The Child’s Language in the Dialogical-Discursive Perspective: Retrospective and Theoretical-Methodological Challenges for the Field of Language Acquisition

ABSTRACT

The purpose of this article is to show when and how the dialogical-discursive approach began to serve as a basis for thinking about the language acquisition process in Brazil and abroad - especially in France. This theoretical line seeks to analyze - the speech of children starting from the discursive movements found in the relationship between the child and his or her interlocutor (other), taking into account the situational contexts, the dialogism, the constitution of the subject in the speech, etc. Thus a) we refer to the authors responsible for this approach, in a retrospective; b) we explain the theoretical aspects mobilized during the data analysis of children's speech; and c) we utilize the methodological aspects involved in this theoretical perspective. Our aim, therefore, is to discuss not only this other way of looking at children's language, but also the theoretical and methodological challenges that this approach brings to this specific field of investigation.

KEYWORDS:
Language acquisition; Children; Dialogic-discursive approach; Bakhtin Circle

RESUMO

O objetivo do presente artigo é mostrar quando e de que forma a abordagem dialógico-discursiva começou a servir de base para se pensar o processo de aquisição da linguagem, no Brasil e fora dele - especialmente na França. Essa linha teórica busca analisar a fala da criança a partir dos movimentos discursivos que compreendem a relação entre a criança e o seu interlocutor (outro), levando em consideração os contextos situacionais, a dialogia, a constituição dos sujeitos no discurso etc. Portanto, a) faremos referência aos autores responsáveis por essa abordagem, em uma es, retrospectiva; b) explicitaremos os aspectos teóricos mobilizados durante as análises dos dados de fala de crianças; e c) abordaremos os aspectos metodológicos implicados nessa perspectiva teórica. Nosso intuito é discutir não apenas esse outro olhar lançado para a linguagem da criança, mas os desafios teórico-metodológicos que essa abordagem traz para o campo de investigação.

PALAVRAS-CHAVE:
Aquisição da Linguagem; Criança; Abordagem dialógico-discursiva; Círculo de Bakhtin

Introduction

The mysterious world of the language of children, from the moment it gained the spotlight of researchers, has been looked at from different theoretical perspectives, always in search of answers to many of the still puzzling phenomena that we can observe in the universe of children. Researchers that make use of the most varied theoretical perspectives and who based their studies on behavioralist, innatist, cognitive, connectionist, interactionist or functionalist hypotheses helped build these various paths and serve as a starting point for the discussions we intend to present in this article.

Sustained by these sources, and adding another point of view to the topic, this article presents a paradigm shift that comes to consider this intriguing human language observed at its genesis - in the period of acquisition by the child - from linguistic-discursive phenomena that allow us to glimpse the relationships established between language and discourse in a child's interaction with his or her interlocutor.

Thus, the purpose of this article is to show when and how the dialogical-discursive approach, based on the work of Bakhtin (1993;¹ 1986)², Vološinov (1976;³ 1973)⁴ and Medvedev (1978),⁵ began to serve as a basis for thinking about children’s initiation into language, in the area of Language Acquisition, both in Brazil and abroad - especially in France -, and, moreover, how the theoretical and methodological issues are aligned in this perspective. This theoretical approach, which dialogues with interactionist views such as those of Vygotsky and Bruner, seeks to analyze the speech of children from the discursive movements (SALAZAR ORVIG, 1999) that arise in the interaction between a child and his or her interlocutor (self and other), taking into account the discursive and situational contexts, the dialogue (constitutive of all discourse), the relationships of empirical interaction between subjects, the constitution of the subjects in the discourse and the role they assume during communication, etc.

In order to do so, a) we will refer to the authors who adhere to this approach, in a type of retrospective, presenting some research results obtained by the GEALin-FCLAr (UNESP)/NALingua-CNPq group, in Brazil; b) we will explain the theoretical concepts mobilized during the data analysis of children's speech, such as subject, language, speech genres, otherness, utterance, responsive-active attitude, subjectivity, singularity and identity; c) will approach the methodological aspects involved in the analysis of discursive phenomena investigated by researchers from this perspective, such as: the collection and creation of a database of children organized by the NALingua group; the transcription of data (based on enunciative, situational aspects, and also aspects regarding the relationship between the interlocutors); examples of analysis’ conductors and the importance of considering the cultural aspects involved in the interaction; and the I-other relationship, to observe the language acquisition process.

Our aim, therefore, is to discuss not only this other way of looking at children’s language, but also to examine the theoretical and methodological changes that this approach brings to this field of investigation. It is worth saying that, considering the limits of a publication of this nature, it will not be possible to delve into all these issues; rather, it is about presenting a general panorama that allows the reader to apprehend the point of view, or the “Bakhtinian glasses” aimed at the Language Acquisition field (DEL RÉ et al., 2014a and b).

1 A Brief Theoretical Retrospective to Situate This “New” Way of Looking

Children enter language in different ways, and this shows us how difficult it is to talk about language. Frédéric François

Frédéric François (1988; 1989; 1993; 1994; 2004; 2006), a graduated philosopher and linguist, was one of the first authors to bring Bakhtin and the Circle’s theoretical issues to the discussion of the language of children, intending to achieve a broader understanding of the nature and functioning of human language. He was also concerned with the need to replace the existing theory of language acquisition with one that observed the ways in which language functions, reflecting on language, and language and culture, among other topics. For the author,

First, the central idea is that the child who learns to speak does not go from language (with a kind of linguistic toolbox) to speech (as a set of uses of the language in context), but from the discourses of others to the discourse of oneself. A child's entry into the language circuit is, therefore, in the strongest sense of the term, “dialogical,” this means that it is in and through verbal exchanges and, among other things, through the speech of the other, as a language that is directed to the child, that this language appropriation takes place (FRANÇOIS, 2004, p.25).⁶

In his works, François highlights the importance of dialogism and interaction during a child’s process of language acquisition, referring to Bakhtinian and Vygotskyan theories in several of his texts. Regarding one of his works, which addresses the construction of narratives by children (FRANÇOIS, 1993), Brazilian linguist Leda Verdiani Tfouni (1997) emphasizes the novelty and the relevance of a study that considers the child's entry into discourse to understand how they develop in general.⁷ This analysis considers, above all, the relations between the child and the adult, who interprets, validates, interferes, censures, and ultimately, who interacts with the child, actively participating in the narrative construction.

In the wake of François’ works, those of Anne Salazar Orvig (1999; 2003; 2005; 2006, among others) - a former student of the researcher and a now specialist in the field of Language Acquisition -, also fall into a Bakhtinian perspective that considers language within the dialogue in which it is inscribed and, therefore, the values of the linguistic units themselves are not taken as the point of departure for understanding a child's language, rather the linguistic units acquire value from their functioning within discourse (SALAZAR ORVIG et al., 2005). The author carries out studies based on this assumption, notably a study on the first referential expressions, the second and third person pronouns in particular (SALAZAR ORVIG et al., 2005; 2006), and an interesting study on the plurifunctionality of the determinants and the value they assume in the relationship between the linguistic unit and the discursive context (SALAZAR ORVIG et al., 2013).

Thus, spurred by the works of François (1988; 1989; 1993; 1994; 2004; 2006), followed by those of Salazar Orvig (1999) and collaborators (SALAZAR ORVIG et al., 2005; 2006), we were prompted, along with our research group, GEALin-FCLAr (Study Group on Language Acquisition, College of Letters and Sciences at UNESP, Araraquara)/NALingua-CNPq, to raise new questions about the language of children within a dialogical-discursive context.

