Speech thinking of children with general underdevelopment of speech. The development of speech. Thinking and speech Thinking and speech specific properties of a person briefly
TEST
in the discipline "General psychology"
Topic: "Thinking and speech"
Introduction
Chapter 1. The concept of thinking and its types.
Chapter 2. The meaning of speech and its types.
Chapter 3. The relationship of thinking and speech.
Conclusion
Introduction
"The problem of thinking and speech belongs to the range of those psychological problems in which the question of the relationship between various psychological functions, various types of activity of consciousness comes to the fore" . The central point of this whole problem is, of course, the question of the relation of thought to the word. All other questions related to this problem are, as it were, secondary and logically subordinate to this first and main question, without the resolution of which even the correct formulation of each of the further and more particular questions is impossible; Meanwhile, it is precisely the problem of interfunctional connections and relations that, oddly enough, is an almost completely undeveloped and new problem for modern psychology.
The problem of thinking and speech - as ancient as the science of psychology itself - is precisely at this point, in the question of the relation of thought to the word, that it is the least developed and the most obscure.
Starting from antiquity, the identification of thinking and speech through psychological linguistics, which declared that thought is “speech minus sound”, and up to modern American psychologists and reflexologists, who consider thought as “an inhibited reflex not revealed in its motor part”, goes through a single line of development of the same idea, which identifies thought and speech. Naturally, all the teachings adjoining this line, by the very essence of their views on the nature of thought and speech, have always faced the impossibility of not only deciding, but even posing the question of the relation of thought to word. If thought and word coincide, if they are one and the same, no relation between them can arise and cannot serve as an object of investigation, just as it is impossible to imagine that the relation of a thing to itself can be an object of investigation.
"L.S. Vygotsky made a significant contribution to the solution of this problem". The word, he wrote, is just as relevant to speech as it is to thought. It is a living cell containing in its simplest form the basic properties inherent in speech thinking as a whole. A word is not a label affixed as an individual name to a separate object. It always characterizes the object or phenomenon denoted by it in a generalized way and, therefore, acts as an act of thinking.
But the word is also a means of communication, so it is part of speech. Being devoid of meaning, the word no longer refers to either thought or speech; acquiring its meaning, it immediately becomes an organic part of both. It is in the meaning of the word, says L.S. Vygotsky, that the knot of that unity, which is called verbal thinking, is tied.
Chapter 1. The concept of thinking and its types.
“Common sense has a wonderful scent, but senile teeth are blunt,” one of its most interesting researchers K. Dunker described the meaning of thinking in such an obvious way, opposing it to common sense. It is difficult to disagree with this, bearing in mind that thinking in its highest creative human forms is not reduced to either intuition or life experience, which form the basis of the so-called "common sense". What is thinking?
First of all, thinking is the highest cognitive process. It is a product of new knowledge, an active form of creative reflection and transformation of reality by a person. Thinking generates such a result, which does not exist either in reality itself or in the subject at a given moment in time. Thinking (animals also have it in elementary forms) can also be understood as the acquisition of new knowledge, the creative transformation of existing ideas.
Thinking is the movement of ideas, revealing the essence of things. Its result is not an image, but some thought, an idea. A specific result of thinking can be concept- a generalized reflection of a class of objects in their most general and essential features.
Thinking is a special kind of theoretical and practical activity that involves a system of actions and operations included in it of an orienting-research, transformative and cognitive nature.
Basic types of thinking.
Theoretical conceptual thinking - this is such thinking, using which a person, in the process of solving a problem, refers to concepts, performs actions in the mind, without directly dealing with the experience obtained with the help of the senses. He discusses and looks for a solution to the problem from beginning to end in his mind, using ready-made knowledge obtained by other people, expressed in a conceptual form, judgments, conclusions. Theoretical conceptual thinking is characteristic of scientific theoretical research.
The main types of thinking in humans
Theoretical figurative thinking differs from the conceptual one in that the material that a person uses here to solve a problem is not concepts, judgments or conclusions, but images. They are either directly retrieved from memory or creatively recreated by the imagination. Such thinking is used by workers in literature, art, in general, people of creative work who deal with images.
Both considered types of thinking - theoretical conceptual and theoretical figurative - in reality, as a rule, coexist. They complement each other quite well, reveal to a person different, but interconnected aspects of being.
Visual-figurative thinking - its distinctive feature is that the thought process in it is directly connected with the perception of the surrounding reality by a thinking person, and cannot be carried out without it. Thinking visually and figuratively, a person is attached to reality, and the images themselves necessary for thinking are presented in his short-term and operative memory (in contrast, images for theoretical figurative thinking are retrieved from long-term memory and then transformed).
This form of thinking is most fully and extensively represented in children of preschool and primary school age, and in adults - among people engaged in practical work. This kind of thinking is sufficiently developed in all people who often have to make a decision about the objects of their activity, only by observing them, but without directly touching them.
Visual-effective thinking Its peculiarity lies in the fact that the process of thinking itself is a practical transformational activity carried out by a person with real objects. The main condition for solving the problem in this case is the correct actions with the appropriate objects. This type of thinking is widely represented among people engaged in real production work, the result of which is the creation of any specific material product.
Note that the listed types of thinking act simultaneously as levels of its development. Theoretical thinking is considered more perfect than practical, and conceptual thinking represents a higher level of development than figurative.
“The difference between theoretical and practical types of thinking, according to B.M. Teplov, is only that “they are connected in different ways with practice ... theoretical thinking is aimed mainly at finding common patterns.
Chapter 2. The meaning of speech and its types.
“The problem of speech is usually posed in psychology in the context of thinking and speech. Indeed, speech is especially closely connected with thinking. The word expresses a generalization, since it is a form of existence of a concept, a form of existence of a thought. Genetically, speech arose along with thinking in the process of social and labor practice and developed in the process of the socio-historical development of mankind in unity with thinking. But speech still goes beyond the limits of correlation with thinking. Emotional moments also play a significant role in speech: speech correlates with consciousness as a whole.
To a large extent, thanks to speech, the individual consciousness of each person, not limited to personal experience, his own observations, through the medium of language is fed and enriched by the results of social experience; the observations and knowledge of all people become or can become the property of everyone through speech.
At the same time, speech opens the consciousness of another person in a peculiar way, making it accessible to multifaceted and subtlest nuanced influences. Being included in the process of real practical relations, the general activity of people, speech through a message (expression, impact) includes human consciousness in it. Thanks to speech, the consciousness of one person becomes a given for another.
Speech is the activity of communication - expression, influence, communication - through language, speech is language in action. Speech, both one with language and different from it, is the unity of a certain activity - communication - and a certain content, which designates and, designating, reflects being. More precisely, speech is a form of existence of consciousness (thoughts, feelings, experiences) for another, serving as a means of communication with him, and a form of a generalized reflection of reality, or a form of existence of thinking.
There are different types of speech: gesture speech and sound speech, written and oral, external and internal.
Modern speech is par excellence sound speech, but in the predominantly sound speech of modern man, gesture plays a certain role. In the form of, for example, a pointing gesture, he often supplements with a reference to the situation what is not said or unambiguously defined in the context of sound speech; in the form of an expressive gesture, it can give a special expression to a word or even introduce a new shade into the semantic content of sound speech. Thus, in sound speech there is some interrelation and complementarity of sound and gesture, the semantic context of sound speech and the more or less visual and expressive situation into which the gesture introduces us; the word and the situation in it usually complement each other, forming, as it were, a single whole.
However, at present sign language(mimicry and pantomime) is only, as it were, an accompaniment to the main text of sound speech: a gesture in our speech has only an auxiliary, secondary meaning. Speech, in which gesture and the concrete situation play the main role, is graphic and expressive, but not very suitable for conveying any abstract content, for conveying a logically coherent, systematic train of thought. The pure speech of gestures, which, rather, depicts what it means, or, in any case, means it only by depicting it, is primarily a form of existence of sensorimotor, visual-effective thinking. The development of human thinking is essentially connected with the development of articulate sound speech. Since the relation of the word and the signified in sound speech is more abstract than the relation of the gesture to what it represents or points to, sound speech presupposes a higher development of thought; on the other hand, more generalized and abstract thinking, in turn, needs sound speech for its expression. Thus, they are interconnected and in the process of historical development were interdependent.
Oral speech (as colloquial speech, speech-conversation in conditions of direct contact with the interlocutor) and written speech are also significantly different from each other.
Written speech And oral are in a relatively complex relationship with each other. They are closely related to each other. But their unity also includes very significant differences. Modern written language is alphabetic in nature; signs of written speech - letters - denote the sounds of oral speech. However, written language is not simply a translation of spoken language into written signs. The differences between them do not boil down to the fact that written and oral speech use different technical means. They are deeper. Great writers are well known who were weak orators, and eminent orators whose speeches, when read, lose much of their charm.
Written and oral speech usually perform different functions.
