Talk:Babbling

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia - View original article

 
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Linguistics / Applied Linguistics (Rated B-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Linguistics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Linguistics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
B-Class article B This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the Applied Linguistics Task Force.
 

Types of babbling[edit]

Could it be specified (if possible) which languages are featured in the example of consonants? Or at least explained so that foreign English speakers don't assume that the alphabet is composed like that? I'm not a foreigner myself, but acknowledge that I was confused at first glance. 98.202.38.225 (talk) 23:28, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Stages of babbling[edit]

At 0-4 months babies gurgle, and coo (vowel sounds such as "oooh" and "aah"). And at 4-6 months babies may start to babble (adding consonants: "gaga," "dada"). At 6-12 months of age, babies typically babble and enjoy vocal play ...

This early period of prelinguistic vocalization can be divided into five stages,” the first of which begins at about age six months. Stage one is crying, stage two is cooing, stage three is vocal play, and stage four is canonical babbling.

These two statements are in contradiction. If cooing begins at 0-4 months (and crying, I can assure you, begins immediately at birth) then the first stage of babbling can't possibly begin at six months. I would have thought that the phrase should have read "... the last of which ...", but the very next sentence states that the fifth stage begins at about 10 months.

I don't see any good way of making this makes sense. It should be cleaned up by some one more knowledgeable than I. 68.76.215.54 (talk) 14:52, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Requested move[edit]

BabblingBaby language — Babbling is only a small subset of baby language. Recent studies have determined some clarity of meaning, making it a language. - 199.125.109.102 (talk) 01:32, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Survey[edit]

Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *'''Support''' or *'''Oppose''', then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's naming conventions.

Discussion[edit]

Any additional comments:

Withdrawn. Article is in fact only about one small portion of baby language. 199.125.109.102 (talk) 04:31, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Update[edit]

We are seeking to update this wikipedia page for a college course titled the Psychology of Language. We would like to update some of the information already provided with journal sources that we have found. We plan to add examples of numerous nonhuman babbling species such as songbirds, primates and bats. We also would like to add information about manual babbling and how cochlear implants for the deaf can influence the onset of babbling. Amf14 (talk) 13:51, 15 March 2012 (UTC) Misaacso (talk) 13:53, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

Deleted page[edit]

Talk:Babbling/GA1

Review following nomination for class GA[edit]

Article title: Babbling


Nominator: Amf14

Nomination date: 3 May 2012

Reviewer: Maarten 1963

Review start date: 4 June 2012

Review completion date: 9 July 2012


Review scale: very poor - poor - mediocre - good - very good

Presentation[edit]

Neatness of the layout: very good


Neatness of the graphical elements: very good


Neatness of the text: good

Explanation:

  1. The article has four in-line references that do not follow the text immediately, but have a space in between.
  2. The subsection “Babbling in deaf infants” contains: “Children are able to produce manual articulation of words correctly, ...”. This sentence does not follow the preceding sentence with a space in between.
  3. References 6, 9, and 13 do not have the title and the publisher. References 1, 6, 9, and 13 do not end with a full stop. Reference 8 has an internal link that is not recognized. References 9 and 13 are inconsistent in notation. Reference 9 misses a comma.

Form[edit]

Spelling: good

Explanation:

  1. The subsection “The link between babbling and language” contains “Sometimes, they lose them all together before learning how to speak.” This must be “Sometimes, they lose them altogether before learning how to speak.”.
  2. There is a section called “Nonhuman babbling”. This must be: “Non-human babbling”.
  3. The section “Nonhuman babbling” contains: “Another important factor is the physiology of the animal where brain regions used in analyzing and processing information and the properties of the ear and vocal tract are critical determinants to how song is interpreted and later produced.”. In this sentence, “analyzing” must be “analysing”.
  4. The section “Nonhuman babbling” contains: “Although babbling is important for practicing adult calls during the juvenile age, babbling decreases with age in pygmy marmosets.”. In this sentence, “practicing” must be “practising”.
  5. The section “Nonhuman babbling” contains: “Babbling is common in infants that have a large repertoire of adult vocalizations to learn and this is seen in the pups of Sac-Winged bat.”. In this sentence, “Sac-Winged bat” must be “sac-winged bat”.


Grammar: poor

Explanation:

  1. In the first sentence of the lead section , the second subordinate clause must be: “but does not yet produce any recognizable words”.
  2. In the last sentence of the lead section, “around 12 months” must be “when they are around 12 months old” or “when they are at around 12 months of age”.
  3. In the first paragraph of the section “Babbling in humans”, “when emotionally calm” must be “when they are emotionally calm”.
  4. The second paragraph of the section “Babbling in humans” contains: “By the time an infant reaches 8–9 months, they display productions of more advanced sounds known as variegated babbling.”. This must be: “By the time an infant reaches 8–9 months, it displays productions of more advanced sounds known as variegated babbling.”.
  5. The second paragraph of the section “Babbling in humans” contains: “The final stage is known as conversational babbling, or the "jargon stage" (usually occurring by about ten months of age).” Usually occurring at about ten months of age.
  6. The subsection “The link between babbling and language” contains: “Infants pay close attention to their caregivers reactions and use their feedback as approval to the sound they are making.”. This must be: “Infants pay close attention to their caregivers' reactions and use their feedback for approval of the sound they are making.”.
  7. The subsection “The link between babbling and language” contains “By comparing infants in English, French, Swedish and Japanese linguistic backgrounds, ...”. This must be “By comparing infants with English, French, Swedish and Japanese linguistic backgrounds, ...”.
  8. The subsection “The link between babbling and language” contains: “These findings support another hypothesis; the “babbling drift hypothesis” in which infant babbling resembles the phonetic characteristics of their native language through exposure to speech.” In this sentence, the semicolon is not correct. It must be a comma. In the last clause, infant babbling is the subject. This subject is singular, and babbling cannot possess something. Therefore, the possessive pronoun their is a double error.
  9. The subsection “The physiology of babbling” contains: “When saying each individual sound out loud, it is noticeable that a human uses different parts of their mouth, ...”. This must be: “When saying each individual sound out loud, it is noticeable that a human uses different parts of its mouth, ...”.
  10. The subsection “The physiology of babbling” contains: “As a baby begins to produce sounds beyond the reduplicated sequences of babbling, they exhibit equal sized mouth or hand openings on the right and left sides.”. This must be: “As a baby begins to produce sounds beyond the reduplicated sequences of babbling, it exhibits equally sized mouth or hand openings on the right and left sides.”.
  11. The subsection “Babbling in deaf infants” contains: “Some deaf infants will never reach the canonical stage of babbling, thus never speaking at all.” This must be: “Some deaf infants will never reach the canonical stage of babbling, thus they will never speak at all.”.
  12. The subsection “Babbling in deaf infants” contains: “In order for hearing impaired humans to gain auditory experience, ...”. This must be: “For hearing impaired humans to gain auditory experience, ...”.
  13. The subsection “Babbling in deaf infants” contains: “Once the surgical implantation is complete, an infant begins to listen and have experience with language outputs.” This must be: “Once the surgical implantation is complete, an infant begins to listen and can have experience with language outputs.”
  14. The subsection “Babbling in deaf infants” contains: “Although all infants move their hands in imitation to what is modeled in their environment, ...”. This must be: “Although all infants move their hands in imitation to what is modelled in their environment, ...”.
  15. The subsection “Babbling in deaf infants” contains: “around 9–12 months deaf infants begin to produce gestures that are distinct from all other hand movements.”. This must be “deaf infants begin to produce gestures that are distinct from all other hand movements when they are around 9–12 months old.”.
  16. The subsection “Babbling in deaf infants” contains: “This was originally thought to represent the first indicators of sign language.”. This must be: “This was originally thought to represent the first indicator of sign language.”.
  17. The subsection “Babbling in deaf infants” contains: “but deaf infants do not reach this stage of babbling until 10 months or later.”. This must be: “but deaf infants do not reach this stage of babbling until they are at least 10 months old.”.
  18. The subsection “Babbling in deaf infants” contains: “Interestingly enough, if a hearing infant has deaf parents, they will still imitate the signs that they see their parents displaying.”. This must be: “Interestingly enough, if a hearing infant has deaf parents, it will still imitate the signs that it sees its parents displaying.”.
  19. The subsection “Babbling in deaf infants” contains: “There are three main components to manual babbling.”. This must be: “There are three main components of manual babbling.”.
  20. The subsection “Babbling in deaf infants” contains: “This is comparable to the important aspects of vocal babblings.”. This must be: “This is comparable to the important aspects of vocal babbling.”.
  21. The section “Nonhuman babbling” contains: “The learning of a song is produced by a mix of interaction, experience and predisposition as shown when young songbirds will imitate their species call when presented with songs from their own and another species.”. This must be: “The learning of a song is produced by a mix of interaction, experience and predisposition. Young songbirds will imitate their species' call when presented with songs of their own and another species.”. Shown is a perfect participle. Will signifies the future tense simple. Something of the future cannot be attributed to the past to be shown in the present. Note also the accent in species' call. Note also “of their own”.
  22. The section “Nonhuman babbling” contains: “variety of immature songs that often are referred to”. This must be: “variety of immature songs that is often referred to”. Variety is singular. For the position of the word often, and other adverbs that express frequency, see a book about English grammar.
  23. The section “Nonhuman babbling” contains: “Another relation to human babbling, is that the amount of vocalizations is not key, but rather the quality of the sounds that is retained and resembles the final produce of language.” It is incorrect to place a comma between the subject and the predicate. Thus, the first comma must be removed.
  24. The section “Nonhuman babbling” contains: “Another important factor is the physiology of the animal where brain regions used in analyzing and processing information and the properties of the ear and vocal tract are critical determinants to how song is interpreted and later produced.”. In this sentence, “determinants to” must be “determinants of”.
  25. The section “Nonhuman babbling” contains: “Memory for songs are able to form before the period where learning to sing occurs.”. In this sentence, memory is singular. Hence, “are” must be “is”.
  26. The section “Nonhuman babbling” contains: “As human infants do, marmoset babies have higher rates of social interaction when producing babbling sounds.”. This must be: “As human infants have, marmoset babies have higher rates of social interaction when producing babbling sounds.”.
  27. The section “Nonhuman babbling” contains: “The sac-winged bat (Saccopteryx bilineata) is a social creature and the vocalizations that they produce depend on the social situation that the animal is in.”. This must be: “The sac-winged bat (Saccopteryx bilineata) is a social creature and the vocalizations that it produces depend on the social situation that the animal is in.”.


Style: very poor

Explanation:

  1. The entire article contains four times “reduplicated babbling”. This is not correct. It must be “reduplicative babbling”. The babbling is not reduplicated, the sounds therein are reduplicated. The entire article also contains two times “reduplicated sequence”. This is also not correct. It must be “reduplicative sequence”.
I see what you mean though in this case "reduplicated babbling" is the way the term is commonly used. --Anne S. Warlaumont (talk) 06:08, 18 September 2013 (UTC)
  1. The lead section does not have an interesting encyclopedic style. It has a pompous and scholarly style.
  2. A lead section is an introductory section. Therefore, it should not have texts between parentheses. And certainly, it should not have anatomical details of child development.
Fixed --Anne S. Warlaumont (talk) 06:08, 18 September 2013 (UTC)
  1. The lead section interchanges the words baby, child, and infant too often. And the long word approximately is not necessary: about is better.
  2. The lead section states: “Infants begin to produce recognizable words usually around 12 months, though babbling may continue for some time afterward.”. Around 12 months is vague, and some time afterwards is also vague.
I agree about the "some time afterwards", but am not sure the vagueness of "around 12 months can be avoided, since this really is an approximate number. --Anne S. Warlaumont (talk) 06:08, 18 September 2013 (UTC)
  1. The second paragraph of the section “Babbling in humans” contains: “When reaching an age of 6 months, infants are finally able to control the opening and closing of the vocal tract, and upon obtaining this ability, infants begin to distinguish between the different sounds of vowels and consonants. This period is known as the beginning of the canonical stage.” When infants reach an age of 6 months, they are 6 months old. This is a point in time for every child. Therefore, it is not correct to state in the next sentence that it is a period.
  2. The second paragraph of the section “Babbling in humans” contains: “During the canonical stage, the babbling involves reduplicated sounds containing alternations of vowels and consonants (i.e.; baba or bobo).” In this sentence, it is not appropriate to place the examples between parentheses, because ebobe would also fit the description. Secondly, the Latin abbreviation i.e. is incorrect, because it means “that is”. A correct Latin abbreviation would be e.g., which means “for example”. Thirdly, the semicolon is inappropriate.
  3. In the second paragraph of the section “Babbling in humans”, the constructs “they display productions of more advanced sounds” and “This stage includes more complex combinations of consonant and vowel syllables” are pompous. They now produce combinations of consonants and vowels.
  4. In the second paragraph of the section “Babbling in humans”, there is another instance of wrong use of the abbreviation i.e. and the semicolon.
  5. The second paragraph of the section “Babbling in humans” contains: “Most babbling consists of a small number of sounds, which suggests the child is preparing the basic sounds necessary to speak the language to which he is exposed.” Humans cannot prepare sounds. Sounds are there or are not there, but they cannot be stored for release later. And the word child is neutral in English, not masculine. The word he is probably not a grammatical mistake though. The sentence may be replaced by: “Most babbling consists of a small number of sounds, which suggests that the child is preparing to speak the basic sounds of the language it is exposed to.”
  6. The third paragraph of the section “Babbling in humans” contains: “If babbling occurs during the first year of life, it can typically be concluded that the child is developing speech normally.” In this sentence, “the child” must be “a child”.
  7. The third paragraph of the section “Babbling in humans” contains: “As the baby grows and changes, his/her vocalizations change as well.” This can be improved: “As babies grow and change, their vocalizations change as well.”.
  8. The subsection “Types of babbling” contains: “The consonants that babbling infants produce tend to be any of the following : /p, b, t, m, d, n, k, ɡ, s, h, w, j/. The following consonants tend to be infrequently produced during phonological development : /f, v, θ, ð, ʃ, tʃ, dʒ, l, r, ŋ/.” However, it is unusual to begin and end lists with a slash.
  9. The subsection “Types of babbling” contains: “The complex nature of sounds that developing children produce ...”. That can be improved: “The complexity of the sounds that infants produce ...”. This is not pompous, and note the definite article before sounds.
  10. The subsection “The link between babbling and language” contains: “The Continuity Hypothesis – According to these claims ...”. However, an hypothesis is not a claim.
  11. The subsection “The link between babbling and language” contains: “This hypothesis agrees with the claim that the anatomical changes of the vocal tract are very important, ...”. However, the continuity hypothesis is not about the relative importance of the descend of the larynx. Furthermore, the descend of the larynx is a singular change; making it plural is pompous.
  12. The subsection “The link between babbling and language” contains: “This reinforcement through feedback helps infants to focus their attention to very specific features of sound.” It seems that this sentence has the cause and the effect swapped. When a baby concentrates on a detail, this reinforces learning. It is not the reinforcement that leads to attention for a detail. Furthermore, “very specific features” is pompous.
  13. In the subsection “The link between babbling and language” it is rather funny that an infant takes a giant step backwards. A funny wording is not appropriate for an encyclopedia.
  14. The subsection “The link between babbling and language” contains: “There is no clear evidence for either of these hypotheses, ...”. However, the paragraphs in which these hypotheses are presented are referenced, so there is evidence for the existence of both hypotheses.
  15. The subsection “The link between babbling and language” contains: “By comparing infants in English, French, Swedish and Japanese linguistic backgrounds, babbling reveals that placement of consonants and vowels also resembles native languages.”. This sentence is pompous. Better is: “The ordering of consonants and vowels in the babbling of English, French, Swedish and Japanese infants also appears to resemble that of their native language.”.
  16. The subsection “The link between babbling and language” contains: “When infants are exposed to two languages after birth, they typically babble in their dominant language. The dominant language is considered to be the one that children have the most exposure to.” This is extremely pompous. Better is: “When babies are exposed to two languages, they normally babble in the language that they are most exposed to.”.
  17. The subsection “The link between babbling and language” has the continuity hypothesis and the discontinuity hypothesis written with capitals at first, but in the last paragraph this is not maintained. It is better not to write hypotheses with capitals. Furthermore, the aforementioned hypotheses are followed by a dash. It is better not to use the dash to connect two sentences when the second sentence does not take an unexpected turn.
  18. The subsection “The link between babbling and language” contains: “Infants do not produce a blend of languages while babbling and sometimes they may choose which language they prefer to babble in based upon particular features.” This sentence is very pompous. Infants do not mix languages when babbling but may switch to another.
  19. The subsection “The physiology of babbling” contains: “According to the Frame Dominance Theory, ...”. It is better not to write theories with capitals; better use italics instead.
  20. The subsection “The physiology of babbling” contains: “When the mandible is depressed, ...”. According to Collins Dictionary, to depress can mean to press or push down. But muscles can only contract or relax. Therefore, it is physically impossible to push the mandible down. Better is: “When the mandible is lowered, ...”.
  21. The subsection “Babbling in deaf infants” contains: “It is also difficult to locate deaf infants that have had severely impaired hearing since birth, have been diagnosed within the first year of their lives, and do not suffer from any other impairments.”. This sentence has 34 words, and the reader must find out what the infants have been diagnosed with.
  22. The subsection “Babbling in deaf infants” contains: “Infants who are deaf do show signs of vocal babbling, but in minimal amounts. This suggests that early babbling arises from inherent human tendencies to use the vocable articulators in particular ways during early language acquisition.”. It cannot be understood why the second sentence should follow from the first. Furthermore, the word articulator is a very uncommon word, but it is not explained.
  23. The article uses the word particular four times: “in no particular order”, “based upon particular features”, “to differentiate particular sounds”, and “in particular ways”. In the last three times, the word conceals information. That may irritate readers, and it makes a pompous impression. Please do not tease readers; give the details or do not mention them at all.
  24. The subsection “Babbling in deaf infants” contains: “Due to the findings relating to this babbling delay, researchers have rejected the belief that language is an innate capability that humans have. Researchers instead support the suggestion that experience with auditory speech is necessary in language development.”. This is pompous. Better is: “Because of this delay in babbling, researchers have rejected the idea that language is an innate capability of humans. They believe that hearing other people talking is necessary for language development.”.
  25. The subsection “Babbling in deaf infants” contains: “There are exceptions to these studies on the occasion that infants are not completely impaired of all hearing.” This is poor English. Exceptions exist for infants with some hearing.
  26. The subsection “Babbling in deaf infants” contains: “Children with varying degrees of hearing loss display different speech signals and babbling.” The degrees of hearing loss are not varying but are various. What are speech signals? Do they display different speech signals and the same babbling, or is the babbling also different?
  27. The subsection “Babbling in deaf infants” contains: “In order for hearing impaired humans to gain auditory experience, a number of solutions have been implemented. Hearing aids can be used to help infants reach babbling stages earlier.” The second sentence follows the first illogically: the first implemented solution is expected, not a possibility to obtain something else.
