Zachy transcript analysis

When comparing the two texts, it could be discussed that in ‘Zachy drawing a banana’ there were 27 interrogative used. However, in the ‘Zach and the healing robot’ transcript there were just 14. This could be due to observer effects – the fact that Halla is aware that she is recording the interaction, may mean that she may alter her language to cater for the aim of the investivation into language. So, this could explain why in the ‘Zachy drawing a banana’ text, Halla may not only use more interrogatives due to the context of the interaction, but because she is trying to collect more relevant and comparable data. When compared to ‘Zach and the healing robot’ she uses almost half of the amount of questions used in the first transcript. It could be discusssed that this is because in this context, Zach was the “project leader”. This may mean that Zach feels as if he has more authority and Halla may ask fewer questions due to not being so much in control. Zygotsky’s theory into the Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD)  would give an idea into why these caregivers use so many interrogatives  when interacting with a child. The theory of the ZPD is that there is a difference between what a child is able to do alone, and what they are able to achieve with help. So, Halla may be using this amount of questions in order to create the ‘scaffolding’ for Zach’s own learning.

In the ‘Zachy drawing a banana’ transcript, Zach says “Yes/ I course you can mummy”. This could show that at a younger age, Zach may not have yet learned politeness features such as ‘please’ or ‘thank you’. So, when Zach says “I course you can mummy” this would be his way of encouraging Halla to help him. This could actually be said to be quite an intelligent technique as Zach has clearly learned how to get what he wants in this way, and does this while also not being rude or using authority. However, in the ‘Zach and the healing robot’ text, Zach first asks “Can you do it mummy?” using no politeness features, but then after Halla helps him, Zach replies saying “thank yooou”. This could mean that at a slightly older age, Zach has began to learn his politeness features, but is still too young to fully understand them. As the text continues, it becomes evident that Zach is aware of the possibly metaphorical authority he has as the ‘project leader’ in this context. This is shown when Zach announces that “we don't need breakfast” and later strongly replies “no” when asked if they could have breakfast while the robot is healing. So, this has shown that Zachy (while not always using them) understands when and where to use politeness features, and also understands the idea of authority and that it means that he doesn't need to use these features.

In the healing robot transcript, Zach uses discourse markers when saying “it's gonna be a long time though(.) but we’re not gonna have breakfast still”. This shows that Zachy understands what he is trying to say, but is unsure of how to say it and so corrects himself saying “still” which is Zach showing he is trying to clarify what he is saying. This would support Chomsky’s Nativist theory as it shows that children may have an innate ability to understand the structure of language (known as universal grammar) but may not have developed the correct vocabulary yet. However, the ‘Zachy drawing a banana” transcript may counteract this idea as Zach very rarely corrects his own grammar. This would mean that Skinner’s idea that children are born as empty vessels is correct, and that Zach is still learning his lexis and grammar from his environment. A support for this would be when Zach exclaims that he doesn't like “bolognay”. The use of the onomatopoeia could suggest that Zach is purely learning from his caregivers and doesn't understand what “bolognaise” is. However, Zach attempts to understand this when he overgeneralises “lasagne” to bolognaise. This shows that Zach is trying to learn and understand, which may support Chomsky’s idea that he may have an innate drive to learn language.

The use of pauses varies slightly in the two transcripts. In the ‘Zachy drawing a banana” text, there were 26 pauses taken by Zach. However, in the healing robot transcript Zach uses 32 pauses. In the second transcript, Zach is slightly older than in the first. This could explain why the length of his pauses increases. At an older age, Zach’s language would begin to develop and become more complex. This could mean that Zach is more conscious of mistakes and is taking longer to think of what he is going to say in conversation. So when compared to the first transcript, his language is slightly less complex and so he may use fewer pauses because he is less conscious of his mistakes as he isn't yet aware that they are mistakes. This shows how children’s language may develop from the two-word stage to the telegraphic stage – as his language begins to develop and become more complex as he gets older.

Skinner’s theory of positive reinforcement could be used throughout both transcripts to discuss how the caregiver (in this case, Halla) helps the child's language to develop further through encouragement. When Halla uses phrases such as “well done”, “very good” and “you are a star” in both texts, this would show Zach that what he has said was impressive and so encourage him to repeat what he has done. So, if this technique is used throughout Zach’s learning of language, whenever he would say something new and more complex, politeness features would be applied to ensure him that what he is saying is correct and that he should continue to expand his knowledge. It is shown in the texts that this technique may have helped Zach to develop as in the second transcript his language is slightly more complex, and Halla still uses positive reinforcement. So this may support Skinners idea because it is shown that Halls applies positive reinforcement techniques in both interactions and also shows that Zach’s language had improved.

To conclude, it is clear that the two transcripts are fairly similar. Both ‘Zachy drawing a banana’ and ‘Zach and the healing robot’ support Skinner’s operant conditioning theory and Zygotsky’s Zone of Proximal development theory. However, it is clear that Zach’s language is more complex and diverse in the healing robot transcript and so differs slightly to the ‘drawing a banana’ text. It is clear that these two transcripts support the idea that language may be innate, and learned in stages. However, the texts also do not fully support any of the child language theories and so they may not be correct. Saying this, there are aspects of the two interactions that could be explained and used as evidence for certain parts of each theory.