Startseite Linguistik & Semiotik Sounds like a dynamic system: a unifying approach to Language
Artikel
Lizenziert
Nicht lizenziert Erfordert eine Authentifizierung

Sounds like a dynamic system: a unifying approach to Language

  • Sara Sowers-Wills EMAIL logo
Veröffentlicht/Copyright: 23. Juli 2021
Linguistics Vanguard
Aus der Zeitschrift Linguistics Vanguard Band 7 Heft 1

Abstract

While nativist linguistic theory readily captures the regular processes of adult language, it struggles to account for often-unwieldy data collected from children. Any theory of language must house both the predictable and unpredictable turns a linguistic system takes. Some usage-based theories make strides in accounting for connections between multiple linguistic factors contributing to linguistic representation. Dynamic systems theory (DST) is capable of describing the interaction between numerous factors both linguistic and extra-linguistic. Grounded in embodiment, DST accounts for continuity between bodily and cognitive processes, which together are crucial in understanding the development of language. Conceptualizing systems as self-organizing, DST allows for the emergence of novel forms alongside the predictable. Furthermore, DST explains both continuity between unexpected child forms and eventual target forms and also apparent discontinuity that gives the illusion of discrete developmental stages. To illustrate the advantages of DST in describing language processes, this paper presents data from one American English-acquiring child, which comes from a larger study investigating phonological development beginning at the onset of word production. The data demonstrate the role of phonological templates in development as part of a dynamic system, entailing the interaction between developing phonological categories, lexical representation, and linguistic environment.

Keywords: dynamic systems theory; embodied cognition; language acquisition; phonological development; phonological templates
Corresponding author: Sara Sowers-Wills, English, Linguistics, and Writing Studies, University of Minnesota Duluth, 1201 Ordean Court, 420 Humanities Building, Duluth, MIN 55812-3000, USA, E-mail:

References

Becker, Michael & Anne-Marie Tessier. 2011. Trajectories of faithfulness in child-specific phonology. Phonology 28(02). 163–196. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0952675711000133.Suche in Google Scholar

Behrens, Heike. 2009. Usage-based and emergentist approaches to language acquisition. Linguistics 47(2). 383–411. https://doi.org/10.1515/ling.2009.014.Suche in Google Scholar

Browman, Catherine P. & Louis Goldstein. 1995. Dynamics and articulatory phonology. In Robert F. Port & Timothy Van Gelder (eds.), Mind as motion: Explorations in the dynamics of cognition, 175–193. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Suche in Google Scholar

Bybee, Joan L. 2006. From usage to grammar: The mind’s response to repetition. Language 82. 711–733. https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2006.0186.Suche in Google Scholar

Byun, Tara McAllister, Sharon Inkelas & Yvan Rose. 2016. The A-map model: Articulatory reliability in child-specific phonology. Language 92(1). 141–178. https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2016.0000.Suche in Google Scholar

Chomsky, Noam & Morris Halle. 1968. The sound pattern of English. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Suche in Google Scholar

Compton, Arthur J. & Mary Streeter. 1977. Child phonology: Data collection and preliminary analyses. Papers and Reports on Child Language Development. ERIC Clearinghouse.Suche in Google Scholar

De Bot, Kees. 2008. Introduction: Second language development as a dynamic process. The Modern Language Journal 92(2). 166–178. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2008.00712.x.Suche in Google Scholar

De Bot, Kees, Wander Lowie & Marjolijn Verspoor. 2007. A dynamic systems theory approach to second language acquisition. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 10(1). 7–21. https://doi.org/10.1017/s1366728906002732.Suche in Google Scholar

DePaolis, Rory A., Marilyn M. Vihman & Tamar Keren-Portnoy. 2011. Do production patterns influence the processing of speech in prelinguistic infants? Infant Behavior and Development 34(4). 590–601. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infbeh.2011.06.005.Suche in Google Scholar

