Tuesday, 13 December 2016

English

Code-switching

This article is about alternating between more than one language in speech. For other uses, see Code-switching (disambiguation).
In linguistics, code-switching occurs when a speaker alternates between two or more languages, or language varieties, in the context of a single conversation. Multilinguals, speakers of more than one language, sometimes use elements of multiple languages when conversing with each other. Thus, code-switching is the use of more than one linguistic variety in a manner consistent with the syntax and phonology of each variety.

Code-switching is distinct from other language contact phenomena, such as borrowing, pidgins and creoles, loan translation (calques), and language transfer (language interference). Borrowing affects the lexicon, the words that make up a language, while code-switching takes place in individual utterances.[1][2][3] Speakers form and establish a pidgin language when two or more speakers who do not speak a common language form an intermediate, third language. On the other hand, speakers practice code-switching when they are each fluent in both languages. Code mixing is a thematically related term, but the usage of the terms code-switching and code-mixing varies. Some scholars use either term to denote the same practice, while others apply code-mixing to denote the formal linguistic properties of language-contact phenomena and code-switching to denote the actual, spoken usages by multilingual persons.[4][5][6]

In the 1940s and the 1950s, many scholars considered code-switching to be a substandard use of language.[7] Since the 1980s, however, most scholars have come to regard it as a normal, natural product of bilingual and multilingual language use.[8][9]

The term "code-switching" is also used outside the field of linguistics. Some scholars of literature use the term to describe literary styles that include elements from more than one language, as in novels by Chinese-American, Anglo-Indian, or Latino writers.[10] In popular usage, code-switching is sometimes used to refer to relatively stable informal mixtures of two languages, such as Spanglish, Taglish, or Hinglish.[11] Both in popular usage and in sociolinguistic study, the name code-switching is sometimes used to refer to switching among dialects, styles or registers.[12] This form of switching is practiced, for example, by speakers of African American Vernacular English as they move from less formal to more formal settings.[13] Such shifts, when performed by public figures such as politicians, are sometimes criticized as signalling inauthenticity or insincerity.[14]

Social motivations

Code-switching relates to, and sometimes indexes social-group membership in bilingual and multilingual communities. Some sociolinguists describe the relationships between code-switching behaviours and class, ethnicity, and other social positions.[15] In addition, scholars in interactional linguistics and conversation analysis have studied code-switching as a means of structuring speech in interaction.[16][17][18] Some discourse analysts, including conversation analyst Peter Auer, suggest that code-switching does not simply reflect social situations, but that it is a means to create social situations.[19]

Markedness model

Main article: Markedness model
The Markedness Model, developed by Carol Myers-Scotton, is one of the more complete theories of code-switching motivations. It posits that language users are rational and choose to speak a language that clearly marks their rights and obligations, relative to other speakers, in the conversation and its setting.[20] When there is no clear, unmarked language choice, speakers practice code-switching to explore possible language choices. Many sociolinguists, however, object to the Markedness Model’s postulation that language-choice is entirely rational.[21][22]

Psychology

Motor developmentPerceptual and Motor Development Domain
California Infant/Toddler Learning & Development Foundations.
Foundations

Perceptual Development
Gross Motor
Fine Motor
References

Return to Contents

Perception refers to the process of taking in, organizing, and interpreting sensory information. Perception is multimodal, with multiple sensory inputs contributing to motor responses (Bertenthal 1996). An infant’s turning his head in response to the visual and auditory cues of the sight of a face and the sound of a voice exemplifies this type of perception. Intersensory redundancy, “the fact that the senses provide overlapping information . . . is a cornerstone of perceptual development” (Bahrick, Lickliter, and Flom 2004).

“Motor development refers to changes in children’s ability to control their body’s movements, from infants’ first spontaneous waving and kicking movements to the adaptive control of reaching, locomotion, and complex sport skills” (Adolph, Weise, and Marin 2003, 134). The term motor behavior describes all movements of the body, including movements of the eyes (as in the gaze), and the infant’s developing control of the head. Gross motor actions include the movement of large limbs or the whole body, as in walking. Fine motor behaviors include the use of fingers to grasp and manipulate objects. Motor behaviors such as reaching, touching, and grasping are forms of exploratory activity (Adolph 1997).

