Two to five

Her, obviously, I wanted, to coat was “intimidated” (that is buttoned).
The same Sasha, hear how a word “watch”, I decided to, that it comes from “meals”: put some things in a dish – in that, her guess, and it belongs to-set-dish.
Such errors are extremely typical. They are repeated again and again in each new generation of children. Since I met Sasha in March 1956 of the year – and immediately remembered, that a quarter-century ago, I met a similar incident Philology. In Sestroretsk neighborhood kids in the country long molded from clay some intricate figurine, then approved it on the board, whose name they dish, They brought to me and said,:
– So much for our observation.
It turned, that they monitored, as Sasha, consider all, lying on a platter.
Using such words, how lomovik, surveillance, scare away, kids do not change the phonetics, or morphology of existing words – they assign them different semantics, fill them with other content.
loafer – this man, which makes the boat, and the rider – “which is in the garden”; “village – where a lot of trees”; “bush – watchman, who watches the bushes”*. Mill – miller's wife, and Cossack, of course, goats husband. “uncle Phil – specialist” – about a man, who likes to sleep. Dreamer – “who let fountains”.
* The last example is taken from A.N.Gvozdeva, The study of children's speech, M. 1961, pp. 309.
Volodya, Kuokkala met in some of the Finn with a child, said his father:
– Here comes Finn, and with it a date.
He had heard the word “date fruit”, but, as it is now revealed, always believed, that is a little Finn.
And what do you think, that may mean our “Adult” word “helpless”? four-Igor, first sculpting a snowman without the help of adults, proudly told others:
– This woman absolutely helpless!
He often heard the word in conversations of parents and in their own way to understand its.
Maya shouted her older sister:
– Suffice to say you secrets! secretary what!
A three year old Tanya said:
– We go for a walk, – we truant!
None of these words the children do not come up with themselves: and “secretary”, and “shirkers”, and “loafer”, and “dreamer”, and “rider” they heard from adults. Every word they reproduce quite correctly, without altering it in any sound. But the true meaning of the words heard eluded them. Unaware of this, they give every word its interpretation, and even then it turns out, because of the lack of life experience all the words they wrongly interpreted, even in these false meaningfully impact inherent in young children a great sense of language.
After all, you can easily imagine some of the Slavic peoples, loafer whose name is human, pertaining to the boats (compare: apothecary, librarian, locksmith, guide and others.), and lomovikami called crackers.
If you do not know, that the word “specialist” the last two letters refer to the root, you need to take them for a suffix (both in words “pile-ec”, “Plague-ec”), and then the word “specialist” inevitably get assigned a value to a child: human, for which there Spanier profession.
These errors show, the direction in which the work is performed brain child, when he takes from us our extensive voice heritage. They reveal the methods, with which the child masters this enormous wealth.
It requires logic of each word, and if you can not find it, it invents. When the five-year Christmas tree for the first time saw a loaf of bread peklevannogo, She looked at him and said with confidence:
– BUT, I see. This bird devoured it.
Indeed, if you do not know Polish verb “pitlovats” (that is clean and finely grind), We have to resort to such an invention.
– Canned do at the conservatoire, Yes? – asked grandfather Igor.
And as far as I know children, who think, it means that frowned ate soup, and poisoned – ate grass.
This desire of the child in their own way to interpret obscure utterances of adults noted Gorky in his story “Countries mordasti”. There withdrawn little boy, lonely cripple, who thought of before, that hospice – this place, where do God (“worthwhile” – workshop, as “shvalnya”).
And in exactly the same manner young Turgenev explained myself to “let us attend” (ie Let us listen), shouted a deacon in the church.
“Someone, – He remembers Turgenev, – I started talking about, the name of the devil, no one could say, whether its name is Beelzebub, or Satan, or even in some other way.
– I know, the name of, – I said, and he was afraid.
– Well, if you know, speaks, – replied the mother.
– His name is “meme”.
– How? Repeat, repeat!
– meme.
– This is who told you? How do you invent?
– I did not invent, I hear it every Sunday at Mass.
– how so – at lunch?!
– And during the Mass the deacon goes out and says,: Won, meme! I got what you mean, it expels from the church of the devil and that his name was Mem.
wonder, like me for it is not carved. But, like a child, I at that time was completely sincere – just do not understand the Slavic word “let us attend” and I interpreted it in their own way”*.
* Ya.P.Polonsky, Turgenev at, “field”, 1884, № 2, pp. 38.
No matter how wrong conclusions, which comes baby, the best method, leading him to them, flawless, – method of analysis of the constituent elements of speech and understanding of their mutual relations.
