[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [xmca] Re: Lytical


I'm not sure if what I am going to discuss fits this topic or not.
I have been wondering about the centrality of *fluency* as a key component
of early reading. Fluency as a construct involves rate,  [automaticity]
accuracy, and prosody.
Recently *prosody* and its centrality to developing reading skill is being
lytically explored.
Prosody involves intonation and *pausing* as markers of turn taking in
communicative acts.
Bakhtin's construct of *answerability* as central to utterances [turn
taking within communicative acts] also involves *intonation* and *prosody*
as central and primary.

Intonation and prosody express the emotional aspect of communicative acts
as forms of *conversation* which is Gadamer's central notion within
philosophical hermeneutics.

I have been wondering if anyone is linking up the centrality of prosody
[intonation and pausing as emotional markers] within BOTH conversational
utterances  and early reading instruction.

The suffix *lytical* meaning to dissolve or loosen and the notion of
*pausing* or *gaps* within communicative acts as *answerability* may share
common features.

Is there such a word as dia-lytical?? [dia meaning seeing through]
Seeing through loosening and dissolving - NOT overcoming??

This is very stream of consciousness but I'm asking myself these questions
so thought I would think out loud.


On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 10:19 PM, Andy Blunden <ablunden@mira.net> wrote:

> I'm putting it back on xmca as requested, Greg.
> Further investigation led me to the fact that the suffix "-lytical" means
> "to dissolve." Perhaps Vygotsky had a cinematic metaphor in mind, changing
> from one scene, or situation, to another, by a dissolve? /Kritikos/, the
> root for "critical", on the other hand, means judgment or discernment,
> which I take to be a one-or-the-other process.
> In my reading of "The Problem of Age" I did not gain from the material
> about the lytical periods much about breaking down. It was much more about
> consolidating and strengthening newly acquired forms of activity in
> preparation perhaps for breaking out of the situation in a critical phase
> of development. The critical phases are famously destructive of course.
> On the side, I would really urge xmca-ers who work in literacy to please
> join in. I am a social philosopher who wants to ally myself with a living
> and robust current of psychology, but I am not myself an elementary school
> teacher and know almost nothing about learning to read. The article Mike
> wants me to read (and which I am still reading and will forward to the list
> when I am done) is totally rivetting stuff. Written 24 years ago it engages
> Vygotsky, Luria and A N Leontyev and is so sophisticated it bowls me over
> really. But I am still searching for something I could *disagree* with.
> Andy
> Greg Thompson wrote:
>> Not OK just yet. I'd like to try to do some dissolving of your parsing of
>> "lytic" a bit.
>> I thought you said you were parsing (lysing?) "lytic" as "gradual"?
>> "Gradual" seems very different from "loosening" or "dissolving", no?
>> The process may be gradual, but to say that "lytical" means "gradual" is
>> like saying that "boiling" means "gradual" (after all it takes time for
>> water to boil - esp. if you are watching it).
>> It seems like there is something very important in the rest of the word
>> "lytic" and how that relates to development. It seems that part of what is
>> being described here is the sense in which developments can actually
>> involve the breaking down (lysing!) of previous psychological "structures"
>> or "formations". That seems much more interesting than "gradual". And it
>> also seems a wonderful corrective to the commonly assumed model of
>> development as simple linear progression.
>> For example, there is a classic example of language learning where very
>> young kids will say conjugate verbs correctly b.c. they are memorized, but
>> then when they start to learn the rules of conjugation, they will no longer
>> produce them correctly (b.c. some don't fit the patterns that they are
>> learning - e.g., past tense of "run" is not "runned"). So their memorized
>> understanding of "ran" must be "lysed"! The result is that from the
>> dissolving of those meanings a new meaning can emerge - e.g., add "ed" to
>> the present tense of a verb to make it past tense.
>> What do you think?
>> I'd be interested in opening this conversation to XMCA if you are
>> interested. Many folks smarter than I when it comes to translation and such.
>> -greg
>> On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 7:06 PM, Andy Blunden <ablunden@mira.net <mailto:
>> ablunden@mira.net>> wrote:
>>     check the definitions for the suffix "-lytical." They mean
>>     "loosening or dissolving." OK?
>>     andy
>>     --     ------------------------------**------------------------------
>> **------------
>>     *Andy Blunden*
>>     Home Page: http://home.mira.net/~andy/ <http://home.mira.net/%7Eandy/
>> **>
>>     Book: http://www.brill.nl/concepts
>> --
>> Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D.
>> 883 Spencer W. Kimball Tower
>> Department of Anthropology
>> Brigham Young University
>> Provo, UT 84602
>> http://byu.academia.edu/**GregoryThompson<http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson>
> --
> ------------------------------**------------------------------**
> ------------
> *Andy Blunden*
> Home Page: http://home.mira.net/~andy/
> Book: http://www.brill.nl/concepts
> ______________________________**____________
> _____
> xmca mailing list
> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/**listinfo/xmca<http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca>
xmca mailing list