[Xmca-l] Re: Noumenal and Phenomenal
Andy Blunden
ablunden@mira.net
Tue Jun 21 05:29:30 PDT 2016
Personally I don't think Phenomenology has much to tell us
about Vygotsky's views, but Martin is one who holds the
opposite view and I hope that he will put that view here.
Vygotsky was certainly clear that his work was part of
Objective Psychology, not only because it was a continuation
of the work of Dilthey and Wundt based on the observation of
cultural development, but also in laboratory conditions
where the actions of both research subjects and researchers
were the material on which psychological research is based.
But Vygotsky differed from the Behaviourists of various
kinds because Vygotsky held that consciousness was an
uneliminable component of action and activity. But the study
of consciousness was indirect, just as is the study of
history, geology and atomic physics.
I don't recall that Vygotsky had much to say about Kant, but
nor did Marx or Lenin. There seems to have been a view that
everything that needed to be said about Kant had already
been said by Hegel.
Andy
------------------------------------------------------------
Andy Blunden
http://home.mira.net/~andy
http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making
On 21/06/2016 9:27 PM, Ma, James (james.ma@canterbury.ac.uk)
wrote:
>
> Hello Andy,
>
>
> Lenin's view of noumenon and phenomenon is new to me but
> somehow reminds me of a Russian scholar I came across at
> the Estoril Vygotsky Conference in 2010. I was curious to
> know why the term "non-classical" was used to describe
> Vygotsky's cultural-historical school of thought.
> He said this was because what was subjective
> in traditional Western psychology was considered to
> be objective by Vygotsky. e.g. thoughts and feelings can
> be studied objectively since they are reflected in a
> particular culture and expressed through the mediational
> functions of signs and symbols associated with that culture.
>
>
> The reason I brought up the Kantian
> distinctionwas somehow connected to existentialism which
> has a direct bearing on hermeneutic phenomenology (the a
> priori property of which has long been my interest).
> I've often had something phenomenological at the back of
> my mind whenever my thoughts are on Vygotsky's
> "non-classical" psychology - I wondered what your thoughts
> on the relevance of phenomenology for CHAT might be, if any?
>
>
> James
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> *From:* xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu
> <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu> on behalf of Andy
> Blunden <ablunden@mira.net>
> *Sent:* 21 June 2016 05:49
> *To:* HENRY SHONERD; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
> *Subject:* [Xmca-l] Re: Noumenal and Phenomenal
> "Noumenal/Phenomenological" is a valid *distinction* (more
> or less), Henry, but it is the reference to noumenal and
> phenomenal *worlds* which placed James' thought firmly in
> the Kantian dualist camp. Without using animation, Hegel
> dealt with the issue you raise, i.e., the transition from
> Being to Phenomenon to Concept, and Lenin made a big point
> of there being "no difference in principle" between noumenon
> and phenomenon, and Vygotsky went that way, too. As soon as
> you mention any kind of mediation then you are with Peirce
> on this question, as well as Hegel, Marx and Vygotsky, as
> Martin insisted.
>
> Andy
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> Andy Blunden
> http://home.mira.net/~andy <http://home.mira.net/%7Eandy>
> Andy Blunden's Home Page <http://home.mira.net/%7Eandy>
> home.mira.net
> Andy Blunden's Home Page with links to pages I maintain
> and mail-to buttons
>
>
>
> http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making
>
>
> On 21/06/2016 1:42 PM, HENRY SHONERD wrote:
> > But can’t those two extremes of conceptualization be
> construed as being on a continuum, where there is no
> specific point where one turrns into the other? How about
> the two concepts being figure and ground to one another? I
> think we need a temporal dimension for this to work. Maybe
> this could be animated? That would capture the
> temporality. On the chat we can only verbalize, so it
> would be impossible to “settle” the issue. We have our
> five senses for something. Even three (Helen Keller) is
> enough. This is so connected to the figure/ground
> relationship of linguistics and semiotics. I think
> Langacker would say that phonological space is a subset of
> semantic space and semantic space a subset of symbolic
> space: Ph>Sem>Sym.As structure, It’s human
> conceptualization/conceptualizing all the way down and
> it’s all embodied, which results in: Syn>Sem>Ph, reversing
> the figure/ground relationship. Of course I/we believe
> there’s a real world, my senses tell me/us so, as do all
> of the technologies that have been developedl to take the
> measure of that world and to imagine that world. I have
> been reading Damasio and like: Our senses are how we
> “read" the external world, our emotions to how we read the
> workings of our bodies.
> > Henry
> >
> >
> >> On Jun 20, 2016, at 6:42 PM, Andy Blunden
> <ablunden@mira.net> wrote:
> >>
> >> "Noumenal and Phenomenal worlds" sounds thoroughly,
> even paradigmatically, Kantian and Dualist to me, too,
> James and quite alien to both Vygotsky and Peirce. Please
> explain.
> >>
> >> Andy
> >>
> >>
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> >> Andy Blunden
> >> http://home.mira.net/~andy <http://home.mira.net/%7Eandy>
> >>
> http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making
> >> On 21/06/2016 8:11 AM, Martin John Packer wrote:
> >>> Well, you introduced it, James. You've confused me!
> >>>
> >>>> On Jun 20, 2016, at 1:57 PM, Ma, James
> (james.ma@canterbury.ac.uk) <james.ma@canterbury.ac.uk> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> Martin, I'm not at all being dualistic here - perhaps
> you thought I borrowed the Kantian distinction? James
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> ________________________________
> >>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu
> <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu> on behalf of Martin John
> Packer <mpacker@uniandes.edu.co>
> >>>> Sent: 20 June 2016 17:50
> >>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
> >>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Sad news-- Jerry Bruner has died
> >>>>
> >>>> But James! That’s a fundamental dualism that
> Vygotsky (following Marx and Hegel) would certainly have
> disavowed. And Peirce too, as I understand him, at least
> from reading interpreters such as Paul Kockelman.
> >>>>
> >>>> Martin
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>> On Jun 20, 2016, at 11:02 AM, Ma, James
> (james.ma@canterbury.ac.uk) <james.ma@canterbury.ac.uk> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Hello Larry, I haven't forgotten your early question
> re free will - sorry about my delayed response.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> OK, first, let's make it clear that we're here
> talking about the phenomenal world, rather than the
> noumenal world. According to Kant, a distinction has to be
> made between the two. We have access to the former because
> it is a thing as it appears (knowable through our sense
> perception), whereas the latter we don't have access to as
> it is a thing in itself (beyond our capacity of knowing).
> Free will concerns what it takes to be in terms of one's
> deliberation of action. Back to what I said earlier,
> perception is selective, situated in virtue of free will.
> A large part of our decision making takes place at a
> preconscious, subconscious or unconscious level. It seems
> to me that Peirce's interpretant (a further sign - in his
> words, "sign in the mind") plays an important part in the
> deliberating of our action. More to the point, Peirce's
> iconicity can help us understand how the psychic imagery
> sets in motion an inward dialogic process within
> ourselves. I'm still thinking about this
> >>> , thanks to Larry's prompt, meanwhile contemplating
> Peirce's idea that "all thinking is dialogic in form. Your
> self of one instant appeals to your deeper self for his
> assent".
> >>>>> James
> >>>>>
> >>>>> ________________________________
> >>>>> From: Lplarry <lpscholar2@gmail.com>
> >>>>> Sent: 20 June 2016 16:00
> >>>>> To: Ma, James (james.ma@canterbury.ac.uk); eXtended
> Mind, Culture, Activity
> >>>>> Subject: RE: [Xmca-l] Re: Sad news-- Jerry Bruner
> has died
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I hope to keep these opinions travelling as I try to
> see through my vagueness towards greater clarity.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> James, I am returning to your article (The Synergy
> of Peirce and Vygotsky as an Analytical Approach to the
> Multimodality of Semiotic Mediation).
> >>>>>
> >>>>> A few key points you offered:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> • Peirce and Vygotsky share an ontological
> resonance.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> • The synergy occurs within the logical
> *fusion* of Vygotskian deduction and Peircean abduction.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> • This logical fusion is *designated* to
> authorize this synergy.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> • How this synergy is exemplified is through
> word-image complementarity in a storybook
> >>>>>
> >>>>> • The article accentuates the con/fluence of
> Peirce-Vygotsky to articulate a profound account of
> semiotic mediation.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> • Resonance, fusion, confluence, synergy,
> share a certain connotation of unity (contrasting with
> union of two separate substances that join but remain two).
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I hope others read this fascinating article through
> the prism of what David calls the invisible becoming
> visible and the 3rd space, the interval or transitional
> space as the via media through which the invisible travels
> on its path to becoming visible. It may contribute to
> scaffolding amd the ZPD as evolving concepts in transition
> to becoming clearer.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Sent from my Windows 10 phone
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> From: Ma, James
> (james.ma@canterbury.ac.uk)<mailto:james.ma@canterbury.ac.uk>
> >>>>> Sent: June 20, 2016 4:02 AM
> >>>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture,
> Activity<mailto:xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu>
> >>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Sad news-- Jerry Bruner has died
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Thank you for the comments, David.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> But I'm afraid, concerning Peircean abduction, you
> miss the point. Like induction, abduction is an
> inconclusive logic, i.e. the conclusion is not guaranteed.
> All abduction necessarily involves inferences to the best
> explanation but there is no final conclusion to abide by.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> With regard to the Barthesian inversion of
> Saussure's categorisation of linguistics as part of
> semiotics, you again miss the point. You are right that
> any linguistics meaning is essentially semiotic. As
> Barthes put it, “to perceive what a substance signifies is
> inevitably to fall back in the individuation of language:
> there is no meaning which is not designated, and the world
> of signifieds is none other than that of language”. But be
> warned that his definition of language is in its most
> productive sense, embracing the entirety of semiotic
> entities - this extends Saussurean linguistics. You would
> probably find an echo in Lacan's account of the
> unconscious structured as a language. In my opinion, these
> assertions are illuminating - in contrast with being
> "outlandish layers of meaning to perfectly normal,
> commonsense insights".
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Anyway, I'm glad the XMCA discussion has spawned
> opinionated thoughts from opinionated people (so long as
> they are not emotionalists)!
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> James
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> ________________________________
> >>>>>
> >>>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu
> <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu> on behalf of David
> Kellogg <dkellogg60@gmail.com>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Sent: 17 June 2016 11:34
> >>>>>
> >>>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Sad news-- Jerry Bruner has died
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> James:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I think that Vygotsky's zone of proximal development
> can be seen as
> >>>>>
> >>>>> involving the transitional zone between the visible
> and the invisible, as
> >>>>>
> >>>>> you say. But the zone involves a transition from the
> invisible to the
> >>>>>
> >>>>> visible. Take for example a class I observed this
> week. Some Korean sixth
> >>>>>
> >>>>> graders are learning the ability to read fluently,
> by skipping over large
> >>>>>
> >>>>> blocks of text, perhaps only noticing the initial
> and final letter, forming
> >>>>>
> >>>>> a testable hypothesis about the letters in between,
> comparing with leading
> >>>>>
> >>>>> and following context and moving on where this is
> adequate. The teacher
> >>>>>
> >>>>> teaches this by giving an impossible task--the kids
> have to read a long
> >>>>>
> >>>>> text about playing music to vegetables--five or six
> pages long. They then
> >>>>>
> >>>>> stand up, one by one, and are given random passages
> with the sections
> >>>>>
> >>>>> blanked out.They have to read the passages aloud and
> fill in the missing
> >>>>>
> >>>>> blocks of text as best they can. When they fail, the
> teacher rings a bell
> >>>>>
> >>>>> and they must sit down, having lost points for their
> whole team. The kids
> >>>>>
> >>>>> are allowed to help each other (making hypotheses
> visible) but they are not
> >>>>>
> >>>>> allowed to check the book (what's in the book stays
> in the book). It is
> >>>>>
> >>>>> really the SAME reasoning as the functional method
> of dual stimulation, but
> >>>>>
> >>>>> reversed. The functional method of dual stimulation
> allows the child to
> >>>>>
> >>>>> INTERNALIZE the meaning making process by
> transferring it first from
> >>>>>
> >>>>> interpersonal modes of mediation (instructor led) to
> extramental modes
> >>>>>
> >>>>> (using signs) to "vraschevanie", or intro-volution.
> With the zone of
> >>>>>
> >>>>> proximal development, we are EXTERNALIZING it; we
> are making still immature
> >>>>>
> >>>>> functions visible by offering mediation, and with
> the functional method of
> >>>>>
> >>>>> dual stimulation we are making visible functions
> invisible.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I can't understand the difference between "best
> explanation" and "final
> >>>>>
> >>>>> solution". It seems a distinction without a
> difference to me, like the
> >>>>>
> >>>>> difference between voting for Donald Trump and
> supporting him.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I can't agree with the Barthesian inversion of
> Saussure's location of
> >>>>>
> >>>>> linguistics as part of semiotics. Semiotics and
> linguistics both deal with
> >>>>>
> >>>>> meaning. But semiotics includes types of meaning
> which are not linguistic.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Can you think of any linguistic meaning which is not
> semiotic? I can't.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> David Kellogg
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Macquarie University
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 3:27 AM, Ma, James
> (james.ma@canterbury.ac.uk) <
> >>>>>
> >>>>> james.ma@canterbury.ac.uk> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> There are at least three points I’d like to make
> regarding the concept of
> >>>>>> scaffolding:
> >>>>>> First, scaffolding is an act of semiotic mediation.
> To some extent it
> >>>>>> resembles Ruqaiya Hasan’s “visible mediation” –
> which is deliberate and of
> >>>>>> which interactants are aware. James Wertsch coined
> the term “explicit
> >>>>>> mediation”, in which stimuli involved are not only
> intentional and overt
> >>>>>> but also non-transitory. However, the very essence
> of scaffolding is to
> >>>>>> reduce and eventually diminish itself when a novice
> has achieved what is
> >>>>>> expected of him, although it may reappear depending
> on the needs of the
> >>>>>> novice. For me, this is where scaffolding differs
> from Vygotsky’s ZPD (of
> >>>>>> course ZPD is used in more of a didactic,
> instructive context).
> >>>>>> Second, through the prism of Peircean abduction,
> scaffolding can be seen
> >>>>>> as involving inference to best explanations – which
> means the more
> >>>>>> experienced social partner trying to work out how
> best to assist the
> >>>>>> novice. Possible effective solutions are best in
> themselves but there is no
> >>>>>> point in finding out a final solution – as Umberto
> Eco would say this is
> >>>>>> “unlimited semiosis”, which means semiosis
> perpetuates itself in the
> >>>>>> realisation of meaning potentials. If I were to
> theorise scaffolding based
> >>>>>> on Peircean iconicity, scaffolding is imbued with
> iconic signs in all
> >>>>>> semiotic forms – verbal, non-verbal, visual,
> gestural and auditory etc.
> >>>>>> Third, Roland Barthes in his “Elements of
> Semiology” (1967) inverted the
> >>>>>> Saussurean classification of linguistics as part of
> semiotics. To me, the
> >>>>>> Barthesian rearrangement of semiotics as part of
> linguistics offers a tour
> >>>>>> d’horizon of the multimodality of communication and
> representation in
> >>>>>> modern times. Language is thus in its most
> productive sense, encompassing
> >>>>>> the entirety of semiotic resources – and this can,
> arguably, assist in
> >>>>>> extending disciplinary boundaries and hence augment
> semiotic construction.
> >>>>>> In the meantime, the word-forming potential of
> other modalities enriches
> >>>>>> language as a linguistic modality because other
> modalities can all be cast
> >>>>>> into words. For me, this is a dynamic two-way
> exchange (between linguistics
> >>>>>> and semiotics) that deserves considered attention,
> if we are to further
> >>>>>> explore scaffolding within the CHAT research paradigm.
> >>>>>> James
> >>>>>> _____________________________________________
> >>>>>> James Ma PhD MA BSc FHEA
> >>>>>> https://canterbury.academia.edu/JamesMa
> >>>>> James Ma | Canterbury Christ Church University -
> Academia.edu<https://canterbury.academia.edu/JamesMa>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> canterbury.academia.edu
> >>>>>
> >>>>> James Ma, Canterbury Christ Church University,
> Faculty of education, Faculty Member. Studies Cultural
> Historical Activity Theory, Sociolinguisitcs, and A Priori
> Knowledge. James Ma is a linguist. He received his PhD
> from the University of Bristol and
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> NEW PEER-REVIEWED JOURNAL ARTICLES
> >>>>>> Ma, J. (2016). Semiotising the student perception
> of learning outcomes in
> >>>>>> British higher education. Social Semiotics. Taylor
> & Francis.
> >>>>>> http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10350330.2016.1189234
> >>>>>> Ma, J. (forthcoming, March 2017). “Good packaging
> can be misleading”: A
> >>>>>> semiotic analysis of intersubjectivity as theory of
> mind between mother and
> >>>>>> child during shared reading. British Journal of
> Educational Psychology.
