[Xmca-l] Re: Thought and language as oscillating and pulsing [or not]

[mike cole]

So a specific text from Shpet on ethnic psychology would be of special
interest,
Martin.

Where might such a thing be hiding?
mike

On Sat, Jan 24, 2015 at 2:40 PM, Martin John Packer <mpacker@uniandes.edu.co
> wrote:

> There is a growing literature on Shpet, but very little of his own work is
> available in English. His book 'Appearance & Sense' is translated (and I
> have a copy in case anyone is interested), but this was early work,
> introducing Husserl to Russian readers (and early Husserl at that: Shpet
> studied with Husserl in 1912-13). Shpet's more explicitly hermeneutic work,
> in particular his writing on the inner form of the word, has not been
> translated, to my knowledge. Yet the connection with, and presumably the
> influence on, LSV is evident. Around 1916 Vygotsky attended Shpet’s seminar
> on "internal form of the word" at Shanyavsky University, and the two were
> both teaching at the Pedology Department of Moscow University in the late
> 1920s. In the early 1920s Shpet organized the 'ethnic psychology' section
> at Moscow University.  Hence my interest in his work, and my suggestion
> that getting more translated would be very interesting.
>
> Martin
>
> On Jan 24, 2015, at 5:21 PM, Martin John Packer <mpacker@uniandes.edu.co>
> wrote:
>
> > Got it!  :)
> >
> > On Jan 24, 2015, at 4:58 PM, Ed Wall <ewall@umich.edu> wrote:
> >
> >> You possibly might also be interested in
> >>
> >> The Role of Hermeneutic Phenomenology in Grounding the Affirmative
> Philosophy of Gustav Gustavovich Shpet
> >> V. G. Kuznetsov
> >> Russian Studies in Philosophy 37 (4):62-90 (1999)
> >>
> >> Ed
> >>
> >> On Jan 24, 2015, at  2:49 PM, Martin John Packer wrote:
> >>
> >>> This is the information I have, Henry.
> >>>
> >>> Freiberger-Sheikholeslami, E. (1984). Gustav G. Shpet: Hermeneutical
> logic and philosophical semiotics. In J. Deely (Ed.), Semiotics 1984 (pp.
> 381-391). Bloomington: Semiotic Society of America.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Martin
> >>>
> >>> On Jan 24, 2015, at 2:37 PM, HENRY SHONERD <hshonerd@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Martin,
> >>>> Thank you very muchfor the article on Sheet. I think the readings and
> dialog generated will help me understand much better Vygotsky and his
> context by getting a better grip on the long view, through the eyes of
> hermeneutics. Do you know when the Freiberger-Sheeikholes article was
> written?
> >>>> Henry
> >>>>
> >>>>> On Jan 24, 2015, at 10:26 AM, Martin John Packer <
> mpacker@uniandes.edu.co> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I am sure that there are differences between LSV and Shpet, as Larry
> points out. But there are also striking similarities. Here is a little
> background:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Martin
> >>>>>
> >>>>> <Freiberger-Sheikholeslami 1985 Gustav G. Shpet He.pdf>
> >>>>> On Jan 24, 2015, at 11:39 AM, Larry Purss <lpscholar2@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> Martin will be sending us an article on Shpet.
> >>>>>> I therefore did some background exploration and discovered that
> Shpet and
> >>>>>> Vygotsky differed on the notion of "oscillation".
> >>>>>> Vygotsky believed thought and language oscillated while Shpet
> disagreed.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Zinchenko clarifies Vygotsky's understanding in this paragraph
> >>>>>> that Zinchenko wrote in his chapter "Thought and Word, the
> Approaches of L.
> >>>>>> S. Vygotsky and G. G. Shpet": It uses the metaphor of rain [which I
> >>>>>> associated with the other thread on rain]
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> "Thought and word are no less polyphonic than mind.  Yet, there is a
> >>>>>> long way to go to arrive at this conclusion.  And it is hard to
> >>>>>> overestimate the input of Shpet and Vygotsky, along with Aleksandr
> Potebnya.
> >>>>>> Out of all the polyphony of mind and thought, out of all the various
> >>>>>> possibilities of origins, Shpet and Vygotsky   gave their
> preference to the
> >>>>>> word, although they understood it differently.  Let us start from
> >>>>>> Vygotsky's metaphorical description: *What is simultaneous in
> thought is
> >>>>>> successive in language.*  It would be possible to compare a thought
> with a
> >>>>>> cloud that showers a rain of words.  This is why the transition from
> >>>>>> thought to language is a very complicated process of
> *dismemberment* of a
> >>>>>> thought and its recreation in a word.  On the next page, Vygotsky
> wrote,
> >>>>>> 'continuing this picturesque comparison, we should liken the
> motivation of
> >>>>>> thought to the wind that sets the clouds in motion.'  If something
> can *pour
> >>>>>> itself, *it means that it already exists.  Therefore we can
> understand the
> >>>>>> given metaphor as saying that thought, already existing is
> *expressed *in a
> >>>>>> word"  [emphasis in the original]
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> This quote draws attention to Vygotsky perceiving *oscillation
> *behind the
> >>>>>> movement of thought and language. Shpet did not see thought and
> language as
> >>>>>> oscillating.  Zinchenko's goal in his article is not to place the
> >>>>>> approaches of Shpet and Vygotsky in opposition but to present them
> as
> >>>>>> mutually complimentary approaches.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I hope to learn from others on the complexity of the notions of
> >>>>>> oscillating movement of thought and language situated within words.
> >>>>>> Polyphonic notions
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>
>
>


-- 
It is the dilemma of psychology to deal with a natural science as an object
that creates history. Ernst Boesch.