Re: Quacking, sharing, signs of involvement

Robin Harwood (HARWOOD who-is-at UConnVM.UConn.Edu)
Thu, 18 Apr 96 21:08:51 EDT

Thanks, Judy, for your thoughts on the term "sharing". I guess for me
the term doesn't have the connotations of sameness of experience;
for me, it means more that there enough understanding in common that
two or more people can create meaning together. For instance, if
I'm talking to a group of academic psychologists, then I can make
reference to a variety of experiences and sources that we are likely
to have in common, and be understood. Mike's use of the term SRCD
was an example; those of us who have in common (share) a certain
professional identity know what this acronym stands for, and the
fact that we know it and can appropriately use it and all that it
represents in a particular professional circle is a marker of
common discourse among those who share it. It is a level of shared
commonality, and the sorts of conversations that I have with my
friends who are also developmental psychologists are quite different
from the conversations I have with my friends who are not, inasmuch
as I make reference to different commonalities with these friends.
Do we both live in Vernon, CT? Well, then we can talk about Buckland
Hills Mall and the Panda Palace and the weather yesterday; this is
not just idle small talk between strangers--this is a way of claiming
membership in some meaningful reference group, a way of belonging.
Are we both developmental psychologists? Well, then we can talk about
SRCD,and gossip we've heard about this and that developmental
researcher, and what it's like to live in a world that's run by
soft money and publications. Again, such conversations serve to
cement our sense of membership in a group larger than ourselves,
and one of the defining characteristics of such membership is the
ability to use the discourse correctly.

Robin