblings YOLmer Siblings Ems M92113 .531; 1420.5. SQ NSA 1 41.1000 20.5751 46.3000 32.1056 NSA 2 3.5667 4.9736 4.2000 4.8594 VSA 1 45.0333 17.7385 45.7333 28.2219 VSA 2 1.1000 1.9713 .9667 1.5421 NSA l = complete nominal sentences NSA 2 = single-word nominal sentences VSA 1 = complete verbal sentences VSA 2 = single-word verbal sentences 57 When the interactions between chronological order and other variables were tested, it was found that there was a significant difference when chronological order interacted only with sex (see Table 18). The findings of the present study found that the older sibling group made 1340 nominal sentences and 1374 verbal sentences for a total of 2714 sentences or 48.46% of the total 5600 sentences made by all subjects in the study. The younger sibling group used 1485 nominal and 1401 verbal sentences for a total of 2886 or 51.54% of the total sentences used by all subjects in the study (see Table 21). Summary The purpose of the study was to identify the vocabulary of five year old Kuwaiti children. The study examined the frequency of vocabulary in children's speech to determine if there were differences in the use they make of the language when grouping those children according to sex, chronological order, and parents' educational background. The study also used the data to discover the types of vocabulary and sentences most frequently recurring in children's conversations. The subjects in the study were 60 children from Kuwait public kindergartens. The subjects were selected according to their sex, chronological order, and parents' educational background from their cumulative records. Photographic pictures and specific, developed questions were used in interviewing the children to solicit their speech. A verbatim transcription was made from the taped interviews. Transcripts were analyzed to determine different parts of speech used. The first was a lexical analysis to indicate the most frequently used words and the size of vocabulary. Second, a grammatical analysis was done according to the following categories: nouns, verbs, particles, 58 locals, and foreign words. Third, a syntactical analysis of sentences was done to identify nominal and verbal sentences. A multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) and analysis of variance (ANOVA) were computed to test nine hypotheses. The overall MANOVA revealed no statistically significant differences for sex, chronological order, and educational background groups. The only interaction of sex by chronological order did reveal statistically significant differences in all categories. The younger sibling females scored higher than the younger sibling males and older sibling males and females. However, the ANOVA test did reveal higher means and standard deviations for females than for males, for the middle and high educational background groups than for the low educational background group, and for the younger sibling group than for the older sibling group. CHAPTER V CONCLUSIONS, DISCUSSION, AND RECOMMENDATIONS Introduction This chapter will present three important aspects of the study: conclusions, discussion, and recommendations. The study of language development in the United States of America has produced several conclusions and theories among educators in regard to children's language during their early years of education. Theories resulting from the controversies emphasize the important role that effective use of language has on school achievements. Kuwait and other Arab countries are farther away from drawing any conclusions or forming theories regarding children's language because they lack studies in language development. The results of the present study are a small contribution in exploration for future conclusions and forming theories about children's language. Conclusions From the results of the study, several conclusions can be drawn. 1. The results of the study were, for the most part, quite consistent with other studies done with English speaking children using the same variables in spontaneous speech production for five year old children. Kuwaiti children produced intelligible utterances, used a variety of words, and developed complete, standard Arabic sentences. Standard Arabic phrases and vocabulary dominated their speech. The percentage of local (10,896) and 59 60 foreign (1.32%) words were small in comparison to the number of standard Arabic words (87.8%). All subjects produced 23,160 running words in a maximum of 30 minutes per child, with an average of 386 running words per child. The subjects used 11,646 different words with a frequency of use of once or more, 1,221 different words with a frequency of three times or more, 1,278 different words with a frequency of two times, and 9,147 different words with a frequency of once. Each child in the study used 152 different words only once. No sex differences were found with regard to the production of nouns, verbs, particles, locals, foreigns, and total frequency or diversity of words and type of sentences. Speech production of males and females was similar in most aspects. No significant differences were found although the females tended, in general, to use higher numbers of different words, frequent words, and types of sentences. The most consistent results were revealed when interactions occurred between sex and chronological order. There were statistically significant differences in the younger sibling females scoring higher than the older sibling males or females. However, the means showed that older sibling males scored higher than older sibling females or younger sibling males. Children grouped according to parents' educational background levels did not differ in regard to the frequency or diversity of words used or to type of sentences. The differences were not statistically significant in all measures. The children belonging to the middle parents' educational background group contributed 10. ll. 12. 13. 61 a slightly larger number of vocabulary words and sentences than either of the other two groups. The high educational background group had a slightly larger number of vocabulary words than the low educational background group. Nouns, verbs, and locals, respectively, had larger numbers of words used by all groups, and particles were highest in frequency used. The following are the 20 words which obtained the highest frequencies. Arabic 5 L. English Sound wha fee la hatha yaloboon ana shaya hathehe kol laha omee kalat Freg. 1143 440 296 208 196 164 130 119 112 104 104 99 102 Information/Meaning conjunction, coordinating, and connector means "and" the particle "ma" has a number of different meanings and functions; interrogative as "what, whatever, that which, the one(s), which and the negative "ma," "not" preposition "into, in" negative particle "not" and "no" a demonstrative refers only to human being, and used for male singular, "this" "they are playing" "me" thing a demonstrative refers only to human being, and used for female singular, "this" indefinite singular noun, "every, each, all" "for her, her" "my mother" "she said" 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. In any study there are factors that operate beyond the researcher's control. These factors have the potential of influencing the study in such a way as to question the results of that study. The purpose of the discussion is to explore the adequacy of the findings in terms of sample, instruments, treatments, and 62 ’9 howa 95 he U. heeya 93 she 41‘ eiad 90 celebration ul‘ ala 89 preposition "on and open" 1.1 omah 92 his mother 1,151 l al—bahar 87 the sea UJ lee 82 for me, main Discussion methodology employed for this study. 1. A sample size smaller than 100 increases the probabilities of sampling error and lowers the power of the statistical tests applied to the data. However, it has also been argued that samples with N5 between 30 and 60 have many practical advantages in exploratory research. The argument is that samples of the size of this study's (60) are more likely to have meaningful significance when statistical significance is found. In addition, the sample in this study was selected randomly from a larger population from different geographical areas in Kuwait. Kuwait public kindergartens are fairly representative of school systems throughout the nation. The sample is typical of what is occurring on a regular basis in kindergartens in any part of the country. 