As infants develop increasing motor competence, they use perceptual information to inform their choices about which motor actions to take (Adolph and Joh 2007). For example, they may adjust their crawling or walking in response to the rigidity, slipperiness, or slant of surfaces (Adolph 1997). Motor movements, including movements of the eyes, arms, legs, and hands, provide most of the perceptual information infants receive (Adolph and Berger 2006). Young children’s bodies undergo remarkable changes in the early childhood years. In describing this development, Adolph and Avolio (2000, 1148) state, “Newborns are extremely top-heavy with large heads and torsos and short, weak legs. As infants grow, their body fat and muscle mass are redistributed. In contrast to newborns, toddlers’ bodies have a more cylindrical shape, and they have a larger ratio of muscle mass to body fat, especially in the legs.” These changes in weight, size, percentage of body fat, and muscle strength provide perceptual/motor challenges to infants as they practice a variety of actions (Adolph and Berger 2006). This dramatic physical development occurs within the broad context of overall development. As infants master each challenge, their perceptual and motor behavior reflects their ever-present interpersonal orientation and social environment.

The extent and variety of infant perceptual and motor behavior are remarkable. Infants and toddlers spend a significant part of their days engaged in motor behavior of one type or another. By three and a half months of age, infants have made between three and six million eye movements during their waking hours (Haith, Hazen, and Goodman 1988). Infants who crawl and walk have been found to spend roughly half of their waking hours involved in motor behavior, approximately five to six hours per day (Adolph and Joh 2007, 11). On a daily basis infants who are walking “. . . take more than 9,000 steps and travel the distance of more than 29 football fields. They travel over nearly a dozen different indoor and outdoor surfaces varying in friction, rigidity and texture. They visit nearly every room in their homes and they engage in balance and locomotion in the context of varied activities” (Adolph and Berger 2006, 181).

Early research in motor development involved detailed observational studies that documented the progression of infant motor skills and presented an understanding of infant motor behavior as a sequence of universal, biologically programmed steps (Adolph and Berger 2006; Bertenthal and Boker 1997; Bushnell and Boudreau 1993; Pick 1989). In comparison, current research in motor development often emphasizes action in the context of behavior and development in the perceptual, cognitive, and social domains (Pick 1989). In particular, contemporary accounts of infant motor development address (1) the strong relationship between perception and action (Bertenthal 1996; Gibson 1988; Thelen 1995), (2) the relationship between actions and the environment (Gibson 1988; Thelen 1995), and (3) the importance of motives in motor behavior, notably social and explorative motives (von Hofsten 2007). Although historical approaches may encourage professionals to focus on the relationship between growing perceptual/motor skills and the child’s increasingly sophisticated manipulation and understanding of objects, contemporary understanding suggests the value of observation of this progression. How these developing behaviors and abilities play a role in the social/emotional aspects of the child’s life and functioning, such as forming early relationships and building an understanding of others, may be noteworthy.

The contemporary view suggests that thinking about perceptual/motor development can be inclusive of infants and toddlers with disabilities or other special needs. Children whose disabilities affect their perceptual or motor development still want to explore and interact with the people and environment around them. Although the perceptual and motor development of children with disabilities or other special needs may follow a pathway that differs from typical developmental trajectories, sensitive and responsive caregivers can provide alternative ways in which to engage children’s drive to explore, building on their interests and strengths and supporting their overall physical and psychological health.

