advanced vocabulary

[minkin03]

what would you consider advanced vocabulary for a 5 1/2 yo? my dd seems to use what i consider somewhat advanced vocab for her age when she's playing. an example would be she'll say defeated, instead of beat when playing a game.

[leighi123]

I dunno.  I consider my ds to have a very advanced vocabulary.  My mom was a kindergarden teacher for 19years and ds surpassed the 'average' 5-6yr old speech patterns around age 2.   

He is 3, almost 4, and uses all kinds of 'big' words in everyday speech - defeated, actually, complicated, apparently, although, even though, delicate, including, tempting, scatter, etc.   Sorry thats a really random list, I have a hard time thinking of examples.   He basically uses the same speech as I do, with a couple minor misprounciations.  (he just recently got the "s blends" down)

[LynnS6]

It's really hard to tell without a language test.

In general, latinate words are learned after the good old Germanic ones. More of our 'basic' vocabulary is Germanic. (Exceptions are the private body parts, assuming you teach your child those.) So, 'defeated' is a borrowing from Norman French (and thus has Latin roots), where as 'beat' is Anglo Saxon through and through. Based on that alone, I'd say that's advanced, but without knowing her whole vocab, it's hard to know.

(The words my kids use in everyday language don't strike me as being all that advanced anymore (they're 7 and 10), but my kids still score very high on vocab tests.)

[moominmamma]

I think advanced vocabulary in children can be due in large measure from them hearing advanced vocabulary at home. If their parents don't talk down to them, if they read or hear good literature on a daily basis, if they engage in more conversation and watch less TV than average kids.

What was it my 8-year-old said today while playing with her sister? "This is a pretty sub-standard historical re-enactment!" 

Miranda

[ollyoxenfree]

Exposure counts for so much with vocabulary. This thread reminds me of my little sister, at about age 3, saying "You're despicable" when she was unhappy about something. She picked it up from watching the Bugs Bunny/Loony Tunes cartoons on television. Everyone thought it was a hoot, and of course, the positive attention was a huge reinforcement for her to find other long, advanced words to try out. 

[whatsnextmom]

I think it's relative to their environment. When I taught preschool, parents were often saying their child had an advanced vocabulary because they'd use "actually" or "technically." Yes, it's darn cute coming out of a 2 or 3-year-old but it's also something they hear adults say regularly. Honestly, it's not that unusual from what I've seen. Also, words go in and out of fashion. A large word can surprise you coming from your child and then you step on campus and note that half the kids use it regularly. Basically, it's sort of hard to say, particularly in a school-aged child.

I often hear that my 10-year-old has an advanced vocabulary but I don't know that he uses "unusual" words so much as is very precise with his language. If you took two kids and wrote every word they uttered in a day, I suspect DS's list would have far more variety but I don't know that you'd be running to your dictionary. KWIM? Then again, he's also considered to have advanced vocabulary in Spanish and Mandarin (he's in an immersion school.) Even then, he doesn't KNOW more words that typical as much as USES more of them in daily conversation.

[minkin03]

I agree that their environment plays an important role in their vocabulary, however I don't usually use many of the words in my speech that she uses. I certainly don't talk down to her but I would say my manner of speaking is pretty bland or straight-forward. I just remarked that she uses very 'colorful' vocabulary when I overhear her playing. I find that when she could use a much simpler word such as beat versus defeat when playing. I wouldn't say it's highly advanced vocabulary but she's very elaborate and creative when she plays and it seems her speech follows suit with that. 

[moominmamma]

Originally Posted by minkin03 

I find that when she could use a much simpler word such as beat versus defeat when playing. I wouldn't say it's highly advanced vocabulary but she's very elaborate and creative when she plays and it seems her speech follows suit with that. 

Beat has one syllable. Defeat has two, just like the words "purple" or "zebra." It's not inherently a complex word. We view them as considerably different in complexity because we've accumulated a lifetime of experience hearing "beat" used casually, but "defeat" used in more high-brow academic contexts. Your dd has not accumulated that lifetime of context. She hasn't yet learned that one is considered the simple word and the other is not, so if she's heard both, she's as likely to use one as the other.

Miranda

[mom2reenie]

I don't know if I would ever think that a 5.5 year old had an advanced vocabulary.   I figure by then they are able to repeat what they have heard and use it correctly and if they are reading they can pick up words that they have read and use them correctly.    I think, also, that 5-6 year olds have such a wide range of knowledge that it's hard to compare them.

