Friday, 14 October 2016

English language investigation:
Piagets theory:
'according to Piaget, children don't talk about a subject until they are ready to understand it'

I don't want to make my investigation have any ethological factors and therefore i'm not going to force him to play with anything he wouldn't normally play with to make it reliable but also I want to try and encourage him to play with things he doesn't play with as much as other things to see how he reacts to talking about things he isn't to confident with talking about.

-record my brother talking to my mum when his playing with his toys
-write out a transcript of when he talks about what he is playing with
-get him to play with different things, some of which he wont know what it is and see what he has to say about it.
-see how my mum responds to what he says when he doesn't know what he's talking about.
-see weather he stops talking all together or weather he will ask questions to learn about the subject or just relate it to things he already knows about that are in a similar lexical field.

Tuesday, 19 April 2016

'The solution to (nearly) everything: working less' This is the headline for the article from the guardian. This is an effective title as according to Grice's maxims, the level of quantitate information if powerful as it doesn't give away too much or too little about the article as it hooks the readers attention however it doesn't give away too much that they no longer need to read the article.

'Excessive work and pressure are status symbols. But overtime is deadly. If we worked less we’d make fewer errors, address inequality and have a better life' This is the strapline taken form the guardian article, this is also a gripping strapline as it summarises the article well however it doesn't tell the story. This strapline is interesting to the targeted target audience and therefore makes it successful as is persuades people to read the article.

'What does working less solve? I’d rather turn the question around. Is there anything that working less does not solve?’' This is the caption displayed below a picture of people working in an office. This is using effective imagery. ( in the exam if you are asked to write an article then use square brackets on an online news paper articles to represent information that wouldn't be read e.g. images or hyperlinks.) This is also a good use of paraphrasing as it is a way of communicating without using written text but by communicating through different ways.

Facts and quotes:
-In 2000, countries such as the UK and the US were already five times as wealthy as in 1930.
-The western standard of living would multiply to at least four times that of 1930 within a century. By his calculations, in 2030 we’d be working just 15 hours a week.
-In return, they could put in not 40 hours a week for all those years, but perhaps just 20-30.
-(a recent poll found that as many as 37% of British workers think they have a “bullshit job”).

This is a good thing to include (added information which is going to aid your description and explaining of your subject or some wider research that is going to benefit the readers understanding.) without this you wouldn't interest the readers as much nor would they understand what you're trying to communicate as fully as they may do with added information and facts.

Discourse markers:
In fact
Yet
Take climate change.
or, better yet
Overtime is deadly.
Obviously,
Furthermore,
Multiple/ a variety in discourse markers makes a piece of text effective as it allows the reader to know when a new idea is going to be addressed but also it allows the text to flow more as well as be more concise and coherent which limits waffling and losing the interest of the reader.

Short sentences:
Leisure.
Take climate change.
Overtime is deadly.

short sentences are effective as they add sentence structure and sentence variety which alters the length of reading time for the reader and makes it flow more concisely.

Speech on language:

Students leaving university.

Miss, Ms, Mrs and Mr…

Hello! I’d like to start by thanking you all for coming today. My name is Amy, and I’m here to talk to you a little bit about the English language and how the male population are being presented to be the dominant figure due to the huarache they have inherited, however I am here to express my opinion and hopefully make you change your perspective of this idea.

Firstly, I’d like to start by just getting you to think about why women have so many titles depending on their status compared to men. Why do women need to change their title to show whether they are married or not? Is this because they are seen to be the weaker sex? Because society makes those who aren’t married when they are middle aged to be ashamed of themselves as they aren’t a Mrs and the idea that Miss sounds like the title given to a young girl?

According to the study by Zimmerman and west, two theorists in the 70’s suggest that men are more dominant than women due to the way they speak as men interrupt more than women suggesting they are dominant as they dictate the way the conversation goes. This theory is supported by Lakoff’s, another theorist from the 70’s that women’s language is more deficient than men’s this is again showing that women are thought to be of less importance than men as they are seen to be the weaker and more deficient sex which makes people’s views of them lower than what they would have of a male.