Pioneering researchers in infant motor development used novel and painstaking methods to study the progression of infant skill acquisition (Adolph and Berger 2005; Adolph 2008). Their findings were presented for both professionals and the public in the form of milestone charts that depicted motor skill acquisition as a clear progression through a series of predictable stages related to chronological age (Adolph 2008; Adolph, Weise, and Marin 2003). More recent research in the area of perceptual and motor development has indicated substantial variability between children in the pathways to acquiring major motor milestones such as sitting and walking (Adolph 1997; Adolph 2008). Each child may take a unique developmental pathway toward attainment of major motor milestones (Adolph and Joh 2007). Crawling, for example, is not a universal stage. Research clearly shows that not all children crawl before they walk (Adolph 2008). Although most children walk independently around age one, the normal range for acquisition of this behavior in western cultures is very broad, between 9 and 17 months of age (Adolph 2008). Age has traditionally been treated as the primary predictor of when landmark motor behaviors occur, but studies now indicate that experience may be a stronger predictor than age is in the emergence of both crawling (Adolph and Joh 2007) and walking (Adolph, Vereijken, and Shrout 2003).

It is important to recognize that, though developmental charts may show motor development unfolding in the form of a smooth upward progression toward mastery, the development of individual children often does not follow a smooth upward trajectory. In fact, “detours” and steps backward are common as development unfolds (Adolph and Berger 2006, 173). Infant motor development can be understood as a process in which change occurs as the infant actively adapts to varying circumstances and new tasks (Thelen 1995). Thelen (1994) demonstrated this experimentally in her well-known study in which three-month-old babies, still too young to coordinate their movements to be able to sit, reach, or crawl, learned to coordinate their kicks in order to engage in the novel task of making a mobile move. Cultural and historical factors, including caregivers’ behavior, also affect the ways in which infants engage in motor behaviors. For example, Adolph and Berger (2005) observed that mothers in Jamaica and Mali “train” infants to sit by propping up three- to four-month-old infants with pillows in a special hole in the ground designed to provide back support.

For years, researchers, educators, and early childhood professionals have emphasized the interrelatedness of the developmental domains. The current research supports an even greater appreciation of the profound role of interrelatedness and interdependence of factors, domains, and processes in development (Diamond 2007). The developmental domains are linked not only with one another, but also with factors such as culture, social relationships, experience, physical health, mental health, and brain functioning (Diamond 2007). In the case of perceptual and motor behavior, Diamond (2007) has observed that perception, motor behavior, and cognition occur in the context of culture, emotion, social relationships, and experience, which in turn influence physical and mental health as well as overall brain functioning. Bertenthal (1996) has proposed that perception and motor action are interrelated rather than autonomous processes. They may be best viewed as different components of an action system. Common behaviors such as reaching and turning the head for visual tracking illustrate the interrelatedness of the motor, perceptual, cognitive, and social-emotional domains in infant development. Even as very young infants, children are highly motivated to explore, gain information, attend, and engage their physical and social environments (Gibson 1987). As Gibson (1988, 5) explains: “We don’t simply see, we look.” Research by Berthier (1996, 811) indicates that “infant reaching is not simply a neural program that is triggered by the presence of a goal object, but that infants match the kinematics of their reaches to the task and their goals.”

Perception and motor action play a key role in children’s experiences and psychological processes (Thelen 1995). They also contribute to human psychological development in general, since ultimately “behavior is movement” (Adolph and Berger 2005, 223), and psychology can be defined as the study of human behavior. It has been proposed that infants’ use of social information to guide their motor behavior in physically challenging or unfamiliar situations provides an excellent means to study infant social cognition (Tamis-LeMonda and Adolph 2005).

Perceptual Development

Infants’ perceptual skills are at work during every waking moment. For example, those skills can be observed when an infant gazes into a caregiver’s eyes or distinguishes between familiar and unfamiliar people. Infants use perception to distinguish features of the environment, such as height, depth, and color. “The human infant is recognized today as ‘perceptually competent’; determining just how the senses function in infancy helps to specify the perceptual world of babies” (Bornstein 2005, 284). The ability to perceive commonalities and differences between objects is related to the cognitive domain foundation of classification. Infants explore objects differently depending upon object features such as weight, texture, sound, or rigidity (Palmer 1989). Parents and professionals may have observed young children exploring a slope, such as a slide, by touching it with their hands or feet before they decide whether to slide down it or not. Research by Adolph, Eppler, and Gibson (1993) suggests that learning plays a part in young children’s decision making in physically risky situations, such as navigating slopes, and that exploratory behavior may be a means to this learning. Perception is also strongly related to the social-emotional domain, such as when young children perceive the differences between various facial expressions and come to understand what they may mean.

