View the H-Childhood Discussion Logs by month
View the Prior Message in H-Childhood's February 2014 logs by: [date] [author] [thread]
View the Next Message in H-Childhood's February 2014 logs by: [date] [author] [thread]
Visit the H-Childhood home page.
1. From: Emily Bruce <email@example.com> Subject: Re: H-CHILDHOOD Digest - 17 Feb 2014 to 18 Feb 2014 (#2014-12) Date: February 18, 2014 9:12:24 PM PST In his book The Stories of English, David Crystal points to Lindley Murray's 1795 English Grammar as one of the originators of this usage. Crystal writes (quoting Murray): “Violation 7 of Rule 5, for example, begins: We hardly consider little children persons, because that term gives us the idea of reason and reflection: and therefore the application of the personal relative who, in this case, seems to be harsh: ‘A child who’. In this case the rule was eventually ignored, though doubtless several generations of schoolchildren were penalized for getting it wrong.” In German, of course, "das Kind" (child) is a neuter noun; I'm sure that pattern holds in other languages as well. Hope this might help! Emily Bruce firstname.lastname@example.org 2. From: Barbara R Beatty <email@example.com> Subject: Re: INQ: Child as "It" v. Child as "He/She" Date: February 19, 2014 5:09:01 AM PST I've been trying to trace a similar linguistic shift, from when developmental psychologists stopped referring to "the child" and began speaking and thinking (?) about children, plural, possibly implying more awareness of individual differences, and less of a focus on group norms. When I spoke with highly-respected developmental psychologist Barbara Rogoff a few years back, she said that the she thought that many psychologists still spoke about "the child." Barbara Barbara Beatty Department of Education Pendleton East 152 Wellesley College 106 Central Street Wellesley, MA 02481 --