[crunchy_mommy]

Originally Posted by moominmamma 

We view them as considerably different in complexity because we've accumulated a lifetime of experience hearing "beat" used casually, but "defeat" used in more high-brow academic contexts. Your dd has not accumulated that lifetime of context. She hasn't yet learned that one is considered the simple word and the other is not, so if she's heard both, she's as likely to use one as the other.

This is such a good point. My 2yo uses words that seem a little complex -- things like "occupant", "counter-clockwise", "actually", etc. -- but they are just words to him, and all words are apparently equal in his mind. I have heard people say his language is advanced, but really he just picks up the words around him... "Actually" is something I tend to say myself, "occupant" is in a book we read, clockwise/counter-clockwise are terms a family friend used one time when she helped us with a construction project and was telling DS which way to turn the screwdriver... I do appreciate how well the words are expanded into various contexts, it's cool to see the connections he makes. But generally, DH & I just use 'normal' vocabulary around him. I've learned from a lifetime of talking to people to watch my words (I got tired of the confused looks or stopping a conversation to define a word I used!) so I tend to match the speech of those around me and avoid "big words" so I would expect DS to use pretty "normal" speech as well. I would expect the child of parents who use a rich vocabulary to have a similarly broad range of words at the ready.

[ollyoxenfree]

Originally Posted by mom2reenie 

I don't know if I would ever think that a 5.5 year old had an advanced vocabulary.   I figure by then they are able to repeat what they have heard and use it correctly and if they are reading they can pick up words that they have read and use them correctly.    I think, also, that 5-6 year olds have such a wide range of knowledge that it's hard to compare them.

Well, education and medical professionals use vocabulary acquisition as an indicator of child development. It's fair to say there is a range of delayed, typical/average and advanced vocabulary for 5 y.o's. I believe the benchmark for a 5 year old is somewhere in the neighbourhood of 2500 to 5000 root words. I think the average North American adult vocabulary is about 50,000 words, so there is a lot of work as a child ages from 5 years to  18 years.  

So, yeah, a 5.5 year old could have an advanced vocabulary.

Comparing 5 to 6 y.o.'s vocabulary (and other language skills) may be necessary to consider whether a significant difference (impoverished or enriched vocabulary) indicates an underlying issue. In the case of impoverished language, the cause may be cognitive, or hearing loss, or cultural (I'm thinking of extreme cases - children locked in closets for years....). At the other end of the spectrum, vocabulary knowledge is often a subtest on IQ assessments for giftedness. 

[meemee]

i stopped looking at individual words when dd was 2. 

its more the context and her ability to be able to communicate her thoughts. 

for instance my friend was impressed that she could have a conversation with dd about being a vegetarian (dd was a veget then, now a rare meatitarian) at 3 and discover dd knew exactly what it meant and had the vocab to express how much she knew and be able to express her own stand on it. she may have used simple vocab.  

so i look upon it not as how many big words she knew. but how she understood words and used them differently in many contexts. for instance at 5 she knew what riparian meant and used it because she learnt it while volunteering but only in teh context she heard it (so repeating). however by 6 she understood the nuances of the word and it became a part of her vocab and she used it when talking about the habitat of the yellow billed magpie robin. 

 however even today i pretty much seem to be clueless about being advanced because she is my only and i dont have a comparison to make. 

[pranava]

Originally Posted by ollyoxenfree 

Well, education and medical professionals use vocabulary acquisition as an indicator of child development. It's fair to say there is a range of delayed, typical/average and advanced vocabulary for 5 y.o's. At the other end of the spectrum, vocabulary knowledge is often a subtest on IQ assessments for giftedness. 

Also, tests like the NART and AMNART are entirely based on vocabulary level and are common tests used to approximate IQ in adults.  Most full scale IQ tests for adults also have vocabulary sections, like the WAIS. 

I think kids who are able to read more complicated books and find it easier to pick up the meaning of words from context are likely to use a wider variety of words on a regular basis.

[mom2reenie]

Originally Posted by ollyoxenfree 

Well, education and medical professionals use vocabulary acquisition as an indicator of child development. It's fair to say there is a range of delayed, typical/average and advanced vocabulary for 5 y.o's. I believe the benchmark for a 5 year old is somewhere in the neighbourhood of 2500 to 5000 root words. I think the average North American adult vocabulary is about 50,000 words, so there is a lot of work as a child ages from 5 years to  18 years.  

So, yeah, a 5.5 year old could have an advanced vocabulary.

Comparing 5 to 6 y.o.'s vocabulary (and other language skills) may be necessary to consider whether a significant difference (impoverished or enriched vocabulary) indicates an underlying issue. In the case of impoverished language, the cause may be cognitive, or hearing loss, or cultural (I'm thinking of extreme cases - children locked in closets for years....). At the other end of the spectrum, vocabulary knowledge is often a subtest on IQ assessments for giftedness. 