63 The analysis of the results was done by multivariate analysis of variance procedures which were appropriate for the data being analyzed. A major concern was the usage of the MANOVA with a small sample or if the MANOVA were the most appropriate form of analysis for the data in this study. In addition, the study used a relatively high alpha (.10). It was thought that the negative impact on precision was minimized. It is probable that different procedures for eliciting and language may have different results. These results are partly dependent on previous learning about these settings and procedures. The child will produce different language at home than that produced in an unfamiliar school room or with unfamiliar instruments. One variable that contributes to those differences is the familiarity of the setting. The researcher had visited all the children and had had informal conversations with them with the help of the female kindergarten teacher. The purpose of the interview was explained to all children, and a familiar room was always provided to create a comfortable situation that allowed a wide latitude of responses. Another variable that contributes to differences is the reliability and validity of the instruments used in the study. The instruments used in this study which differed from those used in other studies performed in other languages, were adapted and developed in an attempt to collect samples of spontaneous conversations of five year old children. The differences for the low educational background children may be due to the unfamiliarity of the instruments especially to the perceptual- 64 social context in which the test occurs. The middle and high educational background children might have been more able to transfer language skills used or learned because of the similarity between the instruments and their every day environments. The photographic pictures in this study were developed, selected, and tested for the purpose of the study to minimize negative impact. However, the low educational background children demonstrated a competence in language collectively, and the photographic pictures motivated all groups into long, interesting conversations. The test showed no significant differences among low, middle, and high educational background levels. The findings in this study indicated that there were no significant differences between sexes, siblings, and parental educational background groups. The most possible explanation for this is that all groups had a very similar social background. One generation ago, Kuwaiti children visited the home of teachers who converted one of their rooms into a classroom. The master wrote his/her own textbook, and the subjects taught were the Quran, basic arithmetic, and correspondence. By 1937, 140 girls attended school for the first time. The first two kindergartens were established in 1954. The national literacy rate was almost zero. The economy was based on fishing and limited trading. All people had the same economic level. Citizens were so poor that their average income was less than $50 per year per person. There were no develoPed social economic classes in the society. 65 The oil boom of the 19605 brought dramatic changes to every aspect of life in Kuwait. Income rose from the lowest to the highest per capita in the world. Kuwait began to expand education on a massive scale. The formerly-small Department of Education became the Ministry of Education in 1962. A university was founded in 1966 with 418 students. In 1983, there were 79 kindergartens with 21,287 children. More opportunities occurred for income diversification which created different economic classes, but the social and traditional values remained very much the same. In the last 30 years of modernization in education, parents lagged behind in the developmental process in the country. The educational system has left parents without much change, not providing them with new insights or developing their responsibilities toward their children. Cultural beliefs that affect the relationship between children and parents is inherited from past generations. Social values take more than one generation to develop new social forms. The traditional forms of communication, especially those between adults and children, probably haven’t changed. There are probably no large social class linguistic differences or different speech styles. The social characteristics of language acquisition remained even with the mass of economic changes. Another possible explanation is that in the study, all the subjects were selected from children in their second year of school. It is probable that the first year of schooling contributed to the results. Kuwaiti kindergartens are controlled by the 66 government; they follow the same guidelines, receive the same materials, and follow the same activities. They all use one curriculum provided by the Ministry of Education. Teachers basically use the same teaching methods. Consequently, the previous year of schooling for the subjects in this study probably eliminated differences between sexes, siblings, and different parental educational background groups for the subjects. 5. The findings in this study indicated that there were no statistically significant differences between male and female groups. It was also found that there were no statistically significant differences between older sibling and younger sibling groups and among the three educational background levels. When the interactions between variables were tested, it was found that sex by chronological order was the only interaction that showed a statistically significant difference. See Chapter IV for detail. Younger sibling females produced more vocabulary words than older sibling females or older and younger sibling males. At the same time, means and standard deviations showed that older sibling males produced slightly more vocabulary than older sibling females and older sibling females produced the same number of vocabulary words as younger sibling males (see Figures 1 and 2). Adequate understanding of the findings requires more highlights on other variables that may influence the interaction between siblings. Number studies have reported marked association between birth order and eminence (Schachter, 1963; Hilton, 1967; Cicirelli, 1972; Abramovitch, Corner, 0t Pepler, 1980). It has 67 been repeatedly demonstrated that those who are more productive or creative or eminent tend to be first born or only children. The first born child profits from his/her closer exposure to adults. This idea seems to be supported by numerous findings. The findings in this study may reveal some sort of developmental trend where at an early age the later born child benefits from the stimulations of an older sibling and at a later age where verbal ability comes into play at school age. Abramovitch (1980) concluded that siblings are more effective teachers than adults; older siblings may serve as role models for one another, particularly when the younger siblings observe the older ones. Lamb (1978) found that young children imitate much more than older ones. Older females were more presocial in their behavior than any other group. Cicirelli (1973) observed that children were more likely to receive and accept help from an older sister than an older brother. Abramovitch, Corter, and Lando (1979) ‘concluded that it might have been expected that older sisters would be more likely to act as models than older brothers. He found that first born males appeared to use more physical power techniques, whereas first born females were more likely to use techniques such as explaining, asking, and taking turns. Cicirelli (1975) observed that older sisters were both "teachers" for their younger siblings in a laboratory problem- solving task. Findings are compatible with the picture of older sisters as more sensitive and skillful in interaction with younger siblings. Data on sex differences in siblings' interaction are needed to explore the same- and mixed-sex composition the siblings (older males, younger females versus older females, younger males need to be examined to reach some developmental trends in this matter. Family size may be an important variable in sibling interaction. The experiences of children living in large and nuclear families need to be explored. 