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

[Xmca-l] Re: Thought and language as oscillating and pulsing [or not]



Got it!  :)

On Jan 24, 2015, at 4:58 PM, Ed Wall <ewall@umich.edu> wrote:

> You possibly might also be interested in 
> 
> The Role of Hermeneutic Phenomenology in Grounding the Affirmative Philosophy of Gustav Gustavovich Shpet
> V. G. Kuznetsov
> Russian Studies in Philosophy 37 (4):62-90 (1999)
> 
> Ed
> 
> On Jan 24, 2015, at  2:49 PM, Martin John Packer wrote:
> 
>> This is the information I have, Henry.
>> 
>> Freiberger-Sheikholeslami, E. (1984). Gustav G. Shpet: Hermeneutical logic and philosophical semiotics. In J. Deely (Ed.), Semiotics 1984 (pp. 381-391). Bloomington: Semiotic Society of America.
>> 
>> 
>> Martin
>> 
>> On Jan 24, 2015, at 2:37 PM, HENRY SHONERD <hshonerd@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> Martin,
>>> Thank you very muchfor the article on Sheet. I think the readings and dialog generated will help me understand much better Vygotsky and his context by getting a better grip on the long view, through the eyes of hermeneutics. Do you know when the Freiberger-Sheeikholes article was written?
>>> Henry
>>> 
>>>> On Jan 24, 2015, at 10:26 AM, Martin John Packer <mpacker@uniandes.edu.co> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> I am sure that there are differences between LSV and Shpet, as Larry points out. But there are also striking similarities. Here is a little background:
>>>> 
>>>> Martin
>>>> 
>>>> <Freiberger-Sheikholeslami 1985 Gustav G. Shpet He.pdf>
>>>> On Jan 24, 2015, at 11:39 AM, Larry Purss <lpscholar2@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> Martin will be sending us an article on Shpet.
>>>>> I therefore did some background exploration and discovered that Shpet and
>>>>> Vygotsky differed on the notion of "oscillation".
>>>>> Vygotsky believed thought and language oscillated while Shpet disagreed.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Zinchenko clarifies Vygotsky's understanding in this paragraph
>>>>> that Zinchenko wrote in his chapter "Thought and Word, the Approaches of L.
>>>>> S. Vygotsky and G. G. Shpet": It uses the metaphor of rain [which I
>>>>> associated with the other thread on rain]
>>>>> 
>>>>> "Thought and word are no less polyphonic than mind.  Yet, there is a
>>>>> long way to go to arrive at this conclusion.  And it is hard to
>>>>> overestimate the input of Shpet and Vygotsky, along with Aleksandr Potebnya.
>>>>> Out of all the polyphony of mind and thought, out of all the various
>>>>> possibilities of origins, Shpet and Vygotsky   gave their preference to the
>>>>> word, although they understood it differently.  Let us start from
>>>>> Vygotsky's metaphorical description: *What is simultaneous in thought is
>>>>> successive in language.*  It would be possible to compare a thought with a
>>>>> cloud that showers a rain of words.  This is why the transition from
>>>>> thought to language is a very complicated process of *dismemberment* of a
>>>>> thought and its recreation in a word.  On the next page, Vygotsky wrote,
>>>>> 'continuing this picturesque comparison, we should liken the motivation of
>>>>> thought to the wind that sets the clouds in motion.'  If something can *pour
>>>>> itself, *it means that it already exists.  Therefore we can understand the
>>>>> given metaphor as saying that thought, already existing is *expressed *in a
>>>>> word"  [emphasis in the original]
>>>>> 
>>>>> This quote draws attention to Vygotsky perceiving *oscillation *behind the
>>>>> movement of thought and language. Shpet did not see thought and language as
>>>>> oscillating.  Zinchenko's goal in his article is not to place the
>>>>> approaches of Shpet and Vygotsky in opposition but to present them as
>>>>> mutually complimentary approaches.
>>>>> 
>>>>> I hope to learn from others on the complexity of the notions of
>>>>> oscillating movement of thought and language situated within words.
>>>>> Polyphonic notions
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> 
> 
>