[Xmca-l] Re: "The political" and "power" in learning

[Larry Purss]

Miguel
your phrase:

 {*the threads* ARE LIKE *roundtables* or *spaces* within a larger venue}

Is an example of meta-phor which captures [grasps] a particular notion of
*thinking* as developing within conference. I will go no further down this
*path* [or way]  as the theme of this *thread* is questioning the relation
of the political and power in learning.
Your particular *journey* as expressed in your article.
I will now *turn* my attention to your article and focus on the section
"decolonizing Pedagogies: Standpoint and Tenets". The power of your writing
shines through the images which you invoke with metaphor as *signposts* to
help me enter your understanding. Your *under*standing *in*formed and
growing *out* of collective experience you name Chicano stand*point*. The
place from which you stand and point as a single gesture.
This  place IS a *vision* by and for Chicanos.  This stand*point* or
*vision* is emergent as it comes into being within my *community* of
Chicanos who are always reinventing the vision of what it *means* to *be*
Chicano.
Miguel you then persuasively share your *believe* [your vision]  which you
express AS a question [a quest]:
 For Chicanos,Is the question of colonialism central to the curriculum and
its investigation [as a quest]  SHOULD emerge as an expression of Chicano
communities' self-determination?

The term "believe" holds an image, which is symbolic, of Chicano Community
which you, Miguel are imagining and you are persuading other Chicanos to
accompany you on this quest . You are acting from this imaginal *space*
[standpoint] as an open space of possibility which can be populated by
Chicano *selves* which emerge AS the Chicano community comes to be what is
imagined and believed AS Chicano community. This phenomena of reinvention,
emerging from this imaginal possibility, will be incarnated [made flesh,
made physical] through *articulated* principles forming within Chicano
community.

Miguel, to turn again to your phrase which I indicated through repetition
is to return to the phenomena of the thinking *conference* as emerging at
*roundtables* or *open spaces* of possibility.

I question if I am *off base* with my thinking process was carried away to
talking at roundtables. If this is intruding on this thread whose focus is
exploring power and the political within learning communities, I apologize.
As a reader, I entered the realm of intentional and interpretive
communities which are imagined places which SHOULD bring forth actual
communities.
Miguel your passion and compassion are necessary to bring into being [to
generate] Chicano communities which form through shared experiences and
shared expressions of those experiences. The relation of the *seeing AS*
and the *saying* AS shared projects. The  phenomenological AND cultural
historical quests sharing a family resemblance, though using different
symbols and metaphors. Are they gesturing or indicating a shared quest?




On Mon, Dec 1, 2014 at 6:26 PM, Zavala, Miguel <
mizavala@exchange.fullerton.edu> wrote:

> Thanks Dana for sorting this new thread.  Mike, I'll follow up with the
> articles you mention...
>
> I am also pressed for time so will be somewhat slow in replying.  I see
> the threads are like roundtables or spaces within a larger venue, a
> thinking conference.
>
> Miguel
>
> On 12/1/14 6:07 PM, "mike cole" <mcole@ucsd.edu> wrote:
>
> >I fully agree, Dana. Several interconnected issues that Miguel is raising
> >are of central concern to xmca.
> >
> >Miguel--
> >
> >I think that the notion of decolonializing pedagogy relates in pretty
> >direct way with Maisha Winn's ideas of  African Diaspora Participatory
> >Literacy. She writes about that in the next issue of MCA. I also like the
> >idea of autobiographical accounts of one's own positionality with respect
> >to the events that have shaped your scholarship. There is an interesting
> >article by a group of South African pedagogs that illustrates again, what
> >seems like, a similar idea of locating one's academic work within the
> >context of one's political engagements. And then we are gifted with Paul's
> >article in a journal devoted to the centrality of class in a journal
> >entitled *African and Black Diaspora. *
> >
> >Synchronic a-causality or Zeitgeist?
> >mike
> >
> >
> >
> >On Mon, Dec 1, 2014 at 5:45 PM, Walker, Dana <Dana.Walker@unco.edu>
> wrote:
> >
> >> Hi Miguel,
> >>
> >> I would be very interested in continuing this thread on "the political"
> >> and "power" in learning. My participation will be slow, as I will be at
> >> the LRA conference in Florida and then finals and so on, but will follow
> >> with interest. I have changed thread title in anticipation of pursuing
> >> this exploration.