Foreign psychologists often refer to these children's guesses are not too respectful. “I do not just studied, – Piaget says, – spontaneous (!) etymology, to which children are fed a passion, and then their amazing commitment to verbalism, that is, to the fantastic interpretation of poorly understood words: these two phenomena show, how easily the child to meet his mind arbitrary justifications”*.
* Piaget, Speech and thinking of the child, M. 1932, pp. 108.
I can not help but admire the persistent and systematic work of the child, directed to mastering the language of adult resources.
Tirelessly working his arrogant mind on the analysis of each unknown word and puts forward one by one, a number of working hypotheses, which should add to the chaos even illusory order.
Ignorance of life makes the child reluctant to operate these temporary hypotheses, but then there is nothing wrong, since the hypothesis was soon superseded accurate experimental data, mainly due to the pedagogical intervention adults.
Is it not significant, that these misconceptions are so few compared to the vast number of words, meaning that a child guessed with absolute precision.
Luckily, false interpretation of adult utterances rarely brings children any significant damage. I know of only a single case, when the attraction to analyze the constituent elements of the word was the result of a dysfunctional. The three-year Vadya stuffed in the forest Syroezhko, concluding, that if they russules, so, eat them raw relies.
WORD is identified with the thing
Of course, analysis of words is not the only method, that a child comes to their understanding; sometimes it gives him an intuitive thanks to the amazing sensitivity to the emotional sounding words.
So, a three year old girl, hearing the noise on the stairs, zašeptala:
– mammy, I'm afraid. To us, probably, Tramot pour.
– What Tramot?
– So big, heavy and banging on the stairs.
I did not realize, what Tramot. Then he explained to me: this is not the murderer and not a beast, this – abbreviation Transportation and material department, where the father of the girls served.
About Tramote often spoken in the family, and the girl is always scary word, because at the very sound of her chudilis begemotnaya ferocity and heaviness: TRAM. not wise, what, when she heard the clatter on the stairs, she immediately decided, it is Tramot – fatty, clumsy, greedy.
Such cases can result in a lot of. The word is often in the mind of a child is the same exact nature, like the kind of thing, that it means. It, so to speak, identified with the thing. Any shishiga, frights, beeches, that frighten adults child, it is therefore terrible for him, that in his mind the names of these ferocious creatures merge with the very monsters. This happens even in cases, when the child himself invents some terrible word. I first saw this, when my little daughter had a single episode, I recorded hot on the trail in such unpretentious rhymes:
Dali Murochke notebook,
Moore began to draw.
“it – kozochka rohataya”.
“it – hairy herringbone”.
“it – uncle with a beard”.
“it – house with a pipe”.
“Well, what is it,
incomprehensible, wondrous,
With ten horns,
With ten feet?”
“It Byaka-zakalyaka
I come from the head of her invented”.
“Why did you leave the notebook,
I ceased to draw?”
“I'm afraid it”.
However, perhaps, that Moore was more frightened graphic representation of the monster, than it sounds terrible name. But in all other cases, who are here, children acting alone phonetics. Companion of my childhood, writer Boris Zhitkov, tell me, that at the age of three, he coined the word “Ubzika” (with an emphasis on “in”) and long evenings was afraid to look at his father's couch, because he himself had assured himself, if there is hidden this terrible Ubzika.
As children are susceptible to the sound of the words in this period of their language development, shows, eg, this dialogue.
– What is Bardadym? What do you think? – ask four Wali.
He immediately responds without hesitation:
– Terrible, big, here is a!
And shows his hand to the ceiling.
– And who is Miklushechka?
– This small, pretty… Mik-Lušečka.
Without such a high feeling for the phonetics and morphology of words one bare imitative instinct would be completely powerless and could not lead to a complete dumb babies possess native language. true, we must not forget, it is the possession of all cases – without a single exception is the result of joint work of the child and those, those around him. But all the efforts of adults would be completely fruitless, if an early age children did not show sensitivity to the sophisticated composition and sounding words.
“Those very wrong, – also wrote K. Ushinskiy, – who thinks, that only the memory effect in the assimilation of the child the mother tongue: no memory would have lacked order, to memorize not only all the words of a language, but even all the possible combinations of these words and all their modifications; not, if one studied the language memory, I never would have learned it is not a single language”*.
* K. Ushinskiy, Mother Tongue, Sobral. Op., t. II, M. 1948, pp. 559.
In addition to the linguistic memory, unusually severe in young children (particularly with respect to the morphology of words), here appears exactly the enhanced voice talent, which, as stated above, inherent to any child between the ages of two and five.
