From a.j.gil@iped.uio.no Fri Mar 3 10:11:11 2017 From: a.j.gil@iped.uio.no (Alfredo Jornet Gil) Date: Fri, 3 Mar 2017 18:11:11 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Moving on, new MCA article discussion ahead Message-ID: <1488564671314.91120@iped.uio.no> Dear all, the discussion on the MCA issue on perezhivanie has now faded off, but it has been a most intense (at least to me) xmca experience?. We were privileged to count with the participation of many of the authors involved, in addition to Marc's as author of the main article, and to be able to discuss many issues that otherwise are impossible to discuss in the printed journal format. So, before I introduce the new article for discussion, I wanted to sum up a bit of what sort of 'experience' the discussion perezhivanie has been for me. First, I want to say a huge thanks to ALL of us who so passionately engaged in the discussion, with many of us not just commenting but expending quite much time and energy (life!) in jointly reading and commenting a whole lot of articles, in jointly watching and commenting movies, following and analysing the social and political situation in the US in the first days of the new administration?... I personally have learn a lot from all these threads that so nicely connected (a) the articles in MCA, (b) our everyday (out-of-school one may say) experience with politics and other forms of art, and (c) the analyses and reflections in xmca. Second, I want to apologise for not having been able to use even more time and energy in following up each and all of the exciting proposals of collective analysis and inquiry. One thing that I've learned concerns the possibilities and limitations for collective production that xmca? currently affords. I've been simultaneously overwhelmed by how much passion and energy it can generate and by how much more it needs in order to channel that passion and energy towards a collective project/production. This 'doubled' experienced has led me to take more seriously the challenge of how we might want to further enhance/organise xmca so as to allow for more sustainable forms of collective production. We still have a not-even-half-way done google doc trying to catch up with all experiences on Trump's inaugural speech. I am not sure how that may move further or if it will just remain a past testimony of a growing praxis as we move towards more efficient forms of collective production in the near future. Finally, I am quite convinced that most of us now have a more nuanced and concrete sense of what we can mean to say when we say that something is a or relates to perezhivanie. I think there are points hat can be summarised as in the bullet points below. In offering you this overly incomplete list, I invite you to (a) add to the points below or add another points not mentioned here, and (b) add literature (references to studies, social movements, online resources, etc) that can be relevant for each of the points. If the exercise proves to be useful, I commit to curate the contributions and add them to a word document while we find more interactive forms of collaboration. * I think the pertinence of perezhivanie as a concept relevant to conceiving and studying intellectual aspects as united to affective aspects has been made quite clear through the discussion. However, I personally feel that we still are in the very infancy of the question, still formulating the problem, with few contributions explicitly concerned with showing precisely how such unity exists in and as concrete phenomena in praxis, and how such exhibition can yield to social change and innovation. But I am sure that several of the xmca members know of studies that have already begun to work in this direction, and I believe that many of our own experiences during the discussion threw light. I particularly think * A major source of dialogue and diversity concerned the apparent paradox of conceiving experience as a sort of state or reflection of a developmental stage, and as a form of working over and change (crisis). Different authors/participants seem to have different views on how the two aspects connect, and the notion of 'mediation' emerged as solution for some (like in Marc's paper), and as a problem for others. The discussion was a great opportunity to extend this tensions beyond the, as Andy put it, 'all too polite' discussions in the articles of the special issues. Thanks again to all for all the great contributions, Alfredo? From a.j.gil@iped.uio.no Sat Mar 4 00:16:23 2017 From: a.j.gil@iped.uio.no (Alfredo Jornet Gil) Date: Sat, 4 Mar 2017 08:16:23 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Tensions in Second Language learning Message-ID: <1488615383307.44588@iped.uio.no> Dear all, I am excited to introduce MCA's current issue article for discussion, *"We Got Rid of Her Sentence for Revenge": Re-Viewing Second-Language Learner Strategies Considering Multiple Tensions in the ESL Classroom*? The article, explores relations between (English) language and power and inequality in the context of second language learning classrooms, examining episodes of tensions related to the learners' proficiency and ethnicity. To do so, Eun-Young, the author, draws from a quite wide range of socio-cultural research.The article is particularly relevant considering what is going on in Europe and North America with regard to ethnic discrimination (to say it softly). Although not directly addressing the latter larger questions, the study offers empirical and theoretical accounts of that same type of relations in which ??privilege and inequality are at stake. Eun-Young has kindly accepted participating in the discussion and I believe will be joining soon. Meanwhile, the article is attached ?in this e-mail and soon open in the T&F pages. Enjoy the read, and everything else. Alfredo -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Jang 2017 second-language strategies Tensions.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 1311334 bytes Desc: Jang 2017 second-language strategies Tensions.pdf Url : https://mailman.ucsd.edu/mailman/private/xmca-l/attachments/20170304/8a432ca7/attachment-0001.pdf From ulvi.icil@gmail.com Sat Mar 4 11:41:31 2017 From: ulvi.icil@gmail.com (=?UTF-8?B?VWx2aSDEsMOnaWw=?=) Date: Sat, 4 Mar 2017 21:41:31 +0200 Subject: [Xmca-l] The most, the best educated and the most dangerous Message-ID: Well, given that education is a class issue in capitalist society, any society, that the best most educated are placing themselves en masse on the side of the dominant class can we think that the most "educated" and also the "best" educated are at the same time the most dangerous people for the humanity because they are located at the most critical decision-making points of a social order. Well, this can be a really trivial issue but since I could not meet it in my country's intellectual life,communist and non communist, I needed to ask it for world experience. It seems that the best educated seem to be en masse the most dangerous ones to initiate wars etc whereas the least educated formally but the best self-educated via working class instititutions seem to be the most emancipatory and in fact best educated people in the real sense of the world (e.g. Jos? Marti) Erdogan is obviously not the most educated in my country, Turkey, nor was Hitler nor Bush. But Obama, Clinton, Hollande, Javier Solana (who destroyed Yugoslavia with Nato bombing) Merkel were and all well educated...and quite dangerous. I was really surprised to the self- gathered conscience of one of my friends when he stated that Hillary Clinton was a very dangerous woman. Thanks Ulvi From lpscholar2@gmail.com Sun Mar 5 04:08:22 2017 From: lpscholar2@gmail.com (lpscholar2@gmail.com) Date: Sun, 5 Mar 2017 04:08:22 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The most, the best educated and the most dangerous In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <58bbffb8.d638620a.3cb8d.353c@mx.google.com> Ulvi, The phrase, ?placing themselves en masse on the side of the dominant class? En masse may be considered a relation of ?holism? as a metaphor. Martin Packer (see page 10 in book ? Cultural and Critical Perspectives on Human Development) defines holism?: ?even in cultural psychology there is often a presumption of *holism*?: The thesis that a social order has an overall systematic pattern that gives definition to its parts and their interrelations. The *metaphor* of culture as a set of tools or a toolkit is *holist* and this unitary and unproblematic conception of culture can *lead* us to assume, erroneously, that cognition and ways of knowing are unitary, fixed, and unchanging, and unaffected by the situations in which they are employed. If we consider (en masse) as a metaphor does it share a family resemblance with (holism) as a metaphor that *leads* us to assumptions? Sent from my Windows 10 phone From: Ulvi ??il Sent: March 4, 2017 11:42 AM To: xmca-l@ucsd.edu Subject: [Xmca-l] The most, the best educated and the most dangerous Well, given that education is a class issue in capitalist society, any society, that the best most educated are placing themselves en masse on the side of the dominant class can we think that the most "educated" and also the "best" educated are at the same time the most dangerous people for the humanity because they are located at the most critical decision-making points of a social order. Well, this can be a really trivial issue but since I could not meet it in my country's intellectual life,communist and non communist, I needed to ask it for world experience. It seems that the best educated seem to be en masse the most dangerous ones to initiate wars etc whereas the least educated formally but the best self-educated via working class instititutions seem to be the most emancipatory and in fact best educated people in the real sense of the world (e.g. Jos? Marti) Erdogan is obviously not the most educated in my country, Turkey, nor was Hitler nor Bush. But Obama, Clinton, Hollande, Javier Solana (who destroyed Yugoslavia with Nato bombing) Merkel were and all well educated...and quite dangerous. I was really surprised to the self- gathered conscience of one of my friends when he stated that Hillary Clinton was a very dangerous woman. Thanks Ulvi From ablunden@mira.net Sun Mar 5 04:18:14 2017 From: ablunden@mira.net (Andy Blunden) Date: Sun, 5 Mar 2017 23:18:14 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The most, the best educated and the most dangerous In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <24bd8bb8-d57e-b7a2-e640-6472546059fb@mira.net> Ulvi, I have attached (in HTML) Gramsci on "The Intellectuals." You may find this useful. Andy ------------------------------------------------------------ Andy Blunden http://home.mira.net/~andy http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making On 5/03/2017 6:41 AM, Ulvi ??il wrote: > Well, given that education is a class issue in capitalist society, any > society, > that the best most educated are placing themselves en masse on the side of > the dominant class > > can we think that the most "educated" and also the "best" educated are > at the same time the most dangerous people for the humanity > > because they are located at the most critical decision-making points > of a social order. > > Well, this can be a really trivial issue but since I could not meet it in > my country's intellectual life,communist and non communist, I needed to ask > it for world experience. > > It seems that the best educated seem to be en masse the most dangerous ones > to initiate wars etc whereas the least educated formally but the best > self-educated via working class instititutions seem to be the most > emancipatory and in fact best educated people in the real sense of the > world (e.g. Jos? Marti) > > Erdogan is obviously not the most educated in my country, Turkey, nor was > Hitler nor Bush. > > But Obama, Clinton, Hollande, Javier Solana (who destroyed Yugoslavia with > Nato bombing) Merkel were and all well educated...and quite dangerous. > > I was really surprised to the self- gathered conscience of one of my > friends when he stated that Hillary Clinton was a very dangerous woman. > > Thanks > Ulvi > > -------------- next part -------------- From ablunden@mira.net Sun Mar 5 04:23:48 2017 From: ablunden@mira.net (Andy Blunden) Date: Sun, 5 Mar 2017 23:23:48 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The most, the best educated and the most dangerous In-Reply-To: <24bd8bb8-d57e-b7a2-e640-6472546059fb@mira.net> References: <24bd8bb8-d57e-b7a2-e640-6472546059fb@mira.net> Message-ID: That didn't seem to work. Try the attached Word.doc. If that doesn't work, I'll send it to you individually, Andy ------------------------------------------------------------ Andy Blunden http://home.mira.net/~andy http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making On 5/03/2017 11:18 PM, Andy Blunden wrote: > Ulvi, I have attached (in HTML) Gramsci on "The > Intellectuals." You may find this useful. > > Andy > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > Andy Blunden > http://home.mira.net/~andy > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making > > On 5/03/2017 6:41 AM, Ulvi ??il wrote: >> Well, given that education is a class issue in capitalist >> society, any >> society, >> that the best most educated are placing themselves en >> masse on the side of >> the dominant class >> >> can we think that the most "educated" and also the "best" >> educated are >> at the same time the most dangerous people for the humanity >> >> because they are located at the most critical >> decision-making points >> of a social order. >> >> Well, this can be a really trivial issue but since I >> could not meet it in >> my country's intellectual life,communist and non >> communist, I needed to ask >> it for world experience. >> >> It seems that the best educated seem to be en masse the >> most dangerous ones >> to initiate wars etc whereas the least educated formally >> but the best >> self-educated via working class instititutions seem to be >> the most >> emancipatory and in fact best educated people in the real >> sense of the >> world (e.g. Jos? Marti) >> >> Erdogan is obviously not the most educated in my country, >> Turkey, nor was >> Hitler nor Bush. >> >> But Obama, Clinton, Hollande, Javier Solana (who >> destroyed Yugoslavia with >> Nato bombing) Merkel were and all well educated...and >> quite dangerous. >> >> I was really surprised to the self- gathered conscience >> of one of my >> friends when he stated that Hillary Clinton was a very >> dangerous woman. >> >> Thanks >> Ulvi >> >> > -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: intellectuals.docx Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document Size: 42767 bytes Desc: not available Url : https://mailman.ucsd.edu/mailman/private/xmca-l/attachments/20170305/d9123e97/attachment.bin From ulvi.icil@gmail.com Sun Mar 5 04:28:39 2017 From: ulvi.icil@gmail.com (=?UTF-8?B?VWx2aSDEsMOnaWw=?=) Date: Sun, 5 Mar 2017 14:28:39 +0200 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The most, the best educated and the most dangerous In-Reply-To: <24bd8bb8-d57e-b7a2-e640-6472546059fb@mira.net> References: <24bd8bb8-d57e-b7a2-e640-6472546059fb@mira.net> Message-ID: Thank you Andy. 5 Mar 2017 15:19 tarihinde "Andy Blunden" yazd?: > Ulvi, I have attached (in HTML) Gramsci on "The Intellectuals." You may > find this useful. > > Andy > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > Andy Blunden > http://home.mira.net/~andy > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making > On 5/03/2017 6:41 AM, Ulvi ??il wrote: > >> Well, given that education is a class issue in capitalist society, any >> society, >> that the best most educated are placing themselves en masse on the side of >> the dominant class >> >> can we think that the most "educated" and also the "best" educated are >> at the same time the most dangerous people for the humanity >> >> because they are located at the most critical decision-making points >> of a social order. >> >> Well, this can be a really trivial issue but since I could not meet it in >> my country's intellectual life,communist and non communist, I needed to >> ask >> it for world experience. >> >> It seems that the best educated seem to be en masse the most dangerous >> ones >> to initiate wars etc whereas the least educated formally but the best >> self-educated via working class instititutions seem to be the most >> emancipatory and in fact best educated people in the real sense of the >> world (e.g. Jos? Marti) >> >> Erdogan is obviously not the most educated in my country, Turkey, nor was >> Hitler nor Bush. >> >> But Obama, Clinton, Hollande, Javier Solana (who destroyed Yugoslavia with >> Nato bombing) Merkel were and all well educated...and quite dangerous. >> >> I was really surprised to the self- gathered conscience of one of my >> friends when he stated that Hillary Clinton was a very dangerous woman. >> >> Thanks >> Ulvi >> >> >> > From ulvi.icil@gmail.com Sun Mar 5 04:30:10 2017 From: ulvi.icil@gmail.com (=?UTF-8?B?VWx2aSDEsMOnaWw=?=) Date: Sun, 5 Mar 2017 14:30:10 +0200 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The most, the best educated and the most dangerous In-Reply-To: References: <24bd8bb8-d57e-b7a2-e640-6472546059fb@mira.net> Message-ID: Word file is working. Thanks. Ulvi On 5 March 2017 at 14:23, Andy Blunden wrote: > That didn't seem to work. Try the attached Word.doc. If that doesn't work, > I'll send it to you individually, > > Andy > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > Andy Blunden > http://home.mira.net/~andy > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making > On 5/03/2017 11:18 PM, Andy Blunden wrote: > >> Ulvi, I have attached (in HTML) Gramsci on "The Intellectuals." You may >> find this useful. >> >> Andy >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------ >> Andy Blunden >> http://home.mira.net/~andy >> http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making >> On 5/03/2017 6:41 AM, Ulvi ??il wrote: >> >>> Well, given that education is a class issue in capitalist society, any >>> society, >>> that the best most educated are placing themselves en masse on the side >>> of >>> the dominant class >>> >>> can we think that the most "educated" and also the "best" educated are >>> at the same time the most dangerous people for the humanity >>> >>> because they are located at the most critical decision-making points >>> of a social order. >>> >>> Well, this can be a really trivial issue but since I could not meet it >>> in >>> my country's intellectual life,communist and non communist, I needed to >>> ask >>> it for world experience. >>> >>> It seems that the best educated seem to be en masse the most dangerous >>> ones >>> to initiate wars etc whereas the least educated formally but the best >>> self-educated via working class instititutions seem to be the most >>> emancipatory and in fact best educated people in the real sense of the >>> world (e.g. Jos? Marti) >>> >>> Erdogan is obviously not the most educated in my country, Turkey, nor was >>> Hitler nor Bush. >>> >>> But Obama, Clinton, Hollande, Javier Solana (who destroyed Yugoslavia >>> with >>> Nato bombing) Merkel were and all well educated...and quite dangerous. >>> >>> I was really surprised to the self- gathered conscience of one of my >>> friends when he stated that Hillary Clinton was a very dangerous woman. >>> >>> Thanks >>> Ulvi >>> >>> >>> >> > From ulvi.icil@gmail.com Sun Mar 5 04:33:08 2017 From: ulvi.icil@gmail.com (=?UTF-8?B?VWx2aSDEsMOnaWw=?=) Date: Sun, 5 Mar 2017 14:33:08 +0200 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The most, the best educated and the most dangerous In-Reply-To: <58bbffb8.d638620a.3cb8d.353c@mx.google.com> References: <58bbffb8.d638620a.3cb8d.353c@mx.google.com> Message-ID: Thanks, well "en masse" may be erroneous, I agree. But I did not aim a totality but rather something "a large part". Thanks. On 5 March 2017 at 14:08, wrote: > Ulvi, > > The phrase, ?placing themselves en masse on the side of the dominant class? > > > > En masse may be considered a relation of ?holism? as a metaphor. Martin > Packer (see page 10 in book ? Cultural and Critical Perspectives on Human > Development) defines holism : > > > > ?even in cultural psychology there is often a presumption of **holism** : > The thesis that a social order has an overall systematic pattern that gives > definition to its parts and their interrelations. The **metaphor** of > culture as a set of tools or a toolkit is **holist** and this unitary and > unproblematic conception of culture can **lead** us to assume, > erroneously, that cognition and ways of knowing are unitary, fixed, and > unchanging, and unaffected by the situations in which they are employed. > > > > If we consider (en masse) as a metaphor does it share a family resemblance > with (holism) as a metaphor that **leads** us to assumptions? > > > > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > > > *From: *Ulvi ??il > *Sent: *March 4, 2017 11:42 AM > *To: *xmca-l@ucsd.edu > *Subject: *[Xmca-l] The most, the best educated and the most dangerous > > > > Well, given that education is a class issue in capitalist society, any > > society, > > that the best most educated are placing themselves en masse on the side of > > the dominant class > > > > can we think that the most "educated" and also the "best" educated are > > at the same time the most dangerous people for the humanity > > > > because they are located at the most critical decision-making points > > of a social order. > > > > Well, this can be a really trivial issue but since I could not meet it in > > my country's intellectual life,communist and non communist, I needed to ask > > it for world experience. > > > > It seems that the best educated seem to be en masse the most dangerous ones > > to initiate wars etc whereas the least educated formally but the best > > self-educated via working class instititutions seem to be the most > > emancipatory and in fact best educated people in the real sense of the > > world (e.g. Jos? Marti) > > > > Erdogan is obviously not the most educated in my country, Turkey, nor was > > Hitler nor Bush. > > > > But Obama, Clinton, Hollande, Javier Solana (who destroyed Yugoslavia with > > Nato bombing) Merkel were and all well educated...and quite dangerous. > > > > I was really surprised to the self- gathered conscience of one of my > > friends when he stated that Hillary Clinton was a very dangerous woman. > > > > Thanks > > Ulvi > > > From a.j.gil@iped.uio.no Sun Mar 5 13:18:09 2017 From: a.j.gil@iped.uio.no (Alfredo Jornet Gil) Date: Sun, 5 Mar 2017 21:18:09 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The most, the best educated and the most dangerous In-Reply-To: References: <24bd8bb8-d57e-b7a2-e640-6472546059fb@mira.net>, Message-ID: <1488748687212.22966@iped.uio.no> Thanks for sharing, Andy. I've been interested in reading Gramsci since I came upon his name in Jean Lave's comments in a presentation and in here 2012 MCA paper addressing the ISCAR community. Alfredo ________________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of Ulvi ??il Sent: 05 March 2017 13:28 To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity; ablunden@mira.net Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The most, the best educated and the most dangerous Thank you Andy. 5 Mar 2017 15:19 tarihinde "Andy Blunden" yazd?: > Ulvi, I have attached (in HTML) Gramsci on "The Intellectuals." You may > find this useful. > > Andy > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > Andy Blunden > http://home.mira.net/~andy > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making > On 5/03/2017 6:41 AM, Ulvi ??il wrote: > >> Well, given that education is a class issue in capitalist society, any >> society, >> that the best most educated are placing themselves en masse on the side of >> the dominant class >> >> can we think that the most "educated" and also the "best" educated are >> at the same time the most dangerous people for the humanity >> >> because they are located at the most critical decision-making points >> of a social order. >> >> Well, this can be a really trivial issue but since I could not meet it in >> my country's intellectual life,communist and non communist, I needed to >> ask >> it for world experience. >> >> It seems that the best educated seem to be en masse the most dangerous >> ones >> to initiate wars etc whereas the least educated formally but the best >> self-educated via working class instititutions seem to be the most >> emancipatory and in fact best educated people in the real sense of the >> world (e.g. Jos? Marti) >> >> Erdogan is obviously not the most educated in my country, Turkey, nor was >> Hitler nor Bush. >> >> But Obama, Clinton, Hollande, Javier Solana (who destroyed Yugoslavia with >> Nato bombing) Merkel were and all well educated...and quite dangerous. >> >> I was really surprised to the self- gathered conscience of one of my >> friends when he stated that Hillary Clinton was a very dangerous woman. >> >> Thanks >> Ulvi >> >> >> > From smago@uga.edu Wed Mar 1 06:06:32 2017 From: smago@uga.edu (Peter Smagorinsky) Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2017 14:06:32 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] JoLLE update Message-ID: https://www.smore.com/xb51e [https://s.smore.com/ss/58b621e1440a2b054dacbd8c-screenshot-fb_wide.jpg?