Does Skinners theory back up Rachaels first words?
Rachaels first words support Skinners theory because the majority of Racheals words are words that would often be repeated in her daily routine by her parents/careers, meaning that she would be able to imitate them and learn them for rewards. Eg her parents would probably often say to her 'more?' as in if she wants more food etc. and she would repeat it learning that when she says it, she would be rewarded by getting more.
Words such as 'mummy' and 'daddy' also support Skinners theory, when she repeats the words she would be rewarded by the parents going to her etc. They are words that would most likely be the most often heard in her daily routine too.
But also; one of Rachaels first words is 'wassat' which shows she is trying to repeat words she has heard, the missing sounds are the least stressed words which shows that she is listening and trying to repeat the words by listening to the sounds made. Skinners theory said that children learn through language by repeating words and then receiving rewards (positive reinforcement), and this supports it as she is clearly trying to repeat words that she has heard before.

Child language acquisition:
What does this say about how a child learns language?
The words in the categories tell us that children learn nouns quicker than any other category. This may be due to these words being used more often. Nouns are probably more incorporated within the child's daily routine, meaning they hear them more and can more easily put the word and object together. For example. two of the child's first words are 'sock' and 'shoe' this could be explained by every time a parent and the child leave the house, the parent could say 'now we must put on your shoes' and then carrying out the action of putting on the child's shoes places the object and the word together for the child. Being able to have a physical meaning behind the word that the child can associate together is probably more easily remembered/learnt than a word that is more of a concept, eg something being too hot.

The lack of adjectives could be down to the idea that before the child can communicate their satisfaction/dissatisfaction or preferences they first must learn the words that get them what they need. Satisfaction/dissatisfaction can also be shown be sounds or body language, not necessarily words, for example crying if they're too hot or hungry. But words such as 'poo', 'toast', 'cup', 'spoon' etc can not be communicated by a sound easily, or at all. If the child wants toast or a cup etc it must learn to ask for one, by saying the one word of what it is wanting it can convey their meaning. This could be another reason why nouns are by far the biggest category of learnt words.

However; there are also a lot of personal words such as 'hello', 'hiya', 'no', 'yes', 'ta' and 'please'. This is probably due to the parents trying to teach their child basic politeness. When giving the child something, the parents might now allow the child to take the object until they say 'ta'. This makes the word important to the child, as they will soon learn to get what they want they must say 'ta'. The same for 'please'. They are also very common words to be heard in everyday language, again repeating the idea that repetition is an important factor for children when learning new words.

'Ta' is obviously short for 'thank you' this shows us that children may learn their language is smaller sounds and then build them up to make the full word. At the age the child is when they say 'ta' they may not have developed the sounds needed to say the full 'thank you'. Later on as they hear the words 'thank you' more, they may start to learn how to make the necessary sounds needed. The child also says 'wassat' as in 'whats that' put together, again repeating the idea that children need to learn the sounds to make the words they are trying to communicate. Over time as the child hears the words more often they may become more familiar with the sounds and be able to say the two words separately.

Twitter discussion: 

We choose this screenshot of Twitter to look at because it is a little amount of data for us, meaning we can analyse it in more detail. One tweet that we looked at was a 'promoted' tweet which shows up on every ones twitter feed, this shows influential power as they are trying to persuade everyone who see's the tweet to read it and advertise their site. Within that tweet there are links to other websites making it easier for the audience to find the site and easily navigate their way through all the pages. The tweet also uses the phrase 'you must get this' which includes the imperative 'must', which the suggest consequences if you don't, but there aren't any. But the effect on the reader makes what evers being advertised sound like they need to have it, no choice.

One person featured a few times in the screenshot used a lot of The Game of Thrones jargon as well, which you wouldn't be able to understand having not read/seen it.

Retweets also shows influential power because people think they are worth being retweeted for their followers and the tweet or maybe the person writing the tweets has influenced them into making that decision. 

Analysis: In The Apprentice there are many more interruptions and overlaps than the Lower Than Atlantis interview, this is probably down the competition of The Apprentice meaning the participants are all fighting for their right to stay in the show. The Lower Than Atlantis interview however; is more informal and a chance for their fans to find out more about them, and for the band to update them on their current work and future plans, therefore it's not competitive. Also in The Apprentice, particularly participant 'P' pushes all the blame onto this fellow player 'L', in a very forceful way by saying she's 'trouble', creating a hostile environment, compared to the Lower Than Atlantis interview which is friendly and warm.
In both transcripts there is a more dominant participant, in The Apprentice it is 'P' who interrupets and speaks a lot more than other participants, in the interview is it is 'M' who is the lead singer of the band, this suggests both of these have higher levels of confidence and perhaps even a bigger role to play in the purpose. 'P''s purpose is to save himself as he seems to be the target of the most criticism, even though he tries to push it on to 'L' and 'M' because he is probably the most well recognisable and the fans can connect with him more than other members.