Subsequently, in 2008 an academic profile began to gradually take shape.⁸ While this inception and consolidation of the research group in Araraquara was taking place, a collaborative work with the then DIAREF⁹ group, led by Anne Salazar Orvig, who is a professor at the Université Sorbonne Nouvelle Paris 3, also began, and contributed greatly to the maturation of reflections on the process of language acquisition according to its discursive aspects, from a Bakhtinian perspective, for which Salazar Orvig and Frédéric François advocated. Some noteworthy studies, developed according to the influence of this new gaze, contributed to the studies on different linguistic-discursive phenomena, such as: bilingualism (BULLIO, 2014; BUENO, 2017; DE SANTIS; DEL RÉ, 2019; MARQUES, 2019), acquisition/learning of a foreign language (FALASCA, 2012; 2017), reference (BULLIO, 2014; BUENO, 2017), the acquisition and use of morphology by the child (HILÁRIO, 2015), the acquisition of humor (DEL RÉ, 2011; DEL RÉ et al., 2015; DEL RÉ et al., 2019; MCROCZINSKI, 2015) and argumentation (VIEIRA, 2015; VASCONCELOS, 2017; GRECCO, 2017; CURY, 2011), among other topics.

In 2013, new collaborations, this time with the SLOVO and GEED groups, in particular with professors Marina Célia Mendonça (UNESP-FCLAr) and Luciane de Paula (UNESP-Assis), both researchers in the field of discourse, from a Bakhtinian perspective, contributed to the enrichment of the discussions, which generated two books, published in 2014 by Editora Contexto: A linguagem da criança - um olhar bakhtiniano (DEL RÉ et al., 2014a), in which data from children's language appear as a background for a theoretical reflection, and Explorando o discurso da criança (DEL RÉ et al., 2014b), in which are carried out analyses of verbal interaction between children and adults (or among children), children in writing, in argumentation, in playful situations, in narrative etc., in different contexts (family and educational, monolingual and bilingual).

From this trajectory, we can say that two principles serve as the point of departure for the current research developed by the GEALin group: i) that there is an inescapable relationship between language and culture and that is why the understanding of the way language constitutes us as subjects is essential for understanding the functioning of language itself; and ii) that our relationship with language is dialectical: we constitute it and are constituted by it, and it is in this interplay that the subject becomes singular, unique. Starting from these two assumptions implies knowing that focusing only on a child’s acquisition of lexical-grammatical aspects is not enough to understand his or her movements in the construction of meanings in discourse. Therefore, it is important for us - as envisioned by François - to understand the “ways language works”¹⁰ (FRANÇOIS, 2006, p.184) and the socio-cultural aspects involved in the process of language acquisition.

We initiate the investigation, therefore, from a conception that seeks to comprehend the way language works, according to the relations between subjects in certain discursive contexts, analyzing the language of children not through a biological and/or psychological framework (which we believe to be important, although it is not part of gaze on the matter), but mainly by considering the relationship between a child’s language and the sociocultural and ideological aspects that influence his or her linguistic-discursive choices (DEL RÉ et al, 2014 a).¹¹

It is important to note that Bakhtin and the members of the Circle did not specifically deal with the language acquisition process. However, their postulates meet many theoretical and methodological aspects that, in our view, are fundamental to understanding how children acquire the language of their community. For this reason, other authors contribute to current research from a dialogical-discursive perspective. We refer, in particular, to Vygotsky (1962)¹² and Bruner (1983;¹³ 2004). Their theories make it possible to look at interaction, highlighting the importance of the other (father, mother, nanny etc.) and of the ludic aspect in the process of language acquisition by the child.¹⁴

Vygotsky (1962),¹⁵ when conducting his research on the relationship between thought and language, establishes that the interaction between the child and the other is fundamental for the development of language (and cognition). Thus, the author emphasizes the importance of the Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD) and the Zone of Real Development (ZRD) for the acquisition of language by a child, pointing out that the ZRD would be the level at which the child is in terms of development and ZPD would be the moment when the child is already able to perform a certain task, but with the help of an adult - named by Wood, Bruner and Ross (1976) as adult “scaffolding.”

Bruner (1983),¹⁶ in his research on the language of children, based his ideas about Vygotsky’s postulates, evidencing the process of language acquisition starting from the child’s relationship with other interactants, especially with the mother. In addition to the notion of scaffolding, Bruner stresses the importance of formats:

this “arranging” of early speech interaction requires routinized and familiar settings, formats, for the child to comprehend what is going on, given his limited capacity for processing information. These routines constitute what I intend by a Language Acquisition Support System (BRUNER, 1983, p.39).¹⁷

For the author, formats can take place in different situations, such as guessing games, make-believe, that is, in ludic situations or routine scenarios. Games and plays would thus have a fundamental role in the language acquisition process, once again highlighting the importance of interaction in the child's initiation into language.

Researches from an interactionist perspective in the field of Language Acquisition, led by De Lemos (1982; 1992), Pereira-Castro (1985), Figueira (1985), among others,¹⁸ also contributed to the discussions of our group in Brazil. These researches deal with a phase in which the works developed by De Lemos’ group still relied on Vygotsky’s and Bruner’s ideas as a basilar framework, considering that, at that moment, their focus was to analyze language acquisition having children’s interaction with the other as the starting point for their research.

In the wake of these works, we consider that each child enters language in their own way, also highlighting the importance of the other in the language acquisition process. This singular way of looking at the child's entry into language, highlighting what is unique in each child, also conducts the work of French groups such as CoLaJE, DIAREF - groups with whom we collaborate. In addition to the work of these groups, our group holds that beyond the existing regularities in the language acquisition process (such as the age of acquisition, the grammatical aspects that are acquired at each stage, logical aspects that develop in a specific period), there are some phenomena throughout the process that are very particular in each child. These phenomena arise from experiences that are social, cultural, ideological, linguistic etc. and with which the child has contact during their development.

Our focus, therefore, is singular data (mostly longitudinal and naturalistic), considering the heterogeneity that constitutes all discursive production when analyzing a child’s speech: “the naturalistic registration, here, is opposed to the experimental method, in which artificial situations are created to observe the linguistic productions of children when facing tasks that are chosen for these contexts” (DEL RÉ et. al, 2014a, p.21).

Reflecting on these issues allows us to observe, as along with other contemporary theorists, the importance of the other (such as the family) and the relationships between the child and the other when acquiring the language of their community, the discursive elements involved in this process, etc., considering the child not as a passive being, but, on the contrary, as a being who has a voice and is constituted in/by language, going from a subject who is spoken and interpreted by the other to a subject who performs utterances; regarding children as not genetically determined or an autonomous beings, but, rather, constituted by language and always in relation - to other subjects, other discourses, other cultures; and who, based on their linguistic-discursive choices, seeks to demonstrate their discursive intention to the other, manifesting, through these singular acts, their subjectivity (DEL RÉ; HILÁRIO; VIEIRA, 2012).

Other Brazilian researchers, members of the NALingua-CNPq group, also seek to approach language acquisition, in general, according to this concern with discursive and multimodal aspects, such as Cavalcante (1999), Cavalcante; Faria (2015), Vasconcelos (2017), among others, allowing us to establish new dialogues about the child's initiation into language from different fields of knowledge, such as Psychology, Phonoaudiology, Education and Linguistics itself.

Given this initial retrospective, we hope to have been able to present the many theoretical influences that guided our perspectives towards the construction of a dialogical-discursive conception. We now present some details on the theoretical elements that serve as a basis for this perspective, observing children’s speech data.

2 Some Theoretical Clarifications

It is from their lips [the mother’s and the ones’ close to them], in the emotional-volitional tones of their love, that a child hears and begins to acknowledge his own proper name and the names of all the features pertaining to his body and to his inner states and experiences. The words of a loving human being are the first and the most authoritative words about him; they are the words that for the first time determine his personality from outside, the words that come to meet his indistinct inner sensation of himself, giving it a form and a name in which, for the first time, he finds himself and becomes aware of himself as a something (BAKHTIN, 1990, pp.49-50; emphasis added by the author).¹⁹

Even before birth, when a child is still in its mother’s womb, as studies in perception show (HERBINET, 1985; BREZINKA et al., 1997), around the 4th month of pregnancy, since they already have a functional ear, the child is already confronted with language, is sensitive to sounds produced outside the womb (speech, music, voice etc.), has a preference for its mother’s voice, for a particular prosody (child-directed speech) and, even if only in active listening, we can say that they already participate in the interaction as a language subject (DODANE; MARTEL, 2008; VASCONCELOS, 2017). It is a process of constitution in and through language, which continues until the end of their lives.

