How to differentiate adults holding similar places in a child's life?
aMAZon
She refers to "the teacher" when she's telling a story.
There's her classroom teacher, Mrs. H., and the classroom
aide, Mrs. V. There's her ballet teacher, Miss Theresa,
her gymnastics teacher, Valentina, and her faith
formation teacher, Mrs. P. There are other sundry
persons in her life that hold that "teacher" spot
from time to time.
What I've been doing is when she says, "The teacher...",
I'll stop and ask her "Which one?" How long do you
think I'll have to do this before she catches on?
--
aMAZon
zesz...@worldnet.att.net
"It's never too late to have a happy childhood."
Geri
wrote:
>Her Majesty has a habit that I'm trying to break her of.
>She refers to "the teacher" when she's telling a story.
>There's her classroom teacher, Mrs. H., and the classroom
>aide, Mrs. V. There's her ballet teacher, Miss Theresa,
>her gymnastics teacher, Valentina, and her faith
>formation teacher, Mrs. P. There are other sundry
>persons in her life that hold that "teacher" spot
>from time to time.
>
>What I've been doing is when she says, "The teacher...",
>I'll stop and ask her "Which one?" How long do you
>think I'll have to do this before she catches on?
Sheesh. I dunno. I don't recall ever going through a phase like that.
I'd be willing to bet it's something that's "going around" the kids at
school. Ever notice how little habits of speech make the rounds among
kids? If so, I'm sure it'll be gone by the time school starts in the
fall...unless all the kids at camp do the same thing :-(
I'd be less subtle than you are about it. I'd say, "The 'teacher' has
a name. You should use it. Would you like it if everyone called you
"the student"?" (This is a tactic employed by Sister Mary Borgia, my
7th grade science teacher. If anyone called her "Teacher" she'd call
them "Student." It worked. I don't think anyone called her "Teacher"
more than once.)
In a related-but-not observation, I have recently discovered that I am
completely peeved by small children who speak about themselves in the
third person. As when my cousin's son says, "Jake wants to go inside,"
instead of "I want to go inside." I know it's mostly the parents'
fault; my cousin always asks Jake if "Jake wants to go inside." And
other friends of ours talk to their daughter this way -- "Does Emily
want a cookie?" But...argh! My Inner Grammar Teacher wants to scream.
Jocelyn
>
> In a related-but-not observation, I have recently discovered that I am
> completely peeved by small children who speak about themselves in the
> third person. As when my cousin's son says, "Jake wants to go inside,"
> instead of "I want to go inside." I know it's mostly the parents'
> fault; my cousin always asks Jake if "Jake wants to go inside." And
> other friends of ours talk to their daughter this way -- "Does Emily
> want a cookie?" But...argh! My Inner Grammar Teacher wants to scream.
How do you feel about grown adults who do it? For some reason, DH and I
were talking about Lennox Lewis (the boxer) this morning. He does that, and
it's *so* annoying. Of course, more annoying was DH pretending all morning
to be Lennox Lewis (as in "Lennox Lewis is going to brush his teeth now" "Do
you think Lennox Lewis should wear the blue socks or the green socks?" said
in a funny British accent)
- Jocelyn (who hopes Lennox Lewis is gone when she gets home)
Geri
<joc...@stinkyvolcano.com> wrote:
>How do you feel about grown adults who do it?
Oh, if adults do it, it's fine ;-)
Seriously...argh!!!! I have The Nuns to thank for the fact that I'm a
grouchy grammar puss, and I know I can sometimes go a little bonkers
over proper usage...but there is *no excuse* for any speaking human
being to speak of themselves in the third person. Well, unless they
are native speakers of a language where that is commonly done (I don't
know of any of these languages offhand, but I'm sure some must exist.)
I thought I was being overly harsh in letting myself be annoyed by
children who do it, but Ron made a comment about how it drives him
nuts and he rarely freaks over such things, so I felt more justified.
>- Jocelyn (who hopes Lennox Lewis is gone when she gets home)
Oy! I hope he's gone too :-)
Liz
"Geri " <ger...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:3b166596...@news.earthlink.net...
> In a related-but-not observation, I have recently discovered that I am
> completely peeved by small children who speak about themselves in the
> third person. As when my cousin's son says, "Jake wants to go inside,"
> instead of "I want to go inside." I know it's mostly the parents'
> fault; my cousin always asks Jake if "Jake wants to go inside." And
> other friends of ours talk to their daughter this way -- "Does Emily
> want a cookie?" But...argh! My Inner Grammar Teacher wants to scream.
We did this with Emily when she was younger, simply so she could learn her
name. Now, I can't call her any sort of pet name because she will look at me
and say, "Mum, call me 'Emily". Of course, the one exception to the rule is
when she is clod-hopping around the place in her Barbie heels wearing a
princess skirt and she speaks all quiet and lovely and says, "Mum, call me
Cinderella, please".
Liz
Deb Hardison
starts referring to himself in the third person - I think he picked it up
from that guy they played basketball with...
Deb
"Geri " <ger...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:3b166596...@news.earthlink.net...
Susan Behr MacDuffee
On Thu, 31 May 2001, Geri wrote:
> I'd be less subtle than you are about it. I'd say, "The 'teacher' has
> a name. You should use it. Would you like it if everyone called you
> "the student"?" (This is a tactic employed by Sister Mary Borgia, my
> 7th grade science teacher. If anyone called her "Teacher" she'd call
> them "Student." It worked. I don't think anyone called her "Teacher"
> more than once.)
I love this story Geri. My aunt has lots of good nun stories too :-)
My BIL has recently started something similar with my niece and nephew.
If they use "she" or "he" when talking about someone he says, "she has a
name." He did it the other day when I was present and my nephew was
referring to me.
--Susan
Liz
"Susan Behr MacDuffee" <sb...@pegasus.cc.ucf.edu> wrote in message
news:Pine.SOL.4.31.010531...@pegasus.cc.ucf.edu...
My grandmother always said, "She is the cat's mother", and it for a kid,
it's kind of frustrating. "Who on earth is the cat's mother? Puddles?", but
after her saying that for several years it caught on. Same with ignoring me
unless I said 'please' or 'thank you'.
Liz
Vicky Larmour
>Of course, more annoying was DH pretending all
>morning to be Lennox Lewis (as in "Lennox Lewis is going to brush his
>teeth now" "Do you think Lennox Lewis should wear the blue socks or the
>green socks?" said in a funny British accent)
Not "Lawrence of the L@bia is going to brush his teeth now"? :-)
g, d & r!
Vicky
--
vicky[at]jifvik.org All opinions mine.
The "unofficial offical alt.newlywed page" and a.n FAQ:
http://www.jifvik.org/newlywed/
Jan A. Cordes
> My grandmother always said, "She is the cat's mother", and it for a kid,
> it's kind of frustrating. "Who on earth is the cat's mother? Puddles?", but
> after her saying that for several years it caught on. Same with ignoring me
> unless I said 'please' or 'thank you'.
> Liz
Oh good, someone else with slightly warped relatives. :^)
My dad used to call from down the hall or another room on occasion.
If we responded with What? or Huh? he'd say "nevermind". If we
responded with "Yes sir" we'd usually get something good (praise,
an actual reward or just a trip to do something with dad...it was
always different).
Jan
--
jan(at)panix.com http://www.couchtigers.com
...................................................................
