CONNECTIVITY OF TEXT AS A FACTOR OF INFORMATION COMMUNICATION OF SCHOOLCHILDREN

Modern general education takes into account the requirements of a changing reality. It is in search of solutions that would ensure the readiness of citizens to make political and social choices. The role of sociability and tolerance in a post-industrial, information society is recognized. It talks about the relevance of modern thinking among the younger generation.

Solving new problems requires teaching in the general educational process that is focused on improving learning as an activity in general, and its types in particular. One of the types of educational activities is speech activity, the success of which largely depends on ensuring connections between sentences. Knowing the statics and dynamics of changes in the implementation of such actions, the teacher will be able to purposefully, consciously correct some actions in the process of constructing an information message.

The object of the study was the texts in which the information message of schoolchildren was presented. This message was left by the same schoolchildren studying in the fifth to ninth grades of a general education institution. The texts of these guys were mentioned by the author of the article in the article “Integrity of the Text as a Factor of the Information Message of Pupils”

The purpose of the study, the results of which form this article, was to identify the determining role of such a category as text coherence on the communication of information by schoolchildren in external speech.

Achieving this goal became possible through the researcher’s use of means of expressing connections between sentences. We find information about such means in the linguistic works of L.A. Bulakhovsky

Means of connections between sentences reflect such a feature of the text as its coherence. The coherence of the text largely determines the information richness of the message, its completeness, and depth. This influence acquires a factorial characteristic.

The author of the research cited in the article was guided by the provisions of the dialectical position. Firstly, he took into account the cause-and-effect dependence of facts and phenomena of the surrounding world, including the linguistic essence. According to this, it is necessary to select those linguistic means that largely determine the information message. Secondly, facts and phenomena of the surrounding world go through stages of their formation. Language products are also susceptible to this. Language formation can be studied. It will be effective through comparison of homogeneous characteristics. Thirdly, a comparison of homogeneous characteristics at the stage of their formation leads to the identification of repeating, general characteristics, for example, to a statement of certain linguistic types, shortcomings, and difficulties in the linguistic expression of thoughts.

The basis of the study was the methods of dynamic research outlined by S.V. Yurtaev in the article “Methodology dynamic study of schoolchildrens speech activity and its impact on educational management”

In addition, the following were involved:

1. Syntactic analysis of the text, which involves identifying means of communication between sentences. Moreover, proposals following one another are subject to consideration. These sentences refer to related sentences. In adjacent sentences, the word that performs the function of replacing or repeating the words of the previous sentence is highlighted.

2. Identification of words, establishment of correspondence between means of communication of sentences and scientific classification indicators. This method leads to the grouping of words, to subsuming words under the name of their class. As a result, classes of words designated by the researcher appear.

The methodology developed by the researcher gave results that prompted him to formulate pedagogical tasks. The focus of the formulation of pedagogical tasks was to strengthen the factorial dependence of the speech message on deepening the awareness of the coherence of the text.

3.1. Use of means of communication of sentences by schoolchildren

Although there is no unified classification of means of communication between sentences, nevertheless, in many of them lexical and grammatical indicators are highlighted. Let us illustrate the presence of these indicators in schoolchildren’s information messages.

1. Communication is carried out using lexical repetition:

...One morning we were descending from Mount Mashuk. This mountain was covered by a mighty forest... (5th grade, Natasha V.); ...Our dog had never seen hedgehogs, and therefore barked loudly. The poor frightened hedgehog, curled up into a ball, snorted incessantly... (5th grade, Katya K.); ...My girlfriend had a cat. A friend lived on the sixth floor... (6th grade, Sveta L.); ...My cousin told me this extraordinary story. This is the story.... (8th grade, Alyosha P.); ...But passing through the plot, we heard some strange and distant sounds. These sounds were pronounced closer and closer... (9th grade, Katya M.).

