Two to five

Or remember the words, as “Higinio”, “kavonina”, “ktoytina”, “sumasoshlataya” etc.
Although they are based on the finished model, but the best choice is the model of, which is most suitable for each of the case, in no way be reduced to a mechanical imitation.
WE. ANALYSIS linguistic heritage ADULTS
Criticism and BUNTARY
Unfortunately, we still have not translated theorists, who continue to repeat, if the child, like an automaton, without hesitation, dutifully copies of our “adult” speech, without making it any analysis.
This is not true is declared even in scientific articles – it is declared, because it is quite impossible to prove. One has only to take a closer look at the language development of children, to become clear, that imitation they combined with the most inquisitive study of the material, which offer them adults:
– Koçegarka – koçegara easy?
– Zander – it is judged?
– elementary School – this is where the heads of study?
– If they fire, they have to do fire, and extinguish the fire must tushenniki!
What child is already in the fourth year he did not stick to his mother with such questions, which is the most severe and even captious criticism “adults” sentences:
– why cricket? he sparkles?
– why creek? We ought to murmurs. He did not ruchit, and murmurs.
– Why do you say: poplar? After all, he is not stamps.
– Why do you say: nails! Nails on our feet. And who in her arms – it EBCCH.
– Why do you say: fish bite? No beak she has no.
– Why scoop? We ought to nalivatelnaya.
– Why penknife? We ought to otochitelny. No feathers I told them not chinyu.
No child, which at a certain period of his spiritual growth would not ask such questions. Called period of his life is characterized by the gazing into the design of each word.
I, eg, I know a lot of guys, reject the word “painter”, because they believe, what, if the word starts adverb “God” – means, is a dirty word. O.I.Kapitsa talks about the five year old boy, who spoke about the artist, do the illustrations in the book:
– He is not an artist: it is very well painted.
Make any picture, The same boy said:
– look, What I horoshnik.
When the picture is especially possible to him, He says:
– And now I prekrasnik!*
* O.I.Kapitsa, children's folklore, L. 1928, pp. 181.
What would we say to a child, we must not forget, what he, eagerly soaking up our words, It requires, to them was flawless logic, and forgive us the slightest violation of its.
This very clearly shows a, eg, episode.
The mother became angry and said the three-year Vanya:
– You're my whole soul exhausted!
In the evening came the neighbor. Mother, talking with her, complained:
– My heart aches.
Vanya, playing in the corner, judiciously corrected:
– You said, I have exhausted your whole soul. Means, you have no soul, and nothing hurt.
he is not known, what the soul, but he knows his three-year experience, what, if anything drunk, poured out, exhausted, it ceases to exist, – and talk, if it hurts, no good.
Such cases are a great many.
Driving in the Crimea on the steppe, I called this desert steppe. But my companion pointed to a four bushes:
– It is not a desert, and kustynya.
Four-Vadik was surprised to see, adults poured into the milkman not milk, and wine.
– Now this is not the milkman, and the perpetrator.
demanding, to each word in the design was the most straightforward logic, child sternly rejects words, logic which does not meet its:
– It's not a bruise, and Krasniak.
– Cow no butts, and horns.
Helen Lozovskaya (four and a half years), uvidya utyat, exclaimed:
– Mama, duck utkom go!
– Guscom.
– Not, geese – in single file, and duck – utkom.
In adults, which surround the child, he, naturally, He sees infallible language teachers. He learns from them from infancy, carefully copying their speech.
But the striking the strict control, which he puts this speech.
Hearing, eg, that the grandmother said someone: “You then still under the table, walk upright”, granddaughter interrupts her sarcastic laugh:
– It is under the table in cabs go?
When my grandmother once said,, that's a holiday coming soon, granddaughter objected, laughing:
– Have a holiday – legs?
This question of the legs ask very many children, thus disputing with our metaphorical interpretation of the words “идти”.
Too wide and varied use of the word “walk” and then it knocks the kids confused.
Mother told the children to lock the door behind her on a hook and let no one, “because, – she explained, – the city goes scarlet fever”.
In the absence of a mother who is a long time knocking at their door.