:Silicon Valley Friends of Ferals : CAT: A pigmy lion that loves :
: http://www.svff.org : mice, hates dogs, and :
:Mary Kay Cosmetics, Inc. : patronizes human beings.:
: http://www.marykay.com/jcordes : --Oliver Herford :
:.................................:...............................:
Holly Boatright
a stage of developement called egocentrism..they see the world most times
thru THEIR eyes and it seems to them the world should know or see things
just as they do without the child giving extra details (such as which
teacher) they assume the person they are talking too knows everything the
child doing the story telling knows! an example...a child in my room was
telling the other teacher in our room about her " friend at church" who had
done this and that and had a new this and that. The teacher asked her some
other questions about this friend and the child looked like the teacher had
lost her mind because the child KNEW who she was talking about and her
egocentric stage in cognitive developement made her assume the teacher also
knew the child she was talking about just because ...make any sense? Can you
tell I just finished my class on child dev. issues....??? That is why when
a child says "the teacher" they just assume you know which one they are in
refernce too because "you think" just as they do....or in their mind you
do....almost like you should be able to read thier minds for info. Once the
get a bit older they gain more social and cognitive thinking skills and
reallize they are just part of a largeer picture and move on to a diff.
stage in thinking.
have I confused everyone yet?
Jocelyn
Vicky Larmour <vi...@jifvik.org.nospam> wrote:
>
> Not "Lawrence of the L@bia is going to brush his teeth now"? :-)
> g, d & r!
<throws things at Vicky>
Note to Self: never let Vicky meet DH, as she apparently can't be trusted
<g>
BTW, I was reading this just as my boss came into ask me a question, and now
he's wondering what's so funny about an amendment to a Shareholder's
Agreement. Thanks a lot. ;-)
- Jocelyn
Vicky Larmour
>Vicky Larmour <vi...@jifvik.org.nospam> wrote:
>> Not "Lawrence of the L@bia is going to brush his teeth now"? :-)
>> g, d & r!
>
><throws things at Vicky>
Hee hee! :-)
>BTW, I was reading this just as my boss came into ask me a question, and
>now he's wondering what's so funny about an amendment to a Shareholder's
>Agreement. Thanks a lot. ;-)
Sorry :-)
Vicky, who's had to clean Diet Coke off the keyboard enough times herself
Kathryn Kula
>Vicky Larmour <vi...@jifvik.org.nospam> wrote:
>>
>> Not "Lawrence of the L@bia is going to brush his teeth now"? :-)
>> g, d & r!
>
><throws things at Vicky>
>
><g>
>
Oh come on Jocelyn, ever since you shared that tidbit, we all think of your
DH
with that nickname, don't we?
>BTW, I was reading this just as my boss came into ask me a question, and now
>he's wondering what's so funny about an amendment to a Shareholder's
>Agreement. Thanks a lot. ;-)
Hmmm... well, you see two shareholders walked into a bar...
Is it Friday yet? W're getting silly again.
--kathy
Jocelyn
Kathryn Kula <kat...@MailAndNews.com> wrote:
>
> Oh come on Jocelyn, ever since you shared that tidbit, we all think of
your
> DH
> with that nickname, don't we?
Okeeeee.... <crosses Kathy off list of people DH is allowed to talk to>
> Hmmm... well, you see two shareholders walked into a bar...
Bwhahahah! Okay, now my secretary is giving me strange looks (though you'd
think she'd be used to me laughing at my computer by now).
The funniest thing about this is my boss was coming in to tell me about a
possible case, and he started out with "a guy invests in a bar" to which I
replied "were a priest, a rabbi and a minister the other investors?" He was
NOT amused.
> Is it Friday yet? W're getting silly again.
I do have a serious case of the sillies today. I'm worried about Friday
though - now that Memorial Day has come, I'm afraid the DPFG (Dreaded Pan
Flute Guy) will be back.
- Jocelyn (who is already humming "El Condor Pasa")
Robin Tutt
No, but you have just described my DH perfectly! When will he grow out of it?
:)
Robin T. (constantly saying..."And the beginning of the story is....?"
Kellie Gaines
I don't know but when you accomplish it, please be sure to let me know how
you
did it! Mark does the same thing, only it's "this girl at work". It's
better
now that he's in his new job, with fewer co-workers and direct employees,
but
before, he worked in a department with 9 women and 1 man (him), so it got
very
confusing.
kellie
>===== Original Message From aMAZon <zesz...@worldnet.att.net> =====
>Her Majesty has a habit that I'm trying to break her of.
>She refers to "the teacher" when she's telling a story.
>There's her classroom teacher, Mrs. H., and the classroom
>aide, Mrs. V. There's her ballet teacher, Miss Theresa,
>her gymnastics teacher, Valentina, and her faith
>formation teacher, Mrs. P. There are other sundry
>persons in her life that hold that "teacher" spot
>from time to time.
>
>What I've been doing is when she says, "The teacher...",
>I'll stop and ask her "Which one?" How long do you
>think I'll have to do this before she catches on?
>
Holly Boatright
Holly
Barbara Warner
> In a related-but-not observation, I have recently discovered that I am
> completely peeved by small children who speak about themselves in the
> third person. As when my cousin's son says, "Jake wants to go inside,"
> instead of "I want to go inside." I know it's mostly the parents'
> fault; my cousin always asks Jake if "Jake wants to go inside." And
> other friends of ours talk to their daughter this way -- "Does Emily
> want a cookie?" But...argh! My Inner Grammar Teacher wants to scream.
AH, but if I recall those infamous MIT language theorists correctly,
that's *part* of the natural process of acquiring language, particularly
in English. It's one of those benchmarks which tells you that the child
*is* actually on the road to full English usage, even if it seems to be
telling you *just* the opposite!
Kind of like the situation where kids learn the past tense "ed", then
pick it up and use it in every verb: I ranged the bell. She shooted the
puck. etc... Kids do that precisely because they've learned how to
employ the past tense. They used to say things like "He rang the bell.
She shot the puck." , then started what seems like a slide back into
toddler language -- when in fact, they're moving forward.
Just an observation. It's quite common in some adults too, such as
adults with developmental disabilities....
-Barbara
Medha
Yup that's so true Barbara. Arpan has learnt how to use the past tense "ed" now.
So yesterday he told me "Mummy the pen falled on the ground at school." :-) And
he has been making up such words a lot these past few days.
Medha
Megan
> > Is it Friday yet? W're getting silly again.
>
> I do have a serious case of the sillies today. I'm worried about Friday
> though - now that Memorial Day has come, I'm afraid the DPFG (Dreaded Pan
> Flute Guy) will be back.
>
> - Jocelyn (who is already humming "El Condor Pasa")
Snort.
Now I'm humming it. Quick, someone suggest an equally annoying song to replace it!
And I just got a new keyboard too! I should *not* drink and read AN.
TGIF anyway.
Megan
aMAZon
No, I understand what you're saying here.
Her Majesty is 7. IIRC, the egocentric thing is a little
earlier in child development (4-6, maybe?).
Even if I know to which school she's referring, there are multiple
teachers at each one!
I've been taking the tack of "It's more polite to find out someone's
name and use it properly."
Holly Boatright
right in just pressing on with her that it is more polite to use one's name
etc...
Hollt
"aMAZon" <zesz...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:3B178A74...@worldnet.att.net...