When you get letters through your door do you ever stop and read who it is addressed to properly? Have you ever read the envelope of the post addressed to your parents? For example ‘Mr and Mrs Mark Jones’ both the woman and the male have their mail addressed to them under the males name. Why is it that women have to take the males name? Are we owned by them?

Tuesday, 8 March 2016

DAILY MAIL http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1153583/Social-websites-harm-childrens-brains-Chilling-warning-parents-neuroscientist.html

Social websites harm children's brains: Chilling warning to parents from top neuroscientist

Social networking websites are causing alarming changes in the brains of young users, an eminent scientist has warned.
Sites such as Facebook, Twitter and Bebo are said to shorten attention spans, encourage instant gratification and make young people more self-centred.
The claims from neuroscientist Susan Greenfield will make disturbing reading for the millions whose social lives depend on logging on to their favourite websites each day.

Facebook founder and CEO Mark Zuckerberg. The popular website has made him a very rich man, but at what cost to human relationships?

But they will strike a chord with parents and teachers who complain that many youngsters lack the ability to communicate or concentrate away from their screens.
More than 150million use Facebook to keep in touch with friends, share photographs and videos and post regular updates of their movements and thoughts.
A further six million have signed up to Twitter, the 'micro-blogging' service that lets users circulate text messages about themselves.
But while the sites are popular - and extremely profitable - a growing number of psychologists and neuroscientists believe they may be doing more harm than good.
Baroness Greenfield, an Oxford University neuroscientist and director of the Royal Institution, believes repeated exposure could effectively 'rewire' the brain.

Experts are concerned children's online social interactions can 'rewire' the brain

Computer games and fast-paced TV shows were also a factor, she said.
'We know how small babies need constant reassurance that they exist,' she told the Mail yesterday.
'My fear is that these technologies are infantilising the brain into the state of small children who are attracted by buzzing noises and bright lights, who have a small attention span and who live for the moment.'

Professor Susan Greenfield: Concerned

Her comments echoed those she made during a House of Lords debate earlier this month. Then she argued that exposure to computer games, instant messaging, chat rooms and social networking sites could leave a generation with poor attention spans.
'I often wonder whether real conversation in real time may eventually give way to these sanitised and easier screen dialogues, in much the same way as killing, skinning and butchering an animal to eat has been replaced by the convenience of packages of meat on the supermarket shelf,' she said.
Lady Greenfield told the Lords a teacher of 30 years had told her she had noticed a sharp decline in the ability of her pupils to understand others.
'It is hard to see how living this way on a daily basis will not result in brains, or rather minds, different from those of previous generations,' she said.
She pointed out that autistic people, who usually find it hard to communicate, were particularly comfortable using computers.
'Of course, we do not know whether the current increase in autism is due more to increased awareness and diagnosis of autism, or whether it can - if there is a true increase - be in any way linked to an increased prevalence among people of spending time in screen relationships. Surely it is a point worth considering,' she added.
Psychologists have also argued that digital technology is changing the way we think. They point out that students no longer need to plan essays before starting to write - thanks to word processors they can edit as they go along. Satellite navigation systems have negated the need to decipher maps.
A study by the Broadcaster Audience Research Board found teenagers now spend seven-and-a-half hours a day in front of a screen.
Educational psychologist Jane Healy believes children should be kept away from computer games until they are seven. Most games only trigger the 'flight or fight' region of the brain, rather than the vital areas responsible for reasoning.
Sue Palmer, author of Toxic Childhood, said: 'We are seeing children's brain development damaged because they don't engage in the activity they have engaged in for millennia.

'I'm not against technology and computers. But before they start social networking, they need to learn to make real relationships with people.'

TEXT 2:
http://www.mumsnet.com/Talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/1350040-Parents-being-Facebook-friends-with-teachers