From: Patrick C. Ryan
Message: 26388
Date: 2003-10-12
----- Original Message -----
From: "Brian M. Scott" <BMScott@...>
To: "Patrick C. Ryan" <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Saturday, October 11, 2003 2:41 PM
Subject: Re[4]: [tied] Glen, regarding...
> At 2:06:29 PM on Saturday, October 11, 2003, Patrick C. Ryan
> wrote:
>
> > From: "Brian M. Scott" <BMScott@...>
>
> >> At 3:25:45 PM on Friday, October 10, 2003, Patrick C.
> >> Ryan wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> >>> [PCR] The effort is expended by the correcters.
>
> >> To very little effect; that simply isn't how children learn
> >> language. This is both well-known and readily observable.
>
> > <PCR>Whether peers or parents do the correcting, that
> > is how children attain correct replication.
>
> I said nothing about peers doing any correcting.
<PCR>Yes, it was a serious omission on your part.
>
> > Your premise is not "well-known" or "readily observable".
>
> On the contrary, it is both.
>
> > What would be the incentive for the child to correct his
> > replication if not disapproval and ridicule?
>
> You really can't think of any? How sad. Let's see:
>
> * A desire to be understood.
> * A desire to fit in, to belong.
> * Pleasure in a sense of competence. (The child
> frequently knows perfectly well that its pronunciation
> isn't right; look up the _fis_ phenomenon.)
>
> (And why would you, of all people, expect disapproval and
> ridicule to be particularly effective?!)
<PCR>*How would one know he was not being understood except by disapproval and/or ridicule?
*How would one know he was not fitting in, or belonging, except by absence of disapproval and/or ridicule?
*How would one know he was justified by taking pleasure in his competence except by absence of disapproval and/or ridicule?
As for your last (?!), I think pursuing that question has no real bearing on the question under discussion.
> >>> In the imperfectly replicating population, obviously, by
> >>> definition, newborn infants will not be regularly
> >>> corrected, and no great effort will be necessary.
>
> >> In fact young kids make all sorts of mistakes even if
> >> their parents are fluent native speakers. They may say
> >> 'cimmanon' for 'cinnamon', or 'pasketti' for 'spaghetti';
> >> they may say 'singed' for 'sang'; they may substitute
> >> /t-/ for /f-/ (e.g., 'tunny' for 'funny'). I've
> >> personally encountered all of these, and the first is
> >> actually fairly common. Very often their parents and
> >> other adults waste a great deal of time and energy trying
> >> to correct these mistakes. Why 'waste'? Because it's a
> >> futile exercise: the child will correct the error in his
> >> own good time irrespective of the effort expended.
>
> > <PCR>I do not believe that for one minute.
>
> I'm sure that the facts will take appropriate account of
> your beliefs.
<PCR>Presumably "facts" like your assertion that *NO* neurological differences exist among ethnic groups. Now I will ask you again, what facts, outside of those in your mind, in the form of scientific studies, support your personal credo?
Pat
PATRICK C. RYAN | PROTO-LANGUAGE@... (501) 227-9947 * 9115 W. 34th St. Little Rock, AR 72204-4441 USA WEBPAGES: PROTO-LANGUAGE: http://www.geocities.com/proto-language/ and PROTO-RELIGION: http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Forum/2803/proto-religion/indexR.html "Veit ec at ec hecc, vindgá meiði a netr allar nío, geiri vndaþr . . . a þeim meiþi, er mangi veit, hvers hann af rótom renn." (Hávamál 138)