When I was thirty years ago, I said in the press with admiration this precious baby quality, the then pedologue welcomed the idea as ridiculous unscientific fiction.
People, which it was alien and hostile to the very idea of ​​the dialectical development of the child, He reacted angrily to the statement, expressed by me at the beginning of this chapter, that older preschoolers voice talent to the six or seven years of running out and gradually supplanted by new, as appropriate qualities.
Meanwhile, at the present time, this truth has been established in science. Countless observations prove, that eight years of decreases not only the child's voice talent, – but often also any other. “Around the age of eight children gradually lose their creative musical gift, which begins in which about a polutoragodovalogo age”, shows the famous conductor Leopold Stokowski *. We shall see below, that the same thing happens with the children-poets. O-draftsman children and say nothing: it will confirm every painter, practically studied the different stages of children's art.
* Leopold Stokowski, Music for all of us, M. 1959, pp. 58.
Of course, this applies not to all children. true, strong talents transcend this safely – set wise nature abroad. And most importantly, a broad biological and social terms, is not only the loss of, but – repeat! – and acquisition. the fact, that children in a certain period of their spiritual growth completely disappears every ability (and inclination) to the creation of new words, signifies the successful completion of the process, by which the child learns the native language.
PHONETICS child's speech
This topic is beyond the scope of my observations. Here I can only say in passing, what, it seems to me, the child gets to the correct pronunciation of words as complex, winding and difficult by, as it comes to their regulatory structures. for example, one of my friends baby, to master the word “cooperative”, I spent at least fifteen months. And it is not a mechanical prisovokupleniem new syllables to those, who were produced before, he created a new form of any, and other, more sophisticated ways:
At first: pIF.
Then: PIF PIF.
Then: APPF.
Then: kapif.
Then: kaapif.
Then: patif.
Then: kopatyf.
finally: cooperative.
son N.A.Menchinskoy, judging from her diary, more than two and a half months, got a hold of a word “lamp”:
At first: eat.
Then: pit.
Then: cork.
Then: lyapa.
Then: lamp *.
* N.A.Menchinskaya, The development of the child's psyche. mother's diary, M. 1957, pp. 57-58.
To master the word “button”, his, as seen from the same diary, It took four months:
At first: pu.
Then: Puga shot.
Then: pugitya and TD *
* N.A.Menchinskaya, The development of the child's psyche. mother's diary, M. 1957, pp. 55.
All this is very close to that scheme, which is given to well-known physiologist N.I.Krasnogorskim, one of the students and staff of Pavlov.
“The new observations show, – writes N.P.Krasnogorsky, – that the formation of words is crucial strength of the stimulus, that is, the power of the sound of phonemes and syllables, that make up the word. A child in the first place and take the first repetition strengthens, the last or the most powerful in the audible syllable word. In the future, he adds to this the second syllable of the stimulus strength and has only then insert the word in the emerging relatively weak, previously lowered syllables. forming a word “milk”, child locks and delivers first syllable “us”, the first stimulus, associating it with the optical stimulus at the sight of milk. Further it attaches to the second syllable shock stimulus syllabic – “to” and, looking for milk, He speaks “Moko”. Finally it introduces the third syllable – “L o” at the end or in the middle of a word, pronounces “Mokoena” and finally “milk”.
In another case, when a child says first milk “dumb-dumb”, that is responsible generalized verbal response. Then, differentiating milk, he synthesizes just two accented syllables and, replacing “L o” sound “I”, He speaks “beacon”; finally, introducing “l”, pronounces “malyako”.
“A remarkable fact, – indicates scientist, – It is a huge synthetic unifying power of the brain in children already at an early age”*.
* N.I.Krasnogorsky, By the formation of the child's speech physiology. Journal of Higher Nervous Activity name Pavlov, MY. 4, t. II, 1952, pp. 477.
I add from myself, what is this “huge synthetic unifying force” thinking miraculously manifested in children as early as the period of the passive voice, when the child is not able to utter a single word. passive voice period, that the superficial observer seem just silence, – most creative time of the child's speech.
Varied and colorful seem facts, set out in the preceding pages. But who wants to think about them carefully, he sees, if not all of them, the vast majority of them is proof of a single thought, and that ties them together.
This idea proclaimed more than once, but most often in the form of an abstract dogma. Meanwhile, the long overdue need to prove its facts, fill it with concrete, living content.
This idea is very simple: the child learns the language of the people, his only teacher – people.
The purpose of this chapter – approve this idea, make possible so, to the reader on the basis of clear evidence of their own came to the conclusion, that there is not a declaration, not outside phrase, a genuine phenomenon of reality, that in the language education of children adults, of whatever social class they may belong, in fact, are only intermediaries between the children and the people.