DePaolis, Rory A., Marilyn M. Vihman & Satsuki Nakai. 2013. The influence of babbling patterns on the processing of speech. Infant Behavior and Development 36(4). 642–649. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infbeh.2013.06.007.Suche in Google Scholar

Elbers, Loekie & Josi Ton. 1985. Play pen monologues: The interplay of words and babbles in the first words period. Journal of Child Language 12(03). 551–565. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0305000900006644.Suche in Google Scholar

Ellis, Nick C. 1998. Emergentism, connectionism and language learning. Language Learning 48(4). 631–664. https://doi.org/10.1111/0023-8333.00063.Suche in Google Scholar

Ellis, Nick C. 2008. The dynamics of second language emergence: Cycles of language use, language change, and language acquisition. The Modern Language Journal 92(2). 232–249. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2008.00716.x.Suche in Google Scholar

Ferguson, Charles A. & Carol B. Farwell. [1975]2013. Words and sounds in early language acquisition. In Marilyn. M. Vihman & Teren Keren-Portnoy (eds.), The emergence of phonology: Whole-word approaches and cross-linguistic evidence, 93–132. New York: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511980503.007Suche in Google Scholar

Flege, James Emil & James Hillenbrand. 1986. Differential use of temporal cues to the/s/–/z/contrast by native and non-native speakers of English. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 79(2). 508–517. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.393538.Suche in Google Scholar

Gallese, Vittorio & George Lakoff. 2005. The brain’s concepts: The role of the sensory-motor system in conceptual knowledge. Cognitive Neuropsychology 22(3-4). 455–479. https://doi.org/10.1080/02643290442000310.Suche in Google Scholar

Gershkoff-Stowe, Lisa & Esther Thelen. 2004. U-shaped changes in behavior: A dynamic systems perspective. Journal of Cognition and Development 5(1). 11–36. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327647jcd0501_2.Suche in Google Scholar

Goldsmith, John. 1994. A dynamic computational theory of accent systems. Perspectives in phonology, 1–28.Suche in Google Scholar

Gooch, Janet L., Mary Hardin-Jones, Kathy L. Chapman, Judith E. Trost-Cardamone & Sussman. Joan. 2001. Reliability of listener transcriptions of compensatory articulations. The Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Journal 38(1). 59–67. https://doi.org/10.1597/1545-1569(2001)038<0059:roltoc>2.0.co;2.10.1597/1545-1569_2001_038_0059_roltoc_2.0.co_2Suche in Google Scholar

Inkelas, Sharon & Yves Rose. 2003. Velar fronting revisited. In Proceedings of the 27th annual Boston University conference on language development, 334–345.Suche in Google Scholar

Inkelas, Sharon & Yves Rose. 2008. Positional neutralization: A case study from child language. Language 83. 707–736. https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2008.0000.Suche in Google Scholar

Johnson, Mark. 1987. The body in the mind: The bodily basis of meaning, imagination, and cognition. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.10.7208/chicago/9780226177847.001.0001Suche in Google Scholar

Kelso, J. A. 1997. Dynamic patterns: The self-organization of brain and behavior. Scott Cambridge, MA: MIT press.Suche in Google Scholar

Kidd, Evan, Seamus Donnelly & Morten H. Christiansen. 2018. Individual differences in language acquisition and processing. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 22(2). 154–169. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2017.11.006.Suche in Google Scholar

Kövecses, Zoltán. 2015. Metaphor and emergentism. In Brian MacWhinney & William O’Grady (eds.), The handbook of language emergence, 100–122. West Sussex, UK: John Wiley & Sons.10.1002/9781118346136.ch6Suche in Google Scholar

Laakso, M-L., A-M. Poikkeus, Kenneth Eklund & Paula Lyytinen. 1999. Social interactional behaviors and symbolic play competence as predictors of language development and their associations with maternal attention-directing strategies. Infant Behavior and Development 22(4). 541–556. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0163-6383(00)00022-9.Suche in Google Scholar

Langacker, Ronald W. 1987. Foundations of cognitive grammar: Theoretical prerequisites. Redwood City, CA: Stanford University Press.Suche in Google Scholar

