Multi-case study reveals cultural variations in mealtime communication among educators and infants, highlighting how caregiving routines influence language learning opportunities.
Previous studies suggest that educator–infant interactions during mealtime have significant potential to promote early language learning. As most of this research has focused on Western contexts, little is known about whether and how educators’ interactions with infants during mealtime in early childhood education and care (ECEC) settings vary across cultures. To address this knowledge gap, using a multi-case study approach, we compared the natural mealtime interactions of 12 educators with infants in ECEC settings in Australia and China, with six educators participating in each country. Drawing on systemic functional linguistic (SFL) theory and multimodal discourse analysis (MDA), this study examined (1) the situational context of the mealtime practices (each meal’s duration, educators’ movement and whether they modelled eating behaviours, and infants’ eating behaviours); (2) educators’ infant-addressed language and gesture use; and (3) infants’ use of vocalisation and gesture. The analysis revealed several differences: (1) the Australian educators sat with the infants, while the Chinese educators moved around the tables and served the infants; (2) the Australian educators’ talk included a higher percentage of mental processes, statements, and gestures, while the Chinese educators used more material processes and commands in their speech and fewer gestures; and (3) the Australian infants vocalised more and used more gestures. Adopting a systemic functional and multimodal discourse analysis (SF MDA) approach enabled us to relate such differences to both the situational and broader cultural context of educator–infant interactions. This study thus contributes to a richer, more nuanced understanding of the factors that shape educator–infant interactions and the potential of mealtime in ECEC settings to provide infants with opportunities for language learning across cultures.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Sheng et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: