Oh....No...nononono.

As the title would suggest, RJ has learned the word "no". He understands what the word means (he will stop what he's doing if you say it firmly enough), but uses the word in a couple of ways.

First, he will push things away and say "no nononono". This is pretty clear and appropriate usage. Unfortunately, pushing away the bulb syringe when he has a bad cold is not something that we can give in to.

Second, we have been trying to set some boundaries since he understands what we're saying. So for example - after nursing, he loves to stand on my lap and grab the moose lamp behind the couch and rock it on its base. I've said "no" and redirected him fairly consistently. However, he now says "no nooooooo" and then shows a devilish smile and does it anyway. So he's showing that he gets it, but can't actually inhibit the behavior yet. I'm actually working on saying "no" less and using positively worded guidance instead. So instead of "no" in the moose lamp situation, I'm now trying to say, "keep the lamp on the floor". Children have an easier time complying with positive statements rather than statement requiring them to inhibit or stop. If you give them an idea of what they should be doing, rather than what they shouldn't be doing, you'll be much more likely to get compliance. But in reality, it is hard to break the, "no" or "stop" habit. We use this technique at RJ's school and it is extremely effective, even for some extremely negative behaviors like biting and pinching.

And just this week, when another child at school took a toy that he was playing with - RJ told the other child, "no". Teacher Krishawn was very proud of RJ for using his words at such a young age!

In addition to the word, "no", RJ has quite the verbal repetoire. He regularly talks to me during our long commutes to school/work and back. He can say momma, dada, no, dat (cat), bo or do (boca), boob, and an assortment of other sounds that are sounding more and more like organized language. He also is linking his speech to the referents more and more. Although, I am convinced that he calls me dada more than momma just because he loves my reaction and increased attention when he does it. In fact, I think he's playing a game because he kind of laughs when saying dada, particularly after I say, "I'm momma, (pointing to me) momma momma momma" and he says dada again.

My favorite has been the few times he's said, "momma boob" (which honestly sounds more like, "mamamama bbbib" when he was sick and wanted to get out of the high chair and stop being fed solids, or when he was thirsty in the fun zone. It was pretty obvious that he was linking the referent since he was also going for my shirt and smiled when the boob came out!

Not only does he have good verbal skills, but he has also been pointing and reaching out for the things he wants. This is both a benefit and a pain in the ass. Its a benefit because it gives us a clue to what he wants, but it is also a pain in the ass because now he grabs at everything in sight!

All in all, he's a really good communicator, and I just can't wait until he has more words and phrases in his repertoire - I'm sure it won't be long. I've been asked by some of our friends about Baby Signs, which are all the rage now. There is actually some substantial research supporting the use of baby signs, but at this point in the game, I simply don't have the time to read the book. Plus, from my understanding, we're actually following some of the principles behind baby sign as it is. Koos noted on Xander's blog that I was categorically against the use of Baby Sign, but that's not entirely true. The point that I was trying to make is that the designers of baby sign provide a method and baby-friendly signs (based on ASL) which enable a child to communicate a few months earlier than they normally would using verbal means. While that sounds great for lowering frustration for everyone involved, in our particular situation, because RJ has been doing a fairly good job of communicating with us, I thought I was better off spending what little free time I have with RJ and showing him to point at things he wants (something I do naturally) and giving him the words for things he wants (which a lot of parents do naturally) rather than spending that free time reading the baby signs book in order to implement their method specifically. So I don't believe that Baby Signs are a waste (anything that gets you interacting with your child is worthwhile). I think that Koos misunderstood my choice not to teach RJ Baby Sign and my reason why as a belief that the method isn't worthwhile rather than a reflection of my belief that the specific method isn't what necessarily leads to all the good results and of my complete and utter lack of even a free hour to read the book.

Do I wish I had time to read the book? Yes - in fact at some point I really should, because Susan Goodwyn (one of the authors who did much of the baby sign research) is a former faculty member at CSU Stanislaus, where I teach. I hope to read it over the summer just to become acquainted with the theory and method better.

In sum, I think that if you have time for reading and implementation, great, but if you have a verbally expressive kid already and you're pressed for time, then I don't think it's a necessary part of baby rearing and I don't think that you'd be putting your kid at a disadvantage for not doing it.