Do you agree ..Comment?

Question

To make it easier for children, those who teach them should avoid using slang, idioms, and long words, try to see the situation from a child's point of view, and, to start with, get children to try to read short, simple pieces of writing such as nursery rhymes or poems, rather than whole books.

Answer 1

Children are sponges from early on. Reading to them before they can walk, sharing thick board books, teaching the words to the pictures is what parents should be doing as the baby develops into a toddler. Every family is unique and depending upon their ethnic background, can have some fun and endearing language the child can carry through to adulthood. As long as the English language is not mascaraed, respected, I don't see any thing wrong with teaching a child what the family uses as a word for specific things as well as the correct word. I am a great advocate for children reading early on and having owned a bookstore, know they can read "whole books" at an early age, age appropriate, in series books.

Answer 2

I think ur right to a certain extent and the most appropriate way to teach the kids is the ancient way of grammer lol i say ancient coz now a days the scene has changed but i certainly hope kids r not lost on grammer which is the main aspect of any language.

Rhymes and poems make it easy for the kids to understand the real english in a easy manner. Wat u say is true but I'd say as the kids grow up and have been through with the grammer they shud be exposed to slangs and idioms so that they can understand the difference too. U have to know wat these things are too. Infact long words taught in the childhood days r grasped better and r fixed in the minds which never leaves the memory bank ever. Majority learning can be done by the kids when they r kids, kids have a high grasping capacity when they r unknown to the material world and thus r absolutely involved with whatever they r taught. Thus the memory is sharp and recollection is way too easy. For eg. if u see kids who have peoms byheart never tend to forget any even after 30 yrs of their life spent growing up and learning different things, thus things when learned in childhood remain forever.

Answer 3

If a child is having difficulty learning their language then yes... it should be scaffolded for them, so that the speaker is speaking only slightly above the level of the child to assist them in constanty developing their receptive and expressive vocabulary.
However, if the child's language is developing appropriately then to limit their exposure to particular parts of language is not at all necessary and even damaging. If you do not expose a child to aspects of language, they are obviously going to have difficulty acquiring them and understanding them when they do come across them.
Parents generally use what is called "motherese" with children... that is different pitch and shorter more simpler sentences. Obviously it would be stupid to say to a two year old, "go and get your left shoe from under the bed and your right shoe from the cupboard that is under the sink and put them on". More likely we would get the shoes ourselves and say something simple such us "shoes on" while we actually put them on.
So in general most people do what you are suggesting without realising it... to a certain age anyway. Also with reading, a child's attention span will generally mean they are not interested in novels until they are able to cope with them reading them anyway.

Basically, what I am saying is I don't think we have to make any extra effort to limit the language that children are exposed to unless they are not learning language at an age appropriate rate

Answer 4

I agree.

I think that children should be taught the correct language, before they should even be exposed to MSN language.
(MSN language meaning the cell-phone text language, chat language and IM language).

It would appear that many, many people do not have a decent command of their own language, yet they manage to twist it perfectly.

I sometimes have dark visions where wars get started just because someone didn`t understand the comment made by the other person in writing...

Answer 5

Srividya sir has uncovered a large style of dimensions to the understanding. Bit hair splitting however, it does look to have plenty relevence. The good judgment of dividing human beings on the muse of a information in an internet site, this is extremely variable and valuable to be conflicting, became into touched by using poondi. i presumed approximately it additionally: think a Dr thinks he knows the therapeutic tech in a definite way and does not understand a component with reference to the track, that is superb. yet while a advaiti Hindu thinks that his concept of Brahman is the final wisdom and taunts on the Budhist conserving a distinctive view, then the scales exchange. If the scales exchange how will we degree the final and incorrect? wisdom with reference to the cosmic beginning place and dissolution, working example, could conflict no longer purely between technology and metaphysics, yet in the metaphysical / non secular sphere itself. In actual area additionally, as hinted by using poondi, the botanist or the physicists could selection in the theories bearing directly to multiple phenomena (Eg., with reference to the beginning place of the international between physicists - is Cosmic power definitely cosciousness in any respect, etc). Even in drugs or track human beings adept in the arts, have distinctive perceptions with reference to the editions of their field - like between the community med or the community track and the unique editions. As such who's to come to a decision if the thought some person's wisdom is authentic in any respect? no longer purely this querry, many conventional theories could desire to be countered in this foundation. however the certainty keeps to be that a tinge of certainty lurks in each and every extraordinary theory and an part of phantasm lies in each and every smart concept, as Sukra neethi could say!! we could consistently have sufficient cloth to argue on the two area of any theory! thank you for upsetting a energetic communicate.

Answer 6

Yes I do agree... I think it would actually help their vocabulary more. Any improvement can't really be dissed.

Answer 7

No if you rymed and used slang they would laugh and understand easilier

Answer 8

yes and SRA reading programs have been proved effective also.