Kids perceive a lot more than we might think. I know my parents made lots of well-intentioned, passing comments that were nothing to them but stay with me decades later.
While I agree with you about the funniness, I worry that a kid might justifiably feel condescended to by that response and thus lose trust in the responder, an authority figure - especially if that figure is a parent, which is to say, a person they have to trust as an implicit safe figure.
I want my toddler to feel free to say anything to me, be it gibberish or a deep and well articulated philosophical point, and know that they won’t be mocked for it. That’s how they know it’s okay to explore and, if they wish to, share their thoughts. Even if their thoughts don’t make sense to me.
Teasing a kid isn’t inherently wrong, but even before they’re articulate, your response to their words - or gibberish - matters.
That stops being nonsense a lot faster than people think it does. Mothers commonly report knowing if the baby wants food, feels pain, or wants to be held very early. Then at about 6 months they’re trying to learn language, they’ll repeat sounds as best as they can. And at a year they’ll have their first word.
So, yeah a 6 month crawler should be getting full sentences but in baby tone.
There is a big difference between recoding “I am unable to do this currently because I am tied up with other work, ask me in a few hours” to “Daddy’s busy right now sweetie, maybe later?”
and
“Aww whosa sweet wittuh one! My wittle girlie so preshusss!”
I also really dislike this. Making simple noises is the kind of baby talk I can get behind. And then just using fewer words, simple words you want them to learn first. This and talking in higher pitched voices. I’m cool with all that baby talk.
But the latter feels like how parents with “fur babies” (who describe themselves as such) talk to their pets, and drives me up the wall.
Baby talk overemphasizes everything, including repetitions, that makes it easier for babies to actually get what you want and what all those cues are supposed to mean.
So yeah, kind of important, even though it sounds stupid.
That being said, there is a point at which kids should be taken seriously and communicated with accordingly. Some parents talk to relatively old kids like with toddlers and that can’t be healthy either.
Idk man. There’s this 3yr old girl that’s a child of one of our family’s friends. She’s pretty expressive with her vocabulary. Like i can have full blown conversations with this girl without dumbing much down, and i think that might be due to her parents’ pedanticalness.
Children pick up language at different rates. But also, while most kids learn words and build up, some learn to deploy whole chunks.
My cousin could say “Excuse me daddy could I please have a cookie?” at like 2 iirc. It sounds very advanced when you hear it, but she couldn’t, for example, replace ‘a cookie’ with ‘that’ or direct the request to me rather than her dad.
Once kids have learned more and more chunks they can sound very proficient, but it’s still just normal child language acquisition. Of course people gifted in language can happen too.
Also, no one is mentioning that there is still a significant amount of “translating” that has to happen. My kids all picked up language pretty quickly, but unless you are familiar enough with their specific pronunciation and vocabulary, it still sounds like baby talk to outsiders.
For example, last night when I got my 2yo out of the bath, he asked me for help putting on his favorite pajamas, if he could have a cookie, and asked to watch his favorite music video before bed, all in one sentence. But if you didn’t know he pronounces pajamas as “comfy cozies,” cookies are called “treat from under the stairs” and “hear wheelie rainbow neckshun” means watching Willie Nelson’s cover of “Rainbow Connection,” then of course it would sound like gibberish.
A baby’s babbling can express fairly sophisticated grammar and sentence structure if you meet them halfway. And frankly, making it clear that you can understand them expressing their ideas in their own words is highly valuable when it comes to raising healthy, confident kids.
It’s a defined term(with variances of course), means between the age of 1 and 3. Weird definition though, really big difference between a 1 year old and a 3 years old child.
It’s very common for 3 year olds to speak very fluently already. My 2 year old niece babbles a lot but actually makes oddly complex sentences already that makes me pause.
I thought the universal part was the tone and cadence people use when talking to small children, and not the actual words or grammar changes.
It’s why you can listen to a recording of a language you don’t know and tell if they’re talking to a baby, but there are also cultures that essentially don’t talk to them at all until they have language.
I just wonder if it’s true. It’s certainly true for many indo-european languages, but I wonder if there’s been a typological study with a representative sample of languages done for it. I’m not sure I buy it being a language univeral.
I know I’ve read a handful of things roughly a long these line, that basically it’s probably not universal that humans simplify language for infants, but that we likely do shift how we vocalize to them.
Seems like a reasonably plausible hypothesis to me.
Baby-talk is a universal human phenomenal and almost certainly plays an important role in helping kids learn language.
The implication that not using baby talk somehow unlocks rapid development of language is simply not true.
But it’s very funny to respond to babies babbling nonsense with “yes, I see, an intriguing point.”
Another good one is to suddenly look frightened and stammer out h-how could you know that".
This is why the baby stage is so fun and the teenage stage is so damn annoying.
You can always troll teenagers by using their words in slightly off contexts.
No way my parents did that accidentally!
This would drive teenage me crazy, fr fr on god.
No cap tho?
I’m a millennial with a gen z sister, can confirm it’s very swag.
that’s straight bussing, on cap, on cap, no god. super radical yo
Conversely, it’s also very funny to respond to self-important adults babbling nonsense with baby talk.
Kids perceive a lot more than we might think. I know my parents made lots of well-intentioned, passing comments that were nothing to them but stay with me decades later.
