[xmca] my conjecture

From: Haydi Zulfei <haydizulfei who-is-at yahoo.com>
Date: Sun Jul 13 2008 - 13:29:34 PDT

Dear Marjanovic-Shane , As I'm always thinking of the convergences and divergences between the Activity Theory and the Cultural-Historical ( Activity Theory ) , while reading the article , I found this part of the article very fascinating and very close to my taste and hope : [Like Cole, we have assumed that symbols, signs, and other semiotic mediating artifacts (texts) gradually gain their referential (object-oriented) dimension within interactive communicative acts. However, we have also assumed that the object orientedness of communicative acts themselves represents a novel step in the development of communicational skills too. Langer (1979) discussed different ways in which some communicative devices are referential. She distinguished between signals and symptoms, on one hand, and symbols, on the other. The referentiality of signals and symptoms originates out of their internal relatedness to the objects they represent: They are an intrinsic part of them, or in some other way they are essentially related to the objects they signify. Like the sound of thunder and the lightning, they cannot be separated. Symptoms and signals are a part of an immediate situation they share with the referents. In contrast to symptoms and signals, according to Langer, symbolsare not a proxy for their objects, but are or a situation is not the same as to ‘react toward it’ overtly, or to be aware of its presence. In talkingvehicles for the conception of objects. To conceive a thingabout the things, that symbols directly “mean.” Now , am I right in my conjecture you're somehow trying to bridge the gap between the supposedly two ways of thought ? Now , I won't deal with *forms of thought* and whether the conjecture could go so far as to reach that point , too . And what about this reference of yours : Based on the analysis of metaphor development in children (Marjanovic-Shane, 1989) Best Haydi haydizulfei@yahoo.comthings we have conceptions of them, not the things themselves; and it is the conceptions, not(italics added; pp. 60–61)]
xmca mailing list
Received on Sun Jul 13 13:31 PDT 2008

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Fri Aug 01 2008 - 00:30:08 PDT