– revenue scarlet fever, but we have not let.
true, in the end, the children created a habit of our “adults” idioms and metaphors, but this habit is developed not too soon, and curious to follow the various stages of its formation and growth. Here is one very specific example. The family talked about the new apartment, and someone said,, that its windows overlook the courtyard. The five-year Gavrik felt it necessary to note, the windows because of the lack of legs can not go from house to house. But he said it is his objection without any temper, and it was evident, that came the period of language development for him, When children begin to come to terms with our metaphors “adults” things. this period, As far as I was able to observe, in normal children begins at the sixth year and ends on the eighth or ninth. And the three-year and four year olds do not have this habit in the bud. The logic of these rationalists are always ruthless. Their rules are not aware of exceptions. Any verbal abuse of them seems willfulness.
tell, eg, during conversation:
– I am glad that before his death,.
And hear a reproachful question:
– Why did not you die?
The child here, as always, It is the guardian of the correctness and purity of the Russian language, requiring, to match the true facts of reality (he in Mere, to the extent that it is really available).
Grandma said with granddaughter:
– A rain and fry in the morning.
Внучка, four-Tanya, immediately began to inspire her to teach voice:
– The rain did not fry, but just falls from the sky. And you fry patty me.
Children generally literalists. Each word has a single for them, direct and clear meaning – and not just a word, but sometimes the whole phrase, and, when, eg, father says threateningly: “Yell at me yet!” – son takes the threat of a request and in good faith strengthens the cry.
– God knows what is happening in our store, – said the saleswoman, returning from work.
– What's going on? – I asked.
her son, five years, He said didactically:
– You also said,, that God knows, and my mother did the devil? She does not know.
Father once said,, that the chocolate bar should be postponed for a rainy day, when there will be another sweet. Year old daughter decided, that day will be black, and very long and eagerly awaited, When will this day.
The four-year Svetlana asked her mother, soon there will come the summer.
– soon. You do not have time to look back and.
Svetlana began as something strange swirl.
– I look, I look, and all of the summer do not have.
The whole point is, what we, adults, so to speak, thought, word, verbal formulas, and young children – things, objects of the material world. They thought at first associated only with concrete images. That is why they are so strongly opposed to our allegories and metaphors.
asks, eg, One woman in her Natasha, four and a half years:
– Do not you tell me, how to understand, when they say, that one person wants another in a spoonful of water to drown?
– What you? In a spoon?! What is it? Say it again.
mother repeats.
– It can not be! – Natasha objects. – Can never be!
And then he shows all of the actual impossibility of such an act: She grabs a spoon and quickly puts it on the floor.
– Look, here I am!
It becomes on a spoon.
– Well, Marsh I. A person does not fit… all the top will be… here you go, look… leg of a large spoon…
And it expresses contempt for a similar turnover “adult” speeches, distorting reality:
– But I want to about it… Nonsense some…*
* N.P.Antonov, The development of thought and language of the child in the preschool age, “Soviet pedagogy”, 1953, № 2, pp. 60 and 63.
“Ivan came home, a frog and asks: “What are you hanging your head?”
Igor and imagined, that took Ivan's head and hung it on a nail.
other children, endowed with humor, often pretend to joke, they can not understand or that our speech idioms, in order to lead us to a greater respect for the rules, we gave them themselves.
complain, eg, with child:
– Today, I have terrible rattle head!
A child asks mockingly:
– Why did not hear cod?
And that accentuate their negative attitude to the strange (for him) way adults express their ideas in metaphors, so far removed from the true reality of life.
Children humorists often find fault even to understand the words, to put us in their guilt “inaccuracy”.
Mother calls his three-year Cyrus to him under the blanket “polaskatʹsâ” and hear the ironic question:
– Is Mom slop cup?
The mother said her daughter after a long separation:
– How do you thin, Nadyusha. One nose was.
– Is, Mama, I used to have two noses was? – ironically opposed four-year daughter.
Angry father said four-year son:
– To this I have in the factory was not!
Son responsible considerate voice:
– But do not plant here, and the apartment.
Hearing, that a woman fainted, the child asks sarcastically:
– And who took ottudova?
Playing with George tin soldiers, I said to one of them, that it will stand on watch. George grabbed the soldier and laughingly ran to, where the hanging wall clock, although he was well aware, what “stand guard”.
However, this debate with our “adult” speech is not always made in jest. I know five year old girl, which reddens with anger, when with her talking about bread-rings.
– Why do you call them bagels? They are not the sheep, a loaf of.