While I agree with you about the funniness, I worry that a kid might justifiably feel condescended to by that response and thus lose trust in the responder, an authority figure - especially if that figure is a parent, which is to say, a person they have to trust as an implicit safe figure.
I want my toddler to feel free to say anything to me, be it gibberish or a deep and well articulated philosophical point, and know that they won’t be mocked for it. That’s how they know it’s okay to explore and, if they wish to, share their thoughts. Even if their thoughts don’t make sense to me.
Teasing a kid isn’t inherently wrong, but even before they’re articulate, your response to their words - or gibberish - matters.
That stops being nonsense a lot faster than people think it does. Mothers commonly report knowing if the baby wants food, feels pain, or wants to be held very early. Then at about 6 months they’re trying to learn language, they’ll repeat sounds as best as they can. And at a year they’ll have their first word.
So, yeah a 6 month crawler should be getting full sentences but in baby tone.
Same with pets! I would have long “conversations” with my vocal cat…
There is a big difference between recoding “I am unable to do this currently because I am tied up with other work, ask me in a few hours” to “Daddy’s busy right now sweetie, maybe later?”
and
“Aww whosa sweet wittuh one! My wittle girlie so preshusss!”
I also really dislike this. Making simple noises is the kind of baby talk I can get behind. And then just using fewer words, simple words you want them to learn first. This and talking in higher pitched voices. I’m cool with all that baby talk.
But the latter feels like how parents with “fur babies” (who describe themselves as such) talk to their pets, and drives me up the wall.
Baby talk overemphasizes everything, including repetitions, that makes it easier for babies to actually get what you want and what all those cues are supposed to mean.
So yeah, kind of important, even though it sounds stupid.
That being said, there is a point at which kids should be taken seriously and communicated with accordingly. Some parents talk to relatively old kids like with toddlers and that can’t be healthy either.
Idk man. There’s this 3yr old girl that’s a child of one of our family’s friends. She’s pretty expressive with her vocabulary. Like i can have full blown conversations with this girl without dumbing much down, and i think that might be due to her parents’ pedanticalness.
Children pick up language at different rates. But also, while most kids learn words and build up, some learn to deploy whole chunks.
My cousin could say “Excuse me daddy could I please have a cookie?” at like 2 iirc. It sounds very advanced when you hear it, but she couldn’t, for example, replace ‘a cookie’ with ‘that’ or direct the request to me rather than her dad.
Once kids have learned more and more chunks they can sound very proficient, but it’s still just normal child language acquisition. Of course people gifted in language can happen too.
Also, no one is mentioning that there is still a significant amount of “translating” that has to happen. My kids all picked up language pretty quickly, but unless you are familiar enough with their specific pronunciation and vocabulary, it still sounds like baby talk to outsiders.
For example, last night when I got my 2yo out of the bath, he asked me for help putting on his favorite pajamas, if he could have a cookie, and asked to watch his favorite music video before bed, all in one sentence. But if you didn’t know he pronounces pajamas as “comfy cozies,” cookies are called “treat from under the stairs” and “hear wheelie rainbow neckshun” means watching Willie Nelson’s cover of “Rainbow Connection,” then of course it would sound like gibberish.
A baby’s babbling can express fairly sophisticated grammar and sentence structure if you meet them halfway. And frankly, making it clear that you can understand them expressing their ideas in their own words is highly valuable when it comes to raising healthy, confident kids.
That’s because she’s 3.
Baby talk is for babies.
I thought we were referring to toddlers as well. Oh well
wait, toddlers and babies are significantly different terms? i’ve been speaking english for decades and thought they were effectively just synonyms…
It’s a defined term(with variances of course), means between the age of 1 and 3. Weird definition though, really big difference between a 1 year old and a 3 years old child.
pedanticness … OOOOOHHHHH!
Get off my ass. It’s a word.
I am only giving you a hard time bc (1) it’s funny, all the more so bc (2) you are the police of these matters! :-D
Erm, what can i say. I’m a connoisseur of the archaic.
You don’t wanna get on my bad side pal👮😎🔫
Oh no, I’m in trouble now!
you better watch out for the pedantry
Nobody expects the Spanish Pedantry
I’ve had a similar experience and came to the same conclusion.
I like to answer questions as if an adult had asked them and then provide the dumbed down answer after.
It’s very common for 3 year olds to speak very fluently already. My 2 year old niece babbles a lot but actually makes oddly complex sentences already that makes me pause.
I think it’s both true that baby talk is good for infants and that people infantilize children for far longer than they should
Is it really universal though? I don’t recall that from my linguistics masters at all, in fact I think I recall pretty much the opposite…
I thought the universal part was the tone and cadence people use when talking to small children, and not the actual words or grammar changes.
It’s why you can listen to a recording of a language you don’t know and tell if they’re talking to a baby, but there are also cultures that essentially don’t talk to them at all until they have language.
I just wonder if it’s true. It’s certainly true for many indo-european languages, but I wonder if there’s been a typological study with a representative sample of languages done for it. I’m not sure I buy it being a language univeral.
https://www.cell.com/current-biology/fulltext/S0960-9822(17)31114-4?xid=PS_smithsonian
I know I’ve read a handful of things roughly a long these line, that basically it’s probably not universal that humans simplify language for infants, but that we likely do shift how we vocalize to them.
Seems like a reasonably plausible hypothesis to me.
우리 애기 너어어무 이쁘으찌이이이
Tillykke med dit smukke barn!