68 Living in larger families offers richer possibilities for cross-age alliances that may not be comparable to those in sibling dyads. The interactional experiences in multiple-child families are in need of investigation. Parental skills may be another variable that effects sibling interactions. Hilton (1969) observed that the inexperienced mother of the first born is more interfering, more inconsistent, and more extreme (either supportive or critical) in her child treatment. The literature concluded that sibling relationships are intense, complex, and of infinite variety. There are more than a few simple factors in the study of sibling interactions. More studies are needed in sibling interactions, sex, parental educational background, and other variables to reach any conclusions and trends in the language of Kuwaiti children. Recommendations for Future Research In light of the present findings, future attempts to study issues related to children's speech production in the Arabic language in Kuwait should take into account that no research has been conducted with language development of Arabic speaking children. There is much to be investigated in this area. Recommendations for future research appear below. 1. Replication of this study should be done, including not only groups of children similar to the ones used here, but also children living in different areas of Kuwait and other Arabic nations and at different age levels in order to determine vocabulary change in language development. 2. Future efforts should be directed at testing and controlling how specific variables determine vocabulary change in language development. Furthermore, greater control in upcoming studies should include how variables such as age, sex, intelligence, 69 siblings, parent social and educational status, and other environmental factors affect language changes and development. Oral language, as evidenced by recent research, plays a significant role in students' efforts to understand written language and ability to read effectively. A knowledge of the syntactic structures that students possess at this level could serve to enlarge the understanding of teachers and reading specialists about the language development of students in different grades in Kuwait. One of the greatest needs of oral language study is related to the non-existence of standardized test measures to assess reading achievements and levels as well as vocabulary and effect of sentence complexity for Arabic speaking children in Kuwait. It would seem only appropriate to invest more energy in the future toward this direction. Lists of words for students at this and earlier levels could be provided by writers. Oral language studies need to be conducted to determine the kind of language problems which appear in children's speech. Language development studies need to use other kinds of approaches and different settings to allow adequate, meaningful assessment of children's language development and could account for the differences found in verbal behavior. APPENDICES APPENDIX A POPULATION INCLUDED IN THE STUDY APPENDIX A POPULATION INCLUDED IN THE STUDY 13> 103 In ID 1m I'm 9. .0 I 1L4 17s 111 66 lst 25 22 Tel.oper. ill. stife. ill. no l 111 56 2 lst 55 3O Foreman ill. stife. 111. no 111 63 1 lst 70 40 Retired ill. stife. 111. no 111 64 l lst 60 40 Retired ill. stife. ill. no 111 63 l lst 60 35 Retired ill. stife. 111. no 112 57 3 lst 30 26 Employee 10th Teacher 12th yes 112 64 2 lst 30 26 Oil tech. 12th Secrty. 10th yes 112 62 2 lst 46 27 Employee 7th stife. 7th no 112 65 3 lst 31 28 Army trnr. 12th Prncpl. 12th yes 112 62 2 lst 30 25 Employee llth stfe. 10th yes 113 66 2 lst 32 26 Bnk.mgr. MA Employee MA yes 113 67 2 lst 30 26 Profes. PhD Teacher 12th yes 113 65 3 lst 29 27 Soc.wkr. BA Teacher BA no 113 66 3 lst 36 34 Prncpl. BA Physician BM yes 113 65 3 lst 34 29 Univ.emp. MA Teacher BA yes 121 68 10 10th 44 35 Employee ill. stife. ill. no 121 68 5 4th 43 30 Guard ill. stife. 111. no 121 65 7 6th 49 34 Foreman ill. stife. 111. no 121 69 8 7th 50 40 Foreman ill. stife. 111. no 121 60 8 8th 46 41 Mailman ill. stife. 111. no 122 64 2 2nd 45 27 Employee 7th stife. 6th no 122 65 3 2nd 32 27 Employee 10th Employee 10th yes 122 58 3 3d 36 34 Teacher 12th Teacher 12th yes 122 64 5 4th 43 35 Merchant 10th stife. 9th yes 122 62 2 2nd 35 30 Employee 8th Employee llth yes 123 62 4 3rd 30 30 Merchant 12 Employee BA yes 123 59 2 2nd 36 31 Police 12 stife. BA no 123 64 3 2nd 33 30 Teacher BA Teacher 12th no 123 56 3 2nd 32 3O Engineer BE Teacher 12th yes 123 65 4 3rd 36 30 Oil eng. MA stife. BS yes 70 13> 211 211 211 211 211 212 212 212 212 212 213 213 213 213 213 221 221 221 221 221 222 222 222 222 222 223 223 223 223 223 Key: 103 64 59 68 53 65 66 63 64 66 65 67 63 66 66 68 63 62 59 67 68 65 63 60 67 62 59 65 65 65 59 XHHIO’TIWUOUJIP 11 " H 11 11 H II 11 11 H 11 (3 ID lst lst lst lst lst {PWWNW lst lst lst lst lst WNWWN lst lst lst lst lst wcwuw— 8 7th 8 8th 11 9th 8 7th 13 10th 3rd 7th 2nd 2nd 2nd #wNOOV 2nd 4th 3rd 2nd 2nd Nwwtw Im 39 60 45 45 45 36 45 29 33 27 32 34 31 27 31 60 40 44 46 65 29 37 28 38 27 32 38 4O 37 36 Code number Child's age in months 111 2 5 20 24 30 20 23 30 26 27 25 25 30 28 24 28 45 32 35 35 35 28 35 26 29 26 3O 35 37 29 27 71 9 Police Guard Guard Retired Foreman Employee Employee Employee Teacher Merchant Gov.ad m. Profes. Teacher Police Schl.supv. Merchant Guard Guard Merchant Retired Teacher Employee Teacher Technicn. Teacher Employee Engineer Physician Prncpl. Gov. ad m. Number of children in family Child's position in family Father's age Mother's age Father's occupation Father's educational level Mother's occupation Mother's educational level Does the mother have anyone to help her in the home? 5 111. ill. ill. ill. ill. 12th 8th 8th 12th 10 th BA PhD BA BA 12th ill. ill. ill. ill. ill. 12th 10th 12th 12th 12th BA BA BA BA MA 1 stife. stife. stife. stife. stife. Teacher stife. stife. Laborer stife. Soc.wkr. Pharmcst. Teacher Teacher Librarian stife. stife. stife. stife. stife. stife. stife. Food mgr. Teacher Teacher Teacher stife. stife. Teacher stife. IL! ill. ill. ill. ill. ill. 12th 8th 12th 10 th 9th BA BC 12th 12th BA ill. 111. ill. ill. ill. 10 th 6th 9th 12th 12th 12th 12th BA BA BA yes no yes no yes no yes yes no yes no no no no yes no no yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes APPENDIX B ARABIC WORD LIST All the nouns used by all the groups in the study and arranged by the subject. Nouns #Frequncy Nouns #Frequncy Nouns #Frequncy 1;.__.. 196 ’c____;l 6 “(J—4 104 o;___; 112 F;__;I — ¢J____S 8 J___g 95 ,J___;; 9 LaJ___S 3 9___9 93 J;__* 28 F—+J——S 12 p____a 55 LiL-.4 3 L;J___s _ sgeja 2 rkJ3-* 2 Lmi____s - ,§SL__2 28 9J3___z - ‘2‘“‘3 119 1§4-——9 l7 L9L___fl 2 ‘QF_JJI 2 eJI s_6 4 lit—p1 2 L_.____.:. - 0.2.1.6 - 1;»: 9 9 1__,_:.l 10 18.5.6 ‘ s__;._.- 31 ‘ l—1—&'¥| 2 :_-.___.. 22 “_d.‘ 17 H 11 dLQ-b 35 Lea—4; 22 p+—b&+ 2 L—J. 2 ask—5 29 red—H ‘ d__J¢ 3 98...; 28 5:11 - ala 3 PS¢__‘5 ' 1J+———5 2 LS.» ‘ 2:14.14 7 Jot...» 4* 6Q - T 4 6.1—“ 3 14,—.“ Q d———> 29 u—J' 3 gym—0 2 rl-s—~ — 72 73 Nouns #Frequency Nouns #Frequency Nouns #Frequency L___‘.I 150 J... 4 61.5.. 29 ;___'.I 3 0H - f3)! 13 L._.._..=. - h_JL._l= - c..___.. 3 °_____,, 1 8.2.146. - A—.—~ 1 ,______,_ 10 k.,_'.-;1____..J1 - C.._... _°___, 10 . ..-> n 3 ~...___.._ 7 ¢___;.,_:, - t...J__J - 01...... 2 '-——e-=~>-~ — 3____:, 12 4......1.__a: 6 U.1_... - ”in._a - (a... 2 13 )___, 19 H.) 24 a. .._.. 6 H‘sf—f’ 2 J31 6 J.___:..c - u—‘L—JJJ - fi___,—l‘,l 2 3J____.2._c 8 L,_l__..s ‘ Q1...:.1 3 J24 Egg—4|} 4 ¢__..9... l7 0......I 15 J24 L__.:.I 3 3.8.1.2.. - 9......1 _ J4": ‘LJL: 3 ¢——'-.» 20 4......“ 3 w“ C-u‘ 3 “PM 10 9.1...“ 9 PM 3 JildJl 2 ”4...: 4 fan a“; ‘ 6.le ‘ 21.-.1...“ 4 4,4544» 2 1.1.1. ‘ Let—4‘ 2" r15 ”u- “ H.151.) ' 4431—"? 4 ‘35-“ 6+" ‘ {ala—J ‘ '21.“.Jl_.~.ll 2 '6an v.14; ‘ S’:,_J1_.; _ #11:. 7 JAE-s 34441-53 ‘ «AL—.6 ‘ ail—:41 2 WU... - , ,JJ 2 1.11.. 19 U__,____, — tor—“.53 2 C—‘T‘JI 4 3J—-‘ 34 Nouns UTIJ" U_lL_'> 18.5 #Frequency 2 34 Nouns “ i “_‘IJ 74 #frequency 5 Nouns Bfl—ll; «.le—.4 #Frequency 2 2 29 12 29 25 23 12 27 l7 17 L\ 75 #Frequency ‘1 #Frequency Nouns ¢3__ml 4 q)__w2| 2 («U—J 6 013..Ji 8 21.-*4 4 w _ 2J___>Q 2 .J‘*L__*¢ _ ”.1...“ 6 8,545 _ 3—“3—4 41 J'J—J 13 J1)...“ 3 o95—-f 2 o—efiJ'J‘ 2 8413.11.11 4 81138.11 2 J—A? 28 J——~>fi 4 ,Ji._.._..1| 4 J--—#** 4 eh-éu' 9 %—-49§' 6 %—-4'5§' 2 iL_4LH l6 1_JaiJl 5 Nouns 3Jl__¢.>._l| Ql—_A.>—J| P5534 ' .. .IJ‘) 8.31in ¢__.I #Frequency 2 [\J Nouns J34 3QUJJI I; 5 JHJ Y JL.__:oJ)l| o -\ 76 #Frequency 6 2 Nouns 2:..si_,_a_n ‘ l L-Jll—Jl ‘|A__£ Ehf' JIJ.__J1 #Frequency 31 ll 34 Nouns S._ufll OW #Frequency 2 10 25 Nouns .bt...b LL...LJI ltd—.13., I 3%.“ 77 #Frequency 2 Nouns H #Frequency 4 Nouns #Frequency Nouns dJIJ JlaJl l__mJl.> 78 #Frequency 3 5 11 [\D Nouns ¢;L__.. I L.;L_..ul (fJJ_‘b #Frequency Nouns I ,. u JL———h_.» éJ-—E* .5 . .31"); 95.5....s__>.Jl @3le #Frequency 18 38 15 Nouns 13L...JI f.