But what does it mean to say that even still inside the womb the baby already begins to constitute itself as a discursive subject? First, it means that the constitution of the subject is not considered as something individual and autonomous, developed only in the production of that specific subject (their psychological action in relation to the linguistic-discursive material to which they are exposed), or something that is imposed on them (neither by the other - empirical subject - nor by the dominance of language as a system). It is a relationship that is established in and through language, in which the subjects appear, embedded in discourse, in culture, in words that were already said and are constantly reframed.

In addition, given we are dealing with language, we need to make our understanding of it explicit. The values (meanings) present in the word are neither in the self nor in the other, but in the culture that places them in relation to one another: in the ways of communicating through the social roles played out by these subjects, in the interplay between the stable and the unstable in discourse, in the linguistic elements that are aesthetically chosen to utter etc. Therefore, it is not possible to think about language without considering these values and this relationship. For this reason, one of the central notions in the Bakhtinian reflections, which is also central to the reflections of researchers in language acquisition within this perspective, is the way language is conceived. In this approach, it is not possible to think of language in a dichotomous way in relation to discourse, as a system of signs whose individual value is defined only in an oppositional relation within the system itself (a Structural Linguistics approach). The language, in the Circle’s work as a whole, is a “living organism,” whose ideological meanings are constituted historically and socially. Thus, the linguistic sign (the word) receives its value in the relationship between discourses: it is, therefore, a socio-ideological sign. The meanings can only be understood and established in the stream of verbal communication. The utterance is part of the dialogue, which is considered as an uninterrupted communicative process, since every utterance is a response to another utterance and also presupposes a responsive attitude.

For this reason, we believe that language cannot be outside the subject or in the individual mind of the subjects, but it is constituted in social, historical and ideological relations. What we can notice in the works that have this same approach is that, especially during a chil’'s language acquisition period, this relationship between the child and the other (father, mother, nanny, grandparents, caregivers etc.) is fundamental.

This finding has already been explored in the area by several studies dedicated to the speech directed to the child, its characteristics, its support for language acquisition. We can say that, even without using the Bakhtinian perspective, these studies were already aware of what listening to this adult speech would produce in a child’s speech. This means that the child does not passively receive the language of the other, but, on the contrary, they actively participate in the communicative situation, initially through multimodal elements, vocalizations, going on to the first words and the combination of two or more words, until they get to the elaboration of complex utterances.

Thus, after birth, what a child wants to say is, as we stated earlier, interpreted by the other, and this can be observed, for example, in the dialogues in which the adult speaks to the child, who utters only a few or no words at all, or sometimes the child just points to an object, and the mother says “do you want it? I'll give it to you”; or even when the adult speaks for the child, in their turn, interpreting a possible desire they might have: “mommy, don’t give me a bath”; “I want daddy”; “give me that food now, daddy” (MENDONÇA et al., 2014) etc. Throughout their development, adults address children in different ways, asking for their enunciative participation, and children, even when they still do not verbalize, manage to make themselves understood, whether through gestures (of pointing, of denying by pushing something with their hands, of shaking the head), or by crying, gazing and more guttural sounds/signals.

Especially in this period, in which the child still does not speak, we are able to identify the existence of presumptions more clearly (DEL RÉ et. al., 2014a), essential in understanding any statement, but which is even more evident in these situations of interaction with a child or when we are learning the language of a very different culture, for example. At the macro level, the presumption involves the culture of a particular community, with its ideological aspects. The value that an utterance assumes in one society and not in others determines what or how one can talk/discuss about a given issue. At the micro level, especially when it comes to language acquisition, it is often the closest interactants, such as the parents and nannies, can interpret the children’s productions, because they know their speech contexts. In several situations, when interacting with a small child, we do not understand what they mean, because we lack the specific situational or historical context of that family, which only those closest to the child are privy, such as, for example, the child calling a butterfly “dedete” or naming milk “mumu” etc.

In Marxism and the Philosophy of Language (VOLOŠINOV, 1973),²⁰ the author explains that every statement is marked by a “social horizon” (or discursive horizon) of an epoch or social group. The utterance, therefore, encompasses a social context, a potential image of the interlocutor and the indexes of the word’s value; an unspoken one (and therefore presumed) that supports what is said. As we have seen, in order to understand the language acquisition process, it is essential to observe the face-to-face dialogue carried out by a child and the other; however, the utterances’ meanings are determined by the social, historical, ideological aspects that emerge in a given speech community. What is said, for whom and how is apprehended by the child as they are initiated into the language. As at the macro level, what supports a child’s productions in their small community (family, its microculture) is the relative stability of utterances, which present themselves in more or less specific contexts and, thus, allow the child and the adult interlocutor(s) to recover meanings already built or resignifies them. In the Bakhtinian perspective, when we think about meaning construction, we are talking about speech genres.

For Bakhtin (1986),²¹ every utterance is composed by a compositional aspect, a theme and a style, and these utterances are relatively stable in each sphere or field of human activity. According to the author,

These utterances reflect the specific conditions and goals of each such area not only through their content (thematic) and linguistic style, that is, the selection of the lexical, phraseological, and grammatical resources of the language, but above all through their compositional structure. All three of these aspects - thematic content, style, and compositional structure - are inseparably linked to the whole of the utterance and are equally determined by the specific nature of the particular sphere of communication. Each separate utterance is individual, of course, but each sphere in which language is used develops its own relatively stable types of these utterances. These we may call speech genres (BAKHTIN, 1986, p.60; emphasis in the original).²²

We believe, therefore, that the child enters language through speech genres that circulate in the social environments in which they participate. Initially, the interaction between children and adults takes place in primary genres, which are conversational exchanges, that is, everyday conversation. As the child interacts in other discursive contexts and with other interlocutors (school, church, doctor’s office, parks, commerce etc.), they have contact with and play other discursive roles, thus entering other genres. The symbolic game is also a place where children learn, through playful situations, to move to different discursive roles - how to be the teacher or the student when playing school, to be the mommy/daddy or the little daughter when playing house, or playing other roles when playing telephone operator, doctor, supermarket etc., - until they get to writing and thus begin having access to the genres Bakhtin denominates as secondary (BAKHTIN, 1986).²³

It is important to remember that children's access to writing does not take place only when they learn to read and write, but much earlier than that, through literacy events both at home and at school: when parents and teachers read to the child, they encourage them to have contact with books, allow them to manipulate and replicate reading gestures, interpret illustrations, recognize graphic aspects, identify familiar words, etc.

In all of these situations, we see the other’s fundamental role in language acquisition. This other (initially the father or the mother) positions the child as a discursive subject, and, as we mentioned earlier, interprets, responds to and asks for the child’s participation. The self-other relationship (child-interlocutor) creates a discursive space where culture circulates in words, gestures, interactions, updating their meanings.

In the Bakhtinian reflections as a whole, the other is the one who gives the utterance a completion. This completion, however, is always provisional, since it is only possible to have access to the incomplete subject and, therefore, to slices of discourses. It is the other that positions the subject, creating with it a discursive space that allows relationships to be established, to be provisionally fixed. The subject and the others(self and other) assume discursive roles, which can be more or less asymmetrical (such as mother-child, teacher-student, doctor-patient, spouses, roommates, etc.) and, by assuming them, they enable the circulation of possible statements in the discursive horizon that is created around them. This other, therefore, is not a passive listener; they actively participate in the utterance’s production.

In the acquisition field, children and adults share a discursive space even before a child utters its first linguistically recognizable word, either because the adult interacts with and responds to it, giving to their production (gesture, glance, babble etc.) a word (or utterance) status, or because the adults themselves verbalize what, in their opinion, might be the child’s word (MENDONÇA et al., 2014).

The center of the discussion on language in the Circle’s works is the concept of utterance. It is understood as a link in verbal communication, which means that there is no isolated utterance, and therefore every utterance is a response to a previous utterance and, referring to what Bakhtin calls “memory of the future” (BAKHTIN, 1986),²⁴ also to a later one.

