Can 2 year olds read?

[spritesoright]

A friend told me today that her DD, age 2.3, is beginning to recognise letters and read. Apparently she managed to read "pasta dishes" from a menu.
My DD is the same age but doesn't recognise any letters, let alone read words! Is this normal? Can other 2 year olds read?

I could read at 2.10, probably learnt a lot from my older brother who was learning to read around the same time. I'd started in a small Montessori by that stage too so I was following a lot of the older kids around picking things up.

I've always been a good/keen reader and frequently got looks from teachers in primary school over my choice of reading material.

I was similarly precocious with maths and languages.

Social skills... not so much. I still struggle with making friends and low self confidence. And it took me an age to learn to drive. My lack of spacial reasoning is a family joke.

DD1 could. I never taught her to read and she never had trouble reading. She could read far more than she could understand.

DD2 is 3.5 and can't even recognise any letter other than O

I got my leg smacked in the reception class for telling lies when I said I'd finished the first reader.

on your behalf!

Some can, if they and their parents have an interest.
All mine were reading some words by 2yo, dd2 was reading books that she hadn't seen before by 2.6yo. They all wanted to learn-dd1 loved anything to do with letters from an early age, and was constantly in a book, so the other two saw it as a "big girl" thing to do, so imitated. Ds also has glue ear, so was keen so he can follow subtitles rather than rely on hearing.

But I would have some skeptism over "pasta dishes" yes, it's phonetical, but it's quite complicated. I would have expected her to be telling you about the three letter words she's sounding out first. She might be doing it by whole word recognition (which is fine) but that requires someone to have told her first.
It's more likely that her dm pointed to it on the menu last time and said "this says "pasta dishes" dd", and she's remembered the picture/position of the words. Although she might have remembered the shape of the words.
Children will use the easiest method to work out things like that eg. I remember dd1 looking very impressive matching jigsaw pieces with a number and a figure together (eg one = 1). Looked great, but she worked out by the second piece she matched that all she needed to look for was the background colour and match that. She didn't even look at the pictures on it.

But you also need to realise is that I don't think by the time they're about 6 it makes any difference whether they learnt to read a 2yo or 6yo. Yes, my dc all read loads-not uncommon to find all three sprawled round the room reading, but I don't think that's made any difference, other children who didn't learn until school are the same.

So smile and say "that's great" and know that it doesn't really matter.

Honestly, I think none of us are going to know how intelligentsia our children really are until their GCSEs/A levels/Bscs/Masters and PHDs are in the bag.

So in the mean time smile and nod, smile and nod and just make sure your child is getting plenty of stimulation.

Of course some will be able to. Its a case of learning letters sounds & being able to blend.

2 is very early, I know of a few forward 3 year olds who can read simple words. My 4 year old (oct born) is reading quite well now, nothing amazing just early reading.

It doesn't indicate future brightness I wouldn't have thought.

If you are reading words simply by word recognition, no one word is any more complicated than any other.

DS used to ask what random words that he saw when out and about said (nothing to do with books). And he would remember them and recognise the same words in other contexts. Which is what this little girl is doing - it really is nothing special.

Both of mine started to learn to read when they were two (nearly three). They knew their letters and started blending and doing simple CVC words.

They clearly didn't just develop this ability though like magic, I taught them.

I could ,I taught myself apparently but I do have a sister who is 16 months older than me so we probably learnt at the same time . I could happily read a newspaper at 4 ,before I started school . When I was in infants there were 3 of us that they had to take over to the Junior school library to get appropriate books.

My dd recognised her own name and her sister's name when she was 2 and could name most of the letters but she's only really reading now aged 5. I think she was almost three when she was sitting in the car with me waiting for her dad to come back when she said, "That says A... S... D... A"
I said, "yes that's right dd. Do you know what the word says?"

"Yes! 'Shop'"

I could read pretty fluently by the time I was 3 - my mother was stuck in a flat abroad with no friends, no husband, a toddler and a baby and was desperately bored so she taught me to read, phonically. Her DSis, who was an NQT at the time, insisted that this was impossible, and refused to send out the books she'd requested.

So yes it's perfectly possible for a 2 year old to read, although it's more common for them to memorise word shapes, and I'd say it's very unlikely that a child that young would learn without being taught.

I'd say it's very unlikely that a child that young would learn without being taught.

That is exactly what my DD1 did. The first I knew was when she drew a picture of a dog and wrote 'bog' underneath at 25 months of age. I then tried her out on some unfamiliar books and other text and she could, indeed read.