Requiring adult accurate and unambiguous speech, child sometimes takes up arms against those familiar formula of politeness, we use automatically, without understanding their true meaning.
Uncle Bob gave Lesha and bread to.
Lesch. thank.
Uncle. Не стоит.
Bob is silent and does not express any gratitude.
Lesch. Bob, what you do not say thank you?
Bob. Why, uncle said: not worth it.
Most often this is caused by children's criticism sincere misunderstanding of our relationship to the word.
Child, which we are accustomed to the fact, that each root of this word has a distinct meaning, can not forgive us “nonsense”, that we introduce in our speech.
When he hears the word “myopic”, he's asking, with what your hands here, proves, what to say blizoglazy.
– And why did the nurse? We must poilitsa. It is not the same chops it will feed our Zozku!
– And why gloves? necessary palchatki.
– Mama, Now you're talking, that icicles can not suck. Why do they call icicles?
Sometimes the child does not protest against the meaning of, but against the phonetics of the word. Writer N.Pryanishnikov tells me about from Uralsk there the four-year girl, which learned with indignation, that the name drawn in the book of human – Shakespeare. She even refused to repeat the name:
– So do not call uncle, but only serve!
must be, Shakespeare's words sounded to her like Selmash, Mosgaz, Detgiz etc.
Wonderful, that even kids, not yet know how to express their thoughts coherently, and they protested against the inconsistencies and ambiguities of our speeches.
I say Vova (fifteen and a half months):
– Here we put on socks and go for a walk.
He will not let me put them on and, protyahyvaya for his hands, repeats: “toe, toe”. I do not understand, what's the matter, and thinking, he does not want to dress. But he grabs my socks, applies them to the nose, He laughs out loud again and repeats: “toe, toe”, indicating that, what, in his opinion, socks can not be called objects, which have a bearing on them not to a nose. He is so small, that can not even express this idea in words, but his facial expression leaves no doubt, he believes deeply wrong discrepancy between the name and the thing, which in this case allowed us. In this way, still almost speechless, he already makes a polemic against our relationship to the word.
Sure, imitative baby reflexes are extremely strong, but the child was not a human baby, if in imitation of his critics did not make, evaluation, control. Only this strict control over our installed speech gives the child the opportunity to creatively assimilate it.
When these are my observations on the analytical approach of the child to the words first appeared in print, rebelled against them categorically pedologue. So I'm so happy feeling read in one of the most watchful and subtle experimenters, late N.X.Shvachkina, that since two years “the child begins to express its attitude to the surrounding speech, noting its peculiarities, and even to criticize the speech of his comrades”*.
* N.X.Švačkin, Psychological analysis of the earlier judgments of the child. Questions of psychology of speech and thought, “Proceedings of the Academy of Pedagogical Sciences”, M. 1954, MY. 54, pp. 127.
nice to know, that your thoughts, made thirty years ago, it is confirmed by the authority of science.
“Active attitude of the child to the speech of others, – says scientist, expressed in the fact, he begins to refine their speech, to which it makes adjustments”*.
* N.X.Švačkin, Psychological analysis of the earlier judgments of the child. Questions of psychology of speech and thought, “Proceedings of the Academy of Pedagogical Sciences”, M. 1954, MY. 54, pp. 128.
It's literally the most, that I pointed out in one of the first editions of books “Two to five”!
The article Shvachkin younger children studied – from one year to two and a half, but if the experiment were subjected to preschool children older, It would be even more obvious, that our child learns “adult” It's not just by imitation, but it protivoborstvuya.
This antagonism is ambiguous:
1. unconscious, when the child does not even know about, he rejected our words and replace them with others.
2. narocito, when the child is aware of himself as a critic and reformer heard them utterance.
In this and in another case, the basic laws established, adult speech produced remain immutable for the child. To them he never encroach; if he rises up against some of our sayings, it is only in order, to stand up for these laws. We seem to him by lawmakers, is in breach of its statutes, and it requires, so we do them with the highest rigor.
Sometimes, however, children generously condescend misleading Adults, and controversy ends amicable disengagement of two different “language systems”.
– Mama, – It offers four-Jackdaw Grigorieva, – Let's agree. You will be in his own talk “runners”, and I will in their own way: “tinker”. They are not “lozyat”, and carry.
