RE: [AlwaysLearning] Digest Number 454/Re/ trilling your RrrrrrrrR's, attached tongues and tv viewing.
Jon and Rue Kream
Melinda - I am tongue tied. It's never affected my speech, except that I am
unable to trill my r's. My daughter is tt too, and it's not causing her any
problems either. Every doctor she's ever seen has mentioned that they could
clip it if we'd like. WHY??? I'd say the only disadvantage is that my
tongue gets sore when I eat an ice cream cone :0). ~Rue
unable to trill my r's. My daughter is tt too, and it's not causing her any
problems either. Every doctor she's ever seen has mentioned that they could
clip it if we'd like. WHY??? I'd say the only disadvantage is that my
tongue gets sore when I eat an ice cream cone :0). ~Rue
Melinda
Hi All.
I was taught in college biology that the ability to
roll r's was genetic. Something like 8 in 10 can. No
real effort if you are one of the 8. More than
challenging if you are one of the 2. Can't confirm
that is accurate info. as research changes may have
been updated in the last 15 years. But maybe this is
not one they grow out of- but just a pre-determined
thing.
I can RRRRRRrrrrrrrrRRRRR from here to Sunday. I am
also one of those children who had an attached tongue
at the bottom.(I hate the term "tongue tied"; sounds
like you have a fear of speaking.) That attached
tongue is an inherited trait. 2 of my 4 children have
it. When they were infants, my mother suggested that I
should "just have them clipped" as she had done with
me @ 6 months. At the family docs direction. And,
"Look how well you speak." Her fear did not convince
me anymore than it had on other parenting issues she
disagreed with me on.
Well, what do you know. My 2 with the "handicap" are
now 6 and 10. Neither had any real difficulties
pronouncing any sounds. Their eccentricities of
speech lasted about as long as those of my 16 and 11
yo's with the "normal" tongues.
Don't know if they can roll the RRRrrrrrrr's but,
aside from not being able to stick their tongues out
to touch their noses, I don't see any permanent
disadvantage. They did avoid the trauma of being cut
on in the mouth as an infant. Which has to be a
psychic plus.
I should also say that my 10 yo has mild to moderate
hearing loss in both ears as a result of antibiotics
he was given as a preemie. (They quite commonly lead
to nerve damage.) Yet, I had to Insist that our
Pediatrician give him a hearing test to diagnose the
loss when he was 4. (The screenings done as an infant
were in a normal range. It's harder to detect
specific tone deficiencies when they are younger.) I
knew he was missing some sounds.... miss hearing
certain letters... She was astounded when the results
came back confirming my suspicion. Because- he speaks
so well. Perfectly by her standards.
He's the 3rd child. I did nothing different with him.
We just talk so damn much that I think it's a matter
of practice, practice, practice around here. He was a
high needs baby and toddler ... still is some days.
So, maybe all the Required attention did increase his
"talking lessons". But mostly I think it's because we
are a family of talkers. Some families are Huge
Go-ers, Readers, Doers, Athletes, etc........
We all talk. A lot. All the time. I love when I
have time to myself because it is always noisy here
from all the talking. But, I do know that that is how
much of the learning occurs in our family. Discussions
of information. Verbal analyzing. Thoughtful debate.
Story telling, Role playing, etc........
I chalk up the lack of any sound attainment
difficulties to sheer VOLUME. Most of us are
proficient at what we do the most.
And as was previously noted, how many adults can't
make certain sounds? Not too many. I think most kids
learn as they need to and develop strategies for
themselves that work for them in mastering language.
On TV:
Hi Lisa. And any others who still struggle with this
one.
Having been there/done that and figured it out-for us
anyway- just an observation or 2.
**What if you REALLY didn't pay attention to the tv
viewing. What if it REALLY wasn't an issue for you.
You say that you "allow him complete access"
And that you have exhausted your creative abilities in
trying to offer him alternatives to tv viewing.
Can you just STOP trying to lure him away? Can you
forget about it as an issue? Not count the tv time or
think of it as wasted?
Because, while you may not be forcing him to turn it
off, you are surely invested in trying to deter and
decrease his viewing. And he knows it. He knows by
your reaction when he does something else. Your : )
tells him. He knows by the anxious looks you send him
when he's zoned out for the 4th hour in a row. He
knows by the stress that has to be coming in loud and
clear to him- as it's clear as crystal in your post.
He knows.
We did have this issue when we started to unschool. I
imagine we still would if I hadn't REALLY committed
myself to letting it go. You might judge that we have
it now if you came on a day when TV was what held
their interest. It's 101 degrees here today, same as
yesterday. TV is more enjoyable than anything outside
right now. But, it may be left off all day when we
get down to outside play temps again. Or if they are
making caves out of blankets or playing cards or.....
