Connection of Speech and Thinking: the Search of Theoretical Background of Scientific Speeking Propaedeutics
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.32405/2309-3935-2024-3(94)-29-36Keywords:
scientific speech, connection between speech and thinking, propaedeutics of scientific speech, scientific literacy, areas of linguistics, cognitive linguisticsAbstract
The article is devoted to the problem of the development of scientific thinking and scientific thinking as interconnected processes, which is a factor in the cognitive characteristics. There is an emphasis on the fact that the development of scientific knowledge and the dissolution of scientific thinking is the basis of scientific literacy. The need for propaedeutics of scientific language is emphasized as a process of preparing students for the development of scientific language at the beginning of the process. The guide for the teacher is the formation of common competence in the process of pre-investigative activity, and itself: understanding of scientific text, familiarization with scientific vocabulary, argumentative reasoning, understanding of scientific terminology, formation of nutrition, conducting scientific conversations. The article presents the views of scientific linguists on the richness of understanding thoughts and meanings. It is shown that thinking is a rich mental process, which is ensured by various psychological mechanisms: mental operations of analysis, synthesis, alignment, memory, respect, memory. An analysis of current areas of scientific research has been carried out, which most clearly reveal the interdependence of language and thought, which officials are investigated and by which methods. The nutritional formation of the scientific thinking of scientists, especially young students, is complicated and little studied by ancient scientists. Descriptions of methods and strategies for the formation of scientific thinking, developed by foreign teachers. It is noted that based on the results of research in cognitive linguistics, psycholinguistics, and sociolinguistics, new technologies are developed, as well as new approaches to the system of awareness of the future. It has been established that metacognition is also an important skill for effective learning and development of scientific thinking. It is stated that the results of this research into the connection between mental activity and cognitive processes became the basis for the development of a methodology for the propaedeutic approach to the development of scientific thinking of young students in the pre-study school. Information in the system of the Minor Academy of Sciences of Ukraine.
Downloads
References
1. Vakulenko, T. S., Lomakovych, S. V., Tereshchenko, V. M., & Novikova S. A.; Shumova, K. Ye. (Trans.) (2018). PISA: pryrodnycho-naukova hramotnist [PISA: scientific literacy]. Kyiv. [in Ukrainian].
2. Osborne, J. F., & Dillon, J. (2008). Science Education in Europe: Critical Reflections. London Nuffield Foundation. Retrieved from: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/252404504_Science_Education_in_Europe_Critical_Reflections.
3. Ribtsun, Yu. V. (2011). Korektsiine navchannia z rozvytku movlennia ditei molodshoho doshkilnoho viku iz ZNM: prohramno-metodychnyi kompleks [Corrective training on the development of speech of children of younger preschool age with SEN: a program and methodical complex]. Kyiv [in Ukrainian].
4. Kalmykova, L. O., Kalmykov, H. V., Lapshyna, I. M., & Kharchenko, N. V. (2008). Psykholohiia movlennia i psykholinhvistyka [Psychology of speech and psycholinguistics]. Kyiv [in Ukrainian].
5. Krymskyi, S. B. (2003). Zapyty filosofskykh smysliv [Requests for philosophical meanings]. Kyiv. Retrieved from: https://slovnyk.me/dict/fes/%D0%BC%D0%B8%D1%81%D0%BB%D0%B5%D0%BD%D0%BD%D1%8F [in Ukrainian].
6. Semchynskyi, S. V. (1988). Zahalne movoznavstvo [General linguistics]. Kyiv [in Ukrainian].
7. Potebnia, A. A. (1892). Mыsl y yazыkъ [Thought and language] (2nd ed.). Kharkovъ [in Ukrainian].
8. Karpenko, Yu. O. (2006). Vstup do movoznavstva [Introduction to Linguistics]. Kyiv [in Ukrainian].
9. Kobylenko, N. K. (2013). Kohnityvni aspekty linhvistyky [Cognitive aspects of linguistics]. Mariupol [in Ukrainian].
10. Vashulenko, M. S. (2010). Metodyka navchannia ukrainskoi movy v pochatkovii shkoli [Methods of teaching the Ukrainian language in primary school]. Kyiv [in Ukrainian].
11. Oliinyk, I. M. (1999). Rozvytok zviaznoho movlennia molodshykh shkoliariv. [Development of coherent speech of younger schoolchildren]. Rivne [in Ukrainian].
12. Petryk, O. V. (2003). Rozvytok i udoskonalennia movlennievoi diialnosti molodshykh shkoliariv [Development and improvement of speech activity of younger schoolchildren]. Zaporizhzhia [in Ukrainian].
13. Krokhmalna, H. I., & Tiutina, S. O. (2017). Rozvytok naukovoho movlennia molodshykh shkoliariv [Development of scientific speech of younger schoolchildren]. Molodyi vchenyi – A young scientist. No. 12, P. 395–398. Retrieved from: http://nbuv.gov.ua/UJRN/molv_2017_12_94 [in Ukrainian].
14. Savchenko, O. Ya. (2012). Navchalne seredovyshche yak chynnyk stymuliuvannia doslidnytskoi diialnosti molodshykh shkoliariv [Educational environment as a factor of stimulation of research activity of junior high school students]. Naukovi zapysky Maloi akademii nauk Ukrainy – Scientific Notes of the Junior Academy of Sciences of Ukraine. No. 1, P. 41–49. [in Ukrainian].
15. Lee, O., Quinn, H., & Valdés, G. (2013). Science and Language for English Language Learners in Relation to Next Generation Science Standards and with Implications for Common Core State Standards for English Language Arts and Mathematics. Educational Researcher. No. 42 (4), P. 223–233. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X13480524.
16. Abo-Romi, S. (2020). Thinking and Scientific Language in the Primary Classes. Creative Education. No. 11, P. 820–833. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4236/ce.2020.115059.
17. Oliveira, A., Simon, V., & Simon, A. (2018). Childhood and Scientific Literacy: Contributions of History and Epistemology. Open Journal of Social Science, No. 6, P. 216–225. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4236/jss.2018.68017.
18. Ron, R., Church, M., & Morrison, К. Making (2011). Thinking Visible : How to Promote Engagement, Understanding, and Independence for All Learners.
19. Pintrich (2002). The Role of Metacognitive Knowledge in Learning, Teaching, and Assessing. Theory Into Practice. No. 41(4). P. 219–225. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4104_3.
20.Tanner (2012). Promoting Student Metacognition. CBE- Life Sciences Education. No. 11(2). P. 113–120. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.12-03-0033.