Because it is a response and evokes another response, there is no subject who is passive when confronted with an utterance. The subject is responsively active. It is not, however, a necessarily oral response, but a subject’s compelling positioning in relation to the discourse to which they have access: they approach or move away from it, agree or disagree with it. That is why, in Marxism and the Philosophy of Language, Vološinov (1973)²⁵ affirms that there is no neutral word, on the contrary, the word is the stage where ideological struggle takes place and it is always loaded with value. The word constitutes the subject: its subjectivity, its identity, its singular acts.

The concepts of subjectivity, singularity and identity are highly relevant for the studies on language acquisition that base themselves on a dialogical-discursive perspective (DEL RÉ; HILÁRIO; VIEIRA, 2012). We call subjectivity the set of discursive experiences that constitute the subject. It is, therefore, the basis (constituted in and by language) that allows subjects to position themselves in any discourse. Because they are constantly subjected to words and discourse, interacting discursively in different spheres of activities and connecting to new discursive horizons, we can say that subjects are in a constant process of becoming; it is always still to be; therefore, their subjectivity is always in a constitutional movement.

The singularity, in turn, has to do with the act of the utterance and its unrepeatability. As each utterance can only be understood in relation to the time/space in which it is inserted - that is, it is socially, historically and culturally located - there is no utterance whose meaning is fixed, absolutely stable and possible to be recovered without the interference of that time/space. Thus, even though the same word is evoked several times, it gains different meanings in each of its occurrences. On the other hand, Bakhtin (1986)²⁶ states that there is no word that is said for the first time, because every word is the result of a dialogical movement that recaptures other words. We thus reach an apparent contradiction: it is precisely the fact that the subject is plural and heterogeneous, because it is constituted by a word/discourse/value (which is not originally in it, but in the discursive space in which the subject is inserted), that makes it unique, since its response-utterance is unique and unrepeatable (DEL RÉ; HILÁRIO; VIEIRA, 2012). This forced (inescapable) manifestation of the subject when facing a word produces a movement of approaching or distancing. This movement reveals the construction of identity, or an identity displacement, as stated by Falasca (2012).

As we can see, explaining the concepts our work is based on, and which we use to analyze the language acquisition data in a dialogical and discursive perspective is a complex task. This is so because those concepts are very closely related to each other, in a movement of mutual constitution. In this article, we have made an effort to present some of the main notions mobilized by Bakhtinian theory, and which help us reflect upon children’s data, with no intention of exhausting all pertinent discussions to this field of study. Despite the conceptual complexity, assuming this theoretical perspective makes it necessary to clarify that the categories of data analysis are subordinate to the Bakhtinian ideas as a whole. This topic will be addressed in the following sections.

3 Methodological Aspects

Every theoretical displacement involves a series of other displacements, since the questions proposed within a theory may not be as relevant in another perspective. With this idea in mind, the phenomena observed in a theory gain another status, leading to the constitution of a different corpus, even if composed by the productions of the same child. When we change the theoretical perspective, the methodological aspects involved in the investigation must be changed as well.

In the case of the studies on language acquisition that have the dialogical-discursive approach as a basis, it is necessary to point out that we do not intend to “apply a theory” when mobilizing notions proposed by Bakhtin and the Circle, but rather to understand phenomena that are inherent to the children’s process of language acquisition - or the child’s entry into language - by the mobilization of certain concepts. Our focus is, at first, to look at the singular aspects that involve this process of language acquisition, considering translinguistic elements in addition to the linguistic-grammatical elements.

It is necessary, therefore, to understand the questions that can be answered within this theoretical basis; that is, the kind of question we ask ourselves when facing the language phenomenon is what mobilizes this approach. It means that other questions may be answered by other theories, so the importance of other theoretical approaches should not be reduced. Generally speaking, there is no restriction in relation to what is or is not relevant to be studied from a dialogical and discursive perspective, but what must be borne in mind is that all phenomena will be observed from the concept of language explained above: as a living organism, impregnated in culture, with values that are ideologically and historically constructed, mobilizing subjects, who are always in relation to one another, in an interplay that contemplates both the stable and the unstable.

Thus, a child’s speech (or, even before that, their position as a discursive subject interpreted by the other) cannot be understood outside the stream of verbal communication. All categories of analysis created from the observation of the data are subject to the theoretical aspects explained above: the concepts of language, subject, other, speech genres, utterance, responsiveness, subjectivity, singularity, identity etc., and also consider the inescapable relationship between word and culture.

To base the study on a dialogical and discursive conception, however, does not mean disregarding the fact that specific aspects of language (in a structuralist conception of language) can be studied. As an example, we can cite again the works of Salazar Orvig et al. (2013) on the acquisition of determiners, those by Salazar Orvig et al. (2006) and Bullio (2014) about the reference to the first, second and third persons in the child’s discursive production, or that of Hilário (2015) on the acquisition and use of the plural morpheme. The particularity that we point out is that, unlike other studies in which the appearance and use of these linguistic elements (determiners, pronouns, plural morphemes, etc.) by the child are observed taking into account only their linguistic context (syntactic-grammatical), in the studies mentioned above they are submitted to a discursive analysis. This means that even repetitions, generally understood as the migration of excerpts from the mother’s speech to the child’s speech, can be interpreted as discursive resources used by the child to argue, to position themselves in relation to the other’s speech, to manifest some kind of reflection on the language and its uses, etc. Thus, according to a dialogical and discursive approach, considering only pre-established linguistic categories, with already fixed meanings, leads us to discard the meanings’ movement present in any interaction.

Following this, we offer an example of the acquisition of the plural noun in Brazilian Portuguese (HILÁRIO, 2015). In this example, the child (A., 2; 3 years old) is cutting out the pictures of a flyer. At a certain point, she decides to cut out the prices on it as well.

MOTHER what are you going to cut?27 A. the number [pause] this numbers. MOTHER oh the number here ? A. yes the num:ber this this [pause] number. A. another another...

MOTHER	what are you going to cut?27
A.	the number [pause] this numbers.
MOTHER	oh the number here ?
A.	yes the num:ber this this [pause] number.
A.	another another...

The data was collected in a longitudinal and naturalistic way, in moments of interaction between the mother and the child while they played on the living room floor, and it was the object of analysis of an investigation about the acquisition of the nominal plural by the child. As we can see in this short passage, thinking about the acquisition of the nominal plural goes far beyond identifying the occurrences of the plural morpheme in the child’s speech. In just five utterances we can notice: a) a reformulation by the child (the number/numbers), referring to the singular/plural opposition; b) a plural collocation pattern (D_sing + N_plu) (or non-collocation) that differs from the adult’s collocation (D_plu + N_plu or D_plu + N_sing); c) the child’s apparent adherence to the adult’s non-explicit correction (oh the number here? / yes the number); d) the child’s insistence on the use of plural, even if by using resources other than the plural morpheme (repetition of this/this, another/another). Only the observation of the relationship between the utterances of the adult and those of the child allows us to incorporate these elements into the analysis, considering not the final product (the stability in the use of the plural morpheme), but the child's path into the acquisition of the nominal plural in BP (Brazilian Portuguese).

One of the questions that arises as we move this theory to a field that differs from the one it was originally thought to cover is: the ideological issue, which is so present in the Bakhtinian ideas, also relevant to the language acquisition studies? First of all, it is necessary to resume that, for Vološinov (1973, p.11)²⁸ ideology involves the subjects who relate to each other in a certain discursive situation and context:

Signs emerge, after all, only in the process of interaction between one individual consciousness and another. And the individual consciousness itself is filled with signs. Consciousness becomes consciousness only once it has been filled with ideological (semiotic) content, consequently, only in the process of social interaction.

