Talk:Language development

	Linguistics portal 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.LinguisticsWikipedia:WikiProject LinguisticsTemplate:WikiProject LinguisticsLinguistics articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Neuroscience

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Neuroscience, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Neuroscience 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.NeuroscienceWikipedia:WikiProject NeuroscienceTemplate:WikiProject Neuroscienceneuroscience articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Fiorellamedinaperez.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 02:11, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Consider deleting this page

Consider deleting this page and pointing to Language acquisition page. RToes 21:00, 18 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Why would you want to delete it? I read it and the other you want it to point to and wanted both. Maybe we should just add a SEE MORE at the bottom and link Language acquisition. AiRo25 01 March 2006

If both articles are kept then a good distinction should be made between them and they should reference each other. The distinction that I see is that language development is an evolutionary or historical process whereas language acquisition is the process by which children acquire the ability to speak. As it is, both articles refer to the latter process. The interesting material in "language development" could be moved to the language acquisiton article. Bob 07:50, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This article is very important, but it needs something else. How about a source why so many first-words are "mama?" There are plenty of books citing those. How about misconceptions? Demographics? However, I do understand RToes's comment about this article being deleted -- if I were to edit this article, I'd probably end up deleting half of it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.23.195.61 (talk) 19:10, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like to reraise the prospect of deleting this page. Here are the reasons:

Most of the material is already under Language acquisition, and the latter also falls within the remit of the broader Portal:Linguistics.
Any material not on the Language acquisition page could easily be moved over.
Child language researchers typically make little distinction between acquisition and development. Acquisition is the most neutral term, as it reflects both the more nativist side (development) and the more empiricist side (learning).
Regarding Bob's comment above, the issues he raises are more properly covered under Historical linguistics.

If I don't hear back from anybody in the coming weeks I will go ahead and reroute to language acquisition. Hugh rab (talk) 18:12, 19 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It seems crazy that Language Acquisition and Language Development exist in WP as two separate but highly overlapping articles. What happened to the idea of merging them? RoachPeter (talk) 09:44, 13 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Resource ... "saying the practice hurts their language development."

Experts warn of harm to kids from secondhand TV viewing by Greg Toppo, USA Today; excerpt ...

The most recent warning came last week when the American Academy of Pediatrics for the first time included warnings about "secondhand television" in its guidelines for kids under age 2.

97.87.29.188 (talk) 22:04, 24 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Consequences of Bilingualism

I added in this paragraph to introduce this debate to the topic of language development. The reader will see both sides of this debate. It is still in question, whether or not bilingualism is beneficial to the child learning language. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cheetah6666 (talk • contribs) 15:47, 5 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Morphological Development

I changed the headings under grammatical development to reflect the earlier outline in the article. More information will need to be added to supplement syntactic development. I added information about the stages of morphological development proposed by Brown (1973).I also changed the ages to reflect months rather than years for added consistency. I used Bowen, C. (1998). Brown’s Stages of Syntactic and Morphological Development. Retrieved from www.speech-language-therapy.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=33. Which is an adaptation of Brown, R. (1973). A first language: The early stages. London: George Allen & Unwin. Amandafoort (talk) 22:41, 27 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Experiments of kids who did not develop to speak

I'm very curious on more real-life accounts of children not being able to develop a language may be due to disability, abuse, or neglection. I once read about the abuse of a little daughter who was locked away and neglected. By the time this was discovered, the kid was too old to develop and could not learn how to speak, only instead of making noises. Why does this occur? I believe a new section should be added to the Wikipedia page of Language development, in order to discuss the science behind how one can't process a language if neglected, or not taught at a young age. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Toanndo (talk • contribs) 06:31, 24 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Language development. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131228122250/http://www.chomsky.info/articles/20021122.pdf to http://www.chomsky.info/articles/20021122.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:53, 16 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]