Oral speech for the most part functions as colloquial speech in a conversation situation, written speech - as business, scientific, more impersonal speech, intended not for the directly present interlocutor.
In this case, written speech is aimed primarily at conveying more abstract content, while oral, colloquial speech is mostly born from direct experience.
Hence a number of differences in the construction of written and oral speech and in the means that each of them uses.
With all the differences that exist between written and oral speech, however, one cannot outwardly oppose them to each other. Neither oral nor written speech is a homogeneous whole. There are various types of both oral and written speech.
Oral speech can be, on the one hand, colloquial speech, speech-conversation, on the other hand, speech, oratory, report, lecture.
There are also various varieties of written speech: the letter will differ significantly in character and style from the speech of a scientific treatise; epistolary style - a special style; it is much closer to the style and general character of oral speech. On the other hand, a speech, a public speech, a lecture, a report, in some respects, are in some respects much closer to written speech.
They are essentially different from each other, and, moreover, also in their attitude to thinking, external, loud oral speech and internal speech, which we mainly use when, thinking to ourselves, we mold our thoughts into verbal formulations.
inner speech differs from the external not only in that external sign that it is not accompanied by loud sounds, that it is “speech minus sound”. Inner speech is different from outer speech in its function. While performing a different function than external speech, it differs from it in some respects also in its structure; flowing in other conditions, it as a whole undergoes some transformation. Not intended for another, inner speech allows "short circuits"; it is often elliptical, omitting what the user takes for granted.
Inner speech is also social in its content. The statement that inner speech is speech with oneself is not entirely accurate. And inner speech is mostly addressed to the interlocutor. Sometimes it is a specific, individual interlocutor. Inner speech can be inner conversation. It happens, especially with a tense feeling, that a person is having an internal conversation with another person, saying in this imaginary conversation everything that, for one reason or another, he could not tell him in a real conversation. But even in cases where inner speech does not take on the character of an imaginary conversation with a certain interlocutor, then it is devoted to reflection, reasoning, argumentation, and then it is addressed to some kind of audience.
It would be wrong to intellectualize inner speech entirely. Internal speech-conversation (with an imaginary interlocutor) is often emotionally saturated. But there is no doubt that thinking is especially closely connected with inner speech. Therefore, thinking and inner speech were repeatedly identified. It is precisely in connection with inner speech that the question of the relationship between speech and thinking in its general, fundamental form arises with particular acuteness.
"The main function of speech in humans yet consists in the fact that it is an instrument of thought.
Chapter 3. The relationship of thinking and speech.
“Associated with consciousness as a whole, human speech is included in certain relationships with all mental processes; but the main and determining factor for speech is its relation to thinking.
Since speech is a form of existence of thought, there is unity between speech and thinking. But this is unity, not identity. Equally unjustified is the establishment of identity between speech and thinking, and the idea of speech as merely an external form of thought.
Behavioral psychology has tried to establish an identity between them, essentially reducing thinking to speech. For a behaviorist, thought is nothing but “the activity of the speech apparatus” (J. Watson). K.S. Lashley in his experiments tried to detect by means of special equipment the movements of the larynx, which produce speech reactions. These verbal responses are made by trial and error, they are not intellectual operations.
Such a reduction of thinking to speech signifies the abolition of not only thinking, but also of speech, because, by preserving only reactions in speech, it abolishes their significance. In reality, speech is speech insofar as it has a conscious meaning. Words, as visual images, sound or visual, in themselves do not yet constitute speech. We sometimes look for and do not find a word or expression for an already existing and yet verbally unformed thought; we often feel that what we say does not express what we think; we discard the word that comes up to us as inadequate to our thought: the ideological content of our thought regulates its verbal expression. Therefore, speech is not a set of reactions performed according to the method of trial and error or conditioned reflexes: it is an intellectual operation. It is impossible to reduce thinking to speech and establish identity between them, because speech exists as speech only due to its relation to thinking.
But it is also impossible to separate thought and speech from each other. Speech is not just the outer garment of thought that it throws off or puts on without thereby changing its being. Speech, the word serve not only to express, to take out, to transfer to another thought already prepared without speech. In speech we formulate a thought, but in formulating it, we often form it. Speech here is something more than an external instrument of thought; it is included in the very process of thinking as a form associated with its content. By creating a speech form, thinking itself is formed. Thought and speech, without being identified, are included in the unity of one process. Thinking in speech is not only expressed, but for the most part it is done in speech.
In those cases where thinking takes place mainly not in the form of speech in the specific sense of the word, but in the form of images, these images essentially perform the function of speech in thinking, since their sensory content functions in thinking as the bearer of its semantic content. That is why it can be said that thinking is generally impossible without speech: its semantic content always has a sensual carrier, more or less processed and transformed by its semantic content. This does not mean, however, that a thought always and immediately appears in a ready-made speech form, accessible to others. Thought usually arises in the form of tendencies, at first having only a few outlined reference points, not yet fully formed. From this thought, which is even more a tendency and a process than a completed, formed formation, the transition to a thought formed in the word is accomplished as a result of often very complex and sometimes difficult work. In the process of speech formation, the thoughts of work on the speech form and on the thought that takes shape in it mutually pass into each other.
Like form and content, speech and thinking are connected by complex and often contradictory relationships. Speech has its own structure, which does not coincide with the structure of thinking: grammar expresses the structure of speech, logic expresses the structure of thinking; they are not the same. Since the forms of thinking of the era when the corresponding forms of speech arose are deposited and imprinted in speech, these forms, being fixed in speech, inevitably diverge from the thinking of subsequent eras. Speech is more archaic than thought. By virtue of this alone, it is impossible to directly identify thinking with speech, which preserves archaic forms in itself. Speech generally has its own "technique". This "technique" of speech is connected with the logic of thought, but is not identical with it.
The presence of unity and the lack of identity between thinking and speech clearly appear in the process of reproduction. The reproduction of abstract thoughts is usually cast in a verbal form, which, as established in a number of studies, including those conducted by our colleagues A.G. Komm and E.M. Gurevich, is significant, sometimes positive, sometimes - if the initial reproduction is false - inhibitory influence on the memory of thought. At the same time, the memorization of thought, semantic content is largely independent of the verbal form. Experiment has shown that memory for thoughts is stronger than memory for words, and it often happens that a thought is retained, but the verbal form in which it was originally clothed falls out and is replaced by a new one. It also happens that the opposite happens - so that the verbal formulation is preserved in the memory, and its semantic content is, as it were, weathered out; Obviously, the speech verbal form is not in itself a thought, although it can help to restore it. These facts convincingly confirm, on a purely psychological level, the proposition that the unity of thought and speech cannot be interpreted as their identity.
The statement about the irreducibility of thinking to speech applies not only to external, but also to internal speech. The identification of thinking and inner speech found in literature is untenable. It obviously proceeds from the fact that speech, in contrast to thinking, refers only to sound, phonetic material. Therefore, where, as is the case in inner speech, the sound component of speech disappears, nothing is seen in it other than the mental content. This is wrong, because the specificity of speech does not at all boil down to the presence of sound material in it. It lies, first of all, in its grammatical - syntactic and stylistic - structure, in its specific speech technique. Such a structure and technique, moreover, a peculiar, reflecting the structure of external, loud speech and at the same time different from it, inner speech also has. Therefore, inner speech is not reduced to thinking, and thinking is not reduced to it.
Speech thinking is a complex dynamic whole in which the relationship between thought and word is revealed as a movement that passes through a whole series of internal plans: from motive to thought - to its mediation in the internal word - in the meanings of external words - and, finally, in words.
Conclusion
“If we try to briefly formulate the results of historical work on the problem of thinking and speech in scientific psychology, we can say that the entire solution to this problem, which was proposed by various researchers, has always and constantly fluctuated - from the most ancient times to the present day - between two extreme poles - between identification, the complete merging of thought and word, and between their equally metaphysical, equally absolute, equally complete rupture and separation. Expressing one of these extremes in a pure form, or combining both of these extremes in their constructions, occupying, as it were, an intermediate point between them, but all the time moving along an axis located between these polar points, various teachings about thinking and speech revolved in one and the same vicious circle, the way out of which has not been found so far.
In this work, only a small part of the problem of thinking and speech, their conceptual meaning, types and relationship was considered, and on the basis of this we can conclude that:
There is a unity between speech and thinking. But this is unity, not identity.
Speech and thinking are connected by complex and often contradictory relationships.
· In the unity of thinking and speech, thinking, not speech, is leading.
Speech and thinking arise in a person in unity on the basis of social and labor practices.
The unity of speech and thinking is concretely carried out in various forms for different types of speech.
List of used literature
1. L.S. Rubinstein "Fundamentals of General Psychology", St. Petersburg, 2001.
2. R.S. Nemov "General foundations of psychology", in 3 books, 4th edition, book 1.
3. L.S. Vygotsky "Thinking and speech", 5th ed., corrected, publishing house "Labyrinth", M., 1999.
4. K. Dunker. Approaches to the study of productive thinking // Reader in general psychology. Psychology of thinking. M… 1981.