  28. The subsection “Babbling in deaf infants” contains: “Once the surgical implantation is complete, an infant begins to listen and have experience with language outputs. As soon as language has been heard, they begin to babble and speak in rhythmic patterns just as normal hearing infants do.”. The subject of the first sentence is an infant, which is singular. Therefore, it is incorrect to use the personal pronoun they in the second sentence.
  29. The subsection “Babbling in deaf infants” contains: “Although all infants move their hands in imitation to what is modeled in their environment, ...”. This sentence is rarely intelligible because of the word modeled. Better is: “Although all babies imitate with their hands the movements that they see before their eyes, ...”.
  30. The subsection “Babbling in deaf infants” contains: “around 9–12 months deaf infants begin to produce gestures that are distinct from all other hand movements.” Gestures are made and not produced.
  31. The subsection “Babbling in deaf infants” contains: “This was originally thought to represent the first indicators of sign language.”. Better is: “This was once thought to be the first sign of sign language.”.
  32. The subsection “Babbling in deaf infants” contains: “Deaf children acquire signs for the same concepts that are present in English speaking children,...” Better is: “Deaf children develop signs for the same concepts that speaking children develop,...”.
  33. The subsection “Babbling in deaf infants” contains: “Deaf children acquire signs for the same concepts that are present in English speaking children, but deaf infants do not reach this stage of babbling until 10 months or later.”. What stage?
  34. The subsection “Babbling in deaf infants” contains: “Children are able to produce manual articulation of words correctly, which is important since many articulation tendencies of manual babbling transfer to the children’s early sign production and then later into the production of words.”. This sentence is hardly intelligible. What is manual articulation of words? What are articulation tendencies?
  35. The subsection “Babbling in deaf infants” contains: “Interestingly enough, if a hearing infant has deaf parents, they will still imitate the signs that they see their parents displaying.”. This sentence is problematic. When a researcher writes that something is interesting, he or she thinks that it is interesting for the advance of science. However, this does not necessarily mean that it is also interesting for a general public or for parents.
  36. The subsection “Babbling in deaf infants” contains: “The most common sign in manual babbling is where all fingers are extended and spread and it is also related to the first signs an infant will make.”. This sentence seems not correct. For in science, to say that two things are related requires proof. A minimal correction is: “The most common sign in manual babbling is where all fingers are extended and spread; this sign is also one of the first signs an infant will make.”. An elaborated correction is: “The extension and spreading of all fingers is the most common sign in manual babbling. This sign is also one of the first signs an infant will make in manual communication.”
  37. The subsection “Babbling in deaf infants” contains: “This is comparable to the important aspects of vocal babblings.”. When Dr. Laura Ann Petitto writes that something is important, she does so as a scientist. This does not necessarily mean that it is also important for a general public or for parents.
  38. The section “Nonhuman babbling” contains: “Young male songbirds produce a variety of immature songs that often are referred to as babbling because the immaturity precedes the fully developed mature song.”. Part of this sentence has already been discussed in the section about grammar. The part “as babbling because the immaturity precedes the fully developed mature song.” is discussed here. It has two problems. Immaturity is not equal to immature songs. Songs are not a song. Thus, a solution is: “as babbling because the immature songs precede those that are fully developed.”.
  39. The section “Nonhuman babbling” contains: “As with humans, if these sounds are reinforced with positive social feedback, they are more likely to recur.” However, sounds are not a synonym of songs.
  40. The section “Nonhuman babbling” contains: “Since the females do not sing songs, they are in charge of providing the feedback. If females provide more social signals, males will develop more mature songs at a faster rate than other male birds.” In the second sentence, it would be better to maintain the word feedback.
  41. The section “Nonhuman babbling” contains: “Another relation to human babbling, is that the amount of vocalizations is not key, but rather the quality of the sounds that is retained and resembles the final produce of language.” This sentence is not intelligible, because its words are not combined in way that makes sense.
  42. The section “Nonhuman babbling” contains: “Another important factor is the physiology of the animal where brain regions used in analyzing and processing information and the properties of the ear and vocal tract are critical determinants to how song is interpreted and later produced.”. Important factor of what? The reader does not know of any previous factors. The previous paragraph ended with a relation, but a relation is not a factor. The rest of the sentence is very hard to understand, and extremely pompous. Better is: “The vocal tract, the ear, and the brain are all factors that determine the learning of a song.”.
  43. The section “Nonhuman babbling” contains: “In studies using isolated birds that have not had exposure to song, they produce an abnormal 'isolate song' that still retains species-specific aspects.”. In this sentence, the words “still” and “retains” are strange. A minimal correction is: “In studies using isolated birds that have not had exposure to song, they produce an abnormal 'isolate song' that nevertheless contains species-specific aspects.”. “Better is: “Songbirds that were never exposed to songs produce an abnormal song which, in some aspects, is still typical for their species.”.
  44. The section “Nonhuman babbling” contains: “This shows that the neural pathways have predetermined features that allow for such a phenomenon to occur.”. In this sentence, the word features is not appropriate; it must be characteristics. Furthermore, the pompous “allow for such a phenomenon to occur” is not logical; this must be “make this occur”.
  45. The section “Nonhuman babbling” contains: “There is an important phase in development when song learning is best accomplished.”. Development of what?
  46. The section “Nonhuman babbling” contains: “This phase is called the ‘sensitive period’ and the amount of change that a songbird experiences in adulthood varies by species.”. This sentence is not intelligible.
  47. The section “Nonhuman babbling” contains: “Young birds have a production phase after a listening phase of development.”. Development of what?
  48. The section “Nonhuman babbling” contains: “The production of song is called ‘subsong’ where vocalizations resemble that of an adult as time passes.”. This sentence does not express its probable meaning correctly. Better is: “The singing of immature songs is called subsong. Subsong gradually evolves into mature singing.”. Best is to simply remove the sentence.
  49. The section “Nonhuman babbling” contains: “Memory for songs are able to form before the period where learning to sing occurs.”. In this sentence, the word “are” has already been discussed in the section about grammar. The sentence also has a pompous noun-style. Better is: “The ability to memorize is attained earlier than the ability to sing.”.
  50. The section “Nonhuman babbling” contains: “Social interaction is important when dealing with vocal learning where non-singing females can even influence an infant through feedback.”. Songbirds are not dealing with vocal learning; they learn because of an internal drive; they do not need to cope with something external. Furthermore, the sentence is rather difficult, because it presents a qualification first, and the matter that it qualifies second. Better is: “Female songbirds can give feedback to infants, which is important for the learning of a song.”.
  51. The section “Nonhuman babbling” contains the title “Pygmy marmosets (Cebuella pygmaea)”. In this title, pygmy marmosets is plural, and Cebuella pygmaea is singular. Better is: “Pygmy marmoset (Cebuella pygmaea)”.
  52. The section “Nonhuman babbling” contains: “A normal series of calls for a pygmy marmoset contains approximately 10 different call types.” This must probably be: “A normal series of calls by a pygmy marmoset contains approximately 10 different call types.”.
  53. The section “Nonhuman babbling” contains: “This abundance of call forms produced by this creature is comparable to babbling in human infants for a multitude of reasons.”. The words abundance and multitude are what Wikipedia calls peacock terms, and they must be avoided. Better is: “This variety is comparable to human babbling for the following reasons.”.
  54. The section “Nonhuman babbling” contains: “The vocalizations also gain attention of caregivers and provide practice for future vocal behavior.”. In this sentence, the word also is not justified, because the previous sentence does not describe an effect of the vocalizations.
  55. The section “Nonhuman babbling” contains: “For these reasons, pygmy marmoset calls are also distinguished as babbling behavior.”. This sentence is somewhat pompous. Better is: “For these reasons, pygmy marmoset calls are seen as babbling.”
  56. The section “Nonhuman babbling” contains: “Like reduplicative babbling in humans, the call type is often repeated several times before a new sequence of sounds is produced.”. It is not a type that is repeated, but the call itself, an instance of a type.
  57. The section “Nonhuman babbling” contains: “Different calls serve different survival functions such as when desiring food and social interaction or during times of alarm.”. After “survival functions such as”, functions are expected, not circumstances.
  58. The section “Nonhuman babbling” contains: “Another babbling occurrence during the juvenile age is the addition of territorial calls and mild threat vocalizations.”. This sentence is pompous. Better is: “Another occurrence during the juvenile age is the addition of territorial calls and mild threats.”.
  59. The section “Nonhuman babbling” contains: “Babbling-like behavior in songbirds, humans and some nonhuman primates has been previously researched, but it has not been seen until recently in non-primate mammals.”. Wikipedia is not a research journal. Furthermore, the statement is based on a publication of 2006, which is 6 years ago. Therefore, the word recently is not correct.


