11 ms·

Back-and-forth exchanges boost children’s brain response to language

148 points by vezycash 8y ago

allcentury 8y ago
I always assumed the word gap was because of conversation, not that high income earners were reading a dictionary aloud. That said, are high income earners more available for conversation? Seems like a good question for economic researchers within child development.
- mac01021 8y ago
  It may not be availability so much as conversational style. Anecdotal (I would most likely qualify as high-income for the purposes of that study): Most of the time when I am with my now-18-month-old daughter, I give her a lot of authority. If she can say where she wants to go or what she wants to do or what she wants me to do, then in general that's what happens. I have to imagine that creates a great incentive to learn to express your thoughts.
- gnicholas 8y ago
  It could have been because of parents reading books aloud to children, with no back-and-forth. Apparently this wasn't it though. Knowing this helps parents with limited time to know that it's better to focus on back-and-forth than to just read more books all the time.
paulsutter 8y ago
This is true for adults as well. I have great retention from speaking Japanese with taxi drivers, but the 900 words in my quiz program evaporated quickly. You need to really use it.
- EGreg 8y ago
  Amazing article about this: https://growingparticipatorapproach.wordpress.com/leave-me-alone-cant-you-see-im-learning-your-language/ https://growingparticipatorapproach.wordpress.com/leave-me-a...
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
- ourmandave 8y ago
  When my daughter was considering an International Studies degree she went to a student seminar put on by a retired Field Service Officer. He explained how they teach you a language with 5 hours of class every day with 3 students per teacher. Then take you to the local town or village to interact with little or no help. Like, sink or swim.
  - mikekchar 8y ago
    I'm fairly opinionated about language acquisition, having spent 5 years teaching English as a foreign language. However, my experience of failing to learn French after 13 years of school study, while at the same time succeeding to learn Japanese after 0 classes of Japanese lessons influences me even more :-) I'll use English as an example because I happen to know lots of trivia about it. I think it is similar for other languages. The average educated adult native English speaker knows about 20,000 "word families" of vocabulary. A "word family" is similar to a word, but the word family includes all conjugations of the word and all compound words (so the "police" in "police station" or "police state" is part of the same word family). The average 3 year old knows about 1500 word families. By age 5 they know about 5000 word families and improve their vocabulary about 1000 word families per year (about 3 per day) until the age of 20. Some people have vocabularies up to around 60,000 word families (for example if they have a very technical job). When people study in school, they tend to study lists of vocabulary up to 1000-3000 words (not word families). These lists often include ridiculous words like "unemployment". Anyone studying a foreign language should look at their word lists. If you have 5000 words, you should be asking yourself, "Would a 5 year old know and use this word?" And then you should be asking yourself, "If this list has this word and a 5 year old would not use it, what word is not on this list that the average 5 year old would know?" Then you should learn that word :-) (bodily functions are usually included in that list and I have to say it is extremely important if you ever need to go to the doctor!) There are only about 1500 grammar structures in basic English (although there are lots more set phrases that can be used in grammatical situations) Basic fluency starts with simply being able to use the language in a variety of situations. One of the problems with many language courses is that they start the student memorising grammatical structures (mainly because it is really easy to test and makes it appear as if the student has made progress). However, I recommend finding a 3 year old to talk to. Take note of the grammar that they can use (it's not much!). Take note of the vocabulary that they can use. When second language learners are at the 1500 word vocabulary level, this is what they should be realistically aiming for. Between the years of 3 and 5, children acquire most of the common conversational grammar. They can do it quite naturally because they can speak easily from about 3 years of age on. Children of that age do not require specialised instruction on language -- their parents are more than sufficient. Finally, a couple of important notes. It takes children about 12 years before they are able to have adult level conversations. Before that, they are unlikely to understand the news, or even movies that are not aimed at children. Even then, it takes until they are in their teens before they start speaking and listening like an adult. We tend to think of children as having underdeveloped brains, but in reality I think they simply lack the language skills. Children that have exceptional language skills at a young age are often thought to be exceptionally bright and often it is not the case. Even if you learn as fast as a native child, it will take you 15 years to be able to learn adult level conversation and reading skills. Luckily, second language learners can actually learn a language faster than children, but most learners have completely unrealistic expectations (by an order of magnitude). Finally, there is a period in language acquisition (known as the "closed