Furthermore, we cannot forget that speaking about a child’s language is actually speaking of language in general. It is not a “minor” or “incomplete” language. It is rather a particular context, as well as so many others to be considered, and in this particular context, the specificities of the subject-child - as well as the specificities of the discursive child-other relationship - need to be taken into account. However, from a theoretical point of view, all observable aspects found in the adult’s language can also be observed in the child’s language. Questions such as “who speaks,” “to whom,” “in what context,” “how is it interpreted by the other,” “what meanings does the word assume and why” etc. are pertinent to thinking about the child's entry into language, their “birth” as a discursive subject, the meaning movements of the words, that migrates from the self to the other (other's word, other's-my own word, my own word), the resignifications. Ideology, therefore, is present in every word: “the word is the ideological phenomenon par excellence […] A word is the purest and most sensitive medium of social intercourse” (VOLOŠINOV, 1973, pp.13-14; emphasis added by the author).²⁹

From a practical point of view, our analyses privilege the singular and relational aspects generally observable in qualitative analyses. This does not mean that the theory makes quantitative analyses impossible. However, as the categories are born from a singular way of looking at the phenomenon in relation to the discursive and situational context, it does not seem effective, at first, to think that the analysis of the phenomenon's frequency would be sufficient to identify its origin and its role in the discourse, although we can cross-check the results with this kind of information. When we look at what is unique, we also focus on what is different, on cases that are rarely or never repeated, and therefore difficult to count for statistical purposes, but at the same time strong enough to test the relevance of a theory: if a theory can explain singularities in different populations (monolingual, bilingual children, children with some kind of syndrome etc.), it is because it is very relevant (DEL RÉ et al, 2014a). In addition, in this perspective, both linguistic and multimodal productions can be analyzed.

An example of this procedure is the study that we developed about humor in the language of children (DEL RÉ, 2011; DEL RÉ et al, 2015; 2019), which seeks to understand how the phenomenon is established, what elements are necessary for its composition in regards to the understanding of it and, above all, for its production. Out of the data from G. (Brazilian) and A. (French), both aged between 24 and 42 months, we were able to identify four essential components of the production of humorous utterances: the incongruence, the retreat, the intention/project of saying and the presumed. The incongruence (or rupture) is the triggering element of humor, because in order for there to be a humorous effect and the interlocutors recognize it as such, an unexpected break in the continuity of discourse is necessary. This process is linked, initially, to a metacognitive work that allows the subjects to distance themselves from discourse. Furthermore, in order for the humorous effect to be successful, there must be an intention, that is, the speaker must be willing to produce this humorous effect in the interlocutor/the other. It is not possible to identify intentionality except through multimodal cues, such as exchanging glances, gestures, etc., which are interpreted by the interlocutor. It is when the expression of this willingness finds an echo in the interlocutor, thanks to the connivance between them and, above all, by a shared knowledge (SALAZAR ORVIG, 2003), that the (shared) humor happens.

In the following episode, we present a funny scene that takes place between father and son, at home, as they were playing with toy cars. The game they are about to play is a car race that the father frequently organizes in the living room hallway. For this game, they select the cars that will take part in the race and those that will be kept in a box. G. (3; 6 years old) does not want to put the cars away and, as he notices that his father is getting a little nervous, because he wants the toys to be organized, G. uses a recurring phrase from his father to try to circumvent the situation:

FATHER and the two others that are going to race.30 FATHER now, all these ones you can put them all inside the box, go! G. what what what what what boy! G. check out if there is a car here! G. a racing car! (laughter) FATHER there is none! (father smiles) G. it’s good!

FATHER	and the two others that are going to race.30
FATHER	now, all these ones you can put them all inside the box, go!
G.	what what what what what boy!
G.	check out if there is a car here!
G.	a racing car! (laughter)
FATHER	there is none! (father smiles)
G.	it’s good!

The funny aspect of this scene is not only in the resumption of the father’s speech (“what what what what boy,” a catchphrase used by a Brazilian comedian), but in the fact that the child does it, imitating his way of speaking, reversing the roles: the father’s voice echoes in G’s voice. This is the unexpected, which causes a rupture in the speech. This resumption of the father’s voice is possible to be verified even through an acoustic analysis that was carried out comparing the speeds of G.’s usual speech, that of the father and the final result of this imitation. Prosody plays an important role in highlighting G’s procedure (DEL RÉ et al, 2017). There is a willingness/intentionality on the part of the child to relax the tension of the moment and not to do what the father asks him to; and since mockery, ironies, etc. are recurrent in the interactions between father and child, G. knows the effect that his speech will produce - and does, because there is connivance between them - on the father: laughter, relaxation. In addition to the intonation used by the child, there is a whole different kind of gesture (arms, body, etc.) that composes this unique communication setting (DEL RÉ et al, 2017).

It was this dialogical-discursive way of looking at the data, with the other as a fundamental part of this interactional interplay, that allowed us to perceive the humorous nuances of this episode. In addition, there is a resumption of other discourses (discursive memory of the past and the future), brought to the enunciative scene by the child, in a singular act, which causes the father to laugh.

From this and other research carried out by research groups that use the same “lenses” to look at the data, it is possible to validate the analyses, as well as to adjust them, thanks to the submission of different production contexts to analysis categories that will be used and tested in each new corpus. In this sense, we seek to constitute a heterogeneous database so that it is possible to observe which factors remain relevant for the analysis of that specific population in each analyzed corpus; what the general factors are and, therefore, open to analysis in a variety of populations etc.

In order to do so, the NALíngua group has been dedicating its efforts since 2008 to the collection and transcription of data from monolingual and bilingual children and adults, who speak several languages (Portuguese, French, Spanish, English, German), in varied production contexts (recordings at home, in interaction with parents; in classes, in interaction with teachers; with or without the participation of the observer/researcher, etc.). All the collected data are being transcribed according to the CHAT standard, using the CLAN program, available on the CHILDES platform (MACWHINNEY, 2000). This standardization facilitates the partnership with different Brazilian and French universities, which can then use the same data for their analysis, including researches that are carried out in different theoretical approaches. The group has already published two textbooks and has offered several courses on this transcription method (DEL RÉ; HILÁRIO; MOGNO, 2011; HILÁRIO et al., 2012; HILÁRIO; DEL RÉ, 2015; DEL RÉ; HILÁRIO; RODRIGUES, 2016).

This method allows us to look at the data and mobilize not only the elements that were effectively verbalized, which can be searched for and reviewed in this tool, but also the enunciative scene as a whole (the relationship between subjects, the situation, the context, the multimodal elements etc.), especially for making use of video data of the analyzed children.

Some Words to End on...

With no intention to exhaust the entire discussion proposed by the dialogic-discursive approach, in this article we intended to present some of its main theoretical and methodological elements, demonstrating the importance of traces that are singular in the development of each child, without setting aside the comprehension of the existing regularity in the children’s process of entering a language. Therefore, our focus is to analyze the observed phenomena from a dialogical perspective, taking into account the linguistic-discursive elements, which we consider to be essential for the understanding of the language acquisition process.

Resuming the work already carried out by the researchers who base their works on this approach, we were able to verify how and when this conception began to outline studies in the field of Language Acquisition, especially in Brazil and in France, also pointing out the main authors who influence research on this perspective. Bakhtin, Vološinov and Médvedev, as well as, of course, Vygotsky, Bruner, François, Salazar Orvig, among others, are the basic pillars of this perspective, providing a view that advocates for the interaction between subjects and the discursive movements resulting from the whole communicative situation, allowing us to more clearly understand the ways in which language works.

Thus, this perspective seeks to reflect upon distinct and multiple phenomena, considering verbal and multimodal aspects, in addition to the mobilization of theoretical aspects discussed by Bakhtin, Vološinov and Médvedev when dealing with the way language works. This new way of looking at the speech of children implies a methodology that contemplates these distinct theoretical aspects, such as the situation of interaction and discursive context, the interactants, the dialogic aspect, the other etc.

In this paper, we hope we were able to present some ways of looking at the process of Language Acquisition from this new perspective. There are evidently many other elements that can be explored in this approach, which we hope to contemplate and discuss in future research.

