Author Topic: To parents. (Read 5892 times)

Colin Michael · « **on:** May 15, 2009, 10:54:51 AM »

I'd like to be a parent someday, perferably after I'm married. Having a son is something which especially excites me, and makes me laugh at the irony of how much I'll probably be like my own dad (who I never listened to as a kid).

Since I am not currently a parent, I thought I'd address my elder brothers and sisters on the boards on a topic which I am currently journaling on (I have also sent my own parents an e-mail regarding this for myself.

My question is, if you would be willing to go down memory lane with me, what can you recall about when your child learned to speak?

As St. Augustine wrote in his Confessions,

Quote

"When they (my elders) named some object, and accordingly moved towards something, I saw this and I grasped that that the thing was called by the sound they uttered when they meant to point it out. Their intention was shown by their bodily movements, as it were the natural language of all peoples; the expression of the face, the play of the eyes, the movement of other parts of the body, and the tone of the voice which expresses our state of mind in seeking, having, rejecting, or avoiding something. Thus, as I heard words repeatedly used in their proper places in various sentences, I gradually learnt to understand what objects they signified; and after I had trained my mouth to form these signs, I used them to express my own desires."

soul seeker · « **Reply #1 on:** May 15, 2009, 11:04:17 AM »

Quote from: Colin Michael on May 15, 2009, 10:54:51 AM

I'd like to be a parent someday, perferably after I'm married.

This can be assured if you follow Godly principles, but I guess that is another topic another day and doesn't deal with the original question.

My youngest is continually expanding his vocabulary, but I noticed in all three that it isn't an overnight thing. Speech is a gradual process for most children. They start babbling pretty young has they try out their different muscles and what they can do. Eventually, they start making recognizable sounds (studies show that classical music, gender, and older siblings speed this process) until they stumble across a word that everyone goes nuts over (i.e. dada, bawl (for ball)..when the child sees this praise then they repeat the sound for everyone's enjoyment. After they practice more sounds, you encourage them to speak for other rewards. For example, with my current son, he most say "more" to ask for more of something. He must say "please (a variation of it)" to get something while using vocabulary and learning manners.
Developing speech is such a long process that there are a lot of tips, tricks, and fun stories that I just dabbed in a little bit.

***IMO, speech is one of the "most boring" developments to watch. Rolling over, walking, and puzzle solving are some of the most fun to watch in child development. So I'm kind of curious why you are interested in the speech aspect.

Colin Michael · « **Reply #2 on:** May 15, 2009, 11:11:36 AM »

I'm studying the philosophy of language in relation to mathematics and philosophy of mind and from that I've walked into the psychology of language. Since both psychology and philosophy of language focus heavily on early childhood development; I thought I'd be a good idea to study as much as I can of childhood development. Ironically, Ludwig Wittgenstein (one of the most significant philosophers of language) revised his theory after retiring as a kindergarden teacher for several years. I too find puzzle solving interesting: a field I was going to investigate by teaching one of my friends chess (which proved harder that I thought it would be).

Hmmm. I should analyse the way I learned Redemption. My brother and I played it incorrectly from ages eight to ten, slowing revising the rules we played by as we realised that they were incorrect (for example, because Jacob was in C and D and banded to silver, I deduced that there must be silver in C and D. Ergo, the borders not the fields were the brigade. This turned out to be something we later realised was an incorrect deduction.) It makes a striking similarity to how Wittgenstein argues that "language games" work.

YourMathTeacher · « **Reply #3 on:** May 15, 2009, 11:14:32 AM »

On the surface it seems that repetition is the most effective way to teach a child a new word. They need to hear the word pronounced correctly many times in order to pick it up. That is why shows like Teletubbies are useless for child development - they do not enunciate the correct words. Children don't want to talk like babies, they want to talk like us.

However, with that said, desire is certainly a strong motivator. My daughter learned her version of the word "chocolate" very quickly.

Interestingly, I have a hard time understanding my 2 year old now, because she sometimes uses Spanish words that she learned from watching Dora the Explorer. Example: she wanted a drink, so she went to the refrigerator and starting pulling on the handle, saying "Abre'! Abre'!" I was befuddled, wondering if she was asking for an apple or perhaps apple juice.

crustpope · « **Reply #4 on:** May 15, 2009, 11:19:18 AM »

[quote author=YourMathTeacher link=topic=15748.msg245552#msg245552 Example: she wanted a drink, so she went to the refrigerator and starting pulling on the handle, saying "Abre'! Abre'!" I was befuddled, wondering if she was asking for an apple or perhaps apple juice. [/quote]

C'mon dad, get with the program and open the fridge

That is crazy when kids teach us stuff we didn even know. Usually you have to wait until they get into jr.high and high school (where they think they know everything and ocasionally do know something..but never as much as they think)

But with Dora teaching children spanish, watchout!

soul seeker · « **Reply #5 on:** May 15, 2009, 11:19:24 AM »

Quote from: YourMathTeacher on May 15, 2009, 11:14:32 AM

Interestingly, I have a hard time understanding my 2 year old now, because she sometimes uses Spanish words that she learned from watching Dora the Explorer. Example: she wanted a drink, so she went to the refrigerator and starting pulling on the handle, saying "Abre'! Abre'!" I was befuddled, wondering if she was asking for an apple or perhaps apple juice.