Foundation: Perceptual Development

Return to Top

Gross Motor Development

Gross motor development includes the attainment of skills such as rolling over, sitting up, crawling, walking, and running. Gross motor behavior enables infants to move and thereby attain different and varied perspectives on the environment. Behaviors such as pulling to stand and climbing present children with new learning opportunities. When infants push a toy stroller or shopping cart, they are also engaging in processes related to cognitive development, such as imitation. The gross motor behaviors involved in active outdoor play with other children are related to children’s development of social skills and an understanding of social rules.

English


English is a link language
English has become a link language in the real sense of the term. In India it's slowly becoming the language of communication for the classes and the masses in various corporate offices, MNCs, colleges, schools etc. Slowly but surely people have started to get the hang of it. Spoken English classes are booming and mushrooming in every nook and corner of India. Thanks to the satellite TV and internet revolution more and more people are getting easy access to the once foreign tongue; now Indians are getting to watch the Hollywood blockbusters in the comfort of their drawing rooms and getting to know the culture of the west through soaps etc. This globalization and liberalization has boosted in the overall development of the country. English has become part of life for many Indians, and many can speak fluently and idiomatically like native speakers. For the younger generation it has become the passport to success and prosperity. Over the years the BBC and the British Council have done a yeoman service in spreading and taking the language to the common man. I personally feel indebted to these institutions who have opened vistas of knowledge and learning.

Sent by: Nawal

Comments

Neha, Yamunanagar, Harayana state, India.  2011-06-05
According to me English is a link language but it is not suitable for Indians. Only because of this language we starts avoiding our culture, our mother tongue - Hindi language.

Flag this comment
Aidan Work, Dominion of New Zealand.  2009-08-29
English is given a status as an official language in the Constitution of India.

In southern India, English is preferred as a linking language, as Hindi is commonly spoken in northern India.

English is also a linking language in both Cyprus

Flag this comment
Tom  2006-08-14
English was the official language in India while it was part of the British Empire, but that doesn't mean that everybody knew how to speak it. A distant governmental decree that the population of a country should speak a certain language does not equate to the population being taught the language properly. Most of the population probably didn't even know they were 'supposed' to be speaking English. Even now, Hindu is the 'main' language in India, but only about 200 million people out of the 1 billion population speak it. There are so many different languages native to India that, as Nawal said, English has NOW become a useful communication tool - as new types of media give the public an opportunity to learn the language.

Flag this comment
Michael Rogers  2006-02-24
Well I always thought that English was an official language in India I know it was in the days of the Raj and indeed afterwards. Maybe that has all changed. Who knows today.

Flag this comment

Psychology

Motor developmentPerceptual and Motor Development Domain
California Infant/Toddler Learning & Development Foundations.
Foundations

Perceptual Development
Gross Motor
Fine Motor
References

Return to Contents

Perception refers to the process of taking in, organizing, and interpreting sensory information. Perception is multimodal, with multiple sensory inputs contributing to motor responses (Bertenthal 1996). An infant’s turning his head in response to the visual and auditory cues of the sight of a face and the sound of a voice exemplifies this type of perception. Intersensory redundancy, “the fact that the senses provide overlapping information . . . is a cornerstone of perceptual development” (Bahrick, Lickliter, and Flom 2004).

“Motor development refers to changes in children’s ability to control their body’s movements, from infants’ first spontaneous waving and kicking movements to the adaptive control of reaching, locomotion, and complex sport skills” (Adolph, Weise, and Marin 2003, 134). The term motor behavior describes all movements of the body, including movements of the eyes (as in the gaze), and the infant’s developing control of the head. Gross motor actions include the movement of large limbs or the whole body, as in walking. Fine motor behaviors include the use of fingers to grasp and manipulate objects. Motor behaviors such as reaching, touching, and grasping are forms of exploratory activity (Adolph 1997).

