Preparing for school. An important point that few people know about
Of course, we have heard more than once that it is necessary to work onspeech development child before school. As a rule, we understand that we need to expand active dictionary child, teach the child to use not only nouns and verbs in speech, but also other parts of speech, and build common sentences. But this, it turns out, is not all.
When we talk about speech development, we mean external, loud speech. And few people realize that there is also inner speech. We don’t hear it and, accordingly, we don’t notice the role of inner speech in the child’s behavior and development. And her role is huge. The formation of inner speech is one very important point , which many people don’t even know about. And then they are surprised that the child does not study well.
Surely there have been situations in your life when you told your child to do something, 15-20 minutes passed, and he did nothing. And in response to your remark, he may be sincerely surprised: “What should have been done?”
At home this is not very noticeable, but in kindergarten and school such children often receive criticism for doing something wrong or not doing anything at all.
In the classroom, the teacher explains to the students that they need to write, for example, the word “Task”. As soon as the teacher fell silent, his hand immediately raised: “What should I do?” The teacher repeats the explanation a second time. This child understands. But, without even allowing the teacher to finish, an exclamation is heard: “Where should I write?” How many times do you think the teacher can explain the same thing? Perhaps it could have been done many times, but the lesson is not rubber-stamp and, in addition to writing the word “Task”, there is still a lot of work that needs to be done.
And what does that student do who has not received an answer to his question, because it has already been the same question 5-6 times? Naturally, by the time he looks at the neighbor’s notebook, asks another neighbor and finally gets around to writing, the children will have already finished solving this problem. Everyone understands that such a student is unlikely to be able to study well. But he will receive comments with enviable regularity.
Why does this happen, since the child hears well?
It turns out that, in addition to loud speech, every person also has inner speech, sometimes we call it inner voice. When we receive instructions, this voice dictates to us every action that needs to be done, and then we carry out the work without problems. For children it is often different. As long as the child hears the instructions, everything is clear to him. But as soon as the voice fell silent, silence reigned in the child’s head. His inner voice cannot repeat anything or only some part of the instructions. So the child is sitting there, not knowing what to do.
Even if your child is verywell prepared for school , can do everything and knows everything, this is not an indicator of the formation of internal speech. When a child’s internal speech is well developed, he can do all actions silently. But if a child speaks all his actions out loud, if all his thoughts are on his tongue, it meansinner speech not yet developed. Which will make his work at school very difficult.
Formation of inner speech – this is a very long process that depends on many components. And on cue magic wand or by order of the parents, it will not be formed. At the same time, whenpreparing for school worth paying attention special attention to this question.
Remember how he talks small child– always says everything out loud. And even in a whisper, the child begins to speak somewhere after 4 years. When , he always voices all his actions, names toys, repeats words, as if clarifying them.
According to psychologists, in the first years of life, connections are established in the child’s brain between sound and the muscle sensation necessary to pronounce the sound. In the process of speech development, the role of muscle sensations decreases and whispered speech appears, and then it turns into inner speech, i.e. pronunciation of a word without external movement of the articulatory apparatus.
Inner speech is a more difficult process for the child, but extremely necessary. Have you noticed that when doing difficult work, the child begins to speak out loud. This is how he helps himself cope with a difficult task.
By the way, adults do the same. Remember how you do something new for yourself? Read the instructions and say each step out loud or in a whisper. This is especially noticeable if a person is tired or doing something unusual for himself. It turns out that for adults, internal speech is more difficult than external speech.
But how does inner speech affect a child’s learning?
Turns out,inner speech has very great value in the life and education of a child. For example, you said to your child: “Take a book and put it on the shelf.” The child mentally repeats your words and understands what he needs to do. He now gives commands to himself. Some children do this out loud, which is also acceptable at primary school age.
But if inner speech is not developed, then the child cannot give himself commands, he simply does not know what to do. And so the child either immediately asks: “What to do” or simply does not follow your instructions. And he does not do it out of harm, not out of ignorance, but because he does not have an internal commander who gives commands. While the child is small, this is not very noticeable, especially since in preschool age internal speech is just beginning to form.
But when such a child comes to school, then the The teacher says what needs to be done, but the child does not do it or asks several times what to do. And, of course, he constantly receives comments. And parents very often hear that the child does not listen, is not attentive in class, and does not work well. And many people don’t realize that it’s not carelessness that’s to blame, butundeveloped inner speech , which does not allow the child to hear and correctly follow instructions.
Want to check how your child hears you? Tell him some instructions of 2-3 steps and ask him to repeat: Repeat what I told you? If your baby repeated everything correctly, great. And if not, then do not despair and scold the child. You just need to pay more attention . This will be discussed in the next article.
Submitting your good work to the knowledge base is easy. Use the form below
Students, graduate students, young scientists who use the knowledge base in their studies and work will be very grateful to you.
Posted on http://allbest.ru/
On the topic: Inner speech
Plan
1. Inner speech as a stage of preparation for external speech
a) Formation of inner speech
b) The structure of inner speech
c) Transformation of the original concept into an expanded system of meanings
2. “Egocentric speech”
a) Assessing the role of inner speech by J. Piaget
b) Interpretation of inner speech by L.S. Vygodsky
c) Experiments by P.Ya. Galperin
3. Internal structure and origin act of will
4. Predicative nature of inner speech
1. Inner speech asstage of preparation for external speech
Inner speech is necessary step preparation for external, detailed speech. In order to translate a simultaneous semantic record into a successive organized process speech utterance, it is necessary that it go through a special stage - the stage of inner speech. At this stage, the internal meaning is translated into a system of expanded syntactically organized speech meanings, the simultaneous scheme of the “semantic record” is recoded into the organized structure of the future expanded, syntactic utterance. This process of translating an initial idea or thought into a smooth successive process of speech utterance does not occur immediately. It requires complex recoding of the original semantic recording into speech syntagmatic schemes, and that is why L.S. Vygotsky said that a thought is not embodied in a word, but is accomplished in a word. Inner speech plays a decisive role in this process.
a) Formation of internalnnney speech
It is known that inner speech occurs in a child at the moment when he begins to experience certain difficulties, when the need arises to solve one or another intellectual problem. It is further known that this internal speech appears relatively late from previously developed external speech, at the first stages addressed to the interlocutor, and at further stages addressed to oneself. The formation of inner speech undergoes a number of stages; it arises through the transition of external speech, first into fragmented external speech, then into whispered speech, and only after that, finally, it becomes speech for itself, acquiring a compressed character.
b)The structure of inner speech
It is known that in its morphological structure, internal speech differs sharply from external speech: it has a collapsed, amorphous character, and in its functional characteristics is primarily a predicative formation. The predicative nature of inner speech is the basis for translating the original “plan” into a detailed, syntagmatically constructed future speech utterance. Inner speech includes only individual words and their potential connections. So, if in inner speech there is the word “buy”, then this means that at the same time all the “valences” of this word are included in inner speech: “buy something”, “buy from someone”, etc.; if the predicate “borrow” appears in internal speech, this means that this predicate retains all its inherent connections (borrow “from someone”, “something”, “to someone” and “for some time” "). It is this preservation of potential connections of elements or “nodes” of the primary semantic record found in internal speech that serves as the basis for a detailed speech utterance that is formed on its basis. Consequently, collapsed internal speech retains the ability to unfold again and turn into syntagmatically organized external speech.
c) Transformation of the original planinto an expanded system of meanings
inner speech thinking intention
With some brain lesions, inner speech suffers, and those potential lexical functions that are associated with the fragments included in it disintegrate. Then the original idea cannot transform into a smooth, syntactically organized, detailed speech utterance, and “dynamic aphasia” arises. A patient who easily repeats the words presented to him, instead of a detailed coherent statement, limits himself to naming individual words(the so-called “telegraphic style”). Thus, inner speech is an essential link in the process of transforming the original idea or simultaneous “semantic record”, the meaning of which is understandable only to the subject himself, into a detailed, flowing in time, syntagmatically constructed system of meanings.