Natalia Rotar
Speech thinking of children with general underdevelopment of speech
Thinking of adults and children who have violations speeches, is one of the central problems of neuropsychology and defectology. Its special significance is determined by the fact that it concentrates a number of other acute problems and issues, the solution of which to a certain extent depends on the correct understanding of the relationship. thinking and speech, as well as internal patterns of development and decay of the higher mental functions of a person as a whole.
The extreme complexity and diversity of this problem calls for the implementation of a variety of approaches to its study, and above all, to the study of such basic mechanisms or "units" thinking what are the meanings of words, inner speech and speech-thinking action.
Psychological structure thinking
In Soviet psychology, the question of the psychological structure of thinking as one of the highest forms of reflective mental activity of a person (L. S. Vygotsky, 1956, 1960; S. L. Rubinstein, 1958; A. N. Leontiev, 1965, 1975;
P. Ya. Galperin, 1959, 1966; O. K. Tikhomirov, 1969; Zh. I. Shif, 1968; and etc.).
According to modern concepts, mental activity in the presence of a stable cognitive need and task consists of a complex hierarchically organized system of separate links and stages, which are multi-level mental processes interacting with each other. (mental actions and operations).
Schematically different stages thinking are presented in the following form. At the first stage, a preliminary orientation in the conditions of the task is carried out, an analysis of its components, and the identification of its essential features and relationships. At the second stage, one of the paths is chosen, along which mental activity develops in the future. (development of a common strategy thinking) . At the next - executive - stage, a search is made for appropriate methods (operations aimed at completing the task. This search is carried out, as a rule, through the selection of intermediate goals and the implementation of intermediate auxiliary mental actions and operations. Such operations are socially developed and learned during life, automated and internalized objective actions, meanings and logical schemes. At the fourth stage, the actual solution of the mental problem is performed - finding the final answer. Then, at the last, fifth stage, the result obtained is compared with the initial conditions of the problem. If the result is consistent with the initial conditions, the thought process ends. If does not agree, then the process of mental activity resumes from the stages of additional orientation in the initial conditions and the search for other ways to solve the problem until an adequate solution is found that is consistent with the initial conditions. viami.
All these stages with their components constitute the psychological structure of any motivated purposeful mental activity.
In turn, the stages themselves have a complexly organized internal structure, which includes such "units" mental activity, as mental actions and operations.
In the existing generally accepted classification, there are three main forms thinking, which are both genetic levels: visual-effective, visual-figurative and verbal-logical thinking. Each of these types thinking has a fundamentally general psychological structure in accordance with the stages described above. At the same time, depending on the level of the thought process and the nature of the task, actions and operations can be visual-effective (functioning in terms of visual-object manipulations, visual-figurative (based on figurative representations and specific verbal meanings) and abstract (based on generalized language meanings, numbers and logical schemes).
It is important to note here that the individual meaning of a word, just like the mental activity itself, is not an integral and further indecomposable spiritual act. It also has a complex system structure. According to L. S. Vygotsky, the meaning of words is "unity thinking and speech» , which is "the product of a long and complex process of development of the child thinking». (16, p. 160).
Understanding the meanings of words as internal mobile mental operations (or ways of performing mental actions) I also find it in A. N. Leontiev. The author notes that in the process of forming meanings in ontogenesis, the child, learning to perform certain actions with specific objects, masters the corresponding operations and ways of handling them; these operations "in their compressed, idealized form" and are presented in individual verbal meanings (first in concrete, that is, directly related to the subject, and later in abstract, highly generalized). (15, p. 142).
From the above characteristics of the psychological structure thinking and the meaning of the word shows how complex and multifactorial human mental activity is organized. It also follows from this that a serious study of the process thinking in children with speech underdevelopment cannot be carried out in any productive way without taking into account its main stages and components, as well as without a psychological analysis of the meaning of the word.
Structure of word meanings
It is well known that the abstract verbal thinking can be performed only on the basis of verbal meanings, concepts and logical operations. As A. N. Leontiev notes, “meanings represent the ideal form of existence of the objective world, its properties, connections and relations, transformed and folded in the matter of language” (16, p. 141, and the movement of abstract values, numerical and logical operations “constitutes an internal mental activity "in terms of consciousness" (16, p. 142).
There is a fairly large psychological literature, in which, from the standpoint of ideas about the semantic structure of the word, developed by L. S. Vygotsky (6) describes various aspects of the violation of the structure of the meanings of words in patients with general underdevelopment of speech(A. R. Luria, 1947, 1969, 1975; E. S. Bein, 1947, 1961; E. S. Bein, P. A. Ovcharova, 1970; V. M. Kogan, 1962; L. S. Tsvetaeva , 1972; T. V. Ryabova, 1968; I. T. Vlasenko, 1971, 1976a, 1976; and others). All these studies are somehow aimed at developing the problem of the decay of the system of interaction speech and thinking in speech pathology, which is of paramount importance for practice speech therapy and a deeper understanding of relationships normal speech and thinking. (3, p. 6)
The word designation of objects, actions, qualities and relationships is one of the main functions speeches- naming function. It involves, first of all, finding and implementing the sound composition of the word by the subject. (in accordance with the lexical and grammatical rules of the language) when the corresponding subject image appears. At the same time, a verbal designation is not a simple linear association of a visual image of an object with a conditional complex of sounds that make up a word. It is, especially when naming an object in difficult conditions, a complex psychological process that involves the implementation of a whole complex of mental and speech operations: active orientation in the attributes of the object, highlighting the leading ones, assigning the object to a certain category while inhibiting secondary non-essential alternatives and selective selection of the most significant designations. Naming, therefore, is not only and not even so much an optical-acoustic-motor act of searching for a word, but a complex speech-thinking action aimed at the realization in the word of its psychological and linguistic (lexical) values.
This general the thesis is confirmed by a number of works (G. L. Rozengart-Pupko, 1947, 1948, 1963; N. Kh. Shvachkin, 1948; A. R. Luria, F. Ya. Yudovich, 1956; V. F. Sergeev, 1957; Ya. Ya. Meyerson, 1958; A. A. Lyublinskaya, 1955, 1966; and others devoted to the psychological study of the formation of perception, speech and thinking in a young child.
In all these studies, the idea of L. S. Vygotsky is concretized that all mental functions, including the function of verbal designation, are psychological systems formed in phylo- and ontogenesis. They are the ones "unities of a higher order", those complex formations that work in no other way than "one into the other", as if "overlapping" each other and growing one from the other (27) .
G. L. Rozengart-Pupko draws attention to the fact that in a child of about one year of life, in the course of communication with him an adult who points out objects to him, “the name of the object is based on the visual perception of the child in the process of his cognitive activity.” By the end of the year, the child's understanding of the named object, as well as its actual naming, is difficult. speech-thinking operation, which includes visual and auditory perception, groping actions of the hand, the selection process, and, finally, activity speech motor apparatus. (20, p. 58).
The child of the beginning of the second year of life, according to G. L. Rozengart-Pupko, called the word "Mu Mu" or "forging" and a cow, and a rhinoceros, and an elephant, generalizing them but in the presence of horns or a trunk, for which the child usually took toys. The same method of action with different objects, the same speech-thinking the operation leads to the fact that the child applies the same name to them. For example, the word "pi" (drink) or "tash" (Cup) the child denotes a cup, teapot, saucer and various other utensils, as well as an action "drink". (20, p. 107).
Thus, children this age due to the fact that verbal connections are still undifferentiated and have not acquired a systemic character, words-names often do not refer to a specific object or a number of objects of the same type, but denote a group of objects or actions generalized according to random, insignificant features.
Only gradually the generalizing function of the word, the structure of its meaning, under the directed influence of adults, is rebuilt, realized and systematized. This restructuring occurs in the process of assimilation by the child of the social purpose of objects and methods of action with them. The formation of the subject relatedness of the word-name occurs inextricably linked with the formation of the meanings of words (this, according to L, S. Vygotsky, unity thinking and speech, as well as value systems. And if sounding (physical) side of the word is used and assimilated by the child unconsciously, then, as L. S. Vygotsky emphasized, “the concepts themselves are the product of a long and complex process of development of the child thinking the concept arises in the process of an intellectual operation, in the process of conscious translation of this operation "from the plane of action to the plane of language". (5, p. 160).
A. N. Leontiev notes that speech actions at a certain stage of phylogenetic development perform a cognitive function, acquiring a purely internal character and representing a special range of internal mental processes that are speech only in the sense that "their fabric is formed by linguistic meanings". (15) .