As infants develop increasing motor competence, they use perceptual information to inform their choices about which motor actions to take (Adolph and Joh 2007). For example, they may adjust their crawling or walking in response to the rigidity, slipperiness, or slant of surfaces (Adolph 1997). Motor movements, including movements of the eyes, arms, legs, and hands, provide most of the perceptual information infants receive (Adolph and Berger 2006). Young children’s bodies undergo remarkable changes in the early childhood years. In describing this development, Adolph and Avolio (2000, 1148) state, “Newborns are extremely top-heavy with large heads and torsos and short, weak legs. As infants grow, their body fat and muscle mass are redistributed. In contrast to newborns, toddlers’ bodies have a more cylindrical shape, and they have a larger ratio of muscle mass to body fat, especially in the legs.” These changes in weight, size, percentage of body fat, and muscle strength provide perceptual/motor challenges to infants as they practice a variety of actions (Adolph and Berger 2006). This dramatic physical development occurs within the broad context of overall development. As infants master each challenge, their perceptual and motor behavior reflects their ever-present interpersonal orientation and social environment.

The extent and variety of infant perceptual and motor behavior are remarkable. Infants and toddlers spend a significant part of their days engaged in motor behavior of one type or another. By three and a half months of age, infants have made between three and six million eye movements during their waking hours (Haith, Hazen, and Goodman 1988). Infants who crawl and walk have been found to spend roughly half of their waking hours involved in motor behavior, approximately five to six hours per day (Adolph and Joh 2007, 11). On a daily basis infants who are walking “. . . take more than 9,000 steps and travel the distance of more than 29 football fields. They travel over nearly a dozen different indoor and outdoor surfaces varying in friction, rigidity and texture. They visit nearly every room in their homes and they engage in balance and locomotion in the context of varied activities” (Adolph and Berger 2006, 181).

Early research in motor development involved detailed observational studies that documented the progression of infant motor skills and presented an understanding of infant motor behavior as a sequence of universal, biologically programmed steps (Adolph and Berger 2006; Bertenthal and Boker 1997; Bushnell and Boudreau 1993; Pick 1989). In comparison, current research in motor development often emphasizes action in the context of behavior and development in the perceptual, cognitive, and social domains (Pick 1989). In particular, contemporary accounts of infant motor development address (1) the strong relationship between perception and action (Bertenthal 1996; Gibson 1988; Thelen 1995), (2) the relationship between actions and the environment (Gibson 1988; Thelen 1995), and (3) the importance of motives in motor behavior, notably social and explorative motives (von Hofsten 2007). Although historical approaches may encourage professionals to focus on the relationship between growing perceptual/motor skills and the child’s increasingly sophisticated manipulation and understanding of objects, contemporary understanding suggests the value of observation of this progression. How these developing behaviors and abilities play a role in the social/emotional aspects of the child’s life and functioning, such as forming early relationships and building an understanding of others, may be noteworthy.

The contemporary view suggests that thinking about perceptual/motor development can be inclusive of infants and toddlers with disabilities or other special needs. Children whose disabilities affect their perceptual or motor development still want to explore and interact with the people and environment around them. Although the perceptual and motor development of children with disabilities or other special needs may follow a pathway that differs from typical developmental trajectories, sensitive and responsive caregivers can provide alternative ways in which to engage children’s drive to explore, building on their interests and strengths and supporting their overall physical and psychological health.