Lewis, Marc D. 2000. The promise of dynamic systems approaches for an integrated account of human development. Child Development 71(1). 36–43. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8624.00116.Suche in Google Scholar

Louko, Linda. J. & Mary Louise Edwards. 2001. Issues in collecting and transcribing speech samples. Topics in Language Disorders 21. 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1097/00011363-200108000-00003.Suche in Google Scholar

Macken, Marlys A. 1979. Developmental reorganization of phonology: A hierarchy of basic units of acquisition. Lingua 49(1). 11–49. https://doi.org/10.1016/0024-3841(79)90073-1.Suche in Google Scholar

MacWhinney, Brian. 2015. Introduction: Language emergence. In Brian MacWhinney & William O’Grady (eds.), Handbook of language emergence, 1–31. West Sussex: John Wiley & Sons.10.1002/9781118346136.ch0Suche in Google Scholar

Majorano, Marinella, Marilyn M. Vihman & Rory A. DePaolis. 2014. The relationship between infant production experience and their processing of speech. Language Learning and Development 10(2). 179–204. https://doi.org/10.1080/15475441.2013.829740.Suche in Google Scholar

McCune, Lorraine. 1992. First words: A dynamic systems view. In Charles. A. Ferguson, Lise Menn & Carol Stoel-Gammon (eds.), Phonological development: Models, research, implications, 313–336. Timonium, MD: York Press.Suche in Google Scholar

McCune, Lorraine. 2013. A view from developmental psychology. In Marilyn M. Vihman & Teren Keren-Portnoy (eds.), The emergence of phonology: Whole-word approaches and cross- linguistic evidence, 441–459. New York: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511980503.021Suche in Google Scholar

McCune, Lorraine & Marilyn M. Vihman. 1987. Vocal motor schemes. Papers and Reports on Child Language Development 26. 72–79.Suche in Google Scholar

Menn, Lise. 1971. Phonotactic rules in beginning speech: A study in the development of English discourse. Lingua 26. 225–251. https://doi.org/10.1016/0024-3841(71)90011-8.Suche in Google Scholar

Menn, Lise & Edward Matthei. 1992. The “two-lexicon” account of child phonology: Looking back, looking ahead. In Charles Ferguson, Lise Menn & Carol Stoel-Gammon (eds.), Phonological development: Models, research, implications, 211–247. Timonium, MD: York Press.Suche in Google Scholar

Menn, Lise, Ellen Schmidt & Brent Nicholas. 2013. Challenges to theories, charges to a model: The linked-attractor model of phonological development. In Marilyn. M. Vihman & Tamar Keren-Portnoy (eds.), The emergence of phonology: Whole-word approaches and cross- linguistic evidence, 460–502. New York: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511980503.022Suche in Google Scholar

Munson, Benjamin, Jan Edwards & Mary E Beckman. 2011. Phonological representations in language acquisition: Climbing the ladder of abstraction. In Abigail C. Cohn, Cécile Fougeron & Marie K. Huffman (eds.), The Oxford handbook of laboratory phonology, 288–309. Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199575039.013.0012.Suche in Google Scholar

Nelson, Katherine. 1981. Individual differences in language development: Implications for development and language. Developmental Psychology 17(2). 170–187. https://doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.17.2.170.Suche in Google Scholar

O’Grady, William. 2015. Anaphora and the case for emergentism. In Brian MacWhinney & William O’Grady (eds.), The handbook of language emergence, 100–122. West Sussex, UK: John Wiley & Sons.10.1002/9781118346136.ch4Suche in Google Scholar

Oliveira-Guimarães, Daniela. 2013. Beyond early words: Word template development in Brazilian Portuguese. In Marilyn M. Vihman & Tamar Keren-Portnoy (eds.), The emergence of phonology: Whole-word approaches and cross-linguistic evidence, 317–342. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511980503.014Suche in Google Scholar

