And while I'm having a rant... Ta!
-
firstly i would look at the age of the child, if around 2 then i would say "ta" is acceptable due to their level of speech (i think its do something with the amount of sylabuls (yes to the spelling police its more than likely wrong!) in the word. . if you can find me a child around 2 year old speaking at the level you would want them then i will change my view. i have a one year old that use's ta, but his older brothers say thank you!
I don't necessarily think it's wrong for a v young child to say 'ta' f that's all they can manage - what I object to and believe is misguided is for adults to teach them to say "ta" rather than "thank you" Yes, multiple sylables are difficult for a v young child - but thanks and you are single sylables. You is a familiar word at a young age - so Thank is simply a new word, one sylable/ question is, does your 1 year old use Ta because you have taugh him to use that (in which case a bogan you are) or is it just an internal (i.e. self-taught) approximation of thankyou or thanks? And, of course it is posisble for children to unlearn one thing they have been taught and to relearn something else - and in some complex cases it is necessary ( lioke you don't teach relativity you teach newtonian physixs- becasue that will do until the basics are grasped).
___________________________________________ .\\axxx (That's an 'M')
-
Why thank you Maxxx, I'm not at all sure that the cognitive scientists such as Noam Chomsky would agree with your point of view. from [^] [quote] Noam Chomsky raised 2 key questions: (1) How can a baby know where a word in a sentence begin or end? Our observation: A baby's world of language is different from that of an adult. Babies' world of language in the first 15 months has no words, only sounds and rhythms, which they associate with particular actions or events. Chomsky's question was wrongly phrased. (2) How can a baby 3 year old speak in perfect grammar? It must be inate, from an international grammar gene. Our findings: Babies aquire a language through 4 distinct stages. 1st stage, from birth to around 12 months, the development of the voice recognition system, with wiring of synapes through stimulation from words spoken by mom and other human beings; 2nd stage: immitation and production of these sounds, with all the details in pitch and rhythm; 3rd stage: vocabulary building, from 15th month onwards, when a child begins to ask "What is this?" 4th stage: pattern finding. A child is intensely interested in the patterns of words they use everyday. They become experts in pattern finding and applications. Grammar is learned in the 3rd year as word patterns through frequent usage, not inborn. [/quote]
modified on Tuesday, April 13, 2010 6:24 AM
Richard A. Abbott wrote:
Why thank you Maxxx, I'm not at all sure that the cognitive scientists such as Noam Chomsky would agree with your point of view.
Is this sarcasm? difficult to tell with a posting like this one. No offense meant - just genuinely difficult to tell and my first instinct is that sarcasm is meant - but then you go on to dispute chimsky (with whome I disagree). I'm not talking grammer, I'm talking essentially a single short word phrase.
Richard A. Abbott wrote:
Babies' world of language in the first 15 months has no words, only sounds and rhythms, which they associate with particular actions or events.
Yep - let's take that as fact and not argue about it - so the baby can hear the sound "thank you" and the sound "ta" (and their name, Mummy , daddy, etc.) and although they do try to imitate at that age, they don't have the physical ability to copy the sounds. But they can associate the sound "thank you" with being given (or giving) something.
Richard A. Abbott wrote:
through stimulation from words spoken by mom and other human beings;
like, erm, "thank you" and not "ta"
Richard A. Abbott wrote:
with all the details in pitch and rhythm
like, erm, "thank you" and not "ta"
Richard A. Abbott wrote:
vocabulary building,
like, erm, "thank you" and not "ta"
Richard A. Abbott wrote:
Grammar is learned in the 3rd year as word patterns through frequent usage,
Yep - like, erm, "thank you" and not "ta" Essentially, I believe that
___________________________________________ .\\axxx (That's an 'M')
-
Why in the name of all that his holy do parents teach their small children to say "Ta"? FFS The number of times I have heard mothers say to their kids, when they've received a present or something, "say 'Ta'". I mean, doesn't the kid have to suffer through life enough being called "Chames" or "Deen", "Daizee" or whatever, but learning to say "ta" rather than "Thanks You" or event "Thanks" is just shoving them to the back of the queue, ready to be a checkout chick or work in maccas. Ahhhhrgh
___________________________________________ .\\axxx (That's an 'M')
-
I don't necessarily think it's wrong for a v young child to say 'ta' f that's all they can manage - what I object to and believe is misguided is for adults to teach them to say "ta" rather than "thank you" Yes, multiple sylables are difficult for a v young child - but thanks and you are single sylables. You is a familiar word at a young age - so Thank is simply a new word, one sylable/ question is, does your 1 year old use Ta because you have taugh him to use that (in which case a bogan you are) or is it just an internal (i.e. self-taught) approximation of thankyou or thanks? And, of course it is posisble for children to unlearn one thing they have been taught and to relearn something else - and in some complex cases it is necessary ( lioke you don't teach relativity you teach newtonian physixs- becasue that will do until the basics are grasped).