> >>
> >> Does Ferguson (or Oakland, or New York, or Hong Kong, or Cairo) matter
> >>in
> >> considerations of 'the political' and 'power' in learning (and
> >>teaching)?
> >>
> >> Dana
> >>
> >> On 11/28/14 5:07 PM, "Zavala, Miguel" <mizavala@exchange.fullerton.edu>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> >Hi Dana,
> >> >
> >> >I believe there are several ways to go with an analysis of "the
> >>political"
> >> >or "power" in learning.  First, is to search for its
> >> >articulation/theorization in existing studies (whether conceptual or
> >> >empirical) within the learning sciences more generally. Who has
> >>attempted
> >> >this work? Also, In the general absence of studies theorizing "the
> >> >political" or "power" in learning (which I gather is an accurate
> >>depiction
> >> >of the field), one might pursue the ways in which "context" is narrowly
> >> >framed in distinct frames/theories of learning.  In what ways does/can
> >> >CHAT enable the analysis of "the political" and "power" in learning?
> >> >
> >> >Now, due to time constraints, this project may take time; perhaps
> >>there is
> >> >a smaller group that would like to continue with this
> >>thread/exploration
> >> >of "the political" or "power" in learning. I place questions of
> >>politics
> >> >and power in quotation marks because they need to be unpacked, like
> >>many
> >> >concepts.
> >> >
> >> >I believe there is another route one can take, and that is to begin
> >>with
> >> >our own political biographies, how we view the world and its
> >> >transformation. In a sense, we all have our biographies of coming to
> >>CHAT.
> >> >How is CHAT a tool in our practical work (as educators,
> >> >action-researchers, community organizers, etc.)?  Because processes are
> >> >relational, I imagine that our own biographies, positionalities, and
> >> >standpoints (which function more like collective consciousness and
> >> >practices, borrowing here from the work of Sandra Harding) are not only
> >> >inflected in our appropriations of CHAT but are interwoven; they shift
> >> >from "external" to "internal" processes of of both research and praxis
> >> >(informed by our politics).  I recognize there are many points being
> >>made
> >> >here and "dangers", especially when one views learning as a-political
> >>or
> >> >mechanistic, but I take that risk.
> >> >
> >> >Attached is a chapter outlining my political philosophy. It was
> >>published
> >> >as part of a text that asked contributors to name our "pedagogic
> >>creeds"
> >> >(á la Dewey).
> >> >
> >> >-Miguel
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >On 11/27/14 8:12 AM, "Walker, Dana" <Dana.Walker@unco.edu> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >>Gracias Miguel, and Mike and Larry for responding and for moving
> >>forward
> >> >>this thread of thought begun by Annalisa.
> >> >>
> >> >>Miguel, I remember now (based on a conference presentation of yours
> >>years
> >> >>ago) that your pedagogical and theoretical work involving migrant
> >> >>students
> >> >>at UCLA addressed questions of power, subjectivity, and embodied
> >>selves
> >> >>in
> >> >>boundary crossing processes in ways that other CHAT theorists (e.g.,
> >> >>Tuomi-Grohn & Engestrom, 2003; Grossen & Zittoun, 2012) do not.  I
> >>wonder
> >> >>if this is a place where we could begin exploring the question of
> >>power
> >> >>in
> >> >>relation to learning and development? Is there an article of yours
> >>that
> >> >>you might suggest on this subject?
> >> >>
> >> >>Dana
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>On 11/27/14 12:02 AM, "Zavala, Miguel"
> >><mizavala@exchange.fullerton.edu>
> >> >>wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >>>Gracias Annalisa and Dana.
