HISPANIC CHILDREN'S RECOGNITION OF LANGUAGES AND PERCEPTIONS ABOUT SPEAKERS OF SPANISH, ENGLISH, AND CHINESE

Mary E. Stafford, Lalima B. Jenckes, and Sheryl L. Santos

Arizona State University

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to examine perceptions that Spanish- and English-speaking Hispanic students from lower socioeconomic backgrounds have about speakers of Spanish, English, and Chinese. The extent to which reactions of monolingual and bilingual English- and Spanish-speakers differ according to age/grade levels and prior exposure to the languages in question was examined. Chinese speech samples were included to gain information about perceptions of a language that was likely to be unfamiliar and to provide a diversion to the focus on attitudes toward Spanish and English. Results indicate that the greater the prior experiences students have with a language, the more favorable are their attitudes toward the language, solidarity with speakers of the language, and perceptions of status associated with the language. Developmental effects were found only for English speakers. Both English and Spanish monolingual speakers expressed more favorable attitudes toward English than toward Spanish and Chinese.

In every society, the power of particular social groups is reflected in language variation and in attitudes toward those variations. Language conveys information about education, class, and occupation (Giles, 1979). Typically in any society, the dominant group promotes its pattern of language use as required to advance socially, while use of a lower prestige language or dialect reduces the opportunities for success in society. The dilemma here is whether it is more important to gain social mobility by adopting the language patterns of the dominant group or to maintain individual group identity by retaining the native speech style. Fishman (1971) indicated that one speech variety (high language) may be associated with status, high culture, and aspiration toward social mobility, while a second variety (low language) may correspond to solidarity, comradeship, and intimacy. The speaker usually chooses the appropriate language variety for specific situations.

Tajfel and Turner (1979), in discussing social identity theory, proposed that individuals may attempt to provide themselves with a positive social identity along valued dimensions by positively defining the group(s) in which they are members. Tajfel and Turner emphasized that attitudes held toward language varieties will depend on the extent to which group members have a positive or as we face the challenges of the millennium. The following research questions were addressed.

Table 1.Sample Sizes for Grade, Gender, and Language

 

Grade	Gender	Monolingual English	Monolingual Spanish	Bilingual Sp/Eng
Third	Boys	17	9	42
	Girls	22	5	58
English	Boys	16	12	39
	Girls	21	6	56
Total	Boys	33	21	81
	Girls	43	11	114
Boys and Girls		76	32	195

The school districts that participated in this study are inner-city districts and will be referred to as District A and District B. A quick summary profile of the two districts follows. District A has an average daily membership (ADM) of 8,419 students; District B has 7,189 students. Expenditures per ADM in District A is $4,506, for District B it is $3,545. Teachers' average salaries in District A are $35,728; for District B the average salary is $37,318. Bonded indebtedness per ADM in District A is $4,019 and in District B, it is $1,920 (Arizona State University, 1998).

Instruments

In the initial phase of the study, children in third and eighth grades were recruited to tell imaginative stories that were tape-recorded and used as stimuli in the study. Tape recordings were made of one boy and one girl at each grade level telling a story in English, one of each telling a story in Spanish, and one of each telling a story in Chinese; thus, twelve children told stories that were recorded. Anglo children were used to tell the English stories. Chinese speakers were used in the tape recordings to provide a language sample to gain information about students' perceptions of a language with which they were not likely to be familiar; however, the study focused on Spanish and English speakers only.

Measures

Demographic data collected from teachers for each student included ethnicity; gender; age; free, reduced or regular lunch; languages spoken; and whether monolingual or bilingual. A locally developed 17-item measure was used to collect data from students about their prior experience with the three languages presented (Chinese, English, and Spanish), attitudes about each language, perceptions about the status of each language, and solidarity with speakers of each language (see Table 2 for items). An additional item (What language is this person speaking?) was included as an informational item. The two-page instrument displays questions in English on one side and in Spanish on the other. Responses for items fell on a four-point Likert scale with lower numbers assigned to more favorable and higher numbers to less favorable responses about the language and speaker.

