My boy Fwats recently posted the following regarding his one year old daughter:
“I hereby refuse to continue on with using the month count to tell her age. For the next year, she has four ages, as follows:
-a little over a year
-a year and a half,
-almost two
-two!”
I wholeheartedly agree. Mod 12 math isn’t that hard, but “20 months”? Really? I have to do some mental gyrations for that to hold a lot of meaning for me. “Almost 2”… now that means something.
So I’m joining the revolution. After your first birthday, months are no longer allowed! I’ve even had some workboys join me in the fight.
That said, last night Diana was skimming a book about baby sign language (a subject which I’m not particularly passionate about, either way… anyone have any advice?). She read me this passage:
“In a long term study, it was found that by age 36 months, children who signed as babies were talking at the 47-month age level, putting them nearly a year ahead of their nonsigning peers.”
The 47-month age level? Seriously? Is this what it has come to?
4 comments:
w00t! 47 months...I mean that's only one month away from saying 4 years. WTF?
re: baby sign language - I had no opinion on this either until I discovered this program and its rapturous effects on Violette.
http://www.signingtime.com/
I'm on board. Once tyler hit's 1, the months are over! In fact, I may stop using months now. After nine months, he's almost 1.
As for signing, we used a little bit (mostly more, eat, drink and all done) and found it to be really nice. Jax could use that to communicate what he wanted far before he could talk. And it's cute.
"...rapturous effects on Violette."
Explain in full detail.
I'm on board.
This counting-by-months has long been a pet peeve of mine. In the past, I was willing to forgive it up till the 2nd b-day. No more!
Post a Comment