> >> >>>
> >> >>>Questions of power have always been central to my work and I am a new
> >> >>>member of this list (and community) and don't have a broader context
> >>as
> >> >>>to
> >> >>>why it was created and whether it is by design meant to grow in its
> >>own
> >> >>>way over time, etc. What I have noticed though is a tendency to
> >>focus on
> >> >>>conceptual clarity (of the work of Vygotsky and Cultural Historical
> >> >>>Activity Theory and prior, such as Marx). So, I am learning anew in
> >>this
> >> >>>space, taking notes, re-reading.  In many ways it reminds me of the
> >>CHAT
> >> >>>reading group many of us at UCLA visualized but never materialized
> >> >>>formally, except that our reading and writing the world with
> >>Vygotsky's
> >> >>>ideas (and others) did materialize in the beautiful pedagogical work
> >>we
> >> >>>did with migrant students at that time...
> >> >>>
> >> >>>I hope the question of how we use, expand, enrich, re-envision, and
> >> >>>carry
> >> >>>forward the ideas of Vygotsky (and how these intersect with or
> >> >>>interweave
> >> >>>with power) are considered in an open and non-controlled way.  By
> >> >>>"non-controlled" I mean the parallel tendency in particular
> >> >>>circles/communities to challenge work that grows out of particular
> >>ideas
> >> >>>and if those ideas do not adhere to some party-line (or experts on
> >>said
> >> >>>theory don't agree on it) then such work should not define itself as
> >> >>>"Vygotskian", "CHAT-based", or "Socio-Cultural," etc. My own
> >>motivation
> >> >>>to
> >> >>>chime in and contribute would increase if we followed this strand,
> >>that
> >> >>>looks at power and how it is integral to (not a 'factor' or
> >>'external'
> >> >>>context) learningŠ Although the reading group orientation is still
> >> >>>useful.
> >> >>>
> >> >>>Warmly,
> >> >>>
> >> >>>Miguel Zavala
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>>On 11/26/14 10:38 PM, "Walker, Dana" <Dana.Walker@unco.edu> wrote:
> >> >>>
> >> >>>>Before we leave this topic, I would like to suggest that we pause to
> >> >>>>consider Annalisa's question:
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>>I'm curious how others have been inspired by Vygotsky and
> >> >>>>sociocultural theory, and even other manifestations of his ideas,
> >>such
> >> >>>>as
> >> >>>>CHAT, etc and how people are using these approaches in their work.
> >>What
> >> >>>>is
> >> >>>>that like for you? And to be more specific, what is that like for
> >>women
> >> >>>>and
> >> >>>>people of color? I'm also interested in thinking-out-loud with
> >>others
> >> >>>>about
> >> >>>>Vygotskian concepts that are not easy to understand; to employ in
> >>real
> >> >>>>time
> >> >>>>dialogue and social interaction to leap over zopeds together. Isn't
> >> >>>>that
> >> >>>>what a listserv is for? Or am I being too idealistic?
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>>For many years I have wondered why the participants on this list so
> >> >>>>seldom
> >> >>>>talk from contextualized positions, specifically positioning the
> >>self
> >> >>>>in
> >> >>>>relation to others and to power relations shaped by race, class,
> >> >>>>gender,
> >> >>>>and so on.  I am myself very aware of power relations being played
> >>out
> >> >>>>through the discursive positioning of people in this space, which is
> >> >>>>why
> >> >>>>I
> >> >>>>choose not to speak. I am wondering if any of the subscribers to
> >>this
> >> >>>>list
> >> >>>>are interested such questions, including the one framed by Annalisa
> >> >>>>above?
> >> >>>>Kris Gutierrez is the only one I know of in CHAT/sociocultural
> >>theory
> >> >>>>who
> >> >>>>deals with these issues, for example in her article "Developing a
> >> >>>>Sociocritical Literacy in the Third Space"(2008). But I'm sure there
> >> >>>>are
> >> >>>>others.
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>>Dana
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>>On 11/26/14 10:49 PM, "Carol Macdonald" <carolmacdon@gmail.com>
> >>wrote:
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>>>Hi
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>>There have been some off list postings about this phenomenon. None
> >>of
> >> >>>>>it
> >> >>>>>complimentary.  This cannot be sorted out in one move.
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>>I propose that we move onto a different thread -  topic.
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>>Mike, would you like to start us off on something new?
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>>Carol
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>>On 27 November 2014 at 02:49, Martin John Packer
> >> >>>>><mpacker@uniandes.edu.co>
> >> >>>>>wrote:
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>>> Andy, if you're going to retire, then retire. But don't aim one
> >>or
> >> >>>>>>two
> >> >>>>>> more underhand blows behind the feint of retiring.