Table 2. Factor Loadings and Internal Consistency Estimates for the Four Factors

Before conducting the full study, a pilot test, using data from 51 third grade students, was undertaken to establish initial levels of internal consistency for the four constructs of the measure. Cronbach's alpha estimates revealed moderate internal consistency for all four constructs: prior experience with the language, .89; attitudes about the language, .77; status of speakers of the language, .58; and solidarity with speakers of the language, .78.

Upon completion of the full study, a principal components analysis with varimax rotation, using the 17 items included in the four constructs (i.e., prior experiences, attitudes, status, and solidarity), revealed a four-factor structure that mirrored the item-to-construct structure that was initially proposed. See Table 2 above for factor loadings and final internal consistency indices. Cronbach's alpha statistics were computed to examine the extent to which these factors are internally consistent. The indices are high for all four constructs (prior experience, alpha = .97; attitudes, alpha = .81; status, alpha = .71; solidarity, alpha =.80). The proportion of variance explained by these four factors is 73%.

Factor scores for the attitudes, status, and solidarity constructs were computed by summing the items contained in each factor and dividing by the number of items in the factor. This procedure resulted in scores that range from one to four, with lower scores indicating greater favor toward the language and speakers of the language. The factor score for prior experiences, which contains six items, was formed by adding the items together, thus forming a continuum ranging from six to 24. Lower scores indicate greater prior experiences with the language. In order to examine the effect of prior experiences on attitudes, solidarity, and status, three prior experience groups were formed. Prior experience factor scores falling between six and nine were categorized as high prior experience, those between ten and eighteen as medium prior experiences, and those nineteen or greater as low prior experiences. For Chinese only medium and low prior experiences groups exist.

Procedure

In the six schools that participated in the study, parents of children in selected third and eighth grades were sent letters asking permission for their children to participate in the study. Children whose parents agreed were taken in small groups to separate rooms from their classrooms to listen to taped speakers and respond to items. Groups were homogeneous along gender and language lines; thus, there were four possible groups formed for administration: English-speaking boys, English-speaking girls, Spanish-speaking boys, and Spanish-speaking girls.

Participants listened to excerpts of four taped stories with similar context and content that were approximately one minute in length. Instruction was given in English and/or Spanish. The first taped story was for practice purposes and featured an adult woman telling a story in Hindi. After listening to the story, students were asked to complete the two-page instrument about the language and speaker on the tape. Before proceeding to the presentation of the next three taped stories, questions about procedure were taken until it appeared that all students understood the procedure.

The remaining three taped stories (one each in English, Spanish, and Chinese) were played one by one to the children, followed by completion of the two page instrument before going to the next tape. The taped presentations were given in counterbalanced order to different groups of children to guard against presentation effects. In order to increase the similarity between students who participated and the voices they heard on the tapes, third grade girls heard stories given by eight-year-old English-, Spanish-, and Chinese-speaking girls; third grade boys heard stories given by eight-year-old English-, Spanish-, and Chinese-speaking boys; eighth grade girls heard stories given by thirteen-year-old English-, Spanish-, and Chinese-speaking girls; and eighth grade boys heard stories given by thirteen-year-old English-, Spanish-, and Chinese-speaking boys.

Results

All except six third graders recognized the Spanish language and all except five third graders and one eighth grader recognized the English language when it was spoken. However, only 68 of 153 third graders and 82 of 150 eighth graders correctly identified the Chinese language when it was presented.

All questions posed by this study were answered using multivariate analyses of variance (MANOVA). When MANOVA results were significant, tests of between-subjects effects were used to determine which dependent variable differed significantly among the groups. When more than two groups existed for the independent variable and MANOVA results were significant, univariate t-tests were used to examine which groups differed. Results are summarized below.

Comparing Monolingual (n = 108) and Bilingual (n = 195) Speakers

Effect of Prior Experiences on Attitudes, Solidarity, and Status

The first research question asks whether children's prior experiences with a language relate to attitudes toward speakers of that language in terms of desiring to speak the language and personal attributes of solidarity and status. Means and standard deviations for attitudes toward, solidarity with, and status of each language with categories of prior experiences with the language are presented in Table 3.