Structure: mediocre

Explanation:

  1. The third paragraph of the section “Babbling in humans” jumps from one subject to another.
  2. The three paragraphs of the section “Babbling in humans” do not have one and only one clear subject.
  3. In the section “Babbling in humans”, the second sentence of the third paragraph could serve as an introduction to the second paragraph, which illustrates imperfect structuring of the section.
  4. The subsection “Types of babbling” contains little more information than the previous section. About 40% of the text is a repetition. The additional information can be incorporated in the previous section text.
  5. The subsection “The link between babbling and language” contains: “These findings support another hypothesis; the “babbling drift hypothesis” in which infant babbling resembles the phonetic characteristics of their native language through exposure to speech.” If the first two hypotheses are in a dotted list, the third one must also be in there.
  6. The subsection “The link between babbling and language” contains: “This hypothesis agrees with the claim that the anatomical changes of the vocal tract are very important, ...”. To understand this sentence, the reader must use a sentence that is in the lead section. However, the distance between these sentences is enormous.
  7. In the subsection “The physiology of babbling”, the first three sentences jump from one subject to another and back again.
  8. The subsection “The physiology of babbling” contains: “The International Phonetic Alphabet was formed in 1897 as a representation of the sounds produced by language.” This sentence has nothing to do with physiology.
  9. The subsection “Babbling in deaf infants” contains: “Deaf babbling is now titled manual babbling, and is structurally identical to vocal babbling in its development.”. However, that manual babbling is structurally identical to vocal babbling in its development has already been written in the previous paragraph.
  10. The section “Nonhuman babbling” contains: “Another relation to human babbling, is that the amount of vocalizations is not key, but rather the quality of the sounds that is retained and resembles the final produce of language.” This sentence is the last sentence of the second paragraph, but belongs more to the first paragraph. The first paragraph starts with the similarities between human and non-human babbling.
  11. The section “Nonhuman babbling” contains: “Social interaction is important when dealing with vocal learning where non-singing females can even influence an infant through feedback.”. This sentence ends the fourth paragraph of the subsection on songbirds, but it is a summary of what already has been written in the second paragraph.