> >> >>>>>>
> >> >>>>>> Martin
> >> >>>>>>
> >> >>>>>> On Nov 26, 2014, at 7:24 PM, Andy Blunden <ablunden@mira.net>
> >> wrote:
> >> >>>>>>
> >> >>>>>> > Well this bloke will retire again at this point. I thought for
> >>a
> >> >>>>>>brief
> >> >>>>>> moment there, I thought we had a breakthrough. Certainly, Huw's
> >> >>>>>>"real
> >> >>>>>> illusion" is perfectly apt to my mind (it's an expression Marx
> >> >>>>>>uses),
> >> >>>>>>or
> >> >>>>>> in  Eric Fromm's words, an illusion with "survival value." Martin
> >> >>>>>>says
> >> >>>>>> "Consciousness is an objective process that *sometimes* can *give
> >> >>>>>>rise
> >> >>>>>>to*
> >> >>>>>> illusions." As Vygotsky says "For him psychology is partly
> >> >>>>>>phenomenology."
> >> >>>>>> > Andy
> >> >>>>>> >
> >>
> >>>>>>>>-------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>>>>>>--
> >> >>>>>>-
> >> >>>>>>-
> >> >>>>>>-
> >> >>>>>> > *Andy Blunden*
> >> >>>>>> > http://home.pacific.net.au/~andy/
> >> >>>>>> >
> >> >>>>>> >
> >> >>>>>> > Bruce Robinson wrote:
> >> >>>>>> >> Henry,
> >> >>>>>> >>
> >> >>>>>> >> Your wife's question leads to another: who speaks for the
> >>silent
> >> >>>>>> majority, many of whom, like me, must be getting fed up with what
> >> >>>>>>David
> >> >>>>>>K
> >> >>>>>> calls a "rather blokish struggle for power over particular
> >>words'?
> >> >>>>>>[Not
> >> >>>>>> Richard Nixon :)]
> >> >>>>>> >>
> >> >>>>>> >> Bruce R
> >> >>>>>> >>
> >> >>>>>> >> PS: You may also note that I have not changed the subject
> >>heading
> >> >>>>>>of
> >> >>>>>> this message so that it bears no relation to the content.
> >>Something
> >> >>>>>>else I
> >> >>>>>> find irritating...
> >> >>>>>> >>
> >> >>>>>> >> On 26/11/2014 17:16, HENRY SHONERD wrote:
> >> >>>>>> >>> Sister Analisa,
> >> >>>>>> >>> Thank you for responding! I was just talking to my wife
> >>(getting
> >> >>>>>> personal!) about the chat. She asked me, "How does anyone get to
> >> >>>>>> participate in the (XMCA) chat if only a few people take part?" I
> >> >>>>>>wondered
> >> >>>>>> in my email below if too much was expected of written
> >>communication
> >> >>>>>>in
> >> >>>>>>the
> >> >>>>>> XMCA chat. With 800 people potentially taking turns, well...what
> >>is
> >> >>>>>>even
> >> >>>>>> possible logistically? Mike Cole has talked about this, and, I
> >> >>>>>>think,
> >> >>>>>>has
> >> >>>>>> some suggestions on how to deal with the bottlenecking. But even
> >> >>>>>>small
> >> >>>>>> scale communication can be daunting. I watched, with my wife, a
> >> >>>>>>Richard
> >> >>>>>> Linklater movie last night, "Before Midnight". Two people, face
> >>to
> >> >>>>>>face, in
> >> >>>>>> a totally committed relationship, smart people, good people,
> >>trying
> >> >>>>>>so
> >> >>>>>>hard
> >> >>>>>> to get it right. Always a work in progress. But it's worth it.
> >>The
> >> >>>>>> alternative is despair. I am sure of this: This chat, which
> >>seems to
> >> >>>>>>get
> >> >>>>>> bogged down in abstractions, pure thinking in the mud, is really
> >> >>>>>> consequential beyond the sensitivities of academics. I said we
> >> >>>>>> >> va
> >> >>>>>> >>>  lue Vygotsky's "heroism", but that's too macho. I should
> >>have
> >> >>>>>>said
> >> >>>>>> courage.