More likely, it gets turned on, looked at for a bit
and then they wander off and go do something else.
If it's clear to me that no one is watching, I'll flip
it off. Usually, I put in a cd when I do as the
stereo is connected to the tv for better sound. I take
a turn with music.
I NEVER make them turn off when they are watching. If
we have an event scheduled or I want to do something
because I want to do it, I will say... Time to go...
and they leave it voluntarily.
They know there will never again be a tv rationing so
it's easy to leave when other things come up that
interest them. Like food. Those who have been starved
or whose food supply is threatened will eat in
anticipation of the next period of want.
One more consideration: I don't know what programs
your son has access to.
We are in an area with digital, which took us from @
60 channels to 250 with no additional cost. We now
have all the Discovery, History, TLC, .........
multi-Disneys, all the really cool channels with
oodles and oodles of choices. Mucho information and
topics of interest.
My children have done an immense amount of learning as
a result of their viewing. They have developed a level
of animal knowledge that far surpasses mine or their
dads. My middle son loves animals and has passed that
on to the other sibs through his heavy viewing of
animal programs. Crocodile Hunter, Jeff Corwin,
Animal Planet shows. Bill Nye and other kid friendly
science programs have spurred on their imaginations
and interests. Same for news programs, history
topics, etc...
TV has become the poster child for laziness. It is an
erroneous correlation. There is just as much good
information and worthy topics of interest on TV as
their are in books. It is in a different form. It
does require discretion of the viewer. But so do
books. Many books are not worthy of the trees that
died for them. Especially text books. Can I say
"YAWN"?
We seem, as a society, to be stuck in that "back in
the good old days" mind-set where tv is concerned.
TV and the internet allow all of us a view of the
world that previous generations could not access. I
can get a photo of virtually any place on the planet.
I don't have to wonder what the favorite food of
Aussies is or how to raise a tadpole or what the
weather is like in Bejing today. Just go look it up.
I think it's Exciting to live in this world we find
ourselves in. The Possibilities are Limitless.
TV can be a part of knowing the rest of the world.
Even most cartoons have a specific world view, whether
it's positive or not ; ) ** What if, instead of
making your disapproval a standing known entity, you
asked him what his Favorite show is an made a date to
watch it with him.
Make his favorite snack. Talk about it during
commercials. What was funny? What did you like, not
like, Why are the characters so _______ whatever they
are? What do you think they like to eat, do with
their parents, etc............. Support his interest.
Let him know that it really is OK with you that he
likes what interests him. Even if it is TV.
Then, just leave it alone. Let it be. Do your thing.
Do the family things and make no judgments on how
much or what. Maybe suggest other shows that he might
like based on his other interests.
If you don't have access to a multitude of channels,
check your library. We went through several series of
animal and science tapes the kids picked out. And all
the old favorites I had as a kid. Classics like "Where
the Wild Things Are", "Mike Mulligan", that donut shop
one where the machine gets stuck, etc...
To me, it sounds more like a power struggle than a TV
problem. If the same conditions were applied to
another activity, you'd likely end up with the same
result. He won't need to hang on to the constant
viewing if he doesn't feel that you are Hoping he will
do something else. He will likely ease up when you do
....... Or maybe he will be the next Larry King or
Tom Brokaw.
:*)
Melinda
=====
: D Melinda
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Health - Feel better, live better
http://health.yahoo.com
I was taught in college biology that the ability to
roll r's was genetic. Something like 8 in 10 can. No
real effort if you are one of the 8. More than
challenging if you are one of the 2. Can't confirm
that is accurate info. as research changes may have
been updated in the last 15 years. But maybe this is
not one they grow out of- but just a pre-determined
thing.
I can RRRRRRrrrrrrrrRRRRR from here to Sunday. I am
also one of those children who had an attached tongue
at the bottom.(I hate the term "tongue tied"; sounds
like you have a fear of speaking.) That attached
tongue is an inherited trait. 2 of my 4 children have
it. When they were infants, my mother suggested that I
should "just have them clipped" as she had done with
me @ 6 months. At the family docs direction. And,
"Look how well you speak." Her fear did not convince
me anymore than it had on other parenting issues she
disagreed with me on.
Well, what do you know. My 2 with the "handicap" are
now 6 and 10. Neither had any real difficulties
pronouncing any sounds. Their eccentricities of
speech lasted about as long as those of my 16 and 11
yo's with the "normal" tongues.
Don't know if they can roll the RRRrrrrrrr's but,
aside from not being able to stick their tongues out
to touch their noses, I don't see any permanent
disadvantage. They did avoid the trauma of being cut
on in the mouth as an infant. Which has to be a
psychic plus.