> >>>>>> Wiley.
> >>>>>> PUBLICATIONS IN T&F MOST READ COLLECTIONS OF 2015
> >>>>>>
> http://explore.tandfonline.com/page/ah/most-read-2015/language-and-linguistics-25-most-read-2015
> >>>>>>
> http://explore.tandfonline.com/content/ed/class-of-2015/educational-research-history-of-education-education-policy-leadership-2015
> >>>>>> ________________________________
> >>>>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu
> <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu>
> >>>>>> on behalf of Lplarry <lpscholar2@gmail.com>
> >>>>>> Sent: 11 June 2016 16:06
> >>>>>> To: Kindred, Jessica Dr.; eXtended Mind, Culture,
> Activity
> >>>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Sad news-- Jerry Bruner has died
> >>>>>> I have watched the video of Bruner describing the
> arc of his personal
> >>>>>> development and noticed the centrality of the way
> hypothesis channel our
> >>>>>> actions in the actual world. Bruner hypothesizes
> two dominate ways of
> >>>>>> knowing (science and narrative) both of which
> generate hypothesis.
> >>>>>> Holding the reality that our hypothesis can both
> constrain and afford
> >>>>>> human actions I want to mention James Ma’s
> exploration of Peirce’s notion
> >>>>>> of *abduction* to elaborate Bruner’s relation
> between hypothesis and
> >>>>>> actuality.
> >>>>>> In James’s article in Mind, Culture, and Activity:
> (2014) vlome 21:4
> >>>>>> (374-389) exploring the synergy of Peirce and
> Vygotsky he explores the
> >>>>>> concept of abduction as central to hypothesis
> *generating* constraints and
> >>>>>> affordances. (see page 380).
> >>>>>> Here is a summary.
> >>>>>> Abduction is “the process of forming an explanatory
> hypothesis”.
> >>>>>> The interpretation of signs (which is sign action)
> IS a *generative
> >>>>>> process* resulting in sparking (meaning potentials)
> through semiotic action.
> >>>>>> That is, the abductive process of hypothesis
> formation (cognition)
> >>>>>> PROVides *space* for continuous representation of
> an object ( a Peircean
> >>>>>> object is the formation of *true meaning*).
> >>>>>> James hears echos of Baldwin’s *genetic logic*
> within this exploration of
> >>>>>> hypothesis generation (abduction) as the process of
> sparking meaning
> >>>>>> *potentials* that *awaken* or *emerge* into actuality.
> >>>>>> The other Peircean notion of *vagueness* or being
> *opaque* seems to be
> >>>>>> implied in abduction.
> >>>>>> For example Bruner’s notion of (scaffolding) when
> intuitively generated is
> >>>>>> a vague, opaque hypothesis *travelling* toward
> becoming a clarified *true
> >>>>>> meaning* (an object) which for Peirce was a
> continuous process of
> >>>>>> generating (meaning potential) which enters actuality.
> >>>>>> I read in this notion of abduction a central theme
> in Bruner’s video
> >>>>>> podcast, and wanted to spark a dialogue with James
> Ma’s project to travel
> >>>>>> towards *multimodal* cognition.
> >>>>>> In particular word-image complimentarity.
> >>>>>> James references Valsiner and Rosa with respect to
> the role of language in
> >>>>>> cognition. They pointed out a contemporary
> *tendency of dependence* on
> >>>>>> language as “the only way of dealing with *meaning
> and sense*
> >>>>>> James is calling us to go deeper into multimodal
> processes that includes
> >>>>>> language as a mode but extending this mode to
> include multimodal semiosis.
> >>>>>> This article sparks deep reflection on the
> centrality of meaning
> >>>>>> *potential* as continuously generated.
> >>>>>> Sent from my Windows 10 phone
> >>>>>> From: Kindred, Jessica Dr.
> >>>>>> Sent: June 11, 2016 6:42 AM
> >>>>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
> >>>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Sad news-- Jerry Bruner has died
> >>>>>> Glad I asked. I guess I see it's value as a
> corrective to the idea of
> >>>>>> teaching as delivery.
> >>>>>> ________________________________________
> >>>>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu
> [xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu]
> >>>>>> on behalf of David Kellogg [dkellogg60@gmail.com]
> >>>>>> Sent: Friday, June 10, 2016 7:48 PM
> >>>>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
> >>>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Sad news-- Jerry Bruner has died
> >>>>>> It's possible to interpret Professor Bruner's email
> as hubris on several
> >>>>>> counts:
> >>>>>> a) It assumes that he was the first to use this
> metaphor. It's not clear to
> >>>>>> me that this is the case--a number of people used
> it and Peter Langford and
> >>>>>> Renee van der Veer have included Vygotsky in this
> number, although I have
> >>>>>> not seen evidence of this at all.
> >>>>>> b) It assumes that it was a good label for the
> phenomenon he is describing.
> >>>>>> This is not clear to me either, as it is a
> mechanical one, and suggests
> >>>>>> that knowledge is something entirely external to
> the child or worse that
> >>>>>> the child himself is the work in progress.
> >>>>>> c) It suggests that Bruner is a prophet to whom
> accurate, correct,
> >>>>>> influential "intuitions" come out of the blue, his
> hand made strong by the
> >>>>>> hand of the Almighty. This slights a lot of the
> painstaking work that
> >>>>>> Bruner did; like Mike he came out of a rigorously
> behaviorist training,
> >>>>>> which like Mike he had to transcend rather than
> simply (like most of us)
> >>>>>> disdain without first mastering (I remember an
> early work of Bruner's in
> >>>>>> which he defined development as "the lengthening of
> the distance between
> >>>>>> the stimulus and the response").
> >>>>>> As I said, I don't interpret Professor Bruner's
> email in that way. Like
> >>>>>> Rob, I found it helpful, but mostly because it
> emphasized the random,
> >>>>>> aleatory, and not very well thought out quality of
> the metaphor.