period") where you can generally understand what's going on, but you can't speak. Virtually everybody goes through this phase in their first language and most second language speakers also go through this phase. Some polyglots have found mechanisms for bootstrapping through the closed period, but in my experience it takes a considerable experience with language learning to figure out how to do that. In general, sink or swim works fine if you are past the closed period and is absolutely dreadful if you are not. There is a reason why children are tired and cranky and prone to emotional outbursts. It's incredibly tiring and frustrating not to be able to communicate. (OK, there are other reasons too ;-) ). It is super important to accommodate the closed period (which will be different for each student -- and can last years). My personal technique is to teach fluency without worrying about specific vocabulary or grammar. I don't use lists, but rather use simple conversations as the guide for what to talk about. I use grammar as a tool to help explain language, not as a subject in itself (although learning grammar taught completely in the target language is a super fun way to learn the language if you happen to enjoy grammar, as I do). My main goal for beginners is to get them past the closed period. After that, you just need to grind (whether that's watching children's TV shows, or reading books, or having conversations with accommodating people). One famous comic/talent in Japan (Pa-kun) came from the US and learned Japanese to practically native level by simply going to the bar every day and talking to the regulars there. It's a great technique IMHO. Class size can be much larger that 3 because the students can ideally talk to each other. In fact, students should be jabbering away all the time. Teachers need to model the language, but they shouldn't be the ones speaking all the time. For me, an ideal class size is between 8 and 12 (depending on the students). Very small class sizes have he downside that it sometimes puts unreasonable pressure on individuals, which lengthens their closed period. I have specialised techniques to deal with up to about 20. Past that, I never found a mechanism that works (but I only did it for 5 years, so there may be someone who knows of a way that works).
le-mark 8y ago
Both of our kids are very verbal, they were speaking very clear sentences when a lot of their peers where barely intelligible for example. We are constantly amazed at their vocabulary and clever turns of phrase they come up with on their own. My personal goal has been to make sure they feel like they have a voice and get to be heard. They have agency in their lives; choices and consequnces. We've always talked to them like people and encouraged them to use their words. When they were little I'd repeat back what they said and respond as clearly as I could, asking for clarification or whatever. They've been read over a thousand books by the age of 5. I don't know how much of that is nature or nurture, but we definitely make time for them, and have the means to do so.
- iamshs 8y ago
  It is hard and non intuitive to talk to newborns, but our hospital material suggested us this. We started talking from day one. And our kid is cooing significantly more and has advanced fine motor skills, according to the pediatrician. We have enrolled in a local library course to do the 1000 books before 5 program. It is very important to give time to kids, and it can be done relatively inexpensively through local government initiatives.
  - Falling3 8y ago
    > It is hard and non intuitive to talk to newborns I had the opposite experience, but maybe that's because I have decades of experience of talking to pets as if they're human adults...
    - iamshs 8y ago
      It is tiresome for me personally, because it is hard to get used to non-verbal responses. My wife does a stellar job though. I am gaining experience along the way though and a bit better than initial days.
      - scandinavegan 8y ago
        My wife used to explain the grocery shopping to our kids when they were babies. "Let's go get tomatoes, OK? What else do we need?" and so on, as a running commentary. They were babies, so they couldn't answer of course. I would feel stupid doing that, even if I see the benefits, but I enjoyed reading out loud to them, because then you have a script to follow. I wouldn't read "Dog - Apple - Ball" children books, but stuff I wanted to read anyway, just to get them used to hearing my voice, the speech rhythm, and the vocabulary.
maxent 8y ago
The Hanen Centre has used this back-and-forth as the foundation of their teaching for over four decades. Check out their take on the same study: http://www.hanen.org/Helpful-Info/Articles/power-turn-taking.aspx http://www.hanen.org/Helpful-Info/Articles/power-turn-taking... We took one of the Hanen Centre parent education courses (“It takes two to talk”). I can’t recommend it highly enough - best training I’ve ever received: http://www.hanen.org/Programs/For-Parents/It-Takes-Two-to-Talk.aspx http://www.hanen.org/Programs/For-Parents/It-Takes-Two-to-Ta...
angel_j 8y ago
File under wisdom lost. I don't know if this asinine study and obvious result should give me hope or dismay. Did people really need a study to tell them that interacting with children is better for them? Countdown 7 years until the public sector of schooling adopts this into state-approved pedagogy.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
jcoffland 8y ago
This is one reason why too much phone time can be detrimental to child development. Modern kids are losing out on verbal skills because they are able to "hide" in their phones and avoid talking to adults. It is sad when parents fail to say to their kids, "hey, an adult is speaking to you, pay attention and answer them."