IN speech-thinking in the action of the verbal designation of an object, certain operations, for example, operations that search for the sound composition of a word and motor speech operations, can be attributed by their genesis to "unconscious". Operations of the perceptual and mental levels - to "conscious", i.e., to operations into which perceptual and mental actions gradually turned (previously conscious and purposeful, which, in turn, before becoming such, went through a long path of transformation (interiorization) from the most developed material actions with objects. In the act of denoting an object verbally, perceptual and mental operations took the form of a highly automated skill. Therefore, under normal conditions, naming is instantaneous. The composition of the operations included in naming is practically not realized, but this does not mean that they have lost the main features of the conscious process. In difficult conditions (when naming an unfamiliar or unusual object, when naming an object perceived "to the touch" with closed eyes, when naming in a sleepy state and in conditions speech pathology) all these operations can again be realized and deployed, acquiring the form of a sequential "intellectualized" speech-thinking process, which already consists of a number of purposeful actions (indicative, executive, control - by function; perceptual, mental, external speech - in form). Under normal conditions, these actions again turn into instant unconscious operations. (16) .
Word substitutions
Word substitutions (verbal paraphasias) in patients with general underdevelopment of speech are complex and interesting speech pathology which is currently being studied. not enough, despite the fact that it has long been known and described by many authors.
One of the most striking indicators insufficient The study of this problem is, for example, the fact that in dictionaries and manuals, verbal paraphasia is still defined only as “the replacement of some words by others, most often close in sound composition (word table)» (8, p. 263) or, which is the same as "mixing similar-sounding words". (1, p. 160) This testifies to that at present there is no single generally accepted definition of verbal substitutions; many authors adhere to the old point of view, according to which sound similarity is the only basis for the emergence of verbal substitutions.
According to modern literature data, the majority of verbal paraphasias in patients with general underdevelopment of speech lies compensatory semantic restructuring of the disturbed speech system.
Verbal substitutions when naming objects
Verbal paraphasia, as noted by many authors, is primarily a verbal error that occurs in conditions of difficult actualization of verbal meanings and includes the defectiveness of both denoting and generalizing functions of the word. Depending on a number of reasons, the quality characteristics are not the same. (or types) emerging verbal substitutions (P. Ya. Galperin, R. A. Golubova, 1933; M. S. Lebedinsky, 1941; B. G. Ananiev, 1960; E. S. Bain, 1947, 1961; P. A. Ovcharova, 1970). (3, p. 35).
Verbal substitutions can occur on the basis of phonemic and phonetic patterns. (I type).
Word substitutions (II type) arise on the basis of other aspects, namely, on the basis of the inertia of physiological processes. The most elementary form of verbal substitutions for this is paraphasia-perseveration.
Paraphasias, included in type III, are psychologically more complex verbal “substitutions. These are the so-called semantic “complex paraphasias. They are arose: 1) either on the basis of the allocation in terms of presentation of a common visual sign; 2) either on the basis of the division of connections of a specific situational nature.
Verbal paraphasias included in the following, type IV and classified as "substitutions within categories of concepts", differ significantly in the psychological mechanism of occurrence from paraphasia of the complex type.
Other neologism substitutions are also formed by all the rules of grammar (cf. (towel) etc.).
Thus, paraphasia-neologisms are new words that have arisen on the basis of isolating a separate feature, designed according to all the rules of word-formation grammar. And if, according to the content-semantic mechanisms, this type of paraphasia is related to the substitutions of the complex type, according to its grammatical features, it stands "above" paraphasia "within the categories of concepts", as it approaches the characteristics of adequately updated words.
In patients with general underdevelopment of speech there are also so-called negative paraphasias or replacements through (according to the terminology of P. Ya. Gal-rin and R. P. Golubova, 1933) (VI type).
Paraphasia through is not found in almost every listed types of substitutions. They are interesting not only from a typological point of view, but from the point of view of analyzing the development of the process of verbal designation in conditions of difficult actualization. Paraphasias through do not represent paraphasias timely noticed by the patient himself, which involuntarily arose in the mind of the patient and then were rejected through the denial of not.
Sometimes patients have paraphasia of unknown origin. These include such verbal substitutions as instead of a shovel a book, a cup, a place for a sheep a fisherman and some others.
Verbal substitutions when naming actions
According to the structural characteristics, verbal substitutions that arose in the process of naming the action of an object (or his fortunes). Part of the paraphasia is combined into types according to the same "nominative" replacement principles. These include verbal paraphasias I (replacements on the axis of non-differentiation of the sound composition of the word, II (replacements of perseverative genesis, VI (negative paraphasias) and VII (substitutions of unknown genesis) types.
"Verbs" paraphasia types I and II, as well as "nominative" paraphasias of these types reflect neurodynamic changes directly related to primary defects.
The meaning of a word is understood as its content side, which includes not only the formation that is directly expressed by the sound, but also all the essential features, accompanying connections and relationships that the potential objects denoted by the word have. (A. A. Leontiev). In other words, the content structure of a word denoting an object potentially has not only denotative properties (related directly to the subject of thought, but also connotative properties (accompanying “semantic layers”). These "semantic layers" an integral part is included in the main content of the word in the form of knowledge, feelings, ideas about the properties and qualities of the objects denoted by this word.
Paraphasias included in type III are classified as "substitutions based on the selection of a visually perceived static element from the general composition of the action." Substitutions of this type reflect the pathological adynamism of the internal speech-thinking search and the rigid dependence of the process of actualization of the word denoting the action on the visually perceived objects of the action, which is manifested in the non-differentiation of the grammatical category.
Verbal paraphasias, combined into the next, IV type, are fundamentally different in nature and meaning from the substitutions of the previous type. Their occurrence is based on the allocation and generalization by patients of dynamic elements or procedural signs of action,
constituting the main content of the semantic structure of the verb. These replacements arise:
a) either on the basis of the allocation of a dynamic element from the general composition of the action;
b) either on the basis of the selection of an equivalent or higher level of generalization of a dynamic feature.
Verbal substitutions of the following, type V (replacements - neologisms) according to the mechanism of occurrence, they are related to the paraphasias of the previous, type IV and with good reason can be attributed to "dynamic" substitutions, since they, like the previous ones, arise on the basis of the allocation of a dynamic (operational) element from the general composition of the action. However, their difference lies in the fact that the selection of a dynamic feature in the first case leads to the actualization of another word, denoting either a completely different action, or an integral part of a given action, and in paraphasia-neologisms, a new verb is created according to all the rules of grammar, followed by its unique "meaning-neologism", which reflects only one or a few secondary dynamic features. For example, the patient said instead of the word sniffing, breathing, sneezing; instead of knitting - meshing; sick: instead of shooting, bullet-chasing, bullet-shooting; sick: instead of sniffing, puffing, etc.
Verbal substitutions-neologisms, as well as paraphasias-neologisms that arose in the experiment with the naming of an object, are an expression of the patient's word creation in the face of difficulty in updating the word and its meaning.
These are the meaningful psychological characteristics of verb substitutions "dynamic" (IV and V) type, which, according to the mechanism of occurrence, i.e., according to the composition speech-thinking operations, has been shown to be fundamentally different from verbal paraphasia "static" (III) type, since the basis of paraphasia "dynamic" type lies the selection and generalization of the leading in function (i.e., procedural, but always secondary in terms of internal content side of the meaning of the verb.
Thus, children with primary speech pathology have in common underdevelopment of speech. Nominative function speeches when naming objects and actions children are sufficiently developed(within the widely colloquial vocabulary).
Literature
1. Arkhangelsky G. V. Guide to practical exercises in neurology. M., 1971.
2. Bogdanov - Berezovsky M. V. Non-speaking and poorly speaking children in the intellectual and in terms of speech. SPb., 1979.
3. Vlasenko I. T. Features of the verbal thinking of adults and children with speech disorders. - M .: Pedagogy, 1990.
4. Volkova G. A. Methods of psychological and speech therapy examination children with speech disorders. Issues of differential diagnosis. - St. Petersburg: Childhood Press, 2004.
5. Vygotsky L. S. Selected psychological research. M., 1976.
6. Vygotsky L. S. Thinking and speech. M., 1984.
7. Vygotsky L. S. Development of higher mental functions. M., 1985.
8. Defectological Dictionary / Ed. A. I. Dyachkova. M., 1970.
9. Diagnostics in kindergarten. The content and organization of diagnostic work in a preschool educational institution. Toolkit. Rostov n / a.: Phoenix, 2003
10. Zhukova N. S., Mastyukova E. M., Filicheva T. B. Overcoming the common underdevelopment of speech in preschool children. – M.: Enlightenment, 1990.
11. Ilyuk M. A., Volkova G. A. speech card for examining a child of preschool age with general underdevelopment of speech. - St. Petersburg, KARO, 2004.
12. Queen L. A. Speech anomalies in children school age and the fight against them. Kharkov, 1978.
13. Kussmaul A. Disorders speeches: Experiences of Pathology speeches. Kyiv, 1979.
14. Levina R. E. To child psychology speeches in pathological cases (autonomous children's speech, M., 1976.
15. Leontiev A. N. Problems of the development of the psyche. M., 1983
16. Leontiev A. N. Activity, consciousness, personality. M., 1969.
17. Speech therapy / Ed. Volkova L. S.; M., Vlados, 2004.
18. Rosengart-Pupko G. L. Development speeches child of early age. M, 1977.
19. Rubinshtein S. Ya. Experimental methods of pathopsychology and experience of their application in the clinic. - M.,: April-Press, 2004.
20. Rubinshtein S. L. Fundamentals of the general psychology: In 2 volumes - T. 1. M., 1989. (Speech: 442-460.)
21. Soviet Encyclopedic Dictionary / Ed. Prokhorov A.V.; M., 1988.
22. Fomicheva M. F. Education children correct pronunciation. M. 1989.
“We were interested in the relationship between thinking and speech in the phylogenetic development of both functions. To clarify this, we resorted to the analysis of experimental studies and observations on the language and intelligence of anthropoid apes.
We can briefly formulate the main conclusions:
1. Thinking and speech have different genetic roots.
2. The development of thinking and speech goes according to various lines and independently of each other.
3. The relationship between thinking and speech is not at all constant throughout phylogenetic development.
4. Anthropoids reveal human-like intelligence in some respects (rudiments of the use of tools) and human-like speech in completely different respects (phonetics of speech, emotional and rudiments of the social function of speech).
5. Anthropoids do not show a relationship characteristic of a person - a close connection between thinking and speech. Both are not in any way directly related in chimpanzees.
6. In the phylogenesis of thinking and speech, we can unquestionably state the pre-speech phase in the development of the intellect and the pre-intellectual phase in the development of speech.
In ontogeny, the relationship between the two lines of development—thinking and speech—is much more vague and confused. However, even here, completely leaving aside any question of the parallelism of ontogenesis and phylogeny, or of another, more complex relationship between them, we can establish various genetic roots and various lines in the development of thinking and speech. […]
As you know, an animal can learn individual words of human speech and apply them in appropriate situations. Before the onset of this period, the child also learns individual words, which are for him conditional stimuli or substitutes for individual objects, people, actions, states, desires. However, at this stage, the child knows as many words as are given to him by the people around him.
Now the situation is fundamentally different. The child himself needs the word and actively strives to master the sign that belongs to the object, the sign that serves to name and communicate. If the first stage in the development of children's speech, as Meiman rightly showed, is in its psychological significance affective-volitional, then, starting from this moment, speech enters the intellectual phase of its development. The child, as it were, discovers the symbolic function of speech. Here it is important for us to note one fundamentally important point: only at a certain, relatively high stage in the development of thinking and speech does “the greatest discovery in a child’s life” become possible.
In order to “open” speech, one must think.
We can briefly formulate our conclusions:
1. In the ontogenetic development of thinking and speech, we also find different roots of both processes.
2. In the development of a child's speech, we can undoubtedly state the "pre-intellectual stage", as well as in the development of thinking - the "pre-speech stage".
3. Up to a certain point, both developments proceed along different lines independently of each other.
4. At a certain point, both lines intersect, after which thinking becomes verbal, and speech becomes intellectual.
We are now approaching the formulation of the main proposition of our entire article, a proposition of the highest methodological significance for the entire formulation of the problem. This conclusion follows from a comparison of the development of speech thinking with the development of speech and intellect, as it proceeded in the animal world and in the earliest childhood along separate, separate lines. This comparison shows that one development is not simply a direct continuation of another, but that the very type of development has also changed.
Speech thinking is not a natural form of behavior, but a socio-historical form and therefore differs mainly in a number of specific properties and patterns that cannot be discovered in natural forms of thinking and speech.
Vygotsky L.S., Thinking and speech, in Collection: Psychology of thinking / Ed. Yu.B. Gippenreiter and others, M., "Ast"; Astrel, 2008, p. 495 and 497.
The main task of sensations and perceptions is the collection of specific impressions of the environment, and memory is the exact preservation of what has been accumulated, then imagination and thinking have another task - to transform what has been received.
Imagination is the creation of new images based on previously perceived ones, and thinking is a process of generalized and indirect reflection of the surrounding world. The result of imagination is an image, and the result of thinking is judgments and concepts.
Thinking and fantasy arose in labor activity.
Thinking -the highest cognitive process, a mediated and generalized reflection of reality by a person in the course of its analysis and synthesis.
Thinking -socially conditioned, inextricably linked with speech, the mental process of searching for and discovering something new.
1 important sign of thinking is generalization, the result of processing the experience of people. The greater the past experience of a person, the wider the generalization of reality.
You can directly perceive only specific signs of objects and phenomena: this book, the table, this tree. You can think about books, tables, trees in general. Our thought pulls us out of the captivity of direct concrete visibility and allows us to capture the similarity in the different and the different in the similar, allows us to discover regular connections between phenomena and events. What happens if you throw paper on fire? Will burn. But we haven't seen this particular item burnt before. We haven't seen it, but we know: paper always burns in fire. Thanks to thinking, the connection between fire and paper has been established. Such a generalized reflection makes it possible to predict the future, to represent it in the form of images that do not yet exist in reality.
2 sign of thinking - mediation reflections of reality. This means that thinking makes it possible to identify, understand, and that which does not directly affect the analyzers and becomes accessible to consciousness only through indirect signs.
Thanks to creative mental activity, a person is able to reflect, to cognize such properties of the world that are inaccessible to direct perception. So, the doctor learns about the presence of an inflammatory process in the patient's body by measuring the body temperature.
Thinking begins where sensory cognition is insufficient or powerless. Thanks to thinking, a person reflects not only what is perceived with the help of the senses, but also what is hidden from perception and can be known only as a result of analysis, comparison, generalization. Thinking allows you to establish various connections and relationships between objects and phenomena.
Characteristics of thought processes.
1) analysis- the division of the whole into parts. All processes of thinking and imagination consist in the mental decomposition of initial thoughts and ideas into component parts (analysis) and
2) their subsequent connection in new combinations ( synthesis). (These mental operations, opposite in content, are inseparably united).
3) comparison- necessary to establish the similarities and differences of individual objects;
4) abstraction- provides the selection of some features and distraction from others;
5) generalization is a means of combining objects and phenomena according to their essential features and properties;
6) classification aimed at the division and subsequent unification of objects for any reason; types.
7) systematization provides separation and subsequent unification, but not of individual objects, but of their groups and classes.
An example with mental operations when mastering the concept of a triangle:
Thanks to the analysis, the number of its sides, angles, dimensions is determined. As a result of the comparison, the general and the special in various triangles are singled out.
Types of thinking
In the course of historical development, people solved the problems that arose, first in practical activity, then theoretical activity emerged from it. Both activities are interconnected.
Stage 1 of the development of thinking - visual-effective. It is based on practice. It develops at preschool age (up to 3 years inclusive). The child analyzes and synthesizes cognizable objects as he separates, unites, correlates, connects with each other the objects that he perceives at the moment.
Stage 2 of the development of thinking - visual-figurative. Occurs in preschoolers (4-7 years old). The connection with practical actions still remains, but is not direct and immediate as before. In the course of the analysis and synthesis of a cognizable object, the child does not necessarily and does not always have to touch the object that interests him with his hands or teeth. But in all cases, it is necessary to clearly perceive and visualize this object. Those. preschoolers still think in visual images and do not yet master concepts.
The absence of concepts in preschoolers is revealed in experience. So, 6-year-old children are shown 2 identical balls of dough. Children see that they are equal. Then, in front of their eyes, one ball is turned into a cake. Children see that not a piece has been added there, only the shape has been changed. However, they believe that the amount of dough in the tortilla is greater. Because see that the cake takes up more space. The fact is that the visual-figurative thinking of children is still subject to direct perception, therefore they cannot yet be distracted from some striking properties of the object under consideration.
Stage 3 - abstract-logical (verbal-logical or abstract) thinking. It is formed on the basis of practical and visual-figurative experience in children. Abstract thinking is thinking in the form of abstract concepts. Mastery of concepts occurs in the course of assimilation by schoolchildren of the basics of various sciences - mathematics, physics ... At the end of the school period of study, children form concept system. Those. operating both individual concepts and entire classes of concepts. The inseparable connection of mental activity with visual-sensory experience (sensations, perceptions, ideas) is of great importance in the formation of concepts in students. Not only in children, but in adults, all kinds of mental activity are constantly developing. For example, visual-effective thinking reaches especially great perfection among engineers, and visual-figurative (visual-sensory) thinking among writers.
The analytical and synthetic activity of thinking is provided by logical forms: concepts, judgments and conclusions.
Concept - about reflection of common essential and distinctive features of objects and phenomena of reality. For example, the concept of "man" includes such essential features as labor activity, the production of tools, and articulate speech. These properties distinguish man from animals.
Judgments - reveal the content of concepts. This is a reflection of the connections between objects and phenomena of reality or between their properties and features. For example, the proposition "metal expands when heated" expresses the relationship between changes in temperature and the volume of the metal. Establishing connections and relationships between concepts in this way, judgments are statements something about something. They are approve or deny any relationship between objects, events, phenomena of reality.