M: My name is Hans
D: And my name is Jock
M: And we are from Iron Maiden ya.(0.5) Uh, not really(0.5) I'm Mike and this is(0.5) Declan Heart the third (1)
D: Esquire
M Esquire and we're from Lower Than Atlantis and we're not very funny so, sorry
Interviewer: um(0.5) second time playing Slam Dunk, is it right? What's changed since last time do you feel?
M: Um(.5) about twelve months(0.5) uh the stage 'cus we played (0.5)
D: Last year we played the smallest stage at about the same time we played the main stage this year(0.5) so (0.5) in a year we've gone up four five stages so that's cool
Interviewer: uhm um that's a it's a good year then so has ah um la last year been a good year for you?
Mike: Yeah(0.5) it definitely has um here we(0.5) I'm so sorry we're a bit flustered because we just played but uh(0.5) I don't really know what to say to that (0.5) yeah it's been good(0.5) isn't in a nutshell (0.5) we signed to a prestigious label (0.5) um we (0.5) since then we've played our first ever head line tour and it sold out everyday in presale which was great and good fun um umm lalalala (1)
D: yeaaaaah
M: yes
Interviewer: How is it, how was it on stage for this show?
M: Absolutely great it was really well received um we had good fun while we were there very hot (0.5) um on stage wasn't great and that's a f****** understatement (0.5) can I say f******? Yeah f*****' hell (0.5) um yeah it was great thanks to everyone who watched us if you're watching this
Interviewer: Um you were saying about um signing to Island um what made ya make the jump make you sign to a major?
D: Money/
M: /Well nothing else/ (0.5) nothing else came along so we thought f*** it yeah alright then was it really(0.5) I dont know(0.5) um everything we've done so far as a band...

P: Well I am arrogant, I am a big head and it's like I said to you last week, it needs slappin' out of us and I think this way I can improve incredibly(0.5)I was responsive of Lorraine and effectively we lost the task(0.5)I was project manager last task(0.5)and no one was bitchin' about me at the end of the day and we won(0.5)
SAS: If I remember rightly that last task was fools win wasn't it↑ Didn't the other team just bomb out badly and/
W: /Yes
SAS: Yeah/
P: /It was a tough/
SAS: /You didn't make any money
P: No but it was a tough - task sir Alan/
SAS: /No but you didn't make any money
P: But we won
SAS: You won by default you lost money and you won by default
P: Yeah well I can't seem to do any right(0.5)
SAS: Listen don't get impatient with me(0.5)Philip you know/
P: /I'm not sir Alan it's just you know it's just I can't seem to say anything right, you criticize Lorraine I get in the nick(0.5)I win as project manager and get in the nick(0.5) I can't do anything right!
SAS: That's all you've done today Philip is criticize Lorraine if you come out with anything else constructive um I might listen to you that's all you've done from the minute you walked through that door today
P: because she's trouble Sir Alan she's trouble(0.5) week after week after week you'll get this again and again and again/
L: /trouble↑/
P: /right before, I think I've been one of the outstanding candidates over the past few weeks I've/
SAS: /woah, well listen look look (0.5) look you know the the body rocker thing↑
P: yeah/
SAS: /I think this bleedin' things gone to your head or what okay you've done well there/
P: /yes/
SAS: /yeah and  the design of it okay but that's it you know one(0.5) swallow don't make it summer (0.5) you understand, 'cus since then you hadn't done that great/ from my understanding
P: /well I sold three of them last week Sir Alan
M: Tell us about pants man (3.0)
SAS: Kate
K: yep
SAS: What I can not understand and what I can not get my head around/
K: /yes/
SAS: /is how you can go from hero to zero↓ You didn't sell one thing this week
K: Believe me, there's no one more frustrated about the day/ than I am
SAS: /Are you sure it wasn't a case of you wanted her to fall on her sword↑
P: It's /Lorraines fault
K: /I am abs- I'm absolutely positive, I expected to be here today on the back up having no orders because that just isn't acceptable, but I believe I've performed consistently throughout all of the tasks and that's been the reason I've not been in the final three in the board room↓

The Dominance theory (1975)

Robin Lakoff

The Dominance theory says that in a mixed gender conversation, men are more likely to interrupt than women. Lakoff tries to get away from the deficit theory (which says female language is weak in comparison to the male language), and instead consider men’s language as dominant, but still, not better than the female language. However; Lakoff says that women lack authority, seriousness, faith in themselves and principle.