This is called Hyperlexia and is a recognised symptom of ASD. The link says that some children struggle with comprehension but DD1 understood everything perfectly unless it was a word she had never heard of.

She was very frustrated when she had to start at the beginning of the reading scheme in Reception.

Yes Goldmandra, I originally worded it stronger, and then cut it back, because there are always prodigies who can do truly extraordinary things. But when it comes to stories like the one in the OP, that's probably not the way to bet (although wading in with "you're lying and that's impossible" would be ill advised).

I could read at 2 1/2 too - my mum never really tried to teach me but apparently I picked it up from being read to. This was back in the days of 'reading ages' and I apparently had a reading age of 7 when I started nursery at 3 and was having books sent from the juniors' library for me. I remember having different books from my friends but at the time I thought it was because I was behind! My DS wasn't remotely interested until he started school but my friend's daughter who's the same age sat and read him an entire Ladybird book (which she'd never seen before) before they were 4. So yes, I can well believe that a two-year-old can start recognising letters and words.

My dd could write her name at 2 and most defiantly recognised it . She couldn't really read until she was 4 but I think that was mostly because he didn't want to . She is very bright but still isn't that keen on reading . Prefers writing and drawing... My friends ds could read brilliantly at 2 .. He is severely autistic ..

But why would you teach a 2 year old to read? It won't really be a head start as everyone else will catch up. And also there is a risk of turning the two year old off learning.

No, most 2 year olds can't.
If they can, and have comprehension as well, then it's likely to be a condition known as hyperlexia, and as sydlexic and Goldrama wrote, it is often associated with being on the spectrum and HFA.
DD had it, is G&T and has AS.

You teach if they want to learn. Mine enjoyed it and it was an advantage to them. They started reception able to read well and therefore moved onto more challenging stuff. DS1 read particularly well by year one and would read books about things he found interesting, learning in the process.

Reading is just a tool.

I taught mine to read aged 3 (not 2 because I wasn't as spectacularly bored as my DM) because I knew they were going to be the littlest, clumsiest and most immature in their reception class, so I wanted them to be really good at something to boost their self esteem. Also of course, the earlier you can read, the more time you can spend reading and the more books you can read, which is always a good thing IMO.

NO! - they don't 'read', but they CAN recognise shapes, and see 'words' as shapes - but there is a very big difference between that and 'reading'.

Having worked in primary schools as helper and as TA for twenty-five years, I have been involved with maybe HUNDREDS of children learning to read. During that period of time teaching methods have changed greatly, and what was THE thing thirty years ago is now discounted as pretty useless!

Starting in the '60s, Dr Glenn Doman promoted his book 'Teaching Babies to Read', and his Institute is still operational today and claiming to 'teach' very young children things way beyond what one would normally expect. His method was basically 'flash cards'; we tried it in the '80s with our DS, when he was around two. He recognised a few words, but soon lost interest. Recognition of even long words with a distinctive 'shape' may be achieved, but there is unlikely to be any real UNDERSTANDING of meaning.

INVOLVING babies and children with books, stories, and 'mark making' materials can only be a good thing, provided they enjoy it, and no pressure is put on them to 'learn' in any formal way. When our DS was two, on a walk one day we saw a great green cricket on a hedge. I wasn't sure what it was, but said we would look it up in a book when we got home, which we did. Between two and five years of age the toddler brain is making 'connections' and the more that are made, via appropriate stimulation and experiences, the better, for future intelligence and learning ability.

Even today, using books for reference purposes is still a useful skill to learn, and one that is needed in school; the Internet hasn't totally replaced books [yet!]. The more relaxed a child is about handling and using books, when he starts school, the more progress he can make.

NO! - they don't 'read', but they CAN recognise shapes, and see 'words' as shapes - but there is a very big difference between that and 'reading'.

Several of us must be lying then!

Yes Ferguson my DM had that Teach Your Baby to Read book, it was indeed very fashionable. She tried to use it's techniques to teach my younger DB to read, and quickly concluded it was bollocks, so she reverted to the simple phonics based methods she'd used with me. What exactly is your point?

As I said DD was reading around her 3rd birthday. I did not know so she had probably been doing it for a few months before so would have been 2.

She did not learn with whole word recognition but sounded out words but could read all CVC words and words with double letters (ie happy, funny, silly, rabbit, carrot) in and ending with a Y (because her name does).

DD is now 5 and in yr1 and reading is still her thing and she is very good and it and enjoys doing it.

Ferguson with respect that's rubbish. My DS's were reading. K i s s spells kiss, c a t spells cat, f r o g spells frog. If that's not reading what on earth is it?

Bizarre