2. "Egocentric speech"
For a long time, "inner speech" was understood as speech devoid of a motor end, as "speech to oneself." It was assumed that inner speech largely retains the structure of external speech; the function of this speech remained unclear.
However, at the end of the 20s of the 20th century, the works of L.S. Vygotsky's doctrine of “inner speech” made fundamental changes. The starting point for the analysis of the formation of inner speech and the role it plays in the child’s behavior was the well-known observations of L. S. Vygotsky on the behavior of a 3-5 year old child in a situation where he encounters difficulties in performing some task. A child, for example, needs to trace a drawing using tissue paper placed on it or trace it with a colored pencil. If the implementation of this task encountered an obstacle (for example, the experimenter quietly removed the button with which the tracing paper was pinned to the drawing being drawn by the child) and, consequently, a difficulty arose in front of the child, he began to speak. This speech of the child, it would seem, was not addressed to strangers. He spoke even when there was no one in the room. Sometimes the child turned to the experimenter with a request to help him, sometimes he seemed to describe the situation that had arisen, asking himself how he could complete this task. Typical statements for a child in this situation were: “What should I do? The paper is sliding, but there are no buttons, what should I do, how can I attach it?” etc. Thus, the child's speech first described difficulties and then planned a possible way out of them. Sometimes the child began to fantasize when faced with similar task, and tried to resolve it in terms of speech.
Such child speech not addressed to an adult was known before L.S. Vygotsky. It is described by such prominent psychologists as Jean Piaget under the name “egocentric speech”, because this speech is not addressed to other people, is not communicative, but is, as it were, speech for oneself. It has been shown that at first this speech is extensive, then in older children it gradually contracts, turning into whispered speech. At a further stage (after a year or two), external speech disappears altogether, only contracted movements of the lips remain, from which one can guess that this speech has “grown” inside, “internalized” and turned into the so-called “inner speech.” Many years after the experiments of L.S. Vygotsky in a whole series of experiments, which, in particular, include the experiments of A.N. Sokolov (1962), the connection between internal speech and movements of the tongue and larynx was proven. Method of recording hidden movements speech apparatus It was found that when it is difficult to solve problems in adults and children, it is possible to register weakly expressed electromyographic reactions of the speech muscles, indicating an increase in the activity of speech motor skills during the performance of intellectual tasks.
Thus, the facts indicate that such “egocentric speech”, not addressed to the interlocutor, arises with every difficulty; at first it is detailed, describing the situation and planning a possible way out of this situation; with the transition to subsequent ages, it gradually decreases, becomes whispery, and then completely disappears, turning into inner speech.
a) Evaluatedthe role of inner speech by J. Piaget
The outstanding Swiss psychologist J. Piaget, assessing the role of inner speech, characterized these facts in accordance with his theory, according to which a child is born an autistic creature, a little hermit who lives on his own, communicating little with outside world. Initially, the child is characterized by autistic or egocentric speech, aimed at himself, and not at communicating with peers or adults. Only gradually, according to Piaget, does the child’s behavior begin to be socialized, and along with it does speech become socialized, gradually turning into speech as a means of communication or communication. Thus, Piaget considered the child’s egocentric speech as an echo of childhood autism, egocentrism, and attributed the disappearance of this egocentric speech to the socialization of his behavior.
b) Interpretation of inner speech by L.S.Vygotsky
L.S. Vygotsky, in his interpretation of inner speech, proceeded from completely opposite positions. He believed that the assumption about the autistic nature of the most early periods child development is false at its very core, that a child from birth is social being; first he is connected with the mother physically, then biologically, but from birth he is connected with the mother socially; this social connection with the mother is manifested in the fact that the mother communicates with the child, addresses him with a speech, teaches him to follow her instructions, starting from the very early age.
According to this view, the evolution of a child’s speech does not consist at all in the fact that the child’s speech, egocentric or autistic in function, turns into social speech. The evolution lies in the fact that if at first the child addresses this social speech to an adult, inviting the adult to help him, then, without receiving help, he himself begins to analyze the situation with the help of speech, trying to find possible ways out of it, and, finally, with the help of speech begins to plan what he cannot do by direct action. So, according to L.S. Vygotsky, an intellectual, and at the same time behavior-regulating, function of the child’s own speech is born. Therefore, the dynamics of the so-called egocentric speech, which at first has a developed character, and then gradually collapses and through whispered speech turns into inner speech, should be considered as the formation of new types of mental activity associated with the emergence of new - intellectual and regulatory - functions of speech. This inner speech of the child fully retains its analyzing, planning and regulating functions, which were initially inherent in the speech of an adult addressed to the child, and then were carried out with the help of the child’s own expanded speech.
Thus, according to L.S. Vygotsky, when internal speech arises, a complex volitional action as a self-regulating system, carried out with the help of the child’s own speech - first expanded, then collapsed.
V)Experiments by P.Ya. Galperin
Over the past decades, these provisions of L.S. Vygotsky were traced in detail in the experiments of P.Ya. Halperin and his collaborators (1959, 1975), who showed that any intellectual action begins as a detailed material or materialized action, in other words, as an action based on developed external manipulation with objects. Then the person begins to use his own speech and intellectual action moves to the stage of expanded speech. Only after this is external speech reduced, becomes internal and begins to take part in the organization of those complex species intellectual activity, which P.Ya. Halperin calls it “mental actions.” Mental actions, which are the basis of human intellectual activity, are created on the basis of first expanded, and then shortened and condensed speech.
3. Internal structuree and the origin of the act of will
These provisions make it possible to approach a solution the most important issue O internal structure and the origin of the act of will. An act of will begins to be understood not as a primarily spiritual act and not as a simple skill, but as an action mediated in its structure, based on speech means, and by this we mean not only external speech as a means of communication, but also internal speech as a means of regulating behavior. All of the above is a completely new solution to one of the the most difficult problems psychology - problems of volitional act. It allows one to approach a volitional (and intellectual) act materialistically, as a process that is social in its origin, mediated in its structure, where the role of a means is played primarily by a person’s inner speech.