But such complaisance – the phenomenon is relatively rare. Most often, the child defends his version of the hot and stubbornly, allowing no compromises:
– Why do you say – “chop wood”? After all, wood is not prick, and ax.
Many baby bugs are explained, to my mind, themes, that of several functions one way or another, the words he learns only one and flatly rejects others.
Seeing, eg, that the suffix ka gives many words pejorative (Vanya, Sonka, Verka, etc.), the child does not see, that the same ending ka sometimes has different properties and is used in other circumstances. Therefore, he is ready to protest against this ka even, when there is no pejorative connotation.
– swearing is bad: We do not say “needle and cotton”, and needles with Nita.
I asked three years Oli:
– Why do you call the rope – “Verevo”?
– And you will be pleased, – she explained, – If you are calling Kornyushko?
It is a defiant stubbornness called his cat – basket:
– she carapace, because good; but when it is bad, I'll call her cat.
A three-Igor for the same reason called protein – White.
Here, the main cause of most of the verbal errors, which makes the child: acting analogies, he has no idea of ​​the variety of functions, performed by a given particle of speech.
Usually, it is known only one, the only function of the particle, and every time, When we go beyond the only known it functions, He accuses us of distorting the words.
Thousands of such facts, and they are irrefutable evidence, the child to the best of their mental powers very often unconsciously analyzing the language material, which give him adult, and sometimes even rejects him, If an utterance for some reason does not match the common grammatical or logical rules, internalized child earlier in the process of interaction with adults *.
* About it “alignment by analogy” cm. A.A.Reformatskogo book “Introduction to linguistics”, M. 1960, pp. 228.
FRESH child's perception WORDS
Only by ignoring all this set of facts, it can be argued, contrary to evidence, if the child is mechanically, blindly, without hesitation and criticism takes from us our linguistic heritage.
Not, any, children who watch carefully, It can not help but notice, roughly to the age of four they have a strong tendency to analyze (for the most part out loud) not only single words, but whole phrases, they hear from adults.
For (I repeat again and again!) semantic perception of words and verbal constructions guys much sharper, than we.
We recently wielding words, that our slovooschuschenie dim. We use speech, without noticing it. A child is due to the freshness of their perception is demanding Comptroller our speech.
Hearing, eg, expression “they live on the knife”, child and imagine, that there are large knives, on blades that some strange people lie and sit.
When he heard, that came to visit the old woman “dog ate” on some matters, he hid from her his favorite dog.
And when someone asked him,, Whether he will soon knock six years, he covered his hands the crown.
In the three-year-Thani torn stockings.
– Mother, – They told her, – Thumb some porridge asks!
A week, and perhaps, and more. Suddenly everyone was surprised to see, Tanya surreptitiously poured into a saucer and cereal prods to toe.
It has long been using speech, we are precisely because of this long term manage to forget the primary meaning of a set of words.
This forgetfulness – a natural and highly beneficial process, that can be seen from our relationship to the names and surnames. I know baby, that and burst out laughing, hearing the name “Griboyedov”, for he clearly introduced its original meaning: human, the wonderful, he eats some mushrooms. We are, adults, We associate with that name so much light and majestic associations, that has long been forgotten its direct value. Our attention once and escaped, that the word “Griboyedov” there is “mushroom”.
The child's consciousness is unusual for such a displacement of the meaning of the spoken word.
I write about the five-year Alike, which the, the first time he heard the name “Bitter”, I asked:
– Why is it tasteless surname?
While thousands of adults, talking about Gorky, there is hardly one, which would have kept in mind the original meaning of his nickname.
– And Lomonosov broken nose? – said four-Sasha, to the great surprise of adults, which, pronouncing the name of a great man, We never noticed the strange image, who is it.
It is the same with the names. Speaking of Leo Tolstoy, who among us feels, the lion – a wild beast! But Boris Novikov, five and a half years, seriously he told his mother, that listened on the radio program about Tiger Tolstoy – so fresh and sharp in the child a sense of each word, which, to our happiness, has blunted our.
That is why the children are not available the simplest idioms.
– I will not go to school, – Sergei said a five-year. – There are guys on the exam cut.
Ask him about his sister:

( 3 assessment, average 3.33 from 5 )
Share with your friends:
Korney Chukovsky
Add a comment

  1. Darina

    I liked the production