Sarah McCusker
> Geri wrote:
>
> > In a related-but-not observation, I have recently discovered that I am
> > completely peeved by small children who speak about themselves in the
> > third person. As when my cousin's son says, "Jake wants to go inside,"
> > instead of "I want to go inside." I know it's mostly the parents'
> > fault; my cousin always asks Jake if "Jake wants to go inside." And
> > other friends of ours talk to their daughter this way -- "Does Emily
> > want a cookie?" But...argh! My Inner Grammar Teacher wants to scream.
>
> AH, but if I recall those infamous MIT language theorists correctly,
> that's *part* of the natural process of acquiring language, particularly
> in English. It's one of those benchmarks which tells you that the child
> *is* actually on the road to full English usage, even if it seems to be
> telling you *just* the opposite!
Right. Another related phenomenon is the problems most kids have for a
while regarding personal pronouns. For example, if little Emily is hot,
she might say to her mom "Please take off your sweater" when what she
*really* means is "please take off MY sweater." Relational words like that
are difficult to learn....after all, how weird is it that other people
refer to you as "you" but to you, you're "me"? It can take a while to get
the complexities of that....but the fact that kids eventually *do* pick it
up without being explicitly taught is pretty phenomenal.
Friends of ours have a 14-month-old who thinks her name is "HiJulia!" :-)
Sarah
Sarah McCusker
Yep. Kids overcompensate like that as they're learning to conjugate. Many
theorize that we all have a set of innate rules in our heads that govern things
like verb conjugation, and when kids make errors or overcompensate like this, it's
because they haven't quite learned yet which order those rules apply in.
It's cute though. :-)
Sarah
graduate student in linguistics :-)
Geri
wrote:
>Yep. Kids overcompensate like that as they're learning to conjugate. Many
>theorize that we all have a set of innate rules in our heads that govern things
>like verb conjugation, and when kids make errors or overcompensate like this, it's
>because they haven't quite learned yet which order those rules apply in.
Okay, but the grammar meanie in me says that parents should continue
to use the proper verb/noun/pronoun forms so that kids will eventually
get what's correct. Right? IOW, parents shouldn't say, "Does Emily
want a cookie?" when they mean, "Do *you* want a cookie, Emily?"
I guess my objection then is to parents who backslide into baby(ish)
talk when talking to their kids.
>It's cute though. :-)
Only when kids do it. Last night I was treated to a 36-year-old man
saying, "Daddy needs to take Daddy's shoes off." Blech.
>Sarah
>graduate student in linguistics :-)
- Geri
(product of Catholic school and Grammar Hardliner :-)
Stacy Lynn
Sarah McCusker wrote:
> graduate student in linguistics :-)
Really? Thats pretty cool. Thats what I studied in college before I
went broke. Now I'm working and waiting until we have more money and
I'll go back to school.
Another interesting thing about child language aquisition is that I've
heard of theories that in the infant stage, baby talking is actually
beneficial. I don't remember the reasoning behind it exactly, but I
believe it had to do with high pitched sounds.
Thats so cool that all this linguistics stuff is being talked about
here!
Stacy
Tracy
> That is irritating. Kinda reminds me of the Seinfeld episode where George
> starts referring to himself in the third person - I think he picked it up
> from that guy they played basketball with...
> Deb
Jimmy.
"Jimmy wants to...."
"Jimmy did this..."
Ugh, totally annoying, especially for adults. Children shouldn't do
it either, but I think it is slightly more acceptable for 2-3 year
olds. My niece, who is 26 monhts, says, "Maddie do, Maddie do" when
she wants to do something herself without assistance. But as she
isn't speaking in sentences yet....we let it slide.
Tracy
Sarah McCusker
> On Fri, 01 Jun 2001 14:32:59 GMT, Sarah McCusker <no...@none.com>
> wrote:
>
> >Yep. Kids overcompensate like that as they're learning to conjugate. Many
> >theorize that we all have a set of innate rules in our heads that govern things
> >like verb conjugation, and when kids make errors or overcompensate like this, it's
> >because they haven't quite learned yet which order those rules apply in.
>
> Okay, but the grammar meanie in me says that parents should continue
> to use the proper verb/noun/pronoun forms so that kids will eventually
> get what's correct. Right? IOW, parents shouldn't say, "Does Emily
> want a cookie?" when they mean, "Do *you* want a cookie, Emily?"
Oh, I'm a grammar meanie too. However, I tend to be torn....I double majored in
English (where the grammar meanie comes from) and linguistics (which tends to advocate
more of a "it doesn't matter what you say, they'll eventually get it right"
approach). :-)
I agree with you - because I find people who talk exclusively in the third person
annoying. :-) However, from a linguistic standpoint, I don't believe it matters all
that much. I'd have to dig out my notes/literature (I'm not a language acquisition
specialist by any means!) but I'm pretty sure that kids get enough secondhand language
to compensate. This is why, for example, if you're an immigrant who speaks only
broken English, your kids will still learn to speak English fluently. They get other
input.
There are other factors at work, too, which I don't really understand. For example,
there have been lots of studies done on deaf kids of hearing parents. Hearing parents
will, 99.9% of the time, never be able to speak fluently in sign. Yet their kids,
even with that imperfect input, will very quickly surpass their parents at fluency.
Somehow, they're able to organize the imperfect input into a cohesive grammar. It's
really quite fascinating.
I'm sure there are some linguists who actually do advocate speaking in the third
person to their kids, since it's arguably easier for the kids to understand until they
get a better grasp on pronouns.
All that said, my comment above was specifically about the "the pen falled on the
floor" conjugation phenomenon. :-)
> I guess my objection then is to parents who backslide into baby(ish)
> talk when talking to their kids.
Again, I'd have to look it up, but I vaguely remember reading once that baby talk may
actually be beneficial, at least up to a certain age.
> >It's cute though. :-)
>
> Only when kids do it. Last night I was treated to a 36-year-old man
> saying, "Daddy needs to take Daddy's shoes off." Blech.
Yeah, I second your blech. But it *is* cute when kids say "the dog ranned down the
stairs". :-)
> >Sarah
> >graduate student in linguistics :-)
>
> - Geri
> (product of Catholic school and Grammar Hardliner :-)
I'm not a product of Catholic school, but the English teacher from whom I obtained
Grammar Hardliner status *was*, so I think I got the benefits of said Catholic
education without the disadvantages. :-)
Sarah
Sarah McCusker
> Sarah McCusker wrote:
> > graduate student in linguistics :-)
>
> Really? Thats pretty cool. Thats what I studied in college before I
> went broke. Now I'm working and waiting until we have more money and
> I'll go back to school.
Cool! Another language geek! Welcome to the club. :-) Good luck with
getting back to school....I know how hard it can be to start again once
you've been away for a while. As for me, I went broke, and then took out
even *more* loans. It's good to finally be done, but believe me, I'm
paying for it now. :-) (mutters about stupid student loan payments....)
> Another interesting thing about child language aquisition is that I've
> heard of theories that in the infant stage, baby talking is actually
> beneficial. I don't remember the reasoning behind it exactly, but I
> believe it had to do with high pitched sounds.
Yep, that's what I remember reading. I can't remember where, though, and
of course now all of my books and old class notes are packed away
somewhere...
> Thats so cool that all this linguistics stuff is being talked about
> here!
Oh, we've definitely got some language geeks here. :-) That was
actually what convinced me that AN was somewhere I wanted to stay. :-)
Sarah
donna
> Geri wrote:
> > I guess my objection then is to parents who backslide into baby(ish)
> > talk when talking to their kids.