__1.._11 3Jj_.JI l%-;JJ-—‘ pr3——4 79 #Frequency [\J Nouns CIJ_.I cifi’w &)L__$Jl flab—‘7' QL._—S.a 8JL__$8 1 #Frequency 29 12 17 31 IO Nouns gag—1.1)“ #Frequency 70 20 Nouns BLJH 80 #Frequency Nouns 0JL___§..o “IL—H #Frequency [\J {in Nouns 3J1... 8JL..JI culJL...” «LLJL..JI «QJL..w 1...»... éJJL~0 é—w'H é.JIJaJI 8JL..9.M 8JL...b 3J8L._16_11 «LIJL__#E k,81J...é>ll 1.2.2.131 ,fIJ..:I 1.81JJI 95133.8! 9513...}...1 8L.J;.JI ij—LAJ 81,;L.LM gr] .5 6.9...ol__:_“ #Frequency Nouns ll l—firJ’ 9 1.8%,» 3 uéur—J 4 .p—uaJ' - ‘13; - £13.11 3 f...» _ 3_33_J - 13L..AJ 3 8.91_..a_l 4 L,21...:. 5 16...; 3 1.. 3.1 1 3 ELI—.1 _ J——:’r 2 8J_..)ll 29 2.1.45.“ 8 L_,...)lS 2 Laws 2 4.8M—S _ rN-S _ r—+*35 - ’93N_5 ' l...JS 6 3-5JJ 5 UJJJI 81 #Frequency Nouns 4 ll 7 3 l3 L_...b 83.3L. a,” r—+JéJJ cf CJJJI tbij—b 24,1.in #Frequency 3 3 Nouns Lil—_aJl L.__'..§.o L1__..:.1J._...1 #Frequency 16 15 ll Nouns n JJJ-J' 6JJ 61331 J..;3S o. LL..A.JI I on I I ‘ 82 #frequency Nouns #Frequency 8 Nouns QMYI 9L,“ #Frequency 3 Nouns Rub—x“ 9.414,ng 1.313.; 83 #Frequency 5 Nouns XML—.3 .L_.L_.. QL—Aw °—--'..J A... JJ‘——# SSH 3")..L._.§ #Frequency Nouns 6653—» l—w 97“” U__.s JJ-‘4* 3H §JL_’;.4 5353* #Frequency Nouns [\J #111“ ML; SSJILJ JJI_£ JL...S 84 #Frequency Nouns 2 A_JL_$ 1......1 .3...m_J| fl 545—>- #Frequency 4 Nouns 1_.,......1 #Frequency 16 87 l7 19 29 .11... 15931—4» .61.... H934» SM...JI L—bJL—"n-O 90 55 43 27 #Frequency Nouns “I . - l' H cal—ia- r—HWJJ‘ ou—-‘-“ ua1;-*J' c. 1...)...“ LwJ—J UuH .Lr—é‘ #Frequency 17 3 10 38 Nouns I'LL—32).” #Frequency 10 Nouns rs; L__5- 3.331._3 Ml—n‘ JJ—‘é cs,_.o .' .u ' a ‘ 3._§_.l_>._.ll JL—aa) Ll-——.>JJ| siflJI 86 #Frequency 5 3 Nouns a..JnI EF—Tb I 0A....“ 0L...;¥l J___> 1 #Frequency 28 14 85 71 [\J Nouns a..4,Jl L-beJI #Frequency 9 11 12 12 25 l4 14 36 17 23 Nouns 1.....JI 87 #Frequency 7 #Frequency 66 92 6 7 56 88 Nouns # Frequency Nouns # Frequency Nouns # Frequency 1;.__'._..J| 8 ,1 29 uJ—J 3 °-—.-.--' 32 {>11 20 1..., - s..JL, — U.....§ - J3L_.s _ U...s 4 11.... - AsL——5 l4 f—H‘ ' u»)——-.5 31 J—CLJJI - U...” - le—,.S 8 33d 12 ,iJL_.> 10 $43—45 .- U.¢sL._s 3o .11.. - -1_..,__s 3 .._._. _ 8...“... 7 L.._.Q_:..n.,.§ - C‘f’“ — 4.4.1 - c..L..a._..§ 2 {~16 - 4.3.3; - EZL—Dgi—Jl — 4......) 2 .5...as 3 ,JL... — C...JJ1 2 l——+JLb’ ‘ aJL——L~ ‘ cr—HJ 3 8...... - .231... - J1... - U.___.n. 10 88L...s - LL..QL; 4 u—e'll-e-J' 2 «anal—.2. 2 QLJ; _ L—w—fll 23 0.3....) — ”4__1.E..'_.' ‘ " 0..."...11 12 Us)...» - L; - Q....._._J - .E..a. - 03.;J 2 5"“)! 4 C—‘gJ—t - u'——1r-JJ _ w! ‘ .16).: - FL...“ - 1...... ‘ 6-———45 - L._. T 4 L.L...; ‘ L..i$Lo ‘ La__.uL... - {63.3.4 18 031—45 2 23.—Li 7 L...,s.s 3 U31.....5 - a... : - rjd—_le ' UgE... 8 C...l.._é ‘ Nouns 1...)...» 1191...; 1.2.1161.> .161... 051... fLL__Q w—‘J &o - #Frequency 2 Nouns 8.1—1... asLE.aJl KlgL..s J41... J31... 04.53;“ enrol—J AJI___“. JJL___§ “_ng 89 #Frequency 6 Nouns LAuL_.» KSHL_. 5 l fiQ—‘J ‘1 -. ""1 £|J__? #Frequency 7 L\ Nouns dUP—‘54 08—3.“ L444oL——5 t..3la Ll . .. 3.01....le HJ‘“ r—PJ—l' 3.31 1 #Frequency Nouns §JP—J 0....l YJL’—i &——4as 5).—ham JL... 1.2.1.. #Frequency Nouns JL...sXI JL-—51 .r-+BJ' JIH)“ L——éw3 #Frequency 3 Nouns 3313...? JIJJJI EJIJJJI cL—‘u‘ let—a) ‘L—<;+—SJ' .. 91 #Frequency 2 5 56 J All the Verbs used by by the Root. Verbs #Frequency / / ....fJ Root H.” 39 w—l—J 164 ;_;J _ HéhLfi 50 . . I" 4 o—eesJS 2 84—:+¥j 8 J 3; .. ’: Lw—s-P- - 1 . - _ .._.LJ — / I: ._/j. _ 147313 — .. ! Lz—Hj-A-‘L ‘ / .? °I’ 6 lj—F‘J _ I Jul—1)” - / . / I d—Aab Root Verbs 1| 3 a ~ 4 . 0’6’ ” '. dj——$ J1 - .. l .. 444351 JJ——-ié 1 331...; o—eJJ—j‘ ’65 :53 1 95—" CJJ—J CUF°JJ‘fi IHIJ #Frequency 9 Root 102 40 23 53 Root 69 23 22 20 Verbs c.» C ' J ¢‘_°J ova—v.24 l—.'..>J all the groups in the study and arranged #Frequency 2 23 l8 I3 23 25 Verbs Lby—daJ // / 853—” #Frequency 11 Root Verbs fiF—93J .. J 'JJ—‘H LIN—La hsi 93 #Frequency Verbs #Frequency Root 25 Verbs QJJF—‘*# w .. cfi L_? CL1)1—-—4¢ #Frequency 18 30 Root 22 Root Verbs L__; L__;#bL> Lav—J» 94 #Frequency 28 24 17 41 Verbs #5ij had)? A_"4d‘, c-.. 9“: #Frequency 95 Verbs #Frequency Verbs #Frequency Verbs #Frequency owe—a5 " via—sew 3 643-3 ' L;._\__..a — c.13__.>._, 2 u—-'-'~>J-' ? Q34—n-‘41' 4 H—o“ 2 “L—HJI — ¢__.af 2 Ho... - L—HJJ—v 3 fawn—o - e..__.> - .543 - .x__..a_. 6 'H - 03¢)?! " I’M—o - o——.-+>~‘ ‘ «gafl 2 He»; - d——..-~. 2 e—L 4 [#4de _ |__~-- 2 ~S~ _ r—‘M-b “ °——L--- “ ‘ ‘ t——J° ROOt HI “‘3 _ “L—‘Hu A ' _ u—‘D‘b _ 4.: l__... Root I" 2 t...» Q 24 Lbu|_~ - ft—g—L-m—r “" - 0W 2 Lad—_ani 15 L_‘._L...._. ' ug—Lu‘h-J ‘ 94mg ‘ L—+—L--—' ' L—wye-LH _ Raul—d. ‘ Hf _ Hf _ ramp? 5 l_.‘_L=..2.T ‘ c.._.>.b 5 oxl.__...=. 3 a...__L,»L, _ u——‘=~_J= _ 45L_... -— B_SJ Root C_‘b" 3 gem—w ‘ w—esfi 9 u—>~’=~ 8 age ‘ BJJ 2 1...}: 7 Lung 2 @J 4 u—“Ab 6 Doug 3 g5) 7 c'—J° 12 451—» 2 e—‘J—3 8 'yL—b 2 Verbs gal—“.1. fm¢;L__u# ML._....T (wage, Lug; dug! .A_‘>i_'. (rs—51 finer eggs->1 :3;_->r QJ.._: .J-CI #Frequency 9 Verbs 96 #Frequency 4 A l\.) Root Verbs ¢_:_ll_bf ”us: :rJJ—e urJ¢——5 #Frequency Root 97 Verbs #Frequency Verbs #Frequency Verbs #Frequency dJ—‘f — (rd—LL“ " 7 0.2).; — MJ—C _ «4'..le — Lady-43 2 w—v—h _ 6—15 11 ms! 3 WJ“; " ¢—-‘-lbt - FPO“ - ”J—L‘ ' C___lh_. 10 l__..-J¢ — Mr Root W51. 4 H‘U‘L' - l_._15i_. 2 C—‘JLL _ wry-P - JJL 12 13.4.15 - f—“J Root H—ISL — C__Lbl' — NJ — w-JSL. 20 :45" ma..." Root OHfl 17 a_._J$‘L_. 6 opus. 20 f—“J‘ 9 t___15f 3 ELL—J 26 ,_..J 3 :J__Jsr 4 Hui 11 Hr- 9 P—“Jf 4 05—5)! 2 LI__,_.J 2 a__1.uJ ~ H5 Root a_.._.JI - L__....._) - L44” 6 t—Jw _ J__....a Root A__.a._3i 7 wad ‘ LJ_..ef 5 gm 3 L——+~=-—.-_,~ _ J__....L 8 03% 6 war 5 a I _ ._\.__n._'1_. 7 LI_HJ_. - L4“; - I)“; — Le-w— 2 4.2.... 3 _u 2 “if — uJ'l“"'—' - gm; ' u—ur ‘ “l—‘A‘ 2 “'9‘ - l‘J—U — M 2 A_.,__:,I 2 WfJ 2 L__*__J...._c" ' - .L—u.“ ~- 6 ‘,____=' ' Rm c Verbs A__“_l....é [—94.51 1345‘) cuss, gag.“ es); #Frequency Root 18 Verbs 98 #Frequency Verbs #Frequency 4 3 Verbs dry—.1“. 533...: eg*_gi orb—w" ~ ”_Luf #Frequency Root 62 ll Verbs 99 #Frequency 4 Root Verbs H:r—-*# “t“ r . A-fJ—‘u I. #Frequency 3 4 l\) Verbs IgoJ__h_nr L3_Ln_“. #Frequency Verbs 8—“1' tA-dt QJ#J-4fi «DJ—5.24?! {Ev—L! 100 #Frequency Root Verbs J39 J3 4.,2 UJJJ°-——e J34 i L§JJ¢——w L—4U34 JJ¢-# €25¢--# 6.4de '—+~'JJJ +3 Ifl—_.b 6).—'6 qy—AHJH #Frequency Root 9 3 Root UI Verbs #Frequency Root 25 5 Root 34 Root 33 1\) Root Root 51 Verbs 101 #Frequncy Verbs Lad—.35..) #Frequency 7 6 Root 22 ll Verbs u;;L__S L__;S I ‘9_AJ> F335 #Frequency Root 9 2 Verbs 102 #Frequency Verbs uJJl__w JJL__~i Lust—- #Frequency Verbs EAL—_sfiJé D—5 J 3 A ¢__&T #Frequency Root Root Root 103 Verbs #Frequency w—J - L__?JJJJ - ¢__:¢JJ — , Root 43__‘~ - L+4J‘-—~v ' L__i}~*# - LDL#¢A——~ _ JH Root Friar—e 2 (“r-"JJJ—‘T! 3 J3——‘# - UJJJ—_‘# 4 LQJJ—a _ OJJJ——‘5w — %~—w4 Root +——#a: 3 $7) Root 6J——5 4 fr—- cur-“Few cur—~i1ee # Frequency Root Root Root Verbs C—JL—b L——ée33e e—s—b" ”3' ii Him J L 71‘ 106 Frequency Root Root Root Verbs b__b; £u_;. # Frequency Root Root Root 107 Verbs # Frequency Verbs # Frequency Verbs fr‘ Frequency chlot _ C°—“‘*-‘- _ H»... 1;. (fl—at - “fig—“h." ' ‘54—; Root J¢__., Root éggf - J43 1...: Root Q34“ - ‘5ng ' JL__2.: 6 C‘J-“l‘ Root 57—h“; Root l__.2: * L___A;__. " whi— - UJL__2._". 2 H Root c—“T 2 I)_ll.u . _ _ . _ Ubj‘) Root e——.-° ROOt Ham - r—Pflafi — bi—Az; " HI 4 n ,_._..a_;, A. - 21.—.3...- .. ‘ r——=¢ ROOC 'J—‘d _ rug—Mew — b‘L—Afl- - U—m _ a——"I Root ” 9 - 0.9—" Root wy‘lfi - (hi-“‘4‘ ‘ arr—“I - cut—4...... ' 3 “fir—‘54“ ‘ 5H _ U.._'.L:....J _ fJ——‘° Root up“; Root 'J—‘Qi—"MI - fJ—‘L‘ 2 Wm; * _ “FAA—k, 4 ,_.=_ Root . g _ u—"5—.I Root OH'I'JL ‘" '- “2.4.... _ ¢L__ — «_UL__=~_J Root UdsJL__> _ C‘—“ Root 8;;4L__u _ ¢LP-’ - unfit Root yr_4u> ll 11‘ Frequency Root Root Root Root Root Root Root Root Root Root Root HO Verbs # Frequency Verbs # Frequency Verbs # Frequency g——éae 10 J33 Root I3———3 Root H*—-—J3 Root ¢¥——J'J - ¢%——d14—e 2 .3 _JsJ _ 33..» Root (Iyi——&e ‘ f—fi—r-Lé -— ._\___~T - J-—4b Root Q——e3~ - éJ__J>l - HI 2 003—4 Root C"“-'“‘ Root C_..._§ Root gar—13 - «'2 9—‘~—-——'. " .. - . .. _ ufir——i¥ _ I¥;__5 Root 095—“3e - ¢L__;J Root rf3__s; — é3__u Root |——4;b_b ‘ 3——?J ROOt (jg—~01 2 fl.) Root JHJI - .7—5.) Root fad—4 - J——-o—-$ ROOt sr-“ir* ' J‘¢-4 ' cL—JAe ‘ &;___u Root 3J___a Root u——3$ Root C‘——”I 4 uJQJ—-&w ' gr——J$$e ’ §¢___s Root u——4+ Root E 5 Root §¢——*# 2 o:——é+e ‘ t__u3i - CJ_~0 Root U__J> Root J¢__5 Root CJ——A# - U__J>f - “+J¢——5 - ¢__§J Root QQ__? Root J) 3 u 3 “cr— ' J-—-?*=' 2 wJ¢—-’-—' — QL_bs Root UJJ__%# - J¢__3; 2 L__+;355 - ‘)____5i Root ‘)¢__5 2 03—5 Root PL! - JLJE ‘ - |.n, - ' Root 03‘) u : ”J Root _5 Verbs o—n? # Frequency Root Root Root Root Root Root Root Root Root Verbs °¢——:§i J—-“" %-———S 111 # Frequency Verbs Root Root CUJ—T‘S—n' (Viz—~35 “Jr—.5 J__.s QflJ*—-S; J——#S—€ n '17 Frequency Verbs # Frequency 112 113 All the particles used by all the groups in the study Earticles # Frequency Particles # Frequency "ParriCles #Frequency .9 1143 '——-‘-.