> >> >>>>>> >>>
> >> >>>>>> >>> The Linguistic Relativity Hypothesis is a powerful idea,
> >>often
> >> >>>>>>called
> >> >>>>>> the Whorf/Sapir hypothesis. Google it. Really. See what you
> >>think.
> >> >>>>>>One
> >> >>>>>> gauge of the power of an idea is if it has found its way into
> >> >>>>>>popular
> >> >>>>>> discourse. I just this morning heard an NPR radio program (thanks
> >> >>>>>>again
> >> >>>>>>to
> >> >>>>>> my wife, who was listening when she heard something she thought I
> >> >>>>>>would
> >> >>>>>>be
> >> >>>>>> interested in) that dealt with the Whorf/Sapir hypothesis in its
> >> >>>>>>strong
> >> >>>>>>and
> >> >>>>>> weak form.
> >> >>>>>> >>>
> >> >>>>>> >>> Henry
> >> >>>>>> >>>
> >> >>>>>> >>>> On Nov 25, 2014, at 10:11 PM, Annalisa Aguilar
> >> >>>>>><annalisa@unm.edu>
> >> >>>>>> wrote:
> >> >>>>>> >>>>
> >> >>>>>> >>>> Dear Henry,
> >> >>>>>> >>>>
> >> >>>>>> >>>> Thank you for your reply.
> >> >>>>>> >>>>
> >> >>>>>> >>>> I don't think being personal (or even personable) requires
> >> >>>>>>being
> >> >>>>>> heated. Does this have to do with my comment of warmth as a sign
> >>of
> >> >>>>>>welcome?
> >> >>>>>> >>>>
> >> >>>>>> >>>> To speak about culture non-personally is not something I am
> >> >>>>>>adept
> >> >>>>>>at
> >> >>>>>> doing. We are always speaking from where we stand, the culture
> >>that
> >> >>>>>>we
> >> >>>>>>are
> >> >>>>>> in or from, what-have-you.
> >> >>>>>> >>>>
> >> >>>>>> >>>> Respectfully, I do not know what "linguistic relativity
> >> >>>>>>hypothesis"
> >> >>>>>> is. So please be patient with me while I connect this academic
> >>idea
> >> >>>>>>you
> >> >>>>>> have offered to this conversation so that I can relate that to my
> >> >>>>>>personal
> >> >>>>>> experience speaking on this thread, though clearly I'm not
> >>speaking
> >> >>>>>> literally right now, but it is speech from me, not a sock puppet
> >> >>>>>>with
> >> >>>>>>my
> >> >>>>>> voice thrown from the position of objective reality.
> >> >>>>>> >>>>
> >> >>>>>> >>>> You are talking about speaking two languages. But it seems
> >>we
> >> >>>>>>are
> >> >>>>>>all
> >> >>>>>> speaking English on this list. So I'm a bit lost right there what
> >> >>>>>>you
> >> >>>>>>are
> >> >>>>>> trying to say to me.
> >> >>>>>> >>>>
> >> >>>>>> >>>> Then, you speak of metalinguistics and how it represents
> >> >>>>>>different
> >> >>>>>> worldviews, if you don't mind me swapping your use of
> >>"perspective"
> >> >>>>>>for
> >> >>>>>> worldview. There is a lot of time clearing muckups to get it
> >>right.
> >> >>>>>>I'm
> >> >>>>>>not
> >> >>>>>> sure that it ever gets right though, which troubles me. I have
> >>found
> >> >>>>>>that
> >> >>>>>> many people who have different worldviews communicate by "talking
> >> >>>>>>to,"
> >> >>>>>> rather than "talking at." I feel, for example, you and I are
> >>talking
> >> >>>>>>to
> >> >>>>>>one
> >> >>>>>> another, despite our likely different POVs.
> >> >>>>>> >>>>
> >> >>>>>> >>>> I don't know what the "perish and dapple of Andy" means when
> >> >>>>>>you
> >> >>>>>>say
> >> >>>>>> that. From what I can tell he's trying to define something for
> >> >>>>>>himself
> >> >>>>>> asking for the help of others. That's fine and I'm learning that
> >> >>>>>> definitions are very bas-relief for him. I think my interests
> >>are a
> >> >>>>>>little
> >> >>>>>> different. So I'd prefer to orient to my interests, if that is
> >>OK.
> >> >>>>>> >>>>
> >> >>>>>> >>>> Speaking of metalinguistics, rather than debate over
> >> >>>>>>definitions,
> >> >>>>>>I'm
> >> >>>>>> more interested in speaking to the very different people who are
> >>on
> >> >>>>>>this
> >> >>>>>> list. The rumor is there are 800 folks out there. Where are you?
> >>:)
> >> >>>>>>To
> >> >>>>>> reference a highly academic quote from the Wizard of Oz:
> >> >>>>>> >>>>
> >> >>>>>> >>>> "Come out, come out wherever you are, and meet the young
> >>lady
> >> >>>>>>who
> >> >>>>>> fell from the star!"
> >> >>>>>> >>>> --Glinda, the Good Witch from the North (waves magic wand)
> >> >>>>>> >>>>
> >> >>>>>> >>>> I'm curious how others have been inspired by Vygotsky and
> >> >>>>>> sociocultural theory, and even other manifestations of his ideas,
> >> >>>>>>such
> >> >>>>>>as
> >> >>>>>> CHAT, etc and how people are using these approaches in their
> >>work.
> >> >>>>>>What
> >> >>>>>>is
> >> >>>>>> that like for you? And to be more specific, what is that like for
> >> >>>>>>women
> >> >>>>>>and
> >> >>>>>> people of color? I'm also interested in thinking-out-loud with
> >> >>>>>>others
> >> >>>>>>about
> >> >>>>>> Vygotskian concepts that are not easy to understand; to employ in
> >> >>>>>>real
> >> >>>>>>time
> >> >>>>>> dialogue and social interaction to leap over zopeds together.
> >>Isn't
> >> >>>>>>that
> >> >>>>>> what a listserv is for? Or am I being too idealistic?
> >> >>>>>> >>>>
> >> >>>>>> >>>> I have tried to speak in an open, easy, and immediate
> >>manner,
> >> >>>>>>to
> >> >>>>>> allow others to engage. But I fear that engagement is never
> >>going to
> >> >>>>>>happen
> >> >>>>>> because all that persists are conversations about definitions, or
> >> >>>>>>whether
> >> >>>>>> nothing can come from nothing, and voila! subsequent debates
> >>ensue.
> >> >>>>>>Or
> >> >>>>>> someone will say, "We already discussed this 20 years ago!" Which
> >> >>>>>>means
> >> >>>>>>I
> >> >>>>>> missed the party, I suppose. Unfortunately, if I disagree with a
> >> >>>>>>position
> >> >>>>>> because I interpret differently, then I'm told to go read
> >>something
> >> >>>>>>without
> >> >>>>>> really a clear explanation why I'm supposed to go read something.
> >> >>>>>> >>>>
> >> >>>>>> >>>> I don't really agree with the approach of "read this," as an
> >> >>>>>>academic
> >> >>>>>> argument. Anyone is free to use it, and I have myself, but
> >>because I
> >> >>>>>>know
> >> >>>>>> how obtuse that can be, I couch it with my reasons why I think it
> >> >>>>>>would
> >> >>>>>>be
> >> >>>>>> a good read for that person, and what I think there is learn from
> >> >>>>>>reading.
> >> >>>>>> I think the "read this" approach, when it is offered with the
> >>tone
> >> >>>>>>of
> >> >>>>>>"now
> >> >>>>>> go eat your vegetables!" fails in the making of speech between
> >> >>>>>>people.
> >> >>>>>>All
> >> >>>>>> it does is shut things down.
> >> >>>>>> >>>>
> >> >>>>>> >>>> If the reading truly is relevant, it seems far more
> >>productive
> >> >>>>>>in
> >> >>>>>>the
> >> >>>>>> moment of speech to cue a person what to look for, to supply a
> >> >>>>>>context,
> >> >>>>>> especially when referencing an entire book, for example, or the
> >>link
> >> >>>>>>to
> >> >>>>>>an
> >> >>>>>> entire website full of texts.