4. Predicative nature of inner speech
If we carefully trace the structure of speech moving from external to internal, we can state, firstly, that it passes from loud to whispered, and then into internal speech, and secondly, that it contracts, turning from expanded to fragmented and rolled up. All this makes it possible to assume that internal speech has a completely different structure than external speech.
Characteristic feature inner speech is that it begins to become purely predicative speech. What does it mean? Every person who tries to include his inner speech in the process of solving a problem knows exactly what he is talking about. we're talking about, what task faces him. This means that the nominative function of speech, an indication of what exactly is meant, or, using the term modern linguistics, which is the “topic” of the message (linguists conventionally denote it with an inverted T), is already included in inner speech and does not need special designation. All that remains is the second semantic function of inner speech - designating what exactly should be said about a given topic, what new should be added, what specific action should be performed, etc. This side of speech appears in linguistics under the term “rheme” (conventionally denoted by an inverted R sign).
Thus, internal speech, in its semantics, never denotes an object, and is never strictly nominative in nature, i.e. does not contain a "subject"; inner speech indicates what exactly needs to be done, in which direction the action needs to be directed. In other words, while remaining folded and amorphous in its structure, it always retains its predicative function. The predicative nature of internal speech, denoting only a plan for further utterance or a plan for further action, can be expanded as necessary, since internal speech arose from the expanded external and this process is reversible. The role of internal speech as an essential link in the generation of speech utterances was covered in detail by such authors as S.D. Katsnelson (1970, 1972), A.A. Leontyev (1974), A.N. Sokolov (1962), T.V. Akhutina (1975), etc.
The book “Formation and Structure of Speech” by A.R. Luria was used in the preparation.
IN domestic psychology We owe knowledge about inner speech mainly to L. S. Vygotsky. According to his research, inner speech is formed from external speech by changing its function and, as a result, its structure. From a means of communicating thoughts to other people, speech becomes a means of thinking “for oneself.” Everything that “I already know” is eliminated from it, speech becomes abbreviated and intermittent, “elliptical” and predicative. For the most part, internal speech occurs to oneself, “inside,” but it can also be performed out loud, for example, when there are difficulties in thinking; when we are alone or forget about others. L. S. Vygotsky made this natural exit of inner speech outward into a research technique, which in its time was of fundamental importance, showing the external origin of inner speech and its understandable connections with thinking.
According to this understanding, internal speech presupposes, on the one hand, speech-message, on the other, everything that is “implied” and what is thought about without the help of speech, i.e., thoughts and thinking free from speech. It is comparison with them that provides an explanation and characterization of inner speech: in comparison with “pure” thinking, it is still speech, and in comparison with voice message-- this is a special speech, a form of thinking; it comes from external speech, and thanks to the thinking hidden behind it, its incoherent particles play a meaningful role; both genetically and functionally, internal speech serves as a transition from external speech to pure thought and from it to external speech. Without both of them and without a direct connection with them, inner speech (in Vygotsky’s understanding) can neither exist nor be understood.
But since Vygotsky, knowledge about thinking and speech and our understanding of their connection have advanced greatly.
Russian linguistics and Russian psychology do not recognize the existence of “bare thoughts,” thinking free of language. To this general position, psychology adds a number of special facts. So, for example, it turned out that even visual representations cannot become a reliable support for mental action unless they are first worked out on the basis of speech. The second signaling system is an indispensable condition for the formation of a separate internal plane of consciousness along with the plane of external perception. In any case, there is no doubt that specifically human thinking is completely verbal. And if it looks “pure” of speech (in a certain internal form), then this should receive a special explanation.
The idea that there are “pure thinking” and thoughts that are difficult to express in words has a long history and was almost universally accepted in Vygotsky’s time. It was based not only on the widespread experience of the “torment of the word,” which poets and writers often and colorfully talk about, but also on experimental data. As for the latter, they represented the results of studies conducted using “systematic introspection” over the process of solving problems (even the simplest ones and with directly available sensory material). These results were confirmed whenever a mental process was observed “from the inside” (which was considered equivalent to studying it “in its own way”). On the other hand, attempts to register the participation of speech motor organs in the process of thinking lead to the conclusion that if tasks relate to a well-mastered area, then the intellectual work performed in the mind is not accompanied by the participation of these organs (at least, such that can be detected by modern means).
The general conclusion from these diverse studies is that when intellectual activity does not encounter difficulties, then neither self-observation nor registration of the state of the speech-motor organs reveals the participation of speech in the thinking process.
These facts, of course, cannot be ignored, but the fact is that in themselves they are completely insufficient to make a reasonable conclusion about the existence of “pure thinking” and “pure thoughts”. To do this, one more assumption is needed: along the line of introspection - that his testimony directly reveals the nature psychic phenomena, in terms of the peripheral speech organs - that their condition is uniquely connected with the central process of speech thinking. In Russian psychology it is considered false. In Russian psychology, the data of introspection, like the data of any other observation, are recognized only as phenomena, and not as the essence of the observed processes. In our case, these phenomena speak of what thinking looks like (in self-observation), not what it really is. In the same way, in Soviet psychology and physiology no one thinks that the same relationship always exists between peripheral organs and the processes of the cerebral cortex. On the contrary, it is elementary that under certain conditions these relations change; in particular, they change during the formation of a dynamic stereotype, i.e., during the formation of a skill. Therefore, if in certain cases thinking “to oneself” occurs without the participation of the vocal organs, this does not mean that the central process of thinking is not connected with the central representation. So, from the fact that, under certain conditions, neither self-observation nor objective registration of the speech-motor organs reveals the participation of speech in the process of thinking,” it does not follow that there is “pure thinking” and thoughts “stripped” of the verbal shell. Scientific facts, which would prove their existence, no. But what positive can psychology (psychology, not linguistics!) say about the speech nature of thinking, which was previously considered “pure” of speech? Obviously, this requires knowledge that would be obtained from other sources? than self-observation or recording the activity of peripheral organs. Here the problem of research methodology comes into play in its entirety. The psychological convincingness of the opinion about the existence of “pure thinking” was precisely due to the fact that psychological information about thinking and speech was limited only to phenomena: the phenomena of thinking - to. its subjective “end”, the phenomena of speech - at its effector end. central processes thinking and speech remained outside the scope of objective research
Recent research on the formation of mental actions opens up some possibilities in this regard. According to these studies, the last stage and final form of mental action is a special type of speech, which by all indications should be called inner speech and which is accompanied by such phenomena. called “pure thinking”. But since now we know from what and in what way all this is obtained, we understand the actual content of the processes and the reason why, ultimately, it acquires such an appearance! Briefly speaking, these transformations occur as follows.