Some of the ways women’s language may be perceived as being the; are techniques such as tag questions, these are questions that follow a declarative sentence, for example: ‘This is nice, isn’t it?’ or ‘I should, shouldn’t I?’, fillers, such as words like ‘um’ or any break in the text filled with a verbal noise which usually has no meaning-for example ‘I think you should, um, urrrr…’, intensifiers, this is words like ‘very’, ‘completely’, ‘better’ etc… Anything that puts emphasis on the meaning or phrase, in context; ‘isn’t she very pretty’ and ‘I completely understand’, hypercorrect grammar: using grammar incorrectly to perhaps look better, formally or intellectually and hedging, which is things that weaken a sentence, and therefore make it lack in authority or declaration and show query, for example ‘I suppose I can’ or ‘I sort of can’

Here is an advert with a tagged question: http://www.printwand.com/blog/media/2013/08/example-advertising-question-with-answer.jpg

If this was used in woman’s language, according to Lakoff it could be considered a sign of weakened language compared to men’s. But in this advert it clearly is thought provoking and effective. The question at the end; ‘don’t they?’ perhaps makes parents (who I think are the target audience of this advert) think and reminisce about either children they have who have grown up, or young children and thinking about their future. This doesn’t show weakness, but that they are looking for you to think about the topic they are introducing, and getting the audience involved.

http://www.eclipse-creative.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/premier-foods-adverts2.jpg

Bibliography:

http://oliviatrippaslanguage.blogspot.co.uk/2012/03/three-ds-deficit-dominance-and.html

http://www.universalteacher.org.uk/lang/gender.htm#dominance

High frequency lexis grouping:
Text B-Recipe that appeared in a cookery magazine in 2004
Text C: An extract from a children's story called Mr Bump Loses his memory'
Text E: Transcript from a transaction in a newspaper's shop.
Text F: An extract from an IM conversation, taken from an internet forum.

In all four texts, high frequency lexis is used to communicate in an easy and understandable manner. The recipe in text B uses easy and straight forward sentences so the readers and can easily follow the instructions. Again; if the language was too difficult for people to understand, then the purpose of teaching people to cook the cake is pointless, as they wouldn't understand what they're supposed to be doing. Text C uses easy language so the children who are reading the book will understand what's happening, this helps with the purpose of entertaining the children, as if the language was too difficult then they wouldn't be able to understand and therefore not find it entertaining. Text E and F is a transcript/extract from a transcript, showing high frequency, everyday language, as they are performing everyday tasks, it would be unnecessary and not normal to have low frequency lexis. When having a conversation in a newspaper shop, you don't use high terminology, the purpose-in this case-is to settle his newspaper account, this doesn't take a huge amount of conversion or intellectual language. Nor does the conversation from the internet forum, which uses a lot of nonstandard language and abbreviations, perhaps because it is easier to type these that the whole word or sentence.

Text A: Extract from Obama's speech:

'The majority of those who died today were children - beautiful, little kids between the ages of 5 and 10 years old. They had their entire lives ahead of them - birthdays, graduations, weddings and kids of their own. Among the fallen were also teachers, men and women who dedicated their lives to helping out children fulfill their dreams.'

Text B: Advert

'YOU WON'T TELL YOUR MUMMY, WILL YOU? 

If this makes you feel uncomfortable, imagine it makes them feel'

The obvious link between these two pieces are the common theme of children and danger, although the second one is a little more ambiguous and a different form, the purpose of both is still the same. They both are attempting to stand up for the innocence of children and stop a awful situation from happening - Obama being school shootings and gun use in general and the advert is to stop child abuse. Both maintain the image of the children being innocent and, in a way, weak. They portray a dominant adult state, perhaps giving the feeling that the older generation should be supporting and looking after them, and hinting at a degree of responsibility. This is shown by the 'your mummy' from text B, 'your mummy' is meant to be looking after you and guiding you, if something has happened that's not right, which is what this advert is hinting at, your parents should be among the first to know so they can support you. In turn; being responsible for them and their well-being. 

However; the obvious difference is the hiding from the adult figure in text B and the loss that is shown in text A. In text A, the children are directly addressed - 'beautiful little kids...' - but in text B they are simply referred to as 'them', showing isolation and distance, this advert is not supposed to be aimed at children, and neither is the Obama's speech, but in text B they purposely don't use the word children, other than the fact of it being unneeded, it is a bigger impact since the identity is hidden, this could be any child, and not only is it child, its plural ('them'). Text A takes the approach of sympathy and empathy with the parents and teachers of the children, although Obama didn't know anything about these children, he still says they were 'beautiful' and would go on to have various occasions happen to them, such as birthdays and weddings etc, this plays with the emotions because although the primary purpose is to show his support for the families, it is also trying to say we need to do something about this, facing the situation of guns etc.. 

