Ulvi:
Here's an example of the distinction between higher and lower
mental functions, and why it's so important.
There are really TWO aspects to Joseph Gilbert's "somatic
semantics", that is, his idea that bodily emotions are in some
important sense fundamental to sense making.
a) The idea that emotion (including interpersonal emotion and
social emotion) is part of the base, part of the substratum, part
of the phylogenetic, sociogenetic and even ontogenetic origins of
speech, and in the same way essential to speech in microgenesis
(everyday use).
b) The idea that this emotion in turn has an individual,
biological, corporeal substratum in the human body, hence the
preverbal examples of "mmm" and "mama" and so on.
Now, my position is that I accept a) but only if we completely turn
it upside down and take the social, cultural, and interpersonal as
the indispensable base and the individual, biological,
intrapersonal as the derivative, and thus optional, superstructure.
This accounts for the linguistic variation with culture (which
Gilbert's theory in its biological form cannot do). But it also
means we have to completely reject b). If we accept b) then we are
reducing speech to a LOWER psychological function..
Actually, there are two different words for "psychological" and
"mental" in Russian, but the distinction is slightly different
things from the distinction we have in English. One of them is
психические, simply a transliteration of "psychological",
and it means what it does in English. But the other is the other
means something like "intellectual" or even "learned" as opposed to
unlearned, uncultured, non-socialized. So it already has in it the
idea of a higher mental function.
Take a look at this Conversation Analysis data from one of my
grads. You can see that the EMOTIONAL substratum is essential to
understanding the whole dialogue. But you can also see that the
ways in which the corporeal body participates in this meaning are
really trivial, and subordinated to "intellectual", "learned" ways
of meaning making
The English teacher is talking in English to the kids after a class
talent show.
T: I was impressed by(.) your acting,(.)°your drum.°
S: bum bu bum bum bum
The kids respond with a sound that is purely biological, and which
could be understood by anyone, even someone who understands no
English. It's a lower level mental function, but it's in RESPONSE
to a compliment delivered (using the passive voice) in a foreign
language.
T: °oh, you were almost like (.) a specialist.°=
Ss: @##$%%
T: = Ohh~! It's cool I think.
The teacher wants the kids to feel good abou their performance. But
she realizes that the word "specialist" doesn't really convey what
she wants, or rather, it conveys what SHE wants but it doesn't
convey what the kids want to hear.
So she uses the word "cool". Now, of course, the word "cool" does
have a physical substratum, just like the word "hot". But that
physical substratum comes from understanding its ideological
superstructure, not vice versa.
"Cool" is an obvious example of complexive thinking: it includes
many many things, including, as we shall see, its opposite, or at
least the opposite of what the teacher means.
Ss: @#$%#
S4: >Oh(.)uh(.)uh(.)< I. I like(.) uh(.) Kim Jiseong's dance.
S4 is referring to a mildly pornographic dance by a boy
impersonating the sexy pop singer Miss A in the sixth grade. The
teacher is shocked.
Ss: huh↓(laughs)
T: do you LIKE it?
Ss: [we like it.]
[hahaha]
[ahh!↓]
T: huh. °never mind.°
The teacher is aghast because of the sexual suggestiveness of the
dance. But what intrigues the kids is not this (they have no real
experience of sex but they have a lot of experience of sexual
suggestiveness and they are quite blase to its meaning as a
result). What intrigues them is the gender bending implicit in the
parody of the pop singer, Miss A.
S7: °mr. a°
T: mr. a (giggles) not miss a. [ok ]
Ss: [hahahaha]
It often happens that kids are exposed to PARODY before they are
really familiar with what is being parodied. A very warm seedbed
for PREJUDICE. It is one of the rather confusing aspects of being
young, and one of the things that makes young people natural
recruits for racist, reactionary and sexist movements.
T: ok(.) I really want to ask him(.) why he wore:: kind of short
pants >°for women.°< =
S4: [Hat ppaensch ibjana (He wore hot pants)]
Ss: [haha ](giggles and laughter)
T: [= ° I don't understand.°]
Ss: [@#$%$#]
Now, you can see from the somewhat precious Conversation Analysis
notation that I force my poor grads to use that Conversation
Analysis really tends to emphasize a lot of the PHYSICAL aspects of
speech (volume, intake of breath, etc.).
Between you and me (and Halliday, who agrees), I find this rather
unfortunate, because it seems to me that key to understanding this
extract as a CHAIN, as a COMPLEX, as a series of EMOTIONAL
responses and responses to responses is not the biological, lower
mental function of the speech but on the contrary its cultural and
sociological value.
Volosinov says "Individual consciousness is not the architect of
the ideological superstructure, but only a tenant loding in the
social edifice of ideological signs (Marxism and the Philosophy of
Language, p. 13)."
David Kellogg
Seoul National University of Education
--- On Sat, 11/20/10, Bella Kotik-Friedgut <bella.kotik@gmail.com>
wrote:
From: Bella Kotik-Friedgut <bella.kotik@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [xmca] Sorry for not modifying the subject: Higher
mental functions = higher psychological processes = executive
functions ?
To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
Date: Saturday, November 20, 2010, 3:17 PM
On Sun, Nov 21, 2010 at 12:21 AM, ulvi icil <ulvi.icil@gmail.com>
wrote:
2010/11/21 ulvi icil <ulvi.icil@gmail.com>
With my apologizes for my ignorance, I have a question:
What we meet as higher mental functions are "almost" the same
with higher
psychological processes YES
and both are "almost" the same as executive
functions. NOT Right
PLEASE SEE THE ATTACHMENTS
Ulvi
__________________________________________
_____
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
--
Sincerely yours Bella Kotik-Friedgut
-----Inline Attachment Follows-----
__________________________________________
_____
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
__________________________________________
_____
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca