'A Critical Analysis Of The Talking Cure'

The average four-year-old child from a low-income household hears thirty million fewer words than one from a high-income household. This “word gap” has been closely scrutinized by numerous linguists and anthropologists and has become the core focus for enhancing the academic development of low-income children. Formulated by psychologists Betty Hart and Todd Risley, the word gap encompasses the different speaking abilities of wealthy and underprivileged children by the number of words they are exposed to. In her article “The Talking Cure”, Margaret Talbot discusses the existence of widespread developmental challenges facing low-income families. She writes about Providence Talks, an anti-poverty program that provides low-income parents with counselling on healthy conversation habits with their children.
In contrast, Shirley Heath in “The Simple and Direct? Almost Never the Solution” appreciates the depth of the developmental problems stemming from the word gap. Refuting simple programs and delving into the complex underpinnings of the word gap, Heath reflects on the encompassing problem of poverty and offers perspectives on how a solution can be formed. While linguistic anthropologists cannot directly alter economic realities or political climate, Heath argues that they should focus on more comprehensive research, such as intervention programs that emphasize change on multiple behaviour features, not just talking more with children. While Talbot’s piece about Providence Talks does not wholly delve into the details that are required to fully understand or offer best solutions to the word gap, Heath’s usage of empirical evidence and attempts to outline real solutions prove a more effective