- •Foreign Language Department language of science
- •Tyumen - 2002
- •Кафедра Иностранных Языков Язык Науки
- •Тюмень-2002 contents
- •Программа разработана
- •Раздел 1
- •Требования по видам речевой коммуникации
- •Виды чтения:
- •Языковой материал
- •Английский язык
- •Французский язык
- •Содержание и структура кандидатского экзамена по иностранному языку
- •Рекомендуемая структура экзамена
- •Раздел 2
- •Методические указания
- •К программе кандидатского экзамена
- •По иностранному языку
- •Английский язык
- •Немецкий язык
- •Французский язык
- •My biography and research work
- •New Webster’s Dictionary definitions
- •Expressions for summarizing or annotating
- •Основные разделы реферата текста
- •Text work: lexis and expressions for oral and written presentation
- •Texts for synopsis on arts and culture
- •Sample sinopsi of the texts
- •It is underlined that Constable's finances were in a bad way for a long time. Constable had to paint portrait commissions though he was a landscape-painter.
- •In the end the article reports the way Constable was elected to full membership of the Royal Academy.
- •It is underlined that portraiture was the heart in British painting in that period.
- •It's interesting to note that a reason of the Hogarth creative activity was his rivalry other painters who lived the same period.
- •In the end the author reports that Hogarth won recognition of Society. He was appointed Sergeant-Painter to the King. It was an honorary and privileged position.
- •In the end the author points out that in the opinion of Reynolds Gainsborough was an outstanding painter and was very good at forming all the parts of a picture together.
- •In conclusion it's interesting to note that Turner was a landscape-painter and especially he tried to convey the dramatic possibilities of natural phenomena.
- •In the end the author underlines that Reynolds was a gifted man not only in the field of painting. He delivered his annual Discourses to the students of the Academy and he founded the Literary Club.
- •1. The concept of culture
- •2. The development of social responses
- •3. Attachment and loss
- •4. Isolated monkeys
- •5. Deprivation in human infants
- •6. Long-term influences
- •7.The socialisation of the infant
- •8. Theories of child development
- •Freud and psychoanalysis
- •Personality development
- •Criticisms
- •The theory of g.H.Mead
- •9. Piaget: cognitive development
- •10. The stages of cognitive development
- •Criticisms
- •12. Connections between the theories
- •Texts on philosophy
- •Western Philosophical Concepts of God
- •Renй Descartes (1596-1650)
- •Tне infinitive
- •Bare Infinitive
- •Exercises
- •Exercises
- •Infinitive in parenthetical phrases
- •The gerund
- •I regret telling him about it.
- •I am fond of reading.
- •Exercises
- •Participle I
- •Asking that question he did not want to offend me
- •Perfect
- •I hate you talking like that.
- •It being a hot day, they went to the river.
- •Exercises
- •Participle II
- •If asked he always helped me.
- •When did you have your hair cut?
- •I want the letter posted at once. Exercises
- •Russian-english dictionary
The theory of g.H.Mead
The background and intellectual career of G.H.Mead (1863-1931) was in most respects quite different from that of Freud. Mead was primarily a philosopher, who spent most of his life teaching at the University of Chicago. He wrote rather little, and the publication for which he is best known, Mind, Self and Society (1934), was put together by students on the basis of their lecture notes and other sources. Since they form the main basis of a general tradition of theoretical thinking, symbolic interactionism, Mead’s ideas have had a very broad impact in sociology. But Mead’s work provides in addition an interpretation of the main phases of child development, giving particular attention to the emergence of a sense of self.
There are some interesting similarities between Mead’s views and those of Freud, although Mead sees the human personality as less racked by tension. According to Mead, infants and young children develop as social beings first of all by imitating the actions of those around them. Play is one way this takes place. In their play, as has been noted above, small children often imitate what adults do. A small child will make mud pies, having seen an adult cooking, or dig with a spoon, having observed someone gardening. Children’s play evolves from simple imitation to more complicated games in which a child of four or five will act out an adult role. Mead calls this taking the roe of the other – learning what it is like to be in the shoes of another person. It is only at this stage that children acquire a developed sense of self. Children achieve an understanding of themselves as separate agents – as a ‘me’ – by seeing themselves through the eyes of others.
We achieve self-awareness, according to Mead, when we learn to distinguish the ‘me’ from the ‘I’. The ‘I’ is the unsocialized infant, a bundle of spontaneous wants and desires. The ‘me’, as Mead uses the term, is the social self. Individuals develop self-consciousness, Mead argues, by coming to see themselves as others see them. Both Freud and Mead see the child becoming an autonomous agent, capable of self-understanding, and able to operate outside the context of the immediate family, at about age five. For Freud, this is the outcome of the Oedipal phase, while for Mead it is the result of a developed capacity of self-awareness.
A further stage of child development, according to Mead, occurs when the child is about eight or nine. This is the age at which children tend to take part in organized games, rather than unsystematic ‘play’. It is not until this period that children begin to understand the overall values nd morality according to which social life is conducted. To learn organized games, one must understand the rules of play and notions of fairness and equal participation. The child at this stage learns to grasp what Mead terms the generalized other – the general values and moral rules involved in the culture in which he or she is developing. This is placed at a somewhat later age by Mead than by Freud, but once more there are clear similarities between their ideas on this point.
Mead’s views are less controversial than those of Freud. They do not contain so many starling ideas, and they do not depend on the theory of an unconscious basis to personality. Mead’s theory of the development of self-consciousness has deservedly been very influential. On the other hand, Mead’s views were never published in a comprehensive form, and are useful as suggestive insights rather than as providing a general interpretation of child development.