From at a different pace than their

From the moment we are born, our environment
prepares us for this journey we call life. We learn to communicate both
verbally and non-verbally.  In my opinion and based on three studies,
socioeconomic status, the child’s gender, the amount of language they hear from
their caregivers, word mapping, and social intent all effect the child’s
vocabulary size. According to Spencer, Clegg, & Stackhouse, “the links between socioeconomic disadvantage
and early language development are well documented with reports of up to 50% of
young children from areas of socioeconomic is advantage having language delay. According
to Pasek, Golinkoff, and Hennon (2006), research states girls showed a quasi-linear
positive gain in language across secondary school, while boys began with a
decline and then accelerated.  

To begin with, socioeconomic status is
categorized an individual’s or family’s social status regarding income and
occupation. I believe children from a low socioeconomic status have a
disadvantage in learning language as opposed to a higher socioeconomic status.
Language acquisition is the process that humans can perceive, dissect, and
understand language. Much research has been conducted on infants and children
to support this. According to Spencer, Clegg, and Stackhouse (2012), many young children in that are from areas of
social disadvantage learn words at a different pace than their peers that are
more advantaged. Many studies have been published to support
this. However, one study wanted to focus on young adolescents to get a bigger
picture on the long-term effects of vocabulary size in students from a low
socioeconomic background. The study was conducted on participants ages 9-16 in
two different schools. One school contained children from low socioeconomic
backgrounds while the other school contained participants from a background of
socioeconomic advantage.   These students
were assessed on receptive skill at word kills and nonverbal word skills. The
results suggested that students from a lower socioeconomic background scored
significantly lower on all language measures. I believe if more studies were to
be conducted the data would remain relatively the same.  

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!


order now

            Next, gender plays a major role in vocabulary
acquisition. In this modern day, women are still fighting for equality. For
many years, we’ve literally been put to the backburner in terms of education,
jobs, and social statuses.  Data is now
supporting that girls are now outperforming boys. According to the article School
Engagement and Language Achievement, girls are showing a much better
performance than boys on almost all educational outcomes. Moreover,
woman are now entering in to fields that are stereotypically led by men.  So why is the boys are now the under
achievers? A major determination factor falls under the fact that boys tend to
be less engaged in school than girls (Van de gaer, leuven, pustjens, Damme,
& Munter, 2009).

Many studies that have been conducted have
shown that there are little to no gender differences in elementary school. The
difference begins to appear in secondary school. A research conducted among
secondary students found that there a big decline in boys attitudes towards
homework and effort for language. An interesting factor was that the data also
revealed boys were less interested in learning tasks too as opposed to girls. The
research on language achievement in both genders in secondary school was
interesting. The data revealed boys showed less learning girls but only during
the first 2 years of secondary school. 
In retrospect many factors that affect boys could include puberty.  Nevertheless, as you can see gender does
affect language.

Finally, language acquisition is the process that
humans can perceive, dissect, and understand language. According to Hennon,
Pasek, Golinkoff, (2006) an essential task in language inquisition is mapping
words on to objects, actions, and events. This process is phenomenal. Babies
can map and associate words such as mommy to figures and objects.  A
suggested theory is they will only do this that are perpetually interesting and
fascinating to them. Children are sensitive to social information (Hennon,
Pasek, Golinkoff, 2006). This means that babies are listening and watching both
our verbal and nonverbal cues. If the person shows excitement verbally and
nonverbally; such as pointing or smiling when teaching a new word, the child
will most likely retain information even if the object is not fascinating. In a
study titled  Are
10-Month-Olds Mapping Words to Objects or to Spatial Locations,
the purpose was to see if two interpretations or words to objects and word to
spatial location.  Infants were exposed
to boring and interesting objects. What the data revealed was infants
are learning words or are at least mapping words onto perceptually salient
objects in their environment. 
Coincidently, interesting objects regardless of social cues were easier
for them to map. The results of this experiments showed that
social input is what paves the way to early vocabulary.  Furthmore, the study shows that infants begin
relying less on their own perspective and more on learning words to learning.
Concepts like this are amazing to draw on. Word mapping and social input
regardless play a role in learning language (Hennon, Pasek, Golinkoff,
2006)

In
conclusion, many factors effect a child’s vocabulary size. In my
opinion and based on three studies, socioeconomic status, the child’s gender,
and word mapping and social intent are all major factors that affect language
acquisition.  Children of low socioeconomic
status have a great disadvantage in regards to language acquisitions.  Research on gender and vocabulary size show
girls are outperforming boys. Also, word mapping and social interest on objects
help children develop better language skills. 

x

Hi!
I'm Joan!

Would you like to get a custom essay? How about receiving a customized one?

Check it out