April 08, 2004

(In the News) Nauw isnt dat my wittle wittle artist?

OK, I've always thought I would never talk baby talk to my baby. I mean what is the point? I figure hey this would stunt the kids ability to communicate. (But of course I do plan to teach my kids to read holding there books upside down. I mean wouldn’t that be unique... Its bound to help them as there mind is caused to transition to hold the book upright once they get to school) But anyways... back to the main subject

Baby talk. Is it of value? Well a new study shows there could be a link between appreciation for the arts (music/poetry/etc) and baby talk. It has been found that the same patterns in baby talk mimic those of metrics and phonetics found in poetry and music. In other words we are singing to our children (and as my Mom will always will inform you ... its good to sing to your kids (Although I would always cover my ears... saying stop stop) ).

So if you want more creative kids, ones who are well rounded... talk to them in baby talk I guess.... It helps the development of both the emotional and cognitive parts of the brain.

And to help teach those lil geniuses, I recommend you read them the news; Use this link to get started.

Naow...isn't that right... yes it is... yes it is... that’s right

Posted by itzjerm at April 8, 2004 07:42 AM
Comments

sometimes its very hard not to talk baby talk to kids, noting crazy or anything like that, some people sound like they are speaking another language. But I guess it all depends on how cute the kid is.

Posted by: judi at April 8, 2004 08:05 AM

jerm you may be on the right track with the upside down reading thing, I forget the guys name but he invented these goggles that make everything look upsidedown, just to prove how the brain can adjust and the other senses make up for the stunted one. he could even ride a bike with the things on. kind of like when a blind persons hearing and other senses are heightened due to their inability to see.

good stuff

Posted by: case at April 8, 2004 08:57 AM

Is there any truth to the point that instead of talking baby talk you could just read to them and let them listen to highly stimulating music all the time? Then you could spare yourself the horrors of baby talk and still make them more intelligent. How many baby's do you hear of that grow into musical or literary prodigy's? The only ones I hear of are those whose parents read regularly to them or turn on Beethoven or Rachmoninov regularly.

Posted by: keats at April 8, 2004 10:11 AM

good points keats! So everyone play some complex stimulating music for the kids...

recomendations:

radiohead
orbital
Carl Orff
Mogwai
Gustav Mahler

Posted by: itzjerm at April 8, 2004 10:47 AM

I agree, I'd rather see my kids with a good taste in music over a speech impediment. I've seen this happen. A kid in our hall who is now in grade 6 still talks like a baby.....I wonder if her parents think it's still so cute?

Posted by: lea at April 8, 2004 11:48 AM

I've not got the patience for a child to talk babyish to it. I always just talk straight to them, lay down the rules, and let them know I don't play. Got that from my father. . .I think.

Posted by: Young Javann at April 8, 2004 01:46 PM

Jerm you forgot a few .....

Martina McBride
Clay Walker
Gary Allan
Rascal Flatts
Tim McGraw
Reba McEntire

Posted by: amber at April 9, 2004 05:27 AM

the key was COMPLEX stimulating music...

my choices of music was in various genre....

indie/ambient trance/classical

the key is to stimulate the kids, not to stunt there creative ability. I mean thats fine if some people like country (yes this is a new more liberal stance I am holding) but I do believe the key should be to expose the kids to some music which will stimulate there creativity. Country music is inherintly non creative maybe in lyrcis... but not in rhythem... which for a small child is what is the stimulating aspect of the whole process. (I mean i even added groups im not crazy about in my list, but that are "difficult" to listen to... in other words requiring a deeper understanding of the point of the artist and music

Posted by: itzjerm at April 9, 2004 09:27 AM

I would have to agree with Jeremy on this one, sis. While most of the "artists" (and I use that term very loosely) are good at what they do I really don't think they push the edge (with the exception of Rascal Flatts, whose harmonies are actually quite gratifying and stimulating). A band like Tool, whose time signatures are off the wall, would be mentally stimulating even if you didn't like them. Listening to Martina McBride too long only stimulates my sleeping habits.
On a side note, does this mean Kenzies gonna be dumb? Have you taken the perfection of my genes and proverbially urinated in the pool? I gave you the perfect genetic opportunity by allowing you to share my genetic code and you met, married and propogated with another genetically acceptable human and you go and ruin it by forcing the child to listen to Clay Walker sing "If I Could Make A Living Outta Loving You"? She hasn't got a chance!

Posted by: keats at April 9, 2004 12:57 PM

Jerm, I think we need to do that test we did with Willie on a child. Start building a maze and we will play each genre of music to see which stimulates their mind.

Posted by: amber at April 9, 2004 04:05 PM
Post a comment









Remember personal info?