AN ENVESTIGATIGN OF CERTAIN SQClO-LING'UISTIC::_' )- ' ' '. 2.;
PHENOMENA m THE VOCABULARY, PRONUNCIATIOND 1 g g.

CHILDREN, THEIR PARENTS AND, THEIR TEACHERS-1: i -,
IN THE DETROIT PUBUC‘SCHOOLS ; ,:- 2;;

Thesis for‘ihe Degree OffEd. D ' D :7 Di: 574',’ .
” MECHlGAN STATE-UNIVERSITY»: r .~ ~ - , . ~

ANNE sums-m HUGHES; _ I , .
. ” 1967 ' '

TH 7.35:

  
  

lllflllM'l t1lil‘flin«\\“lm'\\\M‘Ifiilfifiml *K/ J"; A“ 17L.

 

 

 

 

 

Michigan State a
University 4;

  

This is to certify that the

thesis entitled ‘
AN lNVESTIGATION 01.1" (13.11131 SOCIO-LINGUISTIC
PHENOMENA IN THE VOCABULARY, PRONUNCIATION AND
GRAMMAR OF DISADVANTAGED FREE-SCHOOL CHILDREN,THEIR j
PARENTS AND THEIR TEACHERS IN THE DETROH‘ PUBLIC \
SCHOOLS 1
presented by

Anne miz abeth Hughes

has been accepted towards fulfillment
of the requirements for

M degree in E1 em. Educ 8.175.011

,6 4/, am My
Major professor
Date // g 1

0-169

M “N
‘ MA?”

iw ,

@lfmm?

£412“

NOV 2 21999
5.?

 

ABSTRACT

AN INVESTIGATION OF CERTAIN SOCIO—LINGUISTIC PHENOMENA IN
THE VOCABULARY, PRONUNCIATION AND GRAMMAR OF DISADVANTAGED
PRE-SCHOOL CHILDREN, THEIR PARENTS AND THEIR TEACHERS IN

THE DETROIT PUBLIC SCHOOLS

by Anne Elizabeth Hughes

The purpose of this investigation is to determine cer—
tain socio-linguistic phenomena in the vocabulary, pronuncia-
tion and grammar of disadvantaged pre-school children, their
parents and their teachers and to describe the language
behavior of the informants in terms of educational implication.
In order to accomplish this end certain disadvantaged pre-

schoolers in the Head Start program, their parents and their

 

teachers were selected as speech informants. The speech of
these three groups was taped so that certain phonological, gram—
matical and vocabulary items could be transcribed and analyzed
at a later date. A second interview was conducted with a
sample of the teachers who served as informants in the first
interview as well. The purpose of the second interview was to
determine the teachers' concepts of the language problems of
the pre-schoolers and their parents. Their reactions to the
speech of the children and their parents, both from their
personal classroom experiences and after listening to a tape
of the children and their parents, were also recorded so that
the implications of the teachers' attitudes could be studied

at a later date.

 

 

 

Anne Elizabeth Hughes

This study used the research techniques of the Linguis—
tic Atlas Project and included the biographical data of its
informants. The data tabulated were: his age, his sex, his
race, his academic experience, his birthplace and the birth—
place of his parents, paternal and maternal grandparents, his
residences, his travel experiences and his occupation, all of
which contributed to the speech information, and pointed to
some indices of social stratification in the language of
these informants.

The study discovered that the teachers' concepts of the
language problems of the children were correct in some
instances and incorrect and incomplete in others. Some
teacher—informants vaguely identified such matters as, the
deletion of the final consonant stops /d/ and /t/ correctly,
but made no mention of the /d/ and /t/ deletions in the
medial position. The substitution of /n/ for /n/ in the
phonology of the disadvantaged child was correctly identified,
but it was not understood that this substitution takes place
at times in middle—class speech as well as in the speech of
the lower socio—economic level speaker; this is not always a
social class marker. The teachers were disturbed by the use
of "seen" rather than ”see" in the grammatical system of the
child, but failed to recognize that this may be a phonological
item rather than a grammatical one. Though the items in the
grammatical system of the disadvantaged speaker were identi-

fied by an analysis of the data, the teachers were much more

 

 

Anne Elizabeth Hughes

concerned with vocabulary rather than grammatical usage.
Certain grammatical items identified as being those items
found in the speech of the disadvantaged pre—schooler and
his parent were: The "s" inflection, the double negative,
the pronoun redundancy and the "done" perfective auxiliary.
In terms of educational implication, the grammatical items
identified are of prime importance to the teacher; it must
be understood that vocabulary differences may be an impor-
tation from another region of the country and is not in and
of itself good or bad for that reason. Grammatical usage,
on the other hand, can prevent a man from adequately func—
tioning in a society which accepts the prestige level
speech as that of the educated man.

It is important to know that social classes determine
language and that speech is determined by the social com—
munity of which the individual is a member, not the race or
ethnic group in which he is born.

Finally, the data of the study reveal naive attitudes
toward language and a lack of understanding of the disadvan—
taged on the part of the teacher, whose language identifica—
tion with disadvantaged speech is hard to analyze due to her
guarded use of language in the classroom.

It is recommended that education be provided for the
pre—service and in-service teachers in the areas of cultural
relativity and the nature and use of language. The study

concludes with the strong recommendation that the teacher

 

Anne Elizabeth Hughes

gain a knowledge of how the English language works so that
the instructor can identify the actual language problems
and can teach children the use of standard English by the
use of "switching devices." All groups should be allowed
to retain their cultural heritage with the knowledge and
use of the prestige dialect which will help them to be ade—
quately functioning individuals in a standard—English

speaking community .

 

.AN INVESTIGATION OF CERTAIN SOCIO—LINGUISTIC PHENOMENA IN
THEIVOCABULARY, PRONUNCIATION AND GRAMMAR OF DISADVANTAGED
PRE—SCHOOL CHILDREN, THEIR PARENTS AND THEIR TEACHERS IN

THE DETROIT PUBLIC SCHOOLS

By

Anne Elizabeth Hughes

A THESIS

Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of

DOCTOR OF EDUCATION

Department of Elementary Education
College of Education

1967

 

Q

t
‘UJ

WEHéD

h) ,-'- A;
3: a- 5
; ’3 ‘3

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The writer wishes to express sincere appreciation to
the many to which much is owed: to Dr. Byron H. Van Roekel,
for Iris excellent guidance through the doctoral program and
for Iris valued friendship; to Dr. Roger W. Shuy, for his
wfluxlarly advice,patience and kindness through the writing
of tinis dissertation; and to Drs. Jean Lepere and William V.
Hicks ikm*their helpful suggestions and professional parti—
cipaixion on my committee which made the study a worthwhile
experience.

Special acknowledgment is given to the many principals,
teachers and supervisors of the Detroit Public Schools who
served as informants or aides in the preparation of this
Paper. In particular, I would like to pay special tribute
to Dr..Mary Jean Kluwe, Supervisor, and Dr. Clarence Wachner,‘
Director, Language Education Department, Detroit Public
Schools, for their warm friendship and constant professional
assistance.

Gratitude is expressed to: Mrs. Elizabeth Wright,
Principal, Angell School, Detroit Public Schools, for her
COnstant prodding and loyal affection which were a constant
Source of stimulation to the writer, and to Mr. and Mrs.

Charles Lalonde who are always there as this writer's extra ‘

arm and heart.

ii

 

 

Finally, affectionate appreciation is accorded to my
dear’sister, Mrs. William Van Hulle, and her warm and wonder—
ful family whose support was always with me encouraging my

professional career.

iii

 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ACKNOWLEDGMENT.
LIST OF TABLES.
Chapter

I. INTRODUCTION

Need for the Study

Previous Research . .
Current Research in Progress.
Summary.

II. RESEARCH DESIGN

First Interviews.
Why Project Head Start Was Chosen
Availability of the Informants
SCOpe of the Field Work
Collection of the Linguistic Data
Second Interviews .
Selection of Informants
Availability of the Informants
Scope of the Field Work
Collection of Linguistic Data
Summary.

III. BIOGRAPHICAL DATA

First Interviews.
Population of Informants
Sex of Informants . . . . .
Race of the Informants. . . . .
Age of the Informants
Marital Status of Informants.
Highest Grade Reached in School.
Birthplace of Informants
Residents of Informants
Travel Experience of Informants.
Occupations of Parents and Teachers
Second Interviews
Population of Sample
Sex of Informants
Race of Informants
Age of Informants

Marital Status of Informants.
Summary.

iv

Page

ii

vii

 

Chapter
IV. TEACHERS' CONCEPT OF THE PROBLEM . . .

Letter of Introduction to the Principals.

Statement to the Teachers.

Teachers' Responses to Question 1
Vocabulary Problems of Children.
Grammar Problems of Children.
Pronunciation Problems of Children.

Teachers' Responses to Question 2
Reactions to Parents' Influence on

Child's Speech .
Reactions to Child and Parent Speech
on Tape
Teachers Characterize the Speech
of the Disadvantaged
Summary.

V. SOME INDICES OF SOCIAL STRATIFICATION IN
DETROIT.

The Child's Language Behavior
Some Aspects of the Child's
Phonological System . .
Some Aspects of the Child's
Grammar System.
Language Data of the Parents.
Some Aspects of the Parents'
Phonological System .
Some Aspects of the Parents'
Grammatical System
Vocabulary of the Parent
Language of the Teacher
Summary. .

VI. CONCLUSIONS, IMPLICATIONS, AND
RECOMMENDATIONS

How Pre—School Children in Head Start and
Their Parents Differ in Some Aspects of
Language Behavior and the Teacher's
Concepts of the Problem

The Language of the Teacher . .

Implications of the Language Study.

Suggestions for Implementation of
Language Data Findings in Terms of
the Classroom

Recommendations of this Language Study

Pre— service Education of Teachers
In—service Education of Teachers

 

111
113

116
116

116

127
132

133

1A1
1A3
1AA
14A

1A7

148
153
155

160
165
165
166

 

Chapter
BIBLIOGRAPHY
APPENDICES

APPENDIX
APPENDIX
APPENDIX
APPENDIX
APPENDIX

APPENDIX

.--Map of the City of Detroit Indicat-

ing Selected Schools Included in
the Sample. .

.—-The Eight Pictures IncIuded in the

First Interviews to Elicit the
Language of the Informants

.-—Letter to Principals Whose

Teachers were Included Among the
Speech Informants

.--Statement to Teachers Who Served

as Informants for the Second
Interviews.

.--Map of United States Indicating the

Birthplaces of the Majority of
Parent- Informants

.--Transcript of Child and Parent

Speech to Which the Second-
Interview Teachers Reacted

vi

Page

169

17“

175

177

186

189

191

193

 

 

Table

\OCDNIChUW

10.

11.

12.

LIST OF TABLES

Percentage of agreement with adult norms
shown by members of 28 families, based
on two variables.

Geographic spread of the disadvantaged
schools with Head Start informants
included in the study . . . .

 

Schools included in the language study of
pre-schoolers in Project Head Start,
their parents and their teachers

 

Schools included in the second interviews
of teachers in Prolect Head Start .

 

Population of informants . . . . . .
Sex of informants . . . . .
Race of the informants.

Age range of informants . . . .

Academic background of parents and teachers.

Birthplace of informants

Birthplace of informants' parents and
grandparents . . . . . . .

Biographical data of teachers in second
interviews. . .

vii

Page

38

39

47
55
56
57
58
59
61

62

69

CHAPTER I
THE PROBLEM

Need for the Study

 

This investigation is concerned with some ways in
which pre—school children, their parents, and teachers
differ in vocabulary, pronunciation, and grammar. There
is a growing need for just this type of information about
social dialect and language learning. In particular, the
children from culturally disadvantaged homes and homes
where foreign languages are the usual means of communication
present a problem of great concern to teachers. One group
of scholars has gone so far as to say:

In the deprived home, language usage is more
limited. Much communication is through gestures and
other non-verbal means. When language is used, it
is likely to be terse and not necessarily grammati-
cally correct. In any case, it is likely to be
restricted in the number of grammatical forms which
are utilized. Thus, the deprived child enters
school inadequately prepared for the typical lan-
guage tasks of the first grade. The greatest
handicap seems to be a lack of familiarity with the
Speech used by teachers and insufficient practice
in attending to prolonged Speech sequences.

“—

1Benjamin S. Bloom, Allison Davis, and Robert Hess,
92m2§psatory Education for Cultural Deprivation, based on
Working papers contributed by participants in the Research
Conference on Education and Cultural Deprivation, June 8—12,
1965, University of Chicago (New York: Holt, Rinehart and
Winston, Inc., 1966), pp. 70—71.

 

Whether or not such generalizations are supportable

will be part bf the focus of this research.

Previous Research

 

In historical perspective, the Linguistic Atlas
Project, begun in the early 1930's, is recognized as the
most definitive survey of American English usage. Origi-
nally under the direction of Hans Kurath, Chairman of the
American Council of Learned Societies Committee on American
Speech, the Linguistic Atlas of the United States and
Canada is important as the most comprehensive extant record
of American English usage. Even though World War II inter-
rupted the progress of the Atlas, three volumes of maps
bound as six and an interpretive handbook were published
between 1939 and 1943. In addition to the published works,
thousands of field records, as yet unpublished, have been
collected. These records contain over 750 items of grammar,
pronunciation, and vocabulary, all of which are elicited
from topics of ordinary interest and understanding to most
Of the informants. These topics were weather, food,
health, home, work, religion and superstition, sports and
hobbies. Thus reSponses provided comparable data for the

inVestigation.2

x

2Raven I. McDavid, The Linguistic Atlas Project (an
unpublished paper written in August, 1950, and described
as "A brief account of its [the Linguistic Atlas] influence
upon research in American English, and its implications

forlthe study of the regional aspects of American culture"),
p‘ o

 

 

 

 

For future work in American English to be valid-—
particularly where questions of regional or social
distribution are concerned—-the Atlas materials
must be made accessible to the greatest possible
number of scholars. It is such scholars that will
formulate new historical analyses on the basis of
the descriptive evidence presented in the Linguistic
Atlas. Such analyses may lead to new interpretations
of particular details in the history of the language;
or, applied to the study of dialect representations
in literature, may throw light on the speech of
particular periods or places.

One of the most extensive and comprehensive studies
of language problems of interest to this research, because
of its focus on urban areas, has been reported by William
Labov who utilized a sample of the speech of individuals
who lived on the Lower East Side of New York City. Labov
improved on the highly systematic methods of dialect
geography to study regional variation in Speech patterns
as proposed by the Linguistic Atlas. This investigation
reveals that the first approach to the study of language
behavior is a descriptive one. The evidence must include
an account of the language of native speakers of the
community.“

According to Labov, linguistic data must include:

(1) features which are constant in the speech of the infor-
mants and features which fluctuate; (2) structural descrip-

tiOns which attempt to describe the phonology, the verbal

x

3Ibid., p. 1.

”William Labov, "Stages in the Acquisition of Standard
English," Social Dialects and Language Learning, NCTE
DUblication of 196H Conference, ed. Roger W. Shuy

Champaign, Ill.: NCTE, 1966), p. 77.

 

auxiliaries and those areas of greatest variation; (3) a study
of the social significance of the isolated forms and systems
through the construction of a random sample of the linguistic

community; and (A) a consideration of the influence of other

languages on the speech of English speaking Americans.5 The

conclusions of Labov's study suggests that there are two main

solutions to language problems:

.1- early training which permits lower class
children to enter the acquisition route
at a higher point than they normally would

(see Table l),
2. special training which increases the normal

rate of acquisition of standard English.
There seems to be little doubt concerning the needed

research in urban areas. Raven I. McDavid, Jr., notes that

there is a significant difference between "local standard"
Speech in Chicago, derived from western New England and
Pennsylvania mainly, and the "non-standard dialect of the
blatur ghetto," traced to South Midland and the South. This
furtfluer suggests, however, that urban speech study be
acCompanied by information concerning the linguistic behavior
in tile feeder areas of the urban area under language inves—
tigertion. Another aspect of language study which needs
furtflner attention is paralanguage and the language of Negroes.

StiflLl another problem confronts the linguist and the

edu<lator: should the speaker of a sub-standard dialect be
\

5Ibid., pp. 99—101.

6Ibid., pp. 102—103.

 

 

 

 

TABLE l.——Percentage of agreement with adult norms shown
by members of 28 families, based on two variables.*

 

Per Cent Conformity With

 

Age
Adult Norms
8 I 11 52
12 - 13 50
14 — 15 57
16 — 17 62
18 — 19 64
20 - 39 84

 

Some working class families, and all of the lower
class families, are to be seen operating at much lower
level of conformity to adult norms. Despite this great
variation in relative position, we see that the slope
of most of the lines is similar. Some working class and
most lower class families are apparently too far removed
from the middle class norms to assimilate them efficiently,
and we can.see that those youngsters who are below 50%
at 18 or 19 years old will probably not reach any signifi-
cant degree of conformity while they still have the
learning ability to match performance to evaluation. At
tflie ages of 35 or 40, these individuals may be able to
evwiluate the social significance of their own and other
preech forms, without being able to shift their own

pelsformance.

*William Labov, "Stages in the Acquisition of
Staindard English," Social Dialects and Language Learning,
NCNPE Publication of 1964 Conference, ed. Roger W. Shuy
(Champaign, 111.: NCTE, 1966), pp. 89—90.

taught to eliminate that type of linguistic behavior or

should he be encouraged to use a standard dialect in addi—
7

tion to his own Speech, as dictated by the social situation?
This research will suggest an approach to the solution of
this problem.

Here in the United States, there are a number
of English teaching situations which appear to
involve a quasi—foreign language relationship
between a standard variety of English and some
English—based pidgin or creole or nonstandard,
natively spoken dialect of English. It is
primarily in the densely pOpulated and more
fluid and competitive social environment of the
larger cities, however, that the resultant problems
are likely to have the most serious consequences
for the nation as a whole. Of the various urban
dialect problems, I doubt if any is more widespread
or has been more resistant to self-correction than
that involving the nonstandard speech which is
characteristic of many urban Negro communities.

William Stewart indicates that no real approach to
speech problems of any racial, ethnic or community group
'can be made until the linguistic Situation can be identi—
flied and described and until the teacher of English is
“Mechnically prepared to actually carry through an effective
Iflnagram of remedial English for sub-standard dialect

Speeurers. The individual classroom teacher, too, must have

‘

7Raven I. McDavid, Jr., "Social Dialects: Cause or
Synmflsom of Social Maladjustment," Social Dialects and
Ifirgsuage Learnini (Champaign, Ill.: NCTE Publication,
1966), pp. 8’9.

8William A. Stewart, "Urban Negro Speech: Socio—
linguixstic Factors Affecting English Teaching," Social
EHEEHBtS and Language Learning (Champaign, Ill.: NCTE
Publication, 1966), p. 12.

some knowledge of linguistic structure in order to help him

evaluate the language problems of children in his class.9

As this research involves an urban area of wide vari-
ation in ethnic and racial composition, Stewart's experi—

ences are of keen interest to this investigation:

. Once, while observing a reading class in Operation
in the District, I noticed one of the pupils read

'he brother' for 'his brother.' The teacher seemed

to consider this a reading mistake (i.e., a failure

to perceive grapheme—phoneme-meaning correspondences).
However, I strongly suspect that it was essentially

a case of grammatical interference, since the

basilect equivalent of 'his brother' is, in fact,
'he brother.' Ironically, this would indicate more

success than failure on the teacher's part, the
child having understood the meaning of the printed
material so well that he began to supply his own 10
linguistic expression for the situation described.

Another point of interest is proposed by Charles

Ferguson who asks just what is the responsibility of the

school in terms of language teaching? Surely there is a

vastly different situation when the children speak a

regional variety of some other part of the country, or

scnne other country. In the Southwestern communities, the

ixrfluence of Spanish is unquestionably present; in the
heervily Negro areas of the South, the Negro dialect is in

eVfiJience. In the North of the United States, various ethnic

grcnips influence the speech when German, Polish, Italian,

anti other foreign languages are spoken in the home. In

thee case-of the Negro in the North of the United States,

 

9Ibid., p. 18.

10Ibid.

you do not have a regional dialect, nor another language,
nor, necessarily, the case of the substandard dialect, as

it is in ordinary adult conversation, but the conversation

of the community group as a whole.11

There are many aspects to consider when seeking a
solution or solutions to language problems: it must be
decided whether individuals should be taught to be biloquial
or if an attempt should be made to eliminate substandard
English totally by imposing some kind of Standard English.
This, too, is a concern for other disciplines, in particular,
sociology and psychology. What would be the attitudes of
individuals whose self—image may be involved in such
linguistic activity? At what age Should this linguistic
re—education begin, if it is to be the proposed solution
to language difficulties? What about the education of the
elementary teacher who is not, in most cases, a language
Specialist? Or would the solution be to bring in linguis—
tics; as a special area of training for the elementary
tea£flaer who previously was a generalist in her approach to
her Eilementary classroom teaching? Finally, what about
parerltal influence on the Speech of the child?

Encouragingly enough, there is an increasing number
of r'esearch studies reported every year in the area of the
elemenitary English language arts. In 1965 alone, ninety—

nine istudies were reported to the National Council of
\
11 n
Charles Ferguson, Teaching Standard Languages to

Igialecd: Speakers," Social Dialects and Language Learning
Champaign, 111.: NCTE Publication, 1966), pp. 112, 116.

 

Teachers of English. Many of them were concerned with the
problem of substandard and standard English, as is this
research.

In one such piece of research reported by Charlotte
Brooks, it is reported that the culturally different child
vvith a Speech pattern of substandard English, who may be per-
ftectly happy while saying "what comes natur'lly," can be
bcath happy and successful if she is taught standard English
111 addition to her "natural talk." If standard English is
téiught from the very beginning of the child's school
exxperience, with the best approaches to the teaching of
fRDreign languages, the bidialectal knowledge will allow

tflie child to employ standard English in appropriate situa—

tions.12

Along this same line, Carl Lefevre feels that the

crrild must make the dialect change on his own initiative:

Changing his dialect is a highly complex
psychosociological process, involving his teachers,
to be sure, and his family and childhood friends——
but aboVe all, it depends on the child's own
emergent goals and aspirations, the image the child
projects for himself of his future role in life.1

Lefevre states further that the child must make this
sDesech discovery for himself if he is to accept a different

SBeech pattern which he can come to use with ease.
II“_ _M
l2Charlotte K. Brooks, "Some Approaches to Teaching

Eitlandard English as a Second Language," Elementary English
klampaign, 111.: NCTE Publication, November,*196u), p.‘733.

 

13Carl A. Lefevre, "Language and Self: Fulfillment
C’ir-Trauma?" Elementary English (Champaign, 111.: NCTE
lPublication, March; 1966), p. 234.

10

It is worse than idle——it can be traumatic-—to
attempt "corrections" of the child's developing
speech when he is merely passing through phases
of imitation and creation. He should be allowed
to make his mistakes himself, without prompting
from teachers, workbooks, and handbooks of possible
errors; he should be allowed to work out his mis-
takes for himself, with assistance but without too
much purification from on high. In his own time
the child will discover and make his own the language
and the way of life suitable for him—jif we do not
interfere in unwitting, harmful ways.

McDavid agrees too that it must be the individual
Primself who accepts or rejects a standard dialect. The
Iwesponsibility as teachers is to encourage the acceptance
(1f standard dialects, but not to "stigmatize other varieties
as :reflecting-mental or moral deficiency, but only remark
ctnjectively that they reflect a kind of experience dif—

. l5
feleent from that of the dominant culture."‘

Of vital importance to this research is the attitude
Of‘ elementary teachers, in terms of language behavior. It
is~ prOposed by Muriel Crosby that the wrong attitude on
the? part of the teacher may retard the child's learning of
inffiormal standard English rather than to advance the
prcxzess. If the individual feels disapproval or rejection

of Ilis Speech on the part of his teacher he may refuse to

comnninicate entirely. When this happens the child's

4
1 Ibid., p. 284.

ESRaven I. McDavid, "The Cultural Matrix of American
Enslish," Elementary English (Champaign, 111.: NCTE Publi—
Cation, January, 19657: p. El.

 

11

interest in language suffers, just when enthusiasm and

interest in anything new should be at its height.16

Kenneth Goodman says that the child's existing lan-
guage is that on which literacy is built:

. . . even after literacy has been achieved future
language change cannot come about through the
extinction of the native dialect and the substitu-
tion of another. I believe that language growth
must be a growth outward from the native dialect,
an expansion which eventually will encompass the
socially preferred forms but retain its roots.

The child can expand his language as he expands
his outlook, not rejecting his own sub—culture but
coming to see it in its broader setting. Eventually
he can achieve the flexibility of language which
makes it possible for him to communicate easily in
many diverse settings and on many levels.

Current Research in Progress

The current social dialect studies now under investi—
gxition are exciting in their approach and scope of lan—
Bnlage research. One such study is that being developed by
tile Department of Education, George Washington University
Orl "Research on Language Facility and Dialect Transforma—
tiADn in Children." Attention is focused on this research
fOI’ the present investigation is concerned with the

language of children .

l6Muriel Crosby, "English: New Dimensions and New
Dealhands," Dimensions of Dialect, ed. Eldonna L. Evertts
Champaign,111.: NCTE Publication, 1967), p. 4.

 

17Kenneth S. Goodman, "Dialect Barriers to Reading
Comprehension," Elementary English (Champaign, Ill.: NCTE
PUblication, December, 19655, p. 860.

12

The objectives of the study being conducted at
George Washington University are:

1. To develop a revised code for classifying
errors and deviations in Speech samples
and a method of transferring speech
phonetically to computer tape.

2. To administer the Dailey Language Facility
Test to a nationally representative sample
and develop norms for spoken Speech,
including various 'dialects"and deviations
from standard English.

3. To determine how various 'dialects' are
related to rural urban factors, socio-economic
status, ethnic group, basic level of language
facility, aptitude and achievement measures,
quality of educational opportunity, and
various characteristics of the home and
neighborhood environment.

4. To develOp and evaluate materials for teaching
standard English to preschool children who
speak dialects.

Procedures of the Study:

Data are available for distributions of 24 major
types of errors in speech for 15 District of Columbia
schools for the Dailey Language Facility Test. The
basic code, develOped in this study for classifying
serious errors in speech, pronunciation, and grammar
in the Speech samples, will be revised and particularly
designed for coding differences between urban dialects
and standard English.

The Dailey Language Facility Test will be adminis-
tered in the spring of 1966 to a nationally repre-
sentative sample of 1500 boys and 1500 girls each
in kindergarten, 1st grade, and 3rd grade in approxi—
mately 20 schools. For 200 of the urban students,
mothers and other family members would also be tested
and interviewed. Each protocol would be transcribed,
by specially trained typists on to magnetic tape using
phonetic symbols, word for word, preserving the child's
pronunciation. Normative distributions would be made
for each word used, by sex, grade, ethnic group,
general level of language facility, size of city,
type of family, type of neighborhood, and type of
school. A series of factor analyses of the complete
set of measures would define the way various Speech

13

errors or deviations relate to each other and, in
effect, give detailed definitions of the various
dialects that exist.

On the basis of the analysis results, curriculum
and study materials will be develOped for teaching
standard English to pre—school and kindergarten
pupils. This curriculum would emphasize avoidance
of the errors and deviations found to be most
frequent.18

The results of this study can be of invaluable help
to both the linguist and the educator for the breadth of
its SCOpe and the depth of its investigation. The ulti-
Inate goal of the investigation which is to analyze and
zipply the discoveries to the actual teaching situation can
bee a great help to the teacher of the primary school child
WTIO seeks a solution to the speech problems of her
youngsters.

Another equally interesting study being conducted
orl problems of the speech of urban children is reported
:fironlthe Johns Hopkins Hospital, Baltimore, Maryland.

Its; concern is "Speech Development in Children with Emphasis
(Hi the Development of Syntax in Urban Children Who Speak
a Non-standard Dialect."

As one facet of our research is the Speech of the
pre-schooler, this developmental study is of interest
to our investigation.

The problems that this study prOposes to study are:

x .-

18John T. Dailey, Clinton A. Neyman, Jr., and Dean L.
Des Roches, "Research on Language Facility and Dialect
TranSPormation in Children," Current Social Dialect
3%gggggh at American Higher Institutions (Washington, D.C.:

nghouse for Social Dialect Studles, Center for
APplied Linguistics, NCTE, April 11, 1966), p. 5.

ll

14

1. What are the differences between the urban
child's control of his own non-standard
dialect, and his control of the standard
dialect?

2. What syntactic structures are available to
the child?

3. Are there discernible stages in his syntactic
development?

Twenty 5-year-old children were taped for 20-30
minutes of free Speech and imitations of ten sentences
incorporating passive conjunction, adjective, relative
clause, inversion, separation, possessive, negative,
t-subordinate and t—object constructions. These same
structures were used to test the child's comprehension
ability.

Results: Speech_production--Three main categories
of analysis are being used:

 

(1) Range of structures used by each child and
frequency of occurrence.

(2) Total number of kernels and transformations
per child.

(3) Amount of syntactic complexity in each
child's speech. Children recoded imitations
to fit their own dialects.

Speech comprehension-—Discrepancies were discovered
between the group's responses on the imitation and
comprehension tasks to the same structures, which
could be understood by referring to the child's
dialect. For example, possessives were poorly imi—
tated but apparently well understood ("receptive
bilingualism"). A rank-order of difficulty was
developed for the ten experimental structures. The
order of difficulty from most to least difficult was:
relative clause, (negation, possessive, t—subordinate,
tied), (passive, inversion, conjunction, tied),
adjective, separation, and t-object. This gives
information about the degree of control the children
have over these structures. The frequencies of
occurrence of these structures in free-Speech pro-
duction are being tabulated to compare with their
order of difficulty in the imitation/comprehension
tasks. A quantitative index of syntactic complexity
was develOped based on a weighting system applied to
each kind of grammatical rule. The number and kind of

 

15

rules applied to a kernel to generate a transformation
were the determinants of the measure of the sentence's
syntactic complexity. This index predicted the order
of difficulty of the structures.

The next stage of the research, to begin shortly,
will involve the Negro and white children from 2 groups
each, to isolate the effects of dialect, race and social
class. The same procedures will be used with a larger
number of syntactic structures.

Both phases of this study will be of help to the
teacher concerned with the linguistic behavior of her
children in kindergarten or the primary grades. To ade-
quately describe both the non-standard dialect and the
standard dialect in terms of the child's understanding of
the differences will be the best guide possible to future
worm:in the teaching of standard English to the elementary
<fliild. In addition, the final phase of the study which pro—
;xxses to involve both the Negro and the white child in an
aurtempt to isolate social and racial factors in speech per-
forunance is evidence both the linguist and the educator
alilce seek. The argument is not a new one to either the
socxiologist or the linguist, and certainly the classroom
‘Uflacher may develop her teaching techniques with more real
meaning if the differences are noted and built into the

curriculumr-if these differences do exist and can be pre—

dicted. Curriculum development will be both more meaningful

——

 

l9Harry Osser, "Speech Development in Children with
Emphasis on the Development of Syntax in Urban Children
who-Speak a Non-standard Dialect," Current Social Dialect
Baccarch.at American Higher Institutions (Washington, D.C.:
Clearinghouse for Social Dialect Studies, Center for
Applied Linguistics, NCTE, April 11, 1966), p. 12.

l6

and change Can take place more rapidly and completely if the
goals are formulated and the procedure can be determined.