_v=1488331681] JoLLE update www.smore.com JoLLE Conference Report Thank you to everyone who attended, presented at, planned for, and supported the JoLLE 2017 Winter Conference.... Heidi Lyn Hadley, Managing Editor Journal of Language and Literacy Education The University of Georgia Aderhold 315 Athens, GA 30602 jollesubmissions@uga.edu Follow JoLLE on Twitter: @Jolle_uga Follow JoLLE on Facebook: Journal of Language & Literacy Education http://jolle.coe.uga.edu/ From bella.kotik@gmail.com Sat Mar 4 01:27:17 2017 From: bella.kotik@gmail.com (Bella Kotik-Friedgut) Date: Sat, 4 Mar 2017 11:27:17 +0200 Subject: [Xmca-l] Fwd: Re: Announcement of the Fifth International Luria Memorial Congress 2017 In-Reply-To: <1488568329.868597259@f385.i.mail.ru> References: <8b2bba96e6664637840b2121b6ce26c1@gwp> <1488568329.868597259@f385.i.mail.ru> Message-ID: ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: "Janna Glozman" Date: Mar 3, 2017 21:12 Subject: Re: Announcement of the Fifth International Luria Memorial Congress 2017 To: "neuropsychologia23" , "mcole" , "Bo?ydar Kaczmarek" , "Nikolai.veresov" < nikolai.veresov@monash.edu>, "Joaquim Quintino Aires" < quintino.aires@gmail.com>, "Jordi Pe?a Casanova (18575)" < jpcasanova@parcdesalutmar.cat>, "Antonio Puente" , < mecaccil@gmail.com>, , "Bella Kotik-Friedgut" , "Carla Anauate" < carla@ramark.com.br>, , , "Yulia Solovieva" , "Alfredo Ardila" < ardilaalfredo@gmail.com> Cc: "??????? ???????" , Dear colleagues! Please add the link of Congress website to the information you are distributing http://luria-congress.urfu.ru/ Best regards, Janna Glozman From ewall@umich.edu Mon Mar 6 09:16:58 2017 From: ewall@umich.edu (Edward Wall) Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2017 11:16:58 -0600 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The most, the best educated and the most dangerous In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1580D77A-1E0B-4181-BDE9-CDC32DBC7AF4@umich.edu> Ulvi I have thought about your question and read what others have offered. Here are some thoughts In most societies a purpose of education is to inculcate societal norms and. hence, in is not surprising that some of the better exemplars are those who place themselves on the side of the dominant class. However, those that often rise those critical decision points you mention are not necessarily the best educated. They are, what one might term, well educated. That is, they go to the ?right? schools, know the ?right? [people, wear the ?right? clothes, eat the ?right? food. They often display, as Detienne and Vernant put it, "mental attitudes and intellectual behavior which combine flair, wisdom, forethought, subtlety of mind, deception, resourcefulness, vigilance, opportunism, various skills, and experience acquired over the years. That is, they display what the Greeks termed metis or cunning; Odysseys being the exemplar. Metis, I happen to think (from the viewpoint of a teacher), is a very interesting and troubling trait. Ed > On Mar 4, 2017, at 1:41 PM, Ulvi ??il wrote: > > Well, given that education is a class issue in capitalist society, any > society, > that the best most educated are placing themselves en masse on the side of > the dominant class > > can we think that the most "educated" and also the "best" educated are > at the same time the most dangerous people for the humanity > > because they are located at the most critical decision-making points > of a social order. > > Well, this can be a really trivial issue but since I could not meet it in > my country's intellectual life,communist and non communist, I needed to ask > it for world experience. > > It seems that the best educated seem to be en masse the most dangerous ones > to initiate wars etc whereas the least educated formally but the best > self-educated via working class instititutions seem to be the most > emancipatory and in fact best educated people in the real sense of the > world (e.g. Jos? Marti) > > Erdogan is obviously not the most educated in my country, Turkey, nor was > Hitler nor Bush. > > But Obama, Clinton, Hollande, Javier Solana (who destroyed Yugoslavia with > Nato bombing) Merkel were and all well educated...and quite dangerous. > > I was really surprised to the self- gathered conscience of one of my > friends when he stated that Hillary Clinton was a very dangerous woman. > > Thanks > Ulvi From ulvi.icil@gmail.com Mon Mar 6 09:23:05 2017 From: ulvi.icil@gmail.com (=?UTF-8?B?VWx2aSDEsMOnaWw=?=) Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2017 19:23:05 +0200 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The most, the best educated and the most dangerous In-Reply-To: <1580D77A-1E0B-4181-BDE9-CDC32DBC7AF4@umich.edu> References: <1580D77A-1E0B-4181-BDE9-CDC32DBC7AF4@umich.edu> Message-ID: Thank you very much Ed. 6 Mar 2017 20:20 tarihinde "Edward Wall" yazd?: > Ulvi > > I have thought about your question and read what others have offered. > Here are some thoughts > > In most societies a purpose of education is to inculcate societal > norms and. hence, in is not surprising that some of the better exemplars > are those who place themselves on the side of the dominant class. However, > those that often rise those critical decision points you mention are not > necessarily the best educated. They are, what one might term, well > educated. That is, they go to the ?right? schools, know the ?right? > [people, wear the ?right? clothes, eat the ?right? food. They often > display, as Detienne and Vernant put it, "mental attitudes and intellectual > behavior which combine flair, wisdom, forethought, subtlety of mind, > deception, resourcefulness, vigilance, opportunism, various skills, and > experience acquired over the years. That is, they display what the Greeks > termed metis or cunning; Odysseys being the exemplar. > > Metis, I happen to think (from the viewpoint of a teacher), is a very > interesting and troubling trait. > > Ed > > > > > On Mar 4, 2017, at 1:41 PM, Ulvi ??il wrote: > > > > Well, given that education is a class issue in capitalist society, any > > society, > > that the best most educated are placing themselves en masse on the side > of > > the dominant class > > > > can we think that the most "educated" and also the "best" educated are > > at the same time the most dangerous people for the humanity > > > > because they are located at the most critical decision-making points > > of a social order. > > > > Well, this can be a really trivial issue but since I could not meet it > in > > my country's intellectual life,communist and non communist, I needed to > ask > > it for world experience. > > > > It seems that the best educated seem to be en masse the most dangerous > ones > > to initiate wars etc whereas the least educated formally but the best > > self-educated via working class instititutions seem to be the most > > emancipatory and in fact best educated people in the real sense of the > > world (e.g. Jos? Marti) > > > > Erdogan is obviously not the most educated in my country, Turkey, nor was > > Hitler nor Bush. > > > > But Obama, Clinton, Hollande, Javier Solana (who destroyed Yugoslavia > with > > Nato bombing) Merkel were and all well educated...and quite dangerous. > > > > I was really surprised to the self- gathered conscience of one of my > > friends when he stated that Hillary Clinton was a very dangerous woman. > > > > Thanks > > Ulvi > > > From lpscholar2@gmail.com Tue Mar 7 12:33:42 2017 From: lpscholar2@gmail.com (lpscholar2@gmail.com) Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2017 12:33:42 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The most, the best educated and the most dangerous In-Reply-To: <1580D77A-1E0B-4181-BDE9-CDC32DBC7AF4@umich.edu> References: <1580D77A-1E0B-4181-BDE9-CDC32DBC7AF4@umich.edu> Message-ID: <58bf1928.437c630a.189f7.3ab6@mx.google.com> Ulvi and others interested in this thread. I would like to recommend an article by Michael Cole and Katherine Brown titled?: ?A Utopian Methodology as a Tool for Cultural and Critical Psychologies?: Toward a POSITIVE Critical Theory?. This article (2001) is located in the edited book by Martin Packer and Mark Tappan (Cultural and Critical Perspectives on Human Development). If you google the article a pdf is available. I tried sending the article but do not think it arrived. I found Martin?s *preview* in the introductory pages relevant to Ulvi?s question giving an overview of various cultural psychologies and various critical perspectives. Cole and Brown?s article is a *positive* critical response that refutes Adorno?s negative dialectics.. It specifically addresses the public who do not benefit from reading academic texts through the engagement with those who do benefit from reading academic texts. Engaging the *interplay* between and within the traditions of cultural psychologies AND critical psychologies. Sent from my Windows 10 phone From: Edward Wall Sent: March 6, 2017 9:20 AM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The most, the best educated and the most dangerous Ulvi I have thought about your question and read what others have offered. Here are some thoughts In most societies a purpose of education is to inculcate societal norms and. hence, in is not surprising that some of the better exemplars are those who place themselves on the side of the dominant class. However, those that often rise those critical decision points you mention are not necessarily the best educated. They are, what one might term, well educated. That is, they go to the ?right? schools, know the ?right? [people, wear the ?right? clothes, eat the ?right? food. They often display, as Detienne and Vernant put it, "mental attitudes and intellectual behavior which combine flair, wisdom, forethought, subtlety of mind, deception, resourcefulness, vigilance, opportunism, various skills, and experience acquired over the years. That is, they display what the Greeks termed metis or cunning; Odysseys being the exemplar. Metis, I happen to think (from the viewpoint of a teacher), is a very interesting and troubling trait. Ed > On Mar 4, 2017, at 1:41 PM, Ulvi ??il wrote: > > Well, given that education is a class issue in capitalist society, any > society, > that the best most educated are placing themselves en masse on the side of > the dominant class > > can we think that the most "educated" and also the "best" educated are > at the same time the most dangerous people for the humanity > > because they are located at the most critical decision-making points > of a social order. > > Well, this can be a really trivial issue but since I could not meet it in > my country's intellectual life,communist and non communist, I needed to ask > it for world experience. > > It seems that the best educated seem to be en masse the most dangerous ones > to initiate wars etc whereas the least educated formally but the best > self-educated via working class instititutions seem to be the most > emancipatory and in fact best educated people in the real sense of the > world (e.g. Jos? Marti) > > Erdogan is obviously not the most educated in my country, Turkey, nor was > Hitler nor Bush. > > But Obama, Clinton, Hollande, Javier Solana (who destroyed Yugoslavia with > Nato bombing) Merkel were and all well educated...and quite dangerous. > > I was really surprised to the self- gathered conscience of one of my > friends when he stated that Hillary Clinton was a very dangerous woman. > > Thanks > Ulvi From lpscholar2@gmail.com Tue Mar 7 12:33:40 2017 From: lpscholar2@gmail.com (lpscholar2@gmail.com) Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2017 12:33:40 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] a Response to the place of the academy in tranformation: utopianmethodology.pdf Message-ID: <58bf1926.437c630a.189f7.3ab4@mx.google.com> Here is a link to an article by Michael Cole and Katherine Brown published in Martin Packer and Mark Tappan?s edited book (Cultural and Critical Perspectives on Human Development). I would recommend also going to google books and reading the introductory chapter that *previews* the intent of the book. The intent to read cultural psychologies through a variety of critical theories focused on human development and also reading critical theories through the interplay of cultural psychologies. The book published in 2001 is still relevant in 2017. Both the introductory *preview* and the attached article offer a way to launch into current concerns, including a possible answer to Benjamin?s angel. The article opens with Aldorno?s *negative* dialectics* and offers a *positive* rejoinder to Aldorno. This article is presenting *alternatives* that are read through BOTH cultural psychologies and critical theories and their interplay. The use of the term *positive critical theory* marks the attempt to?: ?supercede those forms of criticism that offer NO possibility for remedy or redress within the reach of people who don?t benefit from reading academic texts. (first paragraph of the attached article) Seems to be a continuing relevant *starting point* in 2017 utopianmethodology.pdf http://lchc.ucsd.edu/People/MCole/utopianmethodology.pdf Sent from my Windows 10 phone From a.j.gil@iped.uio.no Tue Mar 7 13:10:56 2017 From: a.j.gil@iped.uio.no (Alfredo Jornet Gil) Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2017 21:10:56 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The most, the best educated and the most dangerous In-Reply-To: <58bf1928.437c630a.189f7.3ab6@mx.google.com> References: <1580D77A-1E0B-4181-BDE9-CDC32DBC7AF4@umich.edu>, <58bf1928.437c630a.189f7.3ab6@mx.google.com> Message-ID: <1488921055277.85414@iped.uio.no> On the thread of 'most educated and the most dangerous', for those who read Spanish, here is an article on a religious school in Madrid, El Pilar, known for being the school were many figures crucial in Spanish Politics were educated, both during and after Franco, and including former president Jos? Mar?a Aznar (who, together with Blair and Bush, and against their people's wish, threw us in a violet war in Irak). I can't say about Blair, but I remember that by that time almost everybody laughed about Bush' educational level, whereas Aznar has always been an intellectual. They all were very dangerous anyway. Here the link (Spanish): http://www.elconfidencial.com/espana/2012-02-19/el-pilar-un-colegio-de-dirigentes_232887/ The question of level of education has been raised both in England with respect with Brexit voters, and in the US with respect to Trump's voters, as if the electoral outcomes could be understood only if one consider the voters poorly educated. But does actually knowing MORE or LESS of what is being taught at today's schools affect at all whether you are dangerous or not to human well being and rights? Evidence seems to suggest that 'not much'. Perhaps, instead of asking the voter's level of education, we could ask the schools' level of humanity. I think education is the question number 1, at all levels, and yet, starting by the salary people seem to be willing to pay (to teachers, TA's, etc), it is one of the lowest in the list (if a list of how much people is paid for what they do has anything to say about how much a practice is valued). Hope not to be taking the thread off track. Alfredo ________________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of lpscholar2@gmail.com Sent: 07 March 2017 21:33 To: Edward Wall; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The most, the best educated and the most dangerous Ulvi and others interested in this thread. I would like to recommend an article by Michael Cole and Katherine Brown titled : ?A Utopian Methodology as a Tool for Cultural and Critical Psychologies : Toward a POSITIVE Critical Theory?. This article (2001) is located in the edited book by Martin Packer and Mark Tappan (Cultural and Critical Perspectives on Human Development). If you google the article a pdf is available. I tried sending the article but do not think it arrived. I found Martin?s *preview* in the introductory pages relevant to Ulvi?s question giving an overview of various cultural psychologies and various critical perspectives. Cole and Brown?s article is a *positive* critical response that refutes Adorno?s negative dialectics.. It specifically addresses the public who do not benefit from reading academic texts through the engagement with those who do benefit from reading academic texts. Engaging the *interplay* between and within the traditions of cultural psychologies AND critical psychologies. Sent from my Windows 10 phone From: Edward Wall Sent: March 6, 2017 9:20 AM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The most, the best educated and the most dangerous Ulvi I have thought about your question and read what others have offered. Here are some thoughts In most societies a purpose of education is to inculcate societal norms and. hence, in is not surprising that some of the better exemplars are those who place themselves on the side of the dominant class. However, those that often rise those critical decision points you mention are not necessarily the best educated. They are, what one might term, well educated. That is, they go to the ?right? schools, know the ?right? [people, wear the ?right? clothes, eat the ?right? food. They often display, as Detienne and Vernant put it, "mental attitudes and intellectual behavior which combine flair, wisdom, forethought, subtlety of mind, deception, resourcefulness, vigilance, opportunism, various skills, and experience acquired over the years. That is, they display what the Greeks termed metis or cunning; Odysseys being the exemplar. Metis, I happen to think (from the viewpoint of a teacher), is a very interesting and troubling trait. Ed > On Mar 4, 2017, at 1:41 PM, Ulvi ??il wrote: > > Well, given that education is a class issue in capitalist society, any > society, > that the best most educated are placing themselves en masse on the side of > the dominant class > > can we think that the most "educated" and also the "best" educated are > at the same time the most dangerous people for the humanity > > because they are located at the most critical decision-making points > of a social order. > > Well, this can be a really trivial issue but since I could not meet it in > my country's intellectual life,communist and non communist, I needed to ask > it for world experience. > > It seems that the best educated seem to be en masse the most dangerous ones > to initiate wars etc whereas the least educated formally but the best > self-educated via working class instititutions seem to be the most > emancipatory and in fact best educated people in the real sense of the > world (e.g. Jos? Marti) > > Erdogan is obviously not the most educated in my country, Turkey, nor was > Hitler nor Bush. > > But Obama, Clinton, Hollande, Javier Solana (who destroyed Yugoslavia with > Nato bombing) Merkel were and all well educated...and quite dangerous. > > I was really surprised to the self- gathered conscience of one of my > friends when he stated that Hillary Clinton was a very dangerous woman. > > Thanks > Ulvi From ulvi.icil@gmail.com Tue Mar 7 13:53:43 2017 From: ulvi.icil@gmail.com (=?UTF-8?B?VWx2aSDEsMOnaWw=?=) Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2017 23:53:43 +0200 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The most, the best educated and the most dangerous In-Reply-To: <1488921055277.85414@iped.uio.no> References: <1580D77A-1E0B-4181-BDE9-CDC32DBC7AF4@umich.edu> <58bf1928.437c630a.189f7.3ab6@mx.google.com> <1488921055277.85414@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: Exactly, Aznar used the planes provided to him for his election campaign by Cuban-American fascist mafia in Miami and he provoked EU against Cuba around 2002 for a stance close to that of US. Cuba stood firm, very firm. * But what is more important in my opinion is the following: During exit from Franko, CIA (and this is public information, there are many books on this) parachuted Felipe Gonzalez on top of PSOE in Spain for a smooth transition in fear of communists. The main work was done by Willy Brandt and Socialist International and SPD together with CIA. But there was no need for fear, Carillo gave up resisting for a republic and admitted the king, he was persuaded, this is a complete CIA political operation. Imagine this trahison. Because, Spanish workers fought for a republic between 1936 and 1939. CPS adopted itself to the bourgeois democracy. Not only Aznar etc are very dangerous but Gonzalez and today Iglesias, Tsipras too. Many years later, after several election rounds, it was being discussed who will replace Gonzalez for PSOE presidency. One name was discussed in Spain and in party circles. Then, that name was made known to Spanish people that he will not be president of PSOE but general secretary of NATO!!! He was Javier Solana. And what did he do? He executed German and US plan to bomb Yugoslavia. Can you imagine instead of PSOE presidency NATO general secretary. Origin: PSOE. It is for this reason that it does not matter too much, Aznar or Gonzalez. Everything is turning according to the preservation of the capitalist order from a possible revolution. In Portugal the same, the same Willy Brandt (that he received money from CIA is public information) put Soares in a train named liberty to Lisboa to steal the revolution from CPP, from Alvaro Cunhal. All these Gonzalez, Solana, Soares, Tsipras, Iglesias, Demirtas (in Turkey) are modern Kerenskys. It is easy to remember how Kerensky created a bourgeois enthusiasm during the February Revolution. They are all left. Tsipras and Iglesias are ex communists. This is almost a rule. It is for this reason that, October and Lenin - one of the best educated and most dangerous in human history this time for capitalism and imperialism- were great because this same Kerensky play repeated and repeated the whole 20th century to prevent revolutions. For instance today in Turkey there is Erdogan and many people in and out of the country want that this crisis be overcome by a more acceptable person. But I must ask: What do those generations who supported Felipe Gonzalez do now and what do they think? Taking into account that now their sons and daughters are unemployed in couples with several children, and moving to their parents homes because there , there is a pension salary and a house bought once upon a time. Why Spain , Portugal, Turkey should not be another Cuba and should continue with all these capitalist lies? The same for Brazil. Why to escape from revolutions (Revexits)? What can be the future of humanity under capitalism? And why best educated and non dangerous other people do not prefer to be on the side of working masses , of the poor for a permanent egalitarian society? What prevents them from doing so? I think to a great extent prejudices that are cultivated in people's minds. I firmly believe that a better world is possible but the billions of poor are impotent for an emancipation and they need the best educated on their side. Those best educated should leave the way of life of consumer societies imposed on them and they should chose a more cultured one,more human. Spanish people are in streets now again. Unless they dream a revolution the same will happen again and this time it will be Iglesias who will deceive them as it is by Tsipras in Greece. It is the greatest merit of revolutionaries like Lenin and Fidel to stop this vicious circle and put an end to it. Aznar then PSOE then again PP then again PP then Iglesias then PP...= King is there , capitalist exploitation is there for 50 years. In 50 years Cubans created a paradise in 3rd world standards. per capita doctor per capita teacher , the first in the world. lowest infant mortality. What we work to do in Turkey is to prevent that the crisis be overcome by some social democrat party. It is centenary of October. We are fed of good deceiving and well educated leftist Kerenskys. On 7 March 2017 at 23:10, Alfredo Jornet Gil wrote: > On the thread of 'most educated and the most dangerous', for those who > read Spanish, here is an article on a religious school in Madrid, El Pilar, > known for being the school were many figures crucial in Spanish Politics > were educated, both during and after Franco, and including former president > Jos? Mar?a Aznar (who, together with Blair and Bush, and against their > people's wish, threw us in a violet war in Irak). I can't say about Blair, > but I remember that by that time almost everybody laughed about Bush' > educational level, whereas Aznar has always been an intellectual. They all > were very dangerous anyway. > > Here the link (Spanish): http://www.elconfidencial.com/ > espana/2012-02-19/el-pilar-un-colegio-de-dirigentes_232887/ > > The question of level of education has been raised both in England with > respect with Brexit voters, and in the US with respect to Trump's voters, > as if the electoral outcomes could be understood only if one consider the > voters poorly educated. But does actually knowing MORE or LESS of what is > being taught at today's schools affect at all whether you are dangerous or > not to human well being and rights? Evidence seems to suggest that 'not > much'. Perhaps, instead of asking the voter's level of education, we could > ask the schools' level of humanity. I think education is the question > number 1, at all levels, and yet, starting by the salary people seem to be > willing to pay (to teachers, TA's, etc), it is one of the lowest in the > list (if a list of how much people is paid for what they do has anything to > say about how much a practice is valued). > > Hope not to be taking the thread off track. > Alfredo > > ________________________________________ > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > on behalf of lpscholar2@gmail.com > Sent: 07 March 2017 21:33 > To: Edward Wall; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The most, the best educated and the most dangerous > > Ulvi and others interested in this thread. > I would like to recommend an article by Michael Cole and Katherine Brown > titled : > ?A Utopian Methodology as a Tool for Cultural and Critical Psychologies : > Toward a POSITIVE Critical Theory?. > This article (2001) is located in the edited book by Martin Packer and > Mark Tappan (Cultural and Critical Perspectives on Human Development). > > If you google the article a pdf is available. I tried sending the article > but do not think it arrived. > > I found Martin?s *preview* in the introductory pages relevant to Ulvi?s > question giving an overview of various cultural psychologies and various > critical perspectives. > > Cole and Brown?s article is a *positive* critical response that refutes > Adorno?s negative dialectics.. > It specifically addresses the public who do not benefit from reading > academic texts through the engagement with those who do benefit from > reading academic texts. Engaging the *interplay* between and within the > traditions of cultural psychologies AND critical psychologies. > > > > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > From: Edward Wall > Sent: March 6, 2017 9:20 AM > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The most, the best educated and the most dangerous > > Ulvi > > I have thought about your question and read what others have offered. > Here are some thoughts > > In most societies a purpose of education is to inculcate societal > norms and. hence, in is not surprising that some of the better exemplars > are those who place themselves on the side of the dominant class. However, > those that often rise those critical decision points you mention are not > necessarily the best educated. They are, what one might term, well > educated. That is, they go to the ?right? schools, know the ?right? > [people, wear the ?right? clothes, eat the ?right? food. They often > display, as Detienne and Vernant put it, "mental attitudes and intellectual > behavior which combine flair, wisdom, forethought, subtlety of mind, > deception, resourcefulness, vigilance, opportunism, various skills, and > experience acquired over the years. That is, they display what the Greeks > termed metis or cunning; Odysseys being the exemplar. > > Metis, I happen to think (from the viewpoint of a teacher), is a very > interesting and troubling trait. > > Ed > > > > > On Mar 4, 2017, at 1:41 PM, Ulvi ??il wrote: > > > > Well, given that education is a class issue in capitalist society, any > > society, > > that the best most educated are placing themselves en masse on the side > of > > the dominant class > > > > can we think that the most "educated" and also the "best" educated are > > at the same time the most dangerous people for the humanity > > > > because they are located at the most critical decision-making points > > of a social order. > > > > Well, this can be a really trivial issue but since I could not meet it > in > > my country's intellectual life,communist and non communist, I needed to > ask > > it for world experience. > > > > It seems that the best educated seem to be en masse the most dangerous > ones > > to initiate wars etc whereas the least educated formally but the best > > self-educated via working class instititutions seem to be the most > > emancipatory and in fact best educated people in the real sense of the > > world (e.g. Jos? Marti) > > > > Erdogan is obviously not the most educated in my country, Turkey, nor was > > Hitler nor Bush. > > > > But Obama, Clinton, Hollande, Javier Solana (who destroyed Yugoslavia > with > > Nato bombing) Merkel were and all well educated...and quite dangerous. > > > > I was really surprised to the self- gathered conscience of one of my > > friends when he stated that Hillary Clinton was a very dangerous woman. > > > > Thanks > > Ulvi > > > From a.j.gil@iped.uio.no Tue Mar 7 14:34:25 2017 From: a.j.gil@iped.uio.no (Alfredo Jornet Gil) Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2017 22:34:25 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The most, the best educated and the most dangerous In-Reply-To: References: <1580D77A-1E0B-4181-BDE9-CDC32DBC7AF4@umich.edu> <58bf1928.437c630a.189f7.3ab6@mx.google.com> <1488921055277.85414@iped.uio.no>, Message-ID: <1488926063865.88018@iped.uio.no> Thanks for detailed account, Ulvi, in particular of the Spanish recent history and current situation (by the way, similar to Solana's case has been the case of the most recent NATO leader, former Norwegian socialist prime minister...). Interesting that you include Iglesias among the 'dangerous.' He tends to be pictured by the right and the centre as a sort of extremist communist, with the name of 'Cuba' often being brought about when critiquing Iglesias' statements and positions (as in 'this is not Cuba, Mr Iglesias'). What I personally do not like about the Podemos phenomenon is that it begun from a real movement in the streets, but as it moved into the political system, the street movement begun to recede into the voting role, to the point that everything seemed to be left for next elections once more... A ________________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of Ulvi ??il Sent: 07 March 2017 22:53 To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The most, the best educated and the most dangerous Exactly, Aznar used the planes provided to him for his election campaign by Cuban-American fascist mafia in Miami and he provoked EU against Cuba around 2002 for a stance close to that of US. Cuba stood firm, very firm. * But what is more important in my opinion is the following: During exit from Franko, CIA (and this is public information, there are many books on this) parachuted Felipe Gonzalez on top of PSOE in Spain for a smooth transition in fear of communists. The main work was done by Willy Brandt and Socialist International and SPD together with CIA. But there was no need for fear, Carillo gave up resisting for a republic and admitted the king, he was persuaded, this is a complete CIA political operation. Imagine this trahison. Because, Spanish workers fought for a republic between 1936 and 1939. CPS adopted itself to the bourgeois democracy. Not only Aznar etc are very dangerous but Gonzalez and today Iglesias, Tsipras too. Many years later, after several election rounds, it was being discussed who will replace Gonzalez for PSOE presidency. One name was discussed in Spain and in party circles. Then, that name was made known to Spanish people that he will not be president of PSOE but general secretary of NATO!!! He was Javier Solana. And what did he do? He executed German and US plan to bomb Yugoslavia. Can you imagine instead of PSOE presidency NATO general secretary. Origin: PSOE. It is for this reason that it does not matter too much, Aznar or Gonzalez. Everything is turning according to the preservation of the capitalist order from a possible revolution. In Portugal the same, the same Willy Brandt (that he received money from CIA is public information) put Soares in a train named liberty to Lisboa to steal the revolution from CPP, from Alvaro Cunhal. All these Gonzalez, Solana, Soares, Tsipras, Iglesias, Demirtas (in Turkey) are modern Kerenskys. It is easy to remember how Kerensky created a bourgeois enthusiasm during the February Revolution. They are all left. Tsipras and Iglesias are ex communists. This is almost a rule. It is for this reason that, October and Lenin - one of the best educated and most dangerous in human history this time for capitalism and imperialism- were great because this same Kerensky play repeated and repeated the whole 20th century to prevent revolutions. For instance today in Turkey there is Erdogan and many people in and out of the country want that this crisis be overcome by a more acceptable person. But I must ask: What do those generations who supported Felipe Gonzalez do now and what do they think? Taking into account that now their sons and daughters are unemployed in couples with several children, and moving to their parents homes because there , there is a pension salary and a house bought once upon a time. Why Spain , Portugal, Turkey should not be another Cuba and should continue with all these capitalist lies? The same for Brazil. Why to escape from revolutions (Revexits)? What can be the future of humanity under capitalism? And why best educated and non dangerous other people do not prefer to be on the side of working masses , of the poor for a permanent egalitarian society? What prevents them from doing so? I think to a great extent prejudices that are cultivated in people's minds. I firmly believe that a better world is possible but the billions of poor are impotent for an emancipation and they need the best educated on their side. Those best educated should leave the way of life of consumer societies imposed on them and they should chose a more cultured one,more human. Spanish people are in streets now again. Unless they dream a revolution the same will happen again and this time it will be Iglesias who will deceive them as it is by Tsipras in Greece. It is the greatest merit of revolutionaries like Lenin and Fidel to stop this vicious circle and put an end to it. Aznar then PSOE then again PP then again PP then Iglesias then PP...= King is there , capitalist exploitation is there for 50 years. In 50 years Cubans created a paradise in 3rd world standards. per capita doctor per capita teacher , the first in the world. lowest infant mortality. What we work to do in Turkey is to prevent that the crisis be overcome by some social democrat party. It is centenary of October. We are fed of good deceiving and well educated leftist Kerenskys. On 7 March 2017 at 23:10, Alfredo Jornet Gil wrote: > On the thread of 'most educated and the most dangerous', for those who > read Spanish, here is an article on a religious school in Madrid, El Pilar, > known for being the school were many figures crucial in Spanish Politics > were educated, both during and after Franco, and including former president > Jos? Mar?a Aznar (who, together with Blair and Bush, and against their > people's wish, threw us in a violet war in Irak). I can't say about Blair, > but I remember that by that time almost everybody laughed about Bush' > educational level, whereas Aznar has always been an intellectual. They all > were very dangerous anyway. > > Here the link (Spanish): http://www.elconfidencial.com/ > espana/2012-02-19/el-pilar-un-colegio-de-dirigentes_232887/ > > The question of level of education has been raised both in England with > respect with Brexit voters, and in the US with respect to Trump's voters, > as if the electoral outcomes could be understood only if one consider the > voters poorly educated. But does actually knowing MORE or LESS of what is > being taught at today's schools affect at all whether you are dangerous or > not to human well being and rights? Evidence seems to suggest that 'not > much'. Perhaps, instead of asking the voter's level of education, we could > ask the schools' level of humanity. I think education is the question > number 1, at all levels, and yet, starting by the salary people seem to be > willing to pay (to teachers, TA's, etc), it is one of the lowest in the > list (if a list of how much people is paid for what they do has anything to > say about how much a practice is valued). > > Hope not to be taking the thread off track. > Alfredo > > ________________________________________ > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > on behalf of lpscholar2@gmail.com > Sent: 07 March 2017 21:33 > To: Edward Wall; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The most, the best educated and the most dangerous > > Ulvi and others interested in this thread. > I would like to recommend an article by Michael Cole and Katherine Brown > titled : > ?A Utopian Methodology as a Tool for Cultural and Critical Psychologies : > Toward a POSITIVE Critical Theory?. > This article (2001) is located in the edited book by Martin Packer and > Mark Tappan (Cultural and Critical Perspectives on Human Development). > > If you google the article a pdf is available. I tried sending the article > but do not think it arrived. > > I found Martin?s *preview* in the introductory pages relevant to Ulvi?s > question giving an overview of various cultural psychologies and various > critical perspectives. > > Cole and Brown?s article is a *positive* critical response that refutes > Adorno?s negative dialectics.. > It specifically addresses the public who do not benefit from reading > academic texts through the engagement with those who do benefit from > reading academic texts. Engaging the *interplay* between and within the > traditions of cultural psychologies AND critical psychologies. > > > > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > From: Edward Wall > Sent: March 6, 2017 9:20 AM > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The most, the best educated and the most dangerous > > Ulvi > > I have thought about your question and read what others have offered. > Here are some thoughts > > In most societies a purpose of education is to inculcate societal > norms and. hence, in is not surprising that some of the better exemplars > are those who place themselves on the side of the dominant class. However, > those that often rise those critical decision points you mention are not > necessarily the best educated. They are, what one might term, well > educated. That is, they go to the ?right? schools, know the ?right? > [people, wear the ?right? clothes, eat the ?right? food. They often > display, as Detienne and Vernant put it, "mental attitudes and intellectual > behavior which combine flair, wisdom, forethought, subtlety of mind, > deception, resourcefulness, vigilance, opportunism, various skills, and > experience acquired over the years. That is, they display what the Greeks > termed metis or cunning; Odysseys being the exemplar. > > Metis, I happen to think (from the viewpoint of a teacher), is a very > interesting and troubling trait. > > Ed > > > > > On Mar 4, 2017, at 1:41 PM, Ulvi ??il wrote: > > > > Well, given that education is a class issue in capitalist society, any > > society, > > that the best most educated are placing themselves en masse on the side > of > > the dominant class > > > > can we think that the most "educated" and also the "best" educated are > > at the same time the most dangerous people for the humanity > > > > because they are located at the most critical decision-making points > > of a social order. > > > > Well, this can be a really trivial issue but since I could not meet it > in > > my country's intellectual life,communist and non communist, I needed to > ask > > it for world experience. > > > > It seems that the best educated seem to be en masse the most dangerous > ones > > to initiate wars etc whereas the least educated formally but the best > > self-educated via working class instititutions seem to be the most > > emancipatory and in fact best educated people in the real sense of the > > world (e.g. Jos? Marti) > > > > Erdogan is obviously not the most educated in my country, Turkey, nor was > > Hitler nor Bush. > > > > But Obama, Clinton, Hollande, Javier Solana (who destroyed Yugoslavia > with > > Nato bombing) Merkel were and all well educated...and quite dangerous. > > > > I was really surprised to the self- gathered conscience of one of my > > friends when he stated that Hillary Clinton was a very dangerous woman. > > > > Thanks > > Ulvi > > > From ulvi.icil@gmail.com Tue Mar 7 16:03:36 2017 From: ulvi.icil@gmail.com (=?UTF-8?B?VWx2aSDEsMOnaWw=?=) Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2017 02:03:36 +0200 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The most, the best educated and the most dangerous In-Reply-To: <1488926063865.88018@iped.uio.no> References: <1580D77A-1E0B-4181-BDE9-CDC32DBC7AF4@umich.edu> <58bf1928.437c630a.189f7.3ab6@mx.google.com> <1488921055277.85414@iped.uio.no> <1488926063865.88018@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: This extremist communist discourse is not very useful? When Iglesias is an ex communist in fact. To label a social democrat a communist. Can there be any doubt that for instance Tsipras came to power without cooperating with imperialist centers in Germany, in US? Can this be so? Impossible, completely impossible. For instance, in Turkey,we know that some former leftist people from leftist parties joined this Kurdish Party, became MP and they started to tour countries where such national struggles have taken place. Britain. This is also public information. One former leftist journalist asked this same MP, in a public meeting: "Isn't it so, when we were visiting MI5?". They visited MI5! It is unthinkable that all these Iglesias, Tsipras, Kurdish HDP in Turkey, are not in very close contact with centers in US and Germany, cooperating with CIA and BND. Look at Turkish journalist in Germany Can D?ndar. He is under the wings of German BND. And he is a leftist a la Tsipras, a la Iglesias. He is a friend of Joe Biden, of Gauck. What is more: These are acting as mediating to liquidate, to limit the effectiveness of real working class communist movements. That these are all leftist people is what felicity for imperialism and capitalism. But they do not drop from sky, they are products of the crisis and managing tools of capitalism in this crisis. Interesting is that the best educated the most clever leftist people do not notice this mechanism. Don't they? I do not believe that they do not notice, they notice it. Then? The problem is that these leftist best educated tend absolutely to ignore this mechanism, and they label it complot theory. Why? While everyhing is so open before eyes. Because they do not want revolution. They are so well educated so clever but they close their eyes to obvious facts, apparent mechanisms. Because they do not have any idea how capitalism works. What does imperialism for Turkey, they have no idea. They dream that Erdogan will be replaced by a Turkish Tsipras and then everyhing will be fine. Like in Spain? In Greece? They are discontent with Erdogan and would be content with Tsipras. Why? Because they are middle classes who can do within capitalism. It is for this reason that revolutions come with the poorest and for the poorest and least educated. That advanced democracy will result in with more conscious worker is an illusion. That first democracy should be gained and workers should pass through the school of bourgeois democracy is a mistake. Politically most advanced worker can be least educated and best educated can be politcally an absolute ignorant. Advantage and disadvantage of uneven development. This is quite improved mechanism to control leftist movements, communist movements, and they have accumulated great experience in this business. There is more. You can read Ramonet's conversations with Fidel. But before that; I personally believe, the process in Spain was a prelude to Gorbachev. They tried and succeeded in Spain, then they thought it can be applied in USSR. They made Gonzalez a close friend of Gorbachev. And I think it was Gonzalez who gained Gorbachev to imperialist circles. Gonzalez approached to Gorbachev. It was in fact US. And Fidel says that when on the phone Gorbachev spoke of Gonzalez very enthusiasthically and said that he is a socialist, he was surprised because he knew very well that Gonzalez was not a socialist. This mechanism is a political pressure mechanism on communist parties and socialist countries. They sent Gorbachev to Fidel in 1990, to check him, and they understood that Fidel will not surrender. Then, Gonzalez approached Fidel, proposed to send advisors, saying that you will die from hunger. It is incredible. Gorbachev declared that he cancelled all trade with Cuba in a press conference in the presence of George Baker, then US Secr for foreign affairs, which meant that if you do not surrender, then, comes the second blockade, you will die from hunger, from lack of medicine etc. It is incredibly inhuman, unethical. He did this to Cuba to destroy Cuba. And anybody who lived on earth should watch this. The date is 26 th July 1989. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SIhcibEcodY If we were to wake up tomorrow or any other day to the news that there had been a large-scale civil war in the USSR, and even if we were to wake up and learn that the USSR has disintegrated--something that we hope never happens--even under those circumstances, Cuba and the Cuban Revolution would continue struggling and resisting. [rhythmic clapping] Cuba and the Cuban Revolution would resist. I say this knowingly. I say this calmly and serenely, and with all the control in the world. It is time to speak clearly to the imperialists and to the entire world. Can this man be took over? No. Can they excuse him? No. It is for this reason "He is a dictator" for them. Down with dictators but not of Pinochet type! What happened next is that in all international meetings all leftist politicians exerted an immense pressure on him, that socialism was dead, that they should pass to capitalism. Finally, they told him even: Please be like Nicaragua at least. In 2009, Spanish secret service used a man to develop friendship relations with some innocent Cuban very high ranking officials. At the background, there was CIA of course, all information passing to this latter. Operation noticed by Raul, they failed and those officials were expelled but not punished since they were really innocent. But you know hell is paved by good will. US knows very well that they can not take Cuba by war, only way an extermination, like indians after Colomb. That's why Fidel said: Nobody can destroy this revolution but we can destroy with our own mistakes. * I nowadays work on ethical education and I notice that education in capitalist countries almost eliminated it. Because this obstructs working of the system. Whereas in Cuba it is the foundation, it is most primary, science and technic knowledge not neglected but ethical education is the most important. Cooperation instead of competition. Alturism instead of egoism. It is interesting that he, Fidel says capitalist societies are incapable of developing (positive) values. It is very interesting that below Concept of Revolution is intensely ethical education. I think that best education is first of all ethical education. Otherwise, capitalism creates its own conscious or unconscious servants. Ethical education is cancelled because it forces men to an account with capitalism, its existence would mean create anti capitalists in capitalism's schools. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ntLycmidqSk Revolution means to have a sense of history; it is changing everything that must be changed; it is full equality and freedom; it is being treated and treating others like human beings; it is achieving emancipation by ourselves and through our own efforts; it is challenging powerful dominant forces from within and without the social and national milieu; it is defending the values in which we believe at the cost of any sacrifice; it is modesty, selflessness, altruism, solidarity and heroism; it is fighting with courage, intelligence and realism; it is never lying or violating ethical principles; it is a profound conviction that there is no power in the world that can crush the power of truth and ideas. Revolution means unity; it is independence, it is fighting for our dreams of justice for Cuba and for the world, which is the foundation of our patriotism, our socialism and our internationalism. On 8 March 2017 at 00:34, Alfredo Jornet Gil wrote: > Thanks for detailed account, Ulvi, in particular of the Spanish recent > history and current situation (by the way, similar to Solana's case has > been the case of the most recent NATO leader, former Norwegian socialist > prime minister...). > Interesting that you include Iglesias among the 'dangerous.' He tends to > be pictured by the right and the centre as a sort of extremist communist, > with the name of 'Cuba' often being brought about when critiquing Iglesias' > statements and positions (as in 'this is not Cuba, Mr Iglesias'). What I > personally do not like about the Podemos phenomenon is that it begun from a > real movement in the streets, but as it moved into the political system, > the street movement begun to recede into the voting role, to the point that > everything seemed to be left for next elections once more... > A > ________________________________________ > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > on behalf of Ulvi ??il > Sent: 07 March 2017 22:53 > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The most, the best educated and the most dangerous > > Exactly, Aznar used the planes provided to him for his election campaign by > Cuban-American fascist mafia in Miami and he provoked EU against Cuba > around 2002 for a stance close to that of US. Cuba stood firm, very firm. * > But what is more important in my opinion is the following: During exit from > Franko, CIA (and this is public information, there are many books on this) > parachuted Felipe Gonzalez on top of PSOE in Spain for a smooth transition > in fear of communists. The main work was done by Willy Brandt and Socialist > International and SPD together with CIA. But there was no need for fear, > Carillo gave up resisting for a republic and admitted the king, he was > persuaded, this is a complete CIA political operation. Imagine this > trahison. Because, Spanish workers fought for a republic between 1936 and > 1939. CPS adopted itself to the bourgeois democracy. > > > Not only Aznar etc are very dangerous but Gonzalez and today Iglesias, > Tsipras too. > Many years later, after several election rounds, it was being discussed who > will replace Gonzalez for PSOE presidency. One name was discussed in Spain > and in party circles. Then, that name was made known to Spanish people that > he will not be president of PSOE but general secretary of NATO!!! > > He was Javier Solana. And what did he do? He executed German and US plan to > bomb Yugoslavia. > > Can you imagine instead of PSOE presidency NATO general secretary. Origin: > PSOE. > > It is for this reason that it does not matter too much, Aznar or Gonzalez. > Everything is turning according to the preservation of the capitalist order > from a possible revolution. > > In Portugal the same, the same Willy Brandt (that he received money from > CIA is public information) put Soares in a train named liberty to Lisboa to > steal the revolution from CPP, from Alvaro Cunhal. > > All these Gonzalez, Solana, Soares, Tsipras, Iglesias, Demirtas (in Turkey) > are modern Kerenskys. > It is easy to remember how Kerensky created a bourgeois enthusiasm during > the February Revolution. > > They are all left. Tsipras and Iglesias are ex communists. This is almost a > rule. > > It is for this reason that, October and Lenin - one of the best educated > and most dangerous in human history this time for capitalism and > imperialism- were great because this same Kerensky play repeated and > repeated the whole 20th century to prevent revolutions. > > For instance today in Turkey there is Erdogan and many people in and out of > the country want that this crisis be overcome by a more acceptable person. > > But I must ask: What do those generations who supported Felipe Gonzalez do > now and what do they think? > Taking into account that now their sons and daughters are unemployed in > couples with several children, and moving to their parents homes because > there , there is a pension salary and a house bought once upon a time. > > Why Spain , Portugal, Turkey should not be another Cuba and should continue > with all these capitalist lies? > > The same for Brazil. > > Why to escape from revolutions (Revexits)? > > What can be the future of humanity under capitalism? > > And why best educated and non dangerous other people do not prefer to be on > the side of working masses , of the poor for a permanent egalitarian > society? > > What prevents them from doing so? > > I think to a great extent prejudices that are cultivated in people's minds. > > I firmly believe that a better world is possible but the billions of poor > are impotent for an emancipation and they need the best educated on their > side. > > Those best educated should leave the way of life of consumer societies > imposed on them and they should chose a more cultured one,more human. > > Spanish people are in streets now again. Unless they dream a revolution the > same will happen again and this time it will be Iglesias who will deceive > them as it is by Tsipras in Greece. > > It is the greatest merit of revolutionaries like Lenin and Fidel to stop > this vicious circle and put an end to it. > Aznar then PSOE then again PP then again PP then Iglesias then PP...= King > is there , capitalist exploitation is there for 50 years. In 50 years > Cubans created a paradise in 3rd world standards. per capita doctor per > capita teacher , the first in the world. lowest infant mortality. > > What we work to do in Turkey is to prevent that the crisis be overcome by > some social democrat party. > > It is centenary of October. > > We are fed of good deceiving and well educated leftist Kerenskys. > > > > > On 7 March 2017 at 23:10, Alfredo Jornet Gil wrote: > > > On the thread of 'most educated and the most dangerous', for those who > > read Spanish, here is an article on a religious school in Madrid, El > Pilar, > > known for being the school were many figures crucial in Spanish Politics > > were educated, both during and after Franco, and including former > president > > Jos? Mar?a Aznar (who, together with Blair and Bush, and against their > > people's wish, threw us in a violet war in Irak). I can't say about > Blair, > > but I remember that by that time almost everybody laughed about Bush' > > educational level, whereas Aznar has always been an intellectual. They > all > > were very dangerous anyway. > > > > Here the link (Spanish): http://www.elconfidencial.com/ > > espana/2012-02-19/el-pilar-un-colegio-de-dirigentes_232887/ > > > > The question of level of education has been raised both in England with > > respect with Brexit voters, and in the US with respect to Trump's voters, > > as if the electoral outcomes could be understood only if one consider the > > voters poorly educated. But does actually knowing MORE or LESS of what is > > being taught at today's schools affect at all whether you are dangerous > or > > not to human well being and rights? Evidence seems to suggest that 'not > > much'. Perhaps, instead of asking the voter's level of education, we > could > > ask the schools' level of humanity. I think education is the question > > number 1, at all levels, and yet, starting by the salary people seem to > be > > willing to pay (to teachers, TA's, etc), it is one of the lowest in the > > list (if a list of how much people is paid for what they do has anything > to > > say about how much a practice is valued). > > > > Hope not to be taking the thread off track. > > Alfredo > > > > ________________________________________ > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > on behalf of lpscholar2@gmail.com > > Sent: 07 March 2017 21:33 > > To: Edward Wall; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The most, the best educated and the most dangerous > > > > Ulvi and others interested in this thread. > > I would like to recommend an article by Michael Cole and Katherine Brown > > titled : > > ?A Utopian Methodology as a Tool for Cultural and Critical Psychologies : > > Toward a POSITIVE Critical Theory?. > > This article (2001) is located in the edited book by Martin Packer and > > Mark Tappan (Cultural and Critical Perspectives on Human Development). > > > > If you google the article a pdf is available. I tried sending the article > > but do not think it arrived. > > > > I found Martin?s *preview* in the introductory pages relevant to Ulvi?s > > question giving an overview of various cultural psychologies and various > > critical perspectives. > > > > Cole and Brown?s article is a *positive* critical response that refutes > > Adorno?s negative dialectics.. > > It specifically addresses the public who do not benefit from reading > > academic texts through the engagement with those who do benefit from > > reading academic texts. Engaging the *interplay* between and within the > > traditions of cultural psychologies AND critical psychologies. > > > > > > > > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > > > From: Edward Wall > > Sent: March 6, 2017 9:20 AM > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The most, the best educated and the most dangerous > > > > Ulvi > > > > I have thought about your question and read what others have > offered. > > Here are some thoughts > > > > In most societies a purpose of education is to inculcate societal > > norms and. hence, in is not surprising that some of the better exemplars > > are those who place themselves on the side of the dominant class. > However, > > those that often rise those critical decision points you mention are not > > necessarily the best educated. They are, what one might term, well > > educated. That is, they go to the ?right? schools, know the ?right? > > [people, wear the ?right? clothes, eat the ?right? food. They often > > display, as Detienne and Vernant put it, "mental attitudes and > intellectual > > behavior which combine flair, wisdom, forethought, subtlety of mind, > > deception, resourcefulness, vigilance, opportunism, various skills, and > > experience acquired over the years. That is, they display what the Greeks > > termed metis or cunning; Odysseys being the exemplar. > > > > Metis, I happen to think (from the viewpoint of a teacher), is a very > > interesting and troubling trait. > > > > Ed > > > > > > > > > On Mar 4, 2017, at 1:41 PM, Ulvi ??il wrote: > > > > > > Well, given that education is a class issue in capitalist society, any > > > society, > > > that the best most educated are placing themselves en masse on the side > > of > > > the dominant class > > > > > > can we think that the most "educated" and also the "best" educated are > > > at the same time the most dangerous people for the humanity > > > > > > because they are located at the most critical decision-making points > > > of a social order. > > > > > > Well, this can be a really trivial issue but since I could not meet it > > in > > > my country's intellectual life,communist and non communist, I needed to > > ask > > > it for world experience. > > > > > > It seems that the best educated seem to be en masse the most dangerous > > ones > > > to initiate wars etc whereas the least educated formally but the best > > > self-educated via working class instititutions seem to be the most > > > emancipatory and in fact best educated people in the real sense of the > > > world (e.g. Jos? Marti) > > > > > > Erdogan is obviously not the most educated in my country, Turkey, nor > was > > > Hitler nor Bush. > > > > > > But Obama, Clinton, Hollande, Javier Solana (who destroyed Yugoslavia > > with > > > Nato bombing) Merkel were and all well educated...and quite dangerous. > > > > > > I was really surprised to the self- gathered conscience of one of my > > > friends when he stated that Hillary Clinton was a very dangerous woman. > > > > > > Thanks > > > Ulvi > > > > > > > From smago@uga.edu Wed Mar 8 11:33:31 2017 From: smago@uga.edu (Peter Smagorinsky) Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2017 19:33:31 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] FW: Vygotsky in Dialogue with Pepper! In-Reply-To: <4A593EF7722A9A40AAEF667E0FDC0EE2141502AB@mbs1.ad.jyu.fi> References: <4A593EF7722A9A40AAEF667E0FDC0EE2141502AB@mbs1.ad.jyu.fi> Message-ID: I haven?t read this (it just arrived), but hope it finds readers on this list. p From: Karimi Aghdam Ordaklou, Saeed [mailto:saeed.s.karimi-aghdam-ordaklou@student.jyu.fi] Sent: Wednesday, March 8, 2017 10:02 AM To: Peter Smagorinsky Subject: Vygotsky in Dialogue with Pepper! Dear Prof. Smagorinsky, Warm greetings from cold Jyv?skyl?! I hope this finds you well. I write to send you a copy of my paper on Vygotsky which is published very recently with ?Human Development?. I hope it piques your interest to read it. Please kindly note that Anna Stetsenko of the City University of New York has written a commentary paper on this which is published in the same issue: https://www.karger.com/Journal/Issue/274647 Sincerely, Saeed -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Human Development Saeed Karimi Aghdam.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 160081 bytes Desc: Human Development Saeed Karimi Aghdam.pdf Url : https://mailman.ucsd.edu/mailman/private/xmca-l/attachments/20170308/3dbbb71d/attachment.pdf From ulvi.icil@gmail.com Wed Mar 8 13:32:23 2017 From: ulvi.icil@gmail.com (=?UTF-8?B?VWx2aSDEsMOnaWw=?=) Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2017 23:32:23 +0200 Subject: [Xmca-l] Don't do it Message-ID: If I say don't do it, it is imperative. But if I say, It is not realistic and you do not need it. It is affirmative and even though negative, it is again affirmative, to demobilize you. What I mean is Revolution. Addressed to a married couple with two children. With 3 thousand Turkish liras in Istanbul in a rented home of at least 1000 tl for rent. 1 usd = 4 Turkish liras Survival economics. Any prospect? No. That simple. What is socialist revolution? It is neither an intention nor a wish. It is simple necessity. From lpscholar2@gmail.com Wed Mar 8 14:08:36 2017 From: lpscholar2@gmail.com (lpscholar2@gmail.com) Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2017 14:08:36 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The most, the best educated and the most dangerous In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <58c080cb.cc09620a.7486.30ac@mx.google.com> Ulvi, How would you make sense of the educational achievements of the participants of XMCA? It seems they were/are educated in mostly capitalist formations. Is their having been educated in academic institutions not a major factor in their now putting their education in question? Without their education would the questions even arise? The notion of placing *en masse* on the *side of* is what I am questioning as an all encompassing generality. We may need to qualify educated elite with a term such as technocratic elite to get closer to your question. A complex question, many sided? Sent from Mail for Windows 10 From: Ulvi ??il Sent: March 4, 2017 11:42 AM To: xmca-l@ucsd.edu Subject: [Xmca-l] The most, the best educated and the most dangerous Well, given that education is a class issue in capitalist society, any society, that the best most educated are placing themselves en masse on the side of the dominant class can we think that the most "educated" and also the "best" educated are at the same time the most dangerous people for the humanity because they are located at the most critical decision-making points of a social order. Well, this can be a really trivial issue but since I could not meet it in my country's intellectual life,communist and non communist, I needed to ask it for world experience. It seems that the best educated seem to be en masse the most dangerous ones to initiate wars etc whereas the least educated formally but the best self-educated via working class instititutions seem to be the most emancipatory and in fact best educated people in the real sense of the world (e.g. Jos? Marti) Erdogan is obviously not the most educated in my country, Turkey, nor was Hitler nor Bush. But Obama, Clinton, Hollande, Javier Solana (who destroyed Yugoslavia with Nato bombing) Merkel were and all well educated...and quite dangerous. I was really surprised to the self- gathered conscience of one of my friends when he stated that Hillary Clinton was a very dangerous woman. Thanks Ulvi From lpscholar2@gmail.com Thu Mar 9 07:47:14 2017 From: lpscholar2@gmail.com (lpscholar2@gmail.com) Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2017 07:47:14 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: FW: Vygotsky in Dialogue with Pepper! In-Reply-To: References: <4A593EF7722A9A40AAEF667E0FDC0EE2141502AB@mbs1.ad.jyu.fi> Message-ID: <58c17904.14d9620a.82a1d.e222@mx.google.com> Peter, Thanks for this paper and directing us to Anna Stetsenko?s commentary. I want to highlight a metaphor Anna uses on page 286 of her commentary and then put this turn of phrase in context. METAPHOR?: On the cusp of what is established and what appears on the horizon as a *result* of charting the next steps. This seems a way into Anna?s project (verb and noun). Context?: Anna would argue that elaborations of the spirit of Vygotsky are confined by *canonical CHT* (Sawchuk and Stetsenko, 2008). By this Anna means the import of CHT as can be deduced from its central postulates Yet Without inferring the *direction* in which CHT?s dynamics were shaping up to move *next* - on the cusp of what is established and what appears on the horizon As a result of Charting the next steps. Listen now to her following position. THIS set of dynamics operates in the *spirit* of exploration *including self-negation* that never settles (always on the cusp), and instead propels forward and obtains meaning *precisely* in THIS movement beyond itself. Anna believes where the next step taken (taken in Latin is cept) is implicitly drawing on *values and commitments* (axio-logical dimensions) - in particular, Vygotsky?s passionate egalitarianism and unwavering commitment to social equality ? as constitutive moments that are inherent in and inalienable from the overall fabric of fabric of Vygotsky?s approach including its *worldview* and all aspects of his theory and methodo-logy of research. I will pause here, leaving you with the image/metaphor of *riding the cusp* which i experience as a pregnant, gestating metaphor with Anna as a midwife. Sent from my Windows 10 phone From: Peter Smagorinsky Sent: March 8, 2017 11:35 AM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] FW: Vygotsky in Dialogue with Pepper! I haven?t read this (it just arrived), but hope it finds readers on this list. p From: Karimi Aghdam Ordaklou, Saeed [mailto:saeed.s.karimi-aghdam-ordaklou@student.jyu.fi] Sent: Wednesday, March 8, 2017 10:02 AM To: Peter Smagorinsky Subject: Vygotsky in Dialogue with Pepper! Dear Prof. Smagorinsky, Warm greetings from cold Jyv?skyl?! I hope this finds you well. I write to send you a copy of my paper on Vygotsky which is published very recently with ?Human Development?. I hope it piques your interest to read it. Please kindly note that Anna Stetsenko of the City University of New York has written a commentary paper on this which is published in the same issue: https://www.karger.com/Journal/Issue/274647 Sincerely, Saeed From carolmacdon@gmail.com Thu Mar 9 22:52:20 2017 From: carolmacdon@gmail.com (Carol Macdonald) Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2017 08:52:20 +0200 Subject: [Xmca-l] What a scientist thinks about our area of research Message-ID: Here is something from Quora: look at number 7. A bow from the hard sciences. What are some things that are widely known by physicists but not by laypeople? [image: Lynnie Saade] Lynnie Saade , Astronomy Grad Student, Has B.S. in Astrophysics Written Wed ? Upvoted by Ed Caruthers , PhD and post-doc work in Physics at UT Austin. Published papers in electronic properties of metals,? and Frederic Rachford , Ph.D. physics, works at the U. S. Naval Research Laboratory. 1. Everything is locally flat if you zoom in close enough. So you can reduce tons of physical systems to a bunch of spring and wave equations. (Flat forces = quadratic potentials = harmonic oscillators) 2. The Principle of Least Action is actually a mathematical concept, not just a vague notion of ?things follow the path of least resistance.? And you can predict the behavior of a LOT of stuff with it, even quantum fields! (LaGrangians are awesome!) 3. Symmetries do not just make problems easier, they are ESSENTIAL for life as we know it. That?s where all those conservation laws we take for granted come from! (Check out Noether?s theorem!) 4. If you can?t actually use it to calculate a physical quantity, your theory is not physics. (Hint for all those ?"I disproved Einstein with my new theory of everything!? people.) 5. All of our scientific understanding is merely an approximation to Reality. The trick is knowing when your approximations are useful, and when they don?t help you at all. 6. Sometimes the simplest, least intricate things are actually the most powerful. See: black holes. 7. The sciences that are less mathematical are that way not because their subjects are simpler, but because their subjects are so complicated they are not as amenable to the tools of math. See: biology, sociology, etc. 8. All those mind blowing analogies science popularizers use for explaining physics to laymen barely resemble the real thing. You cannot teleport through walls with quantum tunneling, entanglement is not spooky action at a distance, and black holes are not infinitely dense portals to other Universes. Sorry? 9. Things like interstellar travel are not mere engineering problems. The speed of light is not anything like the sound barrier. 10. No matter how skilled you get at physics, you will always feel dumb because you will get surrounded by people even BETTER at physics than you. -- Carol A Macdonald Ph.D (Edin) Cultural Historical Activity Theory Honorary Research Fellow: Department of Linguistics, Unisa alternative email address: tmacdoca@unisa.ac.za From carolmacdon@gmail.com Thu Mar 9 22:52:20 2017 From: carolmacdon@gmail.com (Carol Macdonald) Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2017 08:52:20 +0200 Subject: [Xmca-l] What a scientist thinks about our area of research Message-ID: Here is something from Quora: look at number 7. A bow from the hard sciences. What are some things that are widely known by physicists but not by laypeople? [image: Lynnie Saade] Lynnie Saade , Astronomy Grad Student, Has B.S. in Astrophysics Written Wed ? Upvoted by Ed Caruthers , PhD and post-doc work in Physics at UT Austin. Published papers in electronic properties of metals,? and Frederic Rachford , Ph.D. physics, works at the U. S. Naval Research Laboratory. 1. Everything is locally flat if you zoom in close enough. So you can reduce tons of physical systems to a bunch of spring and wave equations. (Flat forces = quadratic potentials = harmonic oscillators) 2. The Principle of Least Action is actually a mathematical concept, not just a vague notion of ?things follow the path of least resistance.? And you can predict the behavior of a LOT of stuff with it, even quantum fields! (LaGrangians are awesome!) 3. Symmetries do not just make problems easier, they are ESSENTIAL for life as we know it. That?s where all those conservation laws we take for granted come from! (Check out Noether?s theorem!) 4. If you can?t actually use it to calculate a physical quantity, your theory is not physics. (Hint for all those ?"I disproved Einstein with my new theory of everything!? people.) 5. All of our scientific understanding is merely an approximation to Reality. The trick is knowing when your approximations are useful, and when they don?t help you at all. 6. Sometimes the simplest, least intricate things are actually the most powerful. See: black holes. 7. The sciences that are less mathematical are that way not because their subjects are simpler, but because their subjects are so complicated they are not as amenable to the tools of math. See: biology, sociology, etc. 8. All those mind blowing analogies science popularizers use for explaining physics to laymen barely resemble the real thing. You cannot teleport through walls with quantum tunneling, entanglement is not spooky action at a distance, and black holes are not infinitely dense portals to other Universes. Sorry? 9. Things like interstellar travel are not mere engineering problems. The speed of light is not anything like the sound barrier. 10. No matter how skilled you get at physics, you will always feel dumb because you will get surrounded by people even BETTER at physics than you. -- Carol A Macdonald Ph.D (Edin) Cultural Historical Activity Theory Honorary Research Fellow: Department of Linguistics, Unisa alternative email address: tmacdoca@unisa.ac.za From a.j.gil@iped.uio.no Fri Mar 10 08:14:28 2017 From: a.j.gil@iped.uio.no (Alfredo Jornet Gil) Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2017 16:14:28 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: What a scientist thinks about our area of research In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1489162466595.44372@iped.uio.no> Thanks Carol, nice touch of sympathy from the hard sciences, yes. And I think that number 10 applies to every field, and actually applies across fields too: I was just reading theatre and drama literature, Stanislavski (perhaps more known to CHAT people through Vygotsky) and Augusto Boal (The Aesthetics of the Oppressed) and I am amazed about how much they can teach us (educators, psychologists, etc) about cognition, learning, and education. Alfredo ________________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of Carol Macdonald Sent: 10 March 2017 07:52 To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] What a scientist thinks about our area of research Here is something from Quora: look at number 7. A bow from the hard sciences. What are some things that are widely known by physicists but not by laypeople? [image: Lynnie Saade] Lynnie Saade , Astronomy Grad Student, Has B.S. in Astrophysics Written Wed ? Upvoted by Ed Caruthers , PhD and post-doc work in Physics at UT Austin. Published papers in electronic properties of metals,? and Frederic Rachford , Ph.D. physics, works at the U. S. Naval Research Laboratory. 1. Everything is locally flat if you zoom in close enough. So you can reduce tons of physical systems to a bunch of spring and wave equations. (Flat forces = quadratic potentials = harmonic oscillators) 2. The Principle of Least Action is actually a mathematical concept, not just a vague notion of ?things follow the path of least resistance.? And you can predict the behavior of a LOT of stuff with it, even quantum fields! (LaGrangians are awesome!) 3. Symmetries do not just make problems easier, they are ESSENTIAL for life as we know it. That?s where all those conservation laws we take for granted come from! (Check out Noether?s theorem!) 4. If you can?t actually use it to calculate a physical quantity, your theory is not physics. (Hint for all those ?"I disproved Einstein with my new theory of everything!? people.) 5. All of our scientific understanding is merely an approximation to Reality. The trick is knowing when your approximations are useful, and when they don?t help you at all. 6. Sometimes the simplest, least intricate things are actually the most powerful. See: black holes. 7. The sciences that are less mathematical are that way not because their subjects are simpler, but because their subjects are so complicated they are not as amenable to the tools of math. See: biology, sociology, etc. 8. All those mind blowing analogies science popularizers use for explaining physics to laymen barely resemble the real thing. You cannot teleport through walls with quantum tunneling, entanglement is not spooky action at a distance, and black holes are not infinitely dense portals to other Universes. Sorry? 9. Things like interstellar travel are not mere engineering problems. The speed of light is not anything like the sound barrier. 10. No matter how skilled you get at physics, you will always feel dumb because you will get surrounded by people even BETTER at physics than you. -- Carol A Macdonald Ph.D (Edin) Cultural Historical Activity Theory Honorary Research Fellow: Department of Linguistics, Unisa alternative email address: tmacdoca@unisa.ac.za From a.j.gil@iped.uio.no Fri Mar 10 08:14:28 2017 From: a.j.gil@iped.uio.no (Alfredo Jornet Gil) Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2017 16:14:28 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: What a scientist thinks about our area of research In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1489162466595.44372@iped.uio.no> Thanks Carol, nice touch of sympathy from the hard sciences, yes. And I think that number 10 applies to every field, and actually applies across fields too: I was just reading theatre and drama literature, Stanislavski (perhaps more known to CHAT people through Vygotsky) and Augusto Boal (The Aesthetics of the Oppressed) and I am amazed about how much they can teach us (educators, psychologists, etc) about cognition, learning, and education. Alfredo ________________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of Carol Macdonald Sent: 10 March 2017 07:52 To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] What a scientist thinks about our area of research Here is something from Quora: look at number 7. A bow from the hard sciences. What are some things that are widely known by physicists but not by laypeople? [image: Lynnie Saade] Lynnie Saade , Astronomy Grad Student, Has B.S. in Astrophysics Written Wed ? Upvoted by Ed Caruthers , PhD and post-doc work in Physics at UT Austin. Published papers in electronic properties of metals,? and Frederic Rachford , Ph.D. physics, works at the U. S. Naval Research Laboratory. 1. Everything is locally flat if you zoom in close enough. So you can reduce tons of physical systems to a bunch of spring and wave equations. (Flat forces = quadratic potentials = harmonic oscillators) 2. The Principle of Least Action is actually a mathematical concept, not just a vague notion of ?things follow the path of least resistance.? And you can predict the behavior of a LOT of stuff with it, even quantum fields! (LaGrangians are awesome!) 3. Symmetries do not just make problems easier, they are ESSENTIAL for life as we know it. That?s where all those conservation laws we take for granted come from! (Check out Noether?s theorem!) 4. If you can?t actually use it to calculate a physical quantity, your theory is not physics. (Hint for all those ?"I disproved Einstein with my new theory of everything!? people.) 5. All of our scientific understanding is merely an approximation to Reality. The trick is knowing when your approximations are useful, and when they don?t help you at all. 6. Sometimes the simplest, least intricate things are actually the most powerful. See: black holes. 7. The sciences that are less mathematical are that way not because their subjects are simpler, but because their subjects are so complicated they are not as amenable to the tools of math. See: biology, sociology, etc. 8. All those mind blowing analogies science popularizers use for explaining physics to laymen barely resemble the real thing. You cannot teleport through walls with quantum tunneling, entanglement is not spooky action at a distance, and black holes are not infinitely dense portals to other Universes. Sorry? 9. Things like interstellar travel are not mere engineering problems. The speed of light is not anything like the sound barrier. 10. No matter how skilled you get at physics, you will always feel dumb because you will get surrounded by people even BETTER at physics than you. -- Carol A Macdonald Ph.D (Edin) Cultural Historical Activity Theory Honorary Research Fellow: Department of Linguistics, Unisa alternative email address: tmacdoca@unisa.ac.za From mcole@ucsd.edu Fri Mar 10 16:11:51 2017 From: mcole@ucsd.edu (mike cole) Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2017 16:11:51 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Don't do it In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: >From my personal web page, Ulvi: *Apropos Thoughts on Revolutions and Their Causes* (From C. Dickens, *A Tale of Two Cities*, Ch 15) Along the Paris streets, the death carts rumble, hollow and harsh. Six tumbrels carry the day's wine to La Guillotine. All the devouring and insatiate monsters imagined since imagination could record itself, are fused in the one realization, Guillotine. And yet there is not in France, with its rich variety of soil and climate, a blade, a leaf, a root, a sprig, a peppercorn, which will grow to maturity under conditions more certain than those that have produced this horror. Crush human humanity out of shape once more, under similar hammers, and it will twist itself into the same tortured forms. Sow the same seed of rapacious license and oppression over again, and it will surely yield the same fruit, according to its kind. It is the nature of the fruits sewn by the French Revolution that give pause for thought. And perhaps accounts for the lack of reply to your articulately formulated note. mike On Wed, Mar 8, 2017 at 1:32 PM, Ulvi ??il wrote: > If I say > > don't do it, it is imperative. > > But if I say, > > It is not realistic and you do not need it. > > It is affirmative and even though negative, it is again affirmative, to > demobilize you. > > What I mean is Revolution. > > Addressed to a married couple with two children. > > With 3 thousand Turkish liras in Istanbul in a rented home of at least > 1000 tl for rent. > > 1 usd = 4 Turkish liras > > Survival economics. > > Any prospect? > > No. > > That simple. > > What is socialist revolution? > > It is neither an intention nor a wish. > > It is simple necessity. > From dkellogg60@gmail.com Fri Mar 10 17:04:13 2017 From: dkellogg60@gmail.com (David Kellogg) Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2017 12:04:13 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Don't do it In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Dickens is being pretty hypocritical. He was an enthusiastic sensationalist, and an avid connoisseur of good English executions. For example, he reserved a special hotel room next to the last hanging of two gay men in London in the eighteen thirties, and reported on it in "Sketches by Boz". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Pratt_and_John_Smith Note that in "Sketches", Dickens doesn't stipulate the mysterious offense for which Pratt and Smith were hanged, but he does defend their seclusion at Newgate and gloats a lot over their mental torture. Also, in Oliver Twist, written at roughly the same time, Dickens calls for lynching Fagin, a Jew (Fagin has not actually committed any capital offense, but the judge hangs him anyway, and the crowd, Dickens's chorus, approves). After the Cawnpore Massacre, Dickens advocated the extermination of the whole population of India in revenge! (Of course, he was being sentimental--Dickens always is.) It seems to me that we need to clearly distinguish between "racism" and "racist sentiment". One of the interesting problems that comes up in Eunhee Jang's excellent article on second language learning strategies from a sociocultural point of view--a wonderful piece of "inside" work, introducing racial issues into an area where they have never been seriously discussed--is the use of "racist" (by the Korean kids to describe their teacher) as an "insult". I like the article. I think it's important work. But for that very reason, I think that it's important to resist any attempt to reduce "racist" to a personal insult. I think we've seen very very clearly, both in the Sessions confirmation hearing, and in the discussion of Trump's own anti-semitic behavior--that this kind of reduction of the political to the personal is precisely the kind of reducing the sociocultural to the cognitive that Professor Jang is trying to resist. David Kellogg Macquarie University On Sat, Mar 11, 2017 at 11:11 AM, mike cole wrote: > >From my personal web page, Ulvi: > > *Apropos Thoughts on Revolutions and Their Causes* > > (From C. Dickens, *A Tale of Two Cities*, Ch 15) > > Along the Paris streets, the death carts rumble, hollow and harsh. > > Six tumbrels carry the day's wine to La Guillotine. All the devouring and > insatiate monsters imagined since imagination could record itself, are > fused in the one realization, Guillotine. And yet there is not in France, > with its rich variety of soil and climate, a blade, a leaf, a root, a > sprig, a peppercorn, which will grow to maturity under conditions more > certain than those that have produced this horror. Crush human humanity out > of shape once more, under similar hammers, and it will twist itself into > the same tortured forms. Sow the same seed of rapacious license and > oppression over again, and it will surely yield the same fruit, according > to its kind. > > It is the nature of the fruits sewn by the French Revolution that give > pause for thought. And perhaps accounts for the lack of reply to your > articulately formulated note. > > mike > > > > On Wed, Mar 8, 2017 at 1:32 PM, Ulvi ??il wrote: > > > If I say > > > > don't do it, it is imperative. > > > > But if I say, > > > > It is not realistic and you do not need it. > > > > It is affirmative and even though negative, it is again affirmative, to > > demobilize you. > > > > What I mean is Revolution. > > > > Addressed to a married couple with two children. > > > > With 3 thousand Turkish liras in Istanbul in a rented home of at least > > 1000 tl for rent. > > > > 1 usd = 4 Turkish liras > > > > Survival economics. > > > > Any prospect? > > > > No. > > > > That simple. > > > > What is socialist revolution? > > > > It is neither an intention nor a wish. > > > > It is simple necessity. > > > From haydizulfei@rocketmail.com Sat Mar 11 02:39:14 2017 From: haydizulfei@rocketmail.com (=?UTF-8?Q?=E2=80=AAHaydi_Zulfei=E2=80=AC_=E2=80=AA?=) Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2017 10:39:14 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Don't do it In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <401449935.5651093.1489228754330@mail.yahoo.com> A man with covered face takes fourpeople to the seashore . kills the father , then the mother , then takes theirtwo little children having experienced neardeath share of good life to the brimof the water, wants them kneel down and let their heads sink in the water ,they of their nature reject , the man throws them down with hate and harassment, they of their nature try to stand on their feet again , with more horrifyingjerks the man presses the already atrophied neck of the two little girls downinto the devouring insatiating waves of the sea , the virtuous benevolentgraceful act endures in very harmonious rhythmic tone and pulse of the tremblinglittle thin bodies of the two innocent angels ? of the weakest stricken race untilthey die just once miraculously and stealthily having time to throw ahalf-winked glance at the miserably fallen soulless bodies of their parentswith the last short gasps never ever led to the open air. Did the face-coveredman come from Geshtapos , Ashwits , Treblinka ? No , No . this did come fromthe ?Daa?esh? , the so-called Isis. It?s the ?race? , It?s NOT the reducing ofthe political to the personal , It?s NOT the accusation of the ?blood? over thevirtue , the virtue of the Democracy of the very little corporations stationedat all corners of the world , It?s the virtues of the perfect democracy at theUS save , of course , the repeatedly bulleting of the black skin youths just inthe middle of the Day , just before the eyes of the ordinary people hurrying upto their task , the virtue of so being awakened to life and democracy as tocalculate their intelligence of the genius brand just over the many amounts ofthe money that is to be spent on the WILL of the awakened and all to theirConscious awareness! with the perfect impartiality of the Pentagon and the CIAand ? with the virtuosity of just two just two parties of the supremest brands, one Historically on the side of the poor , the other on the side of theMiddle Class obviating the long-died! CLASS of the Upper Ones , the elites ofthe mosts and bests of everything of virtuosity , rationality , ingenuity andemancipation , with virtuous selection/election , gained through borrowed purchasedWILL of the innocent confused strata of the working people plus that of thewretched and the outcasts of the US Paradise (Fanon) who were exhausted withthe well-known Democracy of the Trusts and the Cartels , the virtue of theTrump who?s the only one who?s determined to prevent the poisonous blood of theLAND of the barbarians and the uncivilized ahistorical newly-formed nations frominfusion with the pure traits and genes not of the innocent working ordinarypeople but with those of the %1 of the population who are not to be down withhammer and sickle and with joint goal-oriented practical activities of thecombatant struggling people but by the most fruitful , early-yielding articlesof the ?Cognition&Instruction? plus theft from ?Public Treasury?beneficially named the ?bail-outs? or by some other Clinton as though s/he is anon-corporationalist and non-exploitationist/expansionist.You asked a learned man from Haitiwhat to do with their problems . He said ?Tell your Red House not to meddlewith others? affairs.? Now I tell you : ?You should havetold The Big Bush to wait until People of the Region themselves could toppledown the already Americanized missioned installed established rule of theironce faithful stool of the time , the Saddam Hussein.If you are fair enough , you should admitthat people in this world and in the US are ultimately governed by theman-eater corporations . There are lots of word to say in this respect. Andthere must be a way out of the abyss. No one ascribes to you the guilt of yourBig Men. If you have a way out of the vices committed by the huge companies ,why not , why not present them to the world but always we should think of themacrosocial plannings and the wholesale activities of the corporations and themicrosocial activities carried out with slight slow rhythm and pace usuallysparse , disperse , severed and isolated from one another. Francine recently sent a verysignificant message sarcastically: Improve yourself with your own hero not onefrom Russia , Vygotsky!Now with allied forces here andthere usually with mechanistic technologic devices from the above letting thealready victimized forces on the ground trying to change the geopolitical mapof the Region (premium aim) With Trump and his Cos on the Olympus spying theworld to rethrone the Zeus seems inconceivable to enjoy peace and tranquilityanywhere. Involved in the blessings of the Arabic Spring!!In solidarity with the workingtoiling people mental manualHaydi ???? From: mike cole To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" Sent: Saturday, 11 March 2017, 3:44:06 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Don't do it >From my personal web page, Ulvi: *Apropos Thoughts on Revolutions and Their Causes* (From C. Dickens, *A Tale of Two Cities*, Ch 15) Along the Paris streets, the death carts rumble, hollow and harsh. Six tumbrels carry the day's wine to La Guillotine. All the devouring and insatiate monsters imagined since imagination could record itself, are fused in the one realization, Guillotine. And yet there is not in France, with its rich variety of soil and climate, a blade, a leaf, a root, a sprig, a peppercorn, which will grow to maturity under conditions more certain than those that have produced this horror. Crush human humanity out of shape once more, under similar hammers, and it will twist itself into the same tortured forms. Sow the same seed of rapacious license and oppression over again, and it will surely yield the same fruit, according to its kind. It is the nature of the fruits sewn by the French Revolution that give pause for thought. And perhaps accounts for the lack of reply to your articulately formulated note. mike On Wed, Mar 8, 2017 at 1:32 PM, Ulvi ??il wrote: > If I say > > don't do it, it is imperative. > > But if I say, > > It is not realistic and you do not need it. > > It is affirmative and even? though negative, it is again affirmative, to > demobilize you. > > What I mean is Revolution. > > Addressed to a married couple with two children. > > With 3 thousand Turkish liras in Istanbul in a? rented home of at least > 1000 tl for rent. > > 1 usd = 4 Turkish liras > > Survival economics. > > Any prospect? > > No. > > That simple. > > What is socialist revolution? > > It is neither an intention nor a wish. > > It is simple necessity. > From ulvi.icil@gmail.com Sat Mar 11 02:58:01 2017 From: ulvi.icil@gmail.com (=?UTF-8?B?VWx2aSDEsMOnaWw=?=) Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2017 12:58:01 +0200 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Don't do it In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Mike, please corrct me if i wrongly take this meaning that revolutions causes big numbers of death, death in masses, so we would not prefer them. But, what if we sum up all the deaths because of occupatinal murders in workplaces, deaths from drugs, murders of women and early death because of lack of sufficient health care and all the deaths due to the bad orgsanisation of society under capitalism and what is more turning of tens of millions of children into ignorant and fanatic human beings who are brought up able to kill anyone on the street etc Is it not more rational to put en end to this state of human society rather than to perpetruate it, allow it to exist. Unemployment itself 20 % in Turkey. 11 Mar 2017 03:14 tarihinde "mike cole" yazd?: > >From my personal web page, Ulvi: > > *Apropos Thoughts on Revolutions and Their Causes* > > (From C. Dickens, *A Tale of Two Cities*, Ch 15) > > Along the Paris streets, the death carts rumble, hollow and harsh. > > Six tumbrels carry the day's wine to La Guillotine. All the devouring and > insatiate monsters imagined since imagination could record itself, are > fused in the one realization, Guillotine. And yet there is not in France, > with its rich variety of soil and climate, a blade, a leaf, a root, a > sprig, a peppercorn, which will grow to maturity under conditions more > certain than those that have produced this horror. Crush human humanity out > of shape once more, under similar hammers, and it will twist itself into > the same tortured forms. Sow the same seed of rapacious license and > oppression over again, and it will surely yield the same fruit, according > to its kind. > > It is the nature of the fruits sewn by the French Revolution that give > pause for thought. And perhaps accounts for the lack of reply to your > articulately formulated note. > > mike > > > > On Wed, Mar 8, 2017 at 1:32 PM, Ulvi ??il wrote: > > > If I say > > > > don't do it, it is imperative. > > > > But if I say, > > > > It is not realistic and you do not need it. > > > > It is affirmative and even though negative, it is again affirmative, to > > demobilize you. > > > > What I mean is Revolution. > > > > Addressed to a married couple with two children. > > > > With 3 thousand Turkish liras in Istanbul in a rented home of at least > > 1000 tl for rent. > > > > 1 usd = 4 Turkish liras > > > > Survival economics. > > > > Any prospect? > > > > No. > > > > That simple. > > > > What is socialist revolution? > > > > It is neither an intention nor a wish. > > > > It is simple necessity. > > > From dkellogg60@gmail.com Sat Mar 11 11:18:54 2017 From: dkellogg60@gmail.com (David Kellogg) Date: Sun, 12 Mar 2017 04:18:54 +0900 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Don't do it In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Ulvi, Mike... We started this thread with Ulvi's important remark that there is a difference between: "Don't do it." and "it is not necessary." Ulvi said that the difference does not lie in their polarity--they are both negative. Nor does it lie in their representational (referential, or "ideational" meaning). They both refer to "it" and to the advisability of "it". Ulvi said that the first was imperative, and the second was not (the technical term for the non-imperative form of the second is "indicative-declarative", as opposed to "indicative-interrogative" which would be a question). I shall call this form of meaning--for meaning it is--"interpersonal" meaning, in order to distinguish it from "ideational" meaning. I think that interpersonal meaning is meaning, but it is meaning which is directed towards organizing an interaction as the giving or getting of information or goods and services. Ideational meaning is meaning too, but it is directed towards the representation (hence, "indication") of human experience and logic. They're equally meaningful, but they are filled with different kinds of meanings. The difference is qualitative, and that is another way of saying that it is "revolutionary" (because revolution originally meant turning around axis; the first political "revolution" was the rather pathetic "turning" of Latin-speaking civilization from a republican to an imperial form under Augustus). The difference is between making a proposal and offering a proposition--i.e. between realizing a potential state and simply discussing an actual one. One of the interesting aspects of Professor Jang's paper is that it is about adolescents who are in the process of forming concepts, but who are not there yet. And one way in which an adolescent forms a concept about the difficult concept of a social contract, of citizenship, of nationality is pseudoconceptual: it is based on discussing "actual" perceptual differences between races. This might seem irrelevant to current political discourse. Unfortunately, it isn't. What does a teacher say to kids who are thinking this way? Do we say "Don't do it"? Or is it better to show them that it is not necessary? David Kellogg Macquarie University On Sat, Mar 11, 2017 at 7:58 PM, Ulvi ??il wrote: > Mike, please corrct me if i wrongly take this meaning that revolutions > causes big numbers of death, death in masses, so we would not prefer them. > > But, what if we sum up all the deaths because of occupatinal murders in > workplaces, deaths from drugs, murders of women and early death because of > lack of sufficient health care and all the deaths due to the bad > orgsanisation of society under capitalism and what is more turning of tens > of millions of children into ignorant and fanatic human beings who are > brought up able to kill anyone on the street etc > > Is it not more rational to put en end to this state of human society rather > than to perpetruate it, allow it to exist. > > Unemployment itself 20 % in Turkey. > > > > > > 11 Mar 2017 03:14 tarihinde "mike cole" yazd?: > > > >From my personal web page, Ulvi: > > > > *Apropos Thoughts on Revolutions and Their Causes* > > > > (From C. Dickens, *A Tale of Two Cities*, Ch 15) > > > > Along the Paris streets, the death carts rumble, hollow and harsh. > > > > Six tumbrels carry the day's wine to La Guillotine. All the devouring and > > insatiate monsters imagined since imagination could record itself, are > > fused in the one realization, Guillotine. And yet there is not in France, > > with its rich variety of soil and climate, a blade, a leaf, a root, a > > sprig, a peppercorn, which will grow to maturity under conditions more > > certain than those that have produced this horror. Crush human humanity > out > > of shape once more, under similar hammers, and it will twist itself into > > the same tortured forms. Sow the same seed of rapacious license and > > oppression over again, and it will surely yield the same fruit, according > > to its kind. > > > > It is the nature of the fruits sewn by the French Revolution that give > > pause for thought. And perhaps accounts for the lack of reply to your > > articulately formulated note. > > > > mike > > > > > > > > On Wed, Mar 8, 2017 at 1:32 PM, Ulvi ??il wrote: > > > > > If I say > > > > > > don't do it, it is imperative. > > > > > > But if I say, > > > > > > It is not realistic and you do not need it. > > > > > > It is affirmative and even though negative, it is again affirmative, > to > > > demobilize you. > > > > > > What I mean is Revolution. > > > > > > Addressed to a married couple with two children. > > > > > > With 3 thousand Turkish liras in Istanbul in a rented home of at least > > > 1000 tl for rent. > > > > > > 1 usd = 4 Turkish liras > > > > > > Survival economics. > > > > > > Any prospect? > > > > > > No. > > > > > > That simple. > > > > > > What is socialist revolution? > > > > > > It is neither an intention nor a wish. > > > > > > It is simple necessity. > > > > > > From rein.raud@tlu.ee Sat Mar 11 11:33:00 2017 From: rein.raud@tlu.ee (Rein Raud) Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2017 21:33:00 +0200 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Don't do it In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <90E58631-1BE3-4D53-A1D9-C2B12EDF252C@tlu.ee> These differences have been discussed quite some time ago in J.L.Austin's "How to Do Things with Words" (1962), from which speech act theory originated. Austin distinguishes between locutionary (primary semantical) meaning, illocutionary meaning (what is being meant) and perlocutionary meaning (any event is being produced by the utterance). Thus when you say "Do you have some time?" you might mean "Can you spare some time for me?" and the perlocutionary result of this is that you will actually help me (because you are in a position where you cannot say "no" to me, f.ex. because I am your boss). A lot of speech act theory has evolved from this, notably in the work of Searle. Best to all, Rein Raud On Mar 11, 2017, at 21:18 , David Kellogg wrote: > Ulvi, Mike... > > We started this thread with Ulvi's important remark that there is a > difference between: > > "Don't do it." > > and > > "it is not necessary." > > Ulvi said that the difference does not lie in their polarity--they are both > negative. Nor does it lie in their representational (referential, or > "ideational" meaning). They both refer to "it" and to the advisability of > "it". Ulvi said that the first was imperative, and the second was not (the > technical term for the non-imperative form of the second is > "indicative-declarative", as opposed to "indicative-interrogative" which > would be a question). > > I shall call this form of meaning--for meaning it is--"interpersonal" > meaning, in order to distinguish it from "ideational" meaning. I think that > interpersonal meaning is meaning, but it is meaning which is directed > towards organizing an interaction as the giving or getting of information > or goods and services. Ideational meaning is meaning too, but it is > directed towards the representation (hence, "indication") of human > experience and logic. They're equally meaningful, but they are filled with > different kinds of meanings. > > The difference is qualitative, and that is another way of saying that it is > "revolutionary" (because revolution originally meant turning around axis; > the first political "revolution" was the rather pathetic "turning" of > Latin-speaking civilization from a republican to an imperial form under > Augustus). The difference is between making a proposal and offering a > proposition--i.e. between realizing a potential state and simply discussing > an actual one. > > One of the interesting aspects of Professor Jang's paper is that it is > about adolescents who are in the process of forming concepts, but who are > not there yet. And one way in which an adolescent forms a concept about the > difficult concept of a social contract, of citizenship, of nationality is > pseudoconceptual: it is based on discussing "actual" perceptual differences > between races. This might seem irrelevant to current political discourse. > Unfortunately, it isn't. > > What does a teacher say to kids who are thinking this way? Do we say "Don't > do it"? Or is it better to show them that it is not necessary? > > David Kellogg > Macquarie University > > > On Sat, Mar 11, 2017 at 7:58 PM, Ulvi ??il wrote: > >> Mike, please corrct me if i wrongly take this meaning that revolutions >> causes big numbers of death, death in masses, so we would not prefer them. >> >> But, what if we sum up all the deaths because of occupatinal murders in >> workplaces, deaths from drugs, murders of women and early death because of >> lack of sufficient health care and all the deaths due to the bad >> orgsanisation of society under capitalism and what is more turning of tens >> of millions of children into ignorant and fanatic human beings who are >> brought up able to kill anyone on the street etc >> >> Is it not more rational to put en end to this state of human society rather >> than to perpetruate it, allow it to exist. >> >> Unemployment itself 20 % in Turkey. >> >> >> >> >> >> 11 Mar 2017 03:14 tarihinde "mike cole" yazd?: >> >>>> From my personal web page, Ulvi: >>> >>> *Apropos Thoughts on Revolutions and Their Causes* >>> >>> (From C. Dickens, *A Tale of Two Cities*, Ch 15) >>> >>> Along the Paris streets, the death carts rumble, hollow and harsh. >>> >>> Six tumbrels carry the day's wine to La Guillotine. All the devouring and >>> insatiate monsters imagined since imagination could record itself, are >>> fused in the one realization, Guillotine. And yet there is not in France, >>> with its rich variety of soil and climate, a blade, a leaf, a root, a >>> sprig, a peppercorn, which will grow to maturity under conditions more >>> certain than those that have produced this horror. Crush human humanity >> out >>> of shape once more, under similar hammers, and it will twist itself into >>> the same tortured forms. Sow the same seed of rapacious license and >>> oppression over again, and it will surely yield the same fruit, according >>> to its kind. >>> >>> It is the nature of the fruits sewn by the French Revolution that give >>> pause for thought. And perhaps accounts for the lack of reply to your >>> articulately formulated note. >>> >>> mike >>> >>> >>> >>> On Wed, Mar 8, 2017 at 1:32 PM, Ulvi ??il wrote: >>> >>>> If I say >>>> >>>> don't do it, it is imperative. >>>> >>>> But if I say, >>>> >>>> It is not realistic and you do not need it. >>>> >>>> It is affirmative and even though negative, it is again affirmative, >> to >>>> demobilize you. >>>> >>>> What I mean is Revolution. >>>> >>>> Addressed to a married couple with two children. >>>> >>>> With 3 thousand Turkish liras in Istanbul in a rented home of at least >>>> 1000 tl for rent. >>>> >>>> 1 usd = 4 Turkish liras >>>> >>>> Survival economics. >>>> >>>> Any prospect? >>>> >>>> No. >>>> >>>> That simple. >>>> >>>> What is socialist revolution? >>>> >>>> It is neither an intention nor a wish. >>>> >>>> It is simple necessity. >>>> >>> >> From dkellogg60@gmail.com Sat Mar 11 12:09:42 2017 From: dkellogg60@gmail.com (David Kellogg) Date: Sun, 12 Mar 2017 07:09:42 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Don't do it In-Reply-To: <90E58631-1BE3-4D53-A1D9-C2B12EDF252C@tlu.ee> References: <90E58631-1BE3-4D53-A1D9-C2B12EDF252C@tlu.ee> Message-ID: Here I'm talking about the difference between: a) Don't do it. b) You are doing it. c) Are you doing it? This is not a difference between locutionary, illocutionary, and perlocutionary force--Austin would say that all of these are locutionary in their force, because the pragmatic purpose and the resulting event, which is the giving of linguistic examples and their reception, is the same. And yet they are different. How so? They are different in the nature of the commodity which is put at risk. In a) that commodity is goods and services, while in b) and c) that commodity is information. This means that in a) language is ancillary--we can often perform the same "speech act" (to use the behavioristic terminology of Austin, Searle, and their disciples in pragmatics) using gesticulation, gesture, "eye language", or just intonation. But in b) and c) the use of lexicogrammar is central--we cannot successfully exchange propositions without encoding them lexicogrammatically. This is not the same difference that Austin is discussing. Austin is not a linguist, so he wants to transfer meaning from language to context: to speech roles, to social recognition and to social outcomes. That's simply not possible in this situation: the meaning of b) and c) lies in the lexico-grammar and nowhere else. Speech act theory is to linguistics what behaviorism is to psychology. David Kellogg Macquarie University On Sun, Mar 12, 2017 at 6:33 AM, Rein Raud wrote: > These differences have been discussed quite some time ago in J.L.Austin's > "How to Do Things with Words" (1962), from which speech act theory > originated. Austin distinguishes between locutionary (primary semantical) > meaning, illocutionary meaning (what is being meant) and perlocutionary > meaning (any event is being produced by the utterance). Thus when you say > "Do you have some time?" you might mean "Can you spare some time for me?" > and the perlocutionary result of this is that you will actually help me > (because you are in a position where you cannot say "no" to me, f.ex. > because I am your boss). A lot of speech act theory has evolved from this, > notably in the work of Searle. Best to all, Rein Raud > > On Mar 11, 2017, at 21:18 , David Kellogg wrote: > > > Ulvi, Mike... > > > > We started this thread with Ulvi's important remark that there is a > > difference between: > > > > "Don't do it." > > > > and > > > > "it is not necessary." > > > > Ulvi said that the difference does not lie in their polarity--they are > both > > negative. Nor does it lie in their representational (referential, or > > "ideational" meaning). They both refer to "it" and to the advisability of > > "it". Ulvi said that the first was imperative, and the second was not > (the > > technical term for the non-imperative form of the second is > > "indicative-declarative", as opposed to "indicative-interrogative" which > > would be a question). > > > > I shall call this form of meaning--for meaning it is--"interpersonal" > > meaning, in order to distinguish it from "ideational" meaning. I think > that > > interpersonal meaning is meaning, but it is meaning which is directed > > towards organizing an interaction as the giving or getting of information > > or goods and services. Ideational meaning is meaning too, but it is > > directed towards the representation (hence, "indication") of human > > experience and logic. They're equally meaningful, but they are filled > with > > different kinds of meanings. > > > > The difference is qualitative, and that is another way of saying that it > is > > "revolutionary" (because revolution originally meant turning around axis; > > the first political "revolution" was the rather pathetic "turning" of > > Latin-speaking civilization from a republican to an imperial form under > > Augustus). The difference is between making a proposal and offering a > > proposition--i.e. between realizing a potential state and simply > discussing > > an actual one. > > > > One of the interesting aspects of Professor Jang's paper is that it is > > about adolescents who are in the process of forming concepts, but who are > > not there yet. And one way in which an adolescent forms a concept about > the > > difficult concept of a social contract, of citizenship, of nationality is > > pseudoconceptual: it is based on discussing "actual" perceptual > differences > > between races. This might seem irrelevant to current political discourse. > > Unfortunately, it isn't. > > > > What does a teacher say to kids who are thinking this way? Do we say > "Don't > > do it"? Or is it better to show them that it is not necessary? > > > > David Kellogg > > Macquarie University > > > > > > On Sat, Mar 11, 2017 at 7:58 PM, Ulvi ??il wrote: > > > >> Mike, please corrct me if i wrongly take this meaning that revolutions > >> causes big numbers of death, death in masses, so we would not prefer > them. > >> > >> But, what if we sum up all the deaths because of occupatinal murders in > >> workplaces, deaths from drugs, murders of women and early death because > of > >> lack of sufficient health care and all the deaths due to the bad > >> orgsanisation of society under capitalism and what is more turning of > tens > >> of millions of children into ignorant and fanatic human beings who are > >> brought up able to kill anyone on the street etc > >> > >> Is it not more rational to put en end to this state of human society > rather > >> than to perpetruate it, allow it to exist. > >> > >> Unemployment itself 20 % in Turkey. > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> 11 Mar 2017 03:14 tarihinde "mike cole" yazd?: > >> > >>>> From my personal web page, Ulvi: > >>> > >>> *Apropos Thoughts on Revolutions and Their Causes* > >>> > >>> (From C. Dickens, *A Tale of Two Cities*, Ch 15) > >>> > >>> Along the Paris streets, the death carts rumble, hollow and harsh. > >>> > >>> Six tumbrels carry the day's wine to La Guillotine. All the devouring > and > >>> insatiate monsters imagined since imagination could record itself, are > >>> fused in the one realization, Guillotine. And yet there is not in > France, > >>> with its rich variety of soil and climate, a blade, a leaf, a root, a > >>> sprig, a peppercorn, which will grow to maturity under conditions more > >>> certain than those that have produced this horror. Crush human humanity > >> out > >>> of shape once more, under similar hammers, and it will twist itself > into > >>> the same tortured forms. Sow the same seed of rapacious license and > >>> oppression over again, and it will surely yield the same fruit, > according > >>> to its kind. > >>> > >>> It is the nature of the fruits sewn by the French Revolution that give > >>> pause for thought. And perhaps accounts for the lack of reply to your > >>> articulately formulated note. > >>> > >>> mike > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> On Wed, Mar 8, 2017 at 1:32 PM, Ulvi ??il wrote: > >>> > >>>> If I say > >>>> > >>>> don't do it, it is imperative. > >>>> > >>>> But if I say, > >>>> > >>>> It is not realistic and you do not need it. > >>>> > >>>> It is affirmative and even though negative, it is again affirmative, > >> to > >>>> demobilize you. > >>>> > >>>> What I mean is Revolution. > >>>> > >>>> Addressed to a married couple with two children. > >>>> > >>>> With 3 thousand Turkish liras in Istanbul in a rented home of at > least > >>>> 1000 tl for rent. > >>>> > >>>> 1 usd = 4 Turkish liras > >>>> > >>>> Survival economics. > >>>> > >>>> Any prospect? > >>>> > >>>> No. > >>>> > >>>> That simple. > >>>> > >>>> What is socialist revolution? > >>>> > >>>> It is neither an intention nor a wish. > >>>> > >>>> It is simple necessity. > >>>> > >>> > >> > > > From rein.raud@tlu.ee Sat Mar 11 12:27:54 2017 From: rein.raud@tlu.ee (Rein Raud) Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2017 22:27:54 +0200 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Don't do it In-Reply-To: References: <90 E58631-1BE3-4D53-A1D9-C2B12EDF252C@tlu.ee> Message-ID: <5873CFC6-2F21-4886-B69F-EC39CE4D6ABC@tlu.ee> David, I was only reacting to what you wrote: > I shall call this form of meaning--for meaning it is--"interpersonal" > meaning, in order to distinguish it from "ideational" meaning. I think that > interpersonal meaning is meaning, but it is meaning which is directed > towards organizing an interaction as the giving or getting of information > or goods and services. Ideational meaning is meaning too, but it is > directed towards the representation (hence, "indication") of human > experience and logic. They're equally meaningful, but they are filled with > different kinds of meanings. "Ideational" here seems to be what Austin calls "locutionary". "Interpersonal", in turn, seems to be what Austin called "performative" (in the illocutionary and perlocutionary varieties) and indeed you define it as "directed towards organizing an interaction". Thus I don't think your counter-argument here is wholly legitimate, or perhaps I've missed the point. Best, Rein On Mar 11, 2017, at 22:09 , David Kellogg wrote: > Here I'm talking about the difference between: > > a) Don't do it. > b) You are doing it. > c) Are you doing it? > > This is not a difference between locutionary, illocutionary, and > perlocutionary force--Austin would say that all of these are locutionary in > their force, because the pragmatic purpose and the resulting event, which > is the giving of linguistic examples and their reception, is the same. And > yet they are different. How so? > > They are different in the nature of the commodity which is put at risk. In > a) that commodity is goods and services, while in b) and c) that commodity > is information. This means that in a) language is ancillary--we can often > perform the same "speech act" (to use the behavioristic terminology of > Austin, Searle, and their disciples in pragmatics) using gesticulation, > gesture, "eye language", or just intonation. But in b) and c) the use of > lexicogrammar is central--we cannot successfully exchange propositions > without encoding them lexicogrammatically. > > This is not the same difference that Austin is discussing. Austin is not a > linguist, so he wants to transfer meaning from language to context: to > speech roles, to social recognition and to social outcomes. That's simply > not possible in this situation: the meaning of b) and c) lies in the > lexico-grammar and nowhere else. Speech act theory is to linguistics what > behaviorism is to psychology. > > David Kellogg > Macquarie University > > > On Sun, Mar 12, 2017 at 6:33 AM, Rein Raud wrote: > >> These differences have been discussed quite some time ago in J.L.Austin's >> "How to Do Things with Words" (1962), from which speech act theory >> originated. Austin distinguishes between locutionary (primary semantical) >> meaning, illocutionary meaning (what is being meant) and perlocutionary >> meaning (any event is being produced by the utterance). Thus when you say >> "Do you have some time?" you might mean "Can you spare some time for me?" >> and the perlocutionary result of this is that you will actually help me >> (because you are in a position where you cannot say "no" to me, f.ex. >> because I am your boss). A lot of speech act theory has evolved from this, >> notably in the work of Searle. Best to all, Rein Raud >> >> On Mar 11, 2017, at 21:18 , David Kellogg wrote: >> >>> Ulvi, Mike... >>> >>> We started this thread with Ulvi's important remark that there is a >>> difference between: >>> >>> "Don't do it." >>> >>> and >>> >>> "it is not necessary." >>> >>> Ulvi said that the difference does not lie in their polarity--they are >> both >>> negative. Nor does it lie in their representational (referential, or >>> "ideational" meaning). They both refer to "it" and to the advisability of >>> "it". Ulvi said that the first was imperative, and the second was not >> (the >>> technical term for the non-imperative form of the second is >>> "indicative-declarative", as opposed to "indicative-interrogative" which >>> would be a question). >>> >>> I shall call this form of meaning--for meaning it is--"interpersonal" >>> meaning, in order to distinguish it from "ideational" meaning. I think >> that >>> interpersonal meaning is meaning, but it is meaning which is directed >>> towards organizing an interaction as the giving or getting of information >>> or goods and services. Ideational meaning is meaning too, but it is >>> directed towards the representation (hence, "indication") of human >>> experience and logic. They're equally meaningful, but they are filled >> with >>> different kinds of meanings. >>> >>> The difference is qualitative, and that is another way of saying that it >> is >>> "revolutionary" (because revolution originally meant turning around axis; >>> the first political "revolution" was the rather pathetic "turning" of >>> Latin-speaking civilization from a republican to an imperial form under >>> Augustus). The difference is between making a proposal and offering a >>> proposition--i.e. between realizing a potential state and simply >> discussing >>> an actual one. >>> >>> One of the interesting aspects of Professor Jang's paper is that it is >>> about adolescents who are in the process of forming concepts, but who are >>> not there yet. And one way in which an adolescent forms a concept about >> the >>> difficult concept of a social contract, of citizenship, of nationality is >>> pseudoconceptual: it is based on discussing "actual" perceptual >> differences >>> between races. This might seem irrelevant to current political discourse. >>> Unfortunately, it isn't. >>> >>> What does a teacher say to kids who are thinking this way? Do we say >> "Don't >>> do it"? Or is it better to show them that it is not necessary? >>> >>> David Kellogg >>> Macquarie University >>> >>> >>> On Sat, Mar 11, 2017 at 7:58 PM, Ulvi ??il wrote: >>> >>>> Mike, please corrct me if i wrongly take this meaning that revolutions >>>> causes big numbers of death, death in masses, so we would not prefer >> them. >>>> >>>> But, what if we sum up all the deaths because of occupatinal murders in >>>> workplaces, deaths from drugs, murders of women and early death because >> of >>>> lack of sufficient health care and all the deaths due to the bad >>>> orgsanisation of society under capitalism and what is more turning of >> tens >>>> of millions of children into ignorant and fanatic human beings who are >>>> brought up able to kill anyone on the street etc >>>> >>>> Is it not more rational to put en end to this state of human society >> rather >>>> than to perpetruate it, allow it to exist. >>>> >>>> Unemployment itself 20 % in Turkey. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> 11 Mar 2017 03:14 tarihinde "mike cole" yazd?: >>>> >>>>>> From my personal web page, Ulvi: >>>>> >>>>> *Apropos Thoughts on Revolutions and Their Causes* >>>>> >>>>> (From C. Dickens, *A Tale of Two Cities*, Ch 15) >>>>> >>>>> Along the Paris streets, the death carts rumble, hollow and harsh. >>>>> >>>>> Six tumbrels carry the day's wine to La Guillotine. All the devouring >> and >>>>> insatiate monsters imagined since imagination could record itself, are >>>>> fused in the one realization, Guillotine. And yet there is not in >> France, >>>>> with its rich variety of soil and climate, a blade, a leaf, a root, a >>>>> sprig, a peppercorn, which will grow to maturity under conditions more >>>>> certain than those that have produced this horror. Crush human humanity >>>> out >>>>> of shape once more, under similar hammers, and it will twist itself >> into >>>>> the same tortured forms. Sow the same seed of rapacious license and >>>>> oppression over again, and it will surely yield the same fruit, >> according >>>>> to its kind. >>>>> >>>>> It is the nature of the fruits sewn by the French Revolution that give >>>>> pause for thought. And perhaps accounts for the lack of reply to your >>>>> articulately formulated note. >>>>> >>>>> mike >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Wed, Mar 8, 2017 at 1:32 PM, Ulvi ??il wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> If I say >>>>>> >>>>>> don't do it, it is imperative. >>>>>> >>>>>> But if I say, >>>>>> >>>>>> It is not realistic and you do not need it. >>>>>> >>>>>> It is affirmative and even though negative, it is again affirmative, >>>> to >>>>>> demobilize you. >>>>>> >>>>>> What I mean is Revolution. >>>>>> >>>>>> Addressed to a married couple with two children. >>>>>> >>>>>> With 3 thousand Turkish liras in Istanbul in a rented home of at >> least >>>>>> 1000 tl for rent. >>>>>> >>>>>> 1 usd = 4 Turkish liras >>>>>> >>>>>> Survival economics. >>>>>> >>>>>> Any prospect? >>>>>> >>>>>> No. >>>>>> >>>>>> That simple. >>>>>> >>>>>> What is socialist revolution? >>>>>> >>>>>> It is neither an intention nor a wish. >>>>>> >>>>>> It is simple necessity. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >> >> >> From mpacker@uniandes.edu.co Sat Mar 11 12:41:19 2017 From: mpacker@uniandes.edu.co (Martin John Packer) Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2017 20:41:19 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Don't do it In-Reply-To: <5873CFC6-2F21-4886-B69F-EC39CE4D6ABC@tlu.ee> References: <90 E58631-1BE3-4D53-A1D9-C2B12EDF252C@tlu.ee> <5873CFC6-2F21-4886-B69F-EC39CE4D6ABC@tlu.ee> Message-ID: <10944955-53C6-4C28-AECA-87EA5BF2BCB1@uniandes.edu.co> Rein, David is building here on Halliday?s analysis of the two fundamental ?functions? of language, the ideational and the interpersonal. It is when the child becomes able to combine the two in the same utterance that grammar emerges. (That was not David?s point; I just find it a very interesting idea!) Martin On Mar 11, 2017, at 3:27 PM, Rein Raud > wrote: David, I was only reacting to what you wrote: I shall call this form of meaning--for meaning it is--"interpersonal" meaning, in order to distinguish it from "ideational" meaning. I think that interpersonal meaning is meaning, but it is meaning which is directed towards organizing an interaction as the giving or getting of information or goods and services. Ideational meaning is meaning too, but it is directed towards the representation (hence, "indication") of human experience and logic. They're equally meaningful, but they are filled with different kinds of meanings. "Ideational" here seems to be what Austin calls "locutionary". "Interpersonal", in turn, seems to be what Austin called "performative" (in the illocutionary and perlocutionary varieties) and indeed you define it as "directed towards organizing an interaction". Thus I don't think your counter-argument here is wholly legitimate, or perhaps I've missed the point. Best, Rein On Mar 11, 2017, at 22:09 , David Kellogg wrote: Here I'm talking about the difference between: a) Don't do it. b) You are doing it. c) Are you doing it? This is not a difference between locutionary, illocutionary, and perlocutionary force--Austin would say that all of these are locutionary in their force, because the pragmatic purpose and the resulting event, which is the giving of linguistic examples and their reception, is the same. And yet they are different. How so? They are different in the nature of the commodity which is put at risk. In a) that commodity is goods and services, while in b) and c) that commodity is information. This means that in a) language is ancillary--we can often perform the same "speech act" (to use the behavioristic terminology of Austin, Searle, and their disciples in pragmatics) using gesticulation, gesture, "eye language", or just intonation. But in b) and c) the use of lexicogrammar is central--we cannot successfully exchange propositions without encoding them lexicogrammatically. This is not the same difference that Austin is discussing. Austin is not a linguist, so he wants to transfer meaning from language to context: to speech roles, to social recognition and to social outcomes. That's simply not possible in this situation: the meaning of b) and c) lies in the lexico-grammar and nowhere else. Speech act theory is to linguistics what behaviorism is to psychology. David Kellogg Macquarie University On Sun, Mar 12, 2017 at 6:33 AM, Rein Raud > wrote: These differences have been discussed quite some time ago in J.L.Austin's "How to Do Things with Words" (1962), from which speech act theory originated. Austin distinguishes between locutionary (primary semantical) meaning, illocutionary meaning (what is being meant) and perlocutionary meaning (any event is being produced by the utterance). Thus when you say "Do you have some time?" you might mean "Can you spare some time for me?" and the perlocutionary result of this is that you will actually help me (because you are in a position where you cannot say "no" to me, f.ex. because I am your boss). A lot of speech act theory has evolved from this, notably in the work of Searle. Best to all, Rein Raud On Mar 11, 2017, at 21:18 , David Kellogg wrote: Ulvi, Mike... We started this thread with Ulvi's important remark that there is a difference between: "Don't do it." and "it is not necessary." Ulvi said that the difference does not lie in their polarity--they are both negative. Nor does it lie in their representational (referential, or "ideational" meaning). They both refer to "it" and to the advisability of "it". Ulvi said that the first was imperative, and the second was not (the technical term for the non-imperative form of the second is "indicative-declarative", as opposed to "indicative-interrogative" which would be a question). I shall call this form of meaning--for meaning it is--"interpersonal" meaning, in order to distinguish it from "ideational" meaning. I think that interpersonal meaning is meaning, but it is meaning which is directed towards organizing an interaction as the giving or getting of information or goods and services. Ideational meaning is meaning too, but it is directed towards the representation (hence, "indication") of human experience and logic. They're equally meaningful, but they are filled with different kinds of meanings. The difference is qualitative, and that is another way of saying that it is "revolutionary" (because revolution originally meant turning around axis; the first political "revolution" was the rather pathetic "turning" of Latin-speaking civilization from a republican to an imperial form under Augustus). The difference is between making a proposal and offering a proposition--i.e. between realizing a potential state and simply discussing an actual one. One of the interesting aspects of Professor Jang's paper is that it is about adolescents who are in the process of forming concepts, but who are not there yet. And one way in which an adolescent forms a concept about the difficult concept of a social contract, of citizenship, of nationality is pseudoconceptual: it is based on discussing "actual" perceptual differences between races. This might seem irrelevant to current political discourse. Unfortunately, it isn't. What does a teacher say to kids who are thinking this way? Do we say "Don't do it"? Or is it better to show them that it is not necessary? David Kellogg Macquarie University On Sat, Mar 11, 2017 at 7:58 PM, Ulvi ??il > wrote: Mike, please corrct me if i wrongly take this meaning that revolutions causes big numbers of death, death in masses, so we would not prefer them. But, what if we sum up all the deaths because of occupatinal murders in workplaces, deaths from drugs, murders of women and early death because of lack of sufficient health care and all the deaths due to the bad orgsanisation of society under capitalism and what is more turning of tens of millions of children into ignorant and fanatic human beings who are brought up able to kill anyone on the street etc Is it not more rational to put en end to this state of human society rather than to perpetruate it, allow it to exist. Unemployment itself 20 % in Turkey. 11 Mar 2017 03:14 tarihinde "mike cole" > yazd?: From my personal web page, Ulvi: *Apropos Thoughts on Revolutions and Their Causes* (From C. Dickens, *A Tale of Two Cities*, Ch 15) Along the Paris streets, the death carts rumble, hollow and harsh. Six tumbrels carry the day's wine to La Guillotine. All the devouring and insatiate monsters imagined since imagination could record itself, are fused in the one realization, Guillotine. And yet there is not in France, with its rich variety of soil and climate, a blade, a leaf, a root, a sprig, a peppercorn, which will grow to maturity under conditions more certain than those that have produced this horror. Crush human humanity out of shape once more, under similar hammers, and it will twist itself into the same tortured forms. Sow the same seed of rapacious license and oppression over again, and it will surely yield the same fruit, according to its kind. It is the nature of the fruits sewn by the French Revolution that give pause for thought. And perhaps accounts for the lack of reply to your articulately formulated note. mike On Wed, Mar 8, 2017 at 1:32 PM, Ulvi ??il > wrote: If I say don't do it, it is imperative. But if I say, It is not realistic and you do not need it. It is affirmative and even though negative, it is again affirmative, to demobilize you. What I mean is Revolution. Addressed to a married couple with two children. With 3 thousand Turkish liras in Istanbul in a rented home of at least 1000 tl for rent. 1 usd = 4 Turkish liras Survival economics. Any prospect? No. That simple. What is socialist revolution? It is neither an intention nor a wish. It is simple necessity. From rein.raud@tlu.ee Sat Mar 11 12:51:47 2017 From: rein.raud@tlu.ee (Rein Raud) Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2017 22:51:47 +0200 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Don't do it In-Reply-To: <10944955-53C6-4C28-AECA-87EA5BF2BCB1@uniandes.edu.co> References: <90 E58631-1BE3-4D53-A1D9-C2B12EDF252C@tlu.ee><5873CFC6-2F21-4886-B69F-EC39CE4D6ABC@t lu.ee> <10944955-53C6-4C28-AECA-87EA5BF2BCB1@uniandes.edu.co> Message-ID: <4E54E642-1A2D-439D-A9E7-01756CFB0835@tlu.ee> Yes, this I can agree with - especially as this is fairly close to my own theory of meaning ("Meaning in Action", Polity 2016, ch.2), except that in my opinion the ideational is already given to us interpersonally (as when someone explains to us what a word means), while there is also an "experiential" meaning with which this ideational claims identity. But what you say makes sense. Best, Rein On Mar 11, 2017, at 22:41 , Martin John Packer wrote: > Rein, > > David is building here on Halliday?s analysis of the two fundamental ?functions? of language, the ideational and the interpersonal. It is when the child becomes able to combine the two in the same utterance that grammar emerges. (That was not David?s point; I just find it a very interesting idea!) > > Martin > > > > > On Mar 11, 2017, at 3:27 PM, Rein Raud > wrote: > > David, I was only reacting to what you wrote: > > I shall call this form of meaning--for meaning it is--"interpersonal" > meaning, in order to distinguish it from "ideational" meaning. I think that > interpersonal meaning is meaning, but it is meaning which is directed > towards organizing an interaction as the giving or getting of information > or goods and services. Ideational meaning is meaning too, but it is > directed towards the representation (hence, "indication") of human > experience and logic. They're equally meaningful, but they are filled with > different kinds of meanings. > > "Ideational" here seems to be what Austin calls "locutionary". "Interpersonal", in turn, seems to be what Austin called "performative" (in the illocutionary and perlocutionary varieties) and indeed you define it as "directed towards organizing an interaction". Thus I don't think your counter-argument here is wholly legitimate, or perhaps I've missed the point. > > Best, > > Rein > > On Mar 11, 2017, at 22:09 , David Kellogg wrote: > > Here I'm talking about the difference between: > > a) Don't do it. > b) You are doing