Las respuestas de los niños en discusiones argumentativas relacionadas con las reglas y normas de los padres

Abstract

This study seeks to investigate the types of responses by children aged between 3 and 7 years in argumentative discussions relating to parental rules and prescriptions. The data corpus is composed of 132 argumentative discussions selected from 30 video-recorded meals of 10 middle to upper-middle-class Swiss and Italian families. Data are presented through discursive excerpts of argumentative discussions and analysed by the pragmadialectical ideal model of critical discussion. The findings show that when parents advance context-bound arguments such as the arguments of quality (e.g., very good, salty, or not good) and quantity (e.g., too little, quite enough, or too much) of food, the arguments advanced by children mirror the same types of arguments previously used by parents. On the other hand, when parents advance more complex, elaborated, and context-unbound arguments such as the appeal to consistency's argument, the argument from authority and the argument from analogy, the children typically did not advance any argument, but their response is an expression of further doubt or a mere opposition without providing any argument. Overall, the results of this study indicate that the types of children's responses are strictly connected to the type of argument previously advanced by their parents. This aspect is particularly relevant in terms of children's capacities to engage in argumentative exchanges and to react in rational ways during the confrontation with the parents. Further research in this direction is needed in order to better understand specific potentialities of language in the everyday process of socialization within the family context.

Argumentación en preadolescentes: Descripción de la complejidad y profundidad en su estructura discursiva

“…En esta última década, los estudios de argumentación infantil han derivado hacia investigaciones que consideran la argumentación dentro de una discusión crítica (Bova, 2015Bova et al, 2020Greco, Mehmeti, Perret-Clermont, 2016, 2017Schär, 2016Schär, , 2017Schär, , 2018.…”

“…Asimismo, se evidencia que los infantes tienden a utilizar los mismos argumentos previamente utilizados por sus progenitores, expresando mayoritariamente argumentos de calidad y cantidad para oponerse a la argumentación con el adulto. Al contrario, cuando los padres presentan argumentos más complejos, tales como aquellos de autoridad, apelación a la coherencia y el argumento de analogía, los niños no avanzan en este tipo de argumentos (Bova, 2015;Bova et al, 2020). En esta misma línea, Schär (2017Schär ( , 2018 declara que los niños pueden involucrarse de manera activa en una disputa argumentativa compleja y, que además, son capaces de abrir nuevos temas de discusión que, igualmente, pueden apoyarlos con uno o dos argumentos.…”