In the literature there is repeated reference to the
Speech problems of-children, specifically, the sub-standard
dialect of the culturally deprived child. In evidence of
this, some linguistic studies have made the deprived child
the central figure for linguistic study.

In 1962 Dominic Thomas selected at random 50 Negro
children of kindergarten age from one economically under—

privileged urban community and 50 white children from the

same type of economically depressed area. The white children

were also of kindergarten age. His findings Were that all of
the children showed.deficiencies in amount, maturity, and
quality 0f oral expression, but the Negro children were A
somewhat more deficient than the white.20- Clarence Wachner
reporting on the Thomas study, indicated that theSe same
children were asked 20 questions on different topics in
individual interviews. In total the children spoke 33,668

Ininning words of which only 1,365 were different. This
Vt>cabulary served as a beginning for a language arts program

for the culturally disadvantaged children in the Detroit

E’ublic School's.21

\

20Dominic R. Thomas, "Oral Language Sentence Structure
a11(1Vocabulary of Kindergarten Children Living in Low Socio-
E3<lonomic Urban Areas" (unpublished doctoral dissertation,
Vhayne State University, Detroit, Michigan, 1962).

21Clarence W. Wachner, "Detroit Great Cities School

Improvement Program in Language Arts," Elementary English
(Champaign, 111.: NCTE Publication, October, 1966), p. 592.

17

It is axiomatic that cultural deprivation is
more likely to occur among families of low socio-
economic status. As shown by Eels et al..
Coleman, and Havighurst and Janke2é, this
cultural deprivation results in a level of
cognitive ability which is usually lower for
children from low status families than for
children from high status families.

The label "non-verbal" is one which is often used
in speaking of disadvantaged children, but Mukerji and
Robison strongly disagree with this judgment. They reported
that their experiences did not support this label, although
they conceded that children of different ethnic backgrounds
did reflect problems of standard English enunciation,
syntax, vocabulary, pronunciation and sentence structure.
These researchers further suggested that one of the most
serious language problems of the disadvantaged child was
that they had little knowledge or experience in classifying

terms. Classifying fruits or vegetables, for example,

posed a problem for these children.23

Analysis of changes in the children's behavior
support the effectiveness of certain teaching
strategies in helping disadvantaged children make
noticeable progress toward overcoming some of
their language deficits. Determining specific
goals of standard English for social communication
and conceptualization moved the teacher to evolve
new skills which were sharply differentiated to
meet clearly defined needs. Because children's

2Kenneth Eels et al., Intelligence and Cultural
Differences (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1951),
as quoted in Elementary English (Champaign, Ill.: NCTE
Publication, October, 1966), p. 592.
23RoseMukerji and Helen F. Robison, "A Head Start
in Language," Elementagy English (Champaign, Ill.: NCTE
Publication, May, 1966), p. 460.

 

 

 

l8

deficits were frequently assessed by both
observational data and simple, informal tests, the
teacher acquired precise diagnostic information‘
about the needs of Specific children.) Thus, new
teaching strategies developed more precise and
varied tools to assist children in their efforts
to conceptualize their world and to encode their
understandings in language capable of cowmunication,
storage, and higher levels ofthinking.2
In his discussion of the problem of teaching a
standardized languagetxa the disadvantaged child, Allison
Davis suggests not only must the Speech patterns of
children be identified and described, but the attitudes
of these children toward their teachers and school must
also be considered. Davis says:
1. There is an easy-to-detect lack of interest
in school due to a cultural lack of identifi-
cation with the school, its activities or its
teaching personnel, and
2. There is an open rejection of school activities
and school tasks with no desire to learn more
25
about anything in the school environment. .
If the statements mentioned about the language lack
Of the disadvantaged child are true and if Davis' analysis
Of this child's school attitudes are also true, the first
Concern of the teacher of the young disadvantaged child is
'30 attempt to build a strong and trusting relationship

24
Ibid., p. 463.

 

 

25
Allison Davis, "Teaching Language and Reading to
Disadvantaged Negro Children," Elementary_English
(Champaign, Ill.: NCTE Publication, November, 1965), p. 793.

 

19

26
between herself and the child. If this rapport can be
established between the teacher and the learner, an easy
oral communication can be the vehicle whereby language can
be studied by the teacher in terms of its phonology,
vocabulary, and grammar. If sub-standard English is used,
it must be first known to the teacher before any attempt
is made to teach standardized English as the accepted means
of communication. Where free discussion flourishes, there
will be an atmosphere in which the Speaker of a sub-
standard dialect can feel no personal threat in a learning
situation where the teacher introduces standard English
through her speech.

At the present time, at least two studies are reported
which concern themselves with linguistic problems of the
disadvantaged or culturally deprived child:

Carl Bereiter directs the first study at the
‘University of Illinois. Its project title is:
"Acceleration of Intellectual Development in Early
Childhood" (An Academically— —oriented Pre—school
for Culturally Deprived Children).

This is a pilot program in which 15 disadvantaged
Negro 4—year-olds are being given a high—intensity
program of direct verbal instruction in language,
reading and.arithmetic. The major emphasis in all
phases of the program is on teaching basic language
statement patterns.

After three months, gains of 12—15 months in
language age were obtained, and after a further
three months, further gains, 9, 5, and 8 months,
were obtained on the Illinois Test of Psycho—

linguistic Abilities (ITPA) subtests for auditory-
vocal automatic, auditory—vocal association and

 

 

26Ibid., p. 797.

20
vocal encoding. Gains well in excess of chronological
age gains were obtained on almost all other subtests.27

Finally, it is of value to know that this linguistic
training consisted of structural language training (acquisi—
tion of grammatical statement patterns and the logical
organization of these patterns, with an emphasis on per-
fecting the pronunciation). Work was done on the important
verbal and non—verbal factors in cultural deprivation,
without publication of the results at this date.

A study in contrasts was reported comparing the
functioning of the educationally deprived and the educaf
tionally advantaged children. This study is being con—
ducted at the University of Michigan. The project title
is "Longitudinal Comparison of the Psycholinguistic Func—
tioning of 'Educationally-Deprived' and 'Educationally-
Advantaged Children.'"

The purpose of this research is to eXplore the
relative psycholinguistic functioning of school—age
children in relation to several socio-cultural
variables. Three samples of kindergartenelst-
grade children were drawn from a de facto segre-
gated school (75% Negro), an integrated School, and
a de facto segregated school (100% white).

Baseline performance was determined for all SS
on? 9 subscales of the Illinois Test of Psycho—
linguistiC”Abilities; cognitive maturity test;

several phonetic measures; several syntactic
measures; free operant verbal responding.

 

 

27Carl Bereiter, et al., "Acceleration of Intellec—
tual Development in Early Childhood," Current Social
Qiélpct Research at American Higher Institutions (Washing-
jton, D. 0.: Center for Applied Linguistics, NCTE,
April 11, 1966), p. 11. ~ ‘

 

 

21

Post-test measures will be taken after one year
during which time the de facto group 1 will be
'integrated into group 3; The same tests will be
carried out annually on the same group, wit new
«tests to be devised and used periodically.2

Not only will the linguist be vitally interested in
the results of such a comparative study, but also the
educators and sociologists and psychologists; each of
1 these disciplines is deeply involved in problems of the
disadvantaged, one of which is sub-standard linguistic
behavior. It may be that when all of the disciplines
work as one, the problem of building the self-image of the
disadvantaged may be solved by linguistic competence.

[The beginning of any program of instruction which
involves young children in terms of their linguistic habits
must consider how the pre—schoolers Speak to their family
and peers. Walter Waetjin found that the young child from
the culturally deprived community tends to speak in "short,
sinmfle, often incomplete sentences. Their limited reper-
‘toire~of conjunctions discourages any well—organized or

“conmflex thinking."29

It is essential, according to Ruth Strang, that the

Youuig child should first be taught to speak and understand

 

" 28Loren S. Barritt, Mervyn I. Semmel, and Paul Weener,
Lcuugitudinal Comparison of Psycholinguistic Functioning of
'Edlucationally—Deprived' and 'Educationally—Advantaged'
Chilxiren,"“Current*Sgcial’Dialect'Research‘at'American’
Eighuer Institutions (Washington, D.C.: Center for Applied
Linguistics, NCTE, April 11, 1966), p. 14.

29Walter Waetjin, "Factors Influencing Learning,"
§92££1_Carolina'Guidance°News (Columbia, S. 0.: State Depart-
ment; of Education, Vol. 12, October, 1962), p. 56.

22

the standard English before he is taught to read and write
it. The critics of primary reading materials—-teachers,
parents and the writers themselves, agree that beginning
readers indicate the need for more materials written in
the vocabulary and.sentence patterns that the young
children themselves use in talking. Thus research must

start with the very young if curriculum change is to be

effective.30

Ruth Strickland, in Speaking of needed research in
,oral language, says that one of the chief responsibilities
of the elementary teacher today is to learn as much as
she can about the language children use. In this search,
Inost teachers need guidance in their work to help children
"achieve language that will be an asset, not a liability."
.It is the work of the teacher to guide youngsters in
tzheir acceptance of standard English as the entry into
S<>cial acceptability on.a level where they can.communicate
unith others satisfactorily. Finally, it is acknowledged
triat teachers will have to be provided with "knowledge that
WiLll help them build wholesome and realistic attitudes

tcwvard children's language and what needs to be done about

it . '13]-

30Ruth Strang and Mary Else Hooker, "First-Grade
Chigldren's Language Patterns," Elementary English (Champaign,
Ill. : NCTE Publication, January, 1965), pp. 38-41.

31Ruth Strickland, The Language of Elementary School
Wren: Its Relationship to the Language of Reading
Textfloooks and the Quality of Reading of Selected-Children
lCNDmington, Indiana: Indiana University, Bull. 38, No. 4,

July) 1962) .

23

If it is to be acknowledged that sub—standard dialects
do present problems for children and teachers and that the
deprived child, in particular, suffers from the inability
to communicate with others on a standardized English level,
it must be a problem that teachers should be able to cope
with from the child's first encounter with the school experi-
ence. As pre-school experience is being provided for
youngsters through local and federal assistance, the teacher
is charged with the responsibility of providing an approach
to the solution to the linguistic problem. Albert Griffith
proposes that we are now in a language revolution and that
all teachers--e1ementary and secondary alike—~will have to
gain professional competence in the area of linguistics
as an answer to the problem of adequate (and better) com-
munication between child and society. It may seem an im—
possible task, to re-educate the teachers of the country
who lack this language knowledge. However, if teachers
are truly professional in their approach to their jobs of
teaching the children the complete and satisfying approach
to the science of language, it can be done.

They must somehow develop the necessary lin—

-guistic competence by:. attending state teacher's
college next summer, or by attending an institute

here and a workshop there, or perhaps just buy a
few books and read a few periodicals.32

32Albert J. Griffith, "Linguistics: A Revolution in
Retrospect," Elementary_EngliSh (Champaign, Ill.: NCTE
Publication, May, 1966), pp. 504, 540.

 

24

John Dawkins challenges the words of Griffith, some-
what, when he claims that linguistics can be taught in the
early grades by any good teacher without reference to
further college preparation. The teaching—learning process
is one of discovery, which in "the best sense of the term

is precisely what linguistics is"! What Dawkins proposes

is simple yet solid:33

1 We want to teach a disciplined way of thinking.

2. ... to teach ways of organizing knowledge.

3. ... to teach children to make valid.generaliza—
tions.

4 to teach children to ask significant and
relevant questions.

5. ... to teach children something about the
nature of languages in general and
English in particular. 3

6. ... to further the growth of concepts.

A thought-provoking question that becomes vital in
this linguistic research is the influence of parental
language on the language behavior of their children. Doris

Noell found that the language usage of parents greatly

35

determines the usage of children. Mildred Templin says,

further, that little change takes place after the age of
three in the parts of speech used and articulation growth

takesplace between the ages of three and four-—when most

_‘

33John Dawkins, "Linguistics in the Elementary Grades,"
Elementary En lish (Champaign, Ill.: NCTE Publication,
November, 1965 , p. 762.

34

35Doris I. Noell, "A Comparative Study of the Relation-
ship Between the Quality of the Child's Language Usage and '
the Quality and Types of Languages Used in the Home," Journal

%%?Educational Research, Vol. 47 (November, 1953), pp. 161!

Ibid., p. 768.

25

children readily learn oral language patterns as they are
spoken in thehome,36 and that "aspects Of oral language

are very nearly habitual by the time a child enters first

grade."37

The U. S. Office Of Education, in January of 1966,
granted funds to a project called the Detroit Dialect Study,
under the direction Of Dr. Roger W. Shuy. A growing
interest in urban areas on the part of both the sociologist
and the linguist made the selection of Detroit a natural
one. This city of almost three million individuals includes
a large number of Negroes, Southern whites and immigrants
whose Speech would have a natural effect on the large
urban area.

The research plan for this study was plotted in three
stages:

1. Preparation

2. Fieldwork

3. Analysis38

Shuy listed the aims of the study:

As linguists, the researchers are interested in the

manifestation of Detroit Speech. As dialectologists
we are interested in the relationship of social

status and regional background to this linguistic
manifestation. We are interested, furthermore, in

36Mildred C. Templin, Certain Language Skills in
SEELIdren: Their Development and Interrelationships (Minne—
apOlis, Minn.: University of Minnesota Press, 1957).

37Frank B. May, "The Effects of Environment on Oral
Lanémiage Development," Elementary_Engdish (Champaign, Ill.:
NCTE Publication, October, 19667, p. 595-

38Roger W. Shuy, The Detroit Dialect Study (unpublished
progress report, East Lansing, Michigan, April 1, 1966), p. l.

26

the fact that certain patterns of speech lead to
conclusions about social stratification, and we

are much concerned about how our findings will be
useful to the teachers of English in Detroit.

We are convinced, for example, that by identifying

the features of pronunication, lexicon, grammar

and syntax which characterize the less flexible

groups in Detroit society, we can help the indi-
viduals in these groups to become more linguistically,
and thus socially, flexible.3

One of the major concerns of linguists and educators
alike is the task of changing the level of Speech from
that which is sub—standard to standard English. The first
step in this direction is to define the "problem level,"
approached by the Detroit Dialect Study in this manner:

. We feel that any attempt to bring a person
from one level of performance to another requires
an accurate description of the most significant
features of each level. English teachers have
made some progress in defining the features of
the target level, but they have done relatively
little to identify the problem level. Linguists
feel that all language, whether used by peOple

of high or low status, is systematic and that

the most efficient method of teaching involves
the teaching of patterns rather than items.
Recent developments in almost all the behavioral
sciences attests, furthermore, that learning does
not progress from items to patterns but rather
from one pattern set to another pattern set. In
the case of Speakers of non—prestige dialects,
this means that one system (systematic though non—
prestige speech) is augmented or replaced by“O
another system (systematic prestige Speech).

The research aims are:

to identify the Significant features Of pronuncia—
tion, lexicon, grammar and syntax Bf native Detroiters
Of several social classes and age. 1

\

3.9%” pp. 1-2. uOIbid., p. 2.

4
lIbid.

 

 

27

Linguistic features will compare:

.equivalent responses of Negroes, Jews, Southern

Whites, Poles, Canadians, and Mexicans (of dif-

ferent social classes and age) who have lived in
Detroit for various lengths of time.

Geographical and social factors will be recorded

because:

. . Detroit is Split geographically and sociall ,
east from west, by Woodward Avenue . . . the investi-
gation will further compare the linguistic responses
Of east and west side Negroes, Canadians, etc. The
»patterning which exists within the various minority
groups wfill provide a focus for pedagogical appli-
cations. 3

The research design includes Detroit area residents

who were interviewed from the following groups:

1. Upper elementary age 35%
2. High school age 20%
3. Parents 35%
4. Grandparents * 10%

The selection of persons interviewed was based on the
enumerated population of fourth to Sixth grade elementary
school children from both private and public schools. The
selection was done randomly for the interviews. Older
siblings, parents, and grandparents were included in the
Sample if they were Detroit residents. The total sample
f0? each family included a minimum of one child and one
parent and a maximum of these two plus an Older sibling and/
origrandparent.uu

x

”21bid.
u3Ibid.

qubid., p. 3.

28

Fieldwork for the study followed this procedure:
1. Informants were selected.

2. Fieldwork was conducted by 12 linguists
and the director.

3. Appointments were set up well in advance
of the interview.

4. Each Fieldworker is equipped with a battery
Operated tape recorder which is useful for
checking accuracy of Speech and later analysis.

5. Fieldwork training preceded the fieldwork.

6. Questionnaire used is designed to elicit
several styles of speech and to determine his
attitudes concerning the Speech of other
Detroiters.

The Detroit Dialect Study is of Special interest to

this investigator because of some research similarities.
The graph on the following page may illustrate these dif—

ferences and similarities.

Summary

Growing research studies indicate the need for more
knowledge concerning language behavior. Studies Show that
there is particular attention paid to linguistic problems
of the culturally disadvantaged child. From the advent of
the Linguistic Atlas Prdject to the current research in
progress, particularly the Detroit Dialect Study, Specific
investigators suggest that an identification, description
and study of the phonology, vocabulary and usage of the

language is the scientific point of departure. Through

¥

uSIbid.

29

.coooom pafino co oocoSHQCw Hopconmm .:

.ACOLOHflco Samson

whocomop mo metapflppmv owwswcmq .m

megapmom cocoon mo Coauoflgomoo .m

one soaosoaeaosooH .H

.coflpwsufim

COHUNOHCDEEOO Codm Op :UCGE

upmsmpw cocoon: mo mfimwc och Show .m

mopsumom :Ooodm mo cowpdflsomom .m

soars

one coaosoaaaocooH .H

 

monB<qumzH

.mEouH mpmflscmoo> one

.LmEEmcw azwoaococm

.COHumHOcscosm

.cofluodzooo .OLOOoL Ho>mcu

.woocOOHmon mo pLoOoL .mpcoama

.mEcom xmcc>m .wEouH

HwOHquEmsw “HmOonH

 

mHmwQ<z< mom <B<Q

Ipcmcw Laocp new mucopma
.pcmELOMCH no npcooon cacao

mSDwuw chowpmospo .oomm aowe.

.msumpm

HSCOHumospo pew COHDSQSOOO
.pfloccoo SH cocoofimop

mo COHDSSSO .cowwflaop

.xawemu mszHmCOHumc

.mopmcm OHEocooo .oomm .ow<

 

¢B<Q Q<0Hzm¢moOHm

spasm oooasao oesom odor

spasm oooasao oaosooo one

 

wQDBm OHBmHDUZHA mmB

 

Loogooop made no owOOHZch

CoEEOo no mEouH popcoaom

Loppoooc mom» mo

mEoufl OLHmCCOMDmOSG

 

ZOHBoquOo <B<Q

mcozofl>soocfl
wcflpmflmmm 03p
.LODOOLHO Locomou

ILOmH>LOQ3m oco

momflsmcfla o>Ho3p

.LOOOOSHU oco

 

mmm3mH>mmBZH

neocomoo Sworn

.mocopo; Lfloco

.cosoaaco oesom poo:

mucopmd
Ipcmpw .npcopma
.Lpsoz .cogpawco

hampcoEoHo Load:

mBZ<EmomZH

aflonuoo CH
maoocom UO®Mucm>

:osnao .oooooaom

sass ocsnewar oes
onSLpem: .DHOLOOQ

 

<mm< A<OHmm<moomw

spasm nooaoaa ossom poor

aosom oooasao oaosooo one

 

wabem CHEWHDUZHA mmB

30

this language revolution in progress, both the elementary
and secondary teacher would have to be linguistically
knowledgeable to work with children in terms of the appli-
cation Of this knowledge SO that the movement from a sub-
standard tO standardized dialect could be accomplished.
This study designates the pre-school child, his parent and
teacher as the informants in this investigation.

Chapter II reports the method of investigation used

in the research design.

CHAPTER II
RESEARCH DESIGN

Since the focus of interest in this study of the
speech of pre—school children, their parents and teachers
is concerned with problems of the culturally disadvantaged,
the United States government-Sponsored Project Head Start

was selected for the language sample.

First Interviews

 

Why Project Head Start Was Chosen
The research indicates that the culturally deprived
child is handicapped in Speech development, grammatical
usage, and vocabulary. His auditory and visual discrimina-
tion is less than adequate compared to his middle—class
contemporary. Children from the disadvantaged home suffer
fron1a.lack of vocabulary knowledge in terms of middle-
Class.word—classifications or categories. Some authorities
feel that they do not know the words for that which is non—
concrete.
In the long run, the language which the deprived
child has learned at home is likely to be inade-
quate as an aid and tool in conceptualization.
Furthermore, language serves as a means of social

distinctions which can limit Opportunities for
mobility.1

1 , .
Bloom, DaVIS and Hess, op. Clt., p. 71.

31

32

Recognizing the particular needs of the deprived
child, the Congress Of the United States in April, 1965,
passed a law in which financial aid was provided for the
educationally disadvantaged:

TITLE II: FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE TO LOCAL EDUCATIONAL.
AGENCIES FOR THE EDUCATION OF CHILDREN OF
LOW—INCOME FAMILIES

"Declaration of Policy"

Sec. 201. ---In recognition of the special educa—
tional needs of children of low-income
families and the impact that concentrations
of low-income families have on the ability
of local educational programs, the Congress
hereby declares it to be the policy of the
United States to provide financial
assistance to local educational agencies
serving areas with concentrations of
children from low-income families to
expand and improve their educational
programs by various means (including
preschool programs) which contribute
particularly to meeting the special
educational needs of educationally
deprived children.2

Project Head Start became a reality with this-mandate

 

during the summer of 1965. In the city Of Detroit, Michi—
gan, some 6000 children were registered in the program as
Detroit's participation in the nation's war on poverty and
educational deprivation. These children were primarily
from the central city area and were the children who were
expected to enter the kindergarten classes of the city in

the fall term of 1965.

 

2College and University Reportgf-Public Law 89-10.
89th Congress, H.R. 2362, April 11, I965. AN ACT, Washing—
ton, D.C., United States of America.

 

33

One hundred and twenty-two schools were designated as

those which would house Project Head Start, Child Development

 

Centers. The children selected for this experience were
chosen on the basis of statistics supplied by the Detroit
Commission on Children and Youth, Winter, 1965. This report
listed the family situations of all areas of the city of
Detroit, the income and employment levels, housing con-
ditions, and educational statistics Of the family groups.
The average class size in the Project was fifteen children.
Experienced teachers were hired and trained in an intensive
training session sponsored by Wayne State University in
Detroit. Three assistants and a parent were hired to assist

the teacher. Two parents were placed in the larger Centers.

3

 

The initial Head Start session was a period of six weeks.

The Speech and language development program of the

Project consisted of two aSpectS:

l. the provision of materials prepared to aid the
teachers in the stimulation of Speech and
language development and

2. evaluation and recommendations for follow—up
of children referred as having speech problems.

If doubt should exist that the child of poverty needs

special help in language understanding, let uS look at the

homes of two such children:

 

3Arthur M. Enzmann, "Final Report: PROJECT HEAD START,"
(unpublished report, Detroit Public Schools, Detroit,
Michigan, Summer, 1965), pp. 2-3.

“Ibid., p. 8.

 

34

Shirley was a little 4-year—old girl who lived in
the inner city, in a three-bedroom public housing
apartment. She was the youngest of Six children;
the Oldest was 14. . . . The parents laid down
rules of conduct, almost harshly; otherwise there
was practically no verbal inter-action between
parents and children. To be seen and not heard--
that seemed the rule in this home.5

In the case of another youngster, the home involved
a different pattern of communication between members of
the family:

Chuck was almost 5 years old. . . . Chuck's flat
included a tiny living room, kitchen, and two
bedrooms; there was no bathroom. In this space
lived Chuck's mother and ten children. A common
bathroom down the hall served six families. Chuck's
mother was on welfare. .

Chuck's mother was somewhat intoxicated at the
time of this home visit; She Spoke with adequate
vocabulary and her manner with her visitors was-
uneasy and diffident. With her children (many of
whom were school—age but unaccountably lounging
around the flat on a school day) her manner was
aggressive. She screamed orders at them,told them
tO-get out of the house and let her alone, and she
hit Chuck when he insisted on talking with the*
visiting teacher.6

With these case studies being the rule rather than

the exception, Project Head Start recognized that the

 

children from such disadvantaged homes "tend to do poorly

in language; they have small vocabularies and Often seem

7

unable to speak up and out." The goals of this program

were evident in terms of Speech improvement: "to Sharpen

and widen language skills; both listening and speaking."8

 

5Project Head Start: Daily Proggam 1 (Washington,
D.C.: Office of Economic OpportunityI, p. 4.

6Ibid., p. 5.
7Ibid., p. 9
8Ibid., p. 8.

 

35

With this Short reference to the history and develop—

ment of Project Head Start, it is evident why Head Stagt

 

 

was chosen for this investigation of the Speech Of pre-

school children, their parents and their teachers.

Availability of the Informants

 

During the summer of 1965, Prgject Head Start was in

 

session for approximately six weeks from July 6th through
August 20th. The first week of the class was one of organi—
zation for teachers, children and aides alike. The last

week of the six-week session was one of culmination of
activities and one in which the teachers were eXpected to
complete the many reports for which they were responsible.
This left a period Of four weeks during which time this
investigation of speech behavior could be conducted. The
children were in the school from 9:00 to 12:00 noon. The
teachers were in constant attendance as were the aids and
the parents who assisted in many of the activities. Other
parents were available for the study as they delivered
their children to the school in the morning and were there
to meet them at the close Of the session at noon. This
unusual organization of both the school and the home working
together daily was unique in terms of the regular school

year in which the parent and teacher would meet less Often.

36

 

chpe of the Field Work

Selection of Schools.—-Permission was Obtained from

 

Dr. Arthur Enzmann, Project Head Start Director for the

 

Detroit Public Schools, to visit any of the one hundred
and twenty—two public school centers which participated in
the program. As this number Of schools was such a large
one, private and parochial school centers were not visited
for this investigation. During the four-week visitation
period, data were collected from forty-four of the schools
which were part of this summer public pre-school project.
In order to be eligible for one or more of the Head
Start classes, these schools were selected from those
which had been designated as schools for the disadvantaged.
Schools located in areas Of the city which had been SO
labeled were called disadvantaged because of data obtained
from the Census Tracts (1960).9
Recruiting was done primarily through the local
schools with assistance from the Mayor's Committee
for Total Action Against Poverty, Community Action
Centers, the Welfare Department, and other public
agencies. Ninety per cent of the children selected
had to fall within a poverty income level as stated
by the Office of Economic Opportunity.10
The statement above was taken from a 1966 Report of

Head Start, but according to Enzmann, the criteria was

the same for the 1965 program.

 

9Arthur Enzmann, Unpublished Report Of Head Start
(Detroit, Michigan, Summer, 1966), p. 2.

10Ibid., pp. 2—3.

 

37

The forty-four schools in the study represent a random
sample Of the one hundred and twenty-two schools in.the
total group. To visualize the geographic locations Of the
schools, one might think Of the city of Detroit as being
a wheel the center Of which is the hub or inner—city area.
The main arteries of the city divide the city. Woodward
Avenue divides the city as to those areas which are East
and.West. The Detroit River, which divides Canada and the
United States, is located at the "foot" of Woodward (as it
is referred to by the natives) and is the southern-most
point of the city. For purposes of easier communication,
it can be imagined that the Spokes of the wheel form the
other main streets of the city. The inner-city area is
referred to as that region of approximately two-miles in
circumference jutting out from the hub section or downtown
section of the city. The adjacent two-mile area also
includes some of the schools designated as disadvantaged.
Finally, the area just outside these four miles have a few
disadvantaged schools which are also included in the sample.
(See Appendix A for a map of Detroit and the selected ..

schools included in the study.)

38

TABLE 2.-—Geographic spread of the disadvantaged schools
with Head Start informants included in the study.

 

 

 

Schools in Sample Location of Schools
Inner—city 19 (two—mile radius)
Adjacent to Inner—city 15 (two—mile radius)

7 east of inner—city
8 west of inner-city

Peripheral 10 (two—mile radius)
” 7 east of adj. area
3 west of adj. area

Total School Involvement in Sample: 44

 

Both schools of large student and smaller student
enrollment were included in the sample. Some of the schools

had one Head Start class; others had as many as eight

 

classes, however, the average number of classes in a
center was four. Table 3 lists the schools included in
the language behavior study.

Selection of Informants.—7The informants in this
language study were in three status—classifications:

l. the pre—school child in Head Start,

 

2. a parent (or parent-substitute) of the child
interviewed, and
3. the teacher of the child interviewed.

The selection of the Head Start class which was visited

 

in the school was by pure chance. If the principal or
coordinator were in the building, the Interviewer was usually

escorted to a room where a Head Start class was in session;

 

39

 

m Homo: Hence
SoCLSB

Haaneosm
Ohmom

s "chem Hsooe

cacao .pm
enmEowcwq
xflfiopm
mcfipmox
mo>H

osom
mcopmsmo

a: ”SOSDm SH mHoocom mo Lonesz Hmpoe

w "one; Hsoos

pHo>omoom
Hamsouona
BOLLOMOS
assoc:
escape
somanmh
nsoooa
Haomsa

A "poem Hooch

assaaaaz
mOCOh

.q .< .moeHom
oaoas

cossm

mmhom
o5>oaaom

ma ”Hopoe

Haoxgflce
ogpwm
hoEme
coso
Hao>noz
opooz
Caoocflq
homecom
phospooz
xooocmm
maoooaoo
owhoow
:HHxsmam
mahom
mxsmcpfimm
wcomsoo
coonEOm
Haoodsso
homespflonm

 

mHoocom mog< procdflnom

maoocom moa<
SDHOILoQQH one Op pcoownp<

mHoocom coca mpHOISOSQH

 

|o||i

 

.mhocomop Aflocp paw mucopmd aflocp Augmpm omom
poemopm SH whoaoocomlopd mo spawn owwswcma on» CH OOOSHOsH mHoocomII.m mqm<e

40

at other times, the Interviewer Simply entered the room on
her own and began the Speech study.

The first of the three informants interviewed was
usually the child. In most cases this was a self-selective
procedure. The children simply indicated their interest by
coming over and talking into the microphone. In other
cases, the Interviewer approached a child or a small group
of children and started a discussion.

The selection of the parent depended on the selection
Of the child for every child who was included in the study had
a parent also included. In the few cases where children
were living with grandparents or aunts or in foster homes,
the adults closest to the children were also included in
the sample. The adults were interviewed in the school when
they brought their children to school or picked them up at
the end of the school session. In the case of three parents,
the Interviewer went to the child's home for the interview.

The selection of the teacher also depended on the
selection of the child. Since many teachers taught more
than one of the children interviewed for the investigation,
the teachers are fewer in number than either the children
or their parents. All teachers were interviewed in the

school or the classroom itself.

Collection of the Linguistic Data
Method of Data Collection.——The method employed in

the collection of the linguistic data was by means of

41

recording the speech of the Informants on a tape recorder.
In this way the speech is retained for present and future
study so that identification and description of the lan—
guage is always possible. During this initial interview,
twenty—three tapes were used to record the language data.
Sinpe each tape ran for three hours, the total hours of
recOrded speech of Detroit pre—schoolers, their parents,

and their teachers, during this first interview, were Sixty—
nine.