-.-9 2 L__-._l 28 U——J 296 ¢———#$ 84 eL___J u———4 75 L__?¢J 86 eL__J - 2 208 P——rr3 36 ¢———+ — L__4 440 H 2 by-.. 13 UF——Js 89 d———¢$ " r——Ffi1J-+ 2 u———“ 8 ¢_____'._. 9 “fill—“F 2 U...» 13 WW 16 W9”... 3 3i 32 r__?;‘ 6 ¢___“32s - 1.3: 79 W_-... 4 15* 4 "Pas" §I 176 ¢L___;. — ‘t——#&L+ _ "rad'u—J~ 23 r——e4‘ ' Q'J——JL+ ‘ MW 54 H 16 r—-- — "LT+ALJJ"L£ 96 L__;5 - "QSJ"Lr~ 19 Lg———é5 3 13—e¢>+ - L_st 9 I__q4J 2 L__qJ1¢s - L__4JS 4 ¢__;£ 2 L__m¢.d 3 L__# 20 ¢___#Js 24 iL_,;~s — of 7 L———+—..~J-‘ 14 P——+—.!~L:"—J ‘ Q___SJ _ p——+¢J$ 8 L——k#¢#L—# _ L5__.I - cJ____._Lc 8 WW - 4...: - sa—L‘ - “_H - J——J 7 l——4fi—b - “L—Hhu — 114 1L [I Particles 1; Frequency Particles # Frequency Particles 7F Frequency ujgmsu" 4.“. — a.__3 21 clung 2 "Wang; ~ I_.(.J 109 stains 7 " ULLUEF' 5 rh—H 76 E—JvJ-kd. ‘ L—WJJJJLg - 94$! 2 o—fi—a—L - ou,—Lug - t—sfl 8 ¢——..—=—1L-.- ‘ 25H; — J_SSLJ ‘ Hm. ‘ «Usage. 4 2.6L_Ja_'._1_l ‘ ‘ L__.._II_. ‘ w~_m_JLd 12 %——#ebJJ 3 wh—J'JJJL# - ngstL2 5 313.34J ‘ cA;IJ_fi>JL# ‘ Est—LL- 9 9.45:1 2 d—a-v-JL-r ' tl_i,$JLs ‘ cl__lllJ ‘ as,_bJLs ‘ Quayle ' 143.! ' 5.5.2.“... ' ugh“. ‘ Well 7- :uuluu. 2 J—"-‘JLT' - Irv—«3 _ GJ'JA-‘Lq ‘ oJL?_~JLd 3 ¢>IJ_J ' J__.JL2 2 We. 2 6344'“. ‘ We ' au—JL— ‘ J—JJJL 2 3J—H‘L’Lf' ' Hut. " a_13.» 14 o—-«: Hr - 9.13.314» s 8:,» 3 $5., t—-‘ 13 deLb ‘33“ ‘ 6L——¢3 ¢——&4 ‘ J13—9 ‘33“ ‘ @L-fij 97-‘* 2 §L_a as.» 45 Lmt_ij L_k&4 — tasst_m 1u__J; - 6L-L4 L__&o 9 d—Js .L_L. 2 §L_u 9.4...» 12 L_S 1M3 - tango, a.“ - r—e‘ {—9 4 rel—u P—‘v—‘L" 3 L ‘3__m 5 LDL_A4 L__pas 7 9__;m L__;m ‘ LsLij L__;x_a ‘ °—.-.*-~9 LA» 5 pal—.1; p—H—o 5 U_-.. 1.1:» or. 16 L_‘.l_9...o [—31.0 I 2 tie—39' [—49 31 Q[_,;_L¢_ J99 _Qg 1.460 L__;>l Q__as 23 QL__J5 J_s§ 23 L_;> 0.3; 9 J__S L__ALI¢ 3O «#4.? Is_sa 48 QuaJI 0y. 2 U_JJI §A_JI 51 a__as L_ap1 49 dL_;4 19L49 Q; 2 Q_#¢ad ‘flJJ gas 164 C——J eL__J _ ‘;_Js Iasl‘tasls 6 L—rJS c—eJJ ¢L_1_U 2 L__»J L__4¢d; 29 J-—4w J—-“ o—a 2 o—*4 L—weés S Locals oL-‘JJ «So—J utoL—w JL—QJI mug: S.Arabic L+;1_13Ls |5L__a QflirfiJl OJJL‘ da ISL» .Jl__ébl JLéJoI v.51 E'JJ' # Frequency 18 16 51 17 4O 23 117 Locals S.Arabic ’ / D h-JJ / 9/ Isa—b C'J «ea—w J—ra'o 351.. J1_si JI JuAJASLasI L9H w—t) W [3;le 11. #:Frequency 10 22 14 61 15 l‘\) Locals J?L_n ala—_Jj «w—s Lag—51 J-.+.>L?J egg—#1 S.Arabic \J__5L$ $231 «.251 941 JL—eJ §‘—? #F requency 118 Locals S.Arabic gi—anlLb win—H 13b 6))AJIL2 zJjaJI as» oleLa 6J4.“ AS.» JSJJILA JSLJI 1a» ¢__#JS c.__51 l.\_b ‘lt'x_£ LgL.‘ ‘g C—‘J‘ d__J; 1.2.1.14 LD‘ICA—é o_fi¢i;| ego—A; ol_éJ>J “49.4... «#L_aJl ‘L__4JI JLJziJI lL_iJI §blj_&Jl ¢J_5Jl ¢——&+ L-J1+ J__¥&JI A I §3L_ijl LulLiM uSL_#S uJL_+3 s~—#J s—Jb QIJiioul ijmJ d——Au # Frequency l\) -1.” L73")? ’0 313?...” AA S.Arabic l_‘_,,..u: H 6L4451 ‘thJl Lfdufi AxiaJl ”fix Q's-‘5')" eta.“ an...” aLgqu 4w: CLU-J' stfijJ # Frequency 3 S 119 Locals ¢3L3_s upLi}#q)Jl 34'3“: tsJL—giJI 1JJIJ¢JI 95‘)ng JlanLs 64?.“ éJJfi S.Arabic Ql——5‘-.*> J—T‘DIJ'O'“ 3th crs'J-J t--‘-?'J—° Umi_u_4 GJJJI tel+e5> WI #Frequency Locals '4'-.-.QL-.-?- «iflol Call—3...; 114.". LLQ‘, BJI not; ouch-1“) air-w S.Arabic ‘fiJ'J? Ja; m5 «4.5L; o‘L} 0.41 5| ""Lé- 1.73.56 # Frequency 10 [\J 120 Locals 15 {a Bast—3 AsLS S.Arabic ‘1" 01—0-0 c151 III .)J¢ ASLuA‘Jzé east dye-u» ‘Ufis grabs.) JlgLaJ-U' Ash-«JAG JIJL» JIJLA .JlJ-l._.o LJIJ-Li. sub “Fr-v51 W} .0 ‘fijéfi ¢{}€J-fi lfJJ: «of»? # Frequency 33 46 186 Locals gate 9L? ”J5: S.Arabic E14: H-rfl I 3+1? # Frequency 121 Locals S.Arabic I‘m—“J4 | .. 'Jb L?1Jb 6 Li) S C‘J ‘L? # Frequency Locals Q-séa-z S.Arabic u+4?' UJ~+Je # Frequency 44 19 122 Locals IJ;UH_J S.Arabic 85;: # Frequency Locals l.“:‘.. @J; qu‘t'v—L“ on: 1 ofizl eras-i Hue: 49.91., gas-4+. S.Arabic Jae {x3“5‘ egg-.- QJ-‘J “5:" J'-“"‘ ‘33“ UA2#‘§JJI ask-1' “~30 as _JLw oJ_.Sl Lo Lug.” n AA3L_~ éb‘fi # Frequency 123 Locals 99L? L53: 1.2.1531 LaoJal .Arabic rabbi masts ‘13») gnu? # Frequency 124 All the Forein words used by all the groups in the study. Foreigns From # Frequency Foreigns From # Frequency 2.1.2931 I Shoot it - C1J5.“ Gaeage _ ‘33-35 To shoot _ OsgoLs benzine — Le-J'L To shoot it — QJ-ZJLS Cartoon - a__3353 chocolate 4 f——JJ Film 6 rut Films 3 1_S#S A cake 21 ¢L4~' Bank 8 ‘fi—es Cake 18 e_fi# Pipe - ES#SJI The cake 4 jfiQ'J Radio 4 jLSLS Cocao 14 ujegéJS Television 13 1;J_sfli Biscuit - L)#4LS Camera 3 W Pepsi — W, Hilton — Laws, Macaroni - «_gJLS Karate — £5er Popeye 15 $15—11 Cabinet - ~9L+eJJ1 Lights - f3"; Tom 9 ¢—eJ Light 2 ‘—J And 8 ems-UL. Taxi - 151—r? Terry 9 ¢*JL~LJ| Chalet 2 )2) Rose - t*;#*Jl Cinema - ““J J;“‘ Mr. West - dfiéwuy Plastic - fiJrLS Cowboy 2 QJJJLSJI Cartoon - UJ“JJ* Brucelee - «fiijaJJl Electric - ‘;fiJiJL‘ Margaret - J5?“ Cycle - JJfi'4445 Grandizer — as! Usjfio Disney land — UflfiL‘ L’s-u"o Mickey Mouse 8 tsrsL» Machine - Foreigns Q;WLS J_'3.m.u O L—‘fir' EL,LS¢ JJLéo «_sJ—m war QJQJI do»; HEM)? A_J#¥l JjjJ‘J' 'i ‘H From Captain Baby a sister Supreman Doctor # Frequency a%a:Ltijfi5€5' 2 125 Foreigns coLq3S uyLsfiJ; LWNSJ' c,L_a)J# q,aszI QjaflaJl dflaJl équv+ From Cards Electric Glass Balloons Accordian Telephone Plug Gas Album Albums Kleenex Bus Makeup Box stop Hose Happy Birthday To you Video Their coats My coat Pyjame Jacket Coats 126 Foreigns From Hoolahoor Blouse 041:9 L‘“fl° 45¢ # Frequency APPENDIX C PICTURES Subject 111 112 113 121 122 123 211 212 213 221 222 223 TOTALS: 127 1’— no 64 160 as no 31 30 so as 102 116 50 809 g 36 1+8 66 36 10 3o 36 6O 24 3o 60 25 461 g 35 66 180 54 21+ 25 36 #2 96 40 732 APPENDIX C PICTURES & 2 .6. 1+8 78 36 48 90 72 144 270 234 72 1110 147 42 42 1+2 20 52 20 36 55+ 42 9O 72 78 42 36 10 114 72 66 84 114l 126 20 42 66 760 10 52 939 58 60 228 88 62 35 66 8t} 24 68 114 30 917 24 21+ 108 30 21+ 30 316 2 a #2 9O 60 126 216 282 90 119 40 6O 45 78 51+ 66 96 216 50 42 72 81+ 105 189 40 40 910 1392 APPENDIX D DESCRIPTIONS OF PICTURES APPENDIX D DESCRIPTIONS OF PICTURES Picture 1: Trip to the Zoo Trips to the zoo are a common experience for school children and are part of the school curriculum. In this photograph a group of 16 children are watching an elephant. The children are dressed in a school uniform of red and grey, with the exception of one boy in the center of the photograph who is wearing a blue sweater. This photograph was used to engender comments from the children in my sample group about their experiences with animals and school outings such as a trip to the 200. Picture 2: Children and Their Senses In this picture there are five children in the foreground. Each child is displaying a different sense that is used. From left to right: boy (smell), girl (speech), girl (sight), boy (hearing), and, in the background, girl (touch). There are children in the background who are only partially shown. There is a red car in the distant background. Children in the sample group were asked questions regarding each of these senses. Picture 3: Girls with Injured Turkey There are two girls in this picture. Both are petting and showing concern for a turkey who appears to have an injured leg. In the background are several chickens, ducks, and other birds. In the upper left of the picture, there is a man walking away with his back to the children. Questions were asked regarding the children's feelings about their pets. Picture 4: Camping Trip to the Desert In this picture there are 14 children leaving to go on a trip to the desert. The children are all sitting in the back of a white Chevrolet pick—up truck. Several of the children have their hands up in the air with two fingers raised in the form of a "v." There is a woman standing next to the truck holding on to some children’s clothing. She is looking at the children in the truck. In the background there is another truck with a canvas top that appears to have no one in it. 128 129 This picture was used to ask questions regarding children's experiences in the desert. Questions were asked regarding why the woman was standing next to the truck. Why was the other truck empty? How did the children appear to feel about their upcoming trip? Picture 5: Mother Deer and Injured Doe This picture shows two deer, apparently mother and offspring, in an enclosed setting. The small doe appears to have a broken leg. This picture was used to ask questions about how it felt to be injured or sick. Who took care of you when you were sick-—mother? grandmother? How did the doe get injured? Picture 6: Children in the Classroom There are 10 children in this classroom setting. All are dressed in school uniform of red sweaters and grey pants. 