• Statement of Authorship and Responsibility for Published Content
  We declare that both authors had access to the research corpus, participated actively in the discussion of the results and conducted the review and approval process of the paper's final version.
• Translated by Patrícia Falasca - [e-mail]
• 1
  BAKHTIN, M. M. Rabelais and His World. Translated by Hélène Iswolsky. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1993.
• 2
  BAKHTIN, M. The Problem of Speech Genres. In: BAKHTIN, M. Speech Genres and Other Late Essays. Translated into English by Caryl Emerson and Michael Holquist. Austin, TX: University of Texas Press, 1986.
• 3
  VOLOŠINOV, V.N. Discourse in Life and Discourse in Art (Concerning Sociological Poetics). Trans. I. R. Titunik. In: Freudianism: a Marxist Critique. Ed. I. R. Titunik and Neal H. Bruss. New York: Academic, 1976. Rev. Ed. Indianapolis: Indiana UP, 1976. pp.93-116.
• 4
  VOLOŠINOV, V. N. Marxism and the Philosophy of Language. Translated by. Ladislav Matejka and I. R. Titunik. Cambridge/Massachusetts; London/England: Harvard University Press, 1973.
• 5
  MEDVEDEV, P. N.; BAKHTIN. M. M. The Formal Method in Literary Scholarship: A Critical Introduction to Sociological Poetics. Translated by Albert J. Wehrle. Baltimore and London: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1978.
• 6
  Our translation from the original version (French): “D’abord l’idée centrale que l’enfant qui apprend à parler ne va pas de la langue (comme sorte de boîte à outils linguistiques) à la parole (comme ensemble d’usages de la langue en contexte), mais des discours des autres aux discours de soi. L’entrée de l’enfant dans le circuit du langage est ainsi, au sens fort du terme, ‘dialogique’, c’est-à-dire que c’est dans et par les échanges verbaux et, entre autres, par le biais de la parole de l’autre comme langage qui lui est adressé, que se réalise l’appropriation langagière.”
• 7
  The author states that “[...] little has been said in the literature on Psycholinguistics about the importance, for the development of the child as a whole, in particular for the process of language acquisition, of learning to tell stories” (our translation of the Portuguese - TFOUNI, 1997, p.237). In addition, Tfouni argues that François chooses “transgressions” as privileged data, that is, the “unexpected” structures, which are so common in the child's language, considering them not as a deficit, but as an indication of the movements the child performs within the discursive space. Tfouni’s review of the author's work reveals a welcoming attitude of researchers in the field in relation to an important shift in their study object.
• 8
  The undergraduate scientific initiation, MA and PhD works developed at the Department of Linguistics and the Graduate Program in Linguistics and Portuguese - MA and PhD at the College of Letters and Sciences-UNESP started to assume this perspective, based on the dialogue between Bakhtin's (1993 (for reference, see footnote 1), 1986 (for reference, see footnote 2)), Voloshinov’s (1976 (for reference, see footnote 3), 1973 (for reference, see footnote 4)) and Médvedv’s (1978 (for reference, see footnote 5)) works, and works by authors such as Bruner (1983 (for reference, see footnote 14); 2007) and VYGOTSKY, L. Thought and language. Studies in communication. E. Hanfmann & G. Vakar, (Eds.). MIT Press, 1962.
• 9
  L'acquisition en dialogue des expressions référentielles: approches multidimensionnelles, Programme “Enfants et enfance” (ANR 09 - ENFT - 055) - Sciences humaines et humanités.
• 10
  From the translated version (Portuguese): “os modos de funcionamento da linguagem.”
• 11
  For this reason, in our research there is an emphasis on the fact, as we have already mentioned, that acquiring language does not only mean understanding and producing grammatical elements, but, above all, understanding that words are always inserted in a certain discursive context, in a specific discursive genre, and that, in order for communication to effectively take place, it is necessary to consider the translinguistic elements, such as the linguistic-discursive context, the evaluative intonation, the presumed, the subjects involved in communication, the discourses involved in the communicative situation, among other elements.
• 12
  For reference, see footnote 9.
• 13
  BRUNER, J. S. Child’s Talk: Learning to Use Language. New York: Norton, 1983.
• 14
  There are other concepts mobilized by the authors in their postulates that are important to our perspective. However, due to the nature of the present text, we chose to highlight only a few of them.
• 15
  For reference, see footnote 9.
• 16
  For reference, see footnote 14.
• 17
  For reference, see footnote 14.
• 18
  It is worth mentioning that from 1992 onwards, the research developed by De Lemos's group gained another theoretical direction, approaching the works of Saussure and Lacan: their focus goes to the interaction relationship between the child, the other and the language. For this reason, they start to distance themselves from the idea of language development and to understand that the child is captured by the functioning of language. It is important to emphasize that looking at the unique, the singular, in their new perspective, aims to reveal the dominance of language (and not the subject) in the acquisition process. The subject and the other (or the child and their interlocutor) are subjected to the language order and can only be interpreted from it. Thus, the group's contribution on the dialogical-discursive perspective dates back to the first phase of its research, prior to this new perspective it follows.
• 19
  BAKHTIN, M. M. Author and Hero in Aesthetic Activity (ca. 1920-1923). In: BAKHTIN, M. Art and Answerability. Early Philosophical Essays by M. M. Bakhtin. Translated by Vadim Liapunov. Austin: University of Texas Press, 1990. pp.4-256.
• 20
  For reference, see footnote 4.
• 21
  For reference, see footnote 2.
• 22
  For reference, see footnote 2.
• 23
  For reference, see footnote 2.
• 24
  For reference, see footnote 2.
• 25
  For reference, see footnote 4.
• 26
  For reference, see footnote 2.
• 27
  Original version: MÃE: o que que (vo)cê vai corta(r)? / A. a conta [pausa] essa contas. / MÃE ah a conta aqui ? / A. é a con:ta esse esse [pausa] conta. / A. o(u)tra o(u)tra...
• 28
  For reference, see footnote 4.
• 29
  For reference, see footnote 4.
• 30
  Original version: PAI: e os outros dois que vão correr. / PAI : agora, esses tudo pode pôr tudo dentro da caixa, vai! / G.: o que, o que, o que, o que, o que, rapaz! / G.: veja se tem um carrinho aqui! / G.: de corrida! (riso) / PAI: não tem nenhum! (pai sorri) / G.: é bom!

Acknowledgement

We would like to thank the Brazilian C&T Development Council (CNPq) for the scholarship granted (PQ), the Coordination for the Improvement of Higher Education Personnel (CAPES-PRINT) and FAURGS (Research Support Foundation of UFRGS) for their support in the research.