Processing of Linguistic Data.-—Selected portions of

 

these tapes were transcribed phonetically and typewritten
in traditional orthography. This was done so that patterns
might be revealed in the following areas of language
behavior:

1. Phonology

2. Vocabulary

3. Grammar

Selection of Items-for Language Study.——In addition

 

to the age differences among the three sets Of informants
(the pre—school children and the parent and teacher-groups),
the socio—economic levels of the informants had wide vari—
ation. It was necessary then to arrive at a list of

common terms which would be of knowledge and experience to
all individuals in the sample. The vocabulary selected to
be used for a comparative study of the language behavior of

the informants included concrete items, for the most part.

42

There is a lack of expectation of reward for per—
formance and most tasks are 'motoric,' have a short
time span, and are more likely to be related to
concrete objects. Difficulty arises when they must
move into conceptualization and abstract thinking.
On the basis Of Piaget's theory of the fixed nature
of stages and on the premise that the initial
schooling stage is the concrete stage, a curriculum
Should act upon this and Offer many such concrete
eXperiences.1l

The concrete items used to open the discussion between

the interviewer and the informants were those items of high

interest value to the individuals. In most cases, the pre—

school children were interviewed before their parents and

their teachers. During the first pre-schooler interviews

it was determined which concrete items could be used to

best elicit the response sought.

The vocabulary items selected include:

1.

The-toys and-games the children were using in

the-Head Start classroom. In this case, the

 

ritems present opened the talk but many children

continued so that other toys and games enjoyed
outside the classroom were mentioned.

399d, which was being eaten in the classroom
as breakfast for the children (milk, cereal,
juice, and graham crackers) was named. In the
case of others, names for other foods were

mentioned (i.e., eggs, bacon and so on).

 

11

Martin Deutsch, "The Disadvantaged Child and the

Learning Process," Education in Depressed Areas, ed. A.
Harry Passow (New York: Teachers College Press, 1963),

43

3. Pictures were used as a means of eliciting
phonology, vocabulary knowledge and usage.
The pictures were of family figures, peers,
domestic animals and family-living experiences.
(See Appendix B for a copy of the pictures
used in the interview.)

The interviewer probed the child's knowledge as
deeply as possible SO that items were labeled wherever the
terms were known. Initially the interviewer attempted to
establish rapport with the child SO that the speech was
as natural as possible.

In his work with young children from disadvantaged
homes, Deutsch stresses the verbal and perceptual
skills needed for all types of communication. Many
of these children come from homes where things are
seldom referred to by name; a chair, a table, or a
lamp is pointed at, but not identified. Deutsch
stresses labeling in his approach, getting across
the idea that everything has a name, a name to be
seen and a name to be used. In training the child
to offer oral responses, the teacher first dis—
courages pointing and 'partial' language. Once the-
oral response is given, the teacher encourages the
child to play with the word, or with a word like it,
in a phrase, a sentence or a jingle. Deutsch com—
bines the learning Of concepts with perception and
linguistics.12

The items for language study were those, therefore,
which were of.more common experience to the pre-schoolers

than other more sophisticated vocabulary. The parents and

 

12Joseph 0. Loretan and Shelley Umans, Teaching the

Disadvantaged (New York: Teachers College Press, 1966),“
p. 45, as cited from Martin Deutsch, "The Role Of Social
Class in Language Development and Cognition," American
Journal of Orthgpsychiatry (January, 1965), pp. 78—88.

 

44

teachers alike were asked to react to these same items:

their knowledge of the toys and games with which the children
were playing in the clsssroom and the toys and experiences
the children enjoyed outside the classroom; their knowledge
and feelings about the food the children had both in the
school and at home; and their reactions to the pictures

the children were asked to discuss. In this manner the
interviewer elicited phonology, vocabulary and usage from

all three sets of informants for comparative language study.

Designation of Field Workers.——The field workers or

 

interviewers, as they have been designated in this study,
were three women. Because of time limitation the director
of this study could not conduct the interviews alone and
thus engaged two women to work with her in the collection
of data for the sample. (AS stated in Chapter I the H919
§£g£t_classes were available for language study for a period
of four weeks, five days a week, from 9:00 A.M. to noon.)
The interviewers studied the publication by George Wilson,13

Instructions-to Collectors of Dialect, and were in constant

 

contact with one another during the four—week period. All
three field workers held a Master's degree or better and all
had had teaching experience in the Detroit Public Schools.

Two Of the field workers had majored in the field Of English

 

13George P. Wilson, Instructions to Collectors of
Dialect, No. l (Greensboro, N.C.: American Dialect Society,
April, 1944): pp. 1—12.

45

and the third member of the team was supervisor in the area
of language education and curriculum development, Detroit

Public Schools.

Second Interviews

 

A follow—up interview was conducted with a number
of the teachers who were included in the initial first
interview of pre-schoolers, teachers and parents in the

Head Start program during the summer of 1965. The second

 

interview was conducted during a five-month period from
January to May, 1967. The purpose of this interview was.
to determine teachers' concepts of the task, i.e., thee

language problems of pre—school children.

Selection of Informants

 

The total sample of the teachers interviewed in the
first series Of interviews numbered fortyrthree teachers.
For this second interview, which was conducted by one
field worker, thirty teachers were interviewed.. The sampling
was done by random digits using a table of randomly ordered
digits. The teachers were listed randomly l to 43; the
assigned numbers were thus eliminated: 37 - l - 27 - 38 -
33 - 25 — 39 - 18 — 15 - 6 - 30 - l7 and 16. The remaining

names were re—numbered as Interviews #1 through #30 by which

they will be known for the remainder of this study.lu

lZ‘John H. Mueller and Karl F. Schuessler, Statistical
Reasoning in Sociology (Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co., 1961),
p. 349; and Table IV, "Five Thousand Random Digits," abridged
from Table 1.5.1 in G.W. Snedecor, Statistical Methods, 5th
ed., (Ames, Iowa: Iowa State University Press, 19567.

 

 

 

46

Availability of the Informants

During the two—year interval between the first inter—
views which involved pre—schoolers, their parents and their
teachers, and the second interviews which involved the
teachers in the first interview, seven of the teachers had
been transferred to other buildings in the Detroit area, one
teacher had resigned, two had been transferred to higher
level classes in the buildings in which they had taught the
Head Start class; eight of these teachers were included in
the random sample. One teacher who had been transferred to
another building and one teacher who had been given a higher
level class were not included in the second interviews.
All Of these teachers were interviewed in the public schools
in which they taught with the exception of two teachers who
were interviewed outside of school. The interviewing took
place before or after school sessions, during free periods,
or periods which the principal arranged as free for them,

or during their lunch hours.

Sggpe of the Field Work

Included in the second interviews were teachers who
teach in all areas of the disadvantaged schools in the
Detroit Public Schools. By this is meant all areas were
represented as was the case in the first interviews (see

Table 4).

47

TABLE 4.--Schools included in the second interviews of
of teachers in Project Head Start.

 

Schools Number

 

Inter—city Area Schools

Breitmeyer

Edmonson

Ferry

Moore

Thirkell 5

Adjacent to the Inner—city Area Schools

Bellevue

Berry

Bunche

Field

Holmes, A. L. 5 East

Angell

Jamieson

Keidan

Roosevelt 5 West

Peripheral Area Schools

Carstensv

Ives

Keating

Lingemann 4 East

Sherrill
Turner 2 West

Total Number of Schools Included
in Second Interviews 21

 

Collection of Linguistic Data

 

Method of Data Collection.—-The method employed in the

 

collection of the linguistic data was by means of recording
the Speech of the informants on a tape recorder in the same

manner in which the first interviews were recorded. In this

48

way the speech is retained for future language study and
determination of the teachers' concepts of their task.
Each interview with each teacher ran from thirty to forty—
five minutes depending on the teachers' responses which
varied in length.

Selection Of Items for Language Study.-—During
January Of 1967 a letter was written to the principals of
all the schools which had teachers on their staff who were
included in the second interviews of this study. This
letter informed the principal about the interview and asked
permission to interview the selected teachers. Also
included in this letter was a statement which listed the
two major questions which the teachers would be asked to
react to when the interview took place. These questions
were:

1. What do you think are the major problems your
children have with vocabulary, grammar, and
pronunciation?

2. In what ways does the language of the parents
influence the children? What problems with
vocabulary, grammar, and pronunciation in the
language of the parents are reflected in the
problems of the child?

(See Appendix C for a copy of the letter to principals whose

selected teachers were included in the second interviews.)

49

When the interview actually took place between one

teacher and the interviewer, the teacher was given a state-

ment listing the two questions just as they appeared in

the principal's letter. In addition, five other questions

were added to the interview in an attempt to elicit a

larger sample of speech. These questions were:

1.

Would you give me your Opinion of the Head

Start program as you experienced it?

What kinds Of toys or materials did you use
in the program?

Did the children have anything to eat during
the session in school?

Would you name other foods the children might
have had for breakfast at home, before they

came to school for Head Start?

 

We'd like to improve our use of these cards.
(See Appendix B for a sample of these

picture cards.) Can you tell me how the
children responded to them? Simply tell me

in your own words what the children would have
said in describing the pictures, using nouns

and verbs particularly, please.

(See Appendix D for a COpy of this statement which was

given to the teachers before their interview.)

50

Single Interviewer.-—Unlike the first interview

 

which had three field workers who collected the linguistic
data, the second interviews were conducted by a single
interviewer. Appointments were made well in advance of the
interview and the attempt was made to have the most casual
and informative sessions. The field worker spoke to each
teacher in private and in an atmOSphere which was one of
unhurried Sharing Of ideas.

Processing and Tabulation of Data.——After the thirty
interviews were completed with the thirty teachers reacting
to the questions proposed in terms of language behavior,
the taped Speech was typed. Once again biographical data
was:a major concern. The teachers gave information for the
study which included (1) sex, (2) race, (3) highest grade
reached in school, (4) their birthplace and (5) the birth-
place of their parents and both of their maternal and
paternal grandparents, (6) the informants' previous places
of residence and approximate dates, (7) their travel history
outside of the state, and.(8) their occupation, which in
this case was the same for all informants.

The tabulation of the data collected in this second
interview will include the teachers' concepts Of the task
of the teacher in terms of language identification, de—
scription, and understanding. The teachers' reactions will
be charted in terms of the language the teacher uses to

describe the Specific language problems of children. The

51

teachers' judgments Of language behavior in the speech of
their social concepts of the language of children will be

listed in this study.

Summary

Within this chapter the research design was presented
with reference to two sets of interviews. The First
Interviews involved pre—schoolers, their parents and their

teachers, in Project Head Start. The scope of the field

 

work indicated the selection of schools, informants and
the collection of the linguistic data. The data sought
were the phonology, vocabulary and usage from the above
named informants. The Second Interviews included the ran-
dom sample of thirty teachers included in the First Inter—
views. The particular data sought at this time were the
teachers' concepts Of their language instruction and their
students' language behavior.

Chapter 111 reports the population sample of both
interviews. In the case of the first interview, biographical
data were recorded for the three sets of informants: pre-
schoolers, their parents, and their teachers in the Hggd
Start Project during the summer of 1965. In the case of the
second interview, biographical data were recorded for the
one set of informants, the thirty teachers included in the
random sample of the original forty—three teachers included
in the first interview. The social implications in terms of

dialect study will then be discussed.

 

52

Chapter IV reports the teacher's concept of the task
Of teaching the young in their job of communicating with
their teachers and the world around them. Of particular
interest will be the comparison of the teachers' concepts
Of the crucial tasks with the data presented by the child's
actual speech.

Chapter V reports the language data of the investiga-
tion. Within this study the phonology, the vocabulary, and
the grammar Of the informants will be tabulated. Selected
linguistic indices of social stratification identified in
the Detroit Dialect Study will be noted in this corpus.

Chapter VI draws conclusions from this study of.
language behavior which can be of some importance and help
to the classroom teacher at the elementary school level.
The identification, description and understanding of the
linguistic behavior of children serve as a basis for in—
Service training for the teacher. Curriculum revision is
a necessary follow—up of this language understanding for
with deeper insights into the language problems, the more
instructional aids must be brought up—to—date in terms

Of this knowledge.

CHAPTER III
BIOGRAPHICAL DATA

Using the research techniques of the Linguistic Atlas
Project, this study included the biographical data of its
informants: the pre-schoolers in the 1965 Head Start
Project, their parents and their teachers. This information
was supplied to the interviewers during the first interview.
Since the thirty teachers included in the second interview
were those who were also included in the initial interview,
the biographical data were known.

According to the systematic method used by the Lin-
guistic Atlas, dialect geography is used to study regional
differences in language patterns. Hans Kurath, the first
director of the Atlas, used the methods of the European
dialect geographers to provide the foundation for the study
Of urban American speech communities.1 The informants'
biographical data were tabulated: his age, his sex, his
race, his academic experience, his birthplace, and the birth—
place of his parents, paternal and maternal grandparents,
his residences, his travel experiences and his occupation.

The marital status of teachers was recorded as well, as this

#

1
N Hans Kurath, Handbook of the Linguistic Geoggaphy Of
—2E_§ES£§QQ_(PrOVidence, R. 1.: American Council of Learned
Societies. 1939).

53

54

information was previously known about the other two sets
of informants, i.e., the children and their parents. In a
large urban area, such as the heterogeneous community which
is Detroit, Michigan, the sample provides the study with

social data of significance.

First Interviews

 

Each Of the three interviewers asked the informants
to supply biographical data. These data were recorded on
4" x 6" cards to be kept with their individually taped
Speech. A sample of the Biographical Interview card on
which was recorded biographical data of informants included

in the sample appears below:

 

Biographical Data

 

 

 

 

Interview'#;____Teacher_____Childer___Parent____gAge
Sex~ Racev/ ; Highest grade reached in school
State County' Town or City
Birthplace

' (town or city) I (state)

Previous places of residence and approximate dates:

 

Travel outside of state:

 

 

 

 

 

 

Birthplace Of your Birthplace of your
Father: Paternal grandmother
Paternal grandfather
Mother: Maternal grandmother

 

 

Maternal grandfather
Occupation: Husband's occupation:

 

 

 

 

55

Population of Informants

 

The population of pre—schoolers, parents (or parent—

stubstitutes), and teachers is as follows:

TABLE 5.-—Population of informants.

 

 

Informants Number
Children 156
Parents 155
Teachers ‘ 43

 

Among the children was one set of twins, thus account-
ing for one less parent in the sample. Among the parents
there were two grandparents who were the legal guardians
of the children and one foster parent who had raised the
child from infancy. Within the population sample of teachers,
the study included teachers who taught 3.6 children included

in the study.

Sex of Informants

 

The tabulation of the data revealed a large percentage
of females within each group of informants (see Table 6).

The large percentage of female parents and teachers
included in the sample is possibly due to the fact that the
primary grades are taught by female teachers, for the most
part. The two men interviewed were not primary teachers

during the regular school year. One man was waiting for

 

56

TABLE 6.—-Sex of informants.

 

 

Informants Females Males % Females % Males
Children 99 57 63 37
Parents 147 8 95 5
Teachers 41 2 95 5

 

promotion to administration and sought experience working
with the young child. The other man was a regular physical
education teacher who had not taught below third grade
before his pre—school teaching experience during the summer
Of 1965. The-parents were mothers who ordinarily are in

the home with small children and were therefore available

for the interview when they came to school with their
children. 'The children in the sample, interviewed and-taped,
were those who showed a willingness to talk to the field

worker.

Race of the Informants
Both white and Negro informants were interviewed for
the study (see Table 7).

The child who took part in the Head Start Project

 

experience was from all nationality groups and races; in
the city of Detroit the pre—school group included Puerto
Ricans, Mexicans, Negroes and whites, as well as many dif—
ferent ethnic groups. However, as the designation of

"disadvantaged" had no reference to a racial or ethnic

 

57

TABLE 7.—-Race of the informants.

 

 

Informants Negro Caucasian (white)
Children 141 15
Parents 140 15
Teachers 22 21

 

group, these data were not kept by the administration of

the Project. The eligibility for attendance in the program

was based solely on the environmental conditions under A
which the child resided. Through observation alone, on the

part of the interviewers, however, there seemed to be a

large proportion of Negro children in the program. The

teacher—group was fairly evenly divided among both Negro

and white teachers.

Age of the Informants

 

The one group of informants which was fairly constant
was the youngest, the children. As the prerequisite for
entry into the Project was that the child must be entering
the kindergarten in September, 1965, all the children were
between 4% to 5 years of age. Obviously, the parents and

teachers differed in age (see Table 8).

 

58

TABLE 8.--Age range of informants.

 

 

 

Years
Informants No.
20-30 31—40 41—50 50+
Children 156 All between 4% to 5 years Of age
Parents 155 68 58 27
Teachers 43 14 16 6

 

Research in the relationships of language and society has
certain obligations to honesty in the treatment Of variables._
To compare the language of children, parents and adults, one
must take into consideration the variable Of age. This
research must call attention to the evitable fact that parent
and teacher Speech also varies and that part of this variation

stems from age differences.

Marital Status of Informants

 

This biographical item was not listed as such on the
Interview Card as it was Obvious in the case of the pre—
schooler and the parents who were presently married at the
time of the interview or had been married at a previous time.
There was no Specific statement, however, acknowledging the
presence of the father in the home. In the case of the
teachers, the marital status was known_when the teacher was
asked her husband's occupation. Of the 43 teachers inter-
viewed 16 listed the occupation of husbands. A check was
made and it was confirmed that 37% Of the teachers, or 16

out of the original 43, were married; 63% were single.

 

59

Highest Grade Reached in School

 

Project Head Start was the first experience that the
children had had in the school environment as they were 4%
to 5 year Old pre-schoolers. The other two informants

differed greatly in their school experiences.

TABLE 9.——Academic background of parents and teachers.

 

 

Grade Egrent; ggachers

Grades 1—8 2O 13
Grades 8—12 111 72
Grade 12 Graduate 16 11
College 1—2 years 6 4
B.A. or B.S. in Education 10 23
B.A. or B.S. in Education

+ study beyond 27 65
M.A. or M. in Education 6 12
TOTALS 155 43

 

In Table 9 it will be noted that the higher percentage
of parents are less than high school graduates: 131 of the
parents, or 85% of the 145 parents included in the sample,
have less than a twelfth grade education. In contrast to
this, the higher percentage of teachers included in the
sample reported study beyond the minimum expectation for the
elementary school teacher. Of the 43 teachers included in
the sample, 33 teachers had study beyond that of the bachelor's

degree or 77% of the teacher-informants included inthe sample. It

60

will be noted further that 6 of these teachers, or 12% of

the total group, held the master's degree.

Birthplace of Informants

 

The majority of the younger informants, the pre-
schoolers in the study, were native Detroiters; both of the
adult groups, the parents and the teachers, had many in
their groups who had migrated to Detroit from other parts
of the country where they had been born (see Table 10).

It is Of interest to note here that the younger the
group of informants, the more native Detroiters and fewer
persons born:outside the United States. The following
tables indicate the birthplaces Of parents and grandparents
of the informants. It follows here, too. There are fewer
natives and more persons born outside the limits of the
United States among grandparents than parents. In Table 11
it will be noted that the three sets of informants (the pre-
schoolers, the parents and the teachers) will be considered

as units of three for easy comparison in terms Of parents'

 

and grandparents' birthplace; each unit of three will be
given an interview number for reference purposes (see Table
11).

The eleven units of three interviews are illustrative

 

of the individually collected data which were concerned
with the birthplaces of the informants, their parents and*
their grandparents. In all there were 155 interviews of

parents, 156 interviews of pre-schoolers and 43 interviews

61.

H moHocH .3 cmfipflcm

H Osmaom

m momcmo
Asmv :

NNHr—lv—{HHHHHHHHHH

.o.o
Honwmwammaz
oacamsa> onoz
moxoe
oommoccoe
oceaogmo cpsom
chm>H>wccom
muoxmo cosoz
mcfiaoswo cppoz
xso> 3oz
mcmflocH
mflocHHHH
mmmcoxc<

oHco

newcoaa

Agony as

Asamv mm

m: “Hanoe

neocomoe

 

ocmfiuoom .sa
coco mmoa so A&:©.v H

oxmmmzzzrzmmmmr—h—t

oflcsomflamo
meno>azmccom
moHLon
macfiwcm>
ocmazsmz
mHOcHHHH
ocmfimasoq
fissommflz
scaaonoo cpsom
sesamsa> oooz
ocflaogmo cocoz
mxospcox
OHco
mmmcoxs<
oommoccoe
fldqfimmflmmflz
ofiwpooo
memoma<

Asmov owe

flammv :m

mma "HopOB

muconom

 

mmmmmmHHr—lr-t

moflsoam
mflcm>azwccom
zomsoh 3oz
OHco
axospcox
oflcfimpfl>
Hodfiwmfimwflz
mHocHHHH
ofiwsooo
memnma<
Aasfiv mm

Aaowv ems

oma ”Hopoe

:oLUHHno

 

 

noosom posses ooanoso

nonpum UOUHCD CHLQHB

mumpHOLOOQ o>Hpmz

ill

manEpOMCH

 

.mocmsaouca mo somaqcuaamtr.

if
as names

62

 

chHmsH> so snow 3oz so nasamsH> u a
chHwLH> so xto» 3oz 2o xpow 3oz u E meomH< ”pcocmm
oommoccoe mu chHmLH> mo oommoccoe u m AmcHzpv
oomwoccoe so xto» 3oz so memomH< u z SHOLHOQ "coLoHHco m
mem>OHmocoouo mo ocmHom mo mew>onocoomo n m
ame>ononoono Eu ocmHom 2o ocmHom n z mcmHocH ”Locomoe
SHooH so sHsoH so aHsoH u a
aHsoH so sHsoH so aHsoH u z oHosooo ”oceans
sHooH so aHsoH so oHosooo n a
SHooH 2o SHsoH so oaosooo u z oHosooo noHHeo s
oconsm so ocsHosH so comasoaz u m
osoHusm so ocoHosH so cstcoHs u z oHosooa “cocoons
oon so oaosooo so ssoH u a
oon :0 oHosooo so raccoon u z oHoeooo ”sconce
oHoeooo so oon no oHosooo u m
7 oHosooo so oHocooo so oHosooo n z oHosooo “oHHso .m
mmxoe mo mmxoe mo mmxoe n m
mmxoe 20 mwxoB zo mmxoe u z mmxoe ”Locomoe
mcmeHSOH so mEQOH< mo memomH< n m
mcmHmHSOH 2c mEQOH< Eu osmcmHa u z mEmOmH< ”pcocmm
oHosooa so sssosHa so oaosooo u a
pHospoo Eu mEmomH< :0 mEmomH< u z OHOLHOQ ”UHHEQ N
neocoHa so seoosHa so mssomHa u m
oEoooH< zo memowH< zo memomH< u z wHocHHHH ”genomes
mflmsooo n m
czocx:: czocxc: mepooo u z mesooo upcogmm Loomom
czocxc: crosses AoHHeo soonoa nv csocxc: oHosooo noHEo H
Amocosmnocmsow Ampcogmnocmsow oOmHocchm m.Locomm
Locumm ocm hospoz HmCLoumm Locpmm pew sonooz Hangman: oOdecngm m_pocpoz ucmELomcH a 3oH>poch

 

.mpcocmaocmcm ocm masocod .mucmELomcH so oodecchmnu.HH mqm<e

 

 

613

.HH ocm .OH .ma mSOH>LoOCH pom unmELomcH Demo on» mH someones:

.m use .5 .0» m3OH>uoDcH Lou DCMELOQCH mean on» mH nocomoeu

 

oaosooo
oHosooo

MEMDMH<
mEman<

mean<
mEmcmH<

meman<
mEman<

ocmHucm
accenoo

sHsoH
SHnoH

SHsoH
anoH

cham
Cwmnm

SHooH
oHosooo

chm>H>mCCom
«cacao

spawns:
upmucsm

>CMEpou
Sunshoo

HaaHmmesz
HaaHmmHmmH:

womcmxn<
mmmcmxp<

UCMHznmz
pedenwz

mo
EC

mo
so

mo
so

mu
:0

mo
20

mo
:0

mo
20

mo
:0

mu
:0

mo
26

mo
:0

mo
20

so.

:0

m0
:0

mu
so

awesome
oHosooo

oHosooo
saosooo

mEman<
memcoH<

mEman<
mEman<
comasoaz
csmHnon

aHsoH
SHsoH

sHsoH
oaso

:Hmam
cham

:Hmam
:Hmom
moocmo
:smHnon
momcwo
momcmo
sswacoaz
romance:

Hadfimemez
HaaHmemmHE

HmoflmmHmmH:
HSQHmmHmmHz

capo
oaco

mo
:0

he
20

mo
26

mo
20

mo
20

kc
so

be
:6

mo
:0

mo
26

mo
20

mo
20

no
:0

mo
20

mo
20

mo
20

pHOLqu
pHOLqu

pHOmeQ
mEmcmH<

mEmcwH<
memcmH<

memcmH<
meoan<

oaosooo
raccoon

SHmoH
oHso

oHosooo
oHosooo

CHmam
:Hmam

oaosooo
oHcsoeHHso

momcwo
mowcmo

oHosooo
oHosooo

xpow 3oz
uHOhqu

HQnHmmHmmHz
HQQHmemmHz

mmmcmxp<
wamcmxp<

ocmthoS
OHco

EFL 5334 Elk: Elfin EFL Sin EFT-4 ER: EEK: EEK-4 2&4 EEK-t Eli-4 ELI.

EEK:

uaopuom

pHOmeD

meman<

pHOLpoQ

oaosooo

pHOLuDQ

oHosooa

oassoeaHno

oaosooo

oaosooo.

oHosooo

uHOLuom

mmmcmxp<

raccoon

.o.Q

”D:Ome

”UHHco

“pcopmm

"UHHLQ

"Locomoetm

"pcondm

”UHHEO

"uconmm

"UHHSO

"Sachem

”UHHLO

"genomes.

“unopwm

"UHHSO

"Accents

 

 

64

Of teachers. These eleven units of three informants per
unit were selected at random to illustrate the wide dif-
ferences and some likenesses in the geographicalesocial
environment of-the informants. The remaining data not

listed are available for study if they are so desired.

ResidentSIof‘Informants

 

This paper has-indicated that the informants differed
greatly in their place of birth; this is also true of their
number Of residences. The pre-schoolers, 86% of whom were
native Detroiters, had, in the main, no other place of
residence other than their birth. Much Of this is accounted
for, of course, by their youth (4% to 5 years of age)'andi
the fact that they were from disadvantaged homes. *This
latter fact accounted for their movement around the city
from home to home, which was indicated-by many mothers in
the interview; but this movement did not extend to other
residences outside of Detroit.

The parents, on the other hand, only 22% of whom
were native Detroiters, indicated they had resided in states
other than Michigan. Most of these residences were in the
Southeastern states of the United States, specifically:
Alabama, in which 35% of the parents once resided; Georgia,
in which 20% of the parents had once lived and Mississippi,
in which 18% Of the parent—informants once lived. (See
Appendix E for a map of the United States and the spotted

area from which the greatest majority of parents migrated.)

65

Of the 43 teachers in the sample, 51% were native
Detroiters and remained in Detroit during their entire lives,
with short residences in other cities when they were in
college. The 40% that listed their birthplace as somewhere
other than Detroit added, for the most part, that they did
not take up residency in Detroit until they were young
adults who came to the city seeking a teaching position or
traveled there with a husband whose work was in Detroit.
This was unlike the parent—informants who indicated that
they had been residents of Detroit for many years having
moved to the city from other areas when their fathers came

up to the North to work in the industrial plants.

Travel Experience of Informants

 

In agreement with the paragraphs just preceeding this,
it was not too surprising that the pro—schoolers had little
or no travel experiences in their young lives. Their
parents did travel, but their trips were back to the same
regions from which they came as children. The teachers,
on the other hand, listed travel experiences which took
them all over the United States, including,Hawaii and
Alaska, Canada, South America, Europe and the Orient. One
teacher mentioned that she had just recently returned from
8 Leave of Absence during which she took a world-cruise

which lasted for six months.

66

Occupations Of Parents and Teachers
(and/or Their Husbands and Wives)

 

 

All parents and teachers did not respond to the
question concerning the occupations of their husbands or
wives, or even their own in the case of the working—wife
parent, but a significant enough number of replies makes
these data of interest to the social implication of this
speech study.

Among the answers given by parents, the following

occupations were listed:

Parents' Occupations

Factory Worker 10 Grocery Cashier

Plant Protection Press Operator 2
Key Punch Operator Secretary

Grocery Clerk Dental Technician

Grinder Truck Driver 11
Welder Gas Heat Worker

Solderer Construction Worker 6
Machine Operator 3 Painter

Auto Wash Owner Auto Wash Worker 4
Parking Lot Attendant Tool Company Employee
Railroad Switchman Bartender

Drug Company Employee Caterer Employee
Electrical Worker City Employee

Auto Worker Bus Driver 2
Are Welder 3 Boiler Operator 2
Laborer 2 Post Office Clerk 5
Michigan Gas Company Machinist 2
Stamp Die Man Musician

Mechanic 5 Forger Operator

Hammer Man Chrysler Inspector
Insurance Agent Social Security Office
Steel Maintenance Worker

Car Lott Manager Boat Oiler

U.S. Navy Asst. Principal
Unemployed 7 Metal Pourer

Steel Worker

Beef-Boner

Factory Foreman

Ford Motor Company
Worker

Student

Heat Treater

Pipe Fitter

Bump and Paint Man
Medical Retiree

 

 

 

67

The following occupations were listed by the teachers
as those jobs held by their husbands or wives, as the case

may be.

Occupations of Teachers' Husbands or Wives

Teacher 3
Auto Executive
Crysler Accountant
Jam Handy Writer
(Advertising)
Pharmacy Owner
Press Operator
Physical Therapist
Cleaner and Presser
Orchestra Leader
Exports Executive

Second Interviews

 

The second set of interviews included only one set of
informants, the teachers included in the first interviews.
As stated in Chapter II, thirty of the original forty-three
teachers were selected by random digits using a table of
randomly ordered digits. The population of the second
interviews was quite different from the original informants
and the information sought more the teacher's concept Of
her job than simply data concerned with language behavior

of the three sets of informants.

Population of Sample
The teachers who were interviewed for the second time
in this study of Speech behavior were 30 in number or 70%

of the teachers interviewed initially.

68

Sex of Informants

 

In the initial group of teachers interviewed, 41 of
the informants were female and two were male. In the second
set of interviews including 30 teachers, 29 teachers were

female and one was male.

Race of Informants

 

In the initial group of teachers interviewed, 22 were
Negro and 21 were CaUcasian. In this second set of inter-

, views including 30 teachers, 20 were Negro and 10 were white.

Age of Informants

 

The teachers in the second interviews were smaller in
total number but exhibited a very wide range in age dif-
ferences. The youngest teacher in the sample was 24 years
of age and the chronologically oldest teacher was 58 years

old.

