Learning Chinese Mandarin characters in an English-speaking country: The development of a child’s symbolic mind
Keywords:Symbolic development, Symbolic representation, Early childhood, Chinese Mandarin characters, Relational developmental systems metatheory, Sociocultural theory
This qualitative research explores the development of the symbolic mind in children through learning Chinese Mandarin characters. Navigated through the lens of relational developmental system metatheory and guided by Vygotsky’s sociocultural theory, findings present the analysis of the developmental processes in children’s recognition of symbols and use of known symbols to make and share meaning. This study also offers an explanation of the effect of changes in the sociocultural environment on children's symbolic development. Further, cultural differences toward symbolic representation are discussed with the recommendation of focusing on recognition followed by writing when learning Chinese Mandarin characters.
Abbott, C. (2000). Symbols now. Leamington Spa: Widgit Software.
Apperly, I. A., Williams, E., & Williams, J. (2004). Three‐to four‐year‐olds' recognition that symbols have a stable meaning: Pictures are understood before written words. Child Development, 75(5), 1510-1522. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2004.00754.x
Athey, C. (2007). Extending thought in young children: A parent-teacher partnership (2nd ed.). London: Paul Chapman Publishing. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446279618
Black Delfin, A. (2020). The discursive and the material in early childhood play: Co-constitution of gender in open and subversive spaces. Gender and Education, 1-16. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09540253.2020.1786012
Boroditsky, L. (2001). Does language shape thought?: Mandarin and English speakers' conceptions of time. Cognitive Psychology, 43(1), 1-22. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1006/cogp.2001.0748
Bruner, J. S. (1966). Towards a theory of instruction. New York: Norton.
Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2011). Designing and conducting mixed methods research (2nd ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Sage Publications.
DeLoache, J. S. (2004). Becoming symbol-minded. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 8(2), 66-70. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2003.12.004
Elkins, J. (2003). Visual studies: A skeptical introduction. New York, NY: Routledge.
Fadjo, C., Lu, M., & Black, J. (2009). Instructional embodiment and video game programming in an after school program. In Proceedings of World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia and Telecommunications (pp. 4041-4046). Chesapeake, VA: AACE.
Fleer, M., & Raban, B. (2006). A cultural-historical analysis of concept formation in early education settings: Conceptual consciousness for the child or only the adult?. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 14(2), 69-80. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13502930285209921
Fox, S. E., Levitt, P., & Nelson, C. A. 3rd. (2010). How the timing and quality of early experiences influence the development of brain architecture. Child Development, 81(1), 28-40. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2009.01380.x
Gayman, A. M., Fraser-Thomas, J., & Baker, J. (2017). Relational developmental systems metatheory: A conceptual framework to understand and promote older adults' involvement in sport. European Review of Aging and Physical Activity, 14(1), 1-10. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s11556-017-0182-6
Gee, J. P. (1990). Social linguistics and literacies: Ideology in discourses, critical perspectives on literacy and education. London: Routledge.
Gibbs, R. W. (2006). Embodiment and cognitive science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Glenberg, A. M. (2008). Toward integration of bodily states, language, and action. In. Semin, G. R. & Smith, E. R. (Eds.), Embodied grounding: Social, cognitive, affective, and neuroscientific approaches (pp. 43-70). New York: Cambridge Univ. Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511805837.003
Hammond, J. (Ed.). (2002). Scaffolding teaching and learning in language and literacy education. Newtown: PETA.
Inhelder, B., & Piaget, J. (1964). The early growth of logic in the child. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
Lu, M. T., Wu, C. Y., Fadjo, C., & Black, J. (2010, March). Future trends in Chinese character teaching: Use of embodiment and technologies in classrooms. In Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference (pp. 2485-2492). Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE).
McBride, C. A. (2016). Is Chinese special? Four aspects of Chinese literacy acquisition that might distinguish learning Chinese from learning alphabetic orthographies. Educational Psychology Review, 28(3), 523-549. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-015-9318-2
Menezes, V. (2013). Second language acquisition: Reconciling theories. Open Journal of Applied Linguistics, 3(7), 404-412. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4236/ojapps.2013.37050
Mercer, J. (2018). Child development: Concepts and theories. London: Sage.
