Cynthia Simmonds (September 22, 2011)

Nick: "Mom, what's another word for small?"

Me: "Well, you can say "tiny" or "infinitesimal."

Nick: "Mom, what does 'precise' mean?"

Mom: " It means exactly, like exactly a specific amount."

Nick: "Mom, how else can you say 'fast'?"

Mom: "You could say 'rapid" or 'quick', those both mean the same as fast."

Nick: "Mom, why do bullets bounce off of Superman?"

Mom: "Ummm. . . " (No answer for that one) "Go ask your dad."

And so goes my day--in our house we spend a lot of time talking about language, about words, and about how you can and cannot use them. One of the most compelling ways the environment affects language development is what I like to call "Input effects output," more simply, what goes in has a direct impact on what comes out—at least with respect to language.

The principle is beautiful in its simplicity. My husband and I use a variety of words with our children, hence our children use the same words. I actually enjoy the stares I get when Katie, age three, remarks, "Mom look at that enormous flag" while shopping; the word is almost as big as she.

Janellen Huttenlocher discovered this simple truth by tape recording (yes, back in the days of tape recorders) toddlers interacting with their moms over an extended period of time. When the children were three, she gave them two vocabulary tests. The first assessed how many words they could understand and the second assessed how many words they could say. It is important to look at both because small children typically can understand significantly more than they can say.

Janellen, and her graduate students, found that the amount of talk directed toward a toddler was directly related to his/her vocabulary at age three. The amount of "real" talk, not necessarily the content of that talk, was important. In essence, it didn't really matter what the moms talked about with their children, what mattered was they talked with them—about common, everyday occurrences. More talk directed to the child led to a larger vocabulary. The input effected the output.

This principle is clearly demonstrated by the vocabularies of my children; we talk a lot, they talk a lot. One week on the way to preschool, when Nick was four, we discussed what a "landmark" was and, additionally, what makes a good landmark versus a poor one. "Well, a strange-looking tree or a bridge would be a good landmark, but a house wouldn't," was Nick's final conclusion.

Input effects output—yet another reason I am grateful for Language Stars. I can provide my children with copious amounts of language input in English. I am a well-versed English speaker. However, my Spanish is "so-so" at best, and as I've said before, after 3 years of Parent Tot classes I probably have the Mandarin vocabulary of a typical 14-month old Chinese infant.

Language Stars' native –speaking instructors provide our children with rich linguistic input in a fun, compelling environment. My kids love language class and their teachers—Katie sings about how much she loves class and her teacher the entire car ride on the way to class. And if this all so important principle about language acquisition continues to hold up, the input should effect the output. In fact, I believe it already has.

I suspect my children already have a greater grasp of Mandarin than I. As for Spanish, my years of high school and college classes probably have them beat—at least for now. However, they already have perfect accents, the ability to roll their "r's," and access to awesome teachers. I suspect they will surpass me in the near future. But, that's okay. That's the whole point. I may be sorry at some point—when as teenagers they can plot against their parents in Mandarin or Spanish—but we're not there yet.

Input effects output—it's that simple!

Cindi