Content[edit]

Trustworthiness: mediocre

Explanation:

  1. The lead section states: “Babbling (also called baby talk or twaddling) is a stage in child development and a state in language acquisition, during which an infant appears to be experimenting with uttering sounds of language, but not yet producing any recognizable words.” But twaddling is not acknowledged as a noun by Collins Dictionary. And that babbling is a stage in child development and a state in language acquisition does not have clear support in Baby en Kind by Penelope Leach or in Attachment by John Bowlby or in Psychology by Henry Gleitman and others. Nowhere in these books is a list of stages presented, one of which is babbling.
  2. The lead section states: “Babbling begins at approximately 5 to 7 months of age, when a baby's noises begin to sound like phonemes.”. This statement is opposed by the following copyright-respecting paraphrases.
    1. Babies use their voice from the start of their lives. They cry, coo, and babble, and make word-like sounds as “ga” and “bagoo”. When they are about three months old, the babbling of babies that were exposed to different languages differs. This reveals that their language learning has already begun.[1]
    2. When a baby is about 6 weeks old, it reacts to being smiled at or being talked to, with smiling and trampling. When a baby is about 2 months old, it combines smiling with small fluent sounds. A few weeks later, it distinguishes between being smiled at and being talked to; it gives the same response.[2]
    3. The second quarter of the first year of a baby's life is characterized by a flood of babbling. When a baby is 3 or 4 months old, most sounds are open vowels. It says “Aaah” and “Oooh”. The sounds resemble those of a pigeon. This stadium is often called cooing. When a baby is about 4 or 5 months old, it will learn to make more complicated sounds at an higher pace, provided that the baby is being talked to a lot.[3]
    4. Babbling plays a rather similar role as smiling in social interchange. The similarities are that both occur when a baby is awake and contented, that both are likely to cause a social response of the baby's companion, and that both occur at an age of 5 weeks. The difference is that smiling is a visual signal, and babbling is an auditory signal.[4]
    5. When a baby is 4 months old, it can make a very large variety of sounds. During the second half of its first year, a baby reveals a tendency to copy the intonations and inflections of its companions.[5]
    6. At the end of the 7th month, the sounds that a baby makes develop from one to two syllable words that use one vowel twice: “Ala”, “Amam”, and “booboo”.[6]
  3. The second paragraph of the section “Babbling in humans” states: “Babbling is the first sign of human language.” This statement is opposed by the following copyright-respecting paraphrase.
    1. Quite early on, babies start to exchange looks, caresses, and sounds with caregivers. Several investigators (Bruner, 1974/1975; Tomasello and Ferrar, 1986) have suggested that the interaction with gestures and babbling is the precursor and organizer of language development to follow. It helps children to already learn the conversation's aspects of taking turns and responding to the other.[7]
  4. The second paragraph of the section “Babbling in humans” states: “The sounds and expressions of babbling are produced before an infant begins to construct recognizable words. This is mainly due to the immaturity of the vocal tract and neuromusculature at this age in life.” But according to Collins Dictionary, the word neuromusculature does not exist.
  5. The third paragraph of the section “Babbling in humans” states: “If babbling occurs during the first year of life, it can typically be concluded that the child is developing speech normally.” This statement has medical importance, but it has not been referenced. Even worse, it is opposed by the following copyright-respecting paraphrase.
    1. When a baby, younger than six months old, babbles and makes noises, it may not be concluded that its hearing is normal.[8]
  6. The third paragraph of the section “Babbling in humans” states: “Babies use these vocalizations to communicate.” But the first paragraph of the section stated: “These vocalizations generally do not contain meaning or refer to anything specific.” This is a contradiction.
  7. The third paragraph of the section “Babbling in humans”, especially the last three sentences, arouse the suspicion that the paragraph is based on a trashy book, a book that most editors would not qualify as a reliable published source.
  8. The subsection “The link between babbling and language” contains: “Social feedback facilitates faster learning and earlier production of a variety of advanced words.” The word advanced suggests that babies speak difficult words earlier than simple words. This is opposed by the following copyright-respecting paraphrase.
    1. Almost all children's talking begins with utterances of one word. Examples are hi, peekaboo, Mama, Fido, duck, spoon, give, push, and “No!”.[9]
  9. The subsection “Babbling in deaf infants” contains: “Infants who are deaf do show signs of vocal babbling, but in minimal amounts. This suggests that early babbling arises from inherent human tendencies to use the vocable articulators in particular ways during early language acquisition.” In this sentence, the expression “vocable articulators” is an error. There are no organs that take part in the production of speech (articulators) that are capable of being uttered (vocable).
  10. The subsection “Babbling in deaf infants” states: “However, contradictory evidence supports that language will not develop fully without auditory experience.”. However, when researchers present contradictory findings then none of these findings constitute evidence.
  11. The subsection “Babbling in deaf infants” states: “Although all infants move their hands in imitation to what is modeled in their environment, around 9–12 months deaf infants begin to produce gestures that are distinct from all other hand movements. This was originally thought to represent the first indicators of sign language. Just as hearing infants babble with their mouths, deaf infants babble with their hands. Deaf children acquire signs for the same concepts that are present in English speaking children, but deaf infants do not reach this stage of babbling until 10 months or later.” These sentences contain a contradiction. When deaf infants begin to make gestures when they are around 9-12 months old, then some develop signs for concepts before they are 10 months old.
  12. The section “Nonhuman babbling” states: “Not only are songbird and human language parallel regarding neural and molecular factors, they also are similar in how their communication is initially produced. Observations about these similarities can be traced back to Charles Darwin and his studies. Avian and mammalian brains are similar in form and connectivity and there may even be a gene that is relevant to speech found in both organisms.” When there may be a gene that is relevant to speech found in both organisms, then the statement that songbird and human language are parallel in molecular factors cannot be made.
  13. The section “Nonhuman babbling” states: “Since the females do not sing songs, they are in charge of providing the feedback.” This reasoning seems to have a reference to a publication titled Social interaction shapes babbling: Testing parallels between birdsong and speech, but I have a doubt. There may be another reason why females provide the feedback; for example, they may be more oriented towards caring, while males may be more oriented towards guarding.


Objectivity: good

Explanation:

  1. In my opinion, the article stresses scientific research and undervalues information that has been written for parents.


