[Vocabulary] surnits

[jaleel2007]

What is surnits or surnit?

context : "Do You Believe in Surnits?"

And also
Hercs
"Fairies use hercs to make fairy dust"

"In three studies, about 400 children ages 3 to 6 heard about something new and had to say whether they thought it was real or not. Some children heard the information defined in scientific terms ("Doctors use surnits to make medicine"), while others heard it defined in fantastical terms ("Fairies use hercs to make fairy dust"). The researchers found that children's ability to use contextual cues to determine whether the information is true develops significantly between the ages of 3 and 5."

 

[emsr2d2]

The whole point of the piece is that children in the study have to decide if the word they heard was a real word or not. In this case, neither word given is real. Neither "surnit(s)" nor "herc(s)" exists.

 

[Rover_KE]

Again, please tell us the source and author of that quotation, jaleel.

It's probably the same as in your last post, but we shouldn't have to go looking for it.

 

[jaleel2007]

The whole point of the piece is that children in the study have to decide if the word they heard was a real word or not. In this case, neither word given is real. Neither "surnit(s)" nor "herc(s)" exists.

I can see it but I want to have an image of them, what are they look like? or how do you imagine them?

Again, please tell us the source and author of that quotation, jaleel.

It's probably the same as in your last post, but we shouldn't have to go looking for it.

Good guess! Yes they are same, but because some problem I try to not make denote of my real source, sorry.

 

[emsr2d2]

If you're not going to reveal the true source of your quotes, we might have to delete them.

I have absolutely no idea, imagined or otherwise, as to what a "surnit" or a "herc" might look like.

 

[jaleel2007]

If you're not going to reveal the true source of your quotes, we might have to delete them.

I have absolutely no idea, imagined or otherwise, as to what a "surnit" or a "herc" might look like.

Emsr2d2 thank you for reply.
I have already told my source. Let's put it anther way (maybe I didn't understand "surnit" & "herc" entity exactly in the correct way) So, how do you explain these words to your kids?

 

[emsr2d2]

And we have also told you that you must quote your source every time you use an extract from it. We cannot be expected to go back and find one of your previous threads to find the title and author. This is not optional.

And I will explain again - the words "surnit" and "herc" DO NOT EXIST. I would not explain them to anyone. If a child wants to invent a definition for an invented word, they can do so. If I were ever in the position where I read those sentences to a child and the child said "What's a surnit?", I would say "It isn't anything. It's a made-up word. The author just invented it."

 

[Rover_KE]

Show them Lewis Carroll's Jabberwocky, in which nearly all the words are invented.

 

[jaleel2007]

And we have also told you that you must quote your source every time you use an extract from it. We cannot be expected to go back and find one of your previous threads to find the title and author. This is not optional.

And I will explain again - the words "surnit" and "herc" DO NOT EXIST. I would not explain them to anyone. If a child wants to invent a definition for an invented word, they can do so. If I were ever in the position where I read those sentences to a child and the child said "What's a surnit?", I would say "It isn't anything. It's a made-up word. The author just invented it."

I think You are an angry teacher, and also that would be enough if I write the following paragraph:

What is surnits or surnit?

....

"In three studies, about 400 children ages 3 to 6 heard about something new and had to say whether they thought it was real or not. Some children heard the information defined in scientific terms ("Doctors use surnits to make medicine"), while others heard it defined in fantastical terms ("Fairies use hercs to make fairy dust"). The researchers found that children's ability to use contextual cues to determine whether the information is true develops significantly between the ages of 3 and 5."

And this one "Do You Believe in Surnits?" come from a New York Times article:
link: http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/23/opinion/23woolley.html?_r=0
because I think maybe it can help, that's all. It wasn't the my original source.

 

[emsr2d2]

I'm not angry. I'm frustrated! When you post an excerpt or extract from someone else's work, you simply must quote the source (title and author) every time. Rover asked you to do this in post #3 but you didn't do it. We have explained why it's important. As far as I can tell, you have now given us a link to an article about the "surnit" issue yet, in that article, I still can't find the actual quote which begins "In three studies, about 400 children ages 3 to 6 heard about something new ...".