Pioneering researchers in infant motor development used novel and painstaking methods to study the progression of infant skill acquisition (Adolph and Berger 2005; Adolph 2008). Their findings were presented for both professionals and the public in the form of milestone charts that depicted motor skill acquisition as a clear progression through a series of predictable stages related to chronological age (Adolph 2008; Adolph, Weise, and Marin 2003). More recent research in the area of perceptual and motor development has indicated substantial variability between children in the pathways to acquiring major motor milestones such as sitting and walking (Adolph 1997; Adolph 2008). Each child may take a unique developmental pathway toward attainment of major motor milestones (Adolph and Joh 2007). Crawling, for example, is not a universal stage. Research clearly shows that not all children crawl before they walk (Adolph 2008). Although most children walk independently around age one, the normal range for acquisition of this behavior in western cultures is very broad, between 9 and 17 months of age (Adolph 2008). Age has traditionally been treated as the primary predictor of when landmark motor behaviors occur, but studies now indicate that experience may be a stronger predictor than age is in the emergence of both crawling (Adolph and Joh 2007) and walking (Adolph, Vereijken, and Shrout 2003).

It is important to recognize that, though developmental charts may show motor development unfolding in the form of a smooth upward progression toward mastery, the development of individual children often does not follow a smooth upward trajectory. In fact, “detours” and steps backward are common as development unfolds (Adolph and Berger 2006, 173). Infant motor development can be understood as a process in which change occurs as the infant actively adapts to varying circumstances and new tasks (Thelen 1995). Thelen (1994) demonstrated this experimentally in her well-known study in which three-month-old babies, still too young to coordinate their movements to be able to sit, reach, or crawl, learned to coordinate their kicks in order to engage in the novel task of making a mobile move. Cultural and historical factors, including caregivers’ behavior, also affect the ways in which infants engage in motor behaviors. For example, Adolph and Berger (2005) observed that mothers in Jamaica and Mali “train” infants to sit by propping up three- to four-month-old infants with pillows in a special hole in the ground designed to provide back support.

For years, researchers, educators, and early childhood professionals have emphasized the interrelatedness of the developmental domains. The current research supports an even greater appreciation of the profound role of interrelatedness and interdependence of factors, domains, and processes in development (Diamond 2007). The developmental domains are linked not only with one another, but also with factors such as culture, social relationships, experience, physical health, mental health, and brain functioning (Diamond 2007). In the case of perceptual and motor behavior, Diamond (2007) has observed that perception, motor behavior, and cognition occur in the context of culture, emotion, social relationships, and experience, which in turn influence physical and mental health as well as overall brain functioning. Bertenthal (1996) has proposed that perception and motor action are interrelated rather than autonomous processes. They may be best viewed as different components of an action system. Common behaviors such as reaching and turning the head for visual tracking illustrate the interrelatedness of the motor, perceptual, cognitive, and social-emotional domains in infant development. Even as very young infants, children are highly motivated to explore, gain information, attend, and engage their physical and social environments (Gibson 1987). As Gibson (1988, 5) explains: “We don’t simply see, we look.” Research by Berthier (1996, 811) indicates that “infant reaching is not simply a neural program that is triggered by the presence of a goal object, but that infants match the kinematics of their reaches to the task and their goals.”

Perception and motor action play a key role in children’s experiences and psychological processes (Thelen 1995). They also contribute to human psychological development in general, since ultimately “behavior is movement” (Adolph and Berger 2005, 223), and psychology can be defined as the study of human behavior. It has been proposed that infants’ use of social information to guide their motor behavior in physically challenging or unfamiliar situations provides an excellent means to study infant social cognition (Tamis-LeMonda and Adolph 2005).

Perceptual Development

Infants’ perceptual skills are at work during every waking moment. For example, those skills can be observed when an infant gazes into a caregiver’s eyes or distinguishes between familiar and unfamiliar people. Infants use perception to distinguish features of the environment, such as height, depth, and color. “The human infant is recognized today as ‘perceptually competent’; determining just how the senses function in infancy helps to specify the perceptual world of babies” (Bornstein 2005, 284). The ability to perceive commonalities and differences between objects is related to the cognitive domain foundation of classification. Infants explore objects differently depending upon object features such as weight, texture, sound, or rigidity (Palmer 1989). Parents and professionals may have observed young children exploring a slope, such as a slide, by touching it with their hands or feet before they decide whether to slide down it or not. Research by Adolph, Eppler, and Gibson (1993) suggests that learning plays a part in young children’s decision making in physically risky situations, such as navigating slopes, and that exploratory behavior may be a means to this learning. Perception is also strongly related to the social-emotional domain, such as when young children perceive the differences between various facial expressions and come to understand what they may mean.

