 Vignette#=3V 0nnn Days Alive |
with ScurryFrom birth on, people are first in life. Things come later. |
 Scurry, the Scotty |
| What do we see of Peggy’s learning about things in the world, of other beings, and of communication and language through the specific incidents accessible in these materials? | How to represent simply the change in the relationships, communication and language use through the 108 weeks of the thread? |
| 3Vgn#: Parents’ Text Notes OR remarks on Video=> | |
| 0127: introduction of the two: Scurry was a spayed two year old scotch terrier and unquestionably Gretchen’s pet. Gretchen, Peggy’s Mom, introduces the two at 18 weeks. Scurry tastes Peggy, licking her feet. Peggy shows no reaction. Peggy was the third child born to our family. |
|
| 0216(#066): 3V0216.04 PEGGY TALKING TO TOYS AND SCURRY ROBBY PRETENDING TO SPEAK FOR DAPPER DAN; One of the toys not shown on videotape is Dapper Dan — a baby-size cloth doll. After the session, I propped Dapper Dan in the corner of Peggy’s playpen and left her with the two older children reading in the library. From my reading alcove, upstairs I heard a conversation going on. Robby “hid” outside the playpen behind Dapper Dan. When Peggy started talking to Dapper Dan, he responded in the appropriate turn. After a while this lost interest for him. Over following days, Peggy addressed Dapper Dan on occasion and received no response and has stopped doing so (recall she also used to address Scurry with the same expectation). Can we figure out some simple experiment which will permit us to determine how Peggy classifies things into speakers and non-speakers (or interactors and non-interactors)? |
|
| 0344: Peggy indicates things by pointing and uttering “that”. See “the pure point” for relevant information. Note her interest in pictures displayed on walls of the house. See Vignettes 3V0344.2, “A Picture Gallery” and 3V0355.03, PICTURE GALLERY: EXTENSIVE DISCUSSION |
|
| 0403(#182): 3V0403.01 “DOG” USED AS A VERBAL LABEL FOR SCURRY Peggy was downstairs in the kitchen with Gretchen. I sought a book from our shelves on the balcony of the living room. Peggy entered downstairs and crawled over to the sliding glass doors. (These are a window on the world at her level. For several weeks she has been looking over the porch to the woods and playing peek-a-boo and put-over-my-head with the curtains.) Peggy was “alone”, i.e. she did not see me on the balcony and I watched from the time she entered. Scurry barked (she was tied to a tree at the woods’ edge). Peggy pointed to her and said /dog/ i.e. [DOG]. She did not repeat it. Relevance — Peggy clearly used /dog/ as a verbal label, a name, for Scurry. Her use shows no communicative intent to any other person. Gretchen informs me she has been referring to Scurry as a “dog”, i.e. whenever Peggy points at her, Gretchen typically says, “That’s Scurry. She’s a dog.” |
Note: – is this incorrect? could the reference be adjectival? undifferentiated? – her Mom repeated the sound /dog/ with the animal; how could Peggy interpret that message? – did Peggy know the dog’s name? that she had a name? or what a name is? |
| 0408: Notes: Peggy makes 3 different types of utterances: NVEs (non-verbal-exclamations), trills, and the utterance “that.” Note that Peggy brings everything to her mouth, from the dog’s mouse-toy to the end of the leash. Note Peggy’s reaction on seeing the circular rolling path of a paper cup (a truncated, right regular cone). Was this a phenomenon new to her? She was clearly interested, even excited. Note also, as part of that reaction, her glance up toward her Mom. How might we interpret that sort of attempt at communication? About her putting the dog’s leash over her head: what was she doing? Peggy points to Scurry and says “That!”, then points to the poster on the wall picturing a Vixen and her cub and says “That!”. How can we interpret that? Is “That” the only “word” she knows? (Yes.) Could it also show recognition that the pictured Fox is like the live Scotty she plays with. (Yes?) |
|
| 0428: Note: Scurry utters vocal sounds; when does Peggy recognize their difference from speech? Are they NVEs? When she takes up Foxie, Peggy utters “word-like” sounds, vocables, looking up at the Fox painting on the wall. There appears to be no communicative intention here. Does this serve memory or discrimination functions? Reponding to questions and later, (@~ 5min), does she name Foxie’s eye (Mom and Miriam taught body-parts names, e.g., hand,nose, as in 3V0331.01 POINTING AND NAMING |
|
