Ana proudly told me yesterday that she's reading "G" books.

[conuly]

This is the book she brought home: "Baby Elephant had a new bike. He got on. The bike wobbled and wobbled, and Baby Elephant fell off. "I can't ride this bike," he said. (We totally haven't been reading the books she brings home. I have her read a note I write for her to take to school every day instead. It's theoretically for lunchtime, but we read it together over breakfast. I didn't do that this week. Bad Connie!)

So that gives you an idea of how difficult that reading level is. What's funny is that I know she can read harder stuff than that and comprehend it - if and only if she's doing it alone, with little attention. I've seen her do it. She struggles and stumbles though, and *this* she can read easily. This is the old Ana trick of not letting on that she can do something until she can do it perfectly, of course.

I only bring this up because the illustrator's name is kinda cool: Jan van der Voo. Say it. Isn't it awesome? My only problem is that I can't figure out if we say Jan like a Dutch name (as van der Voo is clearly a Dutch name) or, because this book was written and illustrated in the US, as an English name - presumably the illustrator is American, I can't see why they'd send this book to be illustrated overseas. Having never met this person, I don't know how s/he pronounces this name! There's a Jan van der Voo who is a Dutch cartoonist, but that doesn't seem to be *this* person. (Correction: The series was developed in Australia and New Zealand. Well, all right then. How do I pronounce Jan?)

~~~~~~~~~

I can't talk about one being cute without the other, of course. (And do you know, both children insist on saying "teechuther" instead of "each other"? Always have.) Day before yesterday, Evangeline napped on the way home, in the wrap, but woke up as I put her in her hammock. I told her she had to stay in bed and be quiet for half an hour, it was still naptime. After that time was up, I said she could get up so long as she stayed in her room, but she declined. Then, 10 minutes later she asked me first if she could get up (uh, yeah?) but then she asked me "Connie? Did you know that if I have a long bath, my fingers get all p'uney?" This? THIS is what she was thinking about all that time? "Yeah, I was t'inking about it a yot."

And on the subject of each other, I have a question. It has been bugging me and bugging me for over a year now.

When I'm walking with the nieces, sometimes I want them to hold each other's hands (and not just because it looks cute). Maybe I want them to walk together in a crowd so I can keep better track of them, or we're crossing a busy-busy street and I have one hand full - whatever.

What do I say? Do I say "Hold your sister's hand, kids" or "Hold your sisters' hands, kids"? Obviously, each child is only holding one hand from one sister, but there are two hands being held. I have gone round and round thinking about this, and I can't figure it out.

If I asked them to pick up their jackets, and each child has one jacket, I'd still say "Ana, Eva, pick up your jackets", regardless of the fact that each child is fetching one and only one jacket. But somehow, to move that to hands sounds wrong! It sounds right to say "hold your sister's hand", but why in that context when not with jackets or balls or whatnot? Sometimes I use "each other". Hold each other's hand? Hold each others' hands? God, I have no idea what to say! And meanwhile, as I try to figure it out, they've run ahead a mile and I can't catch up.

Comments

[erinlin.livejournal.com]

I think "Hold your sister's hand, kids", sounds right, because each kid is only using one of their hands in the 'hand-holding exercise'.

"Ana, hold your sister's hand."

"Eva, hold your sister's hand."

"Kids, hold your sister's hand."

See?

[conuly]

Okay. How about with "each other", which I say more often? "Hold each other's...."

[erinlin.livejournal.com]

"Hand" would work.

You've already got a plural in the sentence meaning "both of you", so a second plural on the 'hands" sounds like your telling them to hold *both* hands, like they're playing London Bridge.

Isn't the English language fun?

[ncp.livejournal.com]

Just say "Ana, Evangeline, I want you to hold hands." It's still a grammatical sentence, and making it an imperative removes all those pesky possessives.

[conuly]

Ah, of course. When in doubt, recast the sentence! *gives you a cookie*

[sayga.livejournal.com]

I guess I would choose "Hold your sister's hand" and "hold each other's hand." But what I say is, "Hold hands. Keep each other safe!" This eliminates the problem of deciding what feels right or wrong. ;)

Kira made a movie this morning for Eva (and Ana). It hasn't shown up on my youtube yet, but when it does, I'll link you to it.

[conuly]

And Ana can type up a reply. *huggles Kira*

[sayga.livejournal.com]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uBbSF2o8uoU



Here you go. I didn't even coach her on the lines before the said them (I coached her a little on what the activity was we were doing before we went out, but once we got to the desert, it was all original).

[conuly]

Wait, wait, wait.

If you're saying it the long way, it's "hold your sister's hand", but the shorter way it's "hold hands". Why the difference? What gives? Gaaaaaah!

[sayga.livejournal.com]

Because the hands are holding each other. Whereas each girl actually only has one hand being held, so each sister is holding one hand, but they other way, the HAND is doing the action, so the hands are holding each other?

[jillianfish.livejournal.com]

Or we can go with "Everybody hold hands, please!" No more possessive, plural problems. lol.