2. Communication is made using a pronoun:

...I fell on the stones and glass right on my forehead. My whole face was bleeding... (5th grade, Lena G.); ...They were so fluffy and beautiful, like kittens. They had four huge cherry leaves... (6th grade, Natasha V.); ...And Lena realized that it was her mother. After that, the doctors told her... (7th grade, Lena G.); ...My friend Yana and I were sitting on a bench and talking. Suddenly something moved in the grass near us... (7th grade, Katya M.); ...But it was not so easy to put away the restless fluffy lumps. They jumped out and ran away from under our hands... (8th grade, Katya K.); ...We stopped at one turn. It is called “Farewell, Motherland”... (8th grade, Zhenya L.); ...When I look at my cat, for some reason I always remember a story. My mother told it to me... (9th grade, Yulia B.); ...We went to Zhenya, since he lives nearby. It took an hour... (9th grade, Natasha V.); ...We started to run away. It wasn't easy... (9th grade, Sergey Z.); ...A little later I caught the first fish. Then another one. She began to torment the bait... (9th grade, Sergey Ch.)

3. Communication is carried out using an adverb:

...My brother's friend sat on this pile. It turns out that there was a hedgehog... (5th grade, Sveta L.); ...When I was six years old, and my sister was eight, my grandmother and I went to the village. Grandmother’s sister lived there... (8th grade, Sveta L.); ...My friend caught the first fish, a silver crucian carp. Then a large perch was hooked... (9th grade, Dima Z.); ...We children were swimming, and the adults were talking. The whole day went like this... (8th grade, Lena G.).

4. Communication is carried out using the union:

...My sister Oksana and I got thirsty and bought ice cream, but it was sweet, we became even more thirsty. And the money ran out... (5th grade, Masha M.); ...Everything went like clockwork, he learned the role, and told everything well during rehearsals. And then the day of the performance came.... (7th grade, Kolya L.); ...We got to work, and I was even afraid to pass by that place. But then everything calmed down.... (9th grade, Lena G.)

5. Communication is carried out using the same root word:

...When I caught the third fish, dad called me and my brother for dinner. After lunch we sat and continued fishing... (6th grade, Sergey Ch.); ...when I was four years old, a train came for us. The trip to the village was very long for me.... (7th grade, Sergey Ch.); ...The trees stood half asleep, but still they released light green sticky leaves into the wild. Young leaves shimmered in the rays of the sun.... (8th grade, Zhenya G.).

6. The connection is made using a contextual synonym:

...But suddenly we heard a distant whistle and calmed down. This signal was our roll call... (9th grade, Katya M.); ...After we had lunch, I decided to go to the beach for a swim. My brother didn’t mind cooling off in the water either... (9th grade, Sergey Ch.).

7. Communication is carried out using an introductory word:

...Firstly, the forest was a salvation for us on hot days. Secondly, wild berries are much juicier and tastier than garden berries.... (9th grade, Katya M.).

3.2. Dynamics of connections between sentences in schoolchildren’s information messages 

Among the means of communication of sentences used by students, the predominant ones can be identified. Most often, the same form of the nominative case (i.p.) is found. It is replaced by a pronoun, a contextual synonym. In this regard, we will distinguish between repetition of the ip form, pronominal, and contextually synonymous substitutions. The above substitutions can be combined with each other. For example, the use of a common noun is replaced by the use of a pronoun, a proper noun. We will call such a substitution pronominal, contextually synonymous.

Let us show the number of substitutions made by students as they grow older, from fifth grade to ninth grade. Let us present the average number of means of communication of sentences used by schoolchildren by year of study. Thus, these funds will appear to us in dynamics.

Repeat form i.p.: 9.16; 7.74; 6.84; 10; 12.

Pronominal substitution: 5.47; 5.04; 9.84; 6.05; 8.95.

Contextually synonymous substitution: –; 0.21; 0.26; 0.74; 0.32.

Pronominal, contextual-synonymous substitution: 0.68; 1.11; 4.42; 4.47; 6.89.

Almost all substitutions have an unstable aspiration. However, the degree of instability varies.

The repetition of the form decreases during the first years. Then it goes up. Its use has a regressive-progressive orientation

Pronominal substitution in its use either decreases or increases. It has a wavy pattern.

Contextual synonymous substitution increases until the ninth grade. In the ninth grade, it undergoes a decline. Its level is higher than in 7th grade, but lower than in 8th grade.