>
> Again, I'd have to look it up, but I vaguely remember reading once that
baby talk may
> actually be beneficial, at least up to a certain age.
From what I've read, the use of my/yours/me/you is initially confusing,
and so you're supposed to avoid them if possible. Which would permit
the daddy's shoe line Geri didn't like. But I've forgotten what age range
this is aimed at. Plus, it's really hard to do. (When I remember, I often
find myself saying the relevant sentence a couple of times - both
incorrectly and correctly.)
donna
aMAZon
Geri wrote:
>
> On Fri, 01 Jun 2001 14:32:59 GMT, Sarah McCusker <no...@none.com>
> wrote:
>
> >Yep. Kids overcompensate like that as they're learning to conjugate. Many
> >theorize that we all have a set of innate rules in our heads that govern things
> >like verb conjugation, and when kids make errors or overcompensate like this, it's
> >because they haven't quite learned yet which order those rules apply in.
>
> Okay, but the grammar meanie in me says that parents should continue
> to use the proper verb/noun/pronoun forms so that kids will eventually
> get what's correct. Right? IOW, parents shouldn't say, "Does Emily
> want a cookie?" when they mean, "Do *you* want a cookie, Emily?"
We might say something like that if Emily were visiting Her Majesty.
Generally, we use standard grammar, even when dealing with infants.
The kids come up with enough cute stuff to keep us amused.
Her Majesty likes hearing the "No, daddy, *gwapes*!" story
from time to time. I believe I've also shared some of her
neologisms as she acquired language: "underbrella" (you stand
under it, after all) and "ladypops" (because only ladies at the
bank gave her the lollipops).
> - Geri
> (product of Catholic school and Grammar Hardliner :-)
Maybe it's due to Sr. Borgia that you are a clear writer.
We had a parent-teacher conference yesterday, and one
thing mentioned was that Her Maj's pronounciation
and voice projection in class had improved dramatically.
It could have something to do with reading aloud at home.
My-friend-the-English-teacher knew from way back whether
something "sounded" right; both of us picked up proper
grammar just from reading. She'd probably be able
to give you the rules faster than I, but I think
we'd both be more or less correct.
Geri
wrote:
>> - Geri
>> (product of Catholic school and Grammar Hardliner :-)
>
>Maybe it's due to Sr. Borgia that you are a clear writer.
Not entirely. She was a science teacher :-) But they're all sticklers
for grammar, bless them.
I thank Sr. Ellen (from middle school), Sr. Mary Urban (my 7th grade
English teacher) and Mrs. Kuhn, Sr. Mary Ryan, and Mrs. Brown (from
high school) for my writing ability. My education was lacking in a lot
of ways, but darn it, I can string words together :-)
>We had a parent-teacher conference yesterday, and one
>thing mentioned was that Her Maj's pronounciation
>and voice projection in class had improved dramatically.
>It could have something to do with reading aloud at home.
*That's* the other huge thing. I was read aloud to since before I was
born. We always had books in the house and we always read. I starting
reading on my own when I was not-quite three years old. My brother
likes to read less then I do, but he is also very naturally gifted
verbally and is a good storyteller. My shower gift to my SIL for my
niece was a huge box of books. Gotta get her started early :-)
>My-friend-the-English-teacher knew from way back whether
>something "sounded" right; both of us picked up proper
>grammar just from reading. She'd probably be able
>to give you the rules faster than I, but I think
>we'd both be more or less correct.
Yep. I never had to "learn" grammar and I was always puzzled when
other kids struggled with usage. To me, it's just...there. You just
kind of know what's right and what's not. I sometimes wonder if I have
a grammar gene that other people don't have or if I just heard so many
words when I was young that the rules are permanently fused to my
brain :-)
Jocelyn
Sarah McCusker <no...@none.com> wrote:
> I agree with you - because I find people who talk exclusively in the third
person
> annoying. :-) However, from a linguistic standpoint, I don't believe it
matters all
> that much. I'd have to dig out my notes/literature (I'm not a language
acquisition
> specialist by any means!) but I'm pretty sure that kids get enough
secondhand language
> to compensate. This is why, for example, if you're an immigrant who
speaks only
> broken English, your kids will still learn to speak English fluently.
They get other
> input.
This is something that's always amazed me. I live in an apartment building
in which a large portion of the residents are not native speakers of English
(native born Americans are the minority in my building). Despite that, you
can't tell which kids belong the non-native English speakers and which kids
belong to the native English speakers - they all speak English with
basically the same American accent.
>
> Yeah, I second your blech. But it *is* cute when kids say "the dog ranned
down the
> stairs". :-)
Well, I'm kind of with Geri on that one. It's cute, but that doesn't mean
you shouldn't correct it.
>
> > >Sarah
> > >graduate student in linguistics :-)
> >
> > - Geri
> > (product of Catholic school and Grammar Hardliner :-)
I'm neither a linguist nor a product of Catholic school, but I was a German
major, so I had to know both English and German grammar pretty well. I
guess that makes me a Grammar Nazi. ;-)
- Jocelyn
Sarah McCusker
> *That's* the other huge thing. I was read aloud to since before I was
> born. We always had books in the house and we always read. I starting
> reading on my own when I was not-quite three years old. My brother
> likes to read less then I do, but he is also very naturally gifted
> verbally and is a good storyteller. My shower gift to my SIL for my
> niece was a huge box of books. Gotta get her started early :-)
What a great shower gift! I'm stealing that for the next baby shower
I have to go to. :-)
I was an early reader too....I started reading by myself when I was 2.5
(at about the same time I started talking....I was apparently a late
talker, but by the time I started, I was talking in paragraphs). My
parents *always* read out loud to my sisters and me, every night, even
after we all read on our own. We had "family story time" until my
youngest sister was probably 7 or 8. My sisters and mom and I still all
read voraciously (or, as voraciously as we can, given our schedules and
committments!) and are always exchanging books. I can't imagine being in
a family that wasn't like that.
> Yep. I never had to "learn" grammar and I was always puzzled when
> other kids struggled with usage. To me, it's just...there. You just
> kind of know what's right and what's not. I sometimes wonder if I have
> a grammar gene that other people don't have or if I just heard so many
> words when I was young that the rules are permanently fused to my
> brain :-)
I think to a certain degree, different "academic" skills are inate to
certain people. DH is really good with math; I'm not. On the other
hand, I'm a Grammar Hardliner (and never really had to "learn" it
either, as you described) and can pick up second languages much more
easily than anyone else I know.
Now, I could *learn* math....it'd just take a lot of time and effort for
me to learn something that is practically intuitive to DH. And while he
did learn grammar and spelling rules, he still trips them up and has to
come to me for help quite often, since to me they come naturally.
Sarah
Sarah McCusker
> Sarah McCusker <no...@none.com> wrote:
>
> > I agree with you - because I find people who talk exclusively in the third
> person
> > annoying. :-) However, from a linguistic standpoint, I don't believe it
> matters all
> > that much. I'd have to dig out my notes/literature (I'm not a language
> acquisition
> > specialist by any means!) but I'm pretty sure that kids get enough
> secondhand language
> > to compensate. This is why, for example, if you're an immigrant who
> speaks only
> > broken English, your kids will still learn to speak English fluently.
> They get other
> > input.
