A Study of Children’s Writings in Non-Instructional Settings

  • Vera John-Steiner
  • Nancy Roth


An interactionist theory provides the framework for this study of the acquisition of literacy: major premises are drawn from the writings of Vygotsky, Bruner and Halliday. Early development - including the development of language - is viewed as an apprenticeship, where children actively seek and respond to the teaching of their kin. The lengthy period of dependence that characterizes human childhood provides the necessary context for the social embeddedness of learning. During these years, the intense, exploratory activities of children are linked to the scaffolding of adult attention: this interaction enables young learners to develop a mastery of basic cognitive and linguistic processes.


Major Premise Social Embeddedness Private Speech Adult Attention 1scientific Notebook 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Bruner, J. S., 1978, The role of dialogue in language acquisition, in: “The Child’s Conception of Language”, A. Sinclair, R. J. Jarvella, and J. M. Levelt, eds., Springer-Varley, N.Y.Google Scholar
  2. Chafe, W. L., in press, Integration and involvement in speaking, writing, and oral literature, in: “Spoken and Written Language”, D. Tannen, ed., Ablex, Norwood, N.J.Google Scholar
  3. Collins, J. L., and Williamson, M. M., 1981, Spoken language and semantic abbreviation in writing, Research in the Teaching of English, 15: 23.Google Scholar
  4. Elsasser, N., and John-Steiner, V., 1977, An interactionist approach to advancing literacy, Harvard Ed. Review, 47:355.Google Scholar
  5. Goody, J., 1977, “The Domestication of the Savage Mind”, Cambridge U. Press, N.Y.Google Scholar
  6. Halliday, M. A. K., 1975, “Learning How to Mean: Explorations in the Development of Language”, Elsevier, N.Y.Google Scholar
  7. Halliday, M. A. K., and Hasan, R., 1976, “Cohesion in English”, Longman, London.Google Scholar
  8. Heath, S. B., 1981, Oral and literate traditions–endless linkages, in: “Moving between Practice and Research in Writing”, Humes, A., et al, eds., SWRL Educational Research and Development, Los Alamitos, Cal.Google Scholar
  9. John-Steiner, V., and Osterreich, H., 1975, Learning styles among Pueblo children, Final Report, National Institute of Education, Albuquerque, N.M.Google Scholar
  10. John-Steiner, V., and Tatter, P., in press, An interactionist model of language development, in: “The Sociogenesis of Language and Human Conduct”, B. Bain, ed., Plenum, N.Y.Google Scholar
  11. King, M. L., 1980, Learning how to mean in written language, in: Theory into Practice, 14: 163.Google Scholar
  12. Olson, D., 1977, From utterances to text: the bias of language in speech and writing, Harvard Ed. Review, 47:257.Google Scholar
  13. Scribner, S., and Cole, M., 1981, “The Psychology of Literacy”, Harvard U. Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  14. Vygotsky, L. S., 1962, “Thought and Language”, MIT Press, Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Vygotsky, L. S., 1978, “Mind in Society”, M. Cole, S. Scribner, V. John-Steiner, and E. Soubermann, eds., Harvard U. Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  16. Zivin, G., 1979, “The Development of Self-Regulation through Private Speech”, Wiley, New York.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Press, New York 1983

Authors and Affiliations

  • Vera John-Steiner
    • 1
  • Nancy Roth
    • 1
  1. 1.University of New MexicoUSA

Personalised recommendations