> >>>>>> I think where we really disagree is on the nature
> of that metaphor--I don't
> >>>>>> agree at all that it has been a useful tool for
> thinking about learning,
> >>>>>> much less about development, and it has been a very
> blunt instrument for
> >>>>>> thinking about the zone of proximal development.
> >>>>>> I made the point before that Vygotsky measures the
> ZPD in years, but nobody
> >>>>>> else does. One important reason that nobody else
> does is that people have
> >>>>>> assimilated the ZPD to scaffolding, which is
> manifestly (in Bruner, Woods
> >>>>>> and Ross and also in Acts of Meaning) about an
> instantaneous assimilation
> >>>>>> of a ready made solution.
> >>>>>> Over the last few weeks I have been translating the
> lecture on the Crisis
> >>>>>> at Three from Vygotsky's lectures on pedology. Now,
> if you read the
> >>>>>> material in Volume Five of the English Collected
> Works of LSV, you will be
> >>>>>> very disappointed. Vygotsky begins the lecture with
> the statement that he
> >>>>>> is going to examine the crisis from three points of
> view: neoformation,
> >>>>>> line of development, and zone of proximal
> development. Then he says that
> >>>>>> before he does any of these things, he wants to
> examine a good deal of
> >>>>>> factual material (this is a typical move for
> Vygotsky--he never wants to
> >>>>>> impose his categories on the material and instead
> prefers to allow them to
> >>>>>> emerge from it, having given us some advance word
> of what to expect). The
> >>>>>> editors of the Collected Works claim that the
> "factual material" is taken
> >>>>>> from Elsa Kohler (one of the great unsung heroes of
> child development and
> >>>>>> also gay rights, who lived openly with her lover in
> Nazi occupied Vienna).
> >>>>>> On the face of it, though, it's just the "Seven
> Stars"--a folk theory in
> >>>>>> Russia which corresponds to our folk theory of
> "terrible twos" and
> >>>>>> "threenagers". And then the material ends, without
> any further mention of
> >>>>>> the neoformation, the line of development or the ZPD.
> >>>>>> Without Galina Korotaeva, this would be the end of
> the story. But
> >>>>>> Korotaeva's edition of the "Lektsii' po pedologii"
> has a lecture "The
> >>>>>> Crisis at Three and the Crisis at Seven" which for
> all the world appears to
> >>>>>> take up precisely where the material in the
> Collected Works left off
> >>>>>> (Vygotsky begins by referring back to the "Seven
> Stars" and noting the
> >>>>>> unkept promise!). In fact, this appearance is
> misleading: the lecture in
> >>>>>> Korotaeva's edition dates from a year BEFORE the
> material in the CW. But it
> >>>>>> seems very likely that Vygotsky gave this course
> ("Foundations of
> >>>>>> Pedology") more than once in the last two years of
> his life, and so I think
> >>>>>> we can nevertheless read this as an early version
> of the continuation of
> >>>>>> the CW material. Here Vygotsky really does talk
> about the neoformation
> >>>>>> ("hypobulia"), discuss lines of development
> (tantrums where the child
> >>>>>> appears to act contrary to his own wishes, refusing
> to do things he
> >>>>>> actually wants to do, and insisting on doing things
> that he doesn't really
> >>>>>> care about or even dislikes). Then LSV says:
> >>>>>> ???????? ???????? ?? ????????? ??????: ??? ??
> ?????? ??? ????????? ???????
> >>>>>> ?????????????? ? ???????? ?? ???????? ?????????
> ??????? ???????????
> >>>>>> ????????? ?? ?????????????? ?????????, ???????
> ??????????? ? ???, ???
> >>>>>> ??????? ?????? ??? ????????? ?????? ??????? ?????
> ????????????, ???????? ??
> >>>>>> ????? ??????????? ??????? ? ?????????? ??????
> ??????? ??????????? ????????.
> >>>>>> ????? ??????, ?????????? ?????????????? ???????,
> ????? ????????????
> >>>>>> ??????????? 3-??????? ??????? ????????
> ??????????????? ???? ?? ???????.
> >>>>>> "What remains is to reply to the last question:
> What does this hypobulic
> >>>>>> behavior of the child offer, and what does it
> prefigure for the volitional
> >>>>>> behavior of the child in preschool age? The
> contradictory position that
> >>>>>> affects the child offers this different relative
> motive for his own
> >>>>>> behavior, divorced from his own inclinations and
> facutally acting contrary
> >>>>>> to his inclinations. In a word, what transpires is
> a paradoxical phenomenon
> >>>>>> where the essential content of the crisis at three
> consists in the
> >>>>>> differentiation of will from affect."
> >>>>>> What is the last question? I think it's the
> question he asks at the very
> >>>>>> beginning of the material in the CW--what is the
> zone of proximal
> >>>>>> development for the Crisis at Three? And here the
> answer is most clear:
> >>>>>> it's the NEXT zone of development, that is, the
> actual zone of development
> >>>>>> for the preschool years (ages 3-7), i.e. it's not
> and never has been
> >>>>>> scaffolding.
> >>>>>> David Kellogg
> >>>>>> Macquarie University
> >>>>>> On Sat, Jun 11, 2016 at 7:12 AM, Kindred, Jessica
> Dr. <jkindred@cnr.edu>
> >>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>> I am unclear about how the idea of hubris has come
> into this. Humility,
> >>>>>>> okay. Metaphor, clearly. Temporary, yes, as in the
> literal meaning of
> >>>>>>> scaffolding, so too its metaphorical extension.
> But enduring, clearly,
> >>>>>> too,
> >>>>>>> as a tool for thinking about learning.