The formation of mental action goes through five stages. The first of them could be called drawing up a kind of “project of action” - its indicative basis, which later guides the student in its implementation. At the second stage, a material (or materialized) form of this action is formed - its first real form for a given student. At the third stage, the action is detached from things (or their material images) and transferred to the plane of loud, dialogical speech. At the fourth stage, the action is performed by silently pronouncing it to oneself, but with a clear verbal and conceptual division of it. This action in terms of “external speech to oneself” at the next stage becomes an automatic process and, as a result, it is precisely in its speech part that it leaves consciousness; the speech process becomes hidden and in in every sense internal.
Thus, speech is involved at all stages of the formation of mental action, but in different ways. At the first two stages, “in the face of things” and material action, it serves only as a system of indications of material reality. Having absorbed the experience of the latter, speech at three further stages becomes the only basis for action, performed only in consciousness. However, in each of them it forms a special type of speech. The action in terms of “loud speech without objects” is formed under the control of another person and, first of all, as a message to him about this action. For someone who learns to perform it, this means the formation of an objective social consciousness of this action, cast into established forms scientific language, - the formation of objective social thinking about action. Thus, on the first one actually speech stage thinking and communication constitute inseparable aspects of a single process of joint theoretical action. But already here the psychological emphasis can be transferred first to one side, then to the other, and accordingly, the forms of speech change from speech-message to another to speech-message to oneself; V the latter case the goal becomes a detailed presentation of the action, the ideal restoration of its objective content. Then they begin to perform this “action in speech without objects” silently; The result is “external speech to oneself.” Here, too, it is first an appeal to an imaginary interlocutor, but as the action is mastered in this new form, the imaginary control of another person recedes more and more into the background, and the moment of mental transformation of the source material, i.e., thinking itself, becomes more and more dominant. As at all stages, the action in “external speech to oneself” is mastered, with different sides: on different materials, in different speech expressions, with different completeness of the operations that make up the action. Gradually, a person moves to increasingly abbreviated forms of action and, finally, to its most abbreviated form - to action according to a formula, when all that remains of the action is, in fact, the transition from the initial data to the result known from past experience. Under such conditions, natural stereotyping of the action occurs, and with it its rapid automation. The latter, in turn, leads to the movement of action to the periphery of consciousness, and then beyond its borders. Obviously verbal thinking to oneself becomes hidden by verbal thinking “in the mind.” Now its result appears as if “immediately” and without any visible connection with the speech process (which remains outside of consciousness) “simply” as an object. According to the profound instructions of I.P. Pavlov, the course of an automated process (dynamic stereotype) is reflected in consciousness in the form of a feeling. This feeling has control value, and the speech process, which has received the indicated form, like any automated process, remains under control by feeling. For the same reason (the absence of a speech process in consciousness) this feeling of our activity now relates directly to its product, and is perceived as an ideal action in relation to it, as a thought about it. As a result of all these changes, the hidden speech action appears in introspection as “pure thinking.”
The physiological side of this process is of particular interest. Automation of a speech act means the formation of its dynamic stereotype, and last education direct connection between the central links of the speech process, which were previously separated by work, executive bodies. Before the formation of a dynamic stereotype, it was necessary to pronounce a word so that its meaning would clearly appear in consciousness - now a direct connection is formed between the sound image of the word and its meaning, excitement directly passes from the nerve point associated with the sound image of the word to the nerve point associated with its meaning, bypassing the detour through the speech motor periphery. For this reduction physiological process P.K. Anokhin pays special attention. Obviously, in this case, the central speech process may not be accompanied by changes in the speech motor organs.
Thus, the properties of the last form of mental action explain those features of hidden speech thinking that cause so many misunderstandings in the understanding of thinking and speech when they are considered without taking into account their origin as ready-made phenomena.
The process of automation does not immediately capture the entire composition of the speech act, and even then, when this process is over, the action occurs in the described way only on the condition that its application to new task meets no obstacles. If they arise, then the orienting reflex and attention are switched to the difficulty and this causes a transition of action in this area to a simpler and earlier level (in our case, to non-automated execution “in external speech to oneself”). This fact, long known in psychology, was well explained from the psychophysiological side by A. N. Leontiev as a result of disinhibition of previously inhibited areas due to negative induction from a new focus corresponding to a new object of attention. But since this concerns only individual sections of a broader process, the corresponding particles of “external speech to oneself” appear separately and appear to the observer as incoherent speech fragments.
So, these speech fragments represent the result of a partial transition from hidden speech and automated thinking to overt speech and “voluntary” thinking, i.e., a partial return from internal speech to “external speech to oneself.” And in terms of function, and in terms of mechanisms, and in terms of the method of execution, they belong “to external speech to oneself,” of which they constitute one of the abbreviated forms. Having no data either about this type of speech or about the actual nature of what appears to be “pure thinking,” Vygotsky considered these fragments to be a special type of speech—inner speech. But now we see that they do not constitute either inner speech or separate species speech.
Inner speech in the proper sense of the word can and should be called that hidden speech process that is no longer revealed either by introspection or by recording the speech motor organs. This actual internal speech is characterized not by fragmentation and external incomprehensibility, but by a new internal structure - a direct connection between the sound image of a word and its meaning and automatic flow, in which the actual speech process remains outside of consciousness; in the latter, only its individual components are preserved, appearing therefore without any visible connection with the rest of speech and against the background of meanings that seem to be free from it, in a word, in a bizarre form of “pure thinking”.
To study this hidden verbal thinking, the study of mental actions in the process of their formation opens up new methodological possibilities. IN general outline they come down to two techniques with the help of which we systematically manage the course of this process. This is a systematic change in the conditions under which an action is proposed to be performed, and a systematic clarification of the conditions due to which it becomes possible. The system in question in both cases is determined by the sequence of the main properties of the action, its parameters, and within each of them - their indicators. Based on knowledge of this sequence, we build a mental action that has certain properties which it exhibits under clearly defined conditions. And since we ourselves are building it, we know exactly from what and in what way it is formed at each stage and what it actually represents in each new form - we know this by the result of the action even when we no longer see himself and do not receive symptoms about his physiological periphery.
Dictionary
Amorphous- from Greek a is a negative particle and morphз is form, formlessness.
InteriorsAtion(French interiorisation, from Latin interior - internal), transition from outside to inside. The concept of interiorization entered psychology after the work of representatives of the French sociological school (E. Durkheim and others), where it was associated with the concept of socialization, meaning the borrowing of the main categories of individual consciousness from the sphere of public ideas. The cultural-historical theory of the Soviet psychologist L. S. Vygotsky received fundamental significance for psychology; One of the main provisions of this theory was that any truly human form of the psyche initially develops as an external, social form of communication between people and only then, as a result of interiorization, becomes a mental process of an individual.
PredicateAndthoroughness- syntactic category that forms a sentence; relates the content of a sentence to reality and thereby makes it a unit of message (statement). Predicativity represents the unity of two syntactic categories - grammatical tense and mood.
Simultaneous- the same as simultaneous; French simultaneous, from lat. simul together, simultaneously.
SyntagmatAndlogical relationsenia - connections and dependencies between linguistic elements (units of any complexity) simultaneously coexisting in a linear series (text, speech), for example, between neighboring sounds (hence the phenomena of synharmonism, assimilation), morphs (hence the phenomena of overlapping or truncation of adjacent morphemes), etc.
succession- lat. successio following, continuity.