I didn't think the OP was asking if there are tests to use to see if her 5.5 year old had advanced vocabulary.  Of course there are tests that can be given to figure that out. 

I took it as an outsider, what words would I consider advanced for a 5.5 year old and my answer is "I don't think I would consider a 5.5 year old to have advanced vocabulary" based on just listening to them talk.  When I hear my friends 5.5 year old discuss in depth information about skunks, flowers, etc...I don't think "wow, she has an advanced vocabulary", I think "wow, she's really interested in skunks and flowers."  On a test level, yes she would have an advanced vocabulary, because she would know words/concepts that an average 5.5 year old is not expected to know.....but, from being around many 5/6 year olds, they are all advanced on some level because of their interest, outside influences, and culture.  Even the Kindergartener in DD's class, who was unable to count to five and didn't know his colors, was using words correctly that DD didn't know, because of the movies and music he was watching/listening.

Can a 5.5 year old have advanced vocabulary and tests will show that--of course....as an observer and outside person, I have never looked at 5.5 year old and thought "wow, their vocabularly is advanced." (which was how I read the question)

[pranava]

oh,ok.  I skimmed through the thread and thought there seemed to be a common thought that vocab at that age was just different because of exposure and not ever really advanced, so to speak.  Just making a case for the possibility of a vocab in both adults and children that is truly advanced and not just different because of exposure or interest. 

[meemee]

Originally Posted by pranava 

oh,ok.  I skimmed through the thread and thought there seemed to be a common thought that vocab at that age was just different because of exposure and not ever really advanced, so to speak.  Just making a case for the possibility of a vocab in both adults and children that is truly advanced and not just different because of exposure or interest. 

sorry i dont really get what you are saying. vocab, language are all learned (dang that thread in TAO makes me question if it should actually be learnt) through exposure. 

are you saying parroting verses knowing how to use it with all its nuances? is that what you call truly advanced? the knowing?
 

[ollyoxenfree]

Originally Posted by mom2reenie 

I didn't think the OP was asking if there are tests to use to see if her 5.5 year old had advanced vocabulary.  Of course there are tests that can be given to figure that out. 

I took it as an outsider, what words would I consider advanced for a 5.5 year old and my answer is "I don't think I would consider a 5.5 year old to have advanced vocabulary" based on just listening to them talk.  When I hear my friends 5.5 year old discuss in depth information about skunks, flowers, etc...I don't think "wow, she has an advanced vocabulary", I think "wow, she's really interested in skunks and flowers."  On a test level, yes she would have an advanced vocabulary, because she would know words/concepts that an average 5.5 year old is not expected to know.....but, from being around many 5/6 year olds, they are all advanced on some level because of their interest, outside influences, and culture.  Even the Kindergartener in DD's class, who was unable to count to five and didn't know his colors, was using words correctly that DD didn't know, because of the movies and music he was watching/listening.

Can a 5.5 year old have advanced vocabulary and tests will show that--of course....as an observer and outside person, I have never looked at 5.5 year old and thought "wow, their vocabularly is advanced." (which was how I read the question)

Ah, okay, I think I understand your clarification of your original statement "I don't know if I would ever think that a 5.5 year old had an advanced vocabulary....."  To me, It seemed to deny the possibility that a 5.5 y.o. might acquire a vocabulary with more words and greater complexity than normal for that age.  

[loraxc]

Ths thread is sort of confusing to me. Yes, of course, vocabulary depends on what you hear and read, so environment matters, but also, yes, a child of this age can have an advanced vocabulary due to being quicker to pick things up (giftedness). I agree that it would be hard to know for sure without a test, but I feel like I know it when I hear it. For the record, my DD's vocabulary seemed more impressive to me when she was younger. I don't notice it as much now. I don't know if this means it's no longer a strength or if it's just harder to hear this as a child gets older.

[TiredX2]

Originally Posted by loraxc 

Ths thread is sort of confusing to me. Yes, of course, vocabulary depends on what you hear and read, so environment matters, but also, yes, a child of this age can have an advanced vocabulary due to being quicker to pick things up (giftedness). I agree that it would be hard to know for sure without a test, but I feel like I know it when I hear it. For the record, my DD's vocabulary seemed more impressive to me when she was younger. I don't notice it as much now. I don't know if this means it's no longer a strength or if it's just harder to hear this as a child gets older.