1n the background there are pictures on the walls; some appear to have been drawn by children. In the center of the picture's background, there are what appears to be three girls in an enclosed area; one is holding a doll, but it is difficult to say what the other two are doing. Forward, left in the picture, there is another group of three children bent over an activity; it is not possible to describe exactly what the activity is. At the bottom left there is a boy involved in an undisclosed activity. Center, bottom, two children are involved in a cut out art activity. Lower, right there is a boy working by himself. The children in the sample group were asked about the children in the picture. For example, why is the boy in the lower right by himself? What is the activity the children in the front left are involved in? What is the boy in the bottom left of the picture doing? Picture 7: Children at the Seashore There are 16 children involved in various activities. There is a scene of the sea behind them to their right and three large towers behind them on their left. The children in the picture are gathered together in a group but are doing different things. For example, one boy (center right) is looking up in a different direction than the others. Another boy is tying his shoe. Some children are making faces, while others look more natural. The children in the sample group were asked questions regarding the various activities and about their own experiences at the seashore. Picture 8: Imagine This picture is produced from a negative. There are five green blots interspersed on a red mass. There is one small black spot and one diagonal red line cutting across a green spot. This picture was used to allow the children in the sample group to freely use their imagination and describe what they saw there. 130 Picture 9: The Party There are eight female children and one adult male in this picture. The children are dressed in festive clothing. One child is wearing a party hat and holding a gift wrapped box. Many of the children and the adult appear to have their attention focused on something which is hidden from view. The children in the sample group were asked questions about their experiences at parties. They were also asked what they thought the other children were looking at. Picture 10: Woman and Child This black and white photograph shows a young child in the lap of a female who could be old enough to be either its mother or grandmother. Children were asked questions regarding their relationships or what they knew of relationships with someone significant in their lives, be that mother, grandmother, father, uncle, etc. NOTE: All photographs were 40 x 60 cm, mounted, in color, except numbers nine and ten which are described above. BIBLIOGRAPHY BIBLIOGRAPHY References Related to Language Development--Speech Abramovitch, R., Corter, C., or Lando, B. (1979, December). Sibling interaction in the home. Child Development, 29(4), 997-1003. Abramovitch, R., Corter, C., 6c Pepler, D. (1980). Observations of mixed-sex sibling dyads. Child Development, _5_l(4), 1265-1271. Barik, H. C. (1972, April-June). Some innovations in a computer approach to the analysis of speech patterns. Language and Speech, 12(2), 196—207. Beattie, G. W., or Butterworth, B. L. (1979). Contextual probability and word frequency as determinants of pauses and errors in spontaneous Speech. Language and Speech, 2(3), 264-275. Cameron, G. A., 6: Gray, V. V. (1980, May). Longitudinal development of English morphology in French immersion children. Applied Psycholinguistics, 1(2), 171-181. Carroll, 3. B. (1938). Diversity of vocabulary and the harmonic series law of word—frequency distribution. Psychological Record, Q, 379-386. Carroll, 3. (1960). Language development. Encyclopedia of educational research, third edition. C. W. Harris (Ed.). New York: The MacMillan Company. Carroll, 3. B. (1971). A new word frequency book, elementary English. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the National Council of Teachers of English. Cicirelli, V. G. (1972, March). The effect of sibling relationships on concept learning of young children taught by child-teachers. Child Development, 512(1), 282-287. Cicirelli, V. G. (1973). Effects of sibling structure and interaction on children's categorization style. Developmental Psychology, 9, 132-139. Cicirelli, V. G. (1967, June). Sibling constallations, creativity, IO, and academic achievement. Child Development, 38(2), 479-490. Cooke, B. L. (1971). The spoken word. Interpreting language arts research for teachers. Association for Sueprvision and Curriculum Development, NEA. 131 132 Cowe, E. G. (1970). A study of kindergarten activities for language development. In C. B. Cazden, The neglected situation in child langLuage research and education, F. Williams (Ed.). Chicago: Markham Publishing Company. Crededer, C. A. (1970). Quantitative aspects of conversational interaction. In D. Sankoff (Ed.), Linguistic variation. Models and methods. New York: Academic Press. Crosby, M. (1964). Identifying oral language relationships. Children and language. Washington, DC: ASCD. Dale, P. 5., 6r Ingram, D. (Eds.). (1981). Child language. An international perspective. Baltimore: University Park Press. Dewey, J. (1894). The psychology of infant language. The Psycholggical Revew, 1 63-66. .2 Dickie, J., 6: Bager, S. (1972, January). Considerations for the study of language in young, low-income, minority group children. 18(1), 25-38. Edwards, A. D. (1982, May). Perspectives, language difference, and educational failure. Language Arts, 52(5), 513-519. Edwards, J. R. (1979, February). Social class differences and the identification of sex in children's speech. Child Language, _6_(l), 121-127. Eneskar, B. (1978). Children's language at four and six. Sweden: CWK Gleerup. Esposito, A. (1979). Sex differences in children's conversation. Language and Speech, g0), 213-220. Finn, P. J. (1977-78). Word frequency, information theory, and cloze performance: A transfer feature theory of processing in reading. Reading Research Quarterly, XIII(4), 508-537. Garcia-Salas, O. (1977). Word frequency count in spontaneous conversations of five-year-old Guatemalan Spanish gpeaking children. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Michigan State University. Garvey, C., or Dickstein, E. (1972, October-December). Levels of analysis and social class differences in language. Language and Speech, 12(4), 375-384. Graves, M. F., Ryder, R. J., Boettcher, J. A., 6: Peacock, J. L. (1980). Word frequency as a predictor of students' reading vocabularies. Journal of Reading Behavior, XEQ), 117-127. Groff, P. (1982, November). Word frequency and spelling difficulty. T_he_ Elementary School Journal, QB), 125-130. Gunderson, D. V. (1976, March). Sex differences in language and reading. Language Arts, 52(3), 300-30 6. 133 Harrell, L. E. (1957). A comparison of the development of oral and written language in school age children. Monographs of teh Society for Research in Child Development, Inc., XXII(66/3). Harris, A. J., 6: Jacobson, M. D. (1980,, May). A comparison of the Fry, Spache, and Harris-Jacobson readability formulas for primary grades. The Reading Teacher, 920-926. Hilton, 1. (1967, November). Differences in the behavior of mothers toward first- and labert-born children. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 7(3), 282-290. Irish, D. P. (1964, March). Sibling interaction: A neglected aspect in family life research. Social Forces, 2(3), 278-288. Jones, L. V., dc Goodman, M. F. (1963, January-March). The classification of parts of speech for the characterization of aphasia. Languaggand Speech, _6_(l), 94-10 7. Jones, L. V., dc Wepman, J. (1966). A spoken word count for adults. Language Research Associates, Inc. Johnston, R. P. (1977). Social class and grammatical development: A comparison of the speech of five year olds from middle and working class backgrounds. Language and Speech, _2_0_(4), 317-324. Johnston, R. P. (1977, January-March). Social class and the speech of year-olds: The effect of intelligene. Language and Speech, _2_0(l), 40-47. Klare, G. R. (1968). The role of word frequency in readability. A research bulletin prepared by a committee of the National Conference on Research in English, New York. Koch, H. L. (1960). The relation of certain formal attributes of siblings to attitudes held toward each other and toward their parents. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 22(78/4). Kools, J. A., 6: Berryman. (1971). Differences in disfluency behavior between male and female non-stuttering children. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, l_4, 125-130. Koshuk, R. P. (1941). Social influences affecting the behavior of young children. Monogaphs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 1198/2). Lamb, M. E. (1978, March). Interactions between eighteen-month-olds and their preschool-aged siblings. Child Development, 42(1), 51-59. Landon, S. J, dc Sommers, R. K. (1979). Talkativeness and children's linguistic abilities. Language and Speech, 2_2_(3), 269-275. Lasko, J. K. (1954). Parent behavior toward first and second children. Genetic Psychology Monographs, 1(47), 97-137. 134 Lasky, E., dc Klopp. (1982, February). Parent-child interactions in normal and language-disordered children. Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, 4_7, 7-18. Leeper, S. H., Dales, R. J., Skipper, D. 5., 6c Withrespoon, R. L. (1974). Good school for young children, third edition. New York: MacMillan. Loban, W. D. (1963). The language of elementary school children. Illinois: National Council of Teachers of English. Macaulay, R. K. S. (1979, June). The myth of female superiority in language. Child Language, 2(2), 353-363. MacNamara, J. (1978). How do babies learn grammatical categories. In D. Sankoff (Ed.), Linguistic Variation. Models and methods. New York: Academic Press. MacNeilage, P. F. (Reporter). (1980). Speech production. Language and Speech, 23(1). Marks, C. B., Doctorow, M., at Wittrock, M. C. (1974, February). Word frequency and reading comprehension. The Journal of Educational Research, fl(6), 259-262. Martin, R. R., Haroldson, S. K., 6c Kuhl, P. (1972, February). Disfluencies in child—child and child-mother speaking situations. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, _12, 753—756. McKeever, P. (1983, April). Siblings of chronically ill children: A literature review with implications for research and practice. American Orthopsychiatric Journal, 5_3(2), 209-217. McLaughlin, B., Schutz, C., White, D. (1980, June). Parental speech to five- year-old children in a game-playing situation. Child Development, 5_l(2), 580—582. Miller, P. J. (1982). Amy, Wendy, and Beth. Learning in South Baltimore. University of West Texas Press. Nelson, K. (1973). Structure and strategy in learning to talk. Monograph of the Society for Research in Child Development, 3(1-2/147). Nerbonne, P. G., or Hipskind, N. (1973, January-March). Vocabularies of oral and graphic language. Language and Speech, l_6_(l), 57-66. Norman-Jackson, J. (1982, April). Family interactions, language development, and primary reading achievement of black children in families of low income. Child Development, 5_3(2), 349-358. Ollila, L. 0., dc Chamberlain, L. The learning and retention of two classes of graphic words: High frequency nouns and non-noun words among kindergarten children. The Journal of Educational Research. 135 Olson, J. (1965, March). The verbal ability of the culturally different. The Educational Forum. Osser, H., 6: Peng, F. (1964, January-March). A cross-cultural study of speech rate. Language and Speech, _7_(I), 120-126. Poole, M. E., 6: Field, T. W. (1971). Social class and code elaboration in oral communication. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, l_4, 421-427. Rinsland, H. D. (1945). A basic vocabulary of elementary school children. New York: MacMillan. Roberts, H. (1965). A statistical linguistic analysis of American English. New York: Mouton and Company. Robbins, E. L. (1971). Language develOpment research. Interpreting language research for the teacher. ASCO. Rubbin, K. H., 6: Dyck, L. (1980). Preschoolers' private speech in a play setting. Merrill-Palmer Quartery, 2_6_(3/1), 219-229. Rubbin, R. (1972, February). Sex differences in effects of kindergarten attendance on development of school readiness and language skills. [hp ElementarySchool Journal, 12(5), 265-274. Sanford, F. H. (1941, September - June 1942). Speech and personality: A comparative case study. Character and Personality. An International Psychological Quarterly, 12, 169-198. Schachter, F., Kirshner, K., Klips, B., Friedricks, M., 6: Sanders, K. (1974). Everyday preschool interpersonal speech usage: Methodological, developmental, and sociolinguistic studies. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Develcyment, _3_9_(156). Schachter, S. (1963, October). Birth order, eminence, and higher education. American Sociological Review, £0), 757-768. Sharf, D. J. (1972, February). Some relationships between measures of early language development. Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, 37(1), 64- 74. Shatz, M., 6c Gelman, R. (1973). The development of communication skills: Modifications in the speech of young children as a function of listener. Monograth of teh Soceity for Research in Child Development, 38(152/5). Smith, M. E. (1926). An investigation of the development of sentences and the extent of vocabulary in young children. Iowa City: University of Iowa; reprinted by Kraus, New York, 1969. Smith, M. K. (1941). measurement of the size of general English vocabulary through the elementary grades and high shool. Genetic Psychological Monographs, at, 311-345. 136 Strickland, R. G. (1962). The language of elementary school children: Its relationship to the language of reading textbooks and the quality of reading of selected children. Bulletin of the School of Eduation, Indiana University. Teece, C. (1976, April-June). Language and play: A study of the relationship between functions and structure in the language of five year old children. Language and Speech, l_9_(2), 179-192. Templeton, 5., 6c Spirey, E. M. (1980, October). The concept of world in young children as a fucntion of level of cognitive development. Research in the Teaching of English, l_4(3), 265-278. Templin, M. C. (1957). Certain language skills in children. their development and interrelationships. The University of Minnesota Press. Vaker, N. P. (1966). A word count of spoken Russian. The Soviet usage. Ohio State University Press. Vygotsky, L. S. (1962). Thought and langauge. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Warner, R. M. (1979). Periodic rhythms in conversational speech. Language and Speech, 22(4), 381-396. Weeks, T. (1971, October). Speech registers in young children. Child Development, 42(4), 1120-1131. Weir, R. (1962). Language in the crib. The Hague: Mouton and Company. Wellen, C., (St Broen, P. (1982, May). The interruption of young children's responses by older siblings. Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, 32, 204-210. Wilkinson, A. (1971). The foundations of language. Talking and reading in young children. Oxford University Press. Yardley, A. (1970). Exploration and language. Young children learning. London: Evans Brothers. Young, F. M. (1941, February). Analysis of certain variables in development study of language. Genetic Psychology Monographs, Q, 3-142. References Related to Using Pictues in the Study Alexander, T. (1952). The adult-child interaction test: A project test for use in research. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, XVII(55/2). Aliotti, N. C., dc Blanton, W. E. (1969). Some dimensions of creative thinking ability achievement and intelligence in first grade. Mic. No. ED 028818. 137 Amen, E. W. (1941). Individual differences in apperceptive reaction: A study of the response of pre-school children to pictures. Genetic Psychology Monographs, 2_3, 322-385. Arlin, M., Scott, M., 6: Webster, J. (1978-79). The effects of pictures on rate of learning sight words: A critique of the focal attention hypothesis. Reading Research Quarterly, XIV(4), 646-659. Brody, P. J., 6c Legenza, A. (1979). Can pictorial attributes serve mathemagenic functions? Journal of Educational Child Psychology, 88(1), 25-29. Cameron, J. R. (1980, Summer). Promoting talk through 35mm slides. English Journal, 6_9_, l4-l9. Carr, T. H., Bacharach, v. R., a: Mehner, D. s. (1977, March). Preparing children to look at pictures: Advance descriptions direct attention and facilitate active processing. Child Development, 88(1), 22-27. Cocking, R. R., 6c McHale, S. (1981, February). Comparative study of the use of pictures and objects in assessing children's receptive and productive language. Child Languge, 8(1), 1-13. Cooke, B. L. (1980, June). Pictue communication in Papua, New Guinea. Educational Broadcasting International, l_3_, 78-83. Deregowski, J. B. (1968, August). Difficulties in pictorial depth perception in Africa. The Britich Journal of Psychology, 22(3), 195-204. Deregowski, J. B. (1968, June). Pictorial recognition in subjects from a relatively pictureless environment. African Social Research, 20), 356-364. Dilley, M. G., or Paivio, A. (1968). Pictues and words as stimulus and repsonse items in paired-associate learning of young children. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 8, 231-240. Dirkes, M. A. (1978-79). Say it with pictures. Arithmetic Teacher, XIV(4), 646- 659. Elkind, D. (1969). Developmental studies of figurative perception. Advances in child development and behavior, 4_, 29-82. Elkind, D., 6c Scott, L. (1962, September). Studies in perceptual development: I. The decentering of perception. Child Development, 33(3), 619-630. Fitzgerald, M. J. (1980, July). Asking questions with the help of pictures and slides: Some language games. English Language Teaching Journal, 14(4), 277-281. French, J. E. (1952, September - May 1953). Children's preferences for pictures of varied complexity of pictorial pattern. Elementary School Journal, LIII, 90-95. 138 Gibson, J. J. (1954, Winter). Theory of pictorial perception. AV Communication Review,_I, 3-23. Guttmann, J., Levin, J. R., 6c Pressley, G. M. (1977). Pictures, partial pictures, and young children: Oral prose learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 6_9(5), 475-480. Haring, M. J., 6c Fry, M. A. (1979, Fall). Effect of pictures on children's comprehension of written text. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 2_7_(3), 185-190. Higgins, L. G. (1978). Literalism in the young child's interpretation of pictures. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 28(2), 97-119. Hoccberg, J. E., (St Brooks, V. (1962). Pictorial recognition as an unlearned ability. American Journal of Psycholgy, _72, 624-628. Hoffman, C. D. (1971). Recognition memory for pictures: A developmental study. Paper presented at Eastern Psychological Association Conference. Hudson, W. (1960). Pictorial depth perception in sub-cultural groups- in Africa. The Journal of Social Psychology, 22, 183-208. Jenkins, J. R., Neale, D. C., dc Deno, S. L. (1967). Differential memory for pictorial and word stimuli. Journal of Educational Psychology, _5_8(5), 303- 307. Kaufman, L. (1974). Sign and mind. An introduction to visual perception. New York: Oxford University Press. Kennedy, J. M. (1974). A psychology ofpicture perception. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Lesgold, A. M., Levin, J. R., Shimron, J., 6c Guttmann, J. (1975). Pictures and young children's learning from oral prose. Journal of Educational Psychology, 6_7 (5), 636-642. Levin, J. R., Gender, B. G., <5: Pressley, M. (1979, Summer). Picture imagery and children's recall of central versus peripheral sentence information. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, g2), 89-95. Levin, J. R., 6: Berry, J. K. Children's learning of all the news that's fit to picture. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 3(3), 177-185. Levin, J., Divine-Hawkins, P., Kerst, S. M., (St Guttman, J. (1974). Individual differences in lerning from pictues and word: The development and application of an instrument. Journal of Educational Psychology, §_6_(3), 296-303. Levin, J. R., 6c Lesgold, A. M. (1978, Fall). On pictures in prose. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 2_6_(3), 233-243. 139 Manzo, A. N., 6r Legenza, A. (1975). A formula for assessing the language stimulation value of pictues. Language Arts, 22, 1085-1089. Miller, W. A. (1938, September - June 1939). What children see in pictures. Tips Elementary School Journal, XXXIX(l), 280-288. Montare, A., Elman, E., 6: Cohen, J. (1977). Words and pictures: A text of Samuel's findings. Journal of Reading Behavior, 125(3), 269-285. Myatt, B., dc Carter, J. M. (1979, Spring). Pictue preference of children and young adults. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 2_7_(1), 33-38. Nadel, S. F. (1938). A field experiment in racial psychology. Cambridge University Press. O'Connor, N., 6: Hermlein, B. (1961). Like and cross-modality recognitionin subnormal children. Quarterly Journal of Eigerimental Psychology, Q, 48- 52. Paivio, A., 6: Yarmey, D. A. (1966). Pictures versus words as stimuli and responses in paired-associate learning. Psycholomic Science, _5_, 235-236. Peng, C., (St Levin, J. R. (1979, Spring). Pictures and children's story recall: Some questions of durability. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 2_7_(1), 39-44. Pressely, M. (1977). Imagery and children's learning: Putting the picture in developmental perspective. Review of Educational Research, 31(4), 585- 622. Rohwer, W. D., Jr. (1970). Images and pictures in children's learning. Research results and educational implications. Psychological Bulletin, 18(6), 393- 403. Rohwer, W. D., Jr., Lynch, 5., Suzuki, N., (St Levin, J. R. (1967). Verbal and pictorial facilitationof paired-associate learning. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, _5_, 294-302. Rudisill, M. (1951-2). Children's preferences for color versus other qualities in illustration. Elementary School Journal, 22, 444-457. Samuels, J. S. (1978). Can pictures distract students from the printed word: a rebuttal. Journal of Reading Behavior, 135(4), 361-364. Silvern, S. B. (1978). Play, pictures, and repetition: Mediators in aural prose learning. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 88(1), 134-139. Smith, O. W. (1958). Comparison of apparent depth in a photograph viewed from two distances. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 8, 79-81. Smith, P. C., (St Smith, O. W. (1961). Ball-throwing responses to photographically portrayed targets. Journal of Experimental Psychology. 88, 223-233. 140 Stern, W. (1937, September - June 1938). Cloud pictures: A new method for teting imagination, character and personality. An Internationnal Psychological Quarterly, 8, 132-146. Stewing, J. W. (1975, May). Book illustration: Key to visual and verbal literacy. Mic. No. ED 112 352, UP. Stone, L. J., 6: Church, J. (1973). Childhood and adolescence, 2nd ed. New York: Random House. Symonds, P. M. (1939). Criteria for the selectionn of pictures for the investigation of adolescent phantasies. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 2, 271-275. Tennyson, R. D. (1978, Winter). Pictorial support and specific instructions as design variables for children's concepts and rule learnings. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, EM), 291-299. Travers, R. M. W., 6: Alvarado, V. (1970). The design of pictures for teaching children in the elementary school. AV Communication Review, l_8_(l), 47-64. References Related to Statistics Hays, W. L. (1981). Statistics, third edition. New York: Holt-Rinehart and Winston. Hinble, D., Wiersma, W., 6: Jurs, S. (1979). Applied statistics for the behavioral sciences. Boston: Houghton Mifflin. Sankoff, D., or Laberge, S. (1978). The linguistic market and the statistical explanation of variability. In D. Sankoff (Ed.), Linguistic variation. Models and methods. New York: Academic Press. References Related to Arabic Language Abboud, P. F., Bezirgan, N. A., Erwin, W. M., Khouri, M. A., McCarus, E. N., or Rammuny, R. M. (1975). Elementary modern standard Arabic. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan, Department of Near Eastern Studies. Abdul-Rouf, M. (1975). Arabic for English speaking students. Cairo: The Supreme Council for Islamic Affairs, ARE. Atiyeh Abdo, D. (1962). A course in modern standard Arabic. Beirut: Khayats. Bateson, M. C. (1967). Arabic language handbook. Center for Applied Linguistics. 141 Beeston, A. F. L. (1968). Written Arabic. An approach to the basic structures. Cambridge University Press. Beeston, A. F. L. (1970). Teh Arabic language today. London: Hutchinson University Library. Bishai, W. B. (1971). Concise grammar of literary Arabic, a new approach. Kendall/Hunt. Chejne, A. G. (1969). The Arabic language. Its role in history. St. Paul: University of Minnesota Press. Ezzat, A. (1974). Intelligibilitmmong Arabic dialects. Beirut: Arab University. Ferguson, C. A. (Ed.). (1960). Contribution to Arabic linguistics. Center for Middle Eastern Studies of Harvard University. Hashim, A., Ashraf, M., 6r Buzar, K. (1974). Arabic made easy. Pakistan: S. H. Muhammad Ashrof, Kashmiri Bazar-Lahore. Haywood, J. A., or Nahmad, H. M. (1965). A new Arabic grammar. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Wickens, G. H. (1980). Arabic grammar. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Ziadeh, F., 6c Winder, B. (1957). An introduction to modern Arabic. Princeton, NJ: Prineton University Press. "llllllllllllllli