Who actually wrote the paragraph that you quoted in post #1?

 

[jaleel2007]

I'm not angry. I'm frustrated! When you post an excerpt or extract from someone else's work, you simply must quote the source (title and author) every time. Rover asked you to do this in post #3 but you didn't do it. We have explained why it's important. As far as I can tell, you have now given us a link to an article about the "surnit" issue yet, in that article, I still can't find the actual quote which begins "In three studies, about 400 children ages 3 to 6 heard about something new ...".

Who actually wrote the paragraph that you quoted in post #1?

http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2006-11/sfri-ycd110906.php

I wonder there are words that nobody can define but people so many times make use of them!

 

[Charlie Bernstein]

Jaleel, read the paragraph again. The researchers invented the words for the study. They don't mean anything. There are no such words as surnits and hercs.

 

[emsr2d2]

I think you have missed the entire point of the article (both the articles). The whole story is about giving children non-existent words and asking them if they think those words are real or not, based purely on the context in which the words are given to them.

Do you understand that the words "surnit" and "herc" were invented purely for the purposes of this exercise with children and they have absolutely no meaning at all?

 

[Tdol]

I wonder there are words that nobody can define but people so many times make use of them!

Not that many- one text for a particular reason, and that was to invent words to see if people would accept them.

 

[jaleel2007]

Correct, I see that now, But steel there is a problem (for me).
Can I compare them with dragon or something like eeebbbbeee (not like hi = hello but dragon= a large imaginary creature in old stories that has wings or eeebbbbeee = a imaginary thing )?
This "eeebbbbeee" just invented by me.

 

[Rover_KE]

That won't do, jaleel. No English word has that many consecutive Es or Bs.

At least surnits and hercs are pronounceable and plausible.

 

[Skrej]

Show them Lewis Carroll's Jabberwocky, in which nearly all the words are invented.

Jaleel, if you haven't already done so, take the time and read the poem Rover suggested previously. A common exercise is to have students go through and label the parts of speech for the words in this poem. It's the same concept as the article you cited.

Even though they're not real words, they not only look like real words, but you can also tell what part of speech these fake words are and even give an approximate definition.

I'll include the first stanza from the poem below - see if you can identify the parts of speech, a tentative definition, and a 'real' word substitute.

See what you can come up with, and post your thoughts.

’Twas brillig, and the slithy toves

Did gyre and gimble in the wabe:

All mimsy were the borogoves,

And the mome raths outgrabe.



Sometimes, when teaching parts of speech, I'll just make up random words in sentences when I get too frustrated with students who simply look words up in a dictionary instead of applying the rules that identify parts of speech. This forces them to internalize the concepts of what makes a noun, verb, adjective, etc.

 

[jaleel2007]

Thank you.
there is two problem that I have no explanation:
1. Here "In three studies, about 400 children ages 3 to 6 heard about something new...." doesn't suggest that "surnits" is a new thing but the doctors or Fairies action is new (I think) "Doctors use surnits to make medicine" or "Fairies use hercs to make fairy dust"
2- 400 children and nobody ask what is "surnits"? the researcherscouldn't just say it is nothing, without meaning or shut up just tel us do you believe it or not.

 

[emsr2d2]

Of course the researchers can tell them it means nothing. That is the truth. What would be the benefit of lying to those children?

 

[Skrej]

The study is testing whether or not children blindly accept what they're told, (since they will believe in Santa Claus and ghosts more easily than adults). According to this particular study, children tend make similar judgements as adults. They only belive in fantasy when adults are actively trying to 'trick' them into believing in a myth.

Without adults supporting the mythical story, then they're more likely to accept something scientific than fantasy. However, to set up the test, they need to tell the children that there's this new word, in order to establish it's something new versus just a real word they aren't familiar with. In other words, to establish it's not a vocabulary test, but an acceptance test.