- rimliu 8y ago
  What makes you think that without phone kids would do talking instead of gazzilion of other activities? Also I am sure having access to iPad helped my daughter to learn way more than I thought she could at that age (e. g. English names for colors; count in English and the alphabet song — before she even was three). Just to clarify — we do not speak English at home. I had no phone or computer. Most of my time was spent in books. (Not bad for the vocabulary, I guess).
  - user5454 8y ago
    > having access to iPad helped my daughter to learn way more than I thought she could at that age (e. g. English names for colors; count in English and the alphabet song — before she even was three) While that may sound awesome, I'm not so sure it's better in the long term. Your daughter would've learned the English names of colors and the alphabet eventually anyway. OTOH using phones and pads changes our brains, making us worse and worse at keeping our focus. We become addicted to that something is always changing or moving until reading a book becomes hard. I'd rather start from the other side, reading a lot of books for the kids, letting them learn at a slower rate but with retained ability to focus.
    - dangerface 8y ago
      > OTOH using phones and pads changes our brains, making us worse and worse at keeping our focus. Thats not true: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-38896790 https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-38896790
- dangerface 8y ago
  "hey, an adult is speaking to you, pay attention and answer them." This is a very one sided attitude and conversation, why would any one want to talk to some one with this attitude? As an adult I can call out this poor attitude, but a child cant, thats why they are hiding in their phone.
tudorw 8y ago
"electronic reminders to parents to engage their children in conversation", did I wake up in Black Mirror ?
- jacobush 8y ago
  Black Mirror is here, it’s just not evenly distributed yet.
- noxToken 8y ago
  No. Though seemingly grim, this is actually a good use for technology for people who don't talk too much. I don't speak much. Unless I'm in a group where conversation is free-flowing among all parties, then I'm not saying much. I will ask a direct question to a coworker. I have no issue with talking about something specific. However I can't contribute much to small talk unless someone else is driving the bus. In turn, that makes me a great listener. This is where the electronic reminder would come in handy for me. I've played with nieces, nephews, cousins once removed, and when I was younger, I had a volunteer position with the Boys and Girls Club. I have no problem listening and participating in activities. But newborns and infants need you to speak to them even though they may not speak back. An infant cannot (for all intents and purposes) drive conversation with an adult, so my natural inclination is to make faces, imitate sounds if they're making any, and play. I've seen it while out shopping. Mothers and fathers flying solo with their infants in the cart are getting groceries as usual. However, they're narrating their actions to the child so that the child may get a better grasp on the language. Something like this would have never occurred to me. This isn't a dystopian future where we need robots to remind us to breathe. It's leveraging technology to help every live the best life that they can.
  - tudorw 8y ago
    I already see a fairly grim reality around me where adults are spending their time engaging with electronic media over and above engaging with the children around them, theirs or otherwise, you actually state in your reply that you have a natural inclination to do the right thing, I think other options, such as a poster in a place where large numbers of parents gather, or on the wrapping of a child oriented product should be explored before applying a tech oriented solution.
cinspicuous 8y ago
>The important thing is not just to talk to your child, but to talk with your child Taking this to the next level, it's not about about talking per se but having meaningful communication. This entails noting interesting things, fun things and helping the child get what they want, helping the parent get what they want, deciding what to want next, etc. The ability to talk co-evolves with the content i.e. with the reasons to talk.
- Angostura 8y ago
  My brother bought up his kids beautifully, and when I asked him what the secret was, he simply said 'talk to them like people' which worked for us too. My kids do tend to ask me things me now and prefix it with 'not one of your long answers, though dad'.
  - cinspicuous 8y ago
    Detail Dad! >talk to them like people Except that most adult/social conversations are restrictive.
    - Angostura 8y ago
      Not compared with stereotypical parent-child conversations where it is easy to slip into command-based dialogue: "I want to do this", "you can't".
      - cinspicuous 8y ago
        True. And I hope we're moving away from that.
  - user5454 8y ago
    > 'not one of your long answers, though dad' I get this a lot too. My 8 yr old daughter frequently tells me she just wants the answer.
gumby 8y ago
Indeed, and the conversation (allowing the child to experiment and reinforce its use of language) extends to reading as well: I remember we never "read" to our child, but always had an engagement '"Pippi jumped onto the roof", hey, do you believe she really could do that?'
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
renox 8y ago
Not so easy to do when you have several children, especially twins..