Pronominal, contextually synonymous substitution increases. Its use is progressive.

Let's convert the average number of substitutions considered into percentages. And we will illustrate the share of each of them.

Repeat form i.p.: 46.1; 44; 24.8; 31.4; 32.2.

Pronominal substitution: 27.5; 28.6; 35.6; 19; 24.

Contextually synonymous substitution: –; 1.2; 0.9; 2.3; 0.9.

Pronominal, contextually synonymous substitution: 3.4; 6.3; 16; 14; 18.5.

Repetitions take up about 50% of all substitutions in grade 5. In subsequent grades their share decreases. Therefore, the superiority is not so significant. However, it persists. The exception is seventh grade.

Pronominal substitution occupies the second position in terms of participation in the design of subject content. This situation is violated only in the seventh grade. Here, the pronominal substitution prevails over other substitutions.

Pronominal, contextually synonymous substitution occupies third place throughout all years.

Contextually synonymous substitution represents the most minimal part.

In addition to the forms of IP that are subject to substitution, there are also forms of IP that are not subject to this process. We will call these forms non-repeating. Their dynamics of use is not characterized by progressive growth, because there are recessions.

Taking into account the participation of these forms in the design of substantive content, their role is not always constant. In some classes it is tertiary, in others it is primary. We will confirm this judgment by presenting the results of the analysis.

The third-rate value of this share occurs in the fifth, sixth, and seventh years of study. In the eighth grade, it is predominant. However, in the ninth grade he gives up his leading position, falling to second place.

The results of the analysis show that from a semantic-grammatical point of view, the connection between sentences is carried out through the distribution of forms i.p. With

- general semantics: ...It turns out that Musya jumped over the balcony and did not crash. She first walked on the ropes, and then jumped off and landed successfully... (6th grade, Sveta L.);

- with different semantics: ...This lasted five to six minutes. Then there was a flash and everything disappeared. Only the stars that had not yet fallen reached the ground... (7th grade, Natasha V.); ...The results surprised the residents. The boy did not have a scratch, only minor bruises... (8th grade, Ira I.);

- general and different semantics: ...I began to walk on water and suddenly began to drown, then I did not yet know how to swim, I was six years old. I started calling for help because I was scared. My older sister Oksana saved me... (5th grade, Dima Z.)

Such distribution leads to the formation of parallel, chain, semantic, mixed connections. And due to the different arrangement of forms i.p. Students may choose different types of these connections: contact-distant, contact, distant.

Let's convert the average number of substitutions considered into percentages. And we will illustrate the share of each of them.

Repeat form i.p.: 46.1; 44; 24.8; 31.4; 32.2.

Pronominal substitution: 27.5; 28.6; 35.6; 19; 24.

Contextually synonymous substitution: --; 1.2; 0.9; 2.3; 0.9.

Pronominal, contextually synonymous substitution: 3.4; 6.3; 16; 14; 18.5.

Repetitions take up about 50% of all substitutions in fifth grade. In subsequent grades, their share decreases. Therefore, the superiority is not so significant. However, it persists. The exception is seventh grade.

Pronominal substitution occupies the second position in terms of participation in the design of subject content. This situation is violated only in the seventh grade. Here, the pronominal substitution prevails over other substitutions.

Pronominal, contextually synonymous substitution occupies third place throughout all years.

Contextually synonymous substitution represents the most minimal part.

In addition to the forms of IP that are subject to substitution, there are also forms of IP that are not subject to this process. We will call these forms non-repeating. Their dynamics of use is not characterized by progressive growth, because there are recessions.

Students provide connections between sentences and use appropriate syntactic means. Moreover, such means are varied. Their number and share in the coherence of the text increases as schoolchildren grow older. The increasing volume of the category of text coherence indicates an expansion of information conveyed by schoolchildren in information messages. With an increase in transmitted information, certain types of means of communication of sentences are used. The specific use of linguistic means brings together the processes of text formation in adults and adolescents.

However, the process of developing text coherence lacks stability. More emphasis is needed on teaching that focuses on the functional side of language learning.