I should also say that my 10 yo has mild to moderate
hearing loss in both ears as a result of antibiotics
he was given as a preemie. (They quite commonly lead
to nerve damage.) Yet, I had to Insist that our
Pediatrician give him a hearing test to diagnose the
loss when he was 4. (The screenings done as an infant
were in a normal range. It's harder to detect
specific tone deficiencies when they are younger.) I
knew he was missing some sounds.... miss hearing
certain letters... She was astounded when the results
came back confirming my suspicion. Because- he speaks
so well. Perfectly by her standards.
He's the 3rd child. I did nothing different with him.
We just talk so damn much that I think it's a matter
of practice, practice, practice around here. He was a
high needs baby and toddler ... still is some days.
So, maybe all the Required attention did increase his
"talking lessons". But mostly I think it's because we
are a family of talkers. Some families are Huge
Go-ers, Readers, Doers, Athletes, etc........
We all talk. A lot. All the time. I love when I
have time to myself because it is always noisy here
from all the talking. But, I do know that that is how
much of the learning occurs in our family. Discussions
of information. Verbal analyzing. Thoughtful debate.
Story telling, Role playing, etc........
I chalk up the lack of any sound attainment
difficulties to sheer VOLUME. Most of us are
proficient at what we do the most.
And as was previously noted, how many adults can't
make certain sounds? Not too many. I think most kids
learn as they need to and develop strategies for
themselves that work for them in mastering language.
On TV:
Hi Lisa. And any others who still struggle with this
one.
Having been there/done that and figured it out-for us
anyway- just an observation or 2.
**What if you REALLY didn't pay attention to the tv
viewing. What if it REALLY wasn't an issue for you.
You say that you "allow him complete access"
And that you have exhausted your creative abilities in
trying to offer him alternatives to tv viewing.
Can you just STOP trying to lure him away? Can you
forget about it as an issue? Not count the tv time or
think of it as wasted?
Because, while you may not be forcing him to turn it
off, you are surely invested in trying to deter and
decrease his viewing. And he knows it. He knows by
your reaction when he does something else. Your : )
tells him. He knows by the anxious looks you send him
when he's zoned out for the 4th hour in a row. He
knows by the stress that has to be coming in loud and
clear to him- as it's clear as crystal in your post.
He knows.
We did have this issue when we started to unschool. I
imagine we still would if I hadn't REALLY committed
myself to letting it go. You might judge that we have
it now if you came on a day when TV was what held
their interest. It's 101 degrees here today, same as
yesterday. TV is more enjoyable than anything outside
right now. But, it may be left off all day when we
get down to outside play temps again. Or if they are
making caves out of blankets or playing cards or.....
More likely, it gets turned on, looked at for a bit
and then they wander off and go do something else.
If it's clear to me that no one is watching, I'll flip
it off. Usually, I put in a cd when I do as the
stereo is connected to the tv for better sound. I take
a turn with music.
I NEVER make them turn off when they are watching. If
we have an event scheduled or I want to do something
because I want to do it, I will say... Time to go...
and they leave it voluntarily.
They know there will never again be a tv rationing so
it's easy to leave when other things come up that
interest them. Like food. Those who have been starved
or whose food supply is threatened will eat in
anticipation of the next period of want.
One more consideration: I don't know what programs
your son has access to.
We are in an area with digital, which took us from @
60 channels to 250 with no additional cost. We now
have all the Discovery, History, TLC, .........
multi-Disneys, all the really cool channels with
oodles and oodles of choices. Mucho information and
topics of interest.
My children have done an immense amount of learning as
a result of their viewing. They have developed a level
of animal knowledge that far surpasses mine or their
dads. My middle son loves animals and has passed that
on to the other sibs through his heavy viewing of
animal programs. Crocodile Hunter, Jeff Corwin,
Animal Planet shows. Bill Nye and other kid friendly
science programs have spurred on their imaginations
and interests. Same for news programs, history
topics, etc...
TV has become the poster child for laziness. It is an
erroneous correlation. There is just as much good
information and worthy topics of interest on TV as
their are in books. It is in a different form. It
does require discretion of the viewer. But so do
books. Many books are not worthy of the trees that
died for them. Especially text books. Can I say
"YAWN"?
We seem, as a society, to be stuck in that "back in
the good old days" mind-set where tv is concerned.
TV and the internet allow all of us a view of the
world that previous generations could not access. I
can get a photo of virtually any place on the planet.
I don't have to wonder what the favorite food of
Aussies is or how to raise a tadpole or what the
weather is like in Bejing today. Just go look it up.
I think it's Exciting to live in this world we find
ourselves in. The Possibilities are Limitless.
TV can be a part of knowing the rest of the world.
Even most cartoons have a specific world view, whether
it's positive or not ; ) ** What if, instead of
making your disapproval a standing known entity, you
asked him what his Favorite show is an made a date to
watch it with him.