Classification of judgments:
Depending on how judgments reflect objective reality, they are true(relationship between objects and phenomena that exists in reality) or false(link that doesn't exist).
General judgments- in them something is affirmed or denied regarding the objects of this group. For example, "all people breathe with lungs." IN private judgments affirmation and negation applies only to some subjects: “some students are excellent students”, in singular judgments- only one subject. For example, "this student did not answer well."
Judgments are formed 2-in ways:
1) directly, when they express what is perceived. For example, we see a table that is brown and say, "This table is brown."
2) Indirectly- by inference or reasoning. Here, with the help of reasoning, others are deduced from some concepts.
inference- the main form of mediated cognition of reality. For example, if it is known that “all slates are combustible” (1st proposition) and that “the given substance is shale” (2nd proposition), then one can infer, i.e. conclude that "this substance is combustible." Here it is no longer necessary to resort to direct experimental verification of this conclusion. inference is the connection between thoughts (concepts and judgments).
Inferences are 2-x types:
1) inductive- from a particular case to a general one. For example, as soon as it is established that Fe, AL, Cu have electrical conductivity, it becomes possible to generalize all these particular facts in a general proposition: "All metals are electrically conductive."
2) Deductive- inference from a general judgment to a particular fact. For example, “All metals are electrically conductive. Tin is a metal. So tin is electrically conductive.
Thinking is intelligence in action.
Intelligence is a relatively stable structure of mental abilities, including acquired knowledge, experience and the ability to further accumulate and use them in mental activity. The intellectual qualities of a person are determined by the range of his interests, the amount of knowledge. In a narrower sense, intelligence is the mind, thinking.
Speech.
Thinking is inextricably linked with speech, with language. A thought is formed in a verbal shell: trying to formulate something verbally, we simultaneously clarify the content itself, think out what was first looming approximately. Therefore, many discoveries are made when we try to present our thoughts to others.
Simultaneously thinking and speech are different psychological phenomena, there is unity between them, but not identity. Thus, the proof is that the same thought can be expressed in different words and in different languages. Initially, thinking and speech performed different functions and developed separately. The original function of speech was a communicative function, and speech itself as a means of communication arose in the process of joint work of people in order to separate and coordinate their actions. Language and speech are united in that they reflect two sides of the same phenomenon - communication between people. Language is a product of the people, their history. Speech- the practical use of language by people.
Language- a system of means of communication between people with each other, ways of expressing thoughts; ways of transmission from generation to generation and storage of information. Speech does not exist outside of language, but language is impossible outside of speech. It "dies" if people stop using it. Language develops in socio-historical conditions, in the course of labor activity, speech develops in the conditions of direct communication of people in the family, at school, at work. Language cannot be subjected to pathological disturbances; for the speech of an individual, this is not excluded.
Speech - a form of communication that has developed historically in the process of human activity, mediated by language. Speech is a specifically human form of activity that uses the means of language.
Any thought arises and develops inextricably linked with speech. The deeper the thought is thought out, the more clearly it is expressed in words, in oral and written speech. And vice versa, the more the verbal formulation of a thought is improved, the more distinct and understandable this thought itself becomes. Observations show that some students and adults experience difficulties in the process of solving a problem until they formulate their reasoning aloud. Thinking out loud usually makes it easier to solve a problem. By formulating his thoughts aloud, for others, a person formulates them for himself. Such a formulation, fixing the thought in words means the division of the thought, helps to keep attention on various moments and parts of this thought and contributes to a deeper understanding. Thanks to the formulation in the word, the thought does not disappear as soon as it has arisen. It is firmly fixed in the speech formulation - oral or written.
Speech affects the processes occurring in the body. The word can cause tachycardia, make you blush or turn pale. The word invigorates and depresses, throws you into heat and cold, causes mental trauma.
Speech functions:
1) communicative - message function;
2) significative - designation of real objects, their properties, actions, connections;
3) expressions - the speaker expresses through the intonations of the voice, the tempo of speech and other emotional means - his attitude to the message;
4) motivation function - with the help of words, intonations, the speaker encourages people to act.
Several analyzers of the brain are involved in speech processes - motor (when we speak), auditory (listen to speech) and visual (read, write).
Human speech activity has a conditioned reflex nature. The word as an irritant appears in three forms: audible, visible (written), spoken.
Types of speech: Oral - is divided into dialogic and monologue, written.
An indicator of speech development is an active dictionary- the stock of words that a person uses in his speech. Passive Dictionary- a stock of words that a person himself does not use in communicating with people, but is able to understand in someone else's speech.
External speech - expressive, internal - impressive - speech about oneself and for oneself. Thinking, memory, perception and regulation of behavior are closely related to inner speech.
Federal State Educational Institution of Higher Professional Education
NORTH WESTERN ACADEMY OF PUBLIC SERVICE
Faculty of Social Technologies
Essay on the topic: "Thinking and speech"
Completed by a 1st year student
Groups 1307
Faculty of Social Technologies
Klyukina V. A.
Checked: Professor of the Department of Psychology and Pedagogy
Kuznetsov Gennady Ivanovich
Submission date:___________
Grade:___________
St. Petersburg
1. Introduction
2. The concept of thinking
3. Development of thinking
4. Speech and its functions
5. Development of speech
6. Relationship between thinking and speech
7. Conclusion
8. List of used literature
1. Introduction
A person would know very little about the world around him if his knowledge was limited only to those indications given by sight, hearing, touch and some other analyzers. The possibility of a deep and broad knowledge of the world opens up human thinking. Speech, meanwhile, is closely related to thinking. The problem of the relationship between speech and thinking, its role in communication and the formation of consciousness is perhaps the most important section of psychology and pedagogy.
Throughout the history of psychological research on thought and speech, the problem of the connection between them has attracted increased attention. Its proposed solutions were very different - from the complete separation of speech and thinking and considering them as functions completely independent of each other to their equally unambiguous and unconditional connection, up to absolute identification.
Many modern scientists take a compromise view, believing that, although thought and speech are inextricably linked, they are relatively independent realities. The main question that is now being discussed in connection with this problem is the question of the nature of the real connection between thinking and speech, of their genetic roots and the transformations that they undergo in the process of their separate and joint development.
L. S. Vygotsky wrote that the word is just as relevant to speech as it is to thinking. It is a living cell containing in its simplest form the basic properties inherent in speech thinking as a whole. A word is not a label pasted as an individual name on a separate object or phenomenon, denoted by it, in a generalized way and, therefore, acts as an act of thinking. But the word is also a means of communication, so it is part of speech. Being devoid of meaning, the word no longer refers to either thought or speech; acquiring its meaning, it immediately becomes an organic part of both. It is in the meaning of the word, said L. S. Vygotsky, that the knot of that unity, which is called verbal thinking, is tied.
Thus, the purpose of my work will be to consider the relationship between speech and thinking.
2. The concept of thinking
“Man is immortal through knowledge. Cognition, thinking is the root of his life, his immortality.
G. W. F. Hegel
First of all, thinking is the highest cognitive process. It is a product of new knowledge, an active form of creative reflection and transformation of reality by a person. Thinking generates such a result, which does not exist either in reality itself or in the subject at a given moment in time. Thinking (animals also have it in elementary forms) can also be understood as the acquisition of new knowledge, the creative transformation of existing ideas.
In practice, thinking as a separate mental process does not exist, it is invisibly present in all other cognitive processes: in perception, attention, imagination, memory, speech. The higher forms of these processes are necessarily associated with thinking, and the degree of its participation in these cognitive processes determines their level of development.
Thinking is the highest form of reflection by the brain of the surrounding world, the most complex cognitive mental process that is unique to man; it is a mental process characterized by a generalized, mediated reflection of reality.
In order for a person to live and work normally, he needs to foresee the consequences of certain phenomena, events or his actions. Knowledge of the individual is not a sufficient basis for foresight. For example, what will happen if a lit match is brought to a sheet of paper? Of course it will light up. But why do we know about it? Most likely, because they had their own experience and, based on the information we have, made a logical conclusion. However, in order to draw this conclusion, we had to compare the properties of this sheet of paper with another paper, identify what they have in common, and only after that draw a conclusion about what will happen to the paper if it comes into contact with fire. Consequently, in order to foresee, it is necessary to generalize individual objects and facts and, proceeding from these generalizations, draw a conclusion regarding other individual objects and facts of the same kind. This multi-stage transition - from the individual to the general and from the general again to the individual - is carried out thanks to a special mental process of thinking.
As already mentioned, thinking as a special mental process has a number of specific characteristics and features. The first such sign is generalized a reflection of reality, since thinking is a reflection of the general in objects and phenomena of the real world and the application of generalizations to individual objects and phenomena. An example of generalized thinking is the paper example described above. So, generalization makes it possible to reveal not only the essential properties of the things around us, but also the main regular connections of objects and phenomena.