That was great YMT!!!

That is why I limit my child's shows to "Little Einsteins" and "Mickey's Clubhouse"....we would have a communication breakdown if he tried to speak Spanish!

STAMP · « **Reply #6 on:** May 15, 2009, 11:20:26 AM »

Sign language can be learned much earlier than spoken language. Many hearing parents are beginning to teach their hearing kids sign language so as to understand what they need. You ought to do some research.

Colin Michael · « **Reply #7 on:** May 15, 2009, 11:21:08 AM »

Quote from: YourMathTeacher on May 15, 2009, 11:14:32 AM

On the surface it seems that repetition is the most effective way to teach a child a new word. They need to hear the word pronounced correctly many times in order to pick it up. That is why shows like Teletubbies are useless for child development - they do not enunciate the correct words. Children don't want to talk like babies, they want to talk like us.

However, with that said, desire is certainly a strong motivator. My daughter learned her version of the word "chocolate" very quickly.

Interestingly, I have a hard time understanding my 2 year old now, because she sometimes uses Spanish words that she learned from watching Dora the Explorer. Example: she wanted a drink, so she went to the refrigerator and starting pulling on the handle, saying "Abre'! Abre'!" I was befuddled, wondering if she was asking for an apple or perhaps apple juice.

Interesting. I've heard many people say that children who learn two languages early in life are typically are the more intellegent. Perhaps Dora the Explorer is very good for children indeed.

Quote from: STAMP on May 15, 2009, 11:20:26 AM

Sign language can be learned much earlier than spoken language. Many hearing parents are beginning to teach their hearing kids sign language so as to understand what they need. You ought to do some research.

Hm, that supports an existing theory of mine: It's easier to recognise the relation between a symbol and an item than a sound and an item because until one hears both the sound and the item without each other, one associates them as the same event rather than two related events.

soul seeker · « **Reply #8 on:** May 15, 2009, 11:24:47 AM »

Quote from: Colin Michael on May 15, 2009, 11:21:08 AM

Interesting. I've heard many people say that children who learn two languages early in life are typically are the more intellegent. Perhaps Dora the Explorer is very good for children indeed.

I disagree with that. How does knowing a second language have any bearing on your God-given intelligence. It may help you develop in certain areas, but to make you automatically smarter? One of my kids has a very high IQ and he only knows 1 language. With your theory, you telling me he could be a genius if I taught him a 2nd or 3rd language? Or is it possible that he has the capability to learn it and just hasn't?

Cameron the Conqueror · « **Reply #9 on:** May 15, 2009, 11:26:08 AM »

I don't think he is saying that learning another language increases IQ, but that people with high IQs are more likely to learn another.

And I resent that statement.

crustpope · « **Reply #10 on:** May 15, 2009, 11:26:50 AM »

There are programs out there that teach infants to read at early ages. some have a 500 word vocabulary by 2 and a half. the do so by pairing the word with a picture/action and then saying the word out loud (then demonstrating it if it is an action) some infants can read basic words before they can speak. they demonstrate this knowledge by choosing the picture associated to the word. its really kind of amazing.

soul seeker · « **Reply #11 on:** May 15, 2009, 11:27:53 AM »

Quote from: Cameron the Conqueror on May 15, 2009, 11:26:08 AM

And I resent that statement.

Mine or Colin's? If mine, why?

Cameron the Conqueror · « **Reply #12 on:** May 15, 2009, 11:28:42 AM »

Quote from: soul seeker on May 15, 2009, 11:27:53 AM

Quote from: Cameron the Conqueror on May 15, 2009, 11:26:08 AM

And I resent that statement.

Mine or Colin's? If mine, why?

The statement that smart people know more languages. Cause I don't (yet anyway). lol =D

Colin Michael · « **Reply #13 on:** May 15, 2009, 11:29:29 AM »

Haha, not quality as much as capacity. Someone who is taught two languages early has the capacity to think about the same thing from two different angles, this enhances the tools that their already existing intellegent can utilise. It's the same as someone who has a college education and someone who hasn't; the person with a college education may not be smarter, but will have a broader context in which to think.

The Schaef · « **Reply #14 on:** May 15, 2009, 11:32:42 AM »

I'm still working on language with my oldest child; essentially he just babbles now. But one of the most important things to remember is that children grasp concepts a lot sooner than they learn spoken language. If you ask Nathaniel right now, he can point to his belly, his head, his mouth, his nose, his foot. When I tell him to sit down, he sits down; if it's with the promise of food he goes over to his booster seat (on the floor) and sits in the seat. He claps when people praise him and sometimes even when he hears applause on the television, and he waves hello and goodbye at socially appropriate moments. At 15 months, not only does he recognize things by sight, he is also associating sounds with ideas.

One thing many parents are doing these days is teaching baby sign, because children learn to use their hands long before they learn spoken language. For whatever reason, either because we were not diligent in teaching or because his fine motor skills have been developing more slowly, sign didn't take with Nathaniel. But even so, the point is, that is another way to get the child to form associations. Essentially, the brain runs on association, establishing patterns; it's what causes the synapses to fire and meld things into the long-term memory. For that reason, I can't stress enough the importance of understanding that children know things before they can say them. So the best long-term road to teaching them language is to teach them everything that's associated with the word: talking to them, signing to them, letting them explore with all their senses.

Language is the specific, this is the general: KIDS. ARE. A. SPONGE. Soak them with everything they want to take in to get that brain pumping early and often. Stimulate them and then let them explore and develop the way they're designed to do naturally.

crustpope · « **Reply #15 on:** May 15, 2009, 11:33:47 AM »

Quote from: soul seeker on May 15, 2009, 11:24:47 AM

[I disagree with that. How does knowing a second language have any bearing on your God-given intelligence. It may help you develop in certain areas, but to make you automatically smarter? One of my kids has a very high IQ and he only knows 1 language. With your theory, you telling me he could be a genius if I taught him a 2nd or 3rd language? Or is it possible that he has the capability to learn it and just hasn't?

learnign a language at an early age causes neural pathways to form in the brain that make it easier for a child to learn languages later on in their years. of course if they are not regularly used by Jr. High, they will begin to be whittled down and re-used for other things. Childrens brains grow by 90% by the time they are like 7 or 8. If children are exposed to more stimulus (and different types of stimulus) the children will respond by forming new neural pathways to solve problems and understand the new content.

This is why IQ points are 6-7 points higher based on socio-economic class. If you live in poverty, you can expect to do 6-7 points poorer than they typical middle class ro upper class person. this is because the IQ tests are made by/ and gueared toward middle class lifestyles and the poorer childred did not have the stimuli that would prepare them for the test. This does not mean that the children cannot catch up, it jsut means that they are goign to begin with a handicap.

soul seeker · « **Reply #16 on:** May 15, 2009, 11:38:59 AM »

Quote from: crustpope on May 15, 2009, 11:33:47 AM

learnign a language at an early age causes neural pathways to form in the brain that make it easier for a child to learn languages later on in their years. of course if they are not regularly used by Jr. High, they will begin to be whittled down and re-used for other things. Childrens brains grow by 90% by the time they are like 7 or 8. If children are exposed to more stimulus (and different types of stimulus) the children will respond by forming new neural pathways to solve problems and understand the new content.

This is why IQ points are 6-7 points higher based on socio-economic class. If you live in poverty, you can expect to do 6-7 points poorer than they typical middle class ro upper class person. this is because the IQ tests are made by/ and gueared toward middle class lifestyles and the poorer childred did not have the stimuli that would prepare them for the test. This does not mean that the children cannot catch up, it jsut means that they are goign to begin with a handicap.

r u calling my child stupid, a cheat, or specifically geared to during the test making procedure?

i'm kidding of course

Colin Michael · « **Reply #17 on:** May 15, 2009, 11:40:37 AM »

Quote

But even so, the point is, that is another way to get the child to form associations. Essentially, the brain runs on association, establishing patterns; it's what causes the synapses to fire and meld things into the long-term memory. For that reason, I can't stress enough the importance of understanding that children know things before they can say them. So the best long-term road to teaching them language is to teach them everything that's associated with the word: talking to them, signing to them, letting them explore with all their senses.