Posted on Allbest.ru
Similar documents
The use of the term “discourse” and approaches to its definition. The speech act as a unit of discourse, its participants and the circumstances of speech. Characteristics, structure and types of speech act of negation. Ways of expressing verbal negation in English.
abstract, added 12/13/2013
Study of types, forms of inner speech and the role of inner speech in a literary text work of art. Consideration linguistic means, used to construct internal speech in a literary text. Examination of the depicted inner speech.
thesis, added 07/16/2017
The process of argumentation in modern rhetoric; concept of speech influence. The five-part division of the speech act in the ancient rhetorical canon: invention, arrangement, expression, memorization and speech delivery. Types of topoi: external and internal.
lecture, added 02/01/2014
Speech from an intercultural perspective. Study of speech act, scientific analysis pragmatic components of its implementation at the locutionary, illocutionary and perlocutionary stages: linguistic design, characteristics of communicants, time, place and conditions of commission.
abstract, added 09/06/2009
Speech as a type of human activity and as its product is carried out on the basis of the use of language (words, their combinations, sentences, etc.) and emotional expression. Functions and types of speech. Etiquette verbal communication and etiquette speech formulas.
abstract, added 04/07/2008
Human thinking and speech. Content and form of speech. Language is a system of signs necessary for human communication, thinking and expression. Gestures are an auxiliary means of communication. Speech in the activities of a lawyer. Varieties and features of legal speech.
course work, added 12/15/2008
Speech communication as a way of intersubjective interaction. Influence gender stereotypes on the perception of spoken language. Linguistic studies of the speech behavior of men and women. Description of the stylistic features of male and female speech.
presentation, added 02/19/2011
Concepts of language and components of speech. Speech etiquette and speech culture. History of formation and features speech etiquette in Russia. Formation of advertising, linguistic means. Skillful use of words. Characteristics of the main language errors in advertising.
abstract, added 10/25/2014
Modern theoretical concept speech culture. Communication skills speech: relevance, richness, accuracy, logic. A system of rules of speech behavior and stable formulas of polite communication. Review of the main groups of vocabulary that can clog speech.
course work, added 02/17/2013
The concept of someone else's speech as a new speech layer in the narration of the author, the narrator introduced by him, the hero of the narration. Methods of transmitting someone else’s speech in Russian: direct, indirect and improperly direct speech. Author's words that introduce someone else's speech.
Ministry of Transport Russian Federation
Federal educational institution higher professional education
Ulyanovsk Higher Aviation School civil aviation(institute)
The concept of inner speech
Completed by: Sr. Redkin A.S.
gr M3.1 -09-1
I checked Alekseeva T.G.
Ulyanovsk 2010
introduction 3
1. Formation and structure of inner speech 5
2. Structure of inner speech 10
conclusion 12
References 14
introduction
In conditions of spontaneous oral speech conscious choice and the assessment of the linguistic means used in it are reduced to a minimum, while in writing and occupy a significant place in prepared oral speech. Various types and forms of speech are built according to specific patterns (for example, colloquial speech allows significant deviations from the grammatical system of the language, special place occupied by logical and even more so artistic speech). Speech is studied not only by speech psychology, but also by psycholinguistics, speech physiology, linguistics, semiotics and other sciences.
According to its many functions, speech is a polymorphic activity, i.e. in its various functional purposes is presented in different forms and types. In psychology, two forms of speech are mainly distinguished:
External;
Internal.
Inner speech is a necessary stage of preparation for external, expanded speech. In order to translate a simultaneous semantic record into a successively organized process of speech utterance, it is necessary that it go through a special stage - the stage of internal speech.
At this stage, the internal meaning is translated into a system of expanded syntactically organized speech meanings, the simultaneous scheme of “semantic recording” is recoded into the organized structure of the future expanded, syntactic utterance.
This process of translating an initial idea or thought into a smooth successive process of speech utterance does not occur immediately. It requires complex recoding of the original semantic recording into speech syntagmatic schemes, and that is why L.S. Vygotsky said that a thought is not embodied in a word, but is accomplished in a word. Inner speech plays a decisive role in this process.
Inner speech(speech “to oneself”) is speech that is devoid of sound design and proceeds using linguistic meanings, but outside the communicative function; inner speaking. Inner speech is speech that does not perform the function of communication, but only serves the process of thinking. specific person. It is distinguished by its structure by its convolution, the absence of minor members of the sentence. Inner speech can be characterized by predicativeness.
Predicativity- a characteristic of internal speech, expressed in the absence in it of words representing the subject (subject), and the presence only of words related to the predicate (predicate).
The role of internal speech as an essential link in the generation of speech utterances was covered in detail by such authors as S.D. Katsnelson (1970, 1972), A.A. Leontyev (1974), A.N. Sokolov (1962), T.V. Akhutina (1975), etc.
1. Formation and structure of inner speech
It is known that inner speech occurs in a child at the moment when he begins to experience certain difficulties, when the need arises to solve one or another intellectual problem. It is further known that this internal speech appears relatively late from previously developed external speech, at the first stages addressed to the interlocutor, and at further stages addressed to oneself. The formation of inner speech undergoes a number of stages; it arises through the transition of external speech, first into fragmented external speech, then into whispered speech, and only after that, finally, it becomes speech for itself, acquiring a compressed character.
It is known that in its morphological structure, internal speech differs sharply from external speech: it has a collapsed, amorphous character, and in its functional characteristics it is primarily a predicative formation. The predicative nature of internal speech is the basis for translating the original “intention” into a future detailed, syntagmatically constructed speech utterance. Inner speech includes only individual words and their potential connections. So, if in inner speech there is the word “buy”, then this means that at the same time all the “valences” of this word are included in inner speech: “buy something”, “buy from someone”, etc.; if the predicate “borrow” appears in internal speech, this means that this predicate retains all its inherent connections (borrow “from someone”, “something”, “to someone” and “for some time” "). It is this preservation of potential connections of elements or “nodes” of the primary semantic record found in internal speech that serves as the basis for a detailed speech utterance that is formed on its basis. Consequently, collapsed internal speech retains the ability to unfold again and turn into syntagmatically organized external speech.
With some brain lesions, inner speech suffers, and those potential lexical functions that are associated with the fragments included in it disintegrate. Then the original idea cannot transform into a smooth, syntactically organized, detailed speech utterance, and “dynamic aphasia” arises. The patient, who easily repeats the words presented to him, instead of making a detailed coherent statement, limits himself to naming individual words. We will speak separately about this violation, which is called “telegraph style.”
