Hi, Ana,
From Halliday, I understand that the jump from indexical to symbolic occurs
in the development of the most basic building block of grammar (long before
sentences - written language - of course): the mood system [a sign for
subject! plus a means to predicate some act - the finite form of a verb],
which gives us choices among declaring, asking, and demanding. I left the
article at my office & need to reread it, but I THINK I remember Thibault
suggesting that this much is compatible with a theory of mind in utero.
have to dash
Judy
At 01:27 AM 7/6/01 -0400, you wrote:
>Bill and all,
>
>I am also at loss when it comes to phylogeny.
>However, maybe we need to search for existing research on modes of
>communication and modes of play in different species (some work on play in
>animals exist).
>And of course, a production of tools which is historically transferred from
>a generation to another generation. Maybe we need to look for "cultural"
>differences between different "tribes" of in each species under study: do
>all bees dance the same dance? (metaphorically speaking).
>
>Another thought - inspired by something written by Thibault: I (Ana) see it
>necessary to describe language development in more detail than: (quote from
>Thibault) "the child participates in and develops proto-genre structures of
>dialogic exchange that regulate its "inner" and "outer" meaning-making
>activity. This suggests that the child does not "acquire" abstract
>syntactic forms as in transformational generative accounts of language
>acquisition. Instead, the infant is apprenticed into (Kaye, 1982/1984) and
>internalizes elementary dialogic structures that regulate and give shape to
>relations between "self" and "nonself"." (page 303)
>Thibault then quotes Halliday's example of incorporating a vocal act into a
>diadic contextual activity.
>At one point he says that the "instrumental"meanings ("Give me that" and
>"give me that bird") are "more properly seen as INDEXICAL. - but in the
>next paragraph (both on page 304), he says: "The child learns that he can
>use an externally uttered physical sound to enact a demand for
>goods-and-services. The child thus learns that he can use one vocal gesture
>in contrast with some other to regulate in various ways his exchanges with
>others according to his needs and desires. --> Thus, the SYMBOLIC use of
>externally projected articulatory act to bring about perceivable results in
>the external world is reentrantly mapped onto internal neural activity."
>
>A HUGE JUMP! Two jumps - indeed. One between the "indexical" (pointing to
>something contingent to the dialogue) and "symbolic" ( pointing to
>something outside this space and time).
>How does symbolic develop from indexical?
>Indexical function is "non valuative" - it is a "stand in" or "stand for"
>or just pointing to... Symbolic reference is already a part of a system ,
>always slanted, from a perspective, with a particular significance. One
>could say that a SYMBOL is an INDEX with a WINK - "if you know what I mean".
>
>Third jump - the claim that this interacts with the neural development and
>that it is "mapped onto internal neural activity".
>Yes but how do we know that these social diadic exchanges have any
>connection to the neural mappings? - THIS is the key!
>
>***
>I am in particular interested in the development between indexical and
>symbolic modes of communication. However the explanations given by
>Silverstein and Halliday and finally Thibault, all suggest to me that they
>are in between two paradigms: where they want to bring in the social
>communication into the development of symbolic mode of thinking, but they
>still analyze symbols and indexes and icons only regarding their
>relationship with an object or an abstract (and normative) category for
>which they stand. There is an attempt to bring a dialogic, diadic
>relationship into the process, but it remains just an outside force that
>brings to an individual meanings that are "objective and independent of
>individual intention per se." Thibault even continues: "This is why
>symbolic reference supervenes indexical (and iconic) reference. (from
>Deacon 1997/1998)".
>However, while it is true that general literal meanings in a language are
>bigger than an individual, it is not enough for me to say that an
>individual get apprenticed into the language. I, rather think that each
>individual has to reconstruct those meanings and that the process of
>reconstruction is both interpersonal and personal, and very dynamic. ...
>
>****
>
>I will be away for the next week but I will try to find a computer with an
>Internet connection and continue this most interesting discussion.
>
>Ana
>
>
>At 07:09 AM 7/5/2001 -0700, you wrote:
>>Ana's reference to Bateson and play is a wonderful insight, having read
Mike's
>>plea for the bigger picture. "this is play" communicates to frame an
activity
>>among participants. What this (what we are communicating now arouind
>>Thibault)
>>seems to be about is just that (that being Mike's and Ana's ideas
combined) --
>>finding an interpretive frame for observing and thinking about human
>>interaction.
>>
>>I complained about using spatial metaphors and suffering their excess
semiotic
>>baggage - levels implies hierarchy (especially, as B&G might argue is a
>>phenomenon of capitalist society), but then there are layers, channels and
>>dimensions, all of which can go on in parallel and mutual influence, i.e.
>>bidirectional causality.
>>
>>Mike seems to say bio-evo-psychologists are playing a bigger game, and he
>>doesn't want chat'ers excluded from it.
>>
>>How to take phylogeny into account for chat studies? Eeek! Tongue in
cheek,
>>does it not belong to the generations of researchers to follow? Is this
too
>>much to bite off?
>>
>>Although it makes sense, I am clueless.
>>
>>bb
>>
>>=====
>>"One of life's quiet excitements is to stand somewhat apart from yourself
>>and watch yourself softly become the author of something beautiful."
>>[Norman Maclean in "A river runs through it."]
>>
>>__________________________________________________
>>Do You Yahoo!?
>>Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail
>>http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Aug 01 2001 - 01:00:56 PDT