REFERÊNCIAS

• BAKHTIN, M. A cultura popular na Idade Média e no Renascimento: o contexto de François Rabelais. Tradução de Yara Frateschi Vieira. São Paulo: Editora Hucitec, 1987.
• BAKHTIN, M. (VOLOCHINOV, V. N.). Marxismo e filosofia da linguagem Problemas fundamentais do método sociológico na ciência da linguagem. Tradução (do francês) Michel Lahud e Yara Frateschi Vieira. Prefácio Roman Jakobson. Apresentação Marina Yaguello. São Paulo: Hucitec, 1995. 1929.
• BAKHTIN, M. Os gêneros do discurso. In: BAKHTIN, M. Estética da criação verbal Tradução feita a partir do francês por Maria Ermantina Galvão Gomes Pereira. 2. ed. São Paulo: Martins Fontes, 1997.
• BREZINKA, C.; LECHNER, T.; STEPHAN, K. The Fetus and Noise. Gynakologisch-Geburtshilfliche Rundschau, v. 37, n. 3, pp.119-129, 1997.
• BRUNER, J. Le développement de l’enfant: savoir faire, savoir dire. Paris: PUF, 2004.
• BRUNER, J. Como as crianças aprendem a falar Tradução de Joana Chaves. Lisboa: Horizontes Pedagógicos, 2007.
• BUENO, R. G. O uso e a omissão do sujeito pronominal de 1ª e 2ª pessoas em português brasileiro e em espanhol: subjetividade, jogo e gênero pedagógico. 2017, 320f. Tese (doutorado) - Universidade Estadual Paulista Julio de Mesquita Filho, Faculdade de Ciências e Letras (Campus de Araraquara), 2017. Disponível em https://repositorio.unesp.br/bitstream/handle/11449/151052/bueno_rg_dr_arafcl.pdf?sequence=3&isAllowed=y Acesso em 20 de outubro de 2020.
  » https://repositorio.unesp.br/bitstream/handle/11449/151052/bueno_rg_dr_arafcl.pdf?sequence=3&isAllowed=y
• BULLIO, P. C. Referência e code-switching: traços de singularidade na linguagem de uma criança bilíngue. 2014, 655f. Tese (Doutorado) - Universidade Estadual Paulista Júlio de Mesquita Filho, Faculdade de Ciencias e Letras (Campus de Araraquara), 2014. Disponível em https://repositorio.unesp.br/bitstream/handle/11449/123295/000824256.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y Acesso em 20 de outubro de 2020.
  » https://repositorio.unesp.br/bitstream/handle/11449/123295/000824256.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y
• CAVALCANTE, M. C. B. Da voz à lingua: a prosódia materna e o deslocamento do sujeito na fala dirigida ao bebê. 1999, 239f. Tese (doutorado) - Universidade Estadual de Campinas, Instituto de Estudos da Linguagem, Campinas, SP, 1999. Disponível em http://repositorio.unicamp.br/jspui/handle/REPOSIP/270742 Acesso em 20 de outubro de 2020.
  » http://repositorio.unicamp.br/jspui/handle/REPOSIP/270742
• CAVALCANTE, M. C. B.; FARIA, E. M. B. de (org.). Cenas em aquisição da linguagem: multimodalidade, atenção conjunta e subjetividade /. 1. ed. João Pessoa: Editora da UFPB, 2015.
• CURY, P. Linguagem dirigida à criança pequena: a argumentação em foco. 2011. 185f. Dissertação de Mestrado. Programa de Pós-Graduação em Linguística e Língua Portuguesa, 2011. Disponível em https://repositorio.unesp.br/bitstream/handle/11449/93870/cury_pc_me_arafcl.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y Acesso em 20 de outubro de 2020.
  » https://repositorio.unesp.br/bitstream/handle/11449/93870/cury_pc_me_arafcl.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y
• DE LEMOS, C. Sobre a aquisição da linguagem e seu dilema (pecado) original Boletim da Abralin, Recife, n. 3, p.97-126, 1982.
• DE LEMOS, C. Los processos metafóricos y metonímicos como mecanismo de cambio. Substratum, Barcelona, n. 1, p.121-135, 1992.
• DE SANTIS, A. B.; DEL RÉ, A. A linguagem dirigida à criança em uma sala da Educação Infantil bilíngue inglês-português. Estudos Linguísticos (São Paulo. 1978), v. 48, n. 3, p.1349-1371, 2019. Disponível em http://dx.doi.org/10.21165/el.v48i3.2351 Acesso em 20 de outubro de 2020.
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.21165/el.v48i3.2351
• DEL RÉ, A.; DE PAULA, L.; MENDONÇA, M. A linguagem da criança: um olhar bakhtiniano. São Paulo: Contexto, 2014a.
• DEL RÉ, A.; DE PAULA, L.; MENDONÇA, M. Explorando o discurso da criança São Paulo: Contexto, 2014b.
• DEL RÉ, A.; HILÁRIO, R. N.; VIEIRA, A. J. Subjetividade, individualidade e singularidade na criança: um sujeito que se constitui socialmente. Bakhtiniana: Revista de Estudos do Discurso, v. 7, p.57-74, 2012.
• DEL RÉ, A; MARCHEZAN, R. C.; VIEIRA, A. J.; QUIMELLO, H. A produção de sentido na interação entre pais e filhos. In: DEL RÉ, A.; DE PAULA, L.; MENDONÇA, M. A linguagem da criança: um olhar bakhtiniano São Paulo: Contexto, 2014.
• DEL RE, A., HILÁRIO, R. N., MOGNO, A. S. Programa CLAN da base CHILDES: normas de transcrição (CHAT) e comandos básicos. In: GONÇALVES, G. F., BRUM DE PAULA, M. R., SOARES, M. K. (orgs). Estudos em Aquisição Fonológica, Vol. 4. Pelotas: Editora Universitária/UFPel, 2011. p.11-30.
• DEL RÉ, A.; HILÁRIO, R. N.; RODRIGUES, R. A. O Corpus NALingua e as tecnologias de apoio: a constituição de um banco de dados de fala de crianças no brasil. Revista Artefactum - Revista de Estudos em Linguagem e Tecnologia. ANO VIII - N° 02/2016. Disponível em http://artefactum.rafrom.com.br/index.php/artefactum/article/view/1363/667 Acesso em 20 de outubro de 2020.
  » http://artefactum.rafrom.com.br/index.php/artefactum/article/view/1363/667
• DEL RÉ, A.; HILÁRIO, R. N.; VIEIRA, A. J. Subjetividade, individualidade e singularidade na criança: um sujeito que se constitui socialmente. Bakhtiniana: Revista de Estudos do Discurso, v. 7, p.57-74, 2012. Disponível em https://doi.org/10.1590/S2176-45732012000200005 Acesso em 20 de outubro de 2020.
  » https://doi.org/10.1590/S2176-45732012000200005
• DEL RÉ, A.; DODANE, C.; CAVALCANTE, M. C. B.; MASSINI-CAGILARI, G. Discurso, prosódia e multimodalidade na produção humorística de uma criança monolíngue In: A criança na/com a linguagem: saberes em contraponto. v.1, Porto Alegre: Instituto de Letras - UFRGS, 2017. p.67-80.
• DEL RE, A., DODANE, C.; MORGENSTERN, A. De l'amusement partagé à la production de l'humour chez l'enfant. In: FARHAT, M.; LACOSTE, F. (eds.). L'humour dans le bassin méditerranéen: contacts linguistiques et culturels. v. 1. Tunis: Nouha éditions, 2015. p.115-139.
• DEL RE, A; DODANE, C.; MORGENSTERN, A. Enunciados humorísticos infantis em foco: implicações pragmáticas, cognitivas e sociais. Revista Linguística (Online) v.35 (2), p.235-254, 2019. Disponível em http://www.scielo.edu.uy/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S2079-312X2019000200235 Acesso em 20 de outubro de 2020.
  » http://www.scielo.edu.uy/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S2079-312X2019000200235
• DODANE, C.; MARTEL, K. La prosodie chez le bébé au stade pré-linguistique : premières formes stables. XXVII ème Journées d’Etude sur la Parole, Avignon, France, Jun 2008.
• FALASCA, P. Aquisição/aprendizagem de LE: subjetividade e deslocamentos identitários. 2012, 153f. Dissertação (mestrado) - Universidade Estadual Paulista, Faculdade de Ciências e Letras de Araraquara, 2012. Disponível em https://repositorio.unesp.br/bitstream/handle/11449/86763/falasca_p_me_arafcl.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y Acesso em 20 de outubro de 2020.
  » https://repositorio.unesp.br/bitstream/handle/11449/86763/falasca_p_me_arafcl.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y