However, at the end of the 20s of the 20th century, the works of L.S. Vygotsky's doctrine of “inner speech” made fundamental changes. The starting point for the analysis of the formation of inner speech and the role it plays in the child’s behavior was the well-known observations of L. S. Vygotsky on the behavior of a 3-5 year old child in a situation where he encounters difficulties in performing some task. A child, for example, needs to trace a drawing using tissue paper placed on it or trace it with a colored pencil. If the implementation of this task encountered an obstacle (for example, the experimenter quietly removed the button with which the tracing paper was pinned to the drawing being drawn by the child) and, consequently, a difficulty arose in front of the child, he began to speak. This speech of the child, it would seem, was not addressed to strangers. He spoke even when there was no one in the room. Sometimes the child turned to the experimenter with a request to help him, sometimes he seemed to describe the situation that had arisen, asking himself how he could complete this task. Typical statements for a child in this situation were: “What should I do? The paper slides, but there’s no button, what should I do, how can I attach it?” etc.
Thus, the child's speech first described difficulties and then planned a possible way out of them. Sometimes the child began to fantasize when faced with a similar problem and tried to solve it verbally.
Such child speech not addressed to an adult was known before L.S. Vygotsky. It is described by such prominent psychologists as Jean Piaget under the name “egocentric speech”, because this speech is not addressed to other people, is not communicative, but is, as it were, speech for oneself. It has been shown that at first this speech is extensive, then in older children it gradually contracts, turning into whispered speech. At a further stage (after a year or two), external speech disappears altogether, only shortened movements of the lips remain, from which one can guess that this speech has “grown” inside, “internalized” and turned into the so-called “inner speech.” Many years after the experiments of L.S. Vygotsky in a whole series of experiments, which, in particular, include the experiments of A.N. Sokolov (1962), the connection between internal speech and movements of the tongue and larynx was proven. Using the method of recording hidden movements of the speech apparatus, it was found that when it is difficult to solve problems in adults and children, it is possible to register weakly expressed electromyographic reactions of the speech muscles, indicating an increase in the activity of speech motor skills during the performance of intellectual tasks.
Thus, the facts indicate that such “egocentric speech”, not addressed to the interlocutor, arises with every difficulty; at first it is detailed, describing the situation and planning a possible way out of this situation; with the transition to subsequent ages, it gradually decreases, becomes whispery, and then completely disappears, turning into inner speech.
The outstanding Swiss psychologist J. Piaget, assessing the role of inner speech, characterized these facts in accordance with his theory, according to which a child is born an autistic creature, a little hermit who lives on his own, communicating little with the outside world. Initially, the child is characterized by autistic or egocentric speech, aimed at himself, and not at communicating with peers or adults. Only gradually, according to Piaget, does the child’s behavior begin to be socialized, and along with it does speech become socialized, gradually turning into speech as a means of communication or communication. Thus, Piaget considered the child’s egocentric speech as an echo of childhood autism, egocentrism, and attributed the disappearance of this egocentric speech to the socialization of his behavior.
L.S. Vygotsky, in his interpretation of inner speech, proceeded from completely opposite positions. He believed that the assumption of an autistic character in the earliest periods of a child's development is false at its very core, that the child is a social being from birth; first he is connected with the mother physically, then biologically, but from birth he is connected with the mother socially; this social connection with the mother is manifested in the fact that the mother communicates with the child, addresses him with speech, teaches him to follow her instructions, starting from a very early age.
According to this view, the evolution of a child’s speech does not consist at all in the fact that the child’s speech, which is egocentric or autistic in function, transforms into social speech. The evolution lies in the fact that if at first the child addresses this social speech to an adult, inviting the adult to help him, then, without receiving help, he himself begins to analyze the situation with the help of speech, trying to find possible ways out of it, and, finally, with the help of speech begins to plan what he cannot do by direct action. So, according to L.S. Vygotsky, an intellectual, and at the same time behavior-regulating, function of the child’s own speech is born. Therefore, the dynamics of the so-called egocentric speech, which at first has a developed character, and then gradually collapses and through whispered speech turns into inner speech, should be considered as the formation of new types of mental activity associated with the emergence of new - intellectual and regulatory - functions of speech. This inner speech of the child fully retains its analyzing, planning and regulating functions, which were initially inherent in the speech of an adult addressed to the child, and then were carried out with the help of the child’s own expanded speech.
Thus, according to L.S. Vygotsky, with the emergence of internal speech, a complex volitional action arises as a self-regulatory system, carried out with the help of the child’s own speech - first expanded, then collapsed.
Over the past decades, these provisions of L.S. Vygotsky were traced in detail in the experiments of P.Ya. Halperin and his colleagues (1959, 1975), who showed that any intellectual action begins as a detailed material or materialized action, in other words, as an action based on detailed external manipulations with objects. Then the person begins to use his own speech and intellectual action moves to the stage of expanded speech. Only after this, external speech is reduced, becomes internal and begins to take part in the organization of those complex types of intellectual activity that P.Ya. Halperin calls it “mental actions.” Mental actions, which are the basis of human intellectual activity, are created on the basis of first expanded, and then shortened and condensed speech.
These provisions make it possible to approach the solution of the most important question about the internal structure and origin of the volitional act. A volitional act begins to be understood not as a primarily spiritual act and not as a simple skill, but as an action mediated in its structure, based on speech means, and by this we mean not only external speech as a means of communication, but also internal speech as a means of regulating behavior . Everything that has been said is a completely new solution to one of the most difficult problems of psychology - the problem of the act of will. It allows us to approach a volitional (and intellectual) act materialistically, as a process that is social in origin, mediated in its structure, where the role of a means is played primarily by a person’s inner speech.
2. Structure of inner speech
Inner speech is not just speech to oneself, as psychologists thought for several generations, who believed that inner speech is the same external speech, but with a truncated end, without speech motor skills, that it is “talking to oneself”, built on the same laws of vocabulary, syntax and semantics as external speech.
To think so would be the greatest mistake. This idea is erroneous, if only because such “speech to oneself” would be a duplication of external speech. IN such a case internal speech would flow at the same speed as external speech. However, it is known that an intellectual act, decision-making, and choosing the right path occur quite quickly, sometimes literally in tenths of a second. During this short period, it is impossible to say to yourself a whole detailed phrase, much less a whole reasoning. Consequently, internal speech, which plays a regulatory or planning role, has a different, abbreviated structure than external speech. This structure can be traced by studying the path of transformation of external speech into internal speech.
Let us remember how a child’s speech is constructed, which arises in any difficulty. At first, his planning speech is of a fully developed nature (“The piece of paper is sliding, how can I make sure it doesn’t slide?”; “Where can I get the button?”; “Maybe I should drool on the piece of paper?”, etc.) . Then it contracts, becomes fragmentary, and then in external whispered speech only fragments of this previously expanded speech appear (“But the piece of paper... it slides... what about... if only there was a button..." or even: “piece of paper,” “ button”, “but what about”).
If we carefully trace the structure of speech moving from external to internal, we can state, firstly, that it passes from loud to whispered, and then into internal speech, and secondly, that it contracts, turning from expanded to fragmented and rolled up. All this makes it possible to assume that internal speech has a completely different structure than external speech.
A characteristic feature of inner speech is that it begins to become purely predicative speech.
