I've looked up the German translation of the paragraph in question.
It goes like this:
"So koennen im Laufe der Erreichung eines herausgearbeiteten allgemeinen=20
Ziels Zwischenziele bestimmt werden, durch deren Realisierung die=20
ganzheitliche Handlung in eine Reihe von einzelnen aufeinanderfolgenden=20
Handlungen aufgegliedert wird. Das ist besonders f=FCr Faelle=20
charakteristisch, in denen die Handlung unter Bedinungen verlaeuft,=20
die ihre Ausfuehrung mit Hilfe bereits ausgeformter Operationen
erschweren. ... " (Leontjew 1979, S. 109)
A comparison of all three translations seems to say the following.
ANL talks about a *certain articulated general goal*, that is: he
asks you to imagine a "common goal" (generalized individual goal)
which has already a habitual form for most occasions when it might be
aimed for. However, in the case that ANL wants to talk about, there are
certain prevailing conditions that do not allow the smooth realization
via a fluid chain of embodied operations. Rather, it is now, in these=20
cases, necessary to consciously find the path thru a set of sub-goals=20
which are being separated from one another, mainly by the reflection
about the conditions of the "breakdown" of the usual smoothness.
ANL adds, by the way, that a contrary process takes place when several
actions (units of activity) coalesce together in such a way that the
part-results aren't discernible anymore (for the subject in question).
Your third quote seems to be from the essay on "psychological questions
of the consciousness of the learning process" (part 7 of the German
translation). On my p. 229 ANL is talking about the difference between
what is thought to be learned by a child, and what is learned in the
subjective reality of the same child:
"Die uebliche Antwort auf diese Frage lautet, dass dasjenige Bewusst-
seinsgegenstand wird, auf das die *Aufmerksamkeit* gerichtet ist. ..."
>"In the usual use of words, however, the question of what the subject
>recognizes has usually been expressed in the form of a question of what his
>attention is directed to." (p. 155)
Your question is, whether the sense of "recognize" in the last quote is
comparable to the one of the first and second quote. My answer is: No.
In the learning case it is the student who "holds" something as a Gestalt
in his or her consciousness, whereas in the first case it is an unknown
social (perhaps collective) subject who *has already* done the work
of generalizing that pattern of operations that now, in the problematic
case that demands a chain of sub-goals, loses its previous clarity and
smoothness of operations.
Is this more clear ?
Hoping so: Arne.
------
At 13:56 16.9.1996, Timothy Koschmann wrote:
>Perhaps someone who has read Leontjev in the original Russian can assist me
>with a couple of questions. I have been studying the concept of breakdown
>in the writings of several authors, including Leontjev. The following
>passage taken from Chapter 3 or the Marie J. Hall translation of "Activity,
>Consciousness, and Personality" (Prentice-Hall, 1978) seemed quite
>relevant:
>
>"Thus, in the course of achieving an isolated goal there may occur a
>separation of intermediate goals as a result of which the whole action is
>divided into a series of separate sequential actions; this is especially
>characteristic for cases where the action takes place under conditions that
>inhibit its being carried out by means of already formulated operations."
>(p. 67).
>
>This same passage, however, is rendered as the following in "The Problem of
>Activity in Psychology" translated in _Soviet Psychology_ (Vol. 13, 4-33):
>
>"Thus, in the course of attaining a discerned common goal, intermediate
>goals can be discerned that in effect divide unitary action into a series
>of separate, sequential actions. This typically happens when conditions
>impede an action's execution through previously formed operations." (p.
>28)
>
>I'm perplexed by how the word "discerned", which plays such a prominent
>role in the second translation, does not appear at all in the first. Was
>this omission simply an oversight or did the second translator augment the
>text to make it more understandable? Assuming the former, I'm interested
>to know what Russian word was translated as "discerned". Moreover, I am
>curious whether this is the same word that is translated as "recognizes" in
>this later passage from "Activity, Consciousness, and Personality":
>
>"In the usual use of words, however, the question of what the subject
>recognizes has usually been expressed in the form of a question of what his
>attention is directed to." (p. 155)
>
>Can anybody out there help me out? ---Tim