However; text B is simply about advertising and promoting the safety of children and bringing attention to the fact that child abuse is a thing and we do need to do something about it.

Target: trying to improve my explanations with the x does y to z strategy.
Task: Bullet pointing ideas using the strategy using different forms of text from the internet or newspapers. This will help me develop ideas and points I make to do with audience, form and purpose as every point I make about each individual audience, form or purpose will be stringed along with the other two, developing my work further.

Piece 1 (political speech): Video clip: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mwv5Q4R3pbM
Transcript: http://www.npr.org/2012/12/14/167275881/transcript-president-obamas-remarks-on-conn-school-shooting

Piece 2 (Educating Essex): Teacher: So, because you obviously want to pass your Art GCSE you made sure you went in to Mr Gowers coursework detention?
Student: Yeah, but I forgot
Teacher: There we are, thank you very much
Student: Ugh, that's silly though
Teacher: Sorry, do you want me to let you fail your GCSE's?
Student: I'm not going to fail!
Teacher: Do you want me to let you fail?
Student: No, but...
Teacher: ...unfortunately when your teacher says you need to do some study work, coursework, revision work or whatever, you need to attend. Okay, thank you, next.

Interview:
Interviewer: So nice to meet you, I'm a huge fan
No, I'm a huge fan
Interviewer: You're so incredibly talented in, in everything you do and I love this new movie that we'll talk about, and so um this really has been a couple of years for you, this kind of attention right?
Yeah, it hasn't been very long
Interviewer: Yeah, and are you used to it?
Totally! It's bizarre, but most of it actually centres in LA, so as soon as I leave LA, like nobody knows who I am or really cares so um
Interviewer: Really? Not yet!
It's almost offensive, so yeah if I'm in LA
Interviewer: You could carry around the magazines you're on the front of
Yeah, I'm just gonna get a t-shirt or just dress up as Katniss
Interviewer: With a bow and arrow
I've always wanted to dress up as Katniss and go out hiking
Interviewer: People are grabbing their dogs and out of the way! Where are you from originally?
Kentucky
Interviewer: Kentucky. And hows your mother enjoying your success?
Oh, she's very happy, she has more fun that I do, she called me one time recently when I just got into the academy which was very exciting for me, well that's exciting for any actor and I get a call from my mother when I was in England and she goes 'I did something hilarious' and I'm like 'what?' and she's like 'I voted' and I go 'voted for what?' 'the Oscars!' and I was like 'you voted for the Oscars? What do you mean?' she was like 'the ballet came here and I voted!' 'Cause she thought I would be like 'hahahaha, that's hilarious, I'm going to get kicked out of the academy' Fortunately she did it wrong and i think mailed it back to herself, So I got to do it again.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=frPxeO7JP90

Piece 4 (conversation between parent and child): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bqhsZm486Mw

Piece 5: (broadsheet piece)
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/jan/30/flooding-experts-uk-adapt-climate-change

Synthetic personalisation:
Synthetic personalisation is the technique of using 'you' or 'your' to make the reader feel personally addressed. The affect of this is making the reader feel as if the piece is written to them and only to them, further engaging the reader fully into the article. In the Beyonce advert, the technique of this is that the reader of the ad feels like the article is written for them and like they need the phone. 'At last a music phone that reflects both sides of your personality.' shows that the advert is written for you, like the phone was made with your needs and personality in mind, even though they know nothing about you, they say and imply that YOU need the phone.

The findings from my twitter research suggested that age does reflect the way people type. I found that Beth-18, typed words in full, capitalised letters, however commas and full stops are missing, standard communication then deteriorates further in Heather-17 tweets, subtle differences such as 'cos' and 'kinda' slip into the tweets. It then gets more substandard by the next girl, Shona-16 who often uses such things as 'u' 'omg' and 'wtf' and then Nathalie-15 who says 'n' 'omfg' 'ffs' and 'ugh'. There is also a lack of capitalisation in all three 17, 16 and 15 year olds tweets and well as simple punctuation missing.

However; an issue that was raised was whether a tweet to someone should start with a capital letter or not, for example, a tweet made by Nathalie (15) said '@-male18- crying omfg(3 laughing emojis)' does the 'crying' start with a capital or not? Does the @ count as a name or just information, as in is it the start of the sentence or not?