148 points by vezycash 8y ago

I always assumed the word gap was because of conversation, not that high income earners were reading a dictionary aloud. That said, are high income earners more available for conversation? Seems like a good question for economic researchers within child development.

mac01021 8y ago
It may not be availability so much as conversational style. Anecdotal (I would most likely qualify as high-income for the purposes of that study): Most of the time when I am with my now-18-month-old daughter, I give her a lot of authority. If she can say where she wants to go or what she wants to do or what she wants me to do, then in general that's what happens. I have to imagine that creates a great incentive to learn to express your thoughts.
gnicholas 8y ago
It could have been because of parents reading books aloud to children, with no back-and-forth. Apparently this wasn't it though. Knowing this helps parents with limited time to know that it's better to focus on back-and-forth than to just read more books all the time.

paulsutter 8y ago

This is true for adults as well. I have great retention from speaking Japanese with taxi drivers, but the 900 words in my quiz program evaporated quickly. You need to really use it.

EGreg 8y ago
Amazing article about this: https://growingparticipatorapproach.wordpress.com/leave-me-alone-cant-you-see-im-learning-your-language/ https://growingparticipatorapproach.wordpress.com/leave-me-a...
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
ourmandave 8y ago
When my daughter was considering an International Studies degree she went to a student seminar put on by a retired Field Service Officer. He explained how they teach you a language with 5 hours of class every day with 3 students per teacher. Then take you to the local town or village to interact with little or no help. Like, sink or swim.
- mikekchar 8y ago
  I'm fairly opinionated about language acquisition, having spent 5 years teaching English as a foreign language. However, my experience of failing to learn French after 13 years of school study, while at the same time succeeding to learn Japanese after 0 classes of Japanese lessons influences me even more :-) I'll use English as an example because I happen to know lots of trivia about it. I think it is similar for other languages. The average educated adult native English speaker knows about 20,000 "word families" of vocabulary. A "word family" is similar to a word, but the word family includes all conjugations of the word and all compound words (so the "police" in "police station" or "police state" is part of the same word family). The average 3 year old knows about 1500 word families. By age 5 they know about 5000 word families and improve their vocabulary about 1000 word families per year (about 3 per day) until the age of 20. Some people have vocabularies up to around 60,000 word families (for example if they have a very technical job). When people study in school, they tend to study lists of vocabulary up to 1000-3000 words (not word families). These lists often include ridiculous words like "unemployment". Anyone studying a foreign language should look at their word lists. If you have 5000 words, you should be asking yourself, "Would a 5 year old know and use this word?" And then you should be asking yourself, "If this list has this word and a 5 year old would not use it, what word is not on this list that the average 5 year old would know?" Then you should learn that word :-) (bodily functions are usually included in that list and I have to say it is extremely important if you ever need to go to the doctor!) There are only about 1500 grammar structures in basic English (although there are lots more set phrases that can be used in grammatical situations) Basic fluency starts with simply being able to use the language in a variety of situations. One of the problems with many language courses is that they start the student memorising grammatical structures (mainly because it is really easy to test and makes it appear as if the student has made progress). However, I recommend finding a 3 year old to talk to. Take note of the grammar that they can use (it's not much!). Take note of the vocabulary that they can use. When second language learners are at the 1500 word vocabulary level, this is what they should be realistically aiming for. Between the years of 3 and 5, children acquire most of the common conversational grammar. They can do it quite naturally because they can speak easily from about 3 years of age on. Children of that age do not require specialised instruction on language -- their parents are more than sufficient. Finally, a couple of important notes. It takes children about 12 years before they are able to have adult level conversations. Before that, they are unlikely to understand the news, or even movies that are not aimed at children. Even then, it takes until they are in their teens before they start speaking and listening like an adult. We tend to think of children as having underdeveloped brains, but in reality I think they simply lack the language skills. Children that have exceptional language skills at a young age are often thought to be exceptionally bright and often it is not the case. Even if you learn as fast as a native child, it will take you 15 years to be able to learn adult level conversation and reading skills. Luckily, second language learners can actually learn a language faster than children, but most learners have completely unrealistic expectations (by an order of magnitude). Finally, there is a period in language acquisition (known as the "closed period") where you can generally understand what's going on, but you can't speak. Virtually everybody goes through this phase in their first language and most second language speakers also go through this phase. Some polyglots have found mechanisms for bootstrapping through the closed period, but in my experience it takes a considerable experience with language learning to figure out how to do that. In general, sink or swim works fine if you are past the closed period and is absolutely dreadful if you are not. There is a reason why children are tired and cranky and prone to emotional outbursts. It's incredibly tiring and frustrating not to be able to communicate. (OK, there are other reasons too ;-) ). It is super important to accommodate the closed period (which will be different for each student -- and can last years). My personal technique is to teach fluency without worrying about specific vocabulary or grammar. I don't use lists, but rather use simple conversations as the guide for what to talk about. I use grammar as a tool to help explain language, not as a subject in itself (although learning grammar taught completely in the target language is a super fun way to learn the language if you happen to enjoy grammar, as I do). My main goal for beginners is to get them past the closed period. After that, you just need to grind (whether that's watching children's TV shows, or reading books, or having conversations with accommodating people). One famous comic/talent in Japan (Pa-kun) came from the US and learned Japanese to practically native level by simply going to the bar every day and talking to the regulars there. It's a great technique IMHO. Class size can be much larger that 3 because the students can ideally talk to each other. In fact, students should be jabbering away all the time. Teachers need to model the language, but they shouldn't be the ones speaking all the time. For me, an ideal class size is between 8 and 12 (depending on the students). Very small class sizes have he downside that it sometimes puts unreasonable pressure on individuals, which lengthens their closed period. I have specialised techniques to deal with up to about 20. Past that, I never found a mechanism that works (but I only did it for 5 years, so there may be someone who knows of a way that works).

