Quote:
Originally Posted by
ellemenopeÂ

Unless you are a native speaker yourself in a language, I really don't think there is that great a benifit to teach a foreign language to your DC. I have learned many languages to fluency and this is my conclusion. Arabic is my strongest foreign language, and it really seems pointless to me to speak that around my DD. I am about as fluent as one can be having learned the language as an adult, but I am not a native, and I am always reminded of that when I speak with one. What could be gained only by learning a language as a young child would not transpire with me as her sole teacher. Sure we count in foreign languages, and every now and then I will use some fun phrases. It is much the same as Dora or Kai (lun? I dunno. We don't watch these). They get some exposure but they are not being exposed to the more subtle and complex components of language. We are not going into the subjunctive.  My DD still cannot pronounce the Arabic 'ayn' or 'kha' like a native, because I cannot. I have concluded that Spanish would be a better idea to expose DD to, but it would not be in the same vein I feel is perpetuated by studies and products claiming babies to be language genii or that there is a closing window of opportunity to learn tones or be accent-less. It is just useful to know, and so easy to learn.
I have to disagree with this. I knew a guy who grew up in Mexico (both parents were Mexican but the father was an English teacher, but not a native speaker). Anyways, the father always spoke English with him and when I met this guy (he was an adult by then) he spoke English fluently. Sure, he had a slight accent but it was definitely worth his years of speaking with his dad. Also, why assume that the parent would be the sole teacher? Even with a less common language like Arabic you could most likely find other speakers around through playgroups, meet-ups etc (ok, assuming you live in a city at least...). If you live in a university town it's even easier.
Â
I've also known people who have raised their children in churches that are not in their native language and again it was very much worth it in that the kids did master the language over the years.Â
Â
The key is, though, that constant exposure is needed. That's why schools fall short so often. They teach Spanish in English
, they wait until kids are in middle school and even then only do minimal exposure to the alphabet/numbers, and then they only have class twice a week. In order to really learn a language you need to be in an environment where you have consistent exposure with fluent speakers of that language (not necessarily native speakers but that obviously helps when it comes to the accent). That certainly can happen even if the parents don't speak that language but it would take consistent effort over the years on the parents part.Â
Â
Â
Quote:
Originally Posted by
sapphire_chanÂ

Did they factor in that just sitting with a parent activates the baby's social brain? Oh, I see, they just did the same presentation live and then videotaped. They didn't show a video and have a second adult interact with the baby about the video. In fact it even looks like the video presentation was less interactive than the in person session. (i.e. the videotaped adult didn't even pretend to be presenting to someone, wasn't leaning in to engage the audience, and such. I think it would've been a better test to video tape the live session and then show THAT recording to the video test group.)
Â
My experience was that I tried to sign with dd from birth off and on. Nothing. She was older than everyone else's babies started signing at least one sign. Then she saw a Signing Time dvd with her cousins, and started signing immediately. One time watching a dvd and she started using the language skill that I had been trying to introduce to her with no success.
Â
I immediately put all the Signing Time dvds on hold at the library. And she learned most of the signs covered in those dvds (I did too, because I watched them with her.) Now, I will say that it was all vocabulary, but that was still good language development in a pre-verbal infant.
Â
Â
Not that it really matters, because that lecture is discussing phoneme perception in pre-verbal infants and the OP is concerned about language acquisition in a highly-verbal toddler and there are tons of preschoolers who learn at least vocabulary from videos. Particularly if it's backed up with parental interaction.
Â
Â
Great points. I can't watch that video at this time but I've read some similar articles and there's a lot missing from the studies. There's a big difference between parents who supplement their child's language learning experience with TV/DVD and those who rely entirely on the TV/DVDs.Â
Â
I've seen DD pick up a number of words from TV. DD's bilingual in Portuguese and English and she watches Dora. Well, we've actually had to correct her a number of times because she was mixing Portuguese and Spanish (DH and I do not speak any Spanish, although we understand quite a bit) since they sound similar. Often she'll pick up words from the TV show and use them in her day-to-day life (ditto for a few Chinese words from Kai Lan).Â
Â
I think a bit part of this too is how interested the child is in the show itself. DD loves Dora/Kai Lan and is constantly begging to watch it (obviously, we don't let her watch it all day, though). That being said, if you put on certain TV shows in Portuguese she would ignore them entirely and obviously learn 0 vocab words because of it (unless it's Monica, which she loves, and picks up way more than I'd like for her to!).Â
Â
And I definitely agree about the difference between preverbal infants and highly verbal toddlers. We didn't let DD watch any TV until she was already speaking some. However, even from the beginning of her days watching TV she would mention things about the shows and try to follow along. I just can't imagine that happening with a preverbal infant (who knows, maybe I'm wrong?).
Â