This is good and has given me several thoughts. Perhaps pre-language cognative development is when the unconscious is developed (although I'm pretty sure Freud thought this as well, just perhaps not in these terms). Something like: unconscious develops, basic functions and reason is formed, languages is learned, consciousness and conscious memory become tied into language, and so forth (I currently hold to the view that language is the source of consciousness and that which is unconscious is that which we cannot clearly express or connect in linguistic reasoning).

crustpope · « **Reply #18 on:** May 15, 2009, 11:42:40 AM »

Quote from: soul seeker on May 15, 2009, 11:38:59 AM

r u calling my child stupid, a cheat, or specifically geared to during the test making procedure?
i'm kidding of course

lol choose yoru own adventure

no, yo know I love your boys. I'm just syaing that exposing them to a language early on cannot hurt them, only help them. (although it may drive you batty)

Colin Michael · « **Reply #19 on:** May 15, 2009, 11:43:37 AM »

Quote from: crustpope on May 15, 2009, 11:42:40 AM

Quote from: soul seeker on May 15, 2009, 11:38:59 AM
r u calling my child stupid, a cheat, or specifically geared to during the test making procedure?
i'm kidding of course

lol choose yoru own adventure

no, yo know I love your boys. I'm just syaing that exposing them to a language early on cannot hurt them, only help them. (although it may drive you batty)

Latin is good too (or at least in elementary school), as it expands their capacity for understanding languages in the future.

Hm, if the speed of cognative development can be shown by how far back someone remembers in their childhood, my sixtee-year-old brother remembers being breast-fed; which makes sense because he's grown up very fast and is perhaps quite more mature than I am.

soul seeker · « **Reply #20 on:** May 15, 2009, 11:58:09 AM »

Quote from: Colin Michael on May 15, 2009, 11:43:37 AM

...by how far back someone remembers in their childhood, my sixtee-year-old brother remembers being breast-fed; which makes sense because he's grown up very fast and is perhaps quite more mature than I am.

Who would want to remember that? I think those are memories that I would suppress!

I do thank God that children don't remember much of their early childhood more for my sake then theirs. (Long term memory really doesn't start until age 3 or 4). That way my kids can forget the mistakes I made.
Here is a doozy: I was watching my oldest child and before my wife would go to work she would set out the current bottle. I get up and tried to feed him. He just wouldn't eat and I can tell from the screaming and accepting the bottle that he was hungry, but after a few sips he would quit. An ounce later, I knew something had to be wrong. Boy was I right, I had grabbed the wrong bottle! The one I had was from the day before that I forgot to throw out....oops.

Colin Michael · « **Reply #21 on:** May 15, 2009, 12:00:36 PM »

Quote from: soul seeker on May 15, 2009, 11:58:09 AM

Quote from: Colin Michael on May 15, 2009, 11:43:37 AM
...by how far back someone remembers in their childhood, my sixtee-year-old brother remembers being breast-fed; which makes sense because he's grown up very fast and is perhaps quite more mature than I am.

Who would want to remember that? I think those are memories that I would suppress!

I do thank God that children don't remember much of their early childhood more for my sake then theirs. (Long term memory really doesn't start until age 3 or 4). That way my kids can forget the mistakes I made.
Here is a doozy: I was watching my oldest child and before my wife would go to work she would set out the current bottle. I get up and tried to feed him. He just wouldn't eat and I can tell from the screaming and accepting the bottle that he was hungry, but after a few sips he would quit. An ounce later, I knew something had to be wrong. Boy was I right, I had grabbed the wrong bottle! The one I had was from the day before that I forgot to throw out....oops.

He's going to become a germaphobic now, good job.

YourMathTeacher · « **Reply #22 on:** May 15, 2009, 01:00:03 PM »

That will still be better than your brother's Oedipus Complex....

Colin Michael · « **Reply #23 on:** May 15, 2009, 01:02:40 PM »

Quote from: YourMathTeacher on May 15, 2009, 01:00:03 PM

That will still be better than your brother's Oedipus Complex....

Touche.

Bryon · « **Reply #24 on:** May 15, 2009, 01:43:31 PM »

My children all learned to speak early, and developed their vocabularies and pronunciation very, very quickly. My wife reads to them very often, and speaks to them very often (she stays home and home schools our older children). I read to them often as well, and spend a lot of time in conversation with them.

A few tips:
1. Marry a smart woman with good read-aloud ability and a gift for nurturing

2. Read to your children daily. Before bed is great.
3. Educational TV that models good speaking is fine, but avoid too much TV. There really isn't a reason for more than an average of 30 minutes per day
4. Talk to them very often about many things: things that interest them, things that interest you, etc. Teach them words that sound funny. Act out verbs and have them do it, too. It is great fun as your children begin to talk. Devote time to it and enjoy it.
5. When they speak incorrectly, don't say "no" to them. Rather, repeat what they said, but correctly, and with a smile.

Some children get apprehensive if they are scolded. But you will know your child's temperament and know what kind of correction is appropriate.
6. Model good conversation habits. Dinner table discussions with your wife and older children are great for this. Talking during family walks is also great, since there are different and interesting things to see out of doors.
7. As your children grow, don't be afraid to discuss grammar with your wife/older children. We did it last night at the dinner table. It was fairly humorous, but reinforced the importance of good grammar to our middle children.

News:

Author Topic: To parents. (Read 5892 times)

The Schaef