le-mark 8y ago

Both of our kids are very verbal, they were speaking very clear sentences when a lot of their peers where barely intelligible for example. We are constantly amazed at their vocabulary and clever turns of phrase they come up with on their own. My personal goal has been to make sure they feel like they have a voice and get to be heard. They have agency in their lives; choices and consequnces. We've always talked to them like people and encouraged them to use their words. When they were little I'd repeat back what they said and respond as clearly as I could, asking for clarification or whatever. They've been read over a thousand books by the age of 5. I don't know how much of that is nature or nurture, but we definitely make time for them, and have the means to do so.

iamshs 8y ago
It is hard and non intuitive to talk to newborns, but our hospital material suggested us this. We started talking from day one. And our kid is cooing significantly more and has advanced fine motor skills, according to the pediatrician. We have enrolled in a local library course to do the 1000 books before 5 program. It is very important to give time to kids, and it can be done relatively inexpensively through local government initiatives.
- Falling3 8y ago
  > It is hard and non intuitive to talk to newborns I had the opposite experience, but maybe that's because I have decades of experience of talking to pets as if they're human adults...
  - iamshs 8y ago
    It is tiresome for me personally, because it is hard to get used to non-verbal responses. My wife does a stellar job though. I am gaining experience along the way though and a bit better than initial days.
    - scandinavegan 8y ago
      My wife used to explain the grocery shopping to our kids when they were babies. "Let's go get tomatoes, OK? What else do we need?" and so on, as a running commentary. They were babies, so they couldn't answer of course. I would feel stupid doing that, even if I see the benefits, but I enjoyed reading out loud to them, because then you have a script to follow. I wouldn't read "Dog - Apple - Ball" children books, but stuff I wanted to read anyway, just to get them used to hearing my voice, the speech rhythm, and the vocabulary.

maxent 8y ago

The Hanen Centre has used this back-and-forth as the foundation of their teaching for over four decades. Check out their take on the same study: http://www.hanen.org/Helpful-Info/Articles/power-turn-taking.aspx http://www.hanen.org/Helpful-Info/Articles/power-turn-taking... We took one of the Hanen Centre parent education courses (“It takes two to talk”). I can’t recommend it highly enough - best training I’ve ever received: http://www.hanen.org/Programs/For-Parents/It-Takes-Two-to-Talk.aspx http://www.hanen.org/Programs/For-Parents/It-Takes-Two-to-Ta...

angel_j 8y ago

File under wisdom lost. I don't know if this asinine study and obvious result should give me hope or dismay. Did people really need a study to tell them that interacting with children is better for them? Countdown 7 years until the public sector of schooling adopts this into state-approved pedagogy.

