Analyticals,
feedback on the Leila paragraphs and the Evie mini-investigations - I will go through this as a class shortly because lessons learned here can be applied to investigation and exam work. Once you're done with Halliday (the last tip), go onto your analysis for your investigation, trying to apply any lessons learned:
Use a clear PEE structure with an ‘x uses y to z’ POINT format.
Be descriptive rather than prescriptive e.g. say ‘uses a non-standard pronunciation’ rather than
mistake/mispronounced. I know you can't use 'virtuous errors' when talking about pronunciation because non-standard pronunications aren't virtuous (they don't show what a child knows about language, unless you can link to the 'fis phenomenon' perhaps) but some other non-standard uses (particularly over-extension and over-generalisation) probably could be explored as virtuous errors and linked to Chomsky.
Avoid stray apostrophes e.g. “support’s” – only use for
possession and omission, not before other kinds of inflection e.g. plural or
second person. Do use one in the possessive e.g. “Skinner’s theory”.
Grandmother not grandma unless using the name from the
transcript as a name, not a concrete noun e.g. ‘Grandma uses interrogatives’ is
fine with a capital (because it is her name as far as Evie and the trascript labelling is concerned) but ‘her grandmother uses interrogatives’ doesn’t have one. Same in the Leila transcript - also use father and not dad (unless Dad) - always go for the more formal alternative when making academic language choices e.g. avoid contractions.
Careful with imperatives - “you choose” isn’t grammatically an imperative as it starts with a
pronoun not a verb but it is a cloaked imperative (it is cloaked as a
declarative but the modal verb is elided – it could be 'you can choose' or 'you
should choose' but it has a commanding feel – although it is an offer, it is
unlikely Evie would feel she could say no). If you say something is a cloaked imperative, you must say how it would be phrased if it were an imperative e.g. 'choose which animal is next, Evie'.
Refer to Grandma’s echoing, her modelling, her repairs to
get more AO1 in a paragraph on the recasting of Evie’s utterances.
Observer’s paradox, not any other variant I have come across!
Tag questions, open and closed questions – what are they
achieving? Put it into more of a developmental context. Link to Bruner,
Vygotski and Piaget.
Link to theory as well as context every paragraph and don’t
forget power and gender theory. Tentatively evaluate the relevance of theory looking for opportunities to challenge it e.g. when evidence contradicts theory.
You need more cohesion – plan for logical flow and linked points.
Leave out points where you don’t know the relevant terms and
theory- it lowers your grade if you don’t write
consistently in-depth.
Never say proved/disproved! Say how far they are supported or contradicted and evaluate, offering alternative interpretations as to why.
Patterns and contrasts are high-level and overview is important. Try and plan to get those in.
Halliday's functions - do some research right now! They are great for giving an overview of the kind of talk happening - you don't need to memorise them all but some would be good.