The second, no less important, sign of thinking is indirect knowledge of objective reality. What is mediated cognition? Imagine that a person sitting in a room wants to know what the temperature is outside. There are various possibilities for this - to feel this temperature directly when you go outside, or to look at the thermometer. In the latter case, a person learns about the weather indirectly. Perceiving one, a person judges another. Because he knows about the relationship between the volume of mercury and the ambient temperature. In other words, "the essence of mediated cognition lies in the fact that we are able to make judgments about the properties or characteristics of objects and phenomena without direct contact with them, but by analyzing indirect information."
Thus, in the process of thinking, we learn something that is generally not available to perception and representation.
3. Development of thinking
There are several stages in the formation and development of thinking. Thus, in most of the currently existing approaches to the periodization of the stages of development of thinking, it is generally accepted that the initial stage of the development of human thinking is associated with generalizations. At the same time, the first generalizations of the child are inseparable from practical activity, which finds expression in the same actions that he performs with objects similar to each other. This tendency begins to appear already at the end of the first year of life. The manifestation of thinking in a child is a vital trend, since it has a practical orientation. Operating with objects on the basis of knowledge of their individual properties, the child can solve certain practical problems already at the beginning of the second year of life. So, a child at the age of one year and one month, in order to get nuts from the table, can substitute a bench for him. Or another example - a boy at the age of one year and three months, in order to move a heavy box with things, first took out half of the things, and then performed the necessary operation. In all these examples, the child relied on the experience he had previously received. And this experience is not always personal. A child learns a lot by watching adults.
The next stage in the development of the child is associated with the mastery of speech. The words that the child masters are for him a support for generalizations. They very quickly acquire a general meaning for him and are easily transferred from one subject to another. However, the meanings of the first words often include only some individual signs of objects and phenomena, which the child is guided by, referring the word to these objects. It is quite natural that a sign that is essential for a child is in fact far from being essential. The word "apple" by children is often compared with all round objects or with all red objects.
At the next stage in the development of the child's thinking, he can name the same object in several words. This phenomenon is observed at the age of about two years and indicates the formation of such a mental operation as comparison. In the future, on the basis of the comparison operation, induction and deduction begin to develop, which by the age of three - three and a half years already reach a fairly high level of development.
Induction – ( Comes from lat. inductio - derivation.) The process of logical inference based on the transition from particular to general provisions. Among the most important laws of inductive logic are the rules of proof that link cause and effect:
- whenever a cause arises, a phenomenon (effect) also arises;
- whenever there is a phenomenon (effect), it is preceded by a cause;
- if the cause varies, the phenomenon also varies;
- if the cause has additional properties, then the phenomenon acquires additional properties.
Deduction -(It comes from the Latin deductio - derivation.) The process of inference based on the transition from general provisions to particular ones.
Based on the information presented, we can identify several of the most significant features of the thinking of a preschool child. Thus, an essential feature of a child's thinking is that his first generalizations are connected with action. The child thinks by acting. Another characteristic feature of children's thinking is its visibility. The visibility of children's thinking is manifested in its concreteness. The child thinks based on single facts that are known to him and are available from personal experience or observations of other people. To the question "Why can't you drink raw water?" the child answers, based on a specific fact: “One boy drank raw water and fell ill.”
When a child reaches school age, there is a progressive growth in the mental capabilities of the child. The range of concepts acquired by the child in the process of learning at school is expanding more and more and includes more and more new knowledge from various fields. At the same time, a transition is made from concrete to more and more abstract concepts, and the content of concepts is enriched: the child learns a variety of properties and features of objects, phenomena, as well as their interconnection; he learns which features are essential and which are not. From simpler, superficial connections of objects and phenomena, the student moves to more complex, deep, versatile.
The theory of the stage-by-stage formation of mental actions, formulated and studied by Pyotr Yakovlevich Galperin, is based on the fact that the organization of the external activity of schoolchildren, which contributes to the transition of external actions into mental ones, is the basis for rational management of the process of mastering knowledge, skills, and abilities. The theory of the gradual formation of mental actions is a concept about an externally controlled process of formation and ideas and concepts about objects based on external actions.
The action formed by the trainee, mastered by him, acquires a mental form not immediately, but gradually, passing through certain stages or stages.
The first stage is called introductory - motivational. At this stage, the action is not executed yet, it is only being prepared. At this stage, an outline of the indicative basis of action is drawn up. At the second stage - the stage of formation of actions in a material form - the action is performed in a material form with the deployment of all the operations included in it. The next stage - the stage of speech action - is aimed at forming the action as a speech action. The fourth stage is the stage of performing a speech action about oneself. The peculiarity of this stage is that the trainee, as in the previous stage, pronounces the whole process of solving the problem, but does it to himself, without external manifestation, silently. In essence, this is the same speech as before, but it is no longer socialized, it is carried out internally. The reduction and automation of the action indicates that its formation is moving to the fifth, final stage - the stage of mental action. The action is quickly reduced and automated, becoming inaccessible to self-observation. It turns into a habit.
The development of thinking is usually divided into three main areas of research: phylogenetic direction, ontogenetic and experimental direction.
Phylogenetic direction involves the study of how human thinking has developed and improved in the process of the historical development of mankind. Ontogenetic direction connected with the study of the main stages of development in the life of one person. In its turn, experimental direction connected with the problems of experimental study of thinking and the possibility of developing intelligence in special, artificially created conditions.
A huge contribution to the study of the formation of thinking was made by L. S. Vygotsky, who, together with L. S. Sakharov, investigated the problem of the formation of concepts. In the course of experimental studies, three stages were identified in the process of concept formation in children.
At the first stage, an unformed, disordered set of objects is formed, which can be denoted by one word. This stage, in turn, has three stages: choosing and combining objects at random; selection based on the spatial arrangement of objects; reduction to one value of all previously combined items.
At the second stage, the formation of concepts-complexes on the basis of individual objective features takes place. Researchers have identified four types of complexes: associative (any externally noticed connection is taken as a sufficient basis for classifying objects as one class); collectible (mutual complement and association of objects on the basis of a particular functional feature); chain (transition in association from one attribute to another so that some objects are combined on the basis of some, and others - on completely different attributes, and all of them are included in the same group); pseudo-concept.
Finally, the third stage is the formation of real concepts. This stage also includes several steps: potential concepts (singling out a group of objects according to one common feature); true concepts (singling out essential features and, on their basis, combining objects).
In concluding this section, it should be noted that, despite the progress made in studying the problem of human thinking, modern researchers face a number of questions that psychological science cannot yet answer. The problem of identifying patterns of emergence, formation and development of thinking is still one of the most relevant in psychology.
4. Speech and its functions
The most important achievement of man, which allowed him to use universal human experience, both past and present, was speech communication, which developed on the basis of labor activity.
Speech is closely related to thinking, since speech is the main means of exchanging thoughts. The use of speech has two aspects - generation and understanding. Generating speech, we start with a mental pronunciation, somehow translate it into a sentence, and finally create sounds that express this sentence. When understanding speech, we start by perceiving sounds, then attach meanings to sounds in the form of words, combine words to form a sentence, and then somehow extract a statement from it. The use of speech involves movement through different levels. At the top level are phrasal units, including sentences and turns of speech. The middle level is words and parts of words that carry meaning (for example, the prefix "non-" or the suffix "-tel"). The lower level contains speech sounds.
Consequently, speech is a multi-level system that connects thoughts with speech through words and phrase units.
Speech has several functions. One of the main functions of speech is to serve as a means of communication between people.
Communication is the transfer of information from person to person. Language is a system of verbal signs, a means by which communication is carried out between people. Speech is the process of using language to communicate with people. People lived and live in society. Public life and the work of people cause the need to constantly communicate, establish contacts with each other, influence each other. Through the word, a person receives knowledge about the objects and phenomena of the surrounding world without direct contact with them.
The intellectual function is that for a person speech is also a means of thinking. It is with the help of speech, with the help of the word, that a person formulates his thoughts.
Regulatory function - speech serves as a factor in controlling one's own psyche and the behavior of the person who uses it, and the psyche of other people. It is assumed that speech plays an important role in the development of arbitrary, volitional behavior. Initially, the highest mental function is, as it were, divided between two people. One person regulates the behavior of another with the help of special stimuli (“signs”), among which speech plays the greatest role. Learning to apply to his own behavior the stimuli that were originally used to regulate the behavior of other people, a person comes to master his own behavior. As a result of the process of internalization - the transformation of external speech activity into internal speech, the latter becomes the mechanism by which a person masters his own voluntary actions.
Psychodiagnostic function - one can judge the psychological characteristics of a given person by his speech, his mental states, properties and cognitive processes.
5. Development of speech
Development occurs at all three levels of the language. It begins at the level of phonemes, continues at the level of words and other morphemes, and then moves on to the level of phrasal units, or syntax.
The first stages in the development of speech, such as crying, babbling, and the first words of a child, are pre-intellectual stages, have nothing to do with the development of thinking, and are often regarded as emotional forms of behavior. At the same time, they already have the social function of speech.