Make his favorite snack. Talk about it during
commercials. What was funny? What did you like, not
like, Why are the characters so _______ whatever they
are? What do you think they like to eat, do with
their parents, etc............. Support his interest.
Let him know that it really is OK with you that he
likes what interests him. Even if it is TV.
Then, just leave it alone. Let it be. Do your thing.
Do the family things and make no judgments on how
much or what. Maybe suggest other shows that he might
like based on his other interests.
If you don't have access to a multitude of channels,
check your library. We went through several series of
animal and science tapes the kids picked out. And all
the old favorites I had as a kid. Classics like "Where
the Wild Things Are", "Mike Mulligan", that donut shop
one where the machine gets stuck, etc...
To me, it sounds more like a power struggle than a TV
problem. If the same conditions were applied to
another activity, you'd likely end up with the same
result. He won't need to hang on to the constant
viewing if he doesn't feel that you are Hoping he will
do something else. He will likely ease up when you do
....... Or maybe he will be the next Larry King or
Tom Brokaw.
:*)
Melinda
=====
: D Melinda
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Health - Feel better, live better
http://health.yahoo.com
[email protected]
In a message dated 7/30/02 4:39:16 PM, melinda2u@... writes:
<< Especially text books. Can I say
"YAWN"? >>
Well yeah, but it would be redundant.
<< Especially text books. Can I say
"YAWN"? >>
Well yeah, but it would be redundant.
[email protected]
In a message dated 7/30/02 4:39:16 PM, melinda2u@... writes:
<< I was taught in college biology that the ability to
roll r's was genetic. Something like 8 in 10 can. >>
Then 20% of Spanish speakers should have a learning disability?
I think the language acquisition theory of any human's ability to learn any
human language beat out the genetics theory a long time ago.
There used to be (in the lifetimes of some of our older grandparents) serious
thoughts that maybe language came along on its own. (It's a stupid and scary
thought, I know...) Kind of along the lines of if wolves raised babies they
would somehow speak ruidimentarily the language of their parents.
Maybe that does come from examples of babies who changed languages as
toddlers and never quite got the nuances. But that part is explained better
by the discouragement of "nonsense" sounds and encouragement of "language"
theory.
Sandra
<< I was taught in college biology that the ability to
roll r's was genetic. Something like 8 in 10 can. >>
Then 20% of Spanish speakers should have a learning disability?
I think the language acquisition theory of any human's ability to learn any
human language beat out the genetics theory a long time ago.
There used to be (in the lifetimes of some of our older grandparents) serious
thoughts that maybe language came along on its own. (It's a stupid and scary
thought, I know...) Kind of along the lines of if wolves raised babies they
would somehow speak ruidimentarily the language of their parents.
Maybe that does come from examples of babies who changed languages as
toddlers and never quite got the nuances. But that part is explained better
by the discouragement of "nonsense" sounds and encouragement of "language"
theory.
Sandra
[email protected]
In a message dated 7/30/02 7:58:50 PM, SandraDodd@... writes:
<< << I was taught in college biology that the ability to
roll r's was genetic. Something like 8 in 10 can. >>
Then 20% of Spanish speakers should have a learning disability? >>
OH never mind. Those who couldn't speak the language wouldn't reproduce as
readily... it would be lower in that population.
Sandra
<< << I was taught in college biology that the ability to
roll r's was genetic. Something like 8 in 10 can. >>
Then 20% of Spanish speakers should have a learning disability? >>
OH never mind. Those who couldn't speak the language wouldn't reproduce as
readily... it would be lower in that population.
Sandra
Cristina Kenski
In a message dated 7/30/02 7:58:50 PM, SandraDodd@... writes:
<<<OH never mind. Those who couldn't speak the language wouldn't reproduce
as
readily... it would be lower in that population.>>>
Sandra,
Maybe it's that I haven't had any coffee yet, but I don't understand your
comment.
Cris (coffee-less) Kenski
<<<OH never mind. Those who couldn't speak the language wouldn't reproduce
as
readily... it would be lower in that population.>>>
Sandra,
Maybe it's that I haven't had any coffee yet, but I don't understand your
comment.
Cris (coffee-less) Kenski
Kate Green
>Kind of Darwinian, survival of the fittest thing???
><<< Those who couldn't speak the language wouldn't reproduce
> as
> >>>
>
>
>
> Sandra,
>
> Maybe it's that I haven't had any coffee yet, but I don't understand your
> comment.
>
> Cris (coffee-less) Kenski
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ADVERTISEMENT
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> [email protected]
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
[email protected]
In a message dated 7/31/02 11:39:55 AM, karegree@... writes:
<< Kind of Darwinian, survival of the fittest thing??? >>
yes. <g>
<< Kind of Darwinian, survival of the fittest thing??? >>
yes. <g>