Thus, they help each other and complement each other.
For example, having blunted the study of a work, we read the introduction, the table of contents, to understand first the author’s intention, then run our eyes over the text. This will be the contour that allows you to better perceive the meaning of the text when read carefully. The same function can be performed by a graphic representation of the relationship of the main semantic units of the message, Shatalov calls them reference notes, signals.
The scheme should be short so as not to get a "bad" infinity, when the introduction will require an even shorter introduction, etc. The boundaries here are determined by the teacher again intuitively. Psycholinguistics, experiment, and pedagogical practice can help to achieve more precise parameters. And to express the main idea of the author, first of all, requires the selection of the necessary and sufficient number of semantic elements, which are the content of the scheme.
In the process of reasoning, the scheme will be detailed.
According to a sociological study, most students feel the need for a schematic preliminary presentation of the material.
The size will prompt psycholinguistics
So, we will proceed from the fact that the final product of thought is a word, a text. The need for multi-level division of the text is due to the limited ability of man to "hold" the information within which he formulates his thought. These limitations are usually not realized. And since the author of the text is in a more favorable position in relation to the perceiver (he is "in the subject", in addition, the paper tolerates any length) and his psychological capabilities of the holistic coverage of the speech situation is slightly higher, there may be misunderstanding. That is why it is so important for a teacher to be able to consciously group information by meaning. The skill of independent semantic grouping of the text by students is not effective.
A few words about the differences between oral and written text in terms of comprehension. The first significant difference is that when perceiving an oral text, the listener does not have the opportunity to move through the text, ie, either to look at it at a pace that is convenient for him, or to go back to think about obscure places … This is a disadvantage of oral monologue text, because due to individual differences in the skills of semantic processing of the text and differences in the level of general training of students, individual students may drop elements of the text from the process of comprehension. And it is necessary to see what oral text Shatalov gives out !!! What portions of new and how many returns! Exactly enough to see the burning eyes of the last student. Without this, he does not go further.
The second difference is related to the size of the text. An oral text is usually shorter than a written one when expressing the same thoughts, if not read, but stated in your own words, so it is easier to understand. The written text is as detailed as possible, because the addressee is unknown, the level of his preparation, no feedback is felt, there is no possibility to use facial expressions, gestures, etc. – in short, here the abbreviations allowed in oral speech are excluded. When reading a written text, you can return to any of its elements and, if necessary, stop the speech flow for comprehension.
So, the exposition begins.
The thought to be formulated in speech is always personal, subjective. The subjective side of thought is denoted by the term "meaning", contrasting it with another term – "meaning", which reflects the objective connections of phenomena that have formed in the process of social development of language and are enshrined in speech practice. The transition to a detailed statement involves the transformation of meanings into meanings available for transmission. Meanings and meanings do not always coincide ("a thought uttered is a lie"). The process of transition of thought to a detailed utterance begins in the head with the general scheme of utterance and then proceeds to the search for the necessary lexical units and the design of speech.
The perception of speech is in reverse order; by the meaning of the words it is necessary to highlight the meaning of the message. Analysis of the psycholinguistic literature, experiment make it possible to establish that the mechanism of understanding all levels of the whole in speech includes two processes – it is prediction and recoding of speech. Both operate simultaneously and within the amount of RAMyou. The first is directed as if forward, on reconnaissance https://123helpme.me/animal-farm/ of a way, and the second – back, on sorting and packing of the perceived information. Thus, they help each other and complement each other. A good forecast is impossible without orderly facts, and ordering newly discovered facts is effective with a good forecast. Consider the processes of prediction and recoding in speech.
Because knowledge, especially at the beginning of training, is minimal, the prognosis cannot be profound. The function of the forecast, as noted, is performed by a brief, schematic presentation of the highest semantic level of the text, it will also ensure the unity of the presented material in the future. Such an exposition should not be just brief – it should not exceed the possibilities of one-moment perception.