___________________________________________ .\\axxx (That's an 'M')
Now see this arguement could go on for ever.. For my one year old i use simple words as "ta" etc. As I would rather that he learns about manners early and simplely, but this evolves as he grows ups For my other children who are 3 or older i use more appropiate words to thier vocabulary suchs as "thanks", "thank you". But for my oldest who suffers from autism i've had to take a slower approach as his understanding of vocabulary is slower. Yes i could adopt your stance and teach him words that aren't slang or abbreivated, but you run the risk of them not understanding the meaning of the word!
-
firstly i would look at the age of the child, if around 2 then i would say "ta" is acceptable due to their level of speech (i think its do something with the amount of sylabuls (yes to the spelling police its more than likely wrong!) in the word. . if you can find me a child around 2 year old speaking at the level you would want them then i will change my view. i have a one year old that use's ta, but his older brothers say thank you!
Huh? A 2 year old should be talking rather well, considering a not-completely-formed mouth and the attention span of a poodle. If you Facebook, go to http://www.facebook.com/daniel.j.wojcik and check out the videos of my son. He turned 2 in February, but there are vids going back to well before that.
-
Yes, this is a Pennsylvania Dutch speaking family. Being immersed in their culture, I am amazed at what great common sense they have. Seems to have disappeared in our modern "society". They don't teach the little guy "Da" because he can't say Danke. They teach him Danke. His older brothers, 8 & 11, are trying to teach my wife and I a little German. I can't pronounce their words, but they don't slack on me just because it's difficult. Nor should they. Side note: the 11 y.o. watched viewed pictures being displayed on an iPhone. He can now tell you how to operate the thing! :thumbsup:
Gary
-
Now see this arguement could go on for ever.. For my one year old i use simple words as "ta" etc. As I would rather that he learns about manners early and simplely, but this evolves as he grows ups For my other children who are 3 or older i use more appropiate words to thier vocabulary suchs as "thanks", "thank you". But for my oldest who suffers from autism i've had to take a slower approach as his understanding of vocabulary is slower. Yes i could adopt your stance and teach him words that aren't slang or abbreivated, but you run the risk of them not understanding the meaning of the word!
Simon_Whale wrote:
this arguement could go on for ever
True! and I'm bored at work, so suits me!
Simon_Whale wrote:
simple words as "ta" etc.
but 'ta' isn't really a word, is it? sure it's in dictionaries but it's slang, and lazy slang, at that, and I don't believe it is polite either.
Simon_Whale wrote:
but you run the risk of them not understanding the meaning of the word!
now there's the thing - you don't (unless the words are toooo long) because kids will pick up words whatever they are, even when they can't repeat them properly or at all - it's common for kids to mispronounce words (hopsital is extremely common - but it is a three syllable word that many very young children understand )
___________________________________________ .\\axxx (That's an 'M')
-
haha. Really? I was being sarcastic. If you do then IMO lends more weight to your oppinion on this - but im still sceptical as to whether it makes a whole lot of difference. And the reason im actually interested in this; I did the typical "ta" thing with my 10month old the other day and my lovely wife told me off. "Say thanks or Thankyou", "I dont want her using some stupid made up word!!". We basically had the conversation that is this thread. I was all ready to call a very close friend who IS a professional Speech Therapist.
-
Nah - don't underestimate him. He may not be able to form the words properly, but he WILL understand that he's meant to be saying Thank You and not Ta. My son's vocabulary and understanding of language is excellent (he's 7) not because we've taught him or tried to do anything other than just talk to him sensibly. never did the "goo-goo gah-gah" thing, and understood that he didn't understand (or need to understand0 many of the words we used when he was a baby - then he just needed the sounds, tone speaks volumes as someone probably said. And it is far more endearing when you son, rather than pointing 'down there' and shouting "willy willy", looks up at you with tears in his eyes and says "I caught my penis in my zip, and it stings a LOT!" m
___________________________________________ .\\axxx (That's an 'M')
_Maxxx_ wrote:
Nah
No thank you? :-P
_Maxxx_ wrote:
And it is far more endearing when you son, rather than pointing 'down there' and shouting "willy willy", looks up at you with tears in his eyes and says "I caught my penis in my zip, and it stings a LOT!"