Oller, D. Kimbrough & Heather L. Ramsdell. 2006. A weighted reliability measure for phonetic transcription. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research 49(6). 1391–1411. https://doi.org/10.1044/1092-4388(2006/100).Suche in Google Scholar

Pater, Joe. 2004. Bridging the gap between receptive and productive development with minimally violable constraints. In René Kager, Pater Joe & Wim Zonneveld (eds.), Constraints in phonological acquisition, 219–244. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511486418.008Suche in Google Scholar

Port, Robert F. 1981. Linguistic timing factors in combination. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 69. 262–74. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.385347.Suche in Google Scholar

Port, Robert F. & Adam P. Leary. 2005. Against formal phonology. Language 81(4). 927–964. https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2005.0195.Suche in Google Scholar

Priestly, Tom M.S. 1977. One idiosyncratic strategy in the acquisition of phonology. Journal of Child Language 4(1). 45–65. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0305000900000477.Suche in Google Scholar

Rácz, Péter, Janet B. Pierrehumbert, Jennifer B. Hay & Viktória Pa. 2015. Morphological emergence. In Brian MacWhinney & William O’Grady (eds.), The handbook of language emergence, 100–122. West Sussex, UK: John Wiley & Sons.10.1002/9781118346136.ch5Suche in Google Scholar

Smith, Linda B. & Esther Thelen. 2003. Development as a dynamic system. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 7(8). 343–348. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1364-6613(03)00156-6.Suche in Google Scholar

Smolensky, Paul & Alan Prince. 1993. Optimality Theory: Constraint interaction in generative grammar. Optimality Theory in phonology 3.Suche in Google Scholar

Sowers-Wills, Sara. 2017. Using schema theory to support a whole-word approach to phonological acquisition. Cognitive Linguistics 28(1). 155–191. https://doi.org/10.1515/cog-2016-0044.Suche in Google Scholar

Stoel-Gammon, Carol. 1989. Prespeech and early speech development of two late talkers. First Language 9(6). 207–223. https://doi.org/10.1177/014272378900900607.Suche in Google Scholar

Stoel-Gammon, Carol. 2001. Transcribing the speech of young children. Topics in Language Disorders 21. 12–21. https://doi.org/10.1097/00011363-200108000-00004.Suche in Google Scholar

Street, James A. & Ewa Dąbrowska. 2010. More individual differences in language attainment: How much do adult native speakers of English know about passives and quantifiers? Lingua 120(8). 2080–2094. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2010.01.004.Suche in Google Scholar

Szreder-Ptasinska, Marta. 2012. Child Phonology as a Dynamic System. York: University of York dissertation.Suche in Google Scholar

Thelen, Esther. 1991. Motor aspects of emergent speech: A dynamic approach. Biological and Behavioral Determinants of Language Development, 339–362.Suche in Google Scholar

Thelen, Esther. 1995. Time-scale dynamics and the development of an embodied cognition. In Robert F. Port & Timothy Van Gelder (eds.), Mind as motion: Explorations in the dynamics of cognition, 69–100. Cambridge, MA: MIT press.Suche in Google Scholar

Thelen, Esther. 2005. Dynamic systems theory and the complexity of change. Psychoanalytic Dialogues 15(2). 255–283. https://doi.org/10.1080/10481881509348831.Suche in Google Scholar

Thelen, Esther, Daniela Corbetta, Kathi Kamm, John P. Spencer, Klaus Schneider & Ronald F. Zernicke. 1993. The transition to reaching: matching intention and intrinsic dynamics. Child Development 64. 1058–98. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.1993.tb04188.x.Suche in Google Scholar

Thelen, Esther & Linda B. Smith. 1994. A dynamic systems approach to the development of cognition and action. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.10.7551/mitpress/2524.001.0001Suche in Google Scholar

Thelen, Esther & Linda B. Smith. 2006. Dynamic systems theories. In William Damon, Richard M. Lerner & Nancy Eisenberg (eds.), Handbook of Child Psychology, 6e (Theoretical Models of Human Development 1), 258–312. West Sussex: John Wiley & Sons.10.1002/9780470147658.chpsy0106Suche in Google Scholar