> >>>>>>> ________________________________________
> >>>>>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu
> [xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu]
> >>>>>>> on behalf of David Kellogg [dkellogg60@gmail.com]
> >>>>>>> Sent: Thursday, June 9, 2016 6:08 PM
> >>>>>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
> >>>>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Sad news-- Jerry Bruner has died
> >>>>>>> I think one of the few advantages of being dead is
> that a critical
> >>>>>>> evaluation of one's work as a complete narrative
> product then becomes
> >>>>>>> possible. This is why I think the idea of a
> memorial issue for Jerome
> >>>>>>> Bruner makes such great critical sense (and it's
> also why a memorial
> >>>>>> issue
> >>>>>>> for Ruqaiya Hasan, the anniversary of whose death
> is in two weeks time,
> >>>>>>> makes sense). Bruner would have welcomed that, not
> in hubris but in
> >>>>>>> humility.
> >>>>>>> I have a rather different interpretation of the
> email that Rob Lake
> >>>>>>> circulated: I thought it was a good example of
> Bruner's humility, not his
> >>>>>>> hubris. "Scaffolding" was a highly influential
> metaphor--but I think that
> >>>>>>> by saying that it was just a labeling intuition
> out of the blue Bruner
> >>>>>> was
> >>>>>>> emphasizing that it was a metaphor. Metaphors are
> misleading: they tell
> >>>>>> us
> >>>>>>> a good deal about the relationship between forces
> but they tell us
> >>>>>> fictions
> >>>>>>> about the nature of the force itself. So for
> example the "scaffolding"
> >>>>>> that
> >>>>>>> Bruner wanted to emphasize was temporary: it was
> something to be taken
> >>>>>>> down. But in th einterpretation of "scaffolding"
> it has become
> >>>>>> hypostatized
> >>>>>>> and a permanent fixture of interaction. Worse, it
> has become identified
> >>>>>>> with the ZPD, which it resembles not at all.
> >>>>>>> I would say the same thing about his ideas of
> narrative. Bruner was prone
> >>>>>>> to wild enthusiasms, and his enthusiasm for
> narrative as the very source
> >>>>>> of
> >>>>>>> self is one of these. Yes, I suppose the life of
> Bruner is now a
> >>>>>> narrative.
> >>>>>>> But from his point of view ,the really interesting
> part is what happened
> >>>>>>> before it became one.
> >>>>>>> David Kellogg
> >>>>>>> Macquarie University
> >>>>>>> On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 1:53 AM, Bella
> Kotik-Friedgut <
> >>>>>>> bella.kotik@gmail.com
> >>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>> I am now in Portugal at EVC 4 Vygotsky
> conference. I shared with the
> >>>>>>>> audience my memories of J.Bruner's visit to
> Moscow. It was more than
> >>>>>>>> obituary: I wanted in a way celebrate his
> beautiful life full with
> >>>>>>>> discoveries and a lot of personal light he
> transmitted to people on his
> >>>>>>>> way. When Alexander Romanowich asked me to stay
> in Moskow ( I just
> >>>>>>> defended
> >>>>>>>> my theses ans had to go to Rostov university for
> my first job) he said
> >>>>>> "
> >>>>>>>> you will not regret" I think I was blessed with
> this opportunity and
> >>>>>>>> enjoyed to be his guide and secretary for this
> week. Let his memory be
> >>>>>>>> blessed.
> >>>>>>>> On Thursday, June 9, 2016, Lplarry
> <lpscholar2@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> Jessica,
> >>>>>>>>> This testament to how you have been deeply moved
> by Robert’s question
> >>>>>>> and
> >>>>>>>>> Bruner’s answer gesturing to how the concept
> *scaffolding* was
> >>>>>> forming
> >>>>>>>> *as*
> >>>>>>>>> a labelling intuition opens up a field of
> *depth* inquiry asking
> >>>>>> where
> >>>>>>>>> these intuitions *arise* or *awaken* from as
> they enter into history
> >>>>>>> and
> >>>>>>>>> culture.
> >>>>>>>>> For example, is there a living *presence* that
> is at this moment
> >>>>>> moving
> >>>>>>>>> through us within the *person* of Jerome Bruner?
> This is a notion of
> >>>>>>>>> *person* that has a continuing *existence*
> tingbeyond Bruner’s
> >>>>>> physical
> >>>>>>>>> death. This is also a labelling intuition.
> >>>>>>>>> Could this living *presence* (imaged as person)
> be a source of
> >>>>>>>>> *intuitions* that arise or awaken within our own
> sense of living
> >>>>>>>> *presence*.
> >>>>>>>>> Is this *presence* that generates *intuitions*
> located internally or
> >>>>>> is
> >>>>>>>>> this presence located externally, or is there a
> location where
> >>>>>>> intuitions
> >>>>>>>>> arise or awaken in a third location that is
> permeable to both
> >>>>>> internal
> >>>>>>>> and
> >>>>>>>>> external presence?
> >>>>>>>>> Others will offer different images and words to
> locate where
> >>>>>>> intuitions
> >>>>>>>>> originate. Is the image of labelling intuitions
> as *seeds* forming
> >>>>>> an
> >>>>>>>> apt
> >>>>>>>>> metaphor?
> >>>>>>>>> The term *scaffolding* that is generating *deep*
> dialogue within our
> >>>>>>>>> questions and answers within particular
> communities which some call
> >>>>>>>>> *learning* communities.
> >>>>>>>>> In this thread James Ma shared a link to his
> article that I have
> >>>>>>>>> downloaded from academia.edu. in which he
> proposes a deep sense that
> >>>>>>>>> *learning* generates what is *worthwhile* as
> advocated by the living
> >>>>>>>>> presence of the Confucian Classics. In
> particular learning that is
> >>>>>>>>> worthwhile develops “culture, conduct,
> conscientiousness, and good
> >>>>>>>> faith”.