MANOVA results for Chinese revealed a significant effect (Pillai's Trace F (3, 291) = 5.43; p = .001; eta² = .05; power = .94) of prior experiences on attitudes, solidarity, and status of Chinese. Because students had little prior experience with Chinese only low and medium prior experiences groups were compared. Tests of between subjects effects revealed that these results were due to significant relationships between prior experiences in Chinese and attitudes

Table 3.Means and Standard Deviations for Attitudes toward, Solidarity with, and Status of Chinese, English, and Spanish by Prior Experiences Group

 

Variable		High Prior Exp.			Low Prior Exp.			Few Prior Exp.
		n	m	SD	n	M	SD	n	M	SD
Chinese		-			19			276
	Attitudes toward		-	-		1.47	0.51		2.29	0.92
	Solidarity with		-	-		1.71	0.57		2.08	0.56
	Status of		-	-		2.23	0.58		2.50	0.65
English		152			128			9
	Attitudes toward		1.22	0.45		1.33	0.49		2.11	0.55
	Solidarity with		1.96	0.60		2.00	0.48		2.13	0.62
	Status of		2.25	0.75		2.23	0.62		2.22	0.60
Spanish		194			77			20
	Attitudes toward		2.15	0.93		2.32	0.78		3.00	0.89
	Solidarity with		1.89	0.50		1.98	0.44		2.50	0.62
	Status of		2.20	0.56		2.43	0.65		3.03	0.63

Note: Lower scores reflect more favorable attitudes, solidarity, and status. toward (F (1, 293) = 14.67; p = .000; eta² = .05; power = .97) and solidarity with (F (1, 293) = 7.10; p = .005; eta² = .03; power = .81) Chinese. Students with greater prior experiences with Chinese expressed more favorable attitudes toward and solidarity with Chinese speakers. However, the effect sizes are relatively low and prior experiences account for only about 5% of variance in attitudes toward Chinese and 3% of variance in solidarity with Chinese speakers.

MANOVA results for English revealed a significant effect (Pillai's Trace F (6, 570) = 5.91; p = .000; eta² = .06; power = 1.00) for prior experiences in English on attitudes toward, solidarity with, and status of English (Table 3). Tests of between subjects effects revealed that these results were due to significant effects only in attitudes toward English (F (2, 286)=15.96; p = .000; eta² = .10; power = 1.00), for which prior experiences account for 10% of the variance in attitudes. Univariate t-tests revealed statistically significant differences among all three prior experience groups. More experiences with English lead to more favorable attitudes toward English, but not greater solidarity with or status of English speakers.

MANOVA results for Spanish revealed a significant effect (Pillai's Trace F (6, 572) = 18.87; p = .000; eta² = .17; power = 1.00) of prior experiences in Spanish on attitudes toward, solidarity with, and status of Spanish (Table 3). Tests of between subjects effects revealed that these results were due to significant effects of attitudes toward (F (2, 287) = 58.97; p = .000; eta² = .29; power = 1.00), solidarity with (F (2, 287) = 13.94; p = .000; eta² = .09; power = 1.00), and status of (F (2, 287) = 20.24; p = .000; eta² = .12; power = 1.00) Spanish. Far more of the variance between prior experiences and attitudes toward Spanish (29%), solidarity with Spanish (9%), and status of Spanish (12%) is explained than was for Chinese and English, with the overall effect size explaining 17% of the variance. Univariate t-tests revealed significant differences for all three dependent variables for all combinations of prior experiences groups. These findings suggest that the higher the prior experience students have with Spanish the more favorable are their attitudes toward, solidarity with, and status of Spanish.

Contribution of Language Spoken and Grade to the Above Relationship

The second research question is related to the first and asks whether the relationships between prior experiences and attitudes, solidarity, and status for a language is similar for monolingual English, monolingual Spanish, and bilingual English/Spanish speakers and for third and eighth graders. Means and standard deviations for attitudes toward each language as well as solidarity with and status of speakers of each language with language groups are presented in Table 4; those for grade are presented in Table 5.