it. > c) Are you doing it? > > This is not a difference between locutionary, illocutionary, and > perlocutionary force--Austin would say that all of these are locutionary in > their force, because the pragmatic purpose and the resulting event, which > is the giving of linguistic examples and their reception, is the same. And > yet they are different. How so? > > They are different in the nature of the commodity which is put at risk. In > a) that commodity is goods and services, while in b) and c) that commodity > is information. This means that in a) language is ancillary--we can often > perform the same "speech act" (to use the behavioristic terminology of > Austin, Searle, and their disciples in pragmatics) using gesticulation, > gesture, "eye language", or just intonation. But in b) and c) the use of > lexicogrammar is central--we cannot successfully exchange propositions > without encoding them lexicogrammatically. > > This is not the same difference that Austin is discussing. Austin is not a > linguist, so he wants to transfer meaning from language to context: to > speech roles, to social recognition and to social outcomes. That's simply > not possible in this situation: the meaning of b) and c) lies in the > lexico-grammar and nowhere else. Speech act theory is to linguistics what > behaviorism is to psychology. > > David Kellogg > Macquarie University > > > On Sun, Mar 12, 2017 at 6:33 AM, Rein Raud > wrote: > > These differences have been discussed quite some time ago in J.L.Austin's > "How to Do Things with Words" (1962), from which speech act theory > originated. Austin distinguishes between locutionary (primary semantical) > meaning, illocutionary meaning (what is being meant) and perlocutionary > meaning (any event is being produced by the utterance). Thus when you say > "Do you have some time?" you might mean "Can you spare some time for me?" > and the perlocutionary result of this is that you will actually help me > (because you are in a position where you cannot say "no" to me, f.ex. > because I am your boss). A lot of speech act theory has evolved from this, > notably in the work of Searle. Best to all, Rein Raud > > On Mar 11, 2017, at 21:18 , David Kellogg wrote: > > Ulvi, Mike... > > We started this thread with Ulvi's important remark that there is a > difference between: > > "Don't do it." > > and > > "it is not necessary." > > Ulvi said that the difference does not lie in their polarity--they are > both > negative. Nor does it lie in their representational (referential, or > "ideational" meaning). They both refer to "it" and to the advisability of > "it". Ulvi said that the first was imperative, and the second was not > (the > technical term for the non-imperative form of the second is > "indicative-declarative", as opposed to "indicative-interrogative" which > would be a question). > > I shall call this form of meaning--for meaning it is--"interpersonal" > meaning, in order to distinguish it from "ideational" meaning. I think > that > interpersonal meaning is meaning, but it is meaning which is directed > towards organizing an interaction as the giving or getting of information > or goods and services. Ideational meaning is meaning too, but it is > directed towards the representation (hence, "indication") of human > experience and logic. They're equally meaningful, but they are filled > with > different kinds of meanings. > > The difference is qualitative, and that is another way of saying that it > is > "revolutionary" (because revolution originally meant turning around axis; > the first political "revolution" was the rather pathetic "turning" of > Latin-speaking civilization from a republican to an imperial form under > Augustus). The difference is between making a proposal and offering a > proposition--i.e. between realizing a potential state and simply > discussing > an actual one. > > One of the interesting aspects of Professor Jang's paper is that it is > about adolescents who are in the process of forming concepts, but who are > not there yet. And one way in which an adolescent forms a concept about > the > difficult concept of a social contract, of citizenship, of nationality is > pseudoconceptual: it is based on discussing "actual" perceptual > differences > between races. This might seem irrelevant to current political discourse. > Unfortunately, it isn't. > > What does a teacher say to kids who are thinking this way? Do we say > "Don't > do it"? Or is it better to show them that it is not necessary? > > David Kellogg > Macquarie University > > > On Sat, Mar 11, 2017 at 7:58 PM, Ulvi ??il > wrote: > > Mike, please corrct me if i wrongly take this meaning that revolutions > causes big numbers of death, death in masses, so we would not prefer > them. > > But, what if we sum up all the deaths because of occupatinal murders in > workplaces, deaths from drugs, murders of women and early death because > of > lack of sufficient health care and all the deaths due to the bad > orgsanisation of society under capitalism and what is more turning of > tens > of millions of children into ignorant and fanatic human beings who are > brought up able to kill anyone on the street etc > > Is it not more rational to put en end to this state of human society > rather > than to perpetruate it, allow it to exist. > > Unemployment itself 20 % in Turkey. > > > > > > 11 Mar 2017 03:14 tarihinde "mike cole" > yazd?: > > From my personal web page, Ulvi: > > *Apropos Thoughts on Revolutions and Their Causes* > > (From C. Dickens, *A Tale of Two Cities*, Ch 15) > > Along the Paris streets, the death carts rumble, hollow and harsh. > > Six tumbrels carry the day's wine to La Guillotine. All the devouring > and > insatiate monsters imagined since imagination could record itself, are > fused in the one realization, Guillotine. And yet there is not in > France, > with its rich variety of soil and climate, a blade, a leaf, a root, a > sprig, a peppercorn, which will grow to maturity under conditions more > certain than those that have produced this horror. Crush human humanity > out > of shape once more, under similar hammers, and it will twist itself > into > the same tortured forms. Sow the same seed of rapacious license and > oppression over again, and it will surely yield the same fruit, > according > to its kind. > > It is the nature of the fruits sewn by the French Revolution that give > pause for thought. And perhaps accounts for the lack of reply to your > articulately formulated note. > > mike > > > > On Wed, Mar 8, 2017 at 1:32 PM, Ulvi ??il > wrote: > > If I say > > don't do it, it is imperative. > > But if I say, > > It is not realistic and you do not need it. > > It is affirmative and even though negative, it is again affirmative, > to > demobilize you. > > What I mean is Revolution. > > Addressed to a married couple with two children. > > With 3 thousand Turkish liras in Istanbul in a rented home of at > least > 1000 tl for rent. > > 1 usd = 4 Turkish liras > > Survival economics. > > Any prospect? > > No. > > That simple. > > What is socialist revolution? > > It is neither an intention nor a wish. > > It is simple necessity. > > > > > > > > From mcole@ucsd.edu Sun Mar 12 09:56:51 2017 From: mcole@ucsd.edu (mike cole) Date: Sun, 12 Mar 2017 09:56:51 -0700 Subject: [Xmca-l] The Passing of Peeter Tulviste Message-ID: Dear Colleagues - News has arrived of the death of Peeter Tulviste. After a career in psychology, Peeter became an active member of the Estonian Parliament and continued to be an active political participant to the end of his life. Here is the note I wrote in response to news of his death to those who had forwarded the information. Darn. :-( mike ---------------- I am deeply saddened by your news, Jim. Peeter was an important person in my life even though we have had little contact in recent years. As a graduate student he was a "go between" in my dialogue with Alexander Romanovich about interpreting cross cultural research. ARL and I tried to make it possible for Peeter to come to Liberia to do research, but it was not possible, even with ARL's political clout at the time. So Peeter did his dissertation in the far East. I believe his formulation of a cultural-historical approach that simultaneously incorporates the concept of activity (a necessity politically because Leontiev's approach was dominant, but also very productive) provides a powerful way to think about education in socio-historical circumstances. Peeter lives on in my thoughts whenever they turn to wondering about the process of human development. That he lived his principles as a public figure as well as a social scientist is particularly admirable in the dark times through which Estonia passed. mike From smago@uga.edu Sun Mar 12 10:15:39 2017 From: smago@uga.edu (Peter Smagorinsky) Date: Sun, 12 Mar 2017 17:15:39 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Passing of Peeter Tulviste In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I met Peeter at the 1994 Vygotsky conference outside Moscow, and found him to be a gracious man as well as the author of a book I've referenced many times, Tulviste, P. (1991). The cultural-historical development of verbal thinking (M. J. Hall, Trans.). Commack, NY: Nova Science Publishers. At the time he was president of the University of Estonia, I believe, the oldest university in Europe and possibly the world. He had a remarkable career, and I'm sad to hear of his passing. -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of mike cole Sent: Sunday, March 12, 2017 12:57 PM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] The Passing of Peeter Tulviste Dear Colleagues - News has arrived of the death of Peeter Tulviste. After a career in psychology, Peeter became an active member of the Estonian Parliament and continued to be an active political participant to the end of his life. Here is the note I wrote in response to news of his death to those who had forwarded the information. Darn. :-( mike ---------------- I am deeply saddened by your news, Jim. Peeter was an important person in my life even though we have had little contact in recent years. As a graduate student he was a "go between" in my dialogue with Alexander Romanovich about interpreting cross cultural research. ARL and I tried to make it possible for Peeter to come to Liberia to do research, but it was not possible, even with ARL's political clout at the time. So Peeter did his dissertation in the far East. I believe his formulation of a cultural-historical approach that simultaneously incorporates the concept of activity (a necessity politically because Leontiev's approach was dominant, but also very productive) provides a powerful way to think about education in socio-historical circumstances. Peeter lives on in my thoughts whenever they turn to wondering about the process of human development. That he lived his principles as a public figure as well as a social scientist is particularly admirable in the dark times through which Estonia passed. mike From mcole@ucsd.edu Sun Mar 12 16:03:48 2017 From: mcole@ucsd.edu (mike cole) Date: Sun, 12 Mar 2017 16:03:48 -0700 Subject: [Xmca-l] Fwd: [COGDEVSOC] Faculty positions at American University of Cairo In-Reply-To: <2146DA9486E9D344BB84510D236DCBBA40C6FC34@EX-MAILBOX-03.stlawu.local> References: <2146DA9486E9D344BB84510D236DCBBA40C6FC34@EX-MAILBOX-03.stlawu.local> Message-ID: ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Helana Girgis Date: Sun, Mar 12, 2017 at 3:58 PM Subject: [COGDEVSOC] Faculty positions at American University of Cairo To: "cogdevsoc@lists.cogdevsoc.org" Cc: "kate.ellis@aucegypt.edu" Dear colleagues, It's a pleasure to announce that there are several tenure track faculty openings at the American University in Cairo. In particular, we are seeking a cognitive or cognitive- developmental psychologist, though we still encourage applications from those with a basic background in developmental, social, community, biological psychology. All instruction at AUC is in English, Arabic language is not required. AUC is one of less than 20 universities overseas that are accredited in the US by the Middle States Commission. The teaching experience (curriculum, textbooks, etc.) is like teaching in the US. We provide an incredible level of support for faculty development and a comprehensive relocation process for those coming from other countries. Please see the attached advert for details on the positions, the university and the link to the application. We are looking to fill the positions soon, so if interested please submit your application as soon as possible. You may also feel free to contact Dr. Kate Ellis if you have any questions regarding your application at kate.ellis@aucegypt.edu. _______________________________________________ To post to the CDS listserv, send your message to: cogdevsoc@lists.cogdevsoc.org (If you belong to the listserv and have not included any large attachments, your message will be posted without moderation--so be careful!) To subscribe or unsubscribe from the listserv, visit: http://lists.cogdevsoc.org/listinfo.cgi/cogdevsoc-cogdevsoc.org -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: AUC Faculty advert.docx Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document Size: 15481 bytes Desc: not available Url : https://mailman.ucsd.edu/mailman/private/xmca-l/attachments/20170312/50c9f99b/attachment.bin From dkellogg60@gmail.com Sun Mar 12 23:54:18 2017 From: dkellogg60@gmail.com (David Kellogg) Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2017 17:54:18 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Tensions in Second Language learning In-Reply-To: <1488615383307.44588@iped.uio.no> References: <1488615383307.44588@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: It's very interesting to compare this paper with Professor Jang's 2011 paper co-authored with Robert T. Jimenez: Eun-Young Jang & Robert T. Jim?nez (2011) A Sociocultural Perspective on Second Language Learner Strategies: Focus on the Impact of Social Context, Theory Into Practice, 50:2, 141-148, DOI: 10.1080/00405841.2011.558443 In some ways, the papers are very similar--the data is identical in one place (p. 42), and the conclusions are for the most part congruent. But consider how different the titles are. "Impact" in one place, and "tension" in the other. There is this note to the 1935 version of Vygotsky's report on preschools, where Zankov, Elkonin and Shif complain about Vygotsky's idea that the child directs his or her own learning before preschool, the environment directs it after preschool, and preschool therefore represents a kind of transitional stage. On the one hand, if the child is directing his or her own learning, how can we say that the environment is the ultimate source of learning? And if the environment is the ultimate source of learning, as Vygotsky says, how can we say that the child is himself or herself part of the environment? Professor Jang gets around this problem just as Vygotsky does--adroitly. On the one hand, strategies are expanded to include "sets of actions performed to deal with problems (perceived by the researcher, indicated by the learners)". On the other, contexts are expanded to include "pedagogical assumptions, power relations, and interracial conflict". I think this solution to the problem is the correct one: when we consider the relationship of the child and the environment, we cannot treat it like an unstoppable force meeting an unmoveable object. But for me that means that both the child and the environment have to be considered in "internal" (that is, abstract, linguistic) terms. We can't think of speech as actions; it's more useful to think of actions as speech. We can't think of the social situation of development as a material setting: it's a relationship with others. Contrariwise, it seems to me that when we consider "racism", it is more helpful to consider it in "external", that is, concrete, nonlinguistic terms. In the 2011 paper, Professor Jang and her co-author are willing to openly criticize the idea that languages are learned in exactly the same way whether they are first or second languages. Here, they just quote the teacher's comments on "mommy skills". It's a very revealing quote. One thing it reveals is why it's probably not helpful to refer to "racist" as an "insult" (p. 40) or to imply that racism and anti-racism is really just a matter of having the right attitude (as the Republicans did in the Sessions debate or as Bernie Sanders did when he referred to Trump supporters who voted for Obama as "not having a racist bone in their bodies"). You can see that subjectively, the teacher is being anti-racist--all students, French, Turkish, Egyptian, Korean, use the same strategies, just like we all have mommies.She has all the right attitudes, and probably doesn't have a racist bone in her body. But that doesn't diminish by one jot the terrible damage that this kind of indiscriminate discrimination does in the classroom. David Kellogg Macquarie University . On Sat, Mar 4, 2017 at 7:16 PM, Alfredo Jornet Gil wrote: > > > Dear all, > > > I am excited to introduce MCA's current issue article for discussion, > > *"We Got Rid of Her Sentence for Revenge": Re-Viewing Second-Language > Learner Strategies Considering Multiple Tensions in the ESL Classroom*? > > The article, explores relations between (English) language and power and > inequality in the context of second language learning classrooms, examining > episodes of tensions related to the learners' proficiency and ethnicity. To > do so, Eun-Young, the author, draws from a quite wide range of > socio-cultural research.The article is particularly relevant considering > what is going on in Europe and North America with regard to ethnic > discrimination (to say it softly). Although not directly addressing the > latter larger questions, the study offers empirical and theoretical > accounts of that same type of relations in which ??privilege and inequality > are at stake. > > > Eun-Young has kindly accepted participating in the discussion and I > believe will be joining soon. Meanwhile, the article is attached ?in this > e-mail and soon open in the T&F pages. Enjoy the read, and everything else. > > Alfredo > From dkellogg60@gmail.com Mon Mar 13 00:37:26 2017 From: dkellogg60@gmail.com (David Kellogg) Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2017 18:37:26 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Don't do it In-Reply-To: <4E54E642-1A2D-439D-A9E7-01756CFB0835@tlu.ee> References: <10944955-53C6-4C28-AECA-87EA5BF2BCB1@uniandes.edu.co> <4E54E642-1A2D-439D-A9E7-01756CFB0835@tlu.ee> Message-ID: In my own (unpublished) study, it was the interpersonal metafunction which emerged first, not the ideational one. That is, children grasped the idea of giving and getting goods and services before they had the idea that experience could be encoded in language and shared with somebody who didn't actually have it. (This study just confirmed work by Clare Painter, Jane Torr, and Halliday himself.) However, I think that Rein is right in one sense: there is some larger whole from which BOTH the interpersonal and the ideational must be co-differentiated. I don't think this differentiation is what happens in development, though: it's an artefact of analysis. I don't think that this larger whole exists in infants, or even in early childhood; to use the Pepperian idea in Karimi-Aghdam article, it's a kind of artefact that arises post hoc, from looking at contextualism (which is dispersive) and organicism (which is integrative) together. By looking at an integrated whole and by thinking about it as development-in-context, we infer it, but to assume that it actually happens, that all word meanings are "given" to children, is to commit the Augustinian fallacy (that Wittgenstein criticizes at the beginning of Philosophical Investigations) Halliday's got a name for this larger whole, at least once it arises in actual speech. It's the TEXTUAL metafunction, that is, the textual devices that we use to integrate interpersonal functions and ideational ones into a single clause. To return to the example I gave earlier: a) Don't do it. (interpersonal proposal, ideational material process, "you" and "it" are Actor and Goal, textually unmarked) b) It's not necessary (interpersonal proposition, ideational relational process "it" and "necessary" are Carrier and Attribute, textually unmarked) c) Don't do it, because it's not necessary. ("because" is a conjunctive adjunct which integrates the two propositions--it has neither interpersonal nor ideational function, but is a purely textual element). (I've got a study on how this metafunction arises in Korean kids--it seems to me that it's not explicit until quite late, in sixth grade, in my data. This one will actually be PUBLISHED...in Language and Education! (DOI: 10.1080/09500782.2017.1306074) David Kellogg Macquarie University On Sun, Mar 12, 2017 at 7:51 AM, Rein Raud wrote: > Yes, this I can agree with - especially as this is fairly close to my own > theory of meaning ("Meaning in Action", Polity 2016, ch.2), except that in > my opinion the ideational is already given to us interpersonally (as when > someone explains to us what a word means), while there is also an > "experiential" meaning with which this ideational claims identity. But what > you say makes sense. Best, Rein > > On Mar 11, 2017, at 22:41 , Martin John Packer wrote: > > > Rein, > > > > David is building here on Halliday?s analysis of the two fundamental > ?functions? of language, the ideational and the interpersonal. It is when > the child becomes able to combine the two in the same utterance that > grammar emerges. (That was not David?s point; I just find it a very > interesting idea!) > > > > Martin > > > > > > > > > > On Mar 11, 2017, at 3:27 PM, Rein Raud raud@tlu.ee>> wrote: > > > > David, I was only reacting to what you wrote: > > > > I shall call this form of meaning--for meaning it is--"interpersonal" > > meaning, in order to distinguish it from "ideational" meaning. I think > that > > interpersonal meaning is meaning, but it is meaning which is directed > > towards organizing an interaction as the giving or getting of information > > or goods and services. Ideational meaning is meaning too, but it is > > directed towards the representation (hence, "indication") of human > > experience and logic. They're equally meaningful, but they are filled > with > > different kinds of meanings. > > > > "Ideational" here seems to be what Austin calls "locutionary". > "Interpersonal", in turn, seems to be what Austin called "performative" (in > the illocutionary and perlocutionary varieties) and indeed you define it > as "directed towards organizing an interaction". Thus I don't think your > counter-argument here is wholly legitimate, or perhaps I've missed the > point. > > > > Best, > > > > Rein > > > > On Mar 11, 2017, at 22:09 , David Kellogg wrote: > > > > Here I'm talking about the difference between: > > > > a) Don't do it. > > b) You are doing it. > > c) Are you doing it? > > > > This is not a difference between locutionary, illocutionary, and > > perlocutionary force--Austin would say that all of these are