Completeness: good

Explanation:

  1. The lead section states: “Infants begin to produce recognizable words usually around 12 months, though babbling may continue for some time afterward.”. This statement can be made more exact with the following copyright-respecting paraphrases.
    1. Infants begin to understand some words of their caregivers' speech when they are 5 to 8 months old. Talking begins when they are between 10 and 20 months old.[10]
    2. Many babies pronounce their first words when they are 10 or 11 months old. Because it is very difficult to recognize the first words, the precise month cannot be determined.[11]
    3. When children are 12 months old, 50% will haven spoken their first words. When they are 18 months old, 90% will have spoken their first words.[12]
  2. The following copyright-respecting paraphrases are meant to show that more attention can be given to the role of parents. The paraphrases are so listed that a more or less continuous flow of information results.
    1. When a baby is about 6 weeks old, it reacts to being smiled at or being talked to, with smiling and trampling. When a baby is about 2 months old, it combines smiling with small fluent sounds. A few weeks later, it distinguishes between being smiled at and being talked to; it gives the same response.[13]
    2. This 'talking' of of a baby is not meant to say anything specific, but is meant to take part in the conversation with the caregiver. The baby uses its voice to have contact with the caregiver, and this contact consists of taking turns in the conversation. When the 'talking' of a baby is answered by ringing a bell instead, then there is no subsequent answer from the baby. When a baby is being talked to a lot, the baby will also 'talk' a lot. Babies do not 'talk' only when being talked to, but also 'talk' when they are alone in their beds. But even then, this solitary 'talking' is exercised more when the baby is being talked to more in general.[14]
    3. The second quarter of the first year of a baby's life is characterized by a flood of babbling. When a baby is 3 or 4 months old, most sounds are open vowels. It says “Aaah” and “Oooh”. The sounds resemble those of a pigeon. This stadium is often called cooing. The p, b and m are the first consonants that are added. When this happens, cooing changes to sounds that are more similar to words. By adding these consonants, a baby learns to make more complicated sounds. When a baby is being talked to a lot, babbling will be more fluent. When a baby is neglected or deaf, babbling takes place nevertheless, but only to a certain extend.[15]
    4. When a baby, younger than six months old, babbles and makes noises, it may not be concluded that its hearing is normal. Deafness can only be recognized by observing a baby's reaction to noise.[16]
    5. When a baby is about 4 or 5 months old, it will learn to make more complicated sounds at an higher pace, provided that the baby is being talked to a lot.[17]
    6. Parents are responsible for the stimulation of a child's babbling. Some parents have no difficulty to talk to their babies, but others feel ashamed to talk to babies that cannot answer. Although parents cannot change their personality, they can create situations that make it less difficult to talk to their babies. For example, they can show them a picture book. Another method is to tell the baby in detail what is being done when caring for the baby.[18]
    7. There is good evidence that babies of four months old prefer Motherese to normal speech, even though they do not understand the one or the other. Motherese is a way of speaking with high pitch, slow word rate, and exaggerated intonations. It is employed almost universally by adults when they talk to infants. This remarkable mutual adjustment is the first indication that our species is biologically adapted to learning a language.[19]
  3. The following copyright-respecting paraphrases give different ideas about the effects of babbling.
    1. Babies have an innate interest for the human voice and are inclined to babble. A baby will gradually associate the voice of a caregiver with the satisfaction of personal needs and with pleasure. When a baby babbles, the baby associates this with the caregiver's voice, and thus with pleasure.[20]
    2. Crying, smiling and babbling, and later calling and certain gestures, can all be grouped to signalling behaviour, the effect of which is to bring mother to child. Crying is effective from birth onwards, but smiling and babbling are not during the first four weeks. When a baby smiles and babbles a mother returns a smile; she also talks to, strokes, and pats the baby, and perhaps she picks it up. In all this each partner seems to express joy and the certain effect is a prolongation of their social interaction.[21]
  4. The following copyright-respecting paraphrases give additional information.
    1. When a baby is picked up it ceases to smile, and it also ceases to babble.[22]
    2. Sooner or later, infants vocalise more in interaction with their familiar mother-figure than with anyone else. Wolff (1963) noticed it in infants of five or six weeks old.[23]
    3. In the ninth month a baby starts making long series of syllables, such as loo-loo-loo-loo-loo. Pitch and emphasis are also varied. At the same time, the baby starts making series as ah-dee-dah-boo-maa. When a baby makes these kinds of sequences, the first words will be next.[24]
    4. Deaf babies usually babble during the first 6 months, but then the vocalizations die away.[25]


Respect for copyright laws: no opinion

Explanation:

  1. Respect for copyright laws can only be completely checked when the article is fully referenced, and a copy of all sources is at hand. The article is not fully referenced, and I did not have the will to acquire a copy of all sources.
  2. I checked the online source by Laura Ann Petitto. This was in order.
  3. I checked the copyright of the photograph. This was in order.
  4. It is possible that the subsection “Sac-winged bat” was copied from the source, because the linguistic quality of this subsection is very high. The first sentence and the word “correlated” raise the suspicion even more. The source is a periodical of Springer-Verlag, and could not be obtained without payment.


Absence of original research: good at best

Explanation:

  1. The absence of original research can only be completely checked when the article is fully referenced, and a copy of all sources is at hand. The article is not fully referenced, and I did not have the will to acquire a copy of all sources.
  2. It is imaginable that the third paragraph of the section “Babbling in humans” is original research. This paragraph could have been written by someone who works at an infant welfare centre.
  3. The subsection “Physiology of babbling” contains: “As a baby begins to produce sounds beyond the reduplicated sequences of babbling, they exhibit equal sized mouth or hand openings on the right and left sides.”. This statement is not supported by the source.
  4. The section “Babbling in deaf infants” contains: “It is also difficult to locate deaf infants that have had severely impaired hearing since birth, have been diagnosed within the first year of their lives, and do not suffer from any other impairments.”. In this sentence, the word locate can be original research resulting from inaccurate paraphrasing of the word identify.
  5. The subsection “Babbling in deaf infants” contains: “Although all infants move their hands in imitation to what is modeled in their environment,”. This statement is not supported by the source.
  6. The subsection “Babbling in deaf infants” contains: “This was originally thought to represent the first indicators of sign language.”. This statement is not supported by the source.