Marital Status of Informants

 

Unlike the first sample which included within its
number 37% of the teachers who were married and 63% of
whom were single, this second interview included an exact
50% of the teachers who were single and 50% of whom were
married, including one teacher who had been widowed.

At this point it is Of interest to see a comparable
biographical chart of the teachers included in the second

interview. Each teacher is given an interview number (see

Table 12).

TABLE l2.-—Biographical data of teachers in second interviews.

69

 

Interview
Number

Race

Age

Degre

e Held

Birthplace

Other Residence

Birthplaces
M:F; M-GMch
P-GM:GF

Occupation (husband-Wife

 

10‘
Male
Informant

ll

l2

l3

l4

15

57

48

\J"
U2

58

44

4O

24

53

M.

B.S.

COT
>

2:11

A I

in Ed.+

M.
Work

Q)
..r g-o

.Ed.

Ohio

Detroit

Indiana

W.Virginia

Detroit

S.Carolina

Penna.

Lefroit

Illinois

Detroit

B.W.Ind1es

N.Carolina'

Detroit

Detroit

Detroit

Ohio (24 yrs.)

Detroit (33 Yrs.)

None

Ind. (11 yrs.)

Detroit (23 yrs.)

W. Va. (5 yrs.)

Detroit (24 yrs.)

Detroit (1-18)
Georgia (18—23)
N.Y.C. (23-35)
Caiir.(35-41)
Detroit (41—48
years)

S.C. (4 yrs.)
Detroit (48 yrs.

V

Penna. (1 yr.)
Illinois (2 yrs.
Detroit (33 yrs.)

v

Illincis (41 yrs.)
Detroit (12 yrs.)

None

B.W.I.(ll yrs.)
Detroit (47 yrs.)

N.C. (20 yrs.)
Detroit (24 yrs.

v

v

Detroit (20 yrs.
N.C. (8 yrs.)
Detroit (12 yrs.

v

Detroit (1 yr.)
Ohio (20 yrs.)
Detroit (3 yrs-)

None

M:Oh10
F:Ohio

MGM: England
MGF: England
POM: Penna.
PGF: Penna.

MzDetroit
F:Penna.
MGM: Italy
MGF: Detroit
PGM: Ireland
PGF: Ireland

MzPoland
F:Czechoslovakia
MGMzPoland
PGM:Czech.
PGF:Czech.

MzTennessee
F:V1rginia
MGM:Tennessee
MGFzTennessee
PGM:Virgin1a
PGF2Virginia

M:Ireland
F:V1rginia
MGlereland
MGlereland
PGM:Virginia
PGF:Virginia

4:8. Carolina
F:S. Carolina
MGM:S.Carolina
MGF:S.Carolina
PGM:S.Carolina
PGF:S.Carolina

M:Alabama
FzPenna.
MGM:Georgla
MGcheorgia
POMzFlorida
PGcmeorgia
MzGeorgia
F:Georgia
MGM:Georgia
FCP:Georg1a
PGM:Georgia
PGcmeorgia

M:Illinois
:Tennessee
MGlellinOis
MGF:IllinOis
PGM:Tennessee
PGFzTennessee

M:New York
szetroit
MGM:New York
MGF:Ireland
POMzcermany
PGF:Germany

M:Jamaica
F:Cuba
MGMzJamaica
MGF:Jamaica
PGM:Cuba
PGF:Cuba

MzN. Carolina
FzN. Carolina
MGM:N. Carolina
MGFzN. Carolina
PGM:N.Carolina
PGF:N.Carolina

Mzs. Carolina
F:S. Carolina
MGM:S. Carolina
MGFzs. Carolina
PGM:S.Carolina
PGF:S.Carolina

M:Ohio
F2Alabama
MGMzPenna.
MGsz. Virginia
PGMzAlabama
PGF:V1rginia

Mzcermany
FzDetroit
MGM:Germany
MGFzGermany
PGM:NOt known
PGFzNot known

Widow

Single

Single

Teacher

Auto Executive

Owns a Pharmacy

Accountant

TLBCLCL'

Wife in a
Homemaker

Exports BUSIUcSE

Bartender

Single

Single

Lawyer

TABLE 12.—-Continued

Interview
Number

16

17

18

19

2O

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

 

Race Age

Degree Held

U7

M.Ed.

.S.in Ed.+

B.Ed.

7O

Birthplace

Detroit

Detroit

Detroit

Alabama

Detroit

Alabama

New York

Tennessee

Detroit

Detroit

Detroit

N.Dakota

Detroit

Detroit

Detroit

Other Residence

None

None

None

Alabama (10 yrs.)

Detroit (21 yrs.)

None

Alabama (26 yrs.
Detroit (10 yrs.

New York(14 yrs.
Detroit (33 yrs.

~./

Tennessee(2 yrs.
Missouri (4 yrs.
Ohio (15 yrs.)

Detroit (8 yrs.)

\./

None

None

N.Dakota(l4 yrs.)

Detroit (23 yrs.)

None

None

None

Birthplaces
MzF; M—GM:GF
P-GMch

MzDetroit
FzRumania
MGM:Detroit
MGFzDetroit
PGM:Rumania
PGFzRumania

MzTennessee
F:Tennessee
MGMzTennessee
MGFzTennessee
PGM:Tennessee
PGF:Tennessee

M:Georgia
F:Mississippi
MGMzGeorgia
MGcmeorgia
PGM:Mississippi
PGF:Mississippi

M:Alabama
FzAlabama
MGMzAlabama
MGFzAlabama
PGM1Alabama
PGFzAlabama

M:Georgia
F:Virginia
MGM:Ireland
MGF:Ireland
PGM:Virginia
PGF:Virginia

MzAlabama
F:Alabama
MGM:Alabama
MGPzAlabama
PGM:Alabama
PGFzAlabama

M:New York
letaly
MGM:Italy
MGletaly
PGM:Italy
FGletaly

M:Mississippi
FzTennessee
MGM:Tennessee
NGFzMississippi
PGM:Mississippi
PGF:Mississippi

MzMichigan
FzDetroit
MGM:Nichigan
MGlereland
PGM:England
PGF:Germany

M:Canada

FzMissouri
MGM:Canada
MGF:Canada
PGM:Canada
PGF:Canada

MzAlabama
F:Arkansas
MGMzFlorida
MGF:Florida
PGMzArkansas
PGF:Arkansas

Mzs. Dakota
F:Massachusetts
MGMzGermany
MGF:Germany
PGM:Canada
PGF:Canada

MzMichigan
FzAlabama
MGM:Canada
MGF:Canada
PGM:Alabama
PGFzAlabama

M:Michigan
F:Spain
MGM:Nassachusetts
MGF:Massachusetts
PGM:Spain
PGF:Spain

M:Mississippi
FzMississippi
MGM:Nississippi
MGF:Mississippi
PGM:Mississippi
PGFzMississippi

Occupation (husband-Wifd

Single

Auto Plant Office

Employee

Single

Government

Employee

Single

Writer

Cleaner and

Presser

Single

Single

Single

Single

Single

Librarian

Single

71

Summary

As was stated briefly in this chapter, the systematic
method of using dialect geography was used to study differ-
ences in language patterns. The differences were many as
can be studied in Tables 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 and 11 which were con-
cerned with informants included in the first interviews of
this study. The data reported in Table 12 were reports of
the biographical data of informants of the second interviews.

Due to the fact that this was a study of the language
behavior of the pre-school child, his teacher and his parent,
the sample included a very large percentage of females among
the adults, i.e., 95 per cent of the total group of both the
parents and the teachers. This was probably a most natural
sample, however, for the parent most likely to accompany a
pre-schooler to the school would be the mother, for the
father, as the financial partner in most marriages, would be
at his daily work. The teacher of the pre—schooler, too,
would most likely be a woman as the greater majority of
primary teachers are women. In a comparative study of speech
behavior it would be probably most natural to use the
language of the mother and the female teacher for they are
around the young child more often than is the male teacher
or even the father, who may not reside in the home.

The race of the informants was heavily Negro within
the children and parents' group, i.e., 141 Negro children

and 15 Caucasian children; 140 Negro parents and 15 Caucasian

 

72

parents. This was probably due to the fact that the larger

percentage of children in the Head Start Project in the

 

Detroit Public Schools were Negro. The teachers were more
evenly divided, i.e., 22 Negro teachers and 21 Caucasian
teachers.

The age of the informants was very similar for the
children for they all had to be pre—kindergarten age to be
accepted in the Proaect. The parents were younger in age,
as an average, than were the teachers. Between the ages of
41 to 50 years and above we found 39% of the teachers; only
12% of the parents fell in this same chronological bracket.

There was a wide difference of academic background
reported among the parents and teachers who served as infor-
mants in this study. Seventy—two per cent of the parents
reported that they had not finished high school; only 4%
of the parents had any college experience at all, with no
parents stating that they held a college degree. Naturally,
on the other hand, all of the teachers stated that they held
at least a bachelor's degree, with 65% of the teachers
reporting that they had work beyond the four year bachelor's
degree and 12% said they held a master's degree.

The children had done very little traveling outside of
their home city of Detroit and their parents said they
traveled between their native states, the majority of which
were in the Southeastern United States, and their adopted

city of Detroit. In contrast, the teachers reported having

 

73

‘traveled extensively in the United States and many reported
having traveled to Europe and other parts of the world.

The pre—schoolers, too, held the highest per cent
rate, among the informants, as native Detroiters, i.e.,
the children were 86% native Detroiters; the parents were
22% native Detroiters, and the teachers were 51% native
Detroiters.

In terms of the birthplaces of parents and grand-

parents, we find the oldest generation reported were more

 

likely to be born in other countries, i.e., England, Italy,
Czechoslovakia, Germany, Poland, Hungary, Ireland, Spain,
and Canada. The parents and grandparents of the pre—
schoolers' parents tended to be natives of the Southeastern
region of our country.

Finally, the occupations reported by the parents and
teachers differed. More occupations in the unskilled and
semi-skilled classes were reported by the parents; occupa-
tions which are recognized as professions and businesses,
or "white collar” kinds of work were reported by the
teachers.

In conclusion, the biographical data of teachers
included in the second interviews is presented in chart form
indicating that which was previously reported as part of the
data of the first interview as the teachers were the same

in both parts of the study; the number is simply smaller.

74

\

Chapter IV presents an analysis of the teachers' concept
of the language problem from their own observations and
experiences with the pre—school child and his parent from

disadvantaged areas in the city.

CHAPTER IV
TEACHERS' CONCEPT OF THE PROBLEM

The real worth of language knowledge in terms of
curriculum development and revision depends greatly on
the teachers' concept of the problem. With the simple
recognition of the need to change, the teacher will
normally seek data which describe the problem and propose
possible solutions to it. The previous chapter described
some of the speech characteristics of the pre-school
child, his parent and his teacher. The second interviews
in this study were directed solely to the teachers of the

pre—schoolers in Project Head Start in an attempt to

 

determine the teachers' concept of the language problems

of her class.

Letter of Introduction to the Principals
To introduce the study to the principals whose

teachers would take part in the second set of interviews,
a.letter was sent to the schools asking for permission to
Speak to the teachers who had participated in the Project.
This letter stated that the study described and identified
the speech of children and adults in Detroit for possible
future in—service training and curriculum revision for

teachers. It went on to say that the teachers would be

75

76

asked to react to questions concerned with their opinions
of Detroit speech. The questions were then stated for the
principals' information. (See Appendix D for a c0py of

the letter sent to the principals.)

Statement to the Teachers

 

Enclosed with the letter sent to the principals was
a statement to the teachers which asked them to react to
specific questions at the time of interview. (See Appendix
E for a copy of the statement to the teachers.)

The first two questions in the statement were pro-
posed to the teachers in an attempt to get the teachers
to state their opinions concerning the language problems
of children. These questions were:

1. What do you think are the major problems

your children have with vocabulary, grammar
and pronunciation?

2. In what ways does the language of the
parents influence children in your class?
)What problems with vocabulary, grammar and
pronunciation in the language of the parent
are reflected in the problems of the child?

The teacher was then asked to listen and react to a
tape of the Speech of children who were pre-schoolers in

the Head Start program.

 

The final five questions were proposed to obtain

further language data from the teachers rather than to

77

determine her concept of the problem. For that reason the
data gathered from the last five questions were included in

the evidence discussed in Chapter V on language data.

Teachers' Responses to Question 1

 

For purposes of anonymity, the thirty teachers in the
study were given numbers 1 to 30 and will be referred to
by these numbers throughout this chapter.

Vocabulary Problems of Children:
Comments Most Often Used

 

 

Teachers' reaction to the question: What
do you think are the major problems your
children have with vocabulary . . . ?

 

Teacher
Interview Vocabulary
# .
1 Their vocabulary is very small-—for most of them.

 

 

2 Some had a vocabulary of about a hundred and some
words, I'd say; no more than that. They got along
fine with what they knew. They didn't have any
trouble expressing themselves. They knew the
important words for them to get along okay. Some
could talk your foot off. I mean, they just knew
everything. The quieter ones were the ones who
didn't have a large vocabulary. The ones who
were always talking had words that you wouldn't
imagine a child that age having. They just knew
a lot.

3 Generally, their vocabulary was very limited, but
then they were very young, pre—school children.
Their trouble was the use of dialect for they
said hal_for now} It was southern dialect among
some of the children which caused them to use the
wrong words.

4 In some cases I can't understand the children at
all. Of course, sometimes the children won't
talk at all, or else they speak in very low tones.
The vocabulary is very limited. When we had free

Teacher

Interview

 

78

Vocabulary

discussions, I like to draw out the children and
ask them questions. They would answer with one

word, for instance; I suppose this is normal enough.

In the Head Start program, the children come with

a very meager vocabulary, I would say. I think
it's because of the background of the home and the
lack of books at home, the lack of communication
with the family, especially, if there are only

one or two children in the family. Perhaps if
there are more children in the family communication
might be a bit better. They might have a few

more words in their vocabulary.

They have a lack of vocabulary simply for the
reason that they have not been encouraged to talk;
they may just gesture for a doll. They would say,
"Mrs. , I want that, you see, that there
thing,” So I feel it's a lack of speech, a lack
of talking in the home, perhaps, or, maybe I've
commented about this because I like to talk.

We have definite problems with vocabulary because
the children haven't been exposed to many words.
Just simple things that they just don't seem to
understand.

They have a definite lack of vocabulary. I find
that with middle—class children you can use more
words and there isn't this problem of having to
interpret for them because they pick up the words
at home. I imagine they have trouble because
their parents Speak in one—syllable words and
they don't even make sentences. I can't get them
to make a sentence. Even if I have them repeat
after me exactly, they don't do it. They repeat
in sentences they are familiar with. They're not
really sentences but fragments of sentences that
are familiar to them, and they understand them.
They don't realize that they aren't making a
complete thought.

I think the children understand more than they
speak. They learn things from TV. I don't think
TV hurts them; they learn and learn but they don't
use it.

 

 

79

Teacher
Interview Vocabulary
#

10 I think their vocabulary, to a great extent, is
very limited when you compare it to a middle-
class child. They don't come in contact as often
with these words. Their parents seem to have a
very limited vocabulary and this affects their
vocabulary. They use terms of their own, such as,
mash the light, for turning off the light switch.
They don't mash the light switch, they mash the
light.

11 The vocabulary is definitely limited; they speak
in single words, simple words, not sentences.

12 They only use those words to which they had been
accustomed to hearing. And, of course, we try to
enlarge upon that in various ways. I used a large
amount of materials. We would play telephoning
and the child had to answer in complete sentences
to try to get him to enlarge his vocabulary in
various manners.

13 They use one—syllable words. They are like
children who have no training at home.

14 Most of them had, on the average, an extensive
vocabulary. One or two might have had a vocabulary
of say a second or third grader. They got their
vocabulary from older brothers and sisters but
not from their parents; this is the difference.
Television was a great influence for most of them.
For example, most of them knew the TV commercials,
and, as soon as they would see a particular type
of cereal for breakfast they would say, "We saw
this on TV."

15 The vocabulary of the total group is very, very
limited——yes—-very, very, limited. This is why we
must go into so many different explanations of a
word.

16 If the vocabulary is something they have actually
had experience with, then they know the word fairly
well. If it's something they're not too familiar
with, they will try and find a way of describing
it, but they really won't come out with the exact
word.

Teacher
Interview

 

#
17

18

19

20

21

80

Vocabulary

 

In the inner—city, the child's vocabulary is very
limited. His experiences are very_limited. If
you say, "Tell me what you see," the child begins
with "It is something." He really has no name for
it. If you have a lawn mower, he could say, "It's
something you cut the grass with," or "It's a
grass cutter." He will give you what the machine
would do rather than its name. There's very
little identification. I feel that they don't
question for they have very little vocabulary with
which to question. You see, if they have no words
with which to ask a question, they can't question.
He sees nothing for his experiences are so limited.
He takes no vacation, has had no exposure to a real
farm. Consequently, when we teach,every single
experience we present has to be backed up with all
kinds of pictures, all kinds of details so the
child really has some kind of mental picture as to
what we're talking about. It's hard to relate to
this kind of child because he has nothing to base
it on. We read about, for example, rabbits. Last
week we had a real, live rabbit in the room and
the child got a chance to feel it and to see the
fur. The child learns in this way—-by seeing and
doing. That which he sees and does--some of that
he retains.

I haven't noticed their vocabulary very much. I
only noticed that it is very limited.

I noticed that a couple of children wouldn't

talk at all when they first came. After

having something to talk about, if they were
playing with a certain toy, they would find some—
thing to say about it. Soon they would tell about
things they were doing at home.

They had a great deal of slang vocabulary. Other-
wise they only used a few single words.

They point at things instead of saying the word for
it. We have to work with them to get them to talk
and converse with us, other leaders and even the
children. If you let them continue doing it, they
would go on pointing out things rather than saying
their names.

Teacher
Interview

 

#
22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

.30

81

Vocabulary

 

I don't think they can communicate because they
cant really let us know what theyire thinking

and how they feel about things. You can hardly
accomplish too much with a child unless you really
know how they feel, how their mind works and how
they're really thinking.

Some of them have very short vocabularies whereas
others who have had more experiences have more
extensive vocabularies.

In using descriptive words their vocabulary is
very limited. They find it very difficult to
describe things. What they do know they get from
TV. It's the key to everything, especially words
on "Batman" they know.

These children know only very simple little words
at first. They improve a great deal as our days
together go on to the kindergarten.

Few words are really known by the Head Start child,
at least when they are speaking to the teacher or
in school; they seem to get along all right when
they are talking together.

 

To be perfectly honest about it, I have a very
hard time trying to communicate with these children.
Forgetting the social differences, the children
are simply language-starved.

When the children are playing together they seem
to understand each other, but the teacher is a
different matter. It takes a long time of working
together to be able to really talk with much sense.

Most of their answers are one-word answers. These
children are almost foreign to words used by
middle—class children their same age.

I think their vocabulary is quite limited because
they have limited experiences in their environment
—-their home environment. that is, until thev

come to school. This is a new world for them.
School words of teachers and books introduce
completely new words to them-—in great contrast

to Words they hear at home.

82

Conclusions of the Teachers' Concept of the Child's

Vocabulary.

 

--In brief review we find these statements often

volunteered by teachers when they evaluate the child's

vocabulary:

limited—-very limited—-definitely
one-syllable words

meager vocabulary

lack of vocabulary

they point

they gesture

not exposed to many words
understand more than they speak
don't know the names for things
don't talk at all

short vocabularies

they haven't heard the words.

Strangely enough, however, a few teachers indicated

tfliat they felt the children had rather extensive vocabularies,

twat these teachers were fewer in number than those who felt

the opposite.

anJnmer Problems of Children:
ngunents Most Often Used

Teacher
Interview

#
1

Teachers' reaction to the question: What
do you think are the major problems your
children have with grammer . . . ?

Grammar

Their grammar is very, very different and it's
limited and poor.

These children have no idea what a sentence is.

I don't think they have ever really realized that
we put our words in sentences. They talk in short,
little phrases. I try to get them to say their
thought in whole sentences but they don't under—
stand what you're saying. Like they say one word
or they say "Yah."

They say seen for saw, such as in "I seen him do
this."

Teacher
Interview
#
4

10

ll

83

Grammar

I have given them exercises in grammar, like
distinguishing which verb to use with singular
nouns, which verb to use with plural nouns for I
don't think their grammer is up to par. This

is the reason that I stress this so much in my
own classroom.

I think the grammar has been very poor among
these children, and there again, it's what they
are used to hearing in the home.

Their grammar problems are many because they use
substitutions, this for that. They use a personal
pronoun after a name and leave off the s, as in
"he see."

The biggest problem that I've had so far is "I'm
gonna," "fishes" finr'TisNL "milks" for "milk” and
foods" for ”food."

The grammar is so poor that I use some of the few
brighter children in the class to kind of trans-
late for them because there is a real communication
difficulty. I have to translate everything into
their own language and they don't always under-
stand me and I don't understand them at all times.
Then I have to use an interpreter.

They try to imitate the grammar--sometimes. They
begin to try to help each other, too. I know one
thing that "bugs" me. When I say "Where can I
get a pencil?" they will answer, "Here it goes."
It is hard for them to say "Here it is," but if I
talk enough.about it, they may change.

I would say their grammar is probably very poor.
Where we would use a sentence to convey a thought,
they are in the habit of maybe using a phrase or
just a few words to try to convey the same

thought which I would presume would affect their
communication to a great extent.

These children out words off: "could" would be
"ould," such as in "Ould you like to do this?"
Too, their "1's" were often missing. I really
don't think it was because the child was unable to
say the word; I would say it was just habit.

 

Teacher
Interview

 

#
12

13

14

15

16

17

84

Grammar

I would say here it's an environmental thing.
They had used only those things which they had
heard in their immediate environment. Some of
these children had not even been out of their
homes. They had not been downtown. They had
not been any farther than their family circle.
You could tell.right away if a child had been
exposed to a wide vocabulary and good grammar.
You could separate the children just by
observation and listening.

I've been working here for a long time so.I
guess my ears are tuned to a great many of these
forms of grammar--but I know they wouldn't be
correct among friends of mine.

The majority of the children don't speak in com—
plete sentences. They might give you a staccato
answer of one or two words. In phrases they

'might say something like, "That's he ball,"

instead of "That's his ball.

To try to help their grammar I play games with
the children. They have to supply the missing
words or phrases, such as in, "Close the . . ."
and they will say "door, " or "window." They are
very alert when you make it fun for them.

In grammar the children actually say one word
instead of a complete sentence. We are working
to have them say a complete sentence even though
it's simple and short.

Their grammar is terrible. "Her hit me," "tie

me shoe" are examples of how the inner-city child
speaks. This is because there is very little com-
munication between the child and the parent. Now
with the era of television, even though it plays
an important part as far as learning is concerned,
the child does not have to listen. Mickey Mouse
is there. The motions take the part of the real
listening. Because there is no real honest com-
munication between parent and child, the child
isn't taught to listen. He doesn't hear; he
doesn't enunciate, you see.

Teacher
Interview

 

#
18

19

2O

21

22

23

214

255

85

Grammar

I find with my little ones at school that they
always seem to put "me" instead of "If in the
phrases they say. When they're speaking, instead
of putting the other fellow first, they'll put
themselves first. They'll say "me and my brother."
I find this very frequently.

Very few talk in sentences. Most of them are
one-word comments, "yes" and "no" become "uh-huh"
and "uh-uh."

Some of them speak in full sentences, but they are
only sentences of two or three words.

I introduce the verb to children as an action
word showing them what they're doing and the noun
as the name of the person or place. That helps
them write and speak in a complete sentence.

They usually use single words or a phrase rather
than a complete sentence and sometimes they would
throw in a single word to answer the question.

Disadvantaged children do not use complete
sentences. Some of it, if I may say so and I'm
reluctant to say so, does come from the home. If
they don't hear a lot of good grammar they don't
speak it--and they don't hear it at home.

I find all children love to hear stories--especially
these children who haven't heard many of them in
their homes. I read to them a great deal and hope
they listen to good grammar, which they are not
capable of when they come to us.

I often can't tell just how good their grammar is
for they don't say much at first. I guess they

are a little bit scared, I suppose. Their parents
probably said, "When you get to school your teacher
won't let-you do that." That is quite common,

you know.

I wouldn't mind if I heard pre—schoolers use the
word "ain't" or misuse English for I just wish
they would talk! Except for the very bright ones;
I just wish they would express themselves in any
way.

Teacher
Interview

 

#
26

27

28

29

30

86

Grammar

The greatest faults that any pre-schoolers have
with grammer is the use of me incorrectly, see
for sees or the use of sentence parts.

Just get the children to talk, talk, talk, that's
my big problem. I can teach them correct grammer
if I can get them to feel at home in school.

I'm just sure they are never spoken to in their
homes to any great extent, that is why these
children do not know correct grammer. You don't
know what you haven't heard.

The child's grammer is poor in terms of adult talk.
It does get her to communicate with her little
childhood friends, however.

The children try to answer as quickly as they can
so they use words instead of sentences. They're
not concerned about grammar or maybe speaking in
complete sentences or even thinking in terms of
saying right or wrong——if they do know right

from wrong. They're just trying to say, as_
quickly as possible, the answer they think you
want and then they shut—up.

Conclusions of the Teachers' Concept of the Child's

Grtunmar.—-In brief review we find these statements often

volninteered by teachers when they evaluate the child's

gr ammar :

poor grammar

seen for saw

words are spoken, not complete sentences

he see for he sees

child out off the ends of words

her hit me or tie me shoe is a common example

mg for I often

get children to talk to teach_good grammar

children's grammar is hard to determine for
they don't speak much.

 

 

87

Pronunciation Problems of Children:
Comments Most Often Used

 

 

Teachers' reaction to the question: What
do you think are the major problems your
children have with pgonunciation . . . ?

 

Teacher
Interview Pronunciation
#
1 Most of them don't talk at all when they first
come to school. We talked to them; we tried to
find out things they were interested in. We read
stories. [No definite comments about.pronunciation.]

 

 

2 I would say on the whole their pronunciation of
words was very poor. They leave off last sounds,
leave off beginning sounds sometimes. But then I
have that trouble now even with the older children.
I keep saying to them to put in all the letters
for that's why they're there.

3 Pronunciation is poor. Things like, "I wanna go,"
or "punkin" for "pumpkin and things like that.
Their dialect is just hard to.understand for most
teachers. We were born and raised in the Midwest,
for the most part.

4 In reading, my children are not able to distin—
guish beginning sounds very well and we stress
this in first grade. This is what I stressed in
Head-Starte-phonics is the answer. We do a lot
of work in a play program with phonics daily.

 

5 Pronunciation is the main factor. The children
seem to run the words together; they mumble and
don't speak clearly. I had great difficulty under—
standing some children who were in the program,
not many, just a few.

6 They leave off the endings of words; instead of
"going" it's "goin." Also the dfs and 3's give
them trouble. Even at the beginning of words you
often cannot hear the beginning letter.

7 The hardest sounds for the boys and girls are the
g, s, gh_and.§t. I've been working on the phonics
charts with them and then I send the word list
home with them to practice. We listen for words
on TV programs and these things have a lot of
influence on them.

 

Teacher
Interview

 

#
8

10

ll

12

il3

14

88

Pronunciation

 

There is a definite problem of pronunciation and
also the understanding of sounds, but the sounds
are very difficult to pin-point. I know some of
the other teachers have that same problem because
I was called out of my classroom a few times to
come and interpret for another teacher—-and to
think we are all speaking English.

I don't have any trouble making myself understood
but some of the children withdraw when you can
not make out what they are trying to say. Some
of the words give them trouble, I'm sure, for
they have never heard them spoken by many adults
before they came to school.

Looking back I don't think I had trouble talking
to, being understood or understanding of the
children I taught. They do have trouble with the
pronunciation of word endings. I think that
they're in the habit of not saying the things as
clearly as we do and they say a word such as
"looking" by leaving the g_off. They abbreviate
to a certain extent.

I wasn't familiar with the Southern background of
most of these children and so I wasn't accustomed
to their type of speech. They cut off their words.

I would notice substitutions with regards to the

initial consonants and at the ends of words. The
dialect form, which I would gather they had from

their parents and environment, was hard to under-
stand, too.

I think their pronunciation errors are errors that
most children make. An example is the word git.

I worked on rhyming words to get them to see that
it wasn't gitf- or the word sing. They had a
tendency to say sang. I think the high school
girls were guilty of these errors, too. Together
we made a few improvements in the speech of the
Head Starters. We did lots of work with phonics.

Some of the children had problems with their
consonants, particularly at the ends of words.
We had two or three problems of children who
couldn't Speak at all.

Teacher
Interview

 

#
15

16

17

18

19

2O

21

89

Pronunciation

 

Let's see; they don't usually pronounce the last
part of a word or letter. They slur over every-
thing. They just pick it up at home.

Many times they mispronounce because they do not
know the sounds.

They leave off the ending sounds and beginning
sounds. The child hasn't really been taught to
listen. Consequently he comes and gives us part

of the word. There is no ending and very seldom

a beginning. The word "get" becomes "git" and

it's hard. You try to get the child to see that
you can rhyme—-"let, met, set, and bet"--then

when you get to the word "get" you still get "git."
You see, it's a speech pattern that has been developed
in the home, hearing the parents talk at home,
brothers and sisters talk at home. They come

with very little real listening. They hear no
sounds at the beginning; they hear very few sounds
at the end. I found this to be a problem.

I found much dropping of endings. Then they sub-
stitute a great deal. They say "slip" instead
"Flip," a dog's name. This happens with the con-
sonants a great deal of the time.

They omit sounds at the beginning; they substitute
sounds and particularly at the end of words they
leave off the end sound. The "thfl sound seems to
be a hard one for them. The "ing" sounds are
usually left off, too. And also the"§" at the
end of verbs gives them trouble.

For "ask" they say "aks". They say "messing me"
or "messing with me" which is poor grammar and
slang and they don't even pronounce the "g" on

H ing . I!

They do have trouble with pronunciation for they
fail to use their teeth and tongue and their lips.
This is necessary for getting the correct sound.
One boy's trouble was that he said "Gwadis" for
"Gladys." Through showing him how to place his
tongue he was able to say it. I used the mirror
for him to see the placement of his tongue.

 

 

 

Teacher
Interview

 

55’
22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

9O

Pronunciation

 

Many of them are still talking baby—talk at that
age. They communicate with movements, with their
arms and gestures. They cut off the ends of words
but I think a lot of adults are guilty as well as
bigger children of this, too. Children seem to
understand one another without the use of words.

They have some problems with beginning consonant
sounds and grammar which comes mainly from the
home.

These children have trouble with "gag, d_and t."
We work with rhyming words and with beginning
consonants and they just can't hear them. I keep
repeating it and saying that a rhyming word is a
word that sounds like the same word--sounds the
same—-and they just can't hear it.

I have one child who mispronounces almost every
word, but they say he does not have a speech
problem. All I have to say or do is to show the
child how to pronounce a word and he'll say it
right. You do have to deal with children differ-
ently but they just want a little warmth and
attention from adults which they just don't get
at home.

The children confuse the digraphs, for example:
"th" and the "wh" too. They are not able to
hear the sounds and other consonant blends.

I just do a great deal of work with the children
and phonics games, particularly rhyming. This
way they gradually seem to hear the difference
in the sounds.