Tilsen, Sam. 2009. Multitimescale dynamical interactions between speech rhythm and gesture. Cognitive Science 33(5). 839–879. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1551-6709.2009.01037.x.Suche in Google Scholar

Tilsen, S. 2013. A dynamical model of hierarchical selection and coordination in speech planning. PloS One 8(4). e62800. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0062800.Suche in Google Scholar

Tomasello, Michael & Malinda Carpenter. 2007. Shared intentionality. Developmental Science 10(1). 121–125. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-7687.2007.00573.x.Suche in Google Scholar

Van Dijk, Marijn. 2003. Child language cuts capers: Variability and ambiguity in early child development. Goningen, Netherlands: University of Groningen dissertation.Suche in Google Scholar

Van Geert, Paul. 2003. Dynamic systems approaches and modeling of developmental processes. In Jaan Valsiner & Kevin Connelly (eds.), Handbook of developmental psychology, 640–672.10.4135/9781848608306.n28Suche in Google Scholar

Velleman, Shelley L. & Marilyn M. Vihman. 2002. Whole-word phonology and templates: Trap, bootstrap, or some of each? Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools 33(1). 9–23. https://doi.org/10.1044/0161-1461(2002/002).Suche in Google Scholar

Vihman, M. M. 1993. Variable paths to early word production. Journal of Phonetics 21(1–2). 61–82. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0095-4470(19)31321-x.Suche in Google Scholar

Vihman, Marilyn & William Croft. 2007. Phonological development: Toward a “radical” templatic phonology. Linguistics 45(4). 683–725. https://doi.org/10.1515/ling.2007.021.Suche in Google Scholar

Vihman, Marilyn, Rory A. DePaolis & Tamar Keren-Portnoy. 2009. A dynamic systems approach to babbling and words. In Edith L. Bavin (ed.), The Cambridge handbook of child language, 163–184. New York: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511576164.010Suche in Google Scholar

Vihman, Marilyn M., Charles A. Ferguson & Mary Elbert. 1986. Phonological development from babbling to speech: Common tendencies and individual differences. Applied PsychoLinguistics 7(01). 3–40. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0142716400007165.Suche in Google Scholar

Vihman, Marilyn. M. & Shelley L. Velleman. 2000. The construction of a first phonology. Phonetica 57(2–4). 255–266. https://doi.org/10.1159/000028478.Suche in Google Scholar

Vihman, Marilyn M. & Sophi Wauquier. 2018. Templates in child language. In M. Hickmann, E. Veneziano & H. Jisa (eds.), Sources of variation in first language acquisition: Languages, contexts, and learners (Trends in Language Acquisition Research), 27–44. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/tilar.22.02vihSuche in Google Scholar

Waterson, Natalie. 1971. Child phonology: A prosodic view. Journal of Linguistics 7. 179–211. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0022226700002917.Suche in Google Scholar
Received: 2019-09-23
Accepted: 2021-02-11
Published Online: 2021-07-23