>
> This is something that's always amazed me. I live in an apartment building
> in which a large portion of the residents are not native speakers of English
> (native born Americans are the minority in my building). Despite that, you
> can't tell which kids belong the non-native English speakers and which kids
> belong to the native English speakers - they all speak English with
> basically the same American accent.
It is pretty cool, isn't it?
> >
> > Yeah, I second your blech. But it *is* cute when kids say "the dog ranned
> down the
> > stairs". :-)
>
> Well, I'm kind of with Geri on that one. It's cute, but that doesn't mean
> you shouldn't correct it.
Most language aquisition experts believe, though, that you can correct a child
until you're blue in the face, but they still won't make the change to the
proper usage until *they're* ready for it. It's not that they're being
contrary, or doing it to annoy you....it simply takes a while for their brains
to organize the rules properly, and they *can't* reliably form the proper words
until that organization has taken place. The right form might come out now and
then, but it'll take a while until it comes out right every time.
And then, sometimes, they'll begin to overcompensate in the *other* direction,
making regular verbs irregular. I can't think of any actual examples off the
top of my head though.
And as I said, the kid is getting other input. Presumably if you're a mom, you
don't speak "baby talk" to your DH (has anyone else seen that Visa commercial?
hee hee!). The child hears you talking on the phone, and talking to your DH,
and maybe hears language on TV or the radio if he's exposed to that. That
proper English is enough.
Mind you, as Miss Grammar, I share your pain. But as Miss Linguist, I just
don't think that there's much that can be done about it.
> I'm neither a linguist nor a product of Catholic school, but I was a German
> major, so I had to know both English and German grammar pretty well. I
> guess that makes me a Grammar Nazi. ;-)
Ha! Yes, I suppose it would!
"No comma for you!" <---lame attempt at a Grammar Nazi joke :-)
Sarah
Liz
"Sarah McCusker" <no...@none.com> wrote in message
news:3B17BC06...@none.com...
> Geri wrote:
>
> > *That's* the other huge thing. I was read aloud to since before I was
> > born. We always had books in the house and we always read. I starting
> > reading on my own when I was not-quite three years old. My brother
> > likes to read less then I do, but he is also very naturally gifted
> > verbally and is a good storyteller. My shower gift to my SIL for my
> > niece was a huge box of books. Gotta get her started early :-)
>
> What a great shower gift! I'm stealing that for the next baby shower
> I have to go to. :-)
>
> I was an early reader too....I started reading by myself when I was 2.5
> (at about the same time I started talking....I was apparently a late
> talker, but by the time I started, I was talking in paragraphs). My
> parents *always* read out loud to my sisters and me, every night, even
> after we all read on our own. We had "family story time" until my
> youngest sister was probably 7 or 8. My sisters and mom and I still all
> read voraciously (or, as voraciously as we can, given our schedules and
> committments!) and are always exchanging books. I can't imagine being in
> a family that wasn't like that.
I was a born reader, too. I remember being three years old and having a ton
of books in my room, and I was happily kept quiet by just reading.
>
> > Yep. I never had to "learn" grammar and I was always puzzled when
> > other kids struggled with usage. To me, it's just...there. You just
> > kind of know what's right and what's not. I sometimes wonder if I have
> > a grammar gene that other people don't have or if I just heard so many
> > words when I was young that the rules are permanently fused to my
> > brain :-)
>
> I think to a certain degree, different "academic" skills are inate to
> certain people. DH is really good with math; I'm not. On the other
> hand, I'm a Grammar Hardliner (and never really had to "learn" it
> either, as you described) and can pick up second languages much more
> easily than anyone else I know.
I was always above my age in spelling, and when I started 7th grade (high
school, in Australia) my brother had recently died and we had an awful
teacher. I found that the weekly spelling lists weren't challenging for me
(I just naturally knew how to spell), and began to misbehave in class. Add
in the fact that this teacher had a thing for me (he scheduled a
parent-teacher-student conference because he didn't like that I had dyed my
hair purple, and the clothes that I wore, I couldn't believe it), and I just
wasn't motivated to learn when he was in the classroom. In 9th grade I went
to another school, and instead of being reviewed and placed in the
appropriate English class, I was put in the only class where they had room
for me, English 7, the lowest of the classes. Again, I wasn't challenged,
and missed out on learning basic essay writing and sentence construction. By
the time I changed schools again in 11th grade, They were writing 1500/2000
word essays on a weekly basis and I was lost and confused, and struggled to
make it up.
That being said, I still love to read, I get grammar and sentence
construction confused at times, simply because of a change in schools. I
remember telling my parents that Mr. M's class in 7th grade was boring. They
knew I could read a 200 page book in a short amount of time, correct the
spelling on my father's letters, and spell words correctly for when my
step-mum had serious problems with dyslexia, but due to the fact that in
their time you just went to school and dealt with it, they didn't approach
the teacher in seeing if I could move up to the next grade for those
classes, or find another solution. (Okay, long sentence!)
>
> Now, I could *learn* math....it'd just take a lot of time and effort for
> me to learn something that is practically intuitive to DH. And while he
> did learn grammar and spelling rules, he still trips them up and has to
> come to me for help quite often, since to me they come naturally.
I still don't know how to do short division. Again, it was a problem in
changing schools. I have been meaning to find a "Dummies" book to teach
myself the things I never learned in school.
Liz
Geri
wrote:
>What a great shower gift! I'm stealing that for the next baby shower
>I have to go to. :-)
Glad I could help. When I saw how many clothes SIL got (which the
Mooselette has outgrown almost all of already and she's only 6 weeks
old!) I was glad to be different. And I think books are more important
anyway :-)
If you have to buy one thing, get "The 20th Century Treasury of
Children's Literature." It's a big giant book with all of the kid lit
biggies -- Where the Wild Things Are; Curious George; Madeline; Amelia
Bedelia; Goodnight Moon; Alexander and the Terrible, Horrible, No
Good, Very Bad Day (a personal favorite)...yada yada yada. I love it
'cause they're all there in one book; *I* think it's a nice gift and I
give one to everyone I know.
Liz
"Geri " <ger...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:3b17c028...@news.earthlink.net...
Amelia Bedelia...*sigh*. I loved reading her books when I was a child, and
it's fun having Emily as equally in love with them now. She loves having
bedtime stories read to her, and she almost always goes for the Amelia
Bedelia books, with "Madeline in London" coming a close second.
Liz
Jean
Geri wrote
>
> Yep. I never had to "learn" grammar and I was always puzzled when
> other kids struggled with usage. To me, it's just...there. You just
> kind of know what's right and what's not. I sometimes wonder if I have
> a grammar gene that other people don't have or if I just heard so many
> words when I was young that the rules are permanently fused to my
> brain :-)
Another similarity - I generally don't have a problem with grammar, though I
do with some spellings (especially double or silent letters), I think
because I learned to spell phonetically. Then again, I usually know whether
a word "looks right" or not once it's written which comes having started
reading at such a young age.
My mother has a story about my sister coming home from school one day and
asking "How do you learn spellings?". She could read and spell all the
words on her list already, but she thought that "learning spelling" was some
mystical thing that she didn't quite get :-).
Jean
--
This email address is currently unread - please post all replies.
"Sisters remember things you would rather forget.
In graphic detail..
...With proof!"
Jean
Sarah McCusker wrote
>
> Now, I could *learn* math....it'd just take a lot of time and effort for
> me to learn something that is practically intuitive to DH.
There's learning involved in maths?