It gets very discouraging at times for I don't
understand the children and I guess they don't
understand me either. I work on phonics every day
stressing the consonants, especially on the ends
of words.

I think these children know they don't speak so
that teachers can understand them and so they
really don't speak much at all. When they do
they say things in a hurry——cut off all their
words and last letters.

91

Teacher
Interview Pronunciation
#
30 I don't think the children are aware of the fact

that they drop the endings of words. They talk
quickly and slur off endings without even being
aware that they're wrong. This is something
that teachers really have to start working on.
Many teachers use phonics constantly and they
need to drill to try to help children enunciate
the way they should. The different vowel sounds
can be taught to children this way.

Conclusions of the Teachers' Concept of the Child's
Pronunciation.——In brief review we find these statements often
volunteered by teachers when they evaluate the child's pron- Q
unciation: ’

phonics is the answer--more and more phonics
and more drill in phonics

pronunciation is very poor

they can't distinguish between Q's and 3's

the ing at the end of words is cut to in

hardeSt sounds are c, s, 22 and st

can't understand the children and the children
can't understand the teachers

it is pronounced for at ‘

rhyming helps some children pronounce the letters

they substitute letters

trouble with beginning and ending consonants

trouble with the many different ways of pro—
nouncing the vowels

they cut off words to get the talking over with

they talk quickly and slur.

Teachers' Responses to Question 2

 

At the same time that the teachers were asked to
give tlieir opinions about child speech in terms of vocabulary,
grmmnax. and pronunciation, a two—part second question was

aSked~ These answers are recorded as follows:

fi-fi a Wmfimw-w_ 3‘? - — - a 7

92

Reactions to Parents' Influence on
‘Child's Speech: Comments Most
Often Used

 

 

 

In what ways does the language of the parents
influence children in your class? What prob—
lems with vocabulary, grammar and pronunciation
in the language of the parent are reflected

in the problems of the child?

Teacher
Interview Reaction to parents' influence on child speech
#
1 The parents' grammar and vocabulary is just as
bad as the child's. Even the high school
graduate mother who worked with me in.this program
mispronounced words and her spelling wasn't good
either. This mother said."feets,"."wa§" for "were"
and "these".fora"those." Her child made the same
mistakes. Most of my children have the same
problems as their mothers.

 

 

2 One parent I know very well is going to college
and she speaks well and so does her little boy.
The other parents have many speech problems. I
have found that if the child speaks well and has
a large vocabulary, when the parent comes in,
you can understand him right away. You can see
the relationship between the child and.the parent.
I have one boy who has a severe speech problem.

He can barely be understood and when his mother
came in I noticed the same speech problem.with
her, too. I can hardly understand a word they
say. I have to say to them, "Now slow down,"

and then it's a little better. They speak quickly
and miSpronounce everything. It's discouraging.

3 I definitely found that the parents spoke much as
the child did. If the parents spoke with a
decided accent, then the child came to school with
a similar sound. I noticed this lazy pronuncia—
tion among parents as well as among the children.
Their grammar and vocabulary was much.the same,
although parents try to say little to teachers.
They seem a little afraid of the school atmos-
sphere.

4 The language of the parents would naturally greatly
influence the children in our classes because, of
course, the children have been with parents some
four or five years before they come to us. This

Teacher

93

Interview Reaction to parents' influence on child speech

#

is a difficulty that all teachers have in trying
to improve the language of the children. This
poor language of the parents is exemplified
during the parent-teacher conferences. I feel
sometimes that the parents are afraid to speak
out. Because of this fear they don't speak as
well as they would otherwise. This is possible.
When children have limited vocabularies, the
parents have limited ones. Even the "colorful"
language of the home is sometimes spoken by the
child-—either slang or profanity, I mean.

Children are like their parents, very definitely,
not only in their grammar, spelling and pro-
nunciation but also in their every-day habits
and attitudes toward the school and teachers.

I think up to now parents have been afraid to
come around to the school. With these new pro—
grams the parents are coming to the school more
often and they realize that they-have always
wanted education for their children. They always
felt that we were, many of us, a little stand-
offish from the home of the child from the dis-
advantaged area. Fathers very seldom come-~if
they are in the home at all; it's always the
mother. Now that we are establishing a closer
feeling between the school and the poorer home
we may be able to help the parent communicate
better herself. In fact one mother asked me
where she could take an English course and I was
very encouraged for she desperately needs it.

I feel that the home is one of the most important
institutions in society and that actually the
parents are using the same type of poor speech.
So often we get the same pattern from the parent.

I find that the parents' vocabulary is very
limited and they are shy about talking to other
adults for they don't know the words to use in
expressing their thoughts—-just like their
children.

This language problem and the poverty in which
so many of them live that they just cannot rise
above it is the cause of the lack of stimulation
in the child.

 

Teacher

94

Interview “Reaction to parents' influence on child speech

 

#
7

10

The parents I know are not too cooperative with
the school. It seems they pick on the children.
When-they speak to their children they curse
whenever and wherever they feel like it. I had
some who came to school and used words I wouldn't
repeat.

»My children.have many speech problems but if
you were in their homes you wouldn't be surprised.
The parents don't have many healthy experiences
themselves and as the children aren't exposed to
good.language they just don't use it. Speech
classes are helping some of my class; now if we
could only send the mothers to class, too.

Parents have a great deal of influence on the
speech of their children but so do their play—
mates and the peOple in the neighborhood that
they're talking with all the time.

I don't know if it's possible to teach.the
parents and the children. I don't like to call
it standard or substandard for I think that they
should learn one and it should be that used by
the educated community in which they live. If
that's standard, that's what both parents and
children alike should learn.

Parents have the great influence they do
because the home is where the children learn in
the first place, from the people they associate
with. Maybe we should teach the children and
then.they could influence the parents, but I don't
think we can have as much influence on the parents
as the children. To get ahead in the world the
children will have to communicate on a higher
level than their disadvantaged home.

I think both the parents and the children have
more influence on each other than they realize——
and the TV influences them both. If only the
child would come to school with some knowledge of
words or some interest in speaking-up, our job
would be easier. When the parents mumble, the
child mumbles. When the parents slur, the child
does, too. ‘

I would say that parental influence is probably
99% of the problem. I think I can see why the

children have problems because the parents have
the same type of problems.

Teacher

95

Interview Reaction to parents' influence on child.§peech

 

#

11

12

1L3

I think I know what to expect when talking to
a parent. I cut my own vocabulary down. I use
only certain words and talk differently than I
would to another teacher. During parent—teacher
conferences I have to be aware of what word I am
going to use here; you have to choose the right
word in order for parents to understand you. The
teacher has to put himself on the same Speech
level as the parent and I've learned how to do
that.

My parents did a great deal of talking, but

their Southern accents were hard to understand,

just as it's hard to understand some of the

children. -
The speech of the parents and the children is i—

so similiar that I feel it is rather difficult '

to change the child's pattern of speech in school.

How can-you change a child's pattern when they're

returning to a different kind of speech in their

homes. But somewhere along the way we have to give

that child the ability and skills to make that

change. But when?
In the limited vocabulary and bad grammar you

can tell from the child just what type of educa-

tion and what background the family has. The

children who Spoke more frequently and in better

phrases or even sentences were those who had

parents with a greater vocabulary.

Some of my parents had finished high school and
could speak well but most of my parents didn't
even finish grade school and you could tell the
difference in their Speech.

The parents had a very limited vocabulary and
often substituted letters incorrectly in words as
they Spoke to me.

AS far as grammar is concerned, I found that it
was about "even—steven." Some of them used very
good grammar and some did not. There were words
which they did not know which they would try to
use—~just exactly as their children would do.

I think the influence of parents on children is
possibly more than we could even imagine—-
especially the very young child. Most of the
children Spoke exactly as their parents did. We
couldn't get to the parents very well so we
decided that we would try to help the children

Teacher

96

Interview..Reaction to.parents' influence on.child.§peech

#

14

15

16

I17

I

with little games and say, "When you go home
tonight, why don't you do this and do that." We
were trying to get the parents interested and
also to know what we were doing in school and yet
not think we were "butting-in."

The children in my class were more influenced by
the speech.of their older brothers or sisters——
more than their parents for their parents were
too busy either working or taking care of their
household duties to really take time to talk to
the children.

Most of the parents are quite cautious about
talking to us until they gain.confidence in us.

Most of the speech problems of parents have to
be dialect. Their grammar dealt mainly with
singular and plural uses of verbs, such as: when
to use "is" and "was" and these types of words."

The children are in contact with parents more than
teachers so the influence of the home is greater
than that of the school, in my opinion.r Some of
the children are deprived of talk with adults
because there are so many children in the family.
But then again, it's a group, too, in the family.
What one says, the others follow. You know, it's
a pattern that they follow and it's very hard to
cope with. And it's very hard to change.

I think that the language of the parents does
influence the children because they pick up
things that the parents use, expressions or ways
of saying things. The children and the parents
reflect each other, at least when the children
are small.

If a parent would mispronounce a word, the
child tends to mispronounce the same word by
copying the parent. That's natural.

You can.tell which is the child's parent when they
both say things like, "ggpfl for "then." It is
true that a course in phonics could help both the
parent and.the child. They eliminate the "pp"
sound in most words, but in addition they mis-
pronounce the.g's and the 3's. They say seen

for paw, If both the parents and the children
could learn to listen--to rhyme "pigngig, and
gig with di ," they would be able to pronounce
words more accurately.

Teacher
Interview

97

Reaction.to parents' influence on child speech

 

18

19

2O

21

22

23

 

Now this is what I meant by more or less their
range in vocabulary. If the parent's vocabulary
is limited, this will limit the child's. I have
one little boy and his father who often comes to
the school. This father speaks better English
than most of the other parents and the boy who
is his son speaks well, too. I think the parents
most definitely will influence the children's
pattern of speech.

The child picks up what he's learned from home
and carries this into the classroom.

I've talked with several parents of the children
in my class and I've noticed the same kinds of
things the children say. I've heard them come
from the parents when I've talked to them.

I would say that there is a great similarity in
the parent and child's speech. There is an
obvious carry—over from the home to the school in
almost everything, and this is particularly so

in speech habits. The limited vocabulary of the
parent was the reason why the child spoke so
little in class or when he did his vocabulary was
simple and his grammar was usually wrong.

I think parents affect the child's speech by ig—
noring it. I really believe this because whatever
the child says, the parents accept it as correct.
Maybe they know better, maybe they don't.

I do think there is communication in the home.
I think there is quite a bit of communication
with the children because a lot of them come into
school bubbling over to talk. When we have talking
time, they don't want to stop. Although I do have
some who aren't participating as they should; they
aren't talkers——but neither are their parents.

Mother's vocabulary, pronunciation——or lack of
pronunciation, that is, dropping off endings,
poor grammar, grammatical construction, are the
same as the child's. They don't say "died" they
both say "passed."

I think children speak the way their parents do.

And this, of course, is foreign to some teachers'
ears. We try, you know, to correct it in school.
But we can't Spend all of our time correcting it
because then you never get the child to communicate.
If only we could help the parents, but I guess that
would be impossible.

 

 

Teacher

98

Reaction to parents' influence on child Speech

 

Interview
#

24

25

26

27

 

The pronunciation of words on the part of the parent
are reflected in the words of the child. Definitely,
they pick up speech habits as they do all kinds

of habits before they ever come to school. If

they have very much communication at all, it‘s

with their immediate family. So if it's evident

in their parents, naturally the children will

adopt it because, you know, they learn speech

from their parents originally.

The main communication the children have at home
is not with their parents but with their television
sets. When you ask them to relate experiences at
home as in "show—and—tell" they only know what
they saw on TV the night before.

The influence parents have on children is terrific
——for good or bad. Both parents and the children
make bad grammatical errors-—or slang expressions,
I guess you would call them. They'll say, for
instance, "He's messing around with me" or ”I'm

a fixin to crack you." I heard curse words in
this class, too, and it's not the kind of language
we use in school. It might be picked up in the
neighborhood or in most cases probably the home--
they repeat what they often hear.

I make it a game to see if I can pick out the
right parent for the right child and I'm not
always right, but I often am. I just have to
listen to their speech and if I know the children
well, the association isn't hard to make. They
cut off the same words and have the same dialect
in their pronunciation of words.

When I hear parents speak for the first time, I
think to myself, "Like mother, like daughter," for
they sound so much alike. I don't know whether
this is an argument for heredity or environment;

I guess it's both. When the home doesn't com-
municate well in the sense that the parent can't
talk comfortably with anyone outside their own
home or circle of friends, this usually means he
does not want to raise himself——or that he doesn't
know how. We could just let children multiply
this through the generations if we didn't try to
raise the ambitions of the child.

 

99

Teacher
Interview Reaction to parents' influence on child Speech

 

 

28 When children have trouble with the endings of
words, so do their parents, it seems. Just being
an observer of parents and their children, I
would say their influence is great when the
children are young, but as they grow older, their
friends (other children) influence them more.
When the influence of teachers occurs, I don't
know.

29 The parents and children seem to be able to com-
municate their ideas between themselves and
probably in their home; it's just when they get
into a different environment as the school that
they have problems. Yes, I would say the speech
problems of the child are directly inherited
from the parent.

30 Oh, yes, I think the child Speaks very much like
his parent does. And I think he speaks very much
more so in this inner-city environment. I think

the parents that have just come up from the South
have a terrific southern accent which the children
bring to class with them also. This is all they
know so this is the way that they speak. Actually
most parents just say "yes" or "no" and smile
pretty——if they can possibly get away with it.

Conclusions of the Teachers' Concepts of the Parents'

 

Inflnience on Child Speech.—-In brief review we find these
Staizennents often volunteered by teachers when they evaluate a
parerit's influence on child speech:

children speak the way their parents do

pronunciation of parents' words are the same
as those of their children

Slang and curse words of parents are repeated
by child

cutting off letters from words are habits of
both

teachers and children communicate among their
family members, but not as satisfactorily
with teachers

grammatical errors are the same for the child
and his parent

100

the same errors are found in parent and child
speech, such as, trouble with E's, Q's, ipg
or word beginnings

home influence on Speech is great

.Reactions to Child and Parent
Speech on Tape: Comments Most

Often Used
At this point in the interview the teachers were

asked to listen to a tape of child and parent speech and
‘to react to both (see Appendix F for transcript of child
21nd parent speech to which the.teachers were asked to

:react). Most of their reactions were facial expressions

c>f the "I told you so" type or simply concentrated listen-
.irig. The few representative remarks of some of the

teeachers are recorded here in the exact language of the

t eacher-informants:

Teacher Language reactions of teachers who listened
Interview to tape of child and pargit speech

1
(t<> children Poor enunciation, very definitely. They run
011 tape) the words all together. That's why we try

to enunciate so well for these children.
They have trouble with verbs; they have
trouble with plurals. They don't understand.
Even the parents don't understand the tense
of verbs--the past tense or the present
tense. They don't understand how to use the
pronoun "I." They say "mg" and "pp“ when
they ought to say "wg." The children don't
know the names for things, even the names of
common farm animals. Sometimes it takes
even a long time to teach the colors to
these children. I do think they have a
knowledge of God. A little boy had disobeyed
the school rules and a little girl said to
him, "God won't love you." They have an
idea that God loves and that's good.

Teacher
Interview
#

(to parents
on tape)

2
(to children
on tape)

(tzo parents
on tape)

3
(to children
or1 tape)

(to parents
on tape)

101

Teachers' reactions to tapes

 

You see, they don't enunciate either, and
their Speech is limited; even the parent's
speech is limited. They're hesitant. They're
afraid to talk. They realize their Speech is
limited; their vocabulary is limited and some—
times it's hard to get the parents to talk to
teachers at all.

That child said, "My mama tooked her.” That
is an example of their trouble with verbs and
mixed up tenses. That's the past tense, but
there is no such word as "tooked." They are
so hard to understand; it's just like the

time I have when I meet a new class of chil—
dren. You just have to get used to the sounds
of their words for they are so different from
our own. You see that child is trying to tell
the other child how to do something. They
don't know how to tell them. They know how

to do it but when it comes to telling people
orally, they don't know how to get it across.
They have a lack of vocabulary because of
their little experience, probably.

 

 

These parents talk just like the ones I know.
Every other sentence they say "Cuz, ya know"
or "yap." They keep doing this over and over.
Did you hear that, "My daughter she" that's
just the way the children Speak, too. The
child says, ”my sister she went" or "my
mother She." It was rather interesting but
very wrong. The best thing about Head Start
is that the children talk more and more as

the time goes on. I noticed that about the
parents who came to the school. Just like the
parents on this tape. They seem to have a
lot to say.

 

That child said "I got me a bike.” I think
that is a typical pattern; we heard this
grammatical error many, many times. This
sounds just like the same speech I mentioned
before, words such as "visitin, projeck, hp
gig" are ways of Shortening speech.

They drOp the last letters on words, too.
These mothers simply seem uninformed of the
vocabulary for they seem to be searching for
words that just don't come because they don't

102

Teacher

Interview Teachers' reactions to tapgs
#

 

 

know them. It's strange though. They, the
parents, that is, seem to get along very well
with each other and have a lot to say. We're
the outsiders when they get together for I
surely can't understand them well enough to
know what they're talking about.

4 This is so typical of what I experienced; you
(to children know, I taught Head Start for two years. The
on tape) type of answers the child gives and the teacher

asking the question and not being able to
really understand the answer is a perfect
example of our class. The short, jagged words
the child uses is a good example. They are
not accustomed to listening to sounds, in
fact, they are not accustomed to listening
at all. This is the reason why I stress the
beginning and ending sounds, and the middle
of the word as well.

 

(to parents That mother did not use the correct verb form.
on tape) They don't seem to understand the use of
verbs at all. This tape proved that the
parents' speech is just as bad as the child's
speech.

We had a lot of searching for words in our

(to children class just as these children are doing. They

on tape) don't know the word for a particular article

so they can't identify it. The only thing
you hear a great deal about from these children,
which surprised me, is God. They all go to
Sunday School so they can tell you all about
it on Monday. They must be allowed to talk
there for they know the words and they really
don't listen that well. They must discuss

there.
(to parents This sounds typical of many of our parents in
on tape) the program, not being able to eXpress them—

selves. I think they might have the idea;
they just don't know how to put it into words.
It is very frustrating for them——and for us.
They have trouble pronouncing the words they
do know, too. Listen to that mother; she puts
S's on words when they don't belong there.
T"This" becomes "dip."

 

Teacher
Interview
#

6
(to children
on tape)

(to parents
on tape)

7
(to children
on tape)
(to parents

on tape)

8
(to children
on tape)

(to parents
on tape)

9
(to children
on tape)

103

Teachers' reactions to tapes

 

That child's struggling effort to explain in
how her mother makes a cake is just that--a
real struggle. She has probably seen it
many times but she doesn't know the simple
words that could explain it. "That there
thing" or her use of the word 'Stuff is
very common among children in the inner—city
area.

 

I can say the same things for these parents
as I did for their children. They don't have
words enough to speak comfortably to the
teacherS——but they do seem to be able to
converse with each other, as they are doing,
on this tape, that is.

”My mamma tooked her," that's a good example
of the speech of the child in Head Start in my
class. "I no gotta” is another typical saying.
Rather than '3” they say "me" and mix other
pronouns.

 

These parents seem to get along better with
each other than mine do. My parents seem shy
with each other. These parents we're listening
to have a hard time pronouncing words and even
knowing enough words to say, but at least

they are talking freely.

This sounds more like my classroom than a tape
of someone else's children. What a terrible
time these children have searching for words
in their poor, very limited vocabulary. Their
pronunciation is poor; they all sound like
they are from the South.

These parents don't have words either, it
sounds like. A lot of them don't have the
experiences for one thing and then if they
don't have the words, they can't really think
about the experiences that they have had.
They search for words but then I do, too, so
that they can understand me.

That child is Simply careless about what she
says and how she says it. I think the parents
just do not take enough time with their chil—
dren to help them learn to speak well. This

104

Teacher
Interview Teachers' reactions to tapes

 

is just my theory. You have to encourage
children to Speak by telling them stories
or talking to them. That's why these poor
children just don't know the words of the
English language.

(to parents If children ever imitate these parents they
on tape) won't be much farther ahead than it they
didn't hear words at all. The parents don't
know vocabulary either. You can‘t communi—
cate without words, can you? How do the
ever get any directions over to their children?

10 They think they're really poking the words
(to children out, it seems out of their mouths. That
on tape) ". . . got me a bike" is a good example of
their misuse of the pronoun. They're really
slow; they're trying to search for words.
They don't know exactly what word to use.

(to parents They run their words together just like their
on tape) children on the tape before them, don't they?
There's another one, "mornin'; both the
parents and the children alike cut off the
ends of their words.

11 That "My mama tooked her”--isn't that typical
(to children though? At least it's a good picture of how
on tape the children in my class speak. And there

is the word they use when they just don't
know the correct word or name for a thing;
they call it "stuff"; that seems to explain
everything for them.

 

 

(to parents That low-pitched voice of the mother is just
on tape) like her child's that we just heard; you
can't really understand either of them too
well unless you make a Study of it. They
chew up their words.

12 This is still an environment influence which
(to children makes these children speak so poorly. From

on tape) an uneducated parent you can't get children
who know much. You see how they chop the
words off? How the entire pronunciation of
a word just isn't there? They continually
substitute, just as they are doing here. The
home has a terrific impact upon the child's
ability to use grammar correctly, to speak
distinctly and pronounce his words right.

 

 

 

 

Teacher
Interview
#

 

(to parents
on tape)

13
(to children
on tape)

(to parents
on tape)

14
(to children
on tape)

(to parents
on tape)

15
(to children
on tape)

105

Teachers' reactions to tapes

 

Listen to his, "I like God." That was correct.
I don't know whether this is due to environment
or a physical thing, or a combination of both.

 

I really don't think this is too bad for
parents. They used the double subject, "my
daughter she," but they all say that. This
mother says "children," and most of the
parents I know would say "chilen."

 

A very common one is what this child just
said, "My_mamma tooked her." And another one
is "trainin wheels"; there is almost a com-
plete omission of the g at the end of words.
Their favorite word is "stuff" when they

don't know the name of something. Do you
think that tells us anything about vocabulary?

 

 

 

I think there is a great deal of omission on

the parent's part. They omit letters in words——
beginning, middle and end, just as they did

on this tape. They can't use pronouns cor—
rectly either.

This child has lazy speech and has trouble
with his beginning consonants. There is that
word "stuff." I hear it from the children all
day long for they just don't have enough words
to use, I guess.

Their dialect is so hard for me to understand.
They say their letters in a completely differ—
ent way-—besides mixing up the letters them-
selves. Listen to that one mother; she says
"£3" for the word "Egg." She would probably
spell it right; She just says it differently
than we do.

The children have that southern "twang." You
see, that is very prevalent around here, this
same dialect. Sometimes it's very, very hard
to understand them. They don't pronounce
their pfs very much. They don't know words.
They talk with their hands——and you can't
tape that. They take for granted that their
hands are going to tell you what they mean.

Teacher
Interview

(to parents
on tape)

16
(to children
on tape)

(to parents
on tape)

17
(to children
on tape)

(to parents
on tape)

18
(to children
on tape)

(to parents
on tape)

106

Teachers' reactions to tapes

 

This mother's voice is as low as most of the
voices of my mothers. It's as though if they
can't be heard, they can't be blamed for making
mistakes. If only they had a little confidence
we might be able to teach them something about
how to help their children. They first have

to help themselves.

The children have the same problems all over
this area of the inner—city. They use pro-
nouns incorrectly, "me" for "I." They
don't know verb tense and they shorten many
of the words they say by dropping off a
letter or two. That isn't saying anything
about their poor pronunciation of words.

The parents are just plain strange to the
school environment and certainly to teachers.
Their English is poor and they know it. I
would be cautious, too, if I had such a limited
vocabulary as these parents know they have.

Not only is this poor, immature speech of
children but this is completely disadvantaged
speech. I mean that the children have never
heard better language; no wonder they Speak
the way they do. For example: "mamma tooked
her," the word "stuff" which is supposed to
stand for everything the child doesn't know
by name.

 

 

The mumble jumble of these parents is because
they are afraid to speak up so that you would
know they don't know good English. Even the
words they do know are wrong. Just think of
using, "she go," ”my daughter She"; those are
just a few of the things they say incorrectly.

 

These children speak so low and mumble so much
that I sometimes think they are talking to
themselves. Yet in this case they seem to

ask little questions, don't they? They surely
don't know verbs or pronouns. They just seem
to be in a hurry to be over with it. They
can't describe things at all.

These parents mumble the very same way. If I
had any doubt if they influence the speech of
their children, this would really convince me
for they speak exactly alike.

 

 

 

Teacher
Interview
#
19
(to children
on tapes)

 

(to parents
on tape)

20
(to children
on tape)

(to parents
on tape)

21
(to children
on tape)

(to parents
on tape)

107

Teachers' reactions to tepes

 

The children in my class were just like these
children. They talked very freely when they
were talking about their toys, or their
friends. The only trouble is they don't know
enough words to really explain What they are
thinking or feeling. The child here prob-
ably Saw a cake or at least something being
made at home, but She just couldn't talk
about it in words.

This tape must have been made of the parents
sometime after Head Start began because they
sound at home in the school—-even if their
Speech isn't too good. At least they are
talking; they didn't when they first came to
school with their children.

 

This is just the kind of speech I hear all

day long here in my school. The children seem
to want to talk but it's a hard task for some
of them because they just don't know the words
to say. "I'm gonna get me one" shows in just
that one sentence that their pronunciation,
verb and pronoun understanding is not right.

 

You can see the carry—over here for the parent's

English is as bad or Worse than her child's.
The parents themselves are groping for words;
you.can just hear them. There is a great
similarity of parent and child speech on this
tape.

Yes, "My_mamma tooked her" is the ordinary way
a child from the inner—city would talk. They
don't know the difference between present or
past tense-—or how to use the past tense.

"Got me a bike" is the fast way to say some—
thing. They don't know pronouns either. They
either put in two subjects right next to each
other or they skip them altogether.

 

 

When I hear these parents talk, I'm more than
ever convinced that the Head Start program is
a worthwhile one. They certainly could not
learn good language from parents such as these
for their grammar is poor; you can't under-
stand their pronunciation and their vocabulary
is unbelievable.

 

Teacher
Interview
#

22
(to children
on tape)

(to parents
on tape)

23
(to children
on tape)

(to parents
on tape)

24
(to children
on tape)

(to parents
on tape)

25
(to children
on tape)

108

Teachers reactions to tapes

 

I think it's a good thing for children to get
a socializing influence and this is what Head

.Start has done for these little ones. You

 

can just hear how they are talking to each
other——even if the grammar is bad.

The poor mothers——you can tell they haven't
been to school too much or know how to speak
our language correctly. Yet, they seem to
be able to speak to each other well, don't
they?

This first child is an example of all the
wrong things to say. For example, "gonna,"
"gonna get me," the wrong use of the verbs,
tense and the pronouns. They cut off all
the endings of their words, too, which is
very hard on the person trying to make out
what they're saying.

 

I've taught in two different kinds of schools.
One in which I taught upper-middle class
children and this school of the inner—city in
which I taught disadvantaged children. I
know why the little inner—city children have
such problems with English; their parents

do not have good grammar, pronunciation or
adequate vocabulary either.

These children are talking freely enough but
they just don't know the words and how to

say them——either in sound or usage, I think.
The best thing to do with children like these
is to give them another or a better way of
saying something rather than constantly
correcting them.

The parents speaking here are making the
same Speech mistakes that my class of little
children make all day long. They confuse
verbs, pronouns and speak in a dialect I
cannot understand.

They do mispronounce an awful lot of words,
don't they? I guess I forget sometimes for
I've taught disadvantaged children so long
that I've dropped to their level of Speech.
I hope I don't make those errors, cutting
off the ends of words, running words together
and so on, but I may even do that at times.

 

Teacher
Interview

(to parents
on tape)

26
(to children
on tape)

(to parents
on tape)

27
(to children
on tape)

(to parents
on tape)

109

Teachers' reactions to tapes

 

Parents make the same grammatical errors as
their children. Now that I've listened to
both tapes, I'm sure the children get their
speech errors from hearing their parents
Speak. I guess I haven't changed so much
in my English or I wouldn't have noticed
such glaring mistakes. My ears are just
tuned to different dialects, I think.

Oh, "My mamma tooked her" is a glaring
mistake when we're listening to the tape, but
actually this is not too unusual. I heard
Similar remarks hundreds of times during the
years of teaching disadvantaged children.
They have the language of the streets and
grammar is the least thing that disturbs
them——young or old.

 

 

Do you see what I mean now? The parents we've
just listened to are very careless about

their speech, too. When they want to make

a point they use facial expressions, their
arms, hands or any other part of their body
which will Show pleasure or displeasure.

The use of nouns and verbs is unimportant,

and they seem to convey ideas to their own
people.

It is hard to understand these children on
tape, but then it is just as bad in the class—
room. They mumble their words so much and

run on and on that it is almost impossible

to understand what they say. I notice that
they speak more clearly about their church on
Sunday; they have little art lessons that

they like, so maybe that's why they talk about
it so much.

Most of the parents of our children in this
program are the same. They have good will
but are almost illiterate, in my opinion.

Only years of education and understanding
will help these adults to help their children.

 

 

Teacher
Interview
#

28
(to children
on tape)

(to parents
on tape)

29
(to children
on tape)

(to parents
on tape)

30 .
(to children
on tape)

(to parents
on tape)

110

Teachers' reactions to tapes

 

Yes, that sounds just like our little ones.
'"Mamma she" and ”tooked her" are very typi—
cal examples of the speech we listen to in
this program and try to upgrade. I don't
know how it's to be done, but an awareness
of the situation should count for something.

Most of these parents never finished elem—
entary school, I'm sure, for they have come
up to Detroit when they were just children
themselves. They married young and had a
flock of children and were too busy to
worry about how they spoke or how they
affected others. Verbs, pronouns, endings
of words are just a few of their problems.

These children speak so poorly because they
have not had the chance to learn the correct
use of their language. That first little
girl sounds as though she is talking to her—
self when she mumbling like that because she's
probably doesn't have anyone at home that
talks to her and draws her out.

Maybe what I say about the children could be
said about these parents of theirs, too.
They seem almost afraid of the words they
are saying. I think they really know they
are not speaking like others, the teachers
in the school, for example.

I know these children are grammatically
wrong in their speech but I am encouraged to
hear them talking at all, at least so freely.
These little children come to us with almost
no experience with oral English and we have
to start from scratch. I can teach them if
only they respOnd.

I don't think these parents are even aware

of the fact that they are speaking so quickly
and slurs slip in, too. The parents here are
chopping off their words and so do their
children.

 

 

lll

Conclusions of Teachers' Reactions to Tapes.——In brief

 

review we find these statements often volunteered by teachers
when they evaluate the taped speech of the child and his
parent:

speech is hard to understand

children and parents sound just alike

they both make the same grammatical errors

they talk too quickly and mumble their words

both the child and parent are afraid to
speak in a new situation, especially in
the school

the speech problems of the child and the
parents are foreign to the teacher who
does not have these problems

Teachers Characterize the Speech
of the Disadvantaged

 

 

Finally, the interviews were closed by the interviewer
who asked each of the teachers if she or he could character-
ize the speech of the disadvantaged. These were the simple

replies they made:

Teachers Comments
1. They don't talk much at all.
2. They slur words together.
Their trouble is just Iggy speech.

These people cannot distinguish between sounds.

 

Pronunciation is the main speech problem they have.
Their problems are communication and expression.
Vocabulary is the biggest problem.

The problem is just simple communication.

\OGJVONUTJI-‘UU

Just getting them to talk is the biggest challenge.

10. They mumble their words.

 

 

Teacher

11.
l2.
13.
111.

15.
l6.
17.

18.

19.

20.
21.

22.

23.
2M.

25.

26.
27.
28.
29.
30.

112

Comments
Their background is the biggest trouble.
The substitution of sounds is a concern.
Dialect is the problem with these children.

Just to get children to converse with each other
is hard.

 

They talk so fast they stutter.

The major speech problem is pronouncing words.

 

The biggest problem is that the child learned to
talk from hearing his parents talk.

The major problem besides their limited vocabulary
is the dropping of endings.

 

 

They omit sounds at the beginning; they substitute
sounds, andleave off sound endings.

 

Their pronunciation is bad.
They point at things rather than say words.

Their main ways of communicating are by movements
of the arms and other gestures.

The biggest problem is the grammar of the language.

The misuse of the pronouns is the most obvious
trouble.

The hardest thing is to express their thoughts in
complete sentences.

 

A limited vocabulary is the biggest problem.

 

They need to know more and more words.
They speak so quickly they often stutter.
They mumble their words.

Their speech is just very careless and lazy.

 

 

113

Summary
Individually taped teacher—interviews of the teachers'
concept of the problem is noted in the reactions to the
questions proposed in this chapter. In summary, the
teachers' answers are tabulated to the following questions:

1. Is it true that there is a difference between

 

the language of the children and the teachers?
YES: 30
NO: 0

2. Is it true that there is a difference between

 

the language of the parents and the teachers?

YES: 30

NO: 0
It was mentioned by two of the teachers that they noticed
that a few of their parents were high school graduates and
some attended college and that the language of these
parents was of superior quality to other parents in the
program. The implication here is that the teacher felt that
these parents could communicate with the teachers on a higher
level of speech due to the more formal education enjoyed by
these parents.

3. Is it true that there is a difference between

 

the language of the parents and their children?

 

YES: 0
NO: 30
The teachers also mentioned the influence of television,

the neighborhood, their peers, the church and older brothers

11”

and sisters on the speech of the pre-schoolers, but every
teacher said she thought parents were a great influence on
the child's language.
N. Is it true that the teachers feel that the
language problems of children are due to their

disadvantaged social status?

 

YES: 30

NO: 0
Every teacher mentioned that she felt that the disadvantaged
social status of the children, and the parents as well, was
the main cause for their langauge problems. A listening
to a tape of child and parent language reinforced this
belief and their estimate of the influence of parents on
child speech.

5. Is it true that the teachers acknowledged that
disadvantaged children do have a language

system within their sub group language?

YES: 0
NO: 27
PERHAPS: 3

Three of the teachers (#ll, 15 and 21) implied that there
was some type of communication system the disadvantaged
children use whereby they communicate with their families,
friends, and neighborhood. This was not called a language
system as such by any one of the teachers.

The teachers seemed to feel that the majority of the

pre-schoolers have definite speech problems in the areas of

115

pronunciation, grammar and vocabulary. In particular,
pronunciation gave them the most-concern. The teachers
referred to their repeated use of phOnic drills and word
games in an effort to up—grade the child's pronunciation
skills. This also helped the limited vocabulary that was
considered a serious problem as well. The teachers used
the phonic practice within the context of words, phrases
and short sentences to insure language understanding and
in an effort to help children identify sound differences.

6. Is there a way that teachers can instruct

children in the acquisition of standard
English skills?

This question was not asked directly of the thirty teachers
interviewed, but all of them indicated that they felt that
the Head Start program was a worthwhile experience for
disadvantaged children who have been deprived of certain
basic language experiences that the middle-class child
normally enjoys. Some of the teachers said that they used
word games, phonic drills and rhyming stories with the
children to perfect their listening skills and to encourage
oral discussion. An identification and description of the
language problems and a proposed solution to the situation
were sought by the teachers involved.

Chapter V presents an analysis of the Language Data
and the Investigation in terms of the phonology, grammar
and vocabulary of the pre—schooler, his parent and his

teacher.

 

 

CHAPTER V

SOME INDICES OF SOCIAL STRATIFICATION

IN DETROIT

The speech of the informants of this investigation
was tape recorded so that the language behavior of the
pre—school child, his parent and his teacher could be
described. The phonology, grammar and vocabulary of the
participants was tabulated for individual and group study.
In particular, the child informant was of first importance

because of his status in terms of educational implication.

The Child's Language Behavior

 

In the search of the data and in line with the con—
cern voiced by the teachers, as noted in Chapter IV, certain
phonological indices were suggested. The tabulation of
this data produced a social stratification1 of language
performance in the various areas of speech study.

Some Aspects of the Child's
Phonological System

 

 

To study the speech behavior of the 156 children

informants in the investigation each child was given a

 

lStratification means the separation of sets of
characteristics into distinct levels; a second-order struc—
ture. See Labov, The Social Stratification of English in
New York City (Washington, D. C.: Center for Applied
Linguistics, 1966), p. 581.

116

117

number 1 to 156; beginning with l, every third child was
chosen for the sample up to 50 children, all of whom were
included in this sample. The following phonological occur-
rences were noted:

The Deletion of the Stop Consonant /t/.——Of the 93
potential occurrences of final /t/ in the speech of Eggd
S3133 children, there were 7“ deletions and 19 realized
occurrences. This is a 79% deletion of /t/ and 21%
realized occurrences.

The following are examples of these deletions:

don't 9 occurrences of the delection;

l per 7 informants,
2 per 2 informants.

faint l occurrence

thought 1 occurrence

coat 2 occurrences
l per informant

carrot 5 occurrences of the deletion;
l per informant

eight 8 occurrences of the deletion;
l per informant

oat l occurrence

hurt I occurrence

hot 9 occurrences of the deletion;
l per informant

right 1 occurrence

toothpaspe l occurrence

toast 1 occurrence

basket 1 occurrence

 

 

118

 

dessert 1 occurrence

can't I occurrence

twist l occurrence

west 1 occurrence

light 3 occurrences of the deletion;
l per informant

cat 3 occurrences of the deletion; ‘
l per informant

fort l occurrence

peanut l occurrence

point 1 occurrence

out 1 occurrence

paint l occurrence

age 1 occurrence

elephanp 2 occurrences of the deletion;
l per informant

chocolape l occurrence

whipe 7 occurrences of the deletion;
l per informant

hop (dog) 1 occurrence

heart 1 occurrence

breakfasp l occurrence

The Head Start children in this investigation were
Dre—kindergarten age, approximately 5 years of age. The
children in the speech sample of the Detroit Dialect Study
were ages 9 to 12. The speech data of the language of
older children in this same geographical and socio—economic

group are the following: children from 9 to 12 years of age,

119

in the language research of the Detroit Dialect Study,
delete the stop consonant /t/ in the final position U6% of
the time, modify the final /t/ to a glottal2 stop 28% of the
time, and realized the final /t/ stop 26% of the time.3
It must be said here that the speech sample of the
Head Start children counted potential deletions of the final
stop consonant /t/ and the realized occurrences of the
deletions; the Detroit Dialect Study considered the glottal
stops in addition.“ In addition, in the larger investiga-
tion of the speech of Detroit, the Detroit Dialect Study
discovered that all deletions of the stop consonant /t/ in
the final position occurred before fronted vowels, such as
in this example of lenis articulation:
There is a mosquito; hit it.5
Though there is little research published in the area
of the stop consonant /t/ in the medial position, this

study attempted to note examples of this in the speech of

Head Start children. Of the l7l potential occurrences of

 

2A glottal stop is produced when the vocal chords or
folds are brought together sufficiently to obstruct the
passage of air, but not to produce voice. See H. A.
Gleason, Introduction to Descriptive Linguistics (New York:
Holt, Rinehart, and Winston Company, 1955), p. 21.

3David Rickard (staff member of the Detroit Dialect
Study), "A Progress Report of the Detroit Dialect Study"
(an unpublished master's thesis, "Sociological Correlation
of the Allophonic Variations of Alveolar Stops in the Speech
of6Highland Park School Children," Michigan State University,
19 7).

“Ibid. 5Ibid.

120

medial /t/ in the speech of these children, there were 35
deletions and 136 realized occurrences. This is a 20%
deletion of medial /t/ and 80% realized occurrences.
The following are examples of these deletions:
1. Simple /t/ deletion:
a. /t/ +Q before vowel, as in

potappes 2 occurrences of the deletion
l per informant

Sanpa l occurrence
water 5 occurrences of the deletion;
l per informant
bupper 2 occurrences of the deletion;
l per informant
bupterfly 3 occurrences of the deletion;
l per informant
cppton l occurrence
skapes l occurrence
b. /t/ + C before b:
foopball 2 occurrences of the deletion;
l per informant
c. /t/ + C before 1:
bapple l occurrence

2. /t/ deletion in consonant clusters:
a. /nt/ + /n/, as in:

painping 3 occurrences of the deletion;
l per informant

Flinpstones-TV l occurrence

pangs 3 occurrences of the deletion;
l per informant

 

121

b. /rt/ + /r/, as in:

turple l occurrence
shorts 1 occurrence
dirpying l occurrence
0. /st/ + /s/, as in:
sisper l occurrence
muspard H occurrences of the deletion;
1 per informant
sppre l occurrence

d. /kt/ + /k/, sd in:

docppr l occurrence

On the basis of final stop consonant /t/ evidence, it

can be predicted that a similar phonemic deletion might
occur in the instance of the medial position /t/, but the
task is a difficult one to prove conclusively because of
the slurred situation in the speech.

The Deletion of the Stop Consonant /d/.--0f the 102
potential occurrences of final /d/ in the speech of Hng
§Eg£t children, there were 52 deletions and 50 realized
occurrences. This is a 50.8% deletion of /d/ and ”9.2%
realized occurrences.

The following are examples of these deletions:

bird 6 occurrences of the deletion;
1 per informant

red 15 occurrences of the deletion;
1 per informant

playground 2 occurrences of the deletion;
1 per informant

122

H

found occurrence
Donalg (Duck) 1 occurrence

bed 2 occurrences of the deletion;
l per informant

cold 5 occurrences of the deletion;
l per informant

old 3 occurrences of the deletion;
1 per informant

head 1 occurrence

food A occurrences of the deletion;
1 per informant

salad 1 occurrence

mustard 2 occurrences of the deletion;
l per informant

friend 3 occurrences of the deletion;
l per informant

wood 1 occurrence

dad l occurrence

bad 2 occurrences of the deletion;
l per informant

good 1 occurrence

record 1 occurrence

According to the data of the Detroit Dialect Study,
children ages 9 to 12 in the lower socio—economic class
delete the stop consonant simple /d/ in the final position
if the next word has a consonant in the initial position.
Twenty-four per cent of all final /d/'s are substituted
With /t/, in the speech of the lower socio—economic class
and only in 5% of all final /d/'s in the speech of the

upper socio-economic group. The past tense [D1] whether

123

it is realized as /t/ or /d/ phonemically as in walked, is
deleted by the disadvantaged 30% before vowels, 36% before
consonants, and substituted for 3% before vowels and 9%
before consonants.6

Though there is little research published in the area
of the stop consonant /d/ in the medial position, this
study attempted to note examples of this in the speech of
Head Start children. 0f the 58 potential occurrences of
medial /d/ in the speech of these children, there were 19
deletions and 39 realized occurrences. This is a 33% dele-
tion of medial /d/ and 67% realized occurrences.

The following are examples of these deletions:
1. Simple /d/ deletion:

/d/ + C before vowel, as in:

mogel l occurrence
sigewalk 1 occurrence
nobody 1 occurrence
cangy 2 occurrences of the deletion;

1 per informant
Cagillac l occurrence
2. /d/ deletion in two consonant clusters:
a. /nd/ + /d/, as in:
friengs 1 occurrence

sangwich 7 occurrences of the deletion;
l per informant

Mongay l occurrence

6Ibid.

124

b. /db/ + /b/, as in:
goog—bye l occurrence
0. /dm/ + /m/, as in:
Gogmother l occurrence
3. /d/ deletion in three consonant clusters:
a. /ldr/ + /l/, as in:
chilgren 1 occurrence
b. /ndm/ + /1/, as in:
grangma 1 occurrence
According to the findings of the Detroit Dialect Study,
/d/ cluster is deleted in the consonant cluster in the
speech of the disadvantaged in 3H% of the potential occur—
rences, and is glottalized or the /t/ consonant is used in
substitution 4% of the potential occurrences in the speech
of the lower socio—economic class.7
As in the studies of Labov in his work with the dis-
advantaged of New York City, the frequent occurrences of
v/t/ and /d/ consonant stop deletion might be expected.
The same consonant stops were identified in the
Detroit Dialect Study as well:
It is a general characteristic of the lower socio--
economic class that there is at least lenis (lightly

articulated) pronunciation for most consonants of
all kinds so that you get complete deletion of

 

7Ibid.

125

8

stops, nasal consonants and fricatives. In many
cases these are grammatical markers such as the —t,
-d, and ng, which are phonologically conditioned
not grammatically. Lenis pronunciation has worked
its way down to deletion. ’

The Substitution of /n/ for /n/.--0f the 81 potential
occurrences of /g/ in the speech of Head Start children,
there was 66 substitutions and 15 realized occurrences.
This is an 83% substitution and 17% occurrences in which
/9/ was realized.

The following are examples of these deletions:

1. -ing morpheme:

running 2 occurrences of the deletion;
1 per informant

skating 6 occurrences of the deletion;
l per informant

batting 2 occurrences of the deletion;
1 per informant

cooking 3 occurrences of the deletion;
l per informant

riding 2 occurrences of the deletion;
l per informant

climbing 2 occurrences of the deletion;
l per informant

shopping 3 occurrences of the deletion;
l per informant

falling l occurrence

looking 1 occurrence

 

8A fricative is a narrowly constructed consonant charac-
terized by a continuous hissing or scraping noise, produced
by turbulent motion induced in the air stream; the initial
consonants of fin, vim, etc., and medial consonant of plea—
sure. See Labov, The Social Stratification of English in New
York Cit (Washington, D.C.: Center for Applied Linguistics,
19665, p. 579.

9William Riley (staff member of the Detroit Dialect Study),
"Phonological Indices of Social Stratification" (unpublished
master's thesis, Michigan State University, 1967).

going

talking

playing

doing
sitting
buying
waving

singing

happening
juggling
reading

painting

making
having
fishing
catching
swimming
bathing
flying
standing
taking
laying
placing

stopping

...J

H

._l

N

H

H

H

H

...—J

'._l

'—l

}_l

H

H

H

l-‘

H

H

126
occurrences of the deletion;
l per informant

occurrences of the deletion
l per informant

occurrences of the deletion;
l per informant

Occurrence
Occurrence
Occurrence
occurrence

occurrences of the deletion;
l per informant

Occurrence
occurrence
occurrence

occurrences of the deletion;
l per informant

occurrence
occurrence
occurrence
occurrence
occurrence
occurrence
occurrence
occurrence
occurrence
occurrence
occurrence

occurrence

 

127

doing 1 occurrence
getting 1 occurrence
barbecuing 6 occurrences of the deletion;

l per informant

2. monomorphemic —ing:

nothing 3 occurrences of the deletion;
l per informant

something 1 occurrence
In most speech, nasal consonants are deleted at times;
this is not necessarily a social marker, according to the
findings of the Detroit Dialect Study. The deletion of the
/m/ occurs far less frequently; only lower class socio-
economic groups have this nasal consonant as a speech marker,

as in them or home.

Some Aspects of the Child's

Grammar System

Specific items of grammatical usage occurred fre—
quently to thus form an obvious speech pattern among the
pre—school informants.

The "s" inflection.—-Three kinds of data are noted

 

here:

1. Noun plurals:

he didn't have no foods 1 occurrence
he done broke his ankleg
(ankles—meaning one) 1 occurrence
2. Verb 3rd singular:
my mamma gotg l occurrence
she say_ it 1 occurrence

 

128

I's scared l occurrence
my sister got runs over 1 occurrence
you know whats this 1 occurrence
anything woulda's

happened to me 1 occurrence
my army mens gots stolen 1 occurrence
that_ what my fathor do's 1 occurrence
he see_ it 1 occurrence

3. Pronominal forms:

playing by his self 1 occurrence
my's cousins l occurrence

Pronoun Redundancy Following the Subject of the

 

Clauser—In a count of the instances of pronoun redundancy,
it was noted that all six examples of this aspect of the
child's grammar system included all the potential occur—
rences; the child only used this form when referring to
his family and when the personal possessive adjective was
used before the subject. Examples of this aspect of the

child's grammar system are as follows:

1. my cousin sps came 1 occurrence
2. my sister sps wants 1 occurrence
3. my mother sps goes 1 occurrence
A. our baby gs cries 1 occurrence
5. my brother ps_tries l occurrence
6 my mamma sps_buys 1 occurrence

129

The often repeated use of the pronoun after the
familiar name seemed to give the speaker the assurance that
in this way the listener would be sure to understand the
communication; the reinforcement was an attempt to assure
this happening, in the opinion of the investigator.

The Use of the Double Negative.——Of the 39 potential

 

occurrences of double negative in the speech of Head Start
children, there were 23 examples of its use and 16 realized
occurrences. This is an example of use of the double
ziegative among 58% of the informants in contrast to 92% of
tlie informants who did not use this form.

Examples of the use of the double negative in the
sgbeech of the children are as follows (1 occurrence per 1
ixiformant is the frequency count):

1. he doesn't have gs pockets
2. we @2212 have pp more

3. that ain't no puppy

A. that ain't no dog

5. he didn't say nothing

6. we gppr have pp grits

7. I @2212 got me ppps

8. there ain't no tractors

9. they didn't bake p9 cake
10. I gppr have pp skates

ll. Mamma gppip buy me ppps
12. We dpp;t_have pp_corn flakes

13. I don't need pg help

 

 

 

130

14. I didn't have pp_birthday.

l5. gpplp run pp more

16. he siplt_gonna do pp work

17. he didn't have pp foods

18. I siplp goin' to do nothing

19. he ain't no good

20. I slplp got pp shoes on

21. I sgplp goin' put his shoes pp where

22. Mamma sgpip_goin' buy me pp skates

23. they gppip got pp_more money

The Detroit Dialect Study investigated this aspect of
the child's grammar in the speech of disadvantaged children
10 to 12 years of age. The totals of actual double negation
in relation to potential occurrences were given for each
informant, arranged in the order of descending social rank.
The following percentages were given, beginning with the
lower socio-economic (or disadvantaged) children to the
highest socio-economic group of children in the sample:
Actual occurrences:

55.0% Lower socio—economic group

43.5%

6.9%

0 % Highest socio—economic group10

10Walter A. Wolfram (staff member of the Detroit Dialect
Study), 'Tuutiple Negation and Social Stratification" (unpub-

192$?d progress report of the Detroit Dialect Study, July,

 

131

The frequent use of the double negative is a mark of
the less academically educated member of the society, a
member of the lower socio-economic class, whose lack of
academic experience allows him the freedom of-grammatical
usage, unhampered by rules of the language. It is not.
surprising, then, how this less language-restricted social
class uses the double negative freely in oral communication.

The "done" Perfective Auxiliary —-The following uses

of done were noted in the speech of the Head Start children:

 

1. Deletion of 3rd singular "s" inflection
The following uses of done were noted in the speech

of the Head Start children (1 occurrence per 1

 

informant):
that's what my father gp_
my mamma gp_that
2. Auxiliary
my brother gpps_gone
he dppp_got a Cadillac
I gpps go to the other yard
he gpps_take his shoes off
Mamma gpps_gone for a barbecue
I dpps_had corn flakes
I gpps_seen a cow
I dpps seen a horse
she gpps seen a pig

he done sat down

 

132

Vocabulary of the Child

 

As can be noted in the teachers' concept of.the lan-
guage problems of the disadvantaged pre—schooler (see
Chapter IV), the vocabulary of this child is extremely
limited, even in comparison with his peer group, at the
middle-class social level. A

Although admittedly a representative study of the
language problems of the informants rather than an
exhaustive one, it is obvious to the investigator that
the vocabulary of the participants in the study is different.
The difference lies in lexical items just as is any impor—
tation from any other part of the country, and many of the
informants are natives of the Southeastern region of the
United States (see Chapter III for biographical data of the
informants). There are no immediately striking differences
among the people in the sample. All persons can describe
and narrate that which needs description and narration, in
terms of their age group and academic experience. It has
been said that some of the best language innovators are
found in the lower socio-economic level of the population

for they are not literarily restricted.

Language Data of the Parents
One of the concerns of this study was the language
of the pre—schooler's parent. The mother of the child in
the Head Start project was of prime interest because of the

usual closeness of the mother and a child of pre-kindergarten

133

age. Because of this, the mother served as a language
informant and her speech was recorded for descriptive study
of her phonology, grammar and vocabulary. In a very few

cases the father of the family served as the parent-informant,
but these were rare. For the manner of parent-selection,

see page 116 of this chapter for parents were chosen for

the sample just as their children were.

Some Aspects of the Parents'
Phonological System

 

The Deletion of the Stop_Consonant /t/.—-Of the 1A1

 

potential occurrences of final /t/ in the speech of the

Head Start parents, there were 113 deletions and 28

 

realized occurrences. This is an 80% deletion of /t/ and

20% realized occurrences. .The following are examples of.
O

the parents' speech:

couldn't 8 occurrences of the deletion;
l per informant

start 3 occurrences of the deletion;
.' l per informant

important A occurrences of the deletion;
l per informant

dentist 2 occurrences of the deletion;
l per informant

just ‘ 2 occurrences of the deletion;
l per informant

won't l occurrence
quipe l occurrence
don't 7 occurrences of the deletion;

l per informant
met 1 occurrence

different A occurrence of the deletion;
l per informant

 

cutest

can't

breakfast

paint

most

eight

benefit

hot

right

toast

set

taspe

parent

select

carrot

cat

saint

elephant

west

13“

3 occurrences of the deletion;
l per informant

6 occurrences of the deletion;
l per informant

A occurrences of the deletion;
l per informant

3 occurrences of the deletion;
1 per informant

5 occurrences of the deletion;
l per informant

3 occurrences of the deletion;
l per informant

l occurrence-

5 occurrences of the deletion;
l per informant

3 occurrences of-the deletion;
l per informant

2 occurrences of the deletion;
the same informant

3 occurrences of the deletion;
l per-informant

2 occurrences of the deletion;
the same informant

8 occurrences of the deletion;
l per informant

2 occurrences of the deletion;
the same informant

3 occurrences of the deletion;
l per informant

2 occurrences of the deletion;
l per informant

3 occurrences of the delection;
the same informant

A occurrences of the deletion;
l per informant

3 occurrences of the deletion;
l per informant

 

135

east 3 occurrences of the
l per informant

whips 2 occurrences of the
l per informant

bipe l occurrence

tint 3 occurrences of the
the same informant

must A occurrences of the
l per informant

let 2 occurrences of the

l per informant.

deletion;

deletion;

deletion;

deletion;

deletion;

The Detroit Dialect Study found that the adults from

the lower socio-economic level deleted final /t/ 62% of the

time when followed bv a consonant; they glottalized the

final /t/ 31% of the time, and in only 9% of the cases are

the final /t/'s realized occurrences.ll

Of the 137 potential occurrences of msdial /t/ in

the speech of the Head Stars parents, there were A2'dele-

tions and 95 realized occurrences. This is 31% deletions

of the medial /t/ and 69% realized occurrences.

1. Simple /t/ deletion:
a. /t/ + E before vowel, as in:

yesperday 3 occurrences of the
l per informant

lesser 4 occurrences of the
2 per 2 informants

masperpiece l occurrence

interested 5 occurrences of the
l per informant

lORickard, op. cit.

deletion;

deletion;

deletion;

 

136

spars 2 occurrences of the deletion;
the same informant
poverpy 3 occurrences of the deletion;

1 per informant

/t/ + D before m, as in:
resenpment l occurrence
/t/ + C before 1, as in:

lipple u occurrences of the deletion;
l per informant ' "

2. /t/ deletion in consonant clusters:
/nt/ + /n/, as in:

fainping 3 occurrences of the deletion;
l per informant

painping 2 occurrences of the deletion;
" l per informant

/st/ r /s/, as in:

misper A occurrences of the deletion;
1 per informant

muspard 7 occurrences of the deletion;
‘ ' l per informant '

sisper 3 occurrences of the deletion;
' ' l per informant ‘

 

The Deletion of the Stop Consonant /d/.-—0f the 138
potential occurrences of final /d/ stop consonant in the
speech of the Head Start parents, there were 8“ deletions
and 9M realized occurrences. This is a 61% deletion of
/d/ and 39% realized occurrences. The following examples

are from the parents' speech:

 

crippled
blind

find
cried
enjoyed
scared
helped

pretend
did
attend
remind
forward
robbed

bed

tired

child

dread
kind
friend
ride

asked

2 H H

11

H

U.)

.2 H

H

H

l...)

10

137

occurrence
occurrence

occurrences of the
l per informant

occurrences of the
l per informant

occurrences of the
l per informant

occurrences of the
1 per,informant

occurrences of the
l per informant

occurrence

occurrences of the
l per informant

occurrence

occurrences of the
l per informant

occurrences of the
l per informant

occurrences of the
1 per informant

occurrences of the
l per informant

occurrence

occurrences of the
l per informant'

occurrence
occurrence
occurrence

occurrence

deletion;
deletion;
deletion;
deletion;

deletion;

deletion;

deletion;
deletion;
deletion;

deletion;

deletion;

occurrences of the deletion;

l per informant

 

138
respond 3 occurrences of the deletion;
l per informant

changed 7 occurrences of the deletion;
l per informant

As has been said, the Detroit Dialect Study found
that with both child and adult speech of the disadvantaged
lower socio-economic group the final stop consonant /d/ is
often substituted with the stop consonant /t/.

Of the potential occurrences of medial position /d/,
there were found to be 66 in this particular speech of the
adult. There were 26 deletions and NO realized occurrences.
This is 39% and 61% realized occurrences.

1. Simple /d/ deletion:
a. /d/ + O before vowel, as in:

bolger

H

occurrence

kingergarten 8 occurrences of the deletion;
l per informant

everybogy l occurrence

reaging 3 occurrences of the deletion;
l per informant

rides l occurrence
megical l occurrence
reagy l occurrence
olger 3 occurrences of the deletion;

l per informant
b. /d/ + 0 before 1, as in:

bungle l occurrence

 

139

2. /d/ in consonant clusters;

a. /nd + /n/, as in:
friends

wonderful

1

l

b. /dr/ + /r/, as in:

bedrooms

1

c. /ds/ + /s/, as in:

Edsel

d. /ldr/ + /l/, as in:

children

The Substitution of /n/ for [D/,-—Of the 61 potential
occurrences of /g/ in —ing morpheme of the speech of Head

Start children, there were 48 substitutions of the /n/ for

l

2

occurrence

occurrence

occurrence

occurrence

occurrences of the
l per informant

/g/ and 13 realized occurrences. This is 79%

of /n/ for /g/ and 21% occurrences of realized /9/.

deletion;

substitution

The

following are examples found in the parents' speech:

painting

singing

counting

drawing

complaining
babying

telling

2

|._J

H

occurrences of the
l per informant

occurrences of the
l per informant

occurrences of the
l per informant

occurrences of the
l per informant

occurrence
occurrence

occurrences of the
l per informant

deletion;

deletion;

deletion;

deletion;

deletion;

 

picking

talking

showing

morning

fighting

skating

going

ending
coloring

eating

coming

being
making

wearing

asking

playing

As with the

that the deletion

and occurs in the

N

F

H

C\

'—l

H

11:0
occurrences of the
l per informant

occurrences of the
l per informant

occurrence

occurrences of the
l per informant

occurrences of the
l per informant

occurrences of the
l per informant

occurrences of the
l per informant

occurrence
occurrence

occurrences of the
l per informant

occurrences of the
l per informant

occurrence
occurrence

occurrences of the
l per informant

occurrence

occurrence

deletion;

deletion;

deletion;
deletion;
deletion;

deletion;

deletion;

deletion;

deletion;

children, the Detroit Dialect Study found
of /g/ is not necessarily a social marker

speech of all groups at times.

 

141

Some Aspects of the Parents'
Grammatical System

Specific items of grammatical usage occurred fre—
quently to thus form an obvious speech pattern among the

parents of pre—school informants.

 

The "s" Inflection.——
l. Noun plurals:
I go everydayd l occurrence
2. Verb 3rd singular:

my child enjoy_ it 1 occurrence
I liked books 1 occurrence
I telld him 1 occurrence
he say_ 1 occurrence
they gotd the

same teacher 1 occurrence
makeg sure that

I reads it 1 occurrence
I sayd l occurrence
he say_ no 1 occurrence
he tell_ me 1 occurrence
teacher get_ mad 1 occurrence
she see_ them 1 occurrence
she do_ it I occurrence
what teacher say_ 1 occurrence
people talkd l occurrence
I can workd l occurrence
I startd l occurrence
she like_ it 1 occurrence

142
she say_ 4 occurrences of the deletion;
l per informant

he say_ 7 occurrences of the deletion;
l per informant

Pronoun Redundancy Following the Subject of the
Clause.——In a count of the instances of pronoun redundancy,
it was noted that all seven examples of this aspect of the
parent's speech included all the potential occurrences;
the parent used this form when referring to his family and
when the personal possessive adjective or proper noun was
used before the redundancy. Examples of this aspect of
grammar are as follows:

the teacher she says
my kids they go
Carolyn she is five
my daughter she cried
my mother she says

my little girl she

my son he is happy

The Use of the Double Negative.-—According to the
Detroit Dialect Study, the double negative is a distinctively
social marker in grammar:

In the first place, there is one group of speakers
for whom the "multiple negative realizations" are
always absent. The chart indicates that these
speakers.consistently evidence higher social rankings

(i.e., lower social index scores) than those speakers
who use the multiple negative.12

 

 

 

l2Wolfram, op. cit.

1&3

The Detroit Dialect Study found that the percentage of
double negatives were found in these percentages among
their adult informants:

7u.6% Lowest socio-economic group of adults
(of all potential occurrences)
35.2% ‘
19 01%

O % Highest socio-economic group of adults

This was found to be true, too, in the class of this
study of adults, parents of the disadvantaged pre-schoolers:
78% of the adults in the sample used the double negative
at least once as in contrast to 22% who did not.

The ""done" Perfective Auxiliary.-—The following

 

uses of done were noted in the speech of the Head Start
children:

he done it 3 occurrences of the deletion;
l per informant

I done it

before 1 occurrence
she do it 1 occurrence
Carolyn

done it 1 occurrence

Vocabulary of the Parent

It must be said of the parent as it was said of the
child; many of the parents with admittedly very little
academic experience or travel experience throughout their
lives have extremely limited vocabularies. Many of the

Questions proposed by the teacher or Interviewer were

14M

answered by one word answers and many of these answers were

'either "yes" or "no," or words of a simple nature.