© 2021 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston

Artikel in diesem Heft

  1. Editorial Note
  2. Editorial note
  3. Phonetics & Phonology
  4. Fast Track: fast (nearly) automatic formant-tracking using Praat
  5. Acoustic investigation of anticipatory vowel nasalization in a Caribbean and a non-Caribbean dialect of Spanish
  6. Evidence against a link between learning phonotactics and learning phonological alternations
  7. The extent and degree of utterance-final word lengthening in spontaneous speech from 10 languages
  8. Morphology & Syntax
  9. Brand names as multimodal constructions
  10. NP-internal structure and the distribution of adjectives in Mə̀dʉ́mbὰ
  11. A quantitative investigation of the ellipsis of English relativizers
  12. Positional dependency in Murrinhpatha: expanding the typology of non-canonical morphotactics
  13. Semantics & Pragmatics
  14. Multifactorial Information Management (MIM): summing up the emerging alternative to Information Structure
  15. Language Documentation & Typology
  16. Current trends in grammar writing
  17. Psycholinguistics & Neurolinguistics
  18. Experimental filler design influences error correction rates in a word restoration paradigm
  19. Phonological and morphological roles modulate the perception of consonant variants
  20. Language Acquisition and Language Learning
  21. Sounds like a dynamic system: a unifying approach to Language
  22. Sociolinguistics and Anthropological Linguistics
  23. Using hidden Markov models to find discrete targets in continuous sociophonetic data
  24. “It’s a Whole Vibe”: testing evaluations of grammatical and ungrammatical AAE on Twitter
  25. The sociolinguistics of /l/ in Manchester
  26. Computational & Corpus Linguistics
  27. An empirical study on the contribution of formal and semantic features to the grammatical gender of nouns
  28. A computational construction grammar approach to semantic frame extraction
  29. The “negative end” of change in grammar: terminology, concepts and causes
  30. In order that – a data-driven study of symptoms and causes of obsolescence
  31. Cognitive Linguistics
  32. Iconicity ratings really do measure iconicity, and they open a new window onto the nature of language
  33. Iconicity ratings really do measure iconicity, and they open a new window onto the nature of language
  34. Repetition in Mandarin-speaking children’s dialogs: its distribution and structural dimensions
https://doi.org/10.1515/lingvan-2020-0070
Schlagwörter für diesen Artikel
dynamic systems theory; embodied cognition; language acquisition; phonological development; phonological templates

Artikel in diesem Heft

  1. Editorial Note
  2. Editorial note
  3. Phonetics & Phonology
  4. Fast Track: fast (nearly) automatic formant-tracking using Praat
  5. Acoustic investigation of anticipatory vowel nasalization in a Caribbean and a non-Caribbean dialect of Spanish
  6. Evidence against a link between learning phonotactics and learning phonological alternations
  7. The extent and degree of utterance-final word lengthening in spontaneous speech from 10 languages
  8. Morphology & Syntax
  9. Brand names as multimodal constructions
  10. NP-internal structure and the distribution of adjectives in Mə̀dʉ́mbὰ
  11. A quantitative investigation of the ellipsis of English relativizers
  12. Positional dependency in Murrinhpatha: expanding the typology of non-canonical morphotactics
  13. Semantics & Pragmatics
  14. Multifactorial Information Management (MIM): summing up the emerging alternative to Information Structure
  15. Language Documentation & Typology
  16. Current trends in grammar writing
  17. Psycholinguistics & Neurolinguistics
  18. Experimental filler design influences error correction rates in a word restoration paradigm
  19. Phonological and morphological roles modulate the perception of consonant variants
  20. Language Acquisition and Language Learning
  21. Sounds like a dynamic system: a unifying approach to Language
  22. Sociolinguistics and Anthropological Linguistics
  23. Using hidden Markov models to find discrete targets in continuous sociophonetic data
  24. “It’s a Whole Vibe”: testing evaluations of grammatical and ungrammatical AAE on Twitter
  25. The sociolinguistics of /l/ in Manchester
  26. Computational & Corpus Linguistics
  27. An empirical study on the contribution of formal and semantic features to the grammatical gender of nouns
  28. A computational construction grammar approach to semantic frame extraction
  29. The “negative end” of change in grammar: terminology, concepts and causes
  30. In order that – a data-driven study of symptoms and causes of obsolescence
  31. Cognitive Linguistics
  32. Iconicity ratings really do measure iconicity, and they open a new window onto the nature of language
  33. Iconicity ratings really do measure iconicity, and they open a new window onto the nature of language
  34. Repetition in Mandarin-speaking children’s dialogs: its distribution and structural dimensions
Jetzt anmelden und 20% sparen
Institutioneller Zugang
Wie funktioniert Authentifizierung?
Haben Sie eine Idee, wie wir unsere Website verbessern können?
Bitte schreiben Sie uns.
© 2025 De Gruyter Brill
Heruntergeladen am 8.12.2025 von https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/lingvan-2020-0070/html
Button zum nach oben scrollen