The purpose of our article is to organize the experiment during 2020-2021 years and to establish the relationships between the dialogical qualities of cognitive activity and the literary environment of pupils; to show the problem of psychological nature of the internal dialogue of schoolchildren actualized by text reality. Methods of the research. The following theoretical methods of the research were used to solve the tasks formulated in the article: a categorical method, structural and functional methods, the methods of the analysis, systematization, modeling, generalization. Also in our research we used empirical methods, such as the experiment of the effectiveness of group and individual forms of the pupils’ activity at the lessons, which in a great degree are actualized by text reality. The results of the research. In the article we showed that without a true understanding of the psychological nature of the internal dialogue there was no way and it couldn’t be able to understand the problem of bringing thoughts to the word according to all real complexity. The primary meanings of “inner speech” were understood by us by internal thinking like verbal memory. You can read the beginning of the verses in memory or you can reproduce it only in memory. The word tends to be replaced by an idea of it or an image of memory, like any other object. In this case, internal speech differs from external as the idea of the subject differs from the real subject. It is in this sense that we consider internal speech, examining in which memory patterns — acoustic, optical, motor, and synthetic — this mention of words is realized, or whether they compare the reproduction of words in memory with internal speech. In fact, there are two different processes, which need to be differentiated. Another interpretation of the internal speech, as a rule, is associated with the process of speeding up the splendid movement act. We have proposed terminologically to demarcate the internal movement and internal speech, signifying the remaining term “a context”, by which we understand the “internal movement”. The third, the most spread term, is giving the inner movement an over-thetop blaze. We internally call everything that precedes the motor act of speaking, the entire inner side of the movement which is blatant, in which two points are blamed: firstly, the motives of speaking, and, in a different way, the manifestation of that it is invisible, non-sensory, motor, specifically moving experience. Each internal movement is not rather movement in the direct meaning of the word, but intellectual and effective-strong action, the shards of it includes into themselves the motives of the movement that was thought, as it is expressed by the word. Conclusions. It was proved that a correct understanding of internal dialogical thinking should be based on the premise that internal speech was a special educational tool in nature, a special type of speech activity that had its own specific features and was in difficult relationships with other types of speech activity. In order to clarify these relations of internal dialogue, on the one hand, to thought, and on the other hand, to speech, it is necessary, first of all, to find its specific differences from one or another form of speech activity and to clarify its very special function.
