Early Child Development and Care 477 material consists of one hour of film for a single couple. It is also easily understandable when one realises that this material is not a finished object but a process leading to a finished object. As stated by Wallon in his brief overview of the studies dedicated to the childs drawing, ' one can only wonder about the few publications referring to this method [of observing the dynamic of the drawings execution](2001, p. 92). Indeed, the difficulty of observing, the little interest in the simultaneous linguistic production and the difficulty in analysing the process of the drawing activity explain that it is rather the statistical work on a high number of completed drawings(as opposed to drawings in the course of completion) that is generally being used. We shall adopt this method ofempirical data analysis; it requires developing an observational and ethnographic approach of the activity(Brassac, 2003a) This means that we offer here a monograph of an activity located in time and space. It is the creation process that is of interest for us, the process in its uniqueness and its sustained relationship with the final drawing-object. The results outlook for scientific validation which we shall obtain on this corpus are as follows: locating consistencies in a great number of situations of jointly created forms. The forms are here mainly graphic(traces left on the sheet)as well as verbal and of body language. You will not find in this article the collection of all the observations carried out, this being another task that we already started. You will rather find one study of one situation being considered in its singularity. thea t he categories of analysis that are going to be used to complete this study are twofold first ones are based not only on the analysis of the speech(the linguistic pragmatism), but also, in a broader sense, on the analysis of the interaction, seen as a modelling of verbal, gestural and artefactual forms( Brassac, 2003b). The first ones have their origin in pragmatic linguistics, the second ones in praxeology (Vernant, 1997). This extension to the mobilisation of bodies and artefacts(here pencil, eraser, sheet) relies on a vygotskian (Vygotski, 1934/1985)and meadian(Mead, 1934/1963)approach. In this sense, we shall bit-by-bit call upon the theory of language acts developed, for example, by Vanderveken (1988)and by ourselves(Brassac, 1992; Trognon Brassac, 1992) The theory of the intermediary objects will also help to provide valuable elements (Jeantet, 1998: Vinck, 1999; Vinck Jeantet, 1995). The second categories of analysis refer to the already classic clinical approach of development, which allow for the under standing of the child's drawing as a creation revealing the choices, the preferences and the rejections of the drawing person. Regarding specifically the drawing of its family, it is customary to consider that the child will express (reveal? its preferred identifications through the care with which it will draw some people, or, by contrast, the carelessness with which it will draw others. The most valued figure is usually the one the child draws first, thus showing how this figure becomes obvious to the child, as a spontaneous response to position in the family cluster, as seen through the childs eyed er being a pointer of the the proposed instruction; the space taken on the sheet of pape Establishing the protocol of the data acquisition The need to create an adequate environment led us to fulfil specific requirements. The subjects had to besiblings; they had to be between 6 and 1 l years old (in order for their graphic productions to be sufficiently sophisticated, especially in their capacity to show the genera tion and sex differences); they had to agree to be filmed and their parents had to agree too: they had to devote time coming to university premises. In the end, a brother and a sister were chosen as subjects. The eldest, whom we will name Emma, was eight years old; her brother, whom we will name Leo, was six years old. Emma was seated on Leo's left, they did not change place throughout the session. Two cameras were filming them; one facing themEarly Child Development and Care 477 material consists of one hour of film for a single couple. It is also easily understandable when one realises that this material is not a finished object but a process leading to a finished object. As stated by Wallon in his brief overview of the studies dedicated to the child’s drawing, ‘one can only wonder about the few publications referring to this method [of observing the dynamic of the drawing’s execution]’ (2001, p. 92). Indeed, the difficulty of observing, the little interest in the simultaneous linguistic production and the difficulty in analysing the process of the drawing activity explain that it is rather the statistical work on a high number of completed drawings (as opposed to drawings in the course of completion) that is generally being used. We shall adopt this method of empirical data analysis; it requires developing an observational and ethnographic approach of the activity (Brassac, 2003a). This means that we offer here a monograph of an activity located in time and space. It is the creation process that is of interest for us, the process in its uniqueness and its sustained relationship with the final drawing-object. The results outlook for scientific validation, which we shall obtain on this corpus are as follows: locating consistencies in a great number of situations of jointly created forms. The forms are here mainly graphic (traces left on the sheet) as well as verbal and of body language. You will not find in this article the collection of all the observations carried out, this being another task that we already started. You will rather find one study of one situation being considered in its singularity. The categories of analysis that are going to be used to complete this study are twofold: the first ones are based not only on the analysis of the speech (the linguistic pragmatism), but also, in a broader sense, on the analysis of the interaction, seen as a modelling of verbal, gestural and artefactual forms (Brassac, 2003b). The first ones have their origin in pragmatic linguistics, the second ones in praxeology (Vernant, 1997). This extension to the mobilisation of bodies and artefacts (here pencil, eraser, sheet) relies on a vygotskian (Vygotski, 1934/1985) and meadian (Mead, 1934/1963) approach. In this sense, we shall bit-by-bit call upon the theory of language acts developed, for example, by Vanderveken (1988) and by ourselves (Brassac, 1992; Trognon & Brassac, 1992). The theory of the intermediary objects will also help to provide valuable elements (Jeantet, 1998; Vinck, 1999; Vinck & Jeantet, 1995). The second categories of analysis refer to the already classic clinical approach of development, which allow for the under￾standing of the child’s drawing as a creation revealing the choices, the preferences and the rejections of the drawing person. Regarding specifically the drawing of its family, it is customary to consider that the child will express (reveal?) its preferred identifications, through the care with which it will draw some people, or, by contrast, the carelessness with which it will draw others. The most valued figure is usually the one the child draws first, thus showing how this figure becomes obvious to the child, as a spontaneous response to the proposed instruction; the space taken on the sheet of paper being a pointer of the position in the family cluster, as seen through the child’s eyes. Establishing the protocol of the data acquisition The need to create an adequate environment led us to fulfil specific requirements. The subjects had to be siblings; they had to be between 6 and 11 years old (in order for their graphic productions to be sufficiently sophisticated, especially in their capacity to show the genera￾tion and sex differences); they had to agree to be filmed and their parents had to agree too; they had to devote time coming to university premises. In the end, a brother and a sister were chosen as subjects. The eldest, whom we will name Emma, was eight years old; her brother, whom we will name Leo, was six years old. Emma was seated on Leo’s left, they did not change place throughout the session. Two cameras were filming them; one facing them