I wouldn't think it was endearing at all... And I question if he's really caught it that badly if he can muster up anything more than "aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaargh". ;-)
I don't have ADHD, I have ADOS... Attention Deficit oooh SHINY!! If you like cars, check out the Booger Mobile blog | If you feel generous - make a donation to Camp Quality!!
-
I don't necessarily think it's wrong for a v young child to say 'ta' f that's all they can manage - what I object to and believe is misguided is for adults to teach them to say "ta" rather than "thank you" Yes, multiple sylables are difficult for a v young child - but thanks and you are single sylables. You is a familiar word at a young age - so Thank is simply a new word, one sylable/ question is, does your 1 year old use Ta because you have taugh him to use that (in which case a bogan you are) or is it just an internal (i.e. self-taught) approximation of thankyou or thanks? And, of course it is posisble for children to unlearn one thing they have been taught and to relearn something else - and in some complex cases it is necessary ( lioke you don't teach relativity you teach newtonian physixs- becasue that will do until the basics are grasped).
___________________________________________ .\\axxx (That's an 'M')
_Maxxx_ wrote:
(in which case a bogan you are)
Funnily enough, this is the kind of attitude that I was happy to move away from (when I used to live just around the corner from where you live). Funny part is, I make more money than most of the people who would consider me a lesser mortal because I don't have a shiny new *insert favourite European car here* in the driveway (which usually just means they are in hock up to their eyeballs). I'm not saying you are one of these people... just sayin'... ;)
I don't have ADHD, I have ADOS... Attention Deficit oooh SHINY!! If you like cars, check out the Booger Mobile blog | If you feel generous - make a donation to Camp Quality!!
-
_Maxxx_ wrote:
(in which case a bogan you are)
Funnily enough, this is the kind of attitude that I was happy to move away from (when I used to live just around the corner from where you live). Funny part is, I make more money than most of the people who would consider me a lesser mortal because I don't have a shiny new *insert favourite European car here* in the driveway (which usually just means they are in hock up to their eyeballs). I'm not saying you are one of these people... just sayin'... ;)
I don't have ADHD, I have ADOS... Attention Deficit oooh SHINY!! If you like cars, check out the Booger Mobile blog | If you feel generous - make a donation to Camp Quality!!
_Damian S_ wrote:
I make more money than most of the people who would consider me a lesser mortal because I don't have a shiny new *insert favourite European car here* in the driveway (which usually just means they are in hock up to their eyeballs).
?? Not sure where you get the similarity between expecting people to speak properly and having money - the things aren't particularly related. Many less educated and poorly-spoken folk earn more than me (although many don't have a shiny new beemer, they tend to drive more expensive utes, have trailers, caravans, motorbikes etc. etc. ) It's about speaking properly and passing that onto children that I am ranting against. don't care if your income is $20k to $120k. Out of interest, my cars are both about 5 years old and certainly not shiney. And neither is european.
___________________________________________ .\\axxx (That's an 'M')
-
haha. Really? I was being sarcastic. If you do then IMO lends more weight to your oppinion on this - but im still sceptical as to whether it makes a whole lot of difference. And the reason im actually interested in this; I did the typical "ta" thing with my 10month old the other day and my lovely wife told me off. "Say thanks or Thankyou", "I dont want her using some stupid made up word!!". We basically had the conversation that is this thread. I was all ready to call a very close friend who IS a professional Speech Therapist.
The major problem with this, as with many child issues, is thet you just can't experiment well with children (it is, for some reson, not socially acceptable!!! :) So you tend to rely on studies. And studies do show that (in general - each child is different) using baby words to children slows down their speech development (I wish I could find the references but it's been a long time ) It is true that it only slows it down, and language has 'caught up' certainly be the age of 11 (when the children enter high school and such things are measured once more) In the meantime, though, the children (again, generally - those who say 'my child learned 'ta' but says thank you now he's seven are statistical anomolies - and those whose chldren still say ta at seven or eight probably find that word socially acceptable in their peer groups). And I'm not a prof. speech therapist - so go call your friend and get their opinion - I'd be genuinely interested to hear it.
___________________________________________ .\\axxx (That's an 'M')