• FALASCA, P. “Eu disse tudo isso em alemão, mas em português penso totalmente diferente”: identidade e argumentação na sala de aula de língua estrangeira. 2017, 490f. Tese de Doutorado do Programa de Pós-Graduação em Linguística e Língua Portuguesa, UNESP/Araraquara, 2017. Disponível em https://repositorio.unesp.br/handle/11449/151014 Acesso em 20 de outubro de 2020.
  » https://repositorio.unesp.br/handle/11449/151014
• FIGUEIRA, R. A. Causatividade: Um Estudo Longitudinal de suas Principais Manifestações no Pocesso de Aquisição do Português por uma Criança. 1985, 363f. Tese de Doutorado em Linguística. Unicamp, 1985. Disponível em http://repositorio.unicamp.br/jspui/handle/REPOSIP/270525. Acesso em 20 de outubro de 2020.
• FRANÇOIS, F. Quelques conduites d’explication chez l’enfant. La psychologie du langage: recherches fondamentales et perspectives pédagogiques. Laboratoire de Psychologie d'acquisition et du développement. Université de Dijon, Dijon, p.91-110, 1988.
• FRANÇOIS, F. Langage et pensée: dialogue et mouvement discursif chez Vygotsky et Bahktine. In: Enfance 1-2 Paris: PUF, 1989. Disponível em https://www.persee.fr/doc/enfan_0013-7545_1989_num_42_1_1877 Acesso em 20 de outubro de 2020.
  » https://www.persee.fr/doc/enfan_0013-7545_1989_num_42_1_1877
• FRANÇOIS, F. Pratiques de l’oral Paris: Editions Nathan, 1993.
• FRANÇOIS, F. Morale et mise en mots Paris: L’harmattan, 1994.
• FRANÇOIS, F. Enfants et récits: mises en mots et “reste”. Paris: Presses universitaires du Septentrion, 2004.
• FRANÇOIS, F. O que nos indica a “linguagem da criança”: algumas considerações sobre a “linguagem”. Tradução de Guacira Marcondes Machado Leite. In: DEL RÉ, A. Aquisição da linguagem: uma abordagem psicolinguística. São Paulo: Contexto, 2006.
• GRECCO, N. A. G. Estilo, autoria e contra-argumentação na aquisição da escrita 2017, 136f. Tese (Doutorado em Linguistica e Lingua Portuguesa) - Universidade Estadual Paulista “Júlio de Mesquita Filho”, Faculdade de Ciências e Letras (Campus Araraquara), 2017. Disponível em http://wwws.fclar.unesp.br/agenda-pos/linguistica_lingua_portuguesa/4261.pdf Acesso em 20 de outubro de 2020.
  » http://wwws.fclar.unesp.br/agenda-pos/linguistica_lingua_portuguesa/4261.pdf
• HERBINET, E. Compétence néonatale dans l’interaction et apprentissage prénatal. Neuropsy Enf, v. 33, p.53-58, 1985.
• HILÁRIO, R. N. Um olhar sobre a aquisição do plural em crianças São Paulo: Cultura Acadêmica, 2015. Disponível em http://www.culturaacademica.com.br/catalogo/um-olhar-sobre-a-aquisicao-do-plural-nominal-em-criancas/ Acesso em 20 de outubro de 2020.
  » http://www.culturaacademica.com.br/catalogo/um-olhar-sobre-a-aquisicao-do-plural-nominal-em-criancas/
• HILÁRIO, R. N. et al O CHAT e o CLAN como ferramentas metodológicas nos trabalhos em aquisição da linguagem. In: DEL RÉ, A; ROMERO, M. Na língua do outro: estudos interdisciplinares em aquisição de linguagens. São Paulo: Cultura Acadêmica, 2012. p.229-247.
• HILÁRIO, R. N.; DEL RÉ, A. Questões metodológicas e ferramentas de pesquisa nos estudos em Aquisição da Linguagem. Letras de Hoje, v. 50, n. 1, p.57-63, 2015. Disponível em https://doi.org/10.15448/1984-7726.2015.1.18397 Acesso em 20 de outubro de 2020.
  » https://doi.org/10.15448/1984-7726.2015.1.18397
• MACWHINNEY, B. The CHILDES Project: Tools for Analyzing Talk. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 2000.
• MARQUES, L. T. DE C. Língua de herança e identidade: o caso de uma criança franco-brasileira. 2019, 130f. Dissertação de Mestrado. Programa de Pós-Graduação em Linguística e Língua Portuguesa. Unesp-Araraquara, 2019 (não disponível).
• MROCZINSKI, A. C. S. A produção e a compreensão do humor por uma criança bilíngue: um estudo de caso 2015. 94 f. Dissertação (mestrado) - Universidade Estadual Paulista Júlio de Mesquita Filho, Faculdade de Ciências e Letras (Campus de Araraquara), 2015. Disponível em https://repositorio.unesp.br/bitstream/handle/11449/127909/000846656.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y Acesso 20 de outubro de 2020.
  » https://repositorio.unesp.br/bitstream/handle/11449/127909/000846656.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y
• MÉDVEDEV, P. N. 1928. El método formal en los estúdios literários - introducción crítica a una poética sociológica. Versión española Tatiana Bubnova. Madrid: Alianza Editorial, 1994.
• MENDONÇA, M. C.; HILÁRIO, R. N; VIEIRA, A. J.; BULLIO, P. C. A retomada da palavra da criança pelos pais. In: DEL RÉ, A.; PAULA, L.; MENDONÇA, M. C. A linguagem da criança: um olhar bakhtiniano. São Paulo: Contexto, 2014. p.75-94.
• PEREIRA-CASTRO, M. F. Aprendendo a argumentar: um momento na construção da linguagem Editora da UNICAMP, 1992.
• SALAZAR ORVIG, A. Les mouvements du discours: style, référence et dialogue dans des entretiens cliniques. Paris: Harmattan, 1999.
• SALAZAR ORVIG, A. Eléments pour l’analyse de la connivence dans le dialogue. In: BONDI, M.; STATI, M. (eds.). Dialogue Analysis 2000, Selected papers from the 10th IADA Anniversary Conference, Bologna 2000, Tübingen: Niemeyer, 2003. p.339-350.
• SALAZAR ORVIG, A. et al Une étude sur les premières expressions référentielles. Le cas des pronoms. Revue Tranel, v. 41, p.15-31, 2005.
• SALAZAR ORVIG, A. et al Peut-on parler d'anaphore chez le jeune enfant? Le cas des pronoms de 3 e personne. Langages, p.10-24, 2006. Disponível em https://www.cairn.info/revue-langages-2006-3-page-10.htm Acesso em 20 de outubro de 2020.
  » https://www.cairn.info/revue-langages-2006-3-page-10.htm
• SALAZAR ORVIG, A. et. al. Definite and Indefinite Determiners in French-speaking Toddlers: Distributional Features and Pragmatic-discursive Factors. Journal of Pragmatics 56, p.88-112, 2013.
• TFOUNI, L.V.; FRANÇOIS, F. Teorias e práticas: práticas do oral. Revista da Anpoll, v. 1, n. 3, 1997.
• VASCONCELOS, A. N. Emergência da negação e prosódia: estudo de casos de uma criança brasileira e uma criança francesa 2017, 218f. Tese (doutorado) - Universidade Estadual de Campinas, Instituto de Estudos da Linguagem, Campinas, SP, 2017. Disponível em http://repositorio.unicamp.br/jspui/handle/REPOSIP/322539 Acesso em 20 de outubro de 2020.
  » http://repositorio.unicamp.br/jspui/handle/REPOSIP/322539
• VIEIRA, A. J. Argumentação e explicação na linguagem da criança: diferenças e intersecções em dois estudos de caso. 2015, 231f. Tese de Doutorado em Linguística e Língua Portuguesa).Universidade Estadual Paulista Unesp-Araraquara, 2015. Disponível em https://repositorio.unesp.br/bitstream/handle/11449/132866/000855922.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y Acesso em 20 de outubro de 2020.
  » https://repositorio.unesp.br/bitstream/handle/11449/132866/000855922.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y
• VYGOTSKY, L. S. Pensamento e linguagem Tradução de Jefferson Luiz Camargo. São Paulo: Martins Fontes, 2005.
• VOLÓCHINOV, V. A palavra na vida e a palavra na poesia: ensaios, artigos, resenhas e poemas. Organização, tradução, ensaio introdutório e notas de Sheila Grillo e Ekaterina Vólva Américo. São Paulo: Editora 34, 2019.
• WOOD, D.; BRUNER, J.; ROSS, G. The Role of Tutoring in Problem Solving. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, v.17, pp.89-100, 1976.

Publication Dates

• Publication in this collection
  11 Dec 2020
• Date of issue
  Jan-Mar 2021

History

• Received
  17 Apr 2020
• Accepted
  22 Oct 2020