Mayu Takasaki | Queen's University at Kingston (original) (raw)
Address: Kingston, Ontario, Canada
less
Uploads
Papers by Mayu Takasaki
Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 2009
A study of 104 Japanese-speaking 2-to 5-year-olds tested the relation between numeral and quantif... more A study of 104 Japanese-speaking 2-to 5-year-olds tested the relation between numeral and quantifier acquisition. A first study assessed Japanese children's comprehension of quantifiers, numerals, and classifiers. Relative to English-speaking counterparts, Japanese children were delayed in numeral comprehension at 2 years of age but showed no difference at 3 and 4 years of age. Also, Japanese 2-year-olds had better comprehension of quantifiers, indicating that their delay was specific to numerals. A second study examined the speech of Japanese and English caregivers to explore the syntactic cues that might affect integer acquisition. Quantifiers and numerals occurred in similar syntactic positions and overlapped to a greater degree in English than in Japanese. Also, Japanese nouns were often dropped, and both quantifiers and numerals exhibited variable positions relative to the nouns they modified. We conclude that syntactic cues in English facilitate bootstrapping numeral meanings from quantifier meanings and that such cues are weaker in classifier languages such as Japanese.
hen we look at the issues of learner autonomy in language learning, mainly three goals spring to ... more hen we look at the issues of learner autonomy in language learning, mainly three goals spring to mind that we would like to pursue with the learner. The first and maybe the most important is reflection, the ability to detach oneself from current learning processes and monitor and evaluate old and new learning processes. The second goal is interaction, the ability to interact in the target language in as many frameworks as are needed. The third goal is experimentation, the ability to experiment with language and learning strategies in a stress-free or stress-reduced environment. One might argue that any materials or "technologies" that can support the learner in achieving these three goals should be selected according to the probability of playing an important role in this pedagogical process. However, we also sometimes play around with materials or technology or see a feature of software and then use this to develop a pedagogical framework around it, just as we look for technology in the broadest sense that can be used to fulfil a particular pedagogical function. Both these views, from pedagogy to technology and from technology to pedagogy are not necessarily contradictory or mutually exclusive; both have their value.
Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 2009
A study of 104 Japanese-speaking 2-to 5-year-olds tested the relation between numeral and quantif... more A study of 104 Japanese-speaking 2-to 5-year-olds tested the relation between numeral and quantifier acquisition. A first study assessed Japanese children's comprehension of quantifiers, numerals, and classifiers. Relative to English-speaking counterparts, Japanese children were delayed in numeral comprehension at 2 years of age but showed no difference at 3 and 4 years of age. Also, Japanese 2-year-olds had better comprehension of quantifiers, indicating that their delay was specific to numerals. A second study examined the speech of Japanese and English caregivers to explore the syntactic cues that might affect integer acquisition. Quantifiers and numerals occurred in similar syntactic positions and overlapped to a greater degree in English than in Japanese. Also, Japanese nouns were often dropped, and both quantifiers and numerals exhibited variable positions relative to the nouns they modified. We conclude that syntactic cues in English facilitate bootstrapping numeral meanings from quantifier meanings and that such cues are weaker in classifier languages such as Japanese.
hen we look at the issues of learner autonomy in language learning, mainly three goals spring to ... more hen we look at the issues of learner autonomy in language learning, mainly three goals spring to mind that we would like to pursue with the learner. The first and maybe the most important is reflection, the ability to detach oneself from current learning processes and monitor and evaluate old and new learning processes. The second goal is interaction, the ability to interact in the target language in as many frameworks as are needed. The third goal is experimentation, the ability to experiment with language and learning strategies in a stress-free or stress-reduced environment. One might argue that any materials or "technologies" that can support the learner in achieving these three goals should be selected according to the probability of playing an important role in this pedagogical process. However, we also sometimes play around with materials or technology or see a feature of software and then use this to develop a pedagogical framework around it, just as we look for technology in the broadest sense that can be used to fulfil a particular pedagogical function. Both these views, from pedagogy to technology and from technology to pedagogy are not necessarily contradictory or mutually exclusive; both have their value.