<g, d & r>
aMAZon
We've been reading any number of things with Her Majesty.
DH just started "The Phantom Tollbooth" with her, and
we recently got a lot of Beverly Cleary's "Henry Huggins"
series.
I'm waiting for her to get a little older before we tackle
Frances Hodgson Burnett's "A Little Princess", Louisa May
Alcott's "Little Women", and Charlotte Bronte's "Jane Eyre".
I'll let her discover Mitchell's "Gone With The Wind"
herself.
I really like books (movies, too) that show a child,
especially a girl, faced with challenges which she
surmounts and ends in triumph.
Sarah Johaningsmeir
wrote:
> Barbara Warner wrote:
>> AH, but if I recall those infamous MIT language theorists correctly,
>> that's *part* of the natural process of acquiring language, particularly
>> in English. It's one of those benchmarks which tells you that the child
>> *is* actually on the road to full English usage, even if it seems to be
>> telling you *just* the opposite!
>
> Right. Another related phenomenon is the problems most kids have for a
> while regarding personal pronouns. For example, if little Emily is hot,
> she might say to her mom "Please take off your sweater" when what she
> *really* means is "please take off MY sweater." Relational words like that
> are difficult to learn....after all, how weird is it that other people
> refer to you as "you" but to you, you're "me"? It can take a while to get
> the complexities of that....but the fact that kids eventually *do* pick it
> up without being explicitly taught is pretty phenomenal.
What I find really fascinating is that after my dad's stroke (he's doing
incredibly well, almost no residual effects, so it's okay for me to kind of
make fun of it) problems with pronouns were his most noticeable speech
problem. The first time I talked to him on the phone, he was pretty hard to
understand, because he couldn't find the words he wanted and kept using the
wrong pronouns.
By the time I was out there (only a few days later) you usually wouldn't
have noticed any speech problems just talking to him except for pronouns.
He referred to himself as "we" and got his genders mixed up a lot. I heard
him with his uncle on the phone calling me "they" and my brother "she." He
also told some salesguy that "we'd been ill," so later when we went in to
the store he said "I hope you're both feeling better." It was also strange
that my dad didn't notice that he was doing this at first. It was a big
moment when I finally heard him say "she, I mean he" when talking about his
brother.
I'm always so amazed at how much our brains can do! That kids can learn
language and people can have parts of their brains *die* and get that
functioning back!
Sarah J
Jan A. Cordes
> Snort.
> TGIF anyway.
> Megan
You'll all probably hate me for this but..."It's a Small World". :^)
Actually, I find myself humming Maple Leaf Rag a lot lately. It may
be because we're learning a fairly difficult clogging dance to this
and we've been working on it for weeks.
Jan
--
jan(at)panix.com http://www.couchtigers.com
...................................................................
:Silicon Valley Friends of Ferals : CAT: A pigmy lion that loves :
: http://www.svff.org : mice, hates dogs, and :
:Mary Kay Cosmetics, Inc. : patronizes human beings.:
: http://www.marykay.com/jcordes : --Oliver Herford :
:.................................:...............................:
Kris Hildrum
aMAZon <zesz...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>I'm waiting for her to get a little older before we tackle
>Frances Hodgson Burnett's "A Little Princess", Louisa May
>Alcott's "Little Women", and Charlotte Bronte's "Jane Eyre".
>I'll let her discover Mitchell's "Gone With The Wind"
>herself.
You forgot Jane Austen's books! Also, for older teens who
like Jane Austen but get frustrated that she died without writing
more books, Georgette Heyer is fun. Her books have little depth,
but they are entertaining.
Kris
Megan
but then again I might just have mucked up the snipping as usual!
>You'll all probably hate me for this but..."It's a Small World". :^)
Thats OK, its night time now and I am pissed enough not to be open to
suggestion. I like quiet Friday nights in, by the way.
Megan
--
Megan Farr Montgomery Wolverhampton, England
Lille kat, lille kat, lille kat på vejen
Hvis er du, Hvis er du
Jeg er sgu' min egen
- Piet Hein
HollyLewis
>talk may
>actually be beneficial, at least up to a certain age.
>
It is. Mostly because "baby talk" consists largely of elongating vowles,
emphasizing consonants, and repeating words, all of which helps a baby learn to
differentiate the sounds that are important to the particular language its
parents speak and to differentiate the flow of sound into discrete words.
"Baby talk" that consists of incorrect grammar is not always so beneficial.
So, saying "Emily fell doooown, didn't she, yes she did, she feeeellll DOWN!"
is actually helping Emily learn English. Saying "Emily falled down" isn't
helping.
The third person thing, I dunno. I think it's likely that this *is* good
because understanding pronouns is a complicated thing! Most "incorrect"
language that parents use instinctively turns out to have a purpose, and I
think this is one of them. I certainly refer to myself as "Mommy" when I'm
talking to my son -- though of course he doesn't call me anything yet. :-)
Also it's good to "narrate" everything you do in front of a baby, so yes, I'm
sure I've said things much like, "Mommy's taking off Mommy's shoes now." Sorry
Geri. Obviously at some point though you have to reinforce correct grammar.
The usual method of doing this is, when Emily says, "Emily falled down", the
parent responds, "Yes, you did fall down, didn't you?"
Holly
HollyLewis
>other kids struggled with usage. To me, it's just...there. You just
>kind of know what's right and what's not.
Me too. Although I really loved learning the actual rules, too. I'm a grammar
geek.
I sometimes wonder if I have
>a grammar gene that other people don't have or if I just heard so many
>words when I was young that the rules are permanently fused to my
>brain :-)
>
Both, maybe? I always thought people who can't spell simply didn't read
enough, but then I met DH.
Holly
HollyLewis
>Children's Literature."
Ditto. GREAT book.
There is another collection out now of children's poetry.
Before this book was published, I often gave books that were collections of
folk/fairy tales from around the world.
Holly
HollyLewis
>especially a girl, faced with challenges which she
>surmounts and ends in triumph.
Did you have "The Paper Bag Princess"? (I think it's by Roald Dahl.)
Dragon invades castle, kidnaps prince and burns all of princess' fancy clothes.
Princess puts on a paper bag and goes to prince's rescue. After princess
outwits dragon, prince scornfully tells princess she doesn't look like much in
that paper bag. Princess tells prince he's dumb and she won't marry him after
all.
Every little girl should have this book.
Holly
HollyLewis
>
>Sarah
We have a friend whose grandfather was called "Booful" because when she (my
friend) was a baby, he always greeted her with, "Hi, beautiful!" -- and she
would respond by repeating, joyfully, "BOO-ful!"
Holly
HollyLewis
>possible case, and he started out with "a guy invests in a bar" to which I
>replied "were a priest, a rabbi and a minister the other investors?" He was
>NOT amused.
You need a new boss. Mine would have laughed. :-)
Going back to that limited partnership agreement now...
Holly
Nantucketgrrl
>though - now that Memorial Day has come, I'm afraid the DPFG (Dreaded Pan
>Flute Guy) will be back.
I wondered when he'd come out of hibernation! Must be summertime again.
Meg
Nantucketgrrl
This is stuck in my head:
It is some really annoying song I heard in a store...all I could make out was
"I'm on survivor" ,or something like that, and it was in my head all day! I
think it's Destiny's Child...some top 40 junk!