Langdage of the Teacher
The language of the teacher was tape recorded as was
that of the other two informants, however, the results
were not as fruitful. Whereas the pre—schooler and his
parent were not as standard in the use of language as was
the teacher, the pre—schooler and parent speech was of a
casual nature. The teacher was much more on guard with

the use of her language. It was noted that the teachers'

 

speech, on the whole, was a careful and guarded language.
The vocabulary was of an extended type, as one might
expect. The grammar was traditionally correct, as a rule.
The phonology was something else, however. As can be
noted, a number of the teachers were not native Detroiters
and had the regional phonology of their birthplaces (see
Chapter III for the biographical data of the teacher—

informants).

Summary
1. The teachers' concepts of the language problems
Of the children were correct in some instances and incorrect
in others. They identified the deletion of the flag;
COnsonant stops /d/ and /t/ correctly.
2. The deletion of the nasal consonants /ng/
Was also identified as part of the phonology of the dis—

advantaged child in Head Start. This is a true identification,

145

however, it was not understood that in most speech nasal
consonants are deleted at times and that this deletion is
not considered a social class marker. 6

3. The grammatical identification of the use of the
past participle "E292? for the simple present tense form
of "sggj"or the use of the participle without the auxi—
liary, was made by many teachers. This may be a phonologi-
cal problem rather than a grammatical one. The only positive
way one could be sure would be if the auxiliary were used
in its complete rather than contracted form, i.e., "I have
seen him."

. H. Vocabulary was of major concern to the teacher yet
no mention was made that this is an importation from another
region of the country and is not in and of itself good or
bad for that reason. Vocabulary differences are in degree.
For example: the word "EElEE" is used by persons of various
races and ethnic backgrounds; it is a word imported from
the South of—the United States.

5. The words of the language are the items that seem
to bother teachers most, but there are other aspects of
language as important or more important for educational
purposes.

Structural things are the really crucial problems

of language, not the most obvious problems which

are the words themselves. There is a folksy feeling

that lexicon is language, but that is Just one facet
of the more complex study.

 

l3Riley, op. cit.

 

146

6. It is important to know that social classes
determine language. Speech is determined by the social
community of which the individual is a member, not the
race or ethnic group in which he is born, as proven in
the studies of Labov.lu

Chapter VI discusses the proposal that a standard
English be taught to the child, to accompany the dialect
that he uses easily with his peers. Biloquialism, it is
suggested, will permit the child to retain his natural
position in the family and peer group which speaks the
sub-group language, while equipping him to meet the demands
of a society which accepts standard speech as that which
the educated man speaks with ease and confidence. This
chapter considers the evidence of language behavior in
terms of the actual data of the investigation and the
teachers' concepts of the language problem. Recommenda-
tions include suggestions to the teacher who would be
expected to remedy language differences. These include
proposals for pre-service and in—service training of
teachers and curriculum revision in terms of the needs of

children.

 

luLabov, op. cit.

 

 

CHAPTER VI

CONCLUSIONS, IMPLICATIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS

This investigation studies the question of the
language differences which exist in the speech of the pre—
school child in Head Start, his parent and his teacher.
The project involved the taping of the speech of these
three types of informants in a first inverview in the
school. Some aspects of the informants' language behavior
were analyzed and described in this manner. The descrip-
tion of this speech is discussed in detail in Chapter V.

A second interview was conducted with a sample of
the teachers who served as informants in the first inter-
view as well. The purpose of the second interview was to
determine the teachers' concepts of the language problems
of the pre—schoolers and their parents. Their reactions
to the speech of the children and their parents, both from
their personal classroom experiences and from listening
to a tape of the children and their parents, have been

described in Chapter IV.

147

 

 

1118

How Pre—School Children in Head Start and Their
Parents Differ in Some Aspects of Language
Behavior and the Teachers' Concepts of

the Problem

 

 

 

The language data of this investigation suggest that
there are differences in the language behavior of the in-
formants. Some of these differences and the teachers' con—
cepts of the problem, both before and after she had listened
to the taped speech,are shown on the following page.

It must be said that the teachers were not specific
about their comments concerning the pronunciation of the
children and their parents, but all of the teachers acknowl—
edged in some way that there was definitely a pronunciation
problem in the speech of the disadvantaged pre—schooler.
Even after listening to a tape of child and parent speech,
which included some aspects of the phonological (and gram—
matical) system of the informants, very little comment of
a specific nature was added to the data already known of
the teacher's concept of the informants' speech. The
implications of this data are discussed later in this
chapter.

Data of this investigation proved, too, that the
teacher was correct in her estimate of the parent's speech
problem being similar to that of the child. The very
young child, such as the pre—schooler in the Head Start
program, apparently has not had the time to have had the
peer influence on his language in a phonological way. In—
stead, the evidence indicates similar delections in the

phonological patterns presented in this chapter.

 

1149

 

.aHHmoHHHooom COHuonc HchoE\u\ osoom meCmE

Ion om on» no oCOC oCm COHpmHmp on psonm wCHCCOC
omCOHquE mCono mm m:. . . .CCo CCw mHoCHE .wCHC
ICwaonnmCCoz CH whoppmH pHEo mmCB: "mHe Cocomme
A.CmuhmmCoCCHx "who: me CH CommawnoCmCmo

Ho mom» ConuCOHpmHmo HmHomEn\p\ Ho mHCmemv
.mCOHpmHoo 03p ohms mCoCo CoHC3 CH

Commaw CHHCo Ho wow» m 0» wCHCmpmHH Cmuum CoCUHHCo
0C» no Comoam on CH \p\ 90 CoHpmHoU HchoE me
cmCOHpCmE mHQEwm mCo CH nCoCommp om me Co mcoz
Swopmummm CCm CmpmHm ”moCoz mmcCp CH CoomCmICHHCo
Ho mom» CounCOHponn HchoE|\p\ Co mmHQmemv

umoumoocmhpsooo nomumoocohhsooo
pmNHHmom Omudemm
Ho ocm no can

«Hm Rom
Ho COHpmHmQ no COHponQ

.mCCoz mCHoCCOCOCQ

mH EmHQOCQ Coooam Canoe mCu: mzpmppspw m mH mHCu w mH mHCp
mono pmmm om meC mono: m:CCooCoo m mmnmmoCongsooo mmHumooCmuHSOOO
mH mpCCOm Ho COHosoHmeCw: mzmHoECE mono: omNHHmmm omNHHmom

m:Cooon HNCH omsh: mz. . . CCHm mmCu:

”mm Cosm mewEmC oxms ou CmCu Cono COHo mm H mCOHpmHmQ mm u mCOHponQ
:Hmoo HmemE oCo CH \p\ Co COHpoHop me HMHumwoCmCCSooo HmHummoCmphsooo
prOC quemm on» CH mCoComoo oCo Ho oCoz HMHqupom HMHqupom

 

CoHpHmoq HmHCmE CH

"\p\ ocmcomCoo doom Ho COHuonQ

 

:.woCsom Co mCCoz Hmo wCHouso: mp prmE

mono uMCz Co mpcsom OHHHoQO COHpCmE uOC CHC mCo
IComop 03» mmon CCw .mocsom Ho COHponU omCOHpCoE
mCmComop Cmeo on» Ho mCOC mzmohoz 90 who wCHpuso:
on psoow wCHCpHCm onm mCmCommp m omon HHCO
:.wUCoz Ho mCCm

mCOCCm wmoze: "mmx CoCowme
:.m©Coz CHme
"mm* CmComoB

was CCO wCprso . . .

Ho meHpCm wmp HHm Pmo use zone:

.CoHpmHme mHCp
psoow waEoC 0: come mCmComou um Cono

on mCmNHHMCchw 3mm CCw mmu A.C0HpHmoo .
umooCoCCCooo ummoCoCCCooo
COan CH saw so: eHo mCm puma =.m.u use How emNHHmmm HHN swuHHmmm
m.p on ooCCOCOCQwHE HoCB: ”mHm HoCommB
ACooQOnuCoCmm Ho mECmp CHV Ho CCm Ho CCm
.\o\ HmCHH Co COHomHoc COHoCmE pOC oHo t
mCoCommp Cmeo ComoCo>mm 0C9 .om UCm .mm now no»
.mH .mH .HH .mH .3H .NH .HH .0H .m mCmpEgC u C0 CoHpmHmo u C0 CoHumHmo
"mum: mCoCommo owoCB .waHUCm CCCOm mmo
wCH>me: Co :HCO mCHopso: CmCoHHCo omme m mH mHCp m mH mHCp

ozone mpCmEopmow HmCmme come mm me Ho
Co>on .Hms zcm CH \C\ oCmComCoo doom mCu
COHpCoE COC CHC mCmCowoo mm wCHCHwEmC one
=.p- ecm .e- .mCH. Csz

mHnCOCo m>mC CmCCHHCo ommCB "2mm CoCommB
:.mHCCOCo Eme m>Hw w.» oCm m.p

mHummoCmnusooo
UGNHmem

mmummoCmCCCooo
womaammm

mHHu mCOHpmHmQ :H u mCoHumHoa

 

 

Apom CCm pCCoumCCoz mmme CH Commam mCo mmmCHpCm CCO o>moH moCB: no} CmCommB HaHummoCmCCsooo mmnmooconnsooo
-nHHCo Co mama CoacoHpuHme HmCHC-\u\ co meaemxmv AcommamueHHzo co mega» CHV HmeCmpom HmHquuom
COHonom HCOHwOHoCOCQ HmCHH CH ”\o\ onCOwCoo doom mCu Ho COHumHoo
Cowoom Coomqm

mama HuHHd mCoHuqmohmm m.meomoB one

pomoCoo HmeHCH m_CmCommB on» CH

m.pcmumm ms» CH m.cHHCo on» CH

Ememwm H<0Hooqozomm mmB mo maommm< msom

150

 

.Commam pCmCmQ
Ho oCmQ on Co \C\ Com \C\ pr Ho COHpsp
IHpmnsm me meOHpCoE mCoComop mCu Ho oCoz

.CoHumep oCu COHpCoE
uoc UHU whosommp mm Hmzpo ch .COHumHmv \C\ H0

HHN u
ICsooo CmNHHmmm

mwocmcm

RHH u mooCmC
Ipzooo noNHHmmm

 

 

 

 

HmCome CH mxoaw 0mm CmComme .wCHCCOE CH \C\ Ho AComemIpCoCmq Ho wECop CHV Ho Cam Co pCm
COHponU me Co comeEmC HHHCOHHHoQO OHH CmComme .EooH HmonoHOCOCQ mHCp COHpCoE COC Has no COHumHoQ «mm Ho coprHmQ
A.wCHCCoE UCm wCHuHmH> ”mppoz mmmCu CH Comoam CH0 mCoCommo Cono m>HCI>on39 :.wCH_ co m w m m m m m
IpCmeQ Ho mam» me COII\C\ COH \C\ we moHQmemv mCo moCCOCOCQ Cm>m p.Cop zone: "QNC CmCommB H HCp H HCp

.COHumHoU mCu COHpCmE no: :.CHo pCmH MHnmmoCompsooo mHnmmoCoCCsooo
CHU mCmCommp CmCoo om mmeHCCo Co moCoz CmHsoHp HHHmzm: mCm mpCsom. wCH_ oCH: ”mHm CoComoB UoNHHmmm omNHHmmm
ICwQ COHpCoE 90C CHC pan .mcczom Ho wCHQQOCC me :.Cmo m on» wCH>moH Hp .wCH I I
“Howme CH .UmCOHpCmE mm on .om .mH .mu mCmCommB IxooH. mm Cosm oCos a 5mm sz9: ”OHm CmComoB m: I mCoHponQ ow I mCOHpmHmQ
A.MCHwCHm ocm wCHHHmp "moCoz mmmCo CH Cowoqm :._CHom m.pH .wCHQw Ho omomeH: "om CoCowwe HmummoCmCCzooo HmumooCmCCsooo
ICHHCo Ho mom» me C0II\C\ Com \C\ Co meQmemv AComemICHHCo C0 mECmp CHV HmHoCmoom HprCopom
\c\ COC \C\ H0 CoHpspHpmnsm
New u mmoCmC “so u mmoCoC
ICsooo noNHmem Ipsooo pmNHchm
Ho oCm Ho oCm
.CoHpmHop on» psonm CoxCMEmC mHQEMm Rom amm
on CH mm Cme0 me Ho mCoz C. . . . mHCoHE Ho COHumHmQ Ho CoHpmHmQ
me . . . CH mCmppoH pHCo Hmcez "mHH CmCommH .
A.CmCUHHCo :.mpCmC0mC00 ooCCOCOCQ o_Coo: :.Cme0Cm m mH CHCH m mH mHCo
CCm HCHCmoCoz ”moCoz me CH ComemIoCmCmo Ho COH CCsom mCo mpsuHomnCm Hon: mep Co oznmooCmCCsooo mmumooCoCCsooo
camp COIICoHpmHmC COHpHmoQ HmHUoEIC\C Ho oHQmemv :szH: :.omHCE:E: :.CmCC:Hm: mH COHC3 own» CmNHHmmm UoNHHmom
.\C\ HmHCmE mm acmECOHCH pHsom pCm CHHCo on» Coon Co I I
no COHpmHmC on» meoHpCmE mCoComou om m:» we mCoz COHuwHoCCOCOCQ oCo oo CmHoC 0p Coco Cmeo mH I mCoHpmHmQ mH I mCOHpmHmQ
A.mCoCCCCC "mono: wHCo CH CooQOICHHCo Ho COHuHmoq HmHCmE on CH \C\Ho COHuoHoC oCo wmnmmoCmmpsooo wmumooCmCCsooo
mam» COIICOHpmHoC CoHpHmoa HmHUmEI\C\ Ho mHQmemv mo0C oHQEmm me CH mCmCowop mCo Co mCoz HprCouom HmHoCmoom
COHpHmoa HmHUmE CH ”\o\ pCmCowCOC doom oCo Ho COHpmHmQ
. HmmnmooCoCCsooo mm.mz n mmoCmC
CwNHHmmm ICsooo cmNHHmmm
.wCHCHOC CHmm mCmeo
.EoHCOCQ mHCp C0 Hm mmpCmEEoo HmCmCow cows 03% :.m.p Ho UCm Ho pCm
oCmEEoo HOC CH0 mCmComop mm meOHpmHoC ozone mpCmE Ccm p.o ooCCOCOCowHE Hone: ”HHH CmCommB RoH Hm.om
IEoo HmCmme come oH CCw .mH .OH .3 .mm mCoComme HComwomIoCmCmQ Ho mECmp CHV Co COprHmQ Ho COHpmHmQ
H.CCm w CCOC mCo CH ComemIpCoCmq Co .CocmEocmCQ m m m m m m
mom» COIICOprHmC COHuHmOQ HmCHHI\C\ Ho mHQmemv mHCp osoom wCHCCOC pHmm mCmCommo Cono NH H HC» H HCp
.EmHCOCo mHCo Co quEEOo COC CH0 mCoComop mmeHoCm ocm mCCsom cCo CH0 wCHopso Co oxoom omummonCCsooo omummoCoCCsooo
m>HCI>pCm39 .mpCoz mo mpCo me EOCH mCmppmH owCowop Co>mHm :.oI Ccm CI .mCH I Csz woNHmem nmNHmem
Hue wCprso pCm mCHoQOCo CmCCHHCo Ho EmHCOCQ mHnsogp m>mC CmCCHHCo owmce. "zmx CoCome I I
Commom on psoom omNHHMCoCow mmm pCm mm» mCmComoB _ :.m.p UCm m.© am I mCOHpmHmQ mm I mCOHponQ
A.CCC I CCm Ime umcpoz mmme CH ComemICHHCo Co oCoIImeHUCm CH0 o>mmH HmCB um* CwCommH mMHnmmoCmCCCooo NOHnmmoCmCCsooo
comp COIICOHumHmC COHpHmog HMCHHIU\C Ho moHomemv ACooonIoHHCo Ho mECoo CHV HwHoCmuom HmeCmoom

 

COHpHmoo HCOHonOCOCo HCCHH CH "\C\ CCmCOmCOC Loom me Ho COHpmHmQ

151

 

.Commom ucmaQ

90 was» on» Co Chaos HonCCsCon CCOCOCQ Ho mmmwo
03» on» COHuCoE poc CHC mCmCommp Hm wCHCHmEmC 0C9
=.HHuomCCooCH Hug Hon» meHCp on» Co sou m pmsw
mud omonp ..mCm CopnwsmC HE. . . .= "HHH CmCommB
:.pru Hum HHC Hme van ..oCm Cmprsz
.uomnnzm oHCCOC me Com: Hone: "NHH Concave
=.oou .xwoam CoCCHHCo on» Hm:
.mCm Counwsz Hz: ”NH CmCome
“.mCm CHHOCmo

CCm .mnm CmpcwsmC HE “who: CooQOIpCmaQ mo

comp cc» COIIHoCmCCCCmC CCOCOCC on» Co mHQmemv
.Coomam m.CHHCo

on» Co pomqmm HCUHquEma mHCp Co pCmEEoo 0C

oCme mCmCommp Cmeo prHmIHquze :.Cmeo some on
uxoC quHC mpoonnsm 03» CH ado Hone: "Hm CmComwB
=....mCm mEmE. HmoHaHp mCCCOm pace: "mmH CmCome
A.mCm CmCWHm

HE CCw .mCm wEEmE HE ”who: CommawICHHCo Ho

mom» on» COIIHoCmCCCCmC CCOCOCQ mCu no mmHQmemv

HE.

«C» meH m.mep . .

.CoomamlpCmCmq Ho mECoo CH CH CoHpCoE
oo CmoomHmmC maComou on no om HH<

.CHHLO mg»

Ho Common oCu CH HoCmCCCCmC CCOCOCQ psonm
ComeEmC mCmComou mm Cono on» no mCoz

.
CCOCOCQ HmComCoa m omr HoCE:
AComonICHHCo mCu Ho mECmp CHV

.Csoc w Cmumm
”CH CmCommB

mC com Hz

ow HCHw
mepHH Hz
mCm nonpoE Hz
on Coocwsz Hz
ma CHHOCmo
Hon» mCHx H2
ow szomop mCB

"Ho mm:
me CH mumC
wwwswaH on»
no moCoCH>m

oCm mEEmE H:
on nonposn H:

on Homo C30
oCm CmeoE HE
mCm Cmpme Hz
mCm CHmCoo Hz

"Co mm:
on» CH wowC
owmswCCH on»
Co ooCoCH>m

 

HonCCSCom CCOCOCC

 

.HCspm

on» CH 0» CoCmpmHH mnonomwp me CoHC3 Commom
pConQ on» CH Couczoo .pmon pm .moHawao Coon
who: when» poH .Commom quCmo me CH COHpooHC
Cm: 0C» CoCOHpCoE owComou om 0C» Co oCo poz
H.30Cx mCm Con «owap o» o>0H mCm .CHMCCC
p0: mCm .Eme Csz oEoo mCm thmz ComemIpCoCmq
Ho mom» on» COIICoHpomHHCH Cm: 0:» Co mmHQmemv
.CmCCHHCo Ho EmHnoua Comoam m mm COHuomHH

ICH m on» COHpCmE poc CHC mCmCowmp mm Cmeo HH<
.EmHCOCQ mCu mm CmEmC HHHwOHHHCQO COC mm: mHCp
pan .COHpooHCCH m C0 mm: mCC 0» omuCCHCppw mp
CHCOC .mHH CmCommE Hp mCmE oCCp mm Cosm :.moCo>
wCHSOCx uOC: on moCoConH w mquCmm :.Coomam
wCHCmuHOCm Ho mHmz ow mom oC . . .: "MH CoComme
A.mmxHH H I CCm I wCOCz has» umCoz ComemICHHCo

Ho mom» on» COIICOHuomHHCH :x: me no moHQmemv

.CooonIpCmCma CH COHuomHHCH m
me COHuCoE uOC CHC waCommp mm Conuo mcfi
”..wmonp.

.mmz. ..mpme.

COC .mmmCC_

CCw
CHGW LmLHOE WHSB:

.mumz. pow
"HH CmComoB

HCommmmIpCmCma me Ho mEme CHV
.Comodm CH CoHuowHHCH m on»
COHquE no: CHC mCmComop CmCuo w>HCIHpCm35

:..mmmw. Com

:..HHQD mHS mCHNEU.

mC m.mep.

.mwm. How Hone:

Ham CHzos HoCB:

Ho CmmprH

"0mm HwCome
.HHCC
”:HH monomme

:.oum nCoo.H COH
wCOOH mCmHH Com moCmHH Hmm HoCB: ”CH Accomme

CH mm .m pr Hmo m>mmH Hone:

CCm> CCHCS Hpr p.Cmo HoCB:
HCommomICHHCo me Co mECop CHV

:..®®m on.
”0* CmCommB

=.mm: on
”2* CmCommH

HmstCHm
CHM an> .m

mHmCCQ CCoz .H
"no mm: on CH

momC mwmsmcmH
Co mocmCH>m

wEmom

HmCHEOCOHm .m
CmstCHm
Cum nso> .m

meCCHQ Csoz .H

“Ho mm: 0:» CH
mpr owwsowH
.Ho moCoCH>m

 

coHpowHCCH

Cm: one

 

mama CopHC mCOHpqooHom m.CmCommB oCB

pqwoCoo HmeHCH m.CmCommB on» CH

Cowmam
m.pCmCmm on» CH

Coomqm
m.CHHCo on» CH

 

EmBmHm H<OHB<ZE<mo mmB

mo maommm< mzom

1532

HHooCH om umme um

 

.mumpw vCH
Icommu CC» Co Cacao Comm Cqu MCHma>Coo uoc ago:
no who: mquCmn CC» 30; Ho COHquE 0C mCmE mHQEmm

0C» CH maComou mm Cono mCE :.HHmeH wCHmeu mCm
Hon» pmme pm Han .Hmm on mCCoz CwCoCo wCHSOCx
Cm>w CCm mCCoz wCHoCCOCOCQ oEHp CHCC m w>mn

ow wCHCmpmHH mC.o3 mpCmCmn wmeEC "HH CmCommE
:.mam» mHCo C0 MCHOC ohm HmCu mm .Hono

Como Cqu mew>Coo on prm on on Emwm 0C HoC»

usn HmLmCummu on» o» HHnmuHomEoo xmwmm cu CMCOCm
mCCos m>mC p.C0C Hose: "0* CoComoB =.Hmm ou HOH
m o>mn CCm CmCuo Como CuHs HHmz HCO> wCOHm How

0» Econ .mH vac» .mpCmCmq wC» .HmCa= "MH CoCome
..Hmm on HOH m o>mC on Eoom HwCE: ”NH CoCommE
”mCoComoo on» EOCH memEmC omon CmuHoHHo

mom» :0 HCmHCnaoo> m.quCmC on» Co mmHQmemv
.mEAop HMCmCmM Co OHHHoon ConHm CH .HCmH

Ianwoo> pr o» Couch Co: CHC mCmCommp Hm CmCuo one
.HHC um MCHmeu Etna Cum: op om
IwwH300C0 Em H . .omH Cocomme =.Ew£p Ham 0»
30C CC“ mCCoz on» soCx ».C0C push HOCu pan CmCOCo
HHmmCH wCHme» oCm CoCCHHCo ommCE= .CNH CwCommB
:.wCCoHCH CHoCu Co wHou CHme psonm wCHmeu mum:
Hon» Cmcz HHwoCH HCw> Comeu HoCEC umHH CoComoB
A.mCoComwp 0C» EOCC memeC omen» Co

éHoHHm mama Co HCmHsnmoo> m.CHHCo me no mmHQmemv

:.mCo3mCm
CnozI mco: =.wCCoz mHCEHm: :.HCmH:nmoo>
MCmHm: :.mCC03 mHanHHmI mCo own: :.mCC03

on opsmoaxo 0C: :nHCmHsomoo> CommmE: "Ho
oxoqm HwCB .mucoumm CHmCu Ccm CwCCHHCo wCu
Cuon Co moHCmHznmoo> prHEHH HCm> 0C» 0»
CmCCoHoC mCmCommu om mCu Ho HHm HHCme HCw>

.CoHumsuHm
Hoonom on» CH
mHnmuCOCEoo uHoH
HmCu Cmcz Co
mCCwHCH Co mambo
CHme CCH: mCH
Ixmmnm mp0: Hme
CmC: HwaCH CCm
.HHxOsz «HwHHmw
exonm muConn
oCu no HCCS

.HCmHsnmoo>
CCWHHow Chm

mquhma wEom

.HMm 0» oHupHH
CmC CCm HCm CCm
poHsv HCw> who:

mpCopmn oEow

.COHumsunIHmHQ
m CH Co whoma
CHme CCH: mCH
Ixmmnw owz HoCu
CmCs EmemCCqu
CuHs CCm HmeCC
mxoam cmCCHHCo
oCH Ho Hcmz
.mquE

Imduh COCooCmm

on» Co oEom
.HHm um swoon

oCu Ho mEom

 

Emamum Hx<qzm<oo> mmB

mo wavmmm< mzom

 

.w>Huoquwa =mCoP.

mC» wCHOHCOC CmCOHpCCE mponumou om on» Co mCoz
H.CCCC3 oCOC oCm ”mm: CoomeIquCmm Ho can» on»
COIIHCCHHHxsm w>HuomuCod CcCOC: on» Co oHnEmev
.Coomam

ICHHCo mC» CH o>HuomCCwa =mCOC= mCu Co mm: «Cu
CmoHCOC oCm can» CmCoHquE mCoComop mCu Ho mco uoz
H.pow CCOC H "mm: CoomCmICHHCo no mama MC»
COIIHCmHHHxsm c>HuooHCon :mCOC: on Ho onmemv

.prCmu mHC
C0\CCm CHHCo «Cu Ho Cowmaw CC» mCHCCwoCoo
CwCuHm .30H>C0»CH meommu HCm CH pcommnn
mm: Homamm HMoHmeEMCw mHCo Ho COHuCoE 02

CH mCOC CHHOCmo
pH mCOC oC

uoHndem Com
HHMHHHCCC pr
”Ho mm: on» CH

ame ommsmCmH
Ho wocmCH>m

oCOC mEsz
wCOC on

"oHndew Com
HumeHxsa CC»
"Ho mm: on» CH

CHMC wwmswaH
Co ooCmCH>m

 

HCmHHHxsm o>HoowHCmC :mCOC. mCB

 

.m>Humwa oHCCOC wCu

CwCOHuCoE oHaEmw mCu CH maComou om me Ho mCoz
H.CoCCHHCo 0C o>mC u.C0C HmCu

.CCd .MCHCHOC 0C u.C0C 03 "who: CoownquCoCma
mo cam» on» C0II®>HumwoC mHCCOC mCu no mmHamemv
.mCMu C0 CbCCHHCo on» Co

Cowmam oCu CH m>HuwwoC wHCCOC oCu Ho mm: on»
CoCOHuCoE oHCEmw map CH mCoCommu om me Ho wCoz
H.mMCHCp 0C w>mC H.C0C H ”mm: CowwmmICHHCo

Co comp CC» COIIw>Humwa wHCCOC 0:» Co oHawamv

.quCma wHC C0\CCm CHHCo oCu CmCuHo

Co Eopme HCOHumEEwa mCu Ho oomamw

Cm mm: m>Hpmme oHCCOC wCu awn» CocoHquE
anEmm msu CH mCoCommu om oCu Ho wCoz

«mm H woonC
Ipsooo CmNHHmmm

no CCm

HwH Co COHumHeC
m mH mHCp
mflmwoflmhhfiooo
CmNHmeC

mm u wCoHpmHmo
Nzlmvocwhhflooo
Hmecouom

um: u moonC
ICCooo CoNHHmmm

Co CCm
«mm «0 COHponQ
m mH mHCu
mHIMOOEOHRSOOO
UONHHmOM

mw I mCOHuoHoQ
mmummoConuaooo
HwHucmuom

 

 

 

m>Humwwz mHnsoo on» Co om:

153

The language data reveals that both the pre—school
children and their parents do have a language which they use
freely when they are in the company of peers or those with
whom they are familiar. The teachers, as a group, failed
to recognize the fact that the children and adults of the
lower socio—economic level group speak a systematic social—
dialect rather than the more normative language of the
school. It is a language system, nevertheless, that permits
communication between children and their parents. An
observation of the inter-action of individuals of the lower
socio—economic level group will reveal this; this is an
important observation that every teacher should strive to
make for the implications this knowledge holds for the

teaching-learning process.

The Language of the Teacher

The language behavior of the teacher in this speech
study was of a very careful and cautious nature. Because
of this, both the phonological and grammatical evidence
secured was not evaluated in terms of its meaning to the
investigation as was the speech of the pre—schooler and his
parent. It will suffice to say that the teacher very care—
fully avoids some aspects of the phonological and grammatical
systems of the child and his parent, such as: the deletion
of final consonants and the substitution of word endings;
the "s" inflection, the use of the double negative, the

pronoun.redundancy, or the "done" perfective auxiliary——if

154

they ever did exist in the speech of the teacher.
According to previous studies in both New York and Detroit
(which have been referred to many times in this investiga—
tion), there is proof that these aspects of phonology or
grammatical usage exist in smaller quantities or not at
all in the speech of the middle socio—economic group to
which most teachers belong. The biographical data of this
study indicate that the teacher is the recipient of more
formal academic education and travel opportunities both
of which are social indices of language usage. The teacher,
therefore, is more apt to be the possessor of a form of
standardized English. Finally, her training in the
language arts in her preparation to teach the elementary
grades has prepared her for her unique awareness of the
value of enunciation in the use of the language.

In this concluding chapter of the language study,
the attempt was made to Specifically identify and describe
some aspects of the language behavior of the disadvantaged
pre—schooler and their parents and the teachers' concepts
of this language, both initially and after listening to a
tape of child-parent speech. The question now arises:
After the identification and description of the language
have been made, what can the teacher do about the gap which
exists between the English of the pre~schooler from the dis—
advantaged home and the more standardized language of the
school and the society in which the child will seek to

live and to work in eventually?

155

Implications of this Language Study

 

The typical elementary language arts classroom
throughout the nation today uses the integrated language
arts approach to the teaching of the skills and apprecia—
tions of the language, but does not concern itself with
just hdw we communicate and hdw language works. At the
pre-school and primary level there is some emphasis on
the oral approach to language, but not nearly enough. In
the work of Kohl, it was discovered that the disadvantaged
child, in particular, SEE talk and write freely, but often
determines not to because of the hostile reception he
rears.l Traditionally, too, the teacher's approach to the
teaching of the language arts is a negative or corrective
one. In such an atmosphere, the child from the disadvantaged
home, which does not usually possess the use of the norma—
tive school language, does not try to communicate with the
teacher.

The implications of this study are evident, as seen
in the language data of the investigation and the teachers'
initial and current perceptions of the language problem:

1. re—education of the teacher is imperative, and

2. curriculum revision essential.

The teacher most certainly should learn more about
the nature of language and the particular needs of the dis—

advantaged child.

 

1Herbert T. Kohl, Teaching the 'Unteachable' (New
York: New York Review, 1967).