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]

jcoffland 8y ago

This is one reason why too much phone time can be detrimental to child development. Modern kids are losing out on verbal skills because they are able to "hide" in their phones and avoid talking to adults. It is sad when parents fail to say to their kids, "hey, an adult is speaking to you, pay attention and answer them."

rimliu 8y ago
What makes you think that without phone kids would do talking instead of gazzilion of other activities? Also I am sure having access to iPad helped my daughter to learn way more than I thought she could at that age (e. g. English names for colors; count in English and the alphabet song — before she even was three). Just to clarify — we do not speak English at home. I had no phone or computer. Most of my time was spent in books. (Not bad for the vocabulary, I guess).
- user5454 8y ago
  > having access to iPad helped my daughter to learn way more than I thought she could at that age (e. g. English names for colors; count in English and the alphabet song — before she even was three) While that may sound awesome, I'm not so sure it's better in the long term. Your daughter would've learned the English names of colors and the alphabet eventually anyway. OTOH using phones and pads changes our brains, making us worse and worse at keeping our focus. We become addicted to that something is always changing or moving until reading a book becomes hard. I'd rather start from the other side, reading a lot of books for the kids, letting them learn at a slower rate but with retained ability to focus.
  - dangerface 8y ago
    > OTOH using phones and pads changes our brains, making us worse and worse at keeping our focus. Thats not true: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-38896790 https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-38896790
dangerface 8y ago
"hey, an adult is speaking to you, pay attention and answer them." This is a very one sided attitude and conversation, why would any one want to talk to some one with this attitude? As an adult I can call out this poor attitude, but a child cant, thats why they are hiding in their phone.

tudorw 8y ago

"electronic reminders to parents to engage their children in conversation", did I wake up in Black Mirror ?

jacobush 8y ago
Black Mirror is here, it’s just not evenly distributed yet.
noxToken 8y ago
No. Though seemingly grim, this is actually a good use for technology for people who don't talk too much. I don't speak much. Unless I'm in a group where conversation is free-flowing among all parties, then I'm not saying much. I will ask a direct question to a coworker. I have no issue with talking about something specific. However I can't contribute much to small talk unless someone else is driving the bus. In turn, that makes me a great listener. This is where the electronic reminder would come in handy for me. I've played with nieces, nephews, cousins once removed, and when I was younger, I had a volunteer position with the Boys and Girls Club. I have no problem listening and participating in activities. But newborns and infants need you to speak to them even though they may not speak back. An infant cannot (for all intents and purposes) drive conversation with an adult, so my natural inclination is to make faces, imitate sounds if they're making any, and play. I've seen it while out shopping. Mothers and fathers flying solo with their infants in the cart are getting groceries as usual. However, they're narrating their actions to the child so that the child may get a better grasp on the language. Something like this would have never occurred to me. This isn't a dystopian future where we need robots to remind us to breathe. It's leveraging technology to help every live the best life that they can.
- tudorw 8y ago
  I already see a fairly grim reality around me where adults are spending their time engaging with electronic media over and above engaging with the children around them, theirs or otherwise, you actually state in your reply that you have a natural inclination to do the right thing, I think other options, such as a poster in a place where large numbers of parents gather, or on the wrapping of a child oriented product should be explored before applying a tech oriented solution.

cinspicuous 8y ago

>The important thing is not just to talk to your child, but to talk with your child Taking this to the next level, it's not about about talking per se but having meaningful communication. This entails noting interesting things, fun things and helping the child get what they want, helping the parent get what they want, deciding what to want next, etc. The ability to talk co-evolves with the content i.e. with the reasons to talk.

Angostura 8y ago
My brother bought up his kids beautifully, and when I asked him what the secret was, he simply said 'talk to them like people' which worked for us too. My kids do tend to ask me things me now and prefix it with 'not one of your long answers, though dad'.
- cinspicuous 8y ago
  Detail Dad! >talk to them like people Except that most adult/social conversations are restrictive.
  - Angostura 8y ago
    Not compared with stereotypical parent-child conversations where it is easy to slip into command-based dialogue: "I want to do this", "you can't".
    - cinspicuous 8y ago
      True. And I hope we're moving away from that.
- user5454 8y ago
  > 'not one of your long answers, though dad' I get this a lot too. My 8 yr old daughter frequently tells me she just wants the answer.

gumby 8y ago

Indeed, and the conversation (allowing the child to experiment and reinforce its use of language) extends to reading as well: I remember we never "read" to our child, but always had an engagement '"Pippi jumped onto the roof", hey, do you believe she really could do that?'

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

renox 8y ago

Not so easy to do when you have several children, especially twins..