Table 4.Means and Standard Deviations for Attitudes toward, Solidarity with, and Status of Chinese, English, and Spanish by Language Group

 

Variable		Momolingual English			Monollingual Spanish			Bilingual Sp/Eng
		n	m	SD	n	M	SD	n	M	SD
Chinese		74			30			191
	Attitudes toward		2.55	0.82		1.96	0.63		2.16	0.97
	Solidarity with		2.16	0.59		1.93	0.38		2.04	0.57
	Status of		2.75	0.73		2.24	0.39		2.41	0.63
English		74			29			186
	Attitudes toward		1.19	0.46		1.38	0.41		1.32	0.52
	Solidarity with		2.02	0.66		1.96	0.38		1.97	0.53
	Status of		2.28	0.80		2.14	0.40		2.24	0.68
Spanish		75			32			194
	Attitudes toward		1.64	0.72		1.16	0.31		1.28	0.45
	Solidarity with		2.09	0.56		1.87	0.36		1.92	0.51
	Status of		2.56	0.71		2.11	0.44		2.26	0.60

Note: Lower scores reflect more favorable attitudes, solidarity, and status.

Table 5.Means and Standard Deviations for Attitudes toward, Solidarity with, and Status of Chinese, English, and Spanish by Grade Level

Variable		High Prior Exp.			Low Prior Exp.
		n	m	SD	n	M	SD
Chinese		146			149
	Attitudes toward		2.21	1.02		2.26	0.81
	Solidarity with		2.05	0.66		2.06	0.45
	Status of		2.43	0.74		2.53	0.55
English		142			147
	Attitudes toward		1.31	0.53		1.28	0.46
	Solidarity with		1.82	0.58		2.14	0.48
	Status of		2.06	0.70		2.41	0.63
Spanish		144			147
	Attitudes toward		1.36	0.58		1.35	0.50
	Solidarity with		1.88	0.60		2.03	0.41
	Status of		2.25	0.70		2.39	0.53

Note: Lower scores reflect more favorable attitudes, solidarity, and status

For Chinese, no main or interaction effects exist due to language one speaks or grade level. Chinese is the only language presented, except in the practice setting, that few students recognized. Thus, one might conclude that when one does not recognize or speak a language, one's attitudes toward that language and its speakers are not strong or well formed. The lack of grade level effect suggests that there is no developmental factor affecting attitudes.

For English, a significant main effect was found for grade (Pillai's Trace F (3, 275) = 5.51; p = .000; eta² = .05; power = .89), which was due to significant differences in solidarity toward (F (1, 277) = 12.13; p = .001; eta² = .04; power = .94) and status of (F (1, 277) = 7.84; p = .005; eta² = .03; power = .80) English. Third grade children express more favorable beliefs about solidarity with and status of English speakers than eighth grade children (Table 5). However, the effect sizes are small and account for only 4% and 3% of the variance, respectively. No main effect or interaction effect for language group was found for English. For Spanish, neither a significant main effect for language group nor grade exists; but a significant interaction effect for prior experiences by language group (Pillai's Trace F (9, 828) = 2.06; p = .03; eta² = .02; power = .87) was found. However, a very small amount of the variance (2%) was explained by this relationship and the interaction effect was not supported by subsequent tests of between subject effects.

Comparing Monolingual English (n = 76) to Monolingual Spanish (n = 32) Speakers

Effect of Native Language on Attitudes Toward Speakers of Native Versus Non-Native Languages

Comparing only monolingual speakers the first research question asks to what extent do children differ in their attitudes toward speakers of their native language versus speakers of other languages. For this question, attitudes toward Chinese, English, and Spanish were used as three dependent variables and native language group (i.e., monolingual English and monolingual Spanish speakers) was used as the independent variable. MANOVA results indicate significant differences in attitudes toward Chinese, English, and Spanish between the two native language groups (Pillai's Trace F (3, 101) = 8.45; p = .000; eta² = .20; power = .99). Further tests of between subject effects reveal that these results are due to significant differences between groups in attitudes toward Chinese (F (1, 103) = 13.55; p = .001; eta² = .12; power = .95) and Spanish (F (1, 103) = 12.26; p = .001; eta² = .11; power = .93). For both Chinese and Spanish, monolingual English speakers have the least favorable attitudes (see Table 6; high scores are the least favorable). For native English speakers more favorable attitudes are expressed toward English than toward Chinese and Spanish and for native Spanish speakers more favorable attitudes are expressed toward Spanish than toward Chinese and English.