> >>>>>>>>> The living presence of this ideal has *inspired*
> devotees and
> >>>>>> activists
> >>>>>>>>> throughout history to pursue truth (about)
> *learning* which James
> >>>>>> says
> >>>>>>>>> aligns with intellectualism.
> >>>>>>>>> James describes intellectualism as being *for*
> the virtues and ideals
> >>>>>>>> that
> >>>>>>>>> guide human participation in civilization.
> >>>>>>>>> I would add that this intellectual guidance
> often arises or awakens
> >>>>>>>>> through intuitions in the form of *guises*
> (living presences) as
> >>>>>>> persons.
> >>>>>>>>> Jerome Bruner in his life and in his death
> continues to exist within
> >>>>>>> this
> >>>>>>>>> living presence *who* exemplifies learning and
> intellectualism that
> >>>>>>>> guides
> >>>>>>>>> our own learning and intellectual virtues and
> ideals.
> >>>>>>>>> Bruner would label this a hypothesis.
> >>>>>>>>> Larry
> >>>>>>>>> Sent from my Windows 10 phone
> >>>>>>>>> From: Kindred, Jessica Dr.
> >>>>>>>>> Sent: June 8, 2016 8:30 PM
> >>>>>>>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
> >>>>>>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Sad news-- Jerry Bruner
> has died
> >>>>>>>>> Robert, I have read this email exchange that you
> had with "jb" over
> >>>>>> and
> >>>>>>>>> over and find myself so moved by the idea of
> scaffolding as "just one
> >>>>>>> of
> >>>>>>>>> those 'labeling intuitions' that came out of the
> blue". This very
> >>>>>>>> phrasing
> >>>>>>>>> and sense of how ideas emerge is so important as
> we think about
> >>>>>>> thinking
> >>>>>>>>> and culture and how they influence each other in
> such profound and
> >>>>>>>>> spiralling ways. I love this and I thank you for
> sharing it. What a
> >>>>>>>>> wonderful contribution to the biography of an
> idea that has so
> >>>>>>> influenced
> >>>>>>>>> us all. I recently read a 1981 paper that Bruner
> wrote about
> >>>>>> education
> >>>>>>> in
> >>>>>>>>> which he used the word mindfulness in such an
> in-passing way that I
> >>>>>>>> almost
> >>>>>>>>> wonder naively if his use of it as a labelling
> intuition then might
> >>>>>>> help
> >>>>>>>> to
> >>>>>>>>> account for its huge status in the cultural
> landscape of education
> >>>>>>> now...
> >>>>>>>>> in any case, great thanks for sharing.
> >>>>>>>>> And yes, Leif, it is wonderful to remember his
> keynote at Iscrat 98
> >>>>>> in
> >>>>>>>>> Arhus!
> >>>>>>>>> Thanks to him and to all of you for sharing your
> actual minds toward
> >>>>>>>>> possible worlds.
> >>>>>>>>> Jessie Kindred
> >>>>>>>>> ________________________________________
> >>>>>>>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu
> <javascript:;> [
> >>>>>>>>> xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu <javascript:;>]
> on behalf of Helena
> >>>>>>>>> Worthen [helenaworthen@gmail.com <javascript:;>]
> >>>>>>>>> Sent: Monday, June 6, 2016 6:23 PM
> >>>>>>>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
> >>>>>>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Sad news-- Jerry Bruner
> has died
> >>>>>>>>> Nice, Robert!!!
> >>>>>>>>> Helena
> >>>>>>>>>> On Jun 6, 2016, at 11:05 AM, Robert Lake <
> >>>>>>> boblake@georgiasouthern.edu
> >>>>>>>>> <javascript:;>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>> *Hi Everyone,**Below is a record of my email
> correspondence**
> >>>>>> wi**th
> >>>>>>>>> Jerome
> >>>>>>>>>> Bruner w*
> >>>>>>>>>> *hile I **was writing **an introductory book
> for educators about
> >>>>>>>>> Vygot**sky
> >>>>>>>>>> and a second email about the coining of the
> phrase "scaffolding" *
> >>>>>>>> *It*
> >>>>>>>>>> * starts from the bottom up.*
> >>>>>>>>>> *Robert Lake*
> >>>>>>>>>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> >>>>>>>>>> From: Jerome S Bruner <jsb3@nyu.edu <javascript:;>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Date: Wed, Oct 6, 2010 at 2:05 PM
> >>>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: Sketch about how you were
> introduced to Vygotsky
> >>>>>>>>>> To: Robert Lake <boblake@georgiasouthern.edu
> <javascript:;>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Just one of those "labelling inuitions" that
> came out of the blue!
> >>>>>>>> jb
> >>>>>>>>>> ----- Original Message -----
> >>>>>>>>>> From: Robert Lake <boblake@georgiasouthern.edu
> <javascript:;>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Date: Saturday, October 2, 2010 4:17 pm
> >>>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: Sketch about how you were
> introduced to Vygotsky
> >>>>>>>>>> To: jsb3@nyu.edu <javascript:;>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Thank-you Dr. Bruner.
> >>>>>>>>>>> It really does help.
> >>>>>>>>>>> When did you first come up with the notion of
> scaffolding? Was it
> >>>>>>>>>>> connected to an observation out of your own
> experience in research
> >>>>>>> or
> >>>>>>>>>>> a personal experience?
> >>>>>>>>>>> Thanks again for responding. You made my day.
> >>>>>>>>>>> Robert Lake
> >>>>>>>>>> Jerome S Bruner 10/02/10 4:04 PM >>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> As I recall, my introduction to Vygotsky came
> when Eugenia
> >>>>>> Hanfmann
> >>>>>>>>>>> was working on a translation of what was to be
> Vygotsky's first
> >>>>>> book
> >>>>>>>>>>> in English, THOUGHT AND LANGUAGE, published in
> 1962 by MIT Press.