[elenbarathi.livejournal.com]

Well sheesh, it's not like the Grammar Police are going to leap from the shrubbery and beat you with truncheons if you misuse a somewhat ambiguous plural form while giving directions to preschoolers. There are times when grammar Simply Doesn't Matter, and one of those times is when one's children are getting away.

My advice would be to embrace the use of gerunds. As a young teacher I learned this trick from the book How To Talk So Kids Will Listen And Listen So Kids Will Talk (http://www.amazon.com/How-Talk-Kids-Will-Listen/dp/0380811960)) and I've used it ever since, because it works so effectively. The use of gerunds avoids all the subconscious power-issues that cling to the imperative form, thus elicits better cooperation from children, and also it's quick and easy.

The proper form of the directions would thus be "Ana, Eva, holding hands please", or "Kids, picking up your jackets please". I always tack a 'please' onto intitial directions because it costs nothing, it's good modeling, and nobody likes to feel that they're being ordered about, even if, in fact they are. If a second direction is required, the 'please' is joined or replaced by the word 'now'.

I would pronounce Jan van der Voo's first name as 'Yon' rhyming with gone, rather than 'Jan' rhyming with pan - more or less like the name Ian, but with less ee in the initial vowel-sound. How he pronounces it himself, though, you would have to ask someone who knows, because there's no consistent system to how people pronounce their names.

[conuly]

You're not really getting into the fun of this exercise, are you? If I don't spend my time worrying about this I'll have to worry about the fact that they're squabbling about holding hands!


My advice would be to embrace the use of gerunds. As a young teacher I learned this trick from the book How To Talk So Kids Will Listen And Listen So Kids Will Talk) and I've used it ever since, because it works so effectively. The use of gerunds avoids all the subconscious power-issues that cling to the imperative form, thus elicits better cooperation from children, and also it's quick and easy.

That's interesting advice. I'm assuming it works, and it sounds useful.


I would pronounce Jan van der Voo's first name as 'Yon' rhyming with gone, rather than 'Jan' rhyming with pan - more or less like the name Ian, but with less ee in the initial vowel-sound. How he pronounces it himself, though, you would have to ask someone who knows, because there's no consistent system to how people pronounce their names.

That's how I first did it, although Yon doesn't rhyme with gone for me (or - gone is gawn, Yon is yahn. Yawn and gone rhyme, not yawn and Jan. But then I wondered if Jan was maybe an American Janice or something, you know?

[elenbarathi.livejournal.com]

Ah yes, the squabbling. Got a cure for that too: since what you want is for the two of them to stay together, and what they want is not to be attached at the hand, offer them a different way. I used to take my whole daycare class for walks with a long length of clothesline with loops attached, staggered on either side, for the kiddies to hold on to. It was far easier than the 'buddy system', and with only two kids, is easier still:

Take a long scarf or a length of cord or ribbon and made a loop at each end big enough for their arms (but not their heads) to go comfortably through, so they can either hold it or slip it up over their elbows, with at least 12 inches between the loops. This will give them a little more personal space, and if they want their hands entirely free, they (or you) can tie it to their belt-loops.

Ask them what they think of this, and if they like the idea, tell them you're willing to try it if they're going to make it work, but if they start fussing and yanking each other about like bad dogs, they'll be back to holding hands in a jiffy.

You're right, 'Jan' could be 'Janet' or 'Janice', like Jan Van Ysslestyne. But apparently Jan van der Voo (http://www.lambiek.net/artists/v/vandervoo.htm) is a Dutchman, if that's the same guy?

Ummm... would you say that John and gone rhyme? For me they almost do, but not exactly - a little closer than yawn and gone do, though.

[conuly]

I think this is a different person. Probably.

And no, I wouldn't say that John and gone rhyme. Not even close.

[pne.livejournal.com]

Fun fact: German and English differ (or so I understand) in whether to use singular or plural in situations where multiple people each have one thing.

As I understand it, English tends to use the plural ("All the men invited brought their wives [plural]") while German tends to use the singular ("Alle eingeladenen Männer brachten ihre Frau [singular] mit").

Another difference is that English uses possessives in some cases where German doesn't: "He put his hand in his pocket" vs. "Er steckte die Hand in die Tasche" (literally, "He put the hand into the pocket", it being understood that it's *his* hand and *his* pocket).

[queenlyzard.livejournal.com]

What do I say? Do I say "Hold your sister's hand, kids" or "Hold your sisters' hands, kids"?

I'm going to vote for the second one. As you are addressing them in plural, you are making the command twice, which argues for using plurals all the way through. Alternately, you could say "Each of you, hold your sister's hand," or just "hold hands!"

And I think it's "Hold each others' hands," too, although I'm not quite sure why. It may just be that I'm used to hearing it that way, or it may be that the implied subject of that sentence is "both of you," which makes it plural again.

I hope this helped some, because now you've got me wondering about it!