To want my child to learn the proper words for things?

[AmIThough]

A friend offered to buy DC a top that says "ask me to see my moo cow" then if you lift the top there's a picture of a cartoon cow.

Crappy tat anyway but that's not the point.

I said no thanks, as I want DC to learn the proper words for things - I don't see why you would teach a child to call a cow a ' moo cow' or a frog a 'ribbit' (which is another example I've heard) rather than a cow or a frog.

I got told I'm a 'boring fart'.
What do you think? Am I being overly precious?

I am not convinced. It seems more likely that "baby-talk" is more satisfactory to silly mothers, and of no benefit to the actual children. How is "Choo-Choo" an easier word than "Train"?

I think it is more likely that parents who feel silly using baby talk and consider it beneath them are determined to believe that it has no benefit rather than getting over themselves and examining their prejudices.

Happily, a study at the University of Edinburgh has answered precisely your question on choo-choo vs train. HTH

Mitsuhiko Ota, Nicola Davies-Jenkins, Barbora Skarabela. Why Choo-Choo Is Better Than Train: The Role of Register-Specific Words in Early Vocabulary Growth. Cognitive Science, 2018; DOI: 10.1111/cogs.12628

“Researchers say these findings suggest some types of baby talk words more than other words can help infants develop their vocabulary more quickly.

“The team says words that end in 'y' such as tummy, mummy and doggy or words that repeat sounds such as choo-choo and night-night could help infants identify words in speech.

“They found that infants who heard a higher proportion of diminutive words and words with repeated syllables developed their language more quickly between nine and 21 months.”

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29998604/

It seems more likely that "baby-talk" is more satisfactory to silly mothers, and of no benefit to the actual children

And what’s your background and expertise in early language development?

The link provided by BlueBilledBeatboxingBird summarises-
"Across languages, lexical items specific to infant-directed speech (i.e., 'baby-talk words') are characterized by a preponderance of onomatopoeia (or highly iconic words), diminutives, and reduplication. These lexical characteristics may help infants discover the referential nature of words, identify word referents, and segment fluent speech into words. If so, the amount of lexical input containing these properties should predict infants' rate of vocabulary growth. To test this prediction, we tracked the vocabulary size in 47 English-learning infants from 9 to 21 months and examined whether the patterns of growth can be related to measures of iconicity, diminutives, and reduplication in the lexical input at 9 months. Our analyses showed that both diminutives and reduplication in the input were associated with vocabulary growth, although measures of iconicity were not. These results are consistent with the hypothesis that phonological properties typical of lexical input in infant-directed speech play a role in early vocabulary growth."
That is absolutely fascinating. I never would have thought that.
And there is no need for LaurieMarlow to be sarcastic.

Yikes, you sound like a right boring killjoy. Pfb by any chance? 🤦🏻‍♀️

Also hope your going to teach her she’s got a vulva instead of a ‘cutesy’ baby word like ‘minnie’ ‘front bottom’ etc etc?

YABU, and too precious, and too stuck up, and a definite fun thief.

Kids need to be a bit silly and funny and giggly, and that includes silly fun names for animals/ things etc

Do you really want a 5 year old who looks down on their peers and asks you ' Mother, why do these children think a fairy will give them money for their teeth?' or ' Mother, why haven't these children been informed that Father Christmas is a myth perpetuated by a consumer society?'

Damn sure I wouldn't FFS. :(

Do you EVER meet a 60-year-old cattle farmer who shows off his moo cows? He would never have said it in the first place
People on MN are forever talking about baby cows on here. And don't get me started on 'old gimmer'

@AmIThough - I agree with you 100%

And there is no need for LaurieMarlow to be sarcastic.

And why not, given the posters on here with big opinions based on no actual knowledge?

OK, LaurieMarlow that is what a Website like this sort of invites. We all have to live with it, and few of us care.
The Moderators do not have time to micro-manage. But the actual posters (and this means you) should try and self-regulate, surely?

But the actual posters (and this means you) should try and self-regulate, surely?

You weren’t exactly holding back with your own derogatory comment about ‘silly mothers’ based on no actual knowledge.

So if you can’t handle a little sarcasm back then I suggest aibu isn’t the right place for you.

@onlyaman wow, right? I admit it, I would not have those got that ether. I would definitely have been in the “ baby words are a bit daft” camp (but I have used them anyway, cos they are fun, and my baby loves them, and the second especially can say them more easily than the real words...he’s been a bit less quick with speech).

I’m itching to comment on the fact that a large number of the “strictly proper words only” posters on this thread have referred to their own children as DC, DS, DD2 etc ...

It’s almost like they understand you can have different registers depending on context.

I'm not sure an abbreviation when typing equates to incorrect terminology when speaking though.

You have to rethink your ideas of ‘correctness’. As the study I posted upthread and wider consensus is beginning to suggest, baby-talk seems to be the best register for very small children in the early stages of language acquisition.

I am sure that all of the posters who insist on proper nomenclature will have provided their children with children’s cutlery which is easier for their small hands to hold, chunky crayons while they are learning to grip, and other adaptations to help their children in early skill acquisition. Modifications to ‘correct’, adult language are a further part of that.