 

156

Even though the teacher was asked to specifically
identify the language problems of the disadvantaged child,
most of them failed to do so. The majority imagined that
the child could not or would not communicate because he
lacked "words." A few others suggested, however, that they,
the children and parents, did speak freely with each other--
though they lacked adequate vocabulary. What the teacher
failed to see was that the child and parent did communicate
with and without the use of words, but that their means
of communication was simply not understood by the school
staff. The teachers spoke a different level of language
and did not recognize the language system of the lower
socio-economic level speaker.

As evidence of the need for in-service re—education
of teachers, the statements of the teachers themselves
should be considered. At the conclusion of the second
interview with the teachers, they were asked to give their
opinions of the language behavior of the disadvantaged
children whom they were teaching. It will be noted that
many of these expressions of concern are moralistic judg—
ments on people rather than on the language. Many teachers
are misinformed. They evidence the insecurity of the
pedagogical stereotype. The follOwing statements from the
teachers are powerful arguments for the need for more in—
service education ofteachers in the fields of language and
the psychological and social needs of the disadvantaged

child.

Teachers

 

#1:

#2:

#3:

#4:

#5:

#6:

#7:

#8:

#9:

#10:

#11:

#12:

#13:

They don't talk
much at all.

They slur words
together.

Their trouble is
just lazy speech.

These people cannot
distinguish between
sounds.

Pronounciation is
the main speech
problem they have.

Their problems are
communication and
expression.

Vocabulary is the
biggest problem.

The problem is
just simple com—
munication.

Just getting them
to talk is the
biggest challenge.

They mumble their
words.

Their background
is the biggest
trouble.

The substitution
of sounds is a
concern.

Dialect is the
problem with
these children.

157

Reactions of the Investigator

 

An empty jargon-like statement
which is disproved by the studies
of Kohl.

Naturally they do; this is the
way language works.

This is a moral judgment.

This is a very broad statement.

If it means that the disadvantaged
speaker cannot distinguish "pig"
from "big," this is a nonsense.

This is much too broad to be
meaningful and is probably
wrong.

This is not true, unless communica—
tion is defined as communication
with the teacher.

This is probably the smallest
problem.

Once again, as stated in reaction
to #6, this is not true.

The greater problem for the
teacher is getting children to
learn.

This may be a problem of enuncia—
tion which the teacher may teach

or a hearing problem on the part

of the listeners.

The statement is too vague to be
of use.

Unless the sound substitutions
can be identified and described,
this statement is meaningless.

We all have a dialect.

Teachers

#1“:

#15:

#16:

#17:

#18:

#19:

#20:

#21:

#22:

#23:

#2H:

Just to get children
to converse with
each other is hard.

They talk so fast
they stutter.

The major speech
problem is pro—
nouncing words.

The biggest problem
is that the child
learned to talk
from hearing his
parents talk.

The major problem
besides their
limited vocabulary
is the dropping of
endings.

They omit sounds
at the beginning;
they substitute.

Their pronouncia—
tion is bad.

They point at
things rather
than say words.

Their main ways of
communicating are
by movements of the
arms and other
gestures.

The biggest problem
is the grammar of
the language.

The misuse of the
pronouns is the

most obvious trouble.

158

Reactions of the Investigator

 

This is entirely wrong, as can be
proved if the listener will
observe the disadvantaged at play
or in a relaxed and familiar
setting.

A remark such as this is psycho—
logically erroneous and
linguistically naive.

Once more, this statement is
false.

We all do; how else?

What is meant by this? The
endings of what? Which ones?
Are all of them dropped?

This probably means morphemes,
such as re—, de—, and the like.

By whose standard is the
pronounciation bad?

This is a cultural bias. Don't we
all use gestures to communicate an
idea at times?

If we would feel intimidated, as
the disadvantaged often do, we
would do the same.

Much too broad a statement to have
any real meaning or to be of much
use.

Does this teacher mean they for I?
W3 for ydd? This is probably not
the meaning intended, but the
teacher is still not descriptive
enough.

Teachers

#25:

#26:

#27:

#28:

#29:

#30:

The hardest thing
is to express their
thoughts in com-
plete sentences.

A limited vocabau—
lary is the
biggest problem.

They need to know
more and more words.

They Speak so quick-
ly they often
stutter.

They mumble their
woods.

Their speech is
just very careless
and lazy.

159

Reactions of the Investigator

 

Not to be philosophical, but
what's a thought? What's complete?
What's a sentence?

Certainly not the biggest.

This is not necessarily so.

As was stated in the reaction to
#15, this statement is erroneous
and naive.

As was stated in the reaction to
#10, this staement may be a
problem of hearing.

This is a moralistic judgment.

This list suggests to the investigator tremendously

naive attitudes toward language and lack of understanding

of the disadvantaged.

cation of teachers in:

It reveals a need for workshop edu-

1. Cultural relativity--learning to respect different

 

social systems;

culturals,

learning to reSpect other

other racial and ethnic groups—-without

forming moral judgments of different peoples.

2. The nature of language——learning to describe

 

language problems first in order to do something

about them later

(for an illustration of this point

see statement of Teacher #18); learning what kinds

of problems are most crucial (for an illustration of

160

this point see statement of Teacher #7).
Teachers should learn to describe language in
terms of: (a) Phonetics; (b) Grammar; (c)
Syntax.

Suggestions for Implementation of Language
Data Findings in Terms of the Classroom

 

There is a contrast between the language data discover—
ies of this investigation and those of the Detroit Dialect
Study which suggest a type of age—oriented pedagogical
implication.

1. What differences in age-grading suggest differences in
language arts sequencing?

The use of the multiple negative suggests that the five
year old pre-schooler from the disadvantaged home uses the
double negative 58% of the time; the ten year old, according
to the Detroit Dialect Study, uses the multiple negative 55%
of the time; this is only a 3% difference yet the ten year old
has five more years of academic experience than the five year
old pre-schooler. This calls for a concentrated effort on
the part of the teacher to teach this aspect of the child's
grammatical system with more meaning and more consistency
and at an earlier stage in the child's academic experience.

2. How much interference can we expect from parents
speech?

The pre-schooler speaks with much the same phonological
and grammatical aspects of language behavior as does his

parent: In the case of the multiple negative, the parents

161

of the pre—schooler from the disadvantaged home used this-
grammatical index 78% of the time; in the investigation of
the Detroit Dialect Study, the parents of the older children
used the multiple negative 74.6% of the time. In both
studies indications are that there is much interference from
parent speech in the speech of children 5 to 12 years of
age. In the studies of Labov this is diminishing percentage
depending on the age and academic skills of the child.

3. What different phonological and grammatical forms can
be expected from disadvantaged children?

Although this was not an exhaustive study of the
phonological and grammatical systems of the disadvantaged
child, the language data of the investigation revealed some
aspects of the language behavior of the child from the lower
socio—economic level group in Detroit:

a. Some expectations which can be anticipated in the

phonological system of the disadvantages pre—

 

schooler:

(l) deletion of the stOp consonant /t/ in the
final phonological position (79% of the time).

(2) deletion of the stop consonant /t/ in the
medial position (20% of the time).

(3) deletion of the stOp consonant /d/ in the
final phonological position (50.8% of the time).

It is further suggested that in this aspect of
phenology, the /d/ stop may be substituted for
the /t/ stop in the final position. However,
whether /d/ is realized as /t/ or /d/ phone—
mically, as in "walked," it is deleted by the
disadvantaged:

30% before vowels

36% before consonants, and substituted for
3% before vowels and

9% before consonants.

A.

162

(A) deletion of stop consonant /d/ in the
medial position (33% of the time).

(5) substitution of /n/ for /n/ (83% of the
time).

Some expectations which can be anticipated in the

grammatical system of the disadvantaged pre—

 

schooler:

(l) the "s" inflection: in the noun plurals
(such as, no foods, fishes); and in the
verb 3rd singular (such as, she say it,
he see it); and in pronominal forms (such
as, his self, my's cousins).

(2) the pronoun redundancy: such as in
my cousin she; our baby he

(3) use of the double negative: such as in
we don't have no more; I don't have no
skates; that ain't no dog

(3) the "done" perfective auziliary: such as
in my brother done gone; Mamma done gone
to the barbecue.

How should these forms of phonological and grammatical
behavior be treated in the classroom?

a.

As item drills: The conventional approach to the
teaching of language skills is the item drill in
which each phonological and grammatical item is
taught in isolation and drilled on consistently
and periodically. There is a question as to the
value of this method of language teaching in

terms of its transfer to practical and meaningful
use in other contexts.

As pattern practice drills: This method advocates
the teaching of language usage and phonological

learning by presenting the language patterns in

163

oral practice in the classroom. There is no
identification or description of the language
proceeding this practice and the transfer of
this language behavior has not yet been proved
in research for the pre—schooler or primary
child.

The pattern practice drill has been proved to
be legitimate language teaching when working with
youth of high school age who are motivated to
learn the use of the normative school language
when school success and preparation for college
and work Opportunities are part of the intrinsic
motivation.

c. As switching devices:2 This is the method of
teaching the prestige dialect in such a way that
the child learns that there are linguistic choices
that each individual must make for himself and
that this choice depends upon the circumstances
in which the person finds himself. Identification
and the description of the language preceeds this
method of language instruction and is, therefore,
the method this investigation suggests in the
teaching of language behavior to the disadvantaged.

Roger W. Shuy, director of the Detroit Dialect

 

2Switching devices are the rules by which a speaker of
one social dialect can convert to another social dialect. Such
rules have been illustrated earlier (see Chapter V, for example,
/d/+/t/ (/d/ realized as /t/). These rules are also reversible
so a person whose realization is /t/ might convert to /d/.
(Statement by Roger W. Shuy, personal interview, July, 1967.)

16A

Study, suggests that locating the switching
devices of oral language is no simple task:

Our task is not to erradicate the social dialects

which are inappropriate in the classroom. On one hand
it is uneconomical of our time to approach our job as

a classroom manifestations of the Al Capone syndrome;

on the other hand it is dangerous to deprive our students
of a channel (perhaps the only channel) of communication
with people with whom they live. Perhaps no other
profession has spent as much time on negatives (spelling
demons, jargon, triteness and seven deadly grammatical
sins) and as little time on positives (alternate styles,
alternate appropriate social dialects) than the profes—
sion_owanglish. It has seldom occurred to English
teachers that their customers may want or need to switch
from schoolroom English to playground English as well as
from playground to schoolroom. The switching devices
may be more apprOpriate identifiers of the substance of
our teaching. The ultimate choice of when to use these
switching devices and when not to use them will have to
be made by the speaker. We can't legislate virtue, no
matter how we define it. But we can, and must, provide
the linguistic alternatives.

What linguistic differences in racial or ethnic groups
should be treated in the classroom?

Involved here is the issue of whether Negroes should

be encouraged to talk like whites or the Polish should talk

like other white Detroiters, for example.

This investigation included in its sample only repre—

sentatives of the Negro and Caucasian groups, but the Negro

children were greatly in the majority; there were 141 Negro

children and 15 Caucasians. Regardless of the numbers, how—

ever, the issue here is whether or not children should be

taught a prestige dialect which is different from that of

their disadvantaged home. All groups should be allowed to

 

3Roger W. Shuy, Locating the Switching Devices of Oral

 

Lan ua e (Sacramento, California: NCTE Institute, April 19,
19575, pp

. 12-13.

165

retain their cultural heritage with the knowledge and use of
the prestige dialect which will help them to be adequately
functioning individuals in the society in which they must
live. As suggested in our discussion of locating switching
devices, all school children should be provided the skills

which will help them to do this, if and when they so choose.

Recommendations of this Language Study

 

The recommendations of this study must consider the
first implementer of curriculum change and development, the
classroom teacher herself. The teacher must become positive
rather than negative in her approach to the teaching of
language behavior. Through the data discovered in our
investigation, it was found that the teacher approached the
language problem in the Head Start program with sympathy and
resignation, but little outward hope of teaching success in
this area. Knowledge is confidence and only with a knowledge
of language and children can the teacher hope to be success—

ful in her instructional efforts.

Pre—service Education of Teachers

 

This investigation of language behavior strongly
recommends a closer working relationship be established
between the public schools and teacher education institutions.
In particular, special preparation should be provided for those
students who will teach the disadvantaged. Experiences
should be provided those students who come from a culture

of the middle—class level but who will be expected to

166

identify with the deprived child.

It would seem to me a valuable thing for teachers
to face the kind of dys-functionalities and ambiguities
and problems in teaching children who come from homes
where parents are.missing, children who arrive in
school from children's shelters, children who do not
fit into our classical lockstep in the public school;
in working with families where answers are not so
simple and clean and direct or with families who may
not know of Harvard or the best school in the West
or any of the other kinds of status symbols we all
live with. It seems to me that involving a person
deeply in this for a long period of time is an
absolute prerequisite if teacher education is going
to move in the direction of genuinely attempting to
help people through the classroom situation.

Fortunately, for children of the nation, more and more
of the teacher'educationinstitutions now require language
courses for the elementary teacher in-training. A few of
the institutions provide courses in the history and the
nature of language, phonetics, and lexicography. With the
growth of such courses, the elementary teacher, always con—
sidered a generalist in the field of language, would be
better prepared to understand and work with the child who
needs training in the use of his language; the disadvantaged

child needs this language skill in particular.

lgrservice Education of Teachers

The most difficult and unpredictable element of cur—
riculum change or revision is that which involves the human
being. In a large urban school system of over 10,000 teachers,

such as is the Detroit Public School System, teacher

¥

“Vernon Haubrich, Conference Report: Remaking the
World of the Career Teacher (Washington, D. C.: National
Education Association, 1966), p. A9.

 

167

acceptance is essential, but difficult to achieve because

of size if nothing else. Among a group of professionals

of this number there are those who are not interested in
altering or unwilling to change the habits of their teaching—
lifetimes, whether that experience means five years, twenty
or more. These individuals must be convinced that the
curriculum change is needed, that it is a move in the right
direction and that the development is both practical and
workable in the classroom.

The in-service education programs for teachers in the
Detroit Public Schools are continually conducted for the
instructors by means of workshops. These workshops are
conducted during the school day when released time is pro—
vided, after-school, Saturdays and summers. This investiga—
tion suggests that a number of different specialists be
invited to conduct these workshOps or serve as resource
persons to individuals who direct these sessions. These
specialists should include anthropologists, sociologists,
psychologists, and linguists in particular. The competence
which these other disciplines provide would give the teachers
the knowledge and understanding they need to work with the
disadvantaged children. Educators on the staffs of colleges
and universities should be invited to sit down with the
teachers to discuss particular problems of learning, and
methods of teaching the skills and literary appreciations
which are such an integral part of the education of the

elementary teacher.

168

Additionally, curriculum guides and bulletins can
provide teachers with the materials they need to teach
language skills and appreciations. These materials should
include lesson plans for the teachers, the theory and
practical application of the area under study and other
instructional suggestions to help the in—service education
program for teachers. The curriculum materials, used with
the commercially produced aids, can be the vehicles whereby
the teacher adds to her knowledge of both the nature of
language and the necessary knowledge of children with
particular needs:

Increased effort should be made to provide teachers,

and special assistants for teachers, with background
and the preparation to equip them more adequately

with the skills and understandings to work with
children in the disadvantaged areas.5

5"A Report of the Investigation: Detroit, Michigan,"
A Study of Barriers to Equal Educational Opportunity in a
Large City (Washington, D. C.: National Education Associa—
tion, 1967).

BIBLIOGRAPHY

169

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Books

Bloom, Benjamin 8., Allison Davis, and Robert Hess.
Compensatory Education for Cultural Deprivation.
New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc., 1965.

Gleason, H. A. Introduction to Descriptive Linguistics.
New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc., 1955.

 

Kohl, Herbert R. Teaching the 'Unteachable'. New York:
New York Review Book, 1967.

 

Kurath, Hans. Handbook of the Linguistic Geography of New
England. Providence, Rhode Island: American Council
of Learned Societies, 1939.

Labov, William. The Social Stratification of English in
New York City. Washington, D. C.: Center for
Applied Linguistics, 1966.

Loretan,.Joseph O. and Shelley Umans. Teaching the Dis-
advantaged. New York: Teachers College Press,
Columbia University, 1966.

 

Mueller, John H. and Karl F. Schuessler. Statistical
Reasoning in Sociology. Boston: Houghton Mifflin
Company, 1961.

 

 

Passow, A. Harry (ed.). Education in Depressed Areas.
New York: Teachers College Press, Columbia University,
1963.

Smith, B. Othanel, William 0. Stanley, and J. Harlan
Shores. Fundamentals of Curriculum Development.
New York: World Book Company, 1950.

 

 

Snedecor, G. W. Statistical Methods. Fifth edition. Ames,
Iowa: Iowa State University Press, 1956.

 

Templin, Mildred C. Certain Language Skills in Children:
Their Development and Interrelationships. Minneapolis,
Minnesota: University of Minnesota Press, 1957.

 

Wylie, Joanne. A Creative Guide for Preschool Teachers.
Racine, Wisconsin: Western Publishing Educational
Services, 1965.

 

170

171

Articles and Periodicals

 

Brooks, Charlotte K. "Some Approaches to Teaching English
as a Second Language," Elementary English, November,
1964, pp. 728—733.

 

Crosby, Muriel. "English: New Dimensions and New Demands,"
Dimensions of Dialest, Eldonna L. Evertts (ed.).
Champaign, Illinois: National Council of Teachers
of English, 1967, pp. 1—6.

 

Dailey, John T., Clinton A. eyman, Jr., Dean L. Des Roches.
"Research on Language Facility and Dialect Trans—
formation in Children," Current Social Dialect
Research at American Higher Institutions. Washington,
D. C.: Center for Applied Linguistics, April 11, 1966.

 

Dawkins, John. "Linguistics in the Elementary Grades,"
Elementary English, November, 1965, pp. 762—768.

Davis, Allison. "Teaching Language and Reading to Disadvan-
taged Negro Children,” Elementary English, November,
1965, pp. 791—797.

 

 

Eels, Kenneth, Allison Davis, R. J. Havighurst, Virgil E.
Herrick and Ralph Tyler. ”The Effects of Environment
on Oral Language Development : I," Intelligence and
Cultural Differences, quoted by Frank B. May in
Elementary English, October, 1966, pp. 587—595.

 

 

Ferguson, Charles, "Teaching Standard Languages to Dialect
Speakers," Social Dialects and Language Learning,
Roger W. Shuy (ed.). Champaign, Illinois: National
Council of Teachers of English, 196A, pp. 112—117.

 

Goodman, Kenneth S. "Dialect Barriers to Reading Compre—
hension," Elementary English, December, 1965, pp.
853—860.

Griffith, Albert J. "Linguistics: A Revolution in
Retrospect," Elementary English, May, 1966, pp. 504—
508.

 

Labov, William. "Stages in the Acquisition of Standard
English," Social Dialects and Language Learning,
Roger W. Shuy (ed.). Champaign, Illinois: National
Council of Teachers of English, 196“, pp. 77—10A.

 

Lefevre, Carl A. "Language and Self: Fulfillment or
Trauma?" Part II, Elementary English, March, 1966,
pp. 230—234.

172

 

McDavid, Raven I., Jr. "The Cultural Matrix of American
English," Elementary English, January, 1965, pp. 13—
21.

McDavid, Raven I., Jr. "Social Dialects: Cause or Symptom

of Social Maladjustment," Social Dialects and
Language Learning, Roger W. Shuy (ed.). Champaign,
Illinois: National Council of Teachers of English,
1964, pp. 3-9.

 

Mukerji, Rose and Helen F. Robison. "A Head Start in
Language," Elementary English, May, 1966, pp. 460—463.

 

Stewart, William A. "Urban Negro Speech: Sociolinguistic
Factors Affecting English Teaching," Social Dialects
and Language Learning, Roger W. Shuy (ed.). Champaign,
Illinois: National Council of Teachers of English,
196A, pp. 10—19.

Strang, Ruth and Mary Elas Hooker. "First—Grade Children's
Language Patterns," Elementary English, January,
1965, pp. 38-41.

 

Strickland, Ruth. The Language of Elementary School
Children: Its Relationship to the Language of Reading
Textbooks and the Quality of Reading of Selected
Children. Bulletin No. 38, No. A. Bloomington,
Indiana: Indiana University, July, 1962.

 

Wachner, Clarence W. "Detroit Great Cities School Improve—
ment Program in Language Arts," Elementary School,
November, 1964, pp. 73A—7A2.

 

Waetjin, Walter. "Factors Influencing Learning," South
Carolina Guidance News, October, 1962, pp.

Government Publications

 

College and University Reports. Public Law 89—10, 89th
Cong., H.R. 2362. Washington, D. C.: U. S. Govern-
ment Printing Office, April 11, 1965.

Office of Economic Opportunity. Parents Are Needed, Project:
Head Start. Washington, D. C.: U. S. Government
Printing Office, 1965.

 

Office of Economic Opportunity. Points for Parents, Project:
Head Start. Washington, D. C.: U. S. Government
Printing Office, 1965.

 

 

173

Unpublished Material

 

Enzmann, Arthur M. "Final Report: Project Heat Start."
Detroit, Michigan: Detroit Public Schools, 1965.

 

McDavid, Raven I., Jr. "The Linguistic Atlas Project."
University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois, August
1950.

Riley, William. "Phonological Indices of Social Stratifi—
cation." Unpublished Master's thesis, Michigan State
University, East Lansing, Michigan, 1967.

Rickard, David. "Sociological Correlation of the Allophonic
Variations of Aleveolar Stops in the Speech of High—
land Park School Children." Unpublished Master's
thesis, Michigan State University, East Lansing,
Michigan, 1967.

Shuy, Roger W. "Progress Report of the Detroit Dialect
Study." Michigan State University, East Lansing,
Michigan, 1967.

 

Shuy, Roger W. "Locating the Switching Devices of Oral
Language." Speech delivered at the National Council
of Teachers of English Spring Institute, Sacramento,
California, April 19, 1967.

Thomas, Dominic R. "Oral Language Sentence Structure and
Vocabulary of Kindergarten Children Living in Low
Socio—Economic Urban Areas." Unpublished doctoral

dissertation, Wayne State University, Detroit,
Michigan, 1962.

Wilson, George P. ”Instructions to Collectors of Dialect."
Prepared by the American Dialect Society, Greensboro,
North Carolina, April, 19AM.

Wolfram, Walter A. "Multiple Negation and Social Stratifi—
cation," from the report of the Detroit Dialect
Study, Michigan State University, East Lansing,
Michigan, 1967.

Newspapers

McDavid, Raven”I., Jr. "A Man Who Says 'Hisn' Labels
Hisself Most Dumbest," Detroit Free Press, June 19,
1967.

 

APPENDI CES

 

17A

APPENDIX A

MAP OF THE CITY OF DETROIT
INDICATING SELECTED SCHOOLS INCLUDED IN THE SAMPLE

 

176

 

/ 90
, , o...
A
O
O
I} v. Q C.
o
C
O
O
\I\
1..
«0
wow?
I. 3—03—0’2
o

 

APPENDIX B

THE EIGHT PICTURES INCLUDED IN THE FIRST INTERVIEWS
TO ELICIT THE LANGUAGE OF THE INFORMANTS

 

   

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

,//

 

iol

Dov

182

   

183

 

KIHy

 

 

 

APPENDIX C

LETTER TO PRINCIPALS
WHOSE TEACHERS WERE INCLUDED AMONG

THE SPEECH INFORMANTS

 

186

187

Michigan State University
701 Cherry Lane, Apt. 101
East Lansing, Mich. 48823
January, 1967

Dear , Principal

School

 

During the summer of 1965 and 1966, studies took
place through the courtesy and interest of the Detroit Public
Schools. These studies attempted to identify and describe
the speech of children and adults in Detroit for possible
future in-service training and curriculum revision for
teachers.

At the present time I am on leave from my responsibili—
ties as elementary language arts supervisor for the Detroit
Public Schools and am working at Michigan State University.
It is my purpose to complete the analysis of the 1965 studies
which taped the speech of pre-schoolers, their parents,
and their teachers in the Head Start program.

 

With your kind permission, I would like to speak with
the teacher or teachers on your staff whose names are listed
below:

 

 

 

My discussion with the teacher will again be taped and
will be concerned with the teacher's reactions to and opinions
of Detroit speech. The teacher will be asked to respond to
the following questions:

1. What do you think are the major problems your
children have with vocabulary, grammar, and
pronunciation?

2. In what ways does the language of the parents
influence the children? What problems with
vocabulary, grammar, and pronunciation in the
language of the parents are reflected in the
problems of the child?

The teacher will then be asked to listen and react
to a five minute tape of the speech of children who
were pre—schoolers in the Head Start program.

 

188

I shall contact you by phone in the near future so
that an appointment can be arranged for me to meet with
the teacher, at the convenience of both the school and the
teacher or teachers involved.

Cordially yours,

Anne E. Hughes

 

APPENDIX D

STATEMENT TO TEACHERS
WHO SERVED AS INFORMANTS

FOR THE SECOND INTERVIEWS

 

189

190

PROJECT: HEAD START Teachers will be asked to react to the
following questions:

 

1. What do you think are the major problems your
children have with vocabulary, grammar and
pronunciation?

2. In what ways does the language of the parents
influence children in your class? What problems
with vocabulary, grammar and pronunciation in the
language of the parent are reflected in the
problems of the child?

The teacher will then be asked to listen and react to a five
minute tape of the speech of children who were pre-schoolers
in the Head Start program.

After the teacher's reactions to these questions are
taped, the teacher will be asked to respond to these questions:

 

1. Would you give me your opinion of the Head Start
program as you experienced it?

2. What kinds of toys or materials did you use in
the program?

3. Did the children have anything to eat during the
session in school?

A. Would you name other foods the children might
have had for breakfast at home, before they came
to school for Head Start?

5. We'd like to improve our use of these cards.
Can you tell me how the children responded to
them? Simply tell me in your own words what the
children would have said in describing the
pictures, using nouns and verbs particularly,
please.

APPENDIX E

MAP OF UNITED STATES

INDICATING THE BIRTHPLACES OF THE MAJORITY OF PARENT—

 

INFORMANTS

191

 

192

Com Hmm
.oo .oHC

   

Roo.ooH proe

Ham. . . . . m: ooncso
CHoo HH CCCH mmmq
. . . . . . moomHQCoCHm
mwm mm m2 Mo HmUGHwEwm
ng Hoooe
HmH . . . . . HCCHmmHmmHC
Com . . . . . . . meHomm
&mm . . . . . . . mEQOH¢

”moCmEHOHCHIHCmHmm
Ho moomHQCoHHm

fill /

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

APPENDIX E

TRANSCRIPT OF CHILD AND PARENT SPEECH

TO WHICH THE SECOND—INTERVIEW TEACHERS REACTED

 

I:

C(l):

C(l):

C(2):

C(2):

0(3):

0(3):

0(3):

C(1):

C(2):

C(2):

C(1):

Interviewer; C(1), C(2), etc.,

SPEECH OF CHILDREN AND THEIR PARENTS
HEAD START Program: Detroit Public Schools

Child;

P(l), P(2), etc., Parent

Come over here, children. You just came in, didn't
you? How did you get to school, Kenny?
Walked.

Your sister went with the other children to the picnic.
How did she get to the bus?

My mamma she tooked her.

Are you making a cake, Carolyn?

 

Yah.

How do you make a cake anyway? Tell me.

You take that there thing and you put the stuff in
here — and then you — then you — put some more stuff
in there.

That sounds good, Carolyn. Why are you playing, Honey?
I don't have no things to play with there.

What would you like to play with?

A bike.

Do you have a bike at home?

No.

I done got me a bike. My sister she got a bike.

I‘m gonna get me one.

Where did you go yesterday, children?

To church.

What do you do in church? Anyone of you tell me.

Singing and telling stories.

19A

195

I: Don't you pray to God, too, children?
C(2): Sometimes.
C(3): I like God.
I: Can anyone of you count to ten?
C(1): I can.
C(3): Me too.
C(2): I can count to ten hundreds.
I: Let's hear you. Carolyn, you go first.

C(2): One - two — three — four — five - six — seven — eight —
nine — ten hundreds.

C(1): That wrong.

 

I: Let's hear you tell me all the colors you know, Kenny,
can you?

C(1): Red — green — blue — yellow.

I: What's your favorite color, Madeline?
C(3): Red.

1: Why is that your favorite color?
C(3): 'Cause it's pretty.

I: Children, what are your favorite toys to play with
here at school?

C(3): Dolls and doll houses.
C(1): Trucks and cars and sometimes blocks.

C(2): I likes dolls and doll buggy.

I: Does your child come to school alone, Mrs. ?

P(l): I feel that Kenny — ah - could come alone but he
sometimes walks with the other kids.

I: What about your child, Mrs. ?

P(2):

P(l):

P(2):

P(2):

P(l):

P(2):

P(2):

P(l):

P(2):

196

Well, my daughter she — well — I have other kids in
school and she come with them every morning. But
she — I know — could come alone 'cause she Visited
the school quite often before. She not afraid of
anyone and she done wanna cross the street and
everything, you know.

Do the children enjoy Head Start, would you say?

I think he enjoys it. They talk about it all day when
they come home from school. They even play school
after they get home.

I think Carolyn she really loves it. Even though I
think they should not call this school for the
deprived. My child she's not deprived. But — ah —
some of the children are on our block.

Do you think that all mothers feel this way about
the program.

No, some send their kids just to get rid of them -
get them out of the house.

I enjoy my kids. I don't want to get rid of them.
Sometimes I go running around with them. Some days
we don't do nothing but go visiting.

This project is a good thing - a really wonderful
thing for 'em - you know — . During the days before -
noon after noon, you know — they always take a nap —
but now I know where they are. They're at school at
least.

What exactly do you think this program does for your
children?

I think some children are not quite ready for
kindergarten. My son wasn't and — ah — the ones
that are are shy or can't get along with other
children. They don't have no kids their own age at
home.

I think they learn more in the Kindergarten and the
fifth grades than any other.

Do you find that the children like the books at all?
Do they talk about stories at home after school?

Well, Carolyn she does like stories. If the teacher
read any story in school she-talks about it all the
day. And she love to talk about it and I talk along
with her about it — and — ah — I get to know the story.

 

P(2):

P(2):

P(l):

P(l):

P(2):

P(2):

197

Does she ever talk about reading a story?

She loves reading books and going to the library and
everything. She tries to hide from me 'cause she
talks to the pictures — and she really thinks that
reading, you know.

Do you ever go to the library with her, Mrs. ?

Oh, yes. I really enjoy the library part. I read
some of the books and then Carolyn she tells me the
story.

I always take my boy to the library. He gets a lot
of books sometimes.

Do you ever bring home a book for yourself, Mrs. ?
No, but I help Kenny when he wants to read a story.

We always bring all the books home for the kids. I
don't have time to read what with the kids and the
house to keep.

Do you remember any of their favorite stories?

Well now, this morning, you know. I get him ready
for school - my big boy and his sister. Carolyn she
say she read a story about three bears that come from
the library. She was showing me the mamma bear,
father bear and baby bear. She was showing me the
mamma bear — no, how did she do it? Oh — how the
little girl ate the baby bear's porridge. So she

ask me what's that? I explain it's like cereal, so
then she know.

 

 

    

IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII

llUllllllllllIIIIHIAllIIIIWIlillllllliWHIIIHIIIIIIH