Meg
Hillary Israeli
Sarah McCusker <no...@none.com> wrote:
*Yep. Kids overcompensate like that as they're learning to conjugate. Many
*theorize that we all have a set of innate rules in our heads that govern things
*like verb conjugation, and when kids make errors or overcompensate like this, it's
*because they haven't quite learned yet which order those rules apply in.
Is it really many who theorize this? Or is it just Chomsky? Just
wondering.
:)h.
--
hillary israeli vmd http://www.hillary.net in...@hillary.net
"uber vaccae in quattuor partes divisum est."
newly minted veterinarian-at-large :)
Leslie Deak
Yup. It's Destiny's Child. "Survivor."
-Leslie
Robin
> In article <9f6615$vpo$1...@slb6.atl.mindspring.net>, Holly Boatright says...
> >have I confused everyone yet?
> >
Actually I didn't manage to follow because of the lack of blank lines--
too much effort =)
> No, but you have just described my DH perfectly! When will he grow out of it?
> :)
>
And my co-workers...
> Robin T. (constantly saying..."And the beginning of the story is....?"
"Could I have a complete sentence please?"
Honestly, I have people who will ask me a question at 9 am, and then
come back at noon and expect me to know what they're talking about when
they say "it didn't work."
Do you think I sit around with my thumb up my butt waiting for the
thrilling conclusion? I have worked on 10 of my own projects by now,
and answered at least a dozen other questions, several of which were
likely other ones of yours. *Pretend I'm stupid! Start at the
beginning!*
--
There's no need to e-mail me a copy of a follow-up; but if you do,
please identify it as such.
Robin
> You'll all probably hate me for this but..."It's a Small World". :^)
>
solved a particularly ornery reconciliation problem.
Robin
> Yep. I never had to "learn" grammar and I was always puzzled when
> other kids struggled with usage. To me, it's just...there. You just
> a grammar gene that other people don't have or if I just heard so many
> words when I was young that the rules are permanently fused to my
> brain :-)
>
specific parts of a sentence, etc. If you had it wrong it would *sound*
wrong, wasn't that enough???
Robin
> Both, maybe? I always thought people who can't spell simply didn't read
> enough, but then I met DH.
>
ability to spell! I can spell the same word wrong three different ways
in a given document and never notice. However, if I had to pick between
lousy grammar and lousy spelling, I'm happy the way I am =) Your
grammar is more likely to leave an impression on people, unless you have
an implanted "grammar checker" in your brain which keeps you in check.
Bad spelling can easily be caught by spell check, which I live by.
Jennifer Angliss
>I'd be less subtle than you are about it. I'd say, "The 'teacher' has
>a name. You should use it. Would you like it if everyone called you
>"the student"?" (This is a tactic employed by Sister Mary Borgia, my
>7th grade science teacher. If anyone called her "Teacher" she'd call
>them "Student." It worked. I don't think anyone called her "Teacher"
>more than once.)
I wish that worked with my kids!!!!! This is one of my pet peeves,
which is probably at least 90% of the reason they do it.
Jennifer A. from Colorado
Jennifer Angliss
>I was a born reader, too. I remember being three years old and having a ton
>of books in my room, and I was happily kept quiet by just reading.
Me too! In fact, while most kids lost TV privileges when they were
bad, I lost book privileges!
Jennifer A. from Colorado
Vicky Larmour
wrote:
>Now I'm humming it. Quick, someone suggest an equally annoying song to
>replace it!
It's not annoying (well, I don't think so) but I find that O-Town song
(Liquid Dreams) quite catchy.
Vicky
--
vicky[at]jifvik.org All opinions mine.
The "unofficial offical alt.newlywed page" and a.n FAQ:
http://www.jifvik.org/newlywed/
Vicky Larmour
wrote:
>My niece, who is 26 monhts, says, "Maddie do, Maddie do" when
>she wants to do something herself without assistance. But as she
>isn't speaking in sentences yet....we let it slide.
Hee. When I was little I would point at something I wanted and say "Doria
want, Doria want!" since "Doria" was the closest I could get to "Victoria".
Sometimes it was even just "Doria Doria Doria!" (again while pointing) ...
but I think I ended up able to string a coherent sentence together, so I
wouldn't worry too much about Maddie :-)
Vicky / Doria
Vicky Larmour
>I'm neither a linguist nor a product of Catholic school, but I was a
>German major, so I had to know both English and German grammar pretty
>well. I guess that makes me a Grammar Nazi. ;-)
I agree that it you a Grammar Nazi makes :-)
Vicky (taking Advanced level RSA Certificate of Business Competence in
German in a few weeks!)
Jean
Vicky Larmour wrote
> Tracy wrote:
> >My niece, who is 26 monhts, says, "Maddie do, Maddie do" when
> >she wants to do something herself without assistance. But as she
> >isn't speaking in sentences yet....we let it slide.
>
> Hee. When I was little I would point at something I wanted and say "Doria
> want, Doria want!" since "Doria" was the closest I could get to
"Victoria".
> Sometimes it was even just "Doria Doria Doria!" (again while pointing) ...
> but I think I ended up able to string a coherent sentence together, so I
> wouldn't worry too much about Maddie :-)
My little brother would say "Self do/want etc". He had the idea of himself
as a seperate entity, but couldn't quite grasp the relevant pronouns :-).
Jen in South Florida
"Jennifer Angliss" <jent...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:c4gjhtci9fe16q3ik...@4ax.com...
Me too! And I was probably the only person ever grounded from Vacation
Bible School - in Jr. High, my boyfriend would be there, so I couldn't go.
Jen
Liz
"Jen in South Florida" <pju...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:9feq0f$jrv$1...@slb1.atl.mindspring.net...
ROTFL. I never had my books taken from me, but I used my weekly pocket money
to buy new books, and that was often cut off. It didn't phase me, i'd just
re-read the hundreds of other books I owned. I remember being 8 years old
and sitting in bed reading a book backwards, because I had read it so many
times the normal way. I was perfectly content doing so, too.
Liz
Robin Tutt
>
>Stacy Lynn wrote:
>
>> Another interesting thing about child language aquisition is that I've
>> heard of theories that in the infant stage, baby talking is actually
>> beneficial. I don't remember the reasoning behind it exactly, but I
>> believe it had to do with high pitched sounds.
>
>Yep, that's what I remember reading. I can't remember where, though, and
>of course now all of my books and old class notes are packed away
>somewhere...
>
DH just finished a study on "motherese" (i.e., baby talk) where he interviewed
parents and asked them why they did certain things. There are a whole lot of
these...changing pitch, nonsense words, changing speed, etc. The best part was
that he brought Katherine with him to the interviews. A whole bunch of people
said "no, I don't use baby talk" Then they turned around and used it on
Katherine. Very funny.
Robin T.
aMAZon
Jean wrote:
>
> Vicky Larmour wrote
> > Tracy wrote:
> > >My niece, who is 26 monhts, says, "Maddie do, Maddie do" when
> > >she wants to do something herself without assistance. But as she
> > >isn't speaking in sentences yet....we let it slide.
> >
> > Hee. When I was little I would point at something I wanted and say "Doria
> > want, Doria want!" since "Doria" was the closest I could get to
> "Victoria".
> > Sometimes it was even just "Doria Doria Doria!" (again while pointing) ...
> > but I think I ended up able to string a coherent sentence together, so I
> > wouldn't worry too much about Maddie :-)
>
> My little brother would say "Self do/want etc". He had the idea of himself
> as a seperate entity, but couldn't quite grasp the relevant pronouns :-).