First of all, we must not forget, what, As already mentioned, adult from the child's birth generously supplying him with such roots, inflections, consoles, suffixes, which would serve him the rest of his days. All of these morpheme Narodnye, and, thus, children, Taking the linguistic heritage of our ancestors and even creating of material provided to them their “own” words and sayings, thereby attached to folk art, because none of neologisms child never goes beyond, established folk tradition.
No wonder all the time is, that children compose words, that already exist among the people (“lyud”, “solnytsa”, “smeyanie”, “obutka”, “Oh baby” etc.). It would be impossible, if the very spirit of the national word creation was not appreciably metabolized by children even earlier, than sleep captured the first ten words (even during the passive voice).
Only in this way they can easily and freely create words, as “inhibited”, “rasshirokaytes”, “otmuhivatsya”, “kustynya”, “krasnyak” etc., having pure folk expression.
In the same day – in January 1955 of the year – I received two letters from readers. In one informed me of this dialogue:
– Mayan, what are you doing?
– I make a door. (That is lockable.)
In another drive letter exclamation four Bori:
– Nelina mother went and entered into my chair! (That is, again, he has closed with a key, – obviously, in Chula.)
AND, of course, I could not remember, that before the word “to conclude” root key is far greater, what now. At Autograph, eg, in his book “Lamentations of the Northern Territory”, in the folk legend “The origin of national grief”, It speaks of some keys, they priladit “to prison inmates” (that is, it is a key to the locked)*.
* characteristically, Nekrasov, writing off for himself the legend, I prefer to give way “prisoner” its current value: “to prison inmates”, i.e “to prison inmates”, because it is rarely talked about in the era of Nekrasov “prisoners doors”, “prisonmate”, and the word “prisoner” It was applied to the people (N.A.Nekrasov, Full. SOBR. op. and letters, t. III, M. 1949, pp. 636).
The child could not be independently recreate this Old Russian word in its original meaning (which now has completely forgotten), if the native people, supplied him with materials to build words, not armed him – simultaneously – the necessary methods for their construction.
Remembered also Nikolai Uspensky: “The men were to evtoy barn”*.
* N.V.Uspensky, story, stories and essays, M. 1957, pp. 67.
When one of the previous pages I have given the word baby “eschokat” (of adverbs “yet”), and I had not occurred, that the same tumor may occur in parallel among adults in the national environment.
V.O.Pertsov told me this episode, I had heard them from the PP Bazhov. I was once at the Ural factory one engineer, loved at all an occasion to pronounce the long tedious speech. Every speech he always ended up the traditional call, where often repeated word “yet” (“We will work more productively, more vigorously” etc.). it “yet” pronounced them particularly loud. Students noticed monotonous cut its heavy speeches, and one of them, when the speaker speech appeared “yet”, relieved and comforted whisper Bazhov:
– Well, now it will soon end! Already started eschokat (local pronunciation – “ishshokat”).
Do not significant, that coincides Leningrader coinage baby to the complete identity with the word, which has created an impromptu on the far Urals adult “ordinary person”?
If speech and thinking of two years, three-year, five-year olds were not imbued with the whole people of language rules, we could never observe a feature of children's creation of words noted above, that is, that different, very different children, remote from each other large spaces, from generation to generation independently invent the same words – whether it is in Crimea, or in Novgorod, or somewhere near the Chinese border.
So, eg, word “kusarik” I heard for the first time from a three-year girl in 1904 year, then I read in twenty years “Blog” A.D.Pavlovoy, that it, too, Adik “He invented” this word. And half a century later, last fall, Kostroma resident Natalia Borshevskaya informs me in a letter to his nephew Vova vnuchatnom (two and a half years), he also called a cracker “kusarikom”.
Such a great number of facts, and, of course, they would never have taken place, if the children in his creation of words not based on the same laws of language development, long established Russian people.
Earlier, I gave one word, invented three year old child:
– mom angry, but quickly fertilized.
That word makes adult smile, For associated in their minds with the fertilizer of fields. Meanwhile, the child made his own from the word “good” (in terms of “heart”) and knows nothing about any fertilizer (Where “kind” means “dunged”, “fat”).
Wonderful, in Old Russian language, Three hundred years ago,, “fertilized” and the mean change temper justice with mercy, to soften the soul. Avvakum and wrote in his book: “women in Welcome”. The same form is preserved in folk proverb: “Fertilize stepmother stepson”.
Here it is one of the most visible evidence, that when you create a new word every child almost always uses the same techniques, which employs people.

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

  1. Darina

    I liked the production