What does it mean? Every person who tries to include his inner speech in the process of solving a problem knows exactly what is at stake, what task is facing him. This means that the nominative function of speech, an indication of what exactly is meant, or, using the term of modern linguistics, what is the “topic” of the message (linguists conventionally designate it with an inverted T), is already included in inner speech and does not need special designation . All that remains is the second semantic function of inner speech - designating what exactly should be said about a given topic, what new should be added, what specific action should be performed, etc.
This side of speech appears in linguistics under the term “rheme” (conventionally denoted by an inverted R sign). Thus, internal speech, in its semantics, never denotes an object, and is never strictly nominative in nature, i.e. does not contain a “subject”; inner speech indicates what exactly needs to be done, in which direction the action needs to be directed. In other words, while remaining folded and amorphous in its structure, it always retains its predicative function. The predicative nature of internal speech, denoting only a plan for further utterance or a plan for further action, can be expanded as necessary, since internal speech originated from expanded external speech and this process is reversible. If, for example, I go to a lecture to talk about the mechanisms of internal speech, then I have an abbreviated lecture plan in the form of several points (“inner speech”, “egocentrism”, “predicativity”, etc.) indicating , what exactly do I want to say about this subject (in other words, of a predicative nature). This short plan and allows you to move on to a detailed external statement.
conclusion
Internal speech - various types the use of language (more precisely, linguistic meanings) outside the process of real communication. There are three main types of internal speech: a) internal pronunciation - “speech to oneself”, preserving the structure of external speech, but devoid of phonation, i.e. pronouncing sounds, and is typical for solving mental tasks in difficult conditions; b) internal speech itself, when it acts as a means of thinking, uses specific units (code of images and schemes, subject code, subject meanings) and has specific structure, different from the structure of external speech: c) internal programming, i.e. formation and consolidation in specific units of the plan (type, program) of a speech utterance, the whole text and its meaningful parts (A. N. Sokolov; I. I. Zhinkin, etc.). In ontogenesis, inner speech is formed in the process of internalization of external speech.
Majority modern psychologists does not believe that internal speech has the same structure and the same functions as expanded external speech. By internal speech, psychology understands a significant transitional stage between an idea (or thought) and developed external speech. Mechanism that allows recoding general meaning into a speech utterance, gives this idea speech form. In this sense, inner speech generates (integrates) a detailed speech utterance, including the original intent in the system of grammatical codes of the language.
The transitional place occupied by inner speech on the path from thought to a detailed utterance determines the main features of both its functions and its psychological structure. Inner speech is, first of all, not a detailed speech utterance, but only a preparatory stage preceding such an utterance; it is directed not at the listener, but at oneself, at translation into speech plan the scheme that existed before only general content plan. This content is already known to the speaker in general terms, because he already knows what exactly he wants to say, but has not determined in what form and in what speech structures he can embody it.
Inner speech is an essential link in the process of transforming the original idea or simultaneous “semantic record”, the meaning of which is understandable only to the subject himself, into a detailed, flowing in time, syntagmatically constructed system of meanings.
For a long time, internal speech was understood as speech devoid of a motor end, as “speech to oneself.” It was assumed that internal speech largely retains the structure of external speech; the function of this speech remained unclear.
Thus, internal speech differs from external speech not only in external sign that she is not accompanied loud sounds- “speech minus sound.” Internal speech differs from external speech in its function (speech for oneself). Performing a different function than the external one (speech for others), in some respects it also differs from it in its structure - it generally undergoes some transformation (abbreviated, understandable only to oneself, predicative, etc.).
References
1. Petrovsky A.V., Yaroshevsky M.G. Psychology. / Textbook. M.: Academ A, 1998.
2. Slobodchikov V.I., Isaev E.I. Human psychology. - M.: “School-Press”, 1995.
3. Danilova N.N. Psychophysiology. Textbook for universities. - M.: Aspect-Press, 1998.
4. Gomezo M.V., Domashenko I.A. Atlas of Psychology: Information and methodological manual for the course “Human Psychology”. M.: Russian Pedagogical Agency, 1998.
5. Leontiev A.A. Fundamentals of psycholinguistics: Textbook. for university students studying in the specialty “Psychology”. - M.: Smysl, 1997.
6. Filicheva T.B., Cheveleva N.A., Chirkina G.V. Basics of speech therapy. - M.: Publishing house "Enlightenment", 1989.
7. Godefroy J. What is psychology. - M.: Mir, vol. 1, 1992.
8. Krysko O.R. General psychology in the diagrams and comments to them. - M.: Moscow Psychological and Social Institute, Flint Publishing House, 1998.
Human inner speech- This is a complex, completely unstudied phenomenon, studied by psychology, general linguistics, and philosophy. Inner speech in psychology is hidden verbalization that accompanies the thinking process. This manifestation represents the relationship between mental operations, language components, communication interaction, and consciousness. Simply put, it is verbal mental functioning. In fact, a person’s thoughts are able to “work” without verbal elements. However, in reality, verbal structures combine mental operations with the external environment, society, and the solution of personal issues and problems of a social nature. Mental speech often presented as a “servicing” mechanism external communication and all active operations of the subject. Consequently, inner speech reveals itself as a silent instrument, a hidden verbalization that arises during mental functioning. It represents the derived form sound speech, consciously adapted to perform mental functions in the mind.
Internal and external speech
There are 3 types of forms of communicative interaction through language structures, namely external, written and internal.
How does external speech differ from internal speech? The first is facing outward, towards the people around you. Thanks to it, thoughts are broadcast, while internal speech is silent speech and reflects what the subject is thinking. Both of these types of communications are interconnected. Simply put, external speech is for the environment, and internal speech is for oneself.
The peculiarities of inner speech lie in its exclusivity, that is, it does not reflect into inner speech, does not precede it. It begins around the age of seven and comes from the egocentric, outward-directed speech of children. Egocentric communication through the language component in a child is speech directed inward in mental functioning and outward in design. With the beginning of the school period, a transformation of egocentric communication into internal communication occurs. In addition, there is a distinction between two speech operations: egocentric communication and the delimitation of speech for the environment and for oneself, from a single speech operation.
The characteristics of inner speech are represented by the following features: brevity, fragmentation, fragmentation. If it were possible to record an internal conversation, it would appear incomprehensible, incoherent, fragmentary, unrecognizable in comparison with the external one.
Communication directed outward is predominantly carried out in the form of dialogue, which always involves visual acceptance of the interlocutor, his body language and acoustic understanding of the intonation aspect of the conversation. Taken together, these two features external communication allow interaction through hints and understanding of understatement.
A person’s inner speech is not exclusively self-talk. Performing the function of regulation and planning, it is characterized by a structure other than external communication, a reduced structure. By semantic meaning communication “to oneself” never means an object and is not purely nominative in nature. In a word, it does not include a “subject”. It displays what exactly needs to be done and where the action should be directed. In structure, while remaining compressed and amorphous, it retains its predicative orientation, defining only the plan for a further sentence, judgment or scheme for a further operation.
