186 SECTIONAL ADDRESSES. 



guard against two dangerous fallacies. First, the assumption that 

 thought only develops when the corresponding word is used ; the second 

 that a word used by the child must necessarily have to some extent the 

 same content of meaning as when used by the adult. In spite of these 

 two great difficulties of interpretation, however, it is possible to make 

 with some considerable degree of confidence inferences about the thought 

 processes of the child when certain types of language are used in given 

 circumstances, or when language spoken by the adult is obviously 

 interpreted correctly by the child, as shown by his actions. 



As an illustration of the contribution child psychology can make to the 

 psychology of thought, let us take the much disputed question as to 

 whether thought can take place without words. 



On one point at least the observation of infants is conclusive — elements 

 of a complex thought process can certainly function without the corres- 

 ponding word being expressed. Take, for example, the many prepositions 

 which at first are omitted but implied : ' Baby go (on) daddy knee.' (2 ; 1). 

 ' Mummy hat (on) floor ' (1 ; 10|). ' That too big (for) B., not too big 

 (for) Daddy.' (2 ; 4). The functioning of the element without the word is 

 still more clearly revealed during the period, which I definitely noted, in 

 which the child sometimes used a given preposition and sometimes 

 omitted it. 



At a still earlier age, in a sentence such as ' Mummy, door ' for ' Mummy 

 open the door ' an activity is evidently thought of when only two names 

 of things are actually expressed in language. It is conceivable, of coiirse, 

 that the missing word appears as an auditory image. But the apparent 

 absence of time interval is against this, though here is a point worthy of 

 exact determination. 



The great influence of feeling on the beginnings of concept formation 

 is demonstrated by observations on the transference of the first names 

 learned. Thus, two of my boys, both at the age of nine months, began 

 to apply the first learned name ' Dadda ' to toys and play generally, no 

 doubt because of the fact that their father when with them was usually 

 romping with them. Father was merely the play person — for a period, 

 alas, all too brief. Similarly, Stern notes that his boy applied the name 

 Beban (for Bow-wow) not only to dogs but to all things which interested 

 him specially — animals, pictures, and his own shadow. 



Light is thrown on the loquacity of some adults by the facts, frequently 

 observed in children, first that they love to babble long before their talk 

 can have any definite meaning, even for them ; and later, that they love 

 to repeat words and use words before they understand them. They will 

 fit them into sentences when they are extremely out of place, or repeat 

 them sometimes like so many nonsense syllables, though they may 

 reproduce the sound of the words with great accuracy. I have to report 

 that I noted this more decidedly in my two little girls than in the boys : 

 but in one of them it has already helped to bring about a constant 

 experimentation with the use of new and partly apprehended words 

 which has resulted in a much richer active vocabulary than either of her 

 brothers had at the same age, though at times it has led to a quaint half 

 misusage, as when she said that she had a ' confidential ' feeling that a 

 certain thing was not going to happen. The ' verbalism ' which Binet 