| 0440(#195): 3V0440.01 A DECLARATIVE SENTENCE [THAT’S SCURRY. THAT’S IT.] Scurry looms large in Peggy’s world. She knows her name is Scurry; she thinks of the fox pictures as dog pictures (especially note the videotape where she first makes that identification). Today Gretchen asked me, “Bob, did you hear that?” (I hadn’t.) “Peggy said, ‘That’s Scurry.’” I remarked that it would be nice if it were true, if that’s what she had said and meant. Here Scurry obliged by walking into the room. Peggy pointed and said [That’s Scurry. That’s it.] Importance — This use appears to be an elaboration of Peggy’s imperative /[th]aet/ and /hae(v)[th]aet/ into declarative use. |
|
| 0444(#197): 3V0444.01 PLAYING WITH SCURRY; TOOL, WEAPONS, CHIMPS, AND PEGGY After Peggy became more skilled at toddling around, she and Scurry have delighted in chasing each other about the house. Scurry bounces up and down, changes direction running off, hides under the chairs and peers out. Peggy toddles about, chortling gleefully, sometimes chasing Scurry, sometimes patting her (the petting is very hard). The latest prop introduced to this play is a yard stick. Peggy holds one end and chases Scurry with the other. With such an end grip, the yardsticks’ other end stays on the floor as Peggy chases Scurry who leaps nimbly over the impediment. When Peggy gets to use a different grip, she is dangerous. Holding the yardstick at mid-point and “patting” Scurry with it, or “chasing” her with it, has given the dog a few bad whacks which she seems to accept without anger |
|
| 0447: Here we tried to capture Peggy’s domination of Scurry, using a yardstick as a weapon. Using found-objects as weapons of domination was witnessed and filmed by Jane Goodall with the chimps of the Gombe reserve. See also the 2 opening chapters of Jared Diamond’s “The Third Chimpanzee.” (Harper Collins, 1992.) |
|
| 0505: Opening words are about adjusting the camera angle. Some adults (like Bob here) put up with “unacceptable” child behavior as a form of play to inform and to socialize the young. Juveniles (like Scurry here and Robby in P64B and here) are in it for the sport. Note the attention to using voice/speech to comfort and support the child (naturally), using words the child doesn’t understand but conveying feelings through modulated tones. Note when Peggy falls, before she can cry (she starts to) Bob comforts and supports her. She rises with no hesitation and goes on playing. Similarly, when she is frightened by a loud “OUCH” from Bob, he comforts her again with assuring tonal modulations. |
|
| 0517(#233): 3V0517.01 FEEDING THE DOG [SCURRY…HE EATEN’] SPONTANEOUS PRODUCTION Food is one thing Scurry and Peggy have in common. Scurry follows Peg about picking up crumbs, claiming whatever falls and is neglected, and even receiving an occasional handout. Peggy, however, takes food from Scurry as well as gives it to her. Thus, it is no surprise to find Peggy, from her high chair, dropping food on the floor, then peering over the edge to watch Scurry eat. What was surprising was Peggy’s comment to me when I asked, “Peggy, what are you doing?” Her reply was [Scurry…he eaten’]. This last was /i en/ (the /t/ was omitted, but the pronoun was definitely there following a pause). Relevance — This is a spontaneous example of Peggy’s speech production. It is already a definitely meaningful comment about an activity in [which] Peggy was engaged and thus contrasts directly with the uncommunicative tirade of speech production. |
|
| 0594: Asked a question, Peggy understands an answer is expected. She recognizes she can’t always say “that.” How should one refer to responses such as hers? Pseudo-words? Ur-words, Would-be words? When does attachment to recognizable referents begin? Note the problem solving incident. Peggy “explains” there is a problem and asks for help. Then she understands Bob wants her to solve the problem. With persuasion, she does so. After, Peggy seems to vocalize about the stuck state. Does she reflect on the problem state? |
|
| 0638(#344): 3V0638.01 HOLOPHRASE SEQUENCES: [GOODY…SCURRY…FOOD…TREAT] Peggy knows where Scurry’s goodies are kept, and often asks to give her one (frequently giving it a nibble herself in transit). She has always called it /fu/ (“food”). Today, as I got Scurry’s heartworm pill from the shelf above, Peggy pointed up and said /guh/di (goodie)…/kur/di/ (Scurry)…/fu/ (food)…/trit/ (treat). This is, I think, the first time I have heard her give a multiple identification of something, using different words to apply to the same object. (The “cup”…”owl” seems more like “mama…eye”, a description of an attribute rather than an alternate definition.) Gretchen. |
|