Features of internal speech are represented by the following characteristics: soundlessness, fragmentaryness, generality, secondary (education from external communication), greater speed (in relation to external), lack of need for strict grammatical design.
Often, direct speech structures in the course of communication “to oneself” are replaced by auditory and visual ones. There are interdependencies and manifestations of external communication and internal communication. Firstly, before sounding a thought, a person in internal conversation draws up a diagram or plan for a future utterance. Secondly, written presentation is generally preceded by the pronunciation of words and phrases mentally, during which the selection of the most suitable structures and the placement of pauses in the resulting written statement occurs. Thirdly, with the help of an electrophysiological study, the presence of hidden articulation in the process of internal communication was discovered.
Consequently, communication “to oneself” for external conversation performs the necessary preparatory function.
External communication interaction can be oral or written. The first is a sounding speech characterized by relatively free norms in relation to the requirements of exemplary linguistic means. It covers: speaking (broadcasting acoustic speech signals that carry some information) and listening (understanding acoustic speech signals, as well as receiving them).
Oral speech is embodied in two directions: everyday (spoken) and public. In order to differentiate them, the term “speech situation” is used, which denotes a lot of circumstances influencing the implementation, its structure and content. This determines the existence of the following definitions of public communication. First of all, public communication is a type of oral interaction that is characterized by the following elements of speech conditions: a large audience, formality of the event (concert, meeting, lesson, lecture, meeting, etc.).
Everyday communication is a type of oral interaction speech conditions which forms: small quantity audience and casual (i.e. non-formal) settings.
Inner speech according to Vygotsky
Over the problems of interconnection mental activity and speech communication, many psychology “gurus” have worked, and are still working today.
L. Vygotsky established that words play a significant role in the formation of mental operations and mental processes human subjects.
Thanks to experiments conducted by L. Vygotsky, it was possible to discover in younger preschool children the presence of a form of communication incomprehensible to adults in their environment, which later became known as egocentric speech or “communication for oneself.” According to L. Vygotsky, egocentric communication is the carrier of the emerging thinking processes of children. During this period, the mental activity of the little ones is just entering the path. He proved that egocentric communication is not just a sound accompaniment of the internal thought process that accompanies the movement of thoughts.
Egocentric thinking, according to Vygotsky, is the only form of existence (formation) of children’s thoughts, and other, parallel, mental thinking in children at this stage simply does not exist. Only after passing through the stage of egocentric communication, thought processes during internalization and subsequent restructuring will gradually transform into mental operations, transforming into internal communication. Therefore, egocentric inner speech in psychology is a communication tool necessary for regulating and controlling the practical activities of children. That is, this is communication addressed to oneself.
It is possible to determine the following features of internal speech, in addition to those listed above: reduction of phonetic aspects (the phonetic side of communication is reduced, words are unraveled according to the intention of the speaker to pronounce them) and the prevalence of the semantic load of words over their designation. Verbal meanings are much broader and more dynamic than their meanings. They reveal different rules of unification and integration than verbal meanings. This is precisely what can explain the difficulty of expressing thoughts in speech for the environment, in sound communication.
Consequently, in children, the external manifestation of speech is formed from a word to several, from a phrase to a combination of phrases, then to a coherent communication consisting of a number of sentences. Internal communication is formed in a different course. The baby begins to “pronounce” whole sentences, and then moves on to comprehend individual semantic elements, dividing the whole thought into several verbal meanings.
Inner speech problem
The problem of inner speech to this day remains a rather complex and completely unknown issue. Initially, scientists believed that internal communication is similar in structure to external communication, the difference lies solely in the absence of sound, since it is silent speech, “to oneself.” However, modern research has proven the described statement to be false.
Inner speech cannot be perceived as a silent analogue of external communication. It differs in significant features of its own structure, first of all, fragmentation and convolution. An individual who uses internal communication to solve a problem understands what problem is posed to him, which allows him to exclude everything that calls the task. In the net result, all that remains is what needs to be done. Simply put, a prescription for what the next action should be. This characteristic of inner speech is often called predicativity. She emphasizes that it is important not to define the subject of communication, but to tell something about it.
Inner speech is often elliptical, so in it the individual skips those elements that seem understandable to him. In addition to verbal formulas, in internal communication images, plans and diagrams are used. Simply put, within himself the subject may not name the object, but imagine it. Often it is built in the form of a summary or table of contents, that is, a person outlines the topic of reflection and omits what needs to be said due to familiarity.
Inner speech and the hidden articulation caused by it should be considered as a tool for purposeful selection, generalization and recording of information obtained through sensations. Hence, internal communication plays a huge role in the process of visual and verbal-conceptual mental activity. In addition, it is also involved in the development and functioning of an individual’s voluntary actions.
Inner speech is a necessary stage of preparation for external, expanded speech.
Inner speech (speech "to oneself") is speech devoid of sound
design and proceeding using linguistic meanings, but outside
communicative function; inner speaking. Inner speech is speech
does not perform the functions of communication, but only serves the thinking process
a specific person. It differs in its structure by being folded,
the absence of minor members of the sentence. Inner speech can
characterized by predicativeness.
Predicativeness is a characteristic of internal speech, expressed in
the absence in it of words representing the subject (subject), and the presence
only words related to the predicate (predicate.
Formation and structure of inner speech
It is known that inner speech occurs in a child at the moment when he
begins to experience certain difficulties when the need arises
solve one or another intellectual problem. It is further known that this
internal speech appears relatively late from the previously developed external
speech, at the first stages addressed to the interlocutor, and at further stages
addressed to oneself. The formation of inner speech undergoes a series of
stages; it arises through the transition of external speech first to fragmentary
external, then into whispered speech and only after that, finally, it becomes speech
for oneself, acquiring a collapsed character.
It is known that, in its morphological structure, inner speech is sharply
differs from the external one: it has a folded, amorphous character, and in its
functional characteristic is primarily predicative
education. The predicative nature of inner speech is the basis for
translation of the original “plan” into the future, expanded, syntagmatically
constructed speech utterance. Inner speech includes only
individual words and their potential connections. So, if in inner speech there is
the word “buy”, this means that at the same time the inner speech includes
all the “valences” of this word: “buy something”, “buy from someone”, etc.;
if the predicate “borrow” appears in inner speech, this means that
of this predicate, all connections inherent to it are preserved (borrow "from someone-
that", "something", "someone" and "for a while"). It is this preservation
potential connections of elements or “nodes” of the primary semantic record,
available in internal speech, and serves as the basis for expanded speech
statements that are formed on its basis. Therefore, collapsed
inner speech retains the ability to unfold again and turn into
syntagmatically organized external speech.
With some brain lesions, inner speech suffers, and those
potential lexical functions that are associated with those included in it
fragments, disintegrate. Then the original plan cannot go smoothly,
syntactically organized, detailed speech utterance, and arises
"dynamic aphasia". A patient who easily repeats the words presented to him
instead of a detailed coherent statement, it is limited to naming individual
words About this violation, which is called "telegraph style", we will
we will talk specifically.