At the age of about two years, previously independent lines of development of thinking and speech "cross, coincide and give rise to a completely new form of behavior, so characteristic of a person." From this moment, speech becomes intellectual, and thinking - speech. This turning point is characterized by two signs, namely: the child begins to actively expand his vocabulary; his vocabulary is growing very rapidly, "leaps".
That is, two phases of speech development can be distinguished: affective-volitional (up to 2 years) and intellectual.
Recall that adult listeners are good at distinguishing sounds corresponding to different phonemes of their language, but they are bad at distinguishing sounds corresponding to the same phoneme of their language. It is noteworthy that children come into the world with the ability to distinguish sounds corresponding to different phonemes of any language. During the first year of life, infants learn which phonemes are essential to their language and lose the ability to distinguish sounds that correspond to the same phoneme in their language (in fact, they lose the ability to differentiate, which are useless for understanding and generating their language).
What phonemes are essential, children learn in the first year of life, but it takes them several years to learn how to combine phonemes into words.
Around the age of 1 year, children begin to talk. One-year-olds already have concepts about many things (including family members, pets, and body parts), and when they begin to speak, they superimpose these concepts on words used by adults. The starting vocabulary is approximately the same for all children. Children aged 1-2 speak mainly about people (“dad”, “mother”, “aunt”), animals (“dog”, “cat”, “duck”), vehicles (“car”, “truck ”, “boat”), toys (“ball”, “cube”, “book”), food (“juice”, “milk”, “cookie”), body parts (“eye”, “nose”, “mouth ”) and household items (“hat”, “sock”, “spoon”).
At about 2.5 years old, a child's vocabulary begins to grow. At 1.5 years old, a child's vocabulary may include 25 words; at 6 years old - about 15,000 words. At the age of 1.5 to 2.5 years, children acquire the ability to build speech turns and sentences, that is, they master syntax.
Now that we have an idea of what children acquire in the process of mastering speech, we can ask how they acquire it. Learning plays a role here.
One of the possible ways of learning speech is to imitate adults. Young children constantly say sentences that they have never heard from adults.
Another possibility for learning is the acquisition of speech through conditioning. Adults can reward children when they build a grammatically correct sentence and scold them when they make mistakes. For this mechanism to work, parents would have to react to the smallest details of the child's speech. But it has been found that parents do not pay attention to how children say something, as long as they can understand their statement.
Thus, based on the foregoing, we can conclude that all children, regardless of their culture and language, go through the same sequence of speech development. At the age of 1 year, the child says a few separate words; at the age of 2 years, the child builds sentences from two and three words; at the age of 3 years, sentences acquire the correct grammatical form; at the age of 4, the child speaks almost like an adult.
6. Relationship between thinking and speech
Speech thinking is a complex dynamic whole in which the relationship between thought and word is revealed as a movement that passes through a whole series of internal plans: from motive to thought - to its mediation in the internal word - in the meanings of external words - and, finally, in words.
Since speech is a form of existence of thought, there is unity between speech and thinking. Speech is not just the outer garment of thought that it throws off or puts on without thereby changing its being. Speech, the word serve not only to express, to take out, to convey to another, a thought already prepared without speech. In speech we formulate a thought, but in formulating it, we often form it. Speech here is something more than an external instrument of thought; it is included in the very process of thinking as a form associated with its content. By creating a speech form, thinking itself is formed. Thought and speech, without being identified, are included in the unity of one process. Thinking in speech is not only expressed, but for the most part it is done in speech. In those cases where thinking takes place mainly not in the form of speech in the specific sense of the word, but in the form of images, these images essentially perform the function of speech in thinking, since their sensory content functions in thinking as the bearer of its semantic content. That is why it can be said that thinking is generally impossible without speech: its semantic content always has a sensual carrier, more or less processed and transformed by its semantic content. This does not mean, however, that a thought always and immediately appears in a ready-made speech form, accessible to others. As Rubinstein wrote, “a thought usually arises in the form of tendencies, which at first have only a few outlined reference points, not yet fully formed. From this thought, which is even more a tendency and a process than a completed, formed formation, the transition to a thought formed in the word is accomplished as a result of often very complex and sometimes difficult work. In the process of speech formation, the thoughts of work on the speech form and on the thought that takes shape in it mutually pass into each other.
Like form and content, speech and thinking are connected by complex and often contradictory relationships. Speech has its own structure, which does not coincide with the structure of thinking: grammar expresses the structure of speech, logic expresses the structure of thinking; they are not identical. Since the forms of thinking of the era when the corresponding forms of speech arose are deposited and imprinted in speech, these forms, being fixed in speech, inevitably diverge from the thinking of subsequent eras. Speech is more archaic than thought. By virtue of this alone, it is impossible to directly identify thinking with speech, which retains archaic forms in itself. Speech generally has its own "technique". This "technique" of speech is connected with the logic of thought, but is not identical with it.
The presence of unity and the lack of identity between thinking and speech clearly appear in the process of reproduction. The reproduction of abstract thoughts is usually molded into a verbal form, which, as established in a number of studies, has a significant, sometimes positive, sometimes - if the initial reproduction is erroneous - an inhibitory effect on the memorization of thoughts. At the same time, the memorization of thought, semantic content is largely independent of the verbal form. Experiment has shown that memory for thoughts is stronger than memory for words, and it often happens that a thought is retained, but the verbal form in which it was originally clothed falls out and is replaced by a new one. It also happens that the opposite happens - so that the verbal formulation is preserved in the memory, and its semantic content is, as it were, weathered out; Obviously, the speech verbal form is not in itself a thought, although it can help to restore it. These facts convincingly confirm, on a purely psychological level, the proposition that the unity of thought and speech cannot be interpreted as their identity.
The statement about the irreducibility of thinking to speech applies not only to external, but also to internal speech. The identification of thinking and inner speech found in literature is untenable. It obviously proceeds from the fact that speech, in contrast to thinking, refers only to sound, phonetic material. Therefore, where, as is the case in inner speech, the sound component of speech disappears, nothing is seen in it other than the mental content. This is wrong, because the specificity of speech does not at all boil down to the presence of sound material in it. It lies primarily in its grammatical - syntactic and stylistic - structure, in its specific speech technique. Such a structure and technique, moreover, a peculiar, reflecting the structure of external, loud speech and at the same time different from it, inner speech also has. Therefore, inner speech is not reduced to thinking, and thinking is not reduced to it.
1) between speech and thinking there is not identity and not a gap, but unity; it is a dialectical unity, including differences that sharpen into opposites;
2) in the unity of thinking and speech, thinking, and not speech, is the leading one, as formalistic and idealistic theories want, turning the word as a sign into the “producing cause” of thinking;
3) speech and thinking arise in a person in unity on the basis of social and labor practices.
The unity of speech and thinking is concretely realized in various forms for different types of speech.
7.Conclusion
So, we have learned that between thinking and speech there is a connection that allows you to penetrate deeper into the phenomena of reality, into the relationship between things, actions and qualities. Also, speech helps to formulate a thought, to express a judgment. Speech has more complex formations that provide the basis for theoretical thinking and that allow a person to go beyond direct experience and draw conclusions in an abstract verbal-logical way. Thinking is the search and discovery of the new. The flexibility of thinking lies in the ability to change the initially planned path (plan) for solving problems if it does not satisfy the conditions of the problem that are gradually isolated in the course of its solution and which could not be taken into account from the very beginning.
All of the listed and many other qualities of thinking are closely related to its main quality, or feature. The most important feature of any thinking - regardless of its individual characteristics - is the ability to single out the essential, to independently come to ever new generalizations. When a person thinks, he is not limited to stating this or that separate fact or event, even if it is bright, interesting, new and unexpected. Thinking necessarily goes further, delving into the essence of a given phenomenon and discovering the general law of development of all more or less homogeneous phenomena, no matter how outwardly they differ from each other.
8. List of used literature:
1. Introduction to psychology: Textbook. Ed. Meshcheryakova B. G., Zinchenko V. P. 2003.
2. Vygotsky L. S. Thinking and speech. M., 1988.
3. Luria A. R. Language and consciousness. Rostov-on-Don., 1998.
4. Maklakov A. G. General psychology. SPb., 2001
5. Psychological dictionary
6. Rubinshtein S. L. Fundamentals of general psychology. SPb., 2006
7. Samygin S.I. Handbook of psychology / S. I. Samygin, L. D. Stolyarenko. – Rostov-on-Don.: March, 2001.
Maklakov A.G. General psychology. Peter, 2001., p. 299
Psychological Dictionary (I)
Psychological Dictionary (D)
Samygin S.I., Stolyarenko L.D. Handbook of psychology. Rostov-on-Don, 2001., p. 26
Introduction to psychology. Textbook. Ed. Meshcheryakova B.G., Zinchenko V.P. 2003., p. 312
Rubinshtein S.L. Fundamentals of General Psychology. Peter. 2006., p. 365