Notes[edit]

  1. Wikipedia articles should be based on reliable published secondary sources, and to a lesser extend, to tertiary sources. Primary sources that have been reliably published may be used in Wikipedia, but only with care. (See Wikipedia:No original research) Of the eighteen sources that the article lists, only two clearly are secondary sources, and no less than twelve are primary sources. In my view, it is possible to base a decent account about the babbling of humans primarily on secondary sources, and to use primary sources for details only.
  2. The Dutch and German Wikipedia articles on language acquisition provide interesting reading on the matter of whether or not babbling is a phase in language development. The Dutch article states that language development is often devided in four phases, which the article lists. The first phase is the prelingual period, that comprises of vocalizations, cooing, and babbling. This means that babbling itself is not recognized as a phase in language development. The German article, even though it gives much more information, does not feature the scheme of four phases that the Dutch article presents, but instead gives detailed information for 9 periods of time. This suggests that the aforementioned scheme is not generally adopted.
  3. This review will not be explained any further.

Rating[edit]

Class: C

Explanation:

  1. The article does not comply with the requirements of class GA, for the following reasons. The prose is sometimes not clear. The prose is often not concise. Grammar is often not correct. The article does not comply with the Manual-of-style requirements for lead sections: the lead does not mention non-human babbling. The article does not provide a reference for all sources. The article contains original research. The article is not factually accurate.
  2. The article does not comply with the requirements of class B, for the following reasons. There are many major grammatical errors. The article does not seem to have the broadest intended audience: parents of all social classes do not seem to be included.


Importance: Mid

Explanation:

  1. The subject is of some interest to all who have a baby.

References[edit]

  1. ^ Psychology, 5th edition, by Henry Gleitman, Alan J. Fridlund, and Daniel Reisberg, W. W. Norton & Company, Inc., 1999, page 372.
  2. ^ Baby en Kind, 4th edition, by Penelope Leach, Uitgeverij Kosmos BV, 1986, page 180.
  3. ^ Baby en Kind, 4th edition, by Penelope Leach, Uitgeverij Kosmos BV, 1986, pages 181-182.
  4. ^ Attachment and Loss, Volume 1, Attachment, 2nd edition, by John Bowlby, Penguin Books Ltd, 1987, pages 287-288.
  5. ^ Attachment and Loss, Volume 1, Attachment, 2nd edition, by John Bowlby, Penguin Books Ltd, 1987, page 289.
  6. ^ Baby en Kind, 4th edition, by Penelope Leach, Uitgeverij Kosmos BV, 1986, page 261.
  7. ^ Psychology, 5th edition, by Henry Gleitman, Alan J. Fridlund, and Daniel Reisberg, W. W. Norton & Company, Inc., 1999, page 372.
  8. ^ Baby en Kind, 4th edition, by Penelope Leach, Uitgeverij Kosmos BV, 1986, page 181.
  9. ^ Psychology, 5th edition, by Henry Gleitman, Alan J. Fridlund, and Daniel Reisberg, W. W. Norton & Company, Inc., 1999, page 374.
  10. ^ Psychology, 5th edition, by Henry Gleitman, Alan J. Fridlund, and Daniel Reisberg, W. W. Norton & Company, Inc., 1999, page 374.
  11. ^ Baby en Kind, 4th edition, by Penelope Leach, Uitgeverij Kosmos BV, 1986, page 263.
  12. ^ De aangeklede aap – het dier in de mens, 2nd edition, by Desmond Morris, Van Holkema & Warendorf/Unieboek BV, 1995, page 171.
  13. ^ Baby en Kind, 4th edition, by Penelope Leach, Uitgeverij Kosmos BV, 1986, page 180.
  14. ^ Baby en Kind, 4th edition, by Penelope Leach, Uitgeverij Kosmos BV, 1986, pages 8, 180-181.
  15. ^ Baby en Kind, 4th edition, by Penelope Leach, Uitgeverij Kosmos BV, 1986, page 181.
  16. ^ Baby en Kind, 4th edition, by Penelope Leach, Uitgeverij Kosmos BV, 1986, page 181.
  17. ^ Baby en Kind, 4th edition, by Penelope Leach, Uitgeverij Kosmos BV, 1986, page 182.
  18. ^ Baby en Kind, 4th edition, by Penelope Leach, Uitgeverij Kosmos BV, 1986, pages 182-183.
  19. ^ Psychology, 5th edition, by Henry Gleitman, Alan J. Fridlund, and Daniel Reisberg, W. W. Norton & Company, Inc., 1999, pages 373-374.
  20. ^ Baby en Kind, 4th edition, by Penelope Leach, Uitgeverij Kosmos BV, 1986, pages 8, 260.
  21. ^ Attachment and Loss, Volume 1, Attachment, 2nd edition, by John Bowlby, Penguin Books Ltd, 1987, pages 244-246.
  22. ^ Attachment and Loss, Volume 1, Attachment, 2nd edition, by John Bowlby, Penguin Books Ltd, 1987, page 246.
  23. ^ Attachment and Loss, Volume 1, Attachment, 2nd edition, by John Bowlby, Penguin Books Ltd, 1987, pages 289, 301.
  24. ^ Baby en Kind, 4th edition, by Penelope Leach, Uitgeverij Kosmos BV, 1986, page 263.
  25. ^ Baby en Kind, 4th edition, by Penelope Leach, Uitgeverij Kosmos BV, 1986, page 260.

Bibliographic information[edit]

  1. Baby en Kind, 4th edition, by Penelope Leach, Uitgeverij Kosmos BV, 1986, is a Dutch translation of Baby and Child, published by Michael Joseph Limited, London.
  2. De aangeklede aap – het dier in de mens, 2nd edition, by Desmond Morris, Van Holkema & Warendorf/Unieboek BV, 1995, is a Dutch translation of The Human Animal, published by BBC Books, a division of BBC Enterprises Ltd.

Signatures[edit]

  1. Maarten 1963 (talk) 22:20, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
  2. Maarten 1963 (talk) 21:25, 12 July 2012 (UTC)


Thanks for your comments. However, I don't understand the purpose of conducting a review like this instead of making the changes yourself. If you're going to all the trouble of finding ways to improve the article, why not just make the improvements (at least the simple ones about wording)? By simply making the changes, there would be no need to catalog them. As far as I can tell, the suggested edits have not yet been made. I refer to WP:BOLD. --Albany NY (talk) 03:41, 9 February 2013 (UTC)