> >>>>>>>>>>> You'll recall that I wrote an Introduction to
> that book. I had
> >>>>>>>>>>> earlier become acquainted with Vygotsky's work
> through Alexander
> >>>>>>>>>>> Romanovich Luria who was the Professor of
> Psychology at Moscow
> >>>>>> with
> >>>>>>>>>>> whom I visited in Moscow on several
> occasions. He was a great
> >>>>>>> admirer
> >>>>>>>>>>> of Vygotsky and his work and felt strongly
> that my own work on
> >>>>>>>>>>> perception and cognition generally were very
> much in the
> >>>>>> Vygotskian
> >>>>>>>>>>> mode. For my part, I felt in those days that
> Vygotsky was an
> >>>>>>>>>>> important corrective to the Piagetian
> culturally-blind approach to
> >>>>>>>>>>> child development. I think that it was that
> aspect of my own work
> >>>>>>>>>>> that led to my being asked to write an
> introduction to the
> >>>>>> Vygotsky
> >>>>>>>>>>> volume.
> >>>>>>>>>>> Does that help?
> >>>>>>>>>>> All best wishes.
> >>>>>>>>>>> Jerome Bruner
> >>>>>>>>>>> ----- Original Message -----
> >>>>>>>>>>> From: Robert Lake
> >>>>>>>>>>> Date: Friday, October 1, 2010 2:40 pm
> >>>>>>>>>>> Subject: Sketch about how you were introduced
> to Vygotsky
> >>>>>>>>>>> To: jerome.bruner@nyu.edu <javascript:;>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Cc: carol.feldman@nyu.edu <javascript:;>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Dear Dr. Bruner,
> >>>>>>>>>>>> I am now beginning chapter one of a primer
> on Vygotsky and
> >>>>>>>>>>>> education. Actually I already signed a book
> contract. One of the
> >>>>>>>>>>> areas
> >>>>>>>>>>>> I am covering is a brief introduction to some
> of LSV's academic
> >>>>>>>>>>>> "family". I have sources for M. Cole, S.
> Scribner, A. Kozulin, L.
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Holtzman, J.Wersch, E. Kravtsova, Y. Engstrom
> ,D.Robbins and L.
> >>>>>>>>>>> Moll,
> >>>>>>>>>>>> but I am not able to find anything in the
> way of historical
> >>>>>>>>>>>> biography about your connection to his work.
> Is there anything
> >>>>>>>>>>>> written anywhere about how you were
> introduced to your Vygotsky?
> >>>>>>>>>>>> If not, may I call you and ask a few questions?
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Thank-you for all you have imparted to our
> generation.
> >>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Jun 6, 2016 at 10:26 AM, Helena Worthen <
> >>>>>>>> helenaworthen@gmail.com
> >>>>>>>>> <javascript:;>>
> >>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>> Andy, thank you for finding this!!!
> >>>>>>>>>>> Helena
> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Jun 5, 2016, at 8:56 PM, Andy Blunden
> <ablunden@mira.net
> >>>>>>>>> <javascript:;>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>> https://vimeo.com/groups/chat/videos/56737069
> >>>>>> [https://i.vimeocdn.com/video/392925080_1280x960.jpg]<
> >>>>>> https://vimeo.com/groups/chat/videos/56737069>
> >>>>>> Jerome Bruner and Oliver Sachs on Luria,
> interviewed by Mike Cole<
> >>>>>> https://vimeo.com/groups/chat/videos/56737069>
> >>>>>> vimeo.com
> >>>>>> Thanks to the Alexander Luria Archive at
> http://luria.ucsd.edu where
> >>>>>> there is a better copy of this movie.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Andy Blunden
> >>>>>>>>>>>> http://home.mira.net/~andy
> <http://home.mira.net/%7Eandy>
> >>>>>>>>
> http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making
> >>>>>>>>>>>> On 6/06/2016 10:38 AM, David H Kirshner wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> My condolences, Mike.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> A huge loss to all of us.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Perhaps sometime you can share with us some
> of your personal
> >>>>>>>>>>> experiences with him.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> David
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu
> <javascript:;> [mailto:
> >>>>>>>>>>> xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu
> <javascript:;>] On Behalf Of mike
> >>>>>>>> cole
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Sent: Sunday, June 05, 2016 6:37 PM
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Sad news-- Jerry Bruner
> has died
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> At the age of 100 it cannot be unexpected,
> but I have just
> >>>>>> heard
> >>>>>>>>> from
> >>>>>>>>>>> a colleague that Jerry Bruner has died.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Its difficult to lose a colleague and friend
> who had a
> >>>>>> fundamental
> >>>>>>>>>>> influence on my own life trajectory.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> mike
> >>>>>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>>>>> Robert Lake Ed.D.
> >>>>>>>>>> Associate Professor
> >>>>>>>>>> Social Foundations of Education
> >>>>>>>>>> Dept. of Curriculum, Foundations, and Reading
> >>>>>>>>>> Georgia Southern University
> >>>>>>>>>> P. O. Box 8144, Statesboro, GA 30460
> >>>>>>>>>> Secretary/Treasurer-AERA- Paulo Freire Special
> Interest Group
> >>>>>>>>>> Webpage:
> https://georgiasouthern.academia.edu/RobertLake*Democracy
> >>>>>>>> must
> >>>>>>>>> be
> >>>>>>>>>> born anew in every generation, and education is
> its midwife.* John
> >>>>>>>>>> Dewey-*Democracy
> >>>>>>>>>> and Education*,1916, p. 139
> >>>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>>> Sincerely yours Bella Kotik-Friedgut
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>
> >
>
>
More information about the xmca-l
mailing list