Foundation: Perceptual Development

Return to Top

Gross Motor Development

Gross motor development includes the attainment of skills such as rolling over, sitting up, crawling, walking, and running. Gross motor behavior enables infants to move and thereby attain different and varied perspectives on the environment. Behaviors such as pulling to stand and climbing present children with new learning opportunities. When infants push a toy stroller or shopping cart, they are also engaging in processes related to cognitive development, such as imitation. The gross motor behaviors involved in active outdoor play with other children are related to children’s development of social skills and an understanding of social rules.

Technology

E mail
GeoGebra

GeoGebra
Geogebra.svg
Geogebra software.png
GeoGebra 4.4.3.0 (HTML5 version)
Developer(s) Markus Hohenwarter et al
Stable release 5.0.304.0 (December 12, 2016) [±]
Preview release (none)[1] [±]
Repository dev.geogebra.org/svn/
Written in Java, HTML5
Operating system Windows, macOS, Debian, Ubuntu, Red Hat Linux, openSUSE, Android, iOS; also a web app
Type Interactive geometry software
License Non-commercial freeware; portions under GPL, CC-BY-NC-SA
Website geogebra.org
GeoGebra is an interactive geometry, algebra, statistics and calculus application, intended for learning and teaching mathematics and science from primary school to university level. GeoGebra is available on multiple platforms with its desktop applications for Windows, macOS and Linux, with its tablet apps for Android, iPad and Windows, and with its web application based on HTML5 technology.

Its creator, Markus Hohenwarter,[2] started the project in 2001 at the University of Salzburg, continuing it at Florida Atlantic University (2006–2008), Florida State University (2008–2009), and now at the University of Linz together with the help of open-source developers and translators all over the world.

After a successful Kickstarter campaign, GeoGebra expanded their offerings to include an iPad, an Android and a Windows Store app version.[3]

In 2013, Bernard Parisse's Giac was integrated into GeoGebra's CAS view.[4]

GeoGebra continues to expand its efforts to deliver the best possible dynamic mathematics software and services to students and teachers worldwide, with a community of users that extends to all but a few countries. GeoGebra includes both a commercial and not-for-profit entity, working closely together from the head office in Linz, Austria to continue to expand the software and cloud services available to its user community of students, teachers, and growing network of government partners.

Interactive geometry, algebra, statistics and calculus

GeoGebra is an interactive mathematics software program for learning and teaching mathematics and science from primary school up to university level. Constructions can be made with points, vectors, segments, lines, polygons, conic sections, inequalities, implicit polynomials and functions. All of them can be changed dynamically afterwards. Elements can be entered and modified directly via mouse and touch, or through the Input Bar. GeoGebra has the ability to use variables for numbers, vectors and points, find derivatives and integrals of functions and has a full complement of commands like Root or Extremum. Teachers and students can use GeoGebra to make conjectures and to understand how to prove geometric theorems. Its main features are:

Psychology

Language development

Language development
Page issues
This article is about the acquisition of language by children. For the development of languages for official or educational purposes, see language planning.
Language development is a process starting early in human life. Infants start without language, yet by 10 months, babies can distinguish speech sounds and engage in babbling. Some research has shown that the earliest learning begins in utero when the fetus starts to recognize the sounds and speech patterns of its mother's voice and differentiate them from other sounds after birth.[1]

Usually, productive language is considered to begin with a stage of preverbal communication in which infants use gestures and vocalizations to make their intents known to others. According to a general principle of development, new forms then take over old functions, so that children learn words to express the same communicative functions they had already expressed by preverbal means.[2]