From my perspective, it just gets "harder to hear" as the child gets older.  It is when a child has good pronounciation and word choice at 2.  When most kids have hit the ability to be readily and easily understood, it just doesn't stand out as much unless they are talking about something with very specific vocabulary.  I find this to go the other way as well--- a child can have speech issues at 3-4, but I don't really notice them unless they still have them at 5-6-7 when their peers have outgrown their speech issues.  Also, if they have one specific pronounciation issue it becomes much more obvious when everything else they are saying is standardized, kwim?

At the age of 5-6 I mainly notice vocabulary in children in a technical context.  We were babysitting last weekend and the 4 year old was talking about photons (and something else).  I definatley noticed his correct, and deep, word usage in that context.  General vocabulary (defeat, apparently, etc...) I would no longer notice as noteworthy at that age.

[LynnS6]

Vocabulary is one of the areas where environment has a huge impact. Maternal education is a pretty good predictor of vocabulary size. So, I'm not shocked that my kids score well on vocabulary tests because I use a wide range of words (just last night I used the word 'malign' with ds -- it's a rarer word/construction than saying "say bad things about", but not as rare as 'traduce').

It's also the case that with vocabulary, the 'rich' tend to get richer, especially if kids are early readers. It takes a lot of exposure to words to learn them well enough to use them correctly. For most people, hearing a word once or twice isn't enough to give them more than a rough sense of the word, and certainly not enough to help them learn a word well enough to use it correctly. So, I 'know' the word 'traduce', but I don't think I could use it in a sentence (I think the only contexts I've ever read are "traduce his/her character"). Usually, it takes 20-50 exposures for that to happen. Early readers tend to read more, and so they're exposed to more.

So while one word can't be 'advanced', a child can have an advanced vocabulary if the set of words they use consist of words that are generally acquired at an older age than their chronological age.

Originally Posted by mom2reenie 

Can a 5.5 year old have advanced vocabulary and tests will show that--of course....as an observer and outside person, I have never looked at 5.5 year old and thought "wow, their vocabularly is advanced." (which was how I read the question)

Well, I might be different because I deal in language issues every day, but I have had that thought (and not just about my own children). Other people have commented to me about my children's vocabulary as well. Just last night, we were having a discussion about the fact that my nephew's wife has been in preterm labor, and we're really hoping that the baby stays put for another 4 weeks. Dd asked "So if it's born now, will it have to go in an incubator?" I was surprised both that she knew the word and the concept, and that she understood the implications of prematurity. Does that one word make her vocabulary advanced? No, of course not. But it is a technical word that most kids her age wouldn't use. It's not a frequent word and it's not one we've used a lot.

Quote:

Originally Posted by crunchy_mommy 


This is such a good point. My 2yo uses words that seem a little complex -- things like "occupant", "counter-clockwise", "actually", etc. -- but they are just words to him, and all words are apparently equal in his mind. I have heard people say his language is advanced, but really he just picks up the words around him... "Actually" is something I tend to say myself, "occupant" is in a book we read, clockwise/counter-clockwise are terms a family friend used one time when she helped us with a construction project and was telling DS which way to turn the screwdriver... I do appreciate how well the words are expanded into various contexts, it's cool to see the connections he makes. But generally, DH & I just use 'normal' vocabulary around him. I've learned from a lifetime of talking to people to watch my words (I got tired of the confused looks or stopping a conversation to define a word I used!) so I tend to match the speech of those around me and avoid "big words" so I would expect DS to use pretty "normal" speech as well. I would expect the child of parents who use a rich vocabulary to have a similarly broad range of words at the ready.

But part of his behavior is unusual -- the fact that he can use the words accurately and appropriately after relatively little exposure suggests that his learning is different from other children's. If your son has learned a word after a few exposures, this is advanced learning, and it will mean that his vocabulary will be richer and bigger than other children his age.

Originally Posted by moominmamma 

Beat has one syllable. Defeat has two, just like the words "purple" or "zebra." It's not inherently a complex word. We view them as considerably different in complexity because we've accumulated a lifetime of experience hearing "beat" used casually, but "defeat" used in more high-brow academic contexts. Your dd has not accumulated that lifetime of context. She hasn't yet learned that one is considered the simple word and the other is not, so if she's heard both, she's as likely to use one as the other.

Actually, kids are remarkably good at 'matching' what goes on in their environment. If you look at corpora of input to children, defeat is less commonly used by both adults and children. So, while it's not 'complex' (I'm not sure we could define any word as complex, as it's the concept they encode that's complex or not), it is less frequent.

'Advanced' vocabulary isn't a matter of complexity, it's a matter of frequency, and then a matter of being able to express shades of meaning. What's the difference between a gulch and a gulley?