> >> >>>>>> >>>>
> >> >>>>>> >>>> Your assessment in the physicality of language is something
> >> >>>>>>with
> >> >>>>>> which I am completely in agreement. Especially since we all seem
> >>to
> >> >>>>>>agree
> >> >>>>>> with the material aspects of language. So the question at hand
> >>is a
> >> >>>>>>matter
> >> >>>>>> of form. Form has an aesthetic but also has a purpose. Are we
> >> >>>>>>throwing
> >> >>>>>> ropes or throwing boulders? If throwing boulders, where does that
> >> >>>>>>need
> >> >>>>>>to
> >> >>>>>> throw boulders come from? If throwing ropes, then at least
> >> >>>>>>connections
> >> >>>>>>are
> >> >>>>>> being made for those who might not be very clear about ideas and
> >>who
> >> >>>>>>may
> >> >>>>>> require a helping hand.
> >> >>>>>> >>>>
> >> >>>>>> >>>> Then there's the old, but handy, elliptical comment,
> >>something
> >> >>>>>>like a
> >> >>>>>> boomerang... meant to be subtle or ironic at the expense of
> >>someone
> >> >>>>>>who
> >> >>>>>>may
> >> >>>>>> not understand.
> >> >>>>>> >>>>
> >> >>>>>> >>>> At this point, I'd to emphasize that being ignorant is not
> >> >>>>>>being
> >> >>>>>> stupid, but it seems someone who is ignorant is frequently
> >>treated
> >> >>>>>>as
> >> >>>>>> stupid (um, on this list). This "phenomenon" has made me reflect
> >> >>>>>>upon
> >> >>>>>>how
> >> >>>>>> little time is spent upon the nature of ignorance in education
> >>and
> >> >>>>>>the
> >> >>>>>> dynamics of ignorance in speaking. Every one of us is ignorant
> >>about
> >> >>>>>>most
> >> >>>>>> things in the world. And yet being ignorant is seen as an
> >> >>>>>>embarrassment, a
> >> >>>>>> deficiency, a lapse in character. I vehemently disagree with this
> >> >>>>>>reception
> >> >>>>>> to ignorance. Even Einstein said something like, "The more I
> >>know,
> >> >>>>>>the
> >> >>>>>>more
> >> >>>>>> I see how much I don't know." Such an aggressive position toward
> >> >>>>>>ignorance
> >> >>>>>> is nothing but hurtful, even arrogant. Arrogance is a blister, a
> >> >>>>>>defense
> >> >>>>>> mechanism from previous hurt. A person who is honest about one's
> >>own
> >> >>>>>> ignorance is a very strong person and is showing a willingness to
> >> >>>>>>learn
> >> >>>>>> something. I think all teachers will agree that a person who
> >>knows
> >> >>>>>>one
> >> >>>>>> doesn't know is an easier student to teach tha
> >> >>>>>> >> n
> >> >>>>>> >>>   one who doesn't know one doesn't know.
> >> >>>>>> >>>> Iconicity is something I can hang my hat on. I see it is
> >> >>>>>>related
> >> >>>>>>to
> >> >>>>>> pointing. What I like about pointing is that it is a gesture,
> >>which
> >> >>>>>>implies
> >> >>>>>> movement, in the way the word is also movement. I hope I have
> >>made
> >> >>>>>> sufficient personal connections to your concepts without the
> >>heat.
> >> >>>>>>Thank
> >> >>>>>> you for offering them to me.
> >> >>>>>> >>>>
> >> >>>>>> >>>> Kind regards,
> >> >>>>>> >>>>
> >> >>>>>> >>>> Annalisa
> >> >>>>>> >>>>
> >> >>>>>> >>>
> >> >>>>>> >>
> >> >>>>>> >>
> >> >>>>>> >>
> >> >>>>>> >>
> >> >>>>>> >
> >> >>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>>--
> >> >>>>>Carol A  Macdonald Ph D (Edin)
> >> >>>>>Developmental psycholinguist
> >> >>>>>Academic, Researcher,  and Editor
> >> >>>>>Honorary Research Fellow: Department of Linguistics, Unisa
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >--
> >It is the dilemma of psychology to deal with a natural science with an
> >object that creates history. Ernst Boesch.
>
>
>