Namy, L. L., & Waxman, S. R. (2005). Afterword: Symbols redefined: Developmental and comparative perspectives. In L. L. Namy (Ed.), Symbol use and symbolic representation: Developmental and comparative perspectives. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
Otsuka, K., & Jay, T. (2017). Understanding and supporting block play: Video observation research on preschoolers' block play to identify features associated with the development of abstract thinking. Early Child Development and Care, 187(5-6), –990-1003. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/03004430.2016.1234466
Overton, W. (2013). Relationism and relational developmental systems: A paradigm for developmental science in the post-cartesian era. In R. Lerner, & J. B. Benson (Eds.), Advances in child development and behavior (Vol. 44, pp. 21-57). Elsevier. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-397947-6.00002-7
Pampoulou, E., & Detheridge, C. (2007). The role of symbols in the mainstream to access literacy. Journal of Assistive Technologies, 1(1), 15-21. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/17549450200700004
Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Piaget, J. (1950). The psychology of intelligences. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
Piaget, J., & Inhelder, B. (1969). The psychology of the child. New York: Basic Books.
Rakoczy, H., Tomasello, M., & Striano, T. (2005). How children turn objects into symbols: A cultural learning account. In L. L. Namy (Ed.), Symbol use and symbolic representation: Developmental and comparative perspectives (pp. 69-97). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
Rochat, P., & Callaghan, T. (2005). What drives symbolic development? The case of pictorial comprehension and production. In L. L. Namy (Ed.), Symbol use and symbolic representation: Developmental and comparative perspectives (pp. 25-46). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
Saldaña, J. (2009). The coding manual for qualitative researchers. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications Ltd.
Smith, L. B., & Jones, S. S. (2011). Symbolic play connects to language through visual object recognition. Developmental Science, 14(5), 1142-1149. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-7687.2011.01065.x
Sun, L. (2015). Radical: A learning system for Chinese Mandarin characters. Retrieved from https://repository.library.northeastern.edu/files/neu:rx915j987/fulltext.pdf
Taylor, K. B. (2016). Diverse and critical perspectives on cognitive development theory. New Directions for Student Services, 154, 29-41. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/ss.20173
Thompson, C. M. (1995). The visual arts and early childhood learning. Reston, Va.: National Art Education Association.
Tong, X., Tong, X., & McBride, C. (2017). Radical sensitivity is the key to understanding Chinese character acquisition in children. Reading and Writing, 30(6), 1251-1265. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-017-9722-8
Toran, M., & Temel, Z. F. (2012). An examination of Turkish preschool curriculum's effect on children's concept acquisition. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 47, 594-599. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.06.701
Uttal, D. H., & Yuan, L. (2014). Using symbols: Developmental perspectives. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Cognitive Science, 5(3), 295-304. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/wcs.1280
Vallotton, C. D., & Ayoub, C. C. (2010). Symbols Build Communication and Thought: The role of gestures and words in the development of engagement skills and social‐emotional concepts during toddlerhood. Social Development, 19(3), 601-626. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9507.2009.00549.x
van Oers, B. (2001). Contextualisation for abstraction. Cognitive Science Quarterly, 1(3), 279-305.
van Oers, B., & Poland, M. (2007). Schematising activities as a means for encouraging young children to think abstractly. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 19(2), 10-22. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03217453
Veraksa, A., & Veraksa, N. (2016). Symbolic representation in early years learning: The acquisition of complex notions. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 24(5), 668-683. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/1350293X.2015.1035539
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in Society: The development of higher psychological processes. In. M. Cole, V. John-Steiner, S. Scribner, & E. Souberman (Eds.), Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1981). The genesis of higher mental functions. In J. V. Wertsch (Ed.), The concept of activity in Soviet psychology (pp. 144-188). Armonk, NY: Sharpe.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1987). Thinking and speech. In R. W. Rieber and A. S. Carton (Eds.), The collected works of L.S Vygotsky, Vol.1: Problems of general psychology (pp. 39-285). New York: Plenum Press.
Wang, W. (2018). Cases of heritage language maintenance among Asian immigrant families in the southwestern United States (Doctoral Dissertation). New Mexico State University, New Mexico [Publication No. 13426314].
Wu, J. (2016). The origins of 670 essential words. Boston: Cheng & Tsui Company, Inc.
Wu, L. Y. (2013). Children's play and symbolic representation. Review of Global Management and Service Science, 3, 7-14.
Wukong Literacy. (2020). Characters learning. Retrieved November 27, 2020, from https://www.gongfubb.com/
Yeh, S. L., Chou, W. L., & Ho, P. (2017). Lexical processing of Chinese sub-character components: Semantic activation of phonetic radicals as revealed by the Stroop effect. Scientific Reports, 7(1), 1-12. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-15536-w
How to Cite
Attribution: You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
NonCommercial: You may not use the material for commercial purposes.
NoDerivatives: If you remix, transform, or build upon the material, you may not distribute the modified material.
Author(s) must confirm that Journal of Childhood, Education & Society retains all the copyrights unconditionally and indefinitely to distribute the articles published by Journal of Childhood, Education & Society.