Effect of Speaking a Language on Solidarity and Status Toward Speakers of That Versus Other Languages

Comparing only monolingual speakers the second research question asks whether children's perceptions regarding dimensions of solidarity with and status of Chinese, English, and Spanish speakers differs between the two native language groups. MANOVA results reveal that a significant relationship exists between native language group and status of Chinese, English, and Spanish (Pillai's Trace F (3, 98) = 5.18; p = .002; eta²= .14; power = .92), but does not exist between native language group and solidarity with Chinese, English, and Spanish. This effect is due to significant differences between language groups in status of Chinese (F (1, 100) = 14.27; p = .000; eta² = .13; power = .96) and of Spanish (F (1, 100) = 9.72; p = .002; eta² = .09; power = .87). For status of both Chinese and Spanish, monolingual English speakers have the least favorable attitudes (see Table 6).

Table 6. Means and Standard Deviations for Attitudes toward, Solidarity with, and Status of Chinese, English, and Spanish by Native Language Speaker

 

Variable		English			Spanish
		n	M	SD	n	M	SD
Attitude toward language		74			31
	Chinese		2.54	0.79		1.96	0.62
	English		1.20	0.46		1.35	0.40
	Spanish		1.60	0.67		1.16	0.31
Solidarity with speakers		73
	Chinese		2.16	0.59		1.94	0.34
	English		2.07	0.66		1.96	0.35
	Spanish		2.10	0.56		1.95	0.30
Status of Speakers		71
	Chinese		2.73	0.71		2.22	0.42
	English		2.30	0.80		2.15	0.43
	Spanish		2.55	0.71		2.12	0.44

Note: Lower scores reflect more favorable attitudes, solidarity, and status.

Discussion

The results of this study suggest that (a) Hispanic students with greater prior experiences with a language express more favorable attitudes toward that language; (b) more favorable attitudes are expressed toward English-speakers than toward Spanish- or Chinese-speakers; (c) developmental differences are evident only in beliefs about English-speakers; and (d) monolingual English-speakers have the least favorable attitudes toward Spanish and Chinese. What does all this mean in terms of curriculum development and the responsibility of school districts experiencing increasing linguistic and cultural diversity? First, the data do suggest that there is a need to introduce second language learning earlier in the curriculum for all children. Monolingual English-speaking Hispanic and White/non-Hispanic children may benefit not only from learning another language, but also from developing a greater understanding of the speakers of those languages. In the present curricular structure, only monolingual Spanish-speaking children entering kindergarten must learn a foreign language: English. Traditionally, second language (sometimes referred to as foreign language) instruction other than English has been relegated to the high schools as an academic subject for college bound students only. In reality, introducing other languages into the curriculum can serve a dual purpose: one academic, the other social. We live and work in a society and in a world that is, by definition, multicultural and multilingual.

Second, students need to understand that qualitatively all languages have value. The fact that children appear to be equating the worth of the speakers of a particular language with its economic and political dominance allows prejudice and misinformation to flourish and proliferate. Attitudes about speakers of certain languages become cultural stereotypes if not corrected. Students, who do not know that great literature, music, art, science, and other expressions of human creativity are adequately represented in all world cultures through their languages, will not have an accurate knowledge base about the contributions of humankind to civilization. This lack of knowledge can lead to oppression of minority groups, unwarranted privilege, and the perpetuation of ignorance at a time when the tools of communication are bringing people more into contact on a worldwide scope.

Third, developmental differences were found only in beliefs about English-speakers, with younger children having more favorable attitudes about solidarity with and status of English-speakers than older children. The fact that no developmental differences were found for Spanish- and Chinese-speakers may mean that attitudes toward speakers are already set by third grade. If this is true, findings of significantly less favorable attitudes toward English-speakers by older children may indicate that the emphasis on English at the expense of Spanish has an adverse effect on personal beliefs of children over time.

Finally, American students of varying heritage languages, in an attempt to distance themselves from their familial, cultural, and linguistic patrimony and in a rush toward becoming more like the dominant group, may not be aware of what they have so freely given up. Students who are in schools that do not reflect positive attitudes toward their clientele are, in essence albeit unconsciously, promoting intergenerational alienation (Wong Fillmore, 1991). No one should be encouraged to perceive in school that their family language or culture is inferior. If anything, bilingualism is a treasured tool of enhanced human interaction and communication. To the degree that our schools are not creating curriculum to reinforce positive intercultural attitudes and maintenance of heritage languages, they are failing to acknowledge the demographic changes in society. Future investigations should focus on both lower and higher socioeconomic groups, as well as White/non-Hispanics and other ethnic groups, with regard to examining the relationship of prior experiences and subsequent attitudes toward languages and their speakers. Additionally, this study could be extended to include sampling of children/adolescents and their parents, both monolingual and bilingual, which could provide interesting perspectives on pedagogical issues surrounding minority languages and their speakers.

What this research, in a nutshell, truly says to us is that the time for an educational paradigm shift from a monocultural/monolingual curricular model to a multicultural/ multilingual curricular model is long overdue. For democracy to flourish, the languages and cultures of our school children and their families must be respected, cherished, and acknowledged as valuable.

References

Anisfeld, E., & Lambert, W. E. (1964). Evaluational reactions to bilingual and monolingual children to spoken language. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 69, 89-97.

Appel, R., & Muysken, P. (1987). Language contact and bilingualism. London: Edward Arnold.

Arizona Department of Education. (1998, April). Bilingual programs and English as a second language programs. School year 1996-1997 report. Arizona Department of Education: Author.

Arizona State University. (1998). School management information data: Public school districts, State of Arizona. Bureau of Educational Research and Services, Arizona State University: Author.

Chronicle of Higher Education. (1998, August). The Chronicle of Higher Education Almanac Issue, 45, 46.

Elias-Olivares, L., & Valdes, G. (1982). Language diversity in Chicano speech communities: Implications for language teaching. In J. A. Fishman & G.D. Keller (Eds.), Bilingual education for Hispanic students in the United States (pp. 151-166). New York: Teachers College Press.

Fishman, J. A. (1971). Sociolinguistics: A brief introduction. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.

Galindo, L. (1991). A sociolinguistic study of Spanish language maintenance and linguistic shift toward English among Chicanos. Lenguas Modernas, 18, 107-116.

Galindo, L. (1993). Spanish use and language attitudes: A study of border women. Paper presented at the Spanish 14th Conference of the United States, San Antonio, Texas.

Galindo, L. (1995). Language attitudes toward Spanish and English varieties - Chicano perspective. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 17, 77-99. Giles, H. (1979). Ethnicity markers in speech. In K. R. Scherer & H. Giles (Eds.), Social markers in speech (pp. 251-289). Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.

Ornstein-Galicia, J. (1981). Varieties of southwest Spanish: Some neglected basic considerations. In R. P. Duran (Ed.), Latino language and communicative behavior (pp. 19-38). Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Corporation.

Politzer, R. L., & Ramirez, A. G. (1973). Judging personality from speech: A pilot study of the attitudes toward ethnic groups of students in monolingual schools (Research & Development Memorandum, No. 107). Stanford, CA: Stanford Center for Research and Development in Teaching.

Ramirez, A. G. (1981). Language attitudes and the speech of Spanish-English bilingual pupils. In R. P. Duran (Ed.), Latino language and communicative behavior (pp. 217-236). Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Corporation.

Ramirez, D. (1992). Executive summary. Bilingual Research Journal, 16, 1- 62.

Ryan, E. B., & Carranza, M. A. (1975). Evaluative reactions toward speakers of standard English and Mexican-American accented English. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 31, 855-863.

Ryan, E. B., Carranza, M. A., & Moffie, R. W. (1975). Mexican American reactions to accented English. In J. W. Berry & W. J. Lonner (Eds.), Applied cross-cultural psychology (pp. 174-178). Amsterdam, Netherlands: Swets and Zeitlinger B.V.

Seaton, I. (1997). Linguistic non-imperialism. ELT Journal, 51, 381-382.

Shannon, S. M. (1995). The hegemony of English: A case study of one bilingual classroom as a site of resistance. Linguistics and Education, 7, 175-200.

Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In W. C. Austin & S. Worchel (Eds.), The social psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 33-47). Monterey, CA: Brooks-Cole.

Williams, F. (1976). Explorations of the linguistic attitudes of teachers. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.

Wong Fillmore, L. (1991). A question for early childhood programs: English first or families first. NABE News, 14, 13-14, 19.

Author Note

This research was funded by a grant from the Arizona State University College of Education.