Theoretical frameworks Edit

Main article: Language acquisition
Language development is thought to proceed by ordinary processes of learning in which children acquire the forms, meanings and uses of words and utterances from the linguistic input.[citation needed] The method in which we develop language skills is universal; however, the major debate is how the rules of syntax are acquired.[citation needed] There are two major approaches to syntactic development, an empiricist account by which children learn all syntactic rules from the linguistic input, and a nativist approach by which some principles of syntax are innate and are transmitted through the human genome.[citation needed]

The nativist theory, proposed by Noam Chomsky, argues that language is a unique human accomplishment.[citation needed] Chomsky says that all children have what is called an innate language acquisition device (LAD). Theoretically, the LAD is an area of the brain that has a set of universal syntactic rules for all languages. This device provides children with the ability to construct novel sentences using learned vocabulary. Chomsky's claim is based upon the view that what children hear—their linguistic input—is insufficient to explain how they come to learn language.[citation needed] He argues that linguistic input from the environment is limited and full of errors. Therefore, nativists assume that it is impossible for children to learn linguistic information solely from their environment.[citation needed] However, because children possess this LAD, they are in fact, able to learn language despite incomplete information from their environment. This view has dominated linguistic theory for over fifty years and remains highly influential, as witnessed by the number of articles in journals and books.[citation needed]

The empiricist theory suggests, contra Chomsky, that there is enough information in the linguistic input children receive and therefore, there is no need to assume an innate language acquisition device exists (see above). Rather than a LAD evolved specifically for language, empiricists believe that general brain processes are sufficient enough for language acquisition. During this process, it is necessary for the child to actively engage with their environment. For a child to learn language, the parent or caregiver adopts a particular way of appropriately communicating with the child; this is known as child-directed speech (CDS).[citation needed] CDS is used so that children are given the necessary linguistic information needed for their language. Empiricism is a general approach and sometimes goes along with the interactionist approach. Statistical language acquisition, which falls under empiricist theory, suggests that infants acquire language by means of pattern perception.[citation needed]

Other researchers embrace an interactionist perspective, consisting of social-interactionist theories of language development. In such approaches, children learn language in the interactive and communicative context, learning language forms for meaningful moves of communication. These theories focus mainly on the caregiver's attitudes and attentiveness to their children in order to promote productive language habits.[3]

An older empiricist theory, the behaviorist theory proposed by B. F. Skinner suggested that language is learned through operant conditioning, namely, by imitation of stimuli and by reinforcement of correct responses. This perspective has not been widely accepted at any time, but by some accounts, is experiencing a resurgence. New studies use this theory now to treat individuals diagnosed with autism spectrum disorders. Additionally, Relational Frame Theory is growing from the behaviorist theory, which is important for Acceptance and Commitment Therapy.[4] Some empiricist theory accounts today use behaviorist models.[5]

Other relevant theories about language development include Piaget's theory of cognitive development, which considers the development of language as a continuation of general cognitive development[6] and Vygotsky's social theories that attribute the development of language to an individual's social interactions and growth.[7]

Social intelligence(psychology)

Social intelligence
Not to be confused with collective intelligence or group intelligence.
"Social IQ" redirects here. For the platform Social IQ, formerly known as Soovox Inc., see SocialIQ.
Social intelligence is the capability to effectively navigate and negotiate complex social relationships and environments.[1] Social scientist Ross Honeywill believes social intelligence is an aggregated measure of self- and social-awareness, evolved social beliefs and attitudes, and a capacity and appetite to manage complex social change.[2] Psychologist Nicholas Humphrey believes that it is social intelligence, rather than quantitative intelligence, that defines humans.

The original definition by Edward Thorndike in 1920 is "the ability to understand and manage men and women and girls, to act wisely in human relations".[3] It is equivalent to interpersonal intelligence, one of the types of intelligence identified in Howard Gardner's theory of multiple intelligences, and closely related to theory of mind.[4] Some authors have restricted the definition to deal only with knowledge of social situations, perhaps more properly called social cognition or social marketing intelligence, as it pertains to trending socio-psychological advertising and marketing strategies and tactics. According to Sean Foleno, social intelligence is a person’s competence to understand his or her environment optimally and react appropriately for socially successful conduct.[4]