| 0638(#346): 3V0638.03 NAMING: METALINGUISTIC NOTE: CHANGES IN THE NAME OF SCURRY Over the past week or two, Peggy’s name for Scurry has shifted somewhat from /kuhl/dah/ or /kuhl/dae/ or /kar/di/ (roughly). She has shown a tendency also to call other dogs /dawg/ rather than /kuhl/dae/. I have told her that Scurry is a dog, and what we call her, her name, is Scurry. The last time I did so, Peggy repeated /naim/. During the same time, she has been making an effort to name Miriam also. (cf. naming Robby, 10-3; naming Miriam, 10-1). Her usual rendition is “Mimi” or “Mamie”, with occasional attempts that sound like Mary. While LaRene D. was here this past week, Peggy called her /rin/. Gretchen. |
|
Today Scurry committed some minor fault against Peggy (such as eating her cookie) and I scolded her. “Shame on you, Scurry,” Peggy repeated [s’em] then kicked the dog neatly under the chin (She was wearing shoes.) Gretchen. |
|
| 0718(#392): 3V0718.02 TIRADES: REAPPEARANCE AS SINGING (CF. P103-105); TALKING TO SCURRY Failing earlier to capture Peggy’s tirades mechanically, I’ve been delighted to find this behavior re-emerge. The most striking example appeared as Peggy led Scurry around the house on the leash. She spent considerable time yammering at Scurry as she took her on this inside walk. Similarly, Peggy has begun singing very openly (and noisily). Her tune is most various but her words are recognizable — they usually include (occasionally) “Morning Dew” and “Monkey Zoo” and thus recognizably classify the tirades as songs. The burden of singing seems to be repetitions of “Oh no.” Some of Peggy’s singing has been captured on videotapes P103-P105. |
Makem & Clancey One for the Morning Glory, Two for he Early Dew, Three for the man who will stand his round<> And Four for the love of you my girl, Four for the love of you. Ronnie Drew Tura-lura-lura-loo, Lots of Monkeys in the Zoo, And if I had a face like you, I’d join the British Army. |
| 0743(#412): 3V0743.01 “SCURRY” FOR THE FIRST TIME Today Peggy said “Scurry” for the first observed time. (getting her mouse, identifying owner.) Gretchen |
|
| 0755: Peggy’s word use is increasingly articulate and expressing shared meanings, through socially standardidzed referents. Poor Scurry gets her own (steals a cookie). Peggy gets a treat (from Miriam, offstage) for Scurry, delivers it and names it as a “bone.” |
|
| 0771(#435): 3V0771.02 SCURRY AND COOKIES Peggy all too often shares her food with the dog, sometimes on purpose, sometimes not so. Today she took some cookies from a little Easter basket made by Miriam and carried them over to Scurry. She then said (and repeated 3 more times) “Scurry eat some.” Here Gretchen censured Peggy, telling her that cookies are not good for dogs and she should not give them to her. Peggy concluded the interchange with her own affirmation, “Scurry good dog.” |
|
| 0797(#470): 3V0797.02 THE SCOTTIE IN MADELINE: [THAT SCURRY. THAT NAME SCURRY.] Reading again Peggy’s early favorite, we came to a page where a figure in the background walks a black Scotty. Peggy asked, “Who’s that who, Daddy?” Confused, I asked, “Who’s what?” She pointed, “That Scurry. That name Scurry.” |
|
| 0830: This video clip appears to have legitimate verbal communication sequences. See clipNotes Text and subtitled video. |
|
| 0841(#512): 3V0841.01 CAUSATION: {SCURRY DID IT. SHE BUMPED MY HEAD.} Under her overlong bangs, I noticed a bruise on Peggy’s forehead and asked what had happened to her. She replied, “This? (pointing to bruise). Scurry did it. She bumped my head.” (This is not a quotation but records the sense of what she said. |
|
| 0846(#513): 3V0846.01THIRD PERSON FOR INTENSE EMPHASIS: COMMANDS TO SCURRY Peggy played with Scurry, trying to get her to SIT (a command whichScurry will obey when she chooses). With the dog on a leash, Peggy pulled her around for a while and in the course said “sit.” Scurry did not obey. Intensifying her command, Peggy said to Scurry, “She told me sit,” emphatically. |
How can one make sense of this? Is Peggy providing for Scurry an interpretation, for Scurry’s perspective, of what she, Peggy, said? |
| 0886: This 41 second video is password protected because Peggy is scantily clad on a hot summer day. Scurry is recruited for the experiment at Peggy’s request, but she escapes, thanks to Gretchen calling her. Exit Scurry, grumbling all the way. |
|
| 0940(#561): 3V0940.01 GSB : LETTERS AS SYMBOLS FOR PEOPLE: “THIS SAY MOMMY, SCURRY, DADDY” We have a key ring about the house from the Guilford Savings Bank. Peggy brought it to me today and explained to me, “This says Mommy, Scurry, Daddy.” She has been told that this first letter begins the name Gretchen, the last Bob, and, of course, S is for “Scurry.” The point to note here is that WE do not impose on her this sort of correspondence. This is what SHE remembers and makes much of. |
|
| 0: | 0: |
| 0: | 0: |