These possibilities are characterized by the so-called Miller number 7 ± 2. American psychologist J. Miller rightly called it "magical". The nature of the "magic number" is not fully understood. The physiological basis of this phenomenon is also insufficiently elucidated. Apparently, according to J. Miller, in the course of the evolutionary process, those organisms were selected that could most successfully respond to the widest set of stimuli coming from the environment.
The amount of attention and RAM is also within the "magic number". It is established that a person of normal abilities can remember and reproduce from one presentation about seven randomly taken and unrelated words, seven shades of sound, seven letters, seven lists, seven ideas, etc. So far the following conclusion of psychologists is important: in complex activities, without allowing excessive overload for attention, RAM and without reducing the accuracy of the absolute estimate, the human brain can simultaneously perform only one complex operation, where the number of single-order elements is not more than seven. The phenomenon of Julius Caesar, ie, the simultaneous implementation of a number of operations, is possible, but most likely it is due to the rapid switching from one activity to another. In any case, this ability is not common among schoolchildren.
At any given moment, only one of the works is realized, and since a person’s behavior requires many operations at the same time, he is forced to organize it at different levels. And the top level gives expediency to the bottom. It is established that only the highest level of action is actually realized, and the rest should be background. The lower the background level, the greater the automation of actions. Depending on the prevailing conditions, we are forced to move from one level to another. These levels of activity are sometimes called behavioral plans. The ability to easily move from one plan to another characterizes the degree of mastery of the material, but to say that you can "turn in the skull of hundreds of provinces" can be a poet, not a psychologist. From the pedagogical point of view, it is very wrong to demand from the student, in addition to listening carefully to the lesson, also his recordings. In itself, the work of understanding the text, its semantic processing requires a lot of effort. Therefore, Shatalov’s children only listen when explaining new material.
When we perceive a word, we instantly recode it into our individual code. Strictly speaking, language is also a code, but in thinking and in speech activity it can create inconvenience by the fact that its elements immediately "clutter" the RAM. The process of translating linguistic expressions into internal speech was called recoding by J. Miller.
When recoding in internal speech, the text is first compressed. As intellectual skills are developed, there is a gradual reduction of speech operations (judgments), when some elements in the syllogism are omitted. At the initial stages of understanding the text, semantic reference points are nouns and verbs, in the future – other grammatical forms, associations, visual images. Visual images in this case are not so much a means of memorization as a means of generalization.
The mechanism of understanding has a certain symmetry, regulating and speech production. The maximum word length is chosen non-arbitrarily. Linguists have long established a tendency to reduce the length of words depending on the frequency of use. However, this reduction is not unlimited. Calculations of the average word length in a section of text and the frequency of use of words of different lengths allow us to conclude that the optimal range of word length, limited by the "magic number". To ensure the reliability of speech communication, the comprehension mechanism seeks to use the minimum amount of simultaneous perception: within 5-7 phonemes. In a scientific text, the average size of words is slightly higher, because the frequency of use of scientific concepts is less than the words of colloquial speech. The method of measuring words can be different: in syllables, phonemes, sounds. It is important to note that if initially the size of the word can be quite arbitrary (deoxyribonucleic acids), then when it is introduced into everyday circulation, it is inevitably "fitted" into a framework that is easy to understand (DeenKa).
Consider the next level of the speech whole – sentences.
The semantic connections of the elements of the sentence are combined into a so-called "tree". At the point where the tree branches, the branches are numbered from right to left. The left branch receives the index "0", the right – "1". The sum of the indexes to the top of the tree is then calculated. The largest sum characterizes the depth of the phrase. In our example, it is 4.
The speaker, of course, does not know how many units is the amount of RAM, but when trying to say a phrase of extreme depth is forced to go back, because, forgetting the beginning, he does not know how to finish it. V. Ingwe’s method is also justified when considering the process of hearing perception of the text. It is enough to change numerical designations, and "depth" of a phrase will increase.