Her Majesty had some jargon (something like "all by oos big girl")
which translated out as "all by myself big girl" when she wanted
to do something by herself. Because, of course, she's a big girl.
--
aMAZon
zesz...@worldnet.att.net
"It's never too late to have a happy childhood."
aMAZon
Backward? Now there's an idea.
DH has the facility of being able to read -- fluently -- upside down.
I don't know if that's because he can also read scripts other than
English.
Sarah McCusker
> In <3B17A790...@none.com>,
> Sarah McCusker <no...@none.com> wrote:
> *Yep. Kids overcompensate like that as they're learning to conjugate. Many
> *theorize that we all have a set of innate rules in our heads that govern things
> *like verb conjugation, and when kids make errors or overcompensate like this, it's
> *because they haven't quite learned yet which order those rules apply in.
>
> Is it really many who theorize this? Or is it just Chomsky? Just
> wondering.
Nope. Many. Even lots who don't necessarily agree with Chomsky otherwise. :-)
Sarah
Megan
> Backward? Now there's an idea.
>
> DH has the facility of being able to read -- fluently -- upside down.
> I don't know if that's because he can also read scripts other than
> English.
Apparently there are records in some of the mission schools in NZ that
Maori used to read books upside down - because they had taught
themselves to read following the words in a bible being read to them.
Megan
Kellie Gaines
from
my books (obviously my parents weren't thinking about true punishment but
not
watching TV and having to stay in my room was not it - just gave me
uninterrupted time to read!).
I can read upside down really well but not as fast reading backwards. My
brother, also a born reader (we both learned at 3), can read backwards and
used to do his ABC's backwards. Not to be smart - just that's how he liked
to
do them.
kellie (you know you are a born reader when you go into any furniture store
and drool over empty bookcases).
>===== Original Message From aMAZon <zesz...@worldnet.att.net> =====
>Liz wrote:
>>
>> "Jen in South Florida" <pju...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
>> news:9feq0f$jrv$1...@slb1.atl.mindspring.net...
>> >
>> > "Jennifer Angliss" <jent...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> > news:c4gjhtci9fe16q3ik...@4ax.com...
>> > > On Fri, 01 Jun 2001 16:14:30 GMT, "Liz" <lizn...@home.com> wrote:
>> > >
>> > > >I was a born reader, too. I remember being three years old and having
a
>> > ton
>> > > >of books in my room, and I was happily kept quiet by just reading.
>> > >
>> > > Me too! In fact, while most kids lost TV privileges when they were
>> > > bad, I lost book privileges!
>> >
>> > Me too! And I was probably the only person ever grounded from Vacation
>> > Bible School - in Jr. High, my boyfriend would be there, so I couldn't
go.
>>
>> ROTFL. I never had my books taken from me, but I used my weekly pocket
money
>> to buy new books, and that was often cut off. It didn't phase me, i'd just
>> re-read the hundreds of other books I owned. I remember being 8 years old
>> and sitting in bed reading a book backwards, because I had read it so many
>> times the normal way. I was perfectly content doing so, too.
>>
>> Liz
>
>Backward? Now there's an idea.
>
>DH has the facility of being able to read -- fluently -- upside down.
>I don't know if that's because he can also read scripts other than
>English.
>
Hillary Israeli
aMAZon <zesz...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
*>
*> ROTFL. I never had my books taken from me, but I used my weekly pocket money
*> to buy new books, and that was often cut off. It didn't phase me, i'd just
*> re-read the hundreds of other books I owned. I remember being 8 years old
*> and sitting in bed reading a book backwards, because I had read it so many
*> times the normal way. I was perfectly content doing so, too.
*>
*> Liz
*
*Backward? Now there's an idea.
*
*DH has the facility of being able to read -- fluently -- upside down.
*I don't know if that's because he can also read scripts other than
*English.
I can read upside down, too - and was able to do so well before I
developed any real ability to read hebrew or greek script (and no, I'm
nowhere close to fluent in either of those, ok?). I don't read books
backwards, but when I'm bored I'll often pull a well-read old novel off my
shelf and read JUST chapter 5, for example, of a 20 chapter book. Then
I'll put it back, and maybe take it out again in a few days and read
chapter 2 or perhaps chapter 9. :)
Jennifer Powell Acord
> > > "Jennifer Angliss" <jent...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> > > news:c4gjhtci9fe16q3ik...@4ax.com...
> > > > On Fri, 01 Jun 2001 16:14:30 GMT, "Liz" <lizn...@home.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > >I was a born reader, too. I remember being three years old and
having a
> > > ton
> > > > >of books in my room, and I was happily kept quiet by just reading.
> > > >
> > > > Me too! In fact, while most kids lost TV privileges when they were
> > > > bad, I lost book privileges!
> > >
I used to get into trouble all the time for staying up late reading. I
still love those nights when I get stuck in a book....of course, it's really
hard the next morning *yawn*
- Jennifer in Delaware
Jennifer Angliss
<jpo...@imagiware.com> wrote:
>I used to get into trouble all the time for staying up late reading. I
>still love those nights when I get stuck in a book....of course, it's really
>hard the next morning *yawn*
That was so me! I'd get sent to bed and then stay up half the night
reading with a flashlight under the covers. I got in *so* much trouble
for that!
This time of year it's a treat to finally be able to read things
written by adults rather than 12 year olds.
Jennifer A. from Colorado
Jennifer
I can definitely see that as an advantage for summer with your job!!!
I was thinking this evening, about all the books I'd rather be reading
rather than working on my thesis...I think it's because a part of me still
thinks of summer as a pleasure reading, suck-up-as-many-novels-as-possible
time.
- J.A. from DE
Robin
> On Wed, 13 Jun 2001 02:51:42 GMT, "Jennifer Powell Acord"
> <jpo...@imagiware.com> wrote:
>
> >I used to get into trouble all the time for staying up late reading. I
> >still love those nights when I get stuck in a book....of course, it's really
> >hard the next morning *yawn*
>
> That was so me! I'd get sent to bed and then stay up half the night
> reading with a flashlight under the covers. I got in *so* much trouble
> for that!
>
I read by that. My mom suspected I was reading at night, and gave me "a
talk" about how I was not allowed to read after lights out by a
flashlight. I promised her that I wasn't.
aMAZon
Robin wrote:
>
> On Wed, 13 Jun 2001 22:58:45 -0600, Jennifer Angliss wrote...
> > On Wed, 13 Jun 2001 02:51:42 GMT, "Jennifer Powell Acord"
> > <jpo...@imagiware.com> wrote:
> >
> > >I used to get into trouble all the time for staying up late reading. I
> > >still love those nights when I get stuck in a book....of course, it's really
> > >hard the next morning *yawn*
> >
> > That was so me! I'd get sent to bed and then stay up half the night
> > reading with a flashlight under the covers. I got in *so* much trouble
> > for that!
> >
> And me. Except I was creative. I had a light-up globe in my room, and
> I read by that. My mom suspected I was reading at night, and gave me "a
> talk" about how I was not allowed to read after lights out by a
> flashlight. I promised her that I wasn't.
When I went to visit my aunt and uncle, they were worried about me
stumbling in the dark, so they got me a night light. Guess who
didn't use the light for its intended purpose!
I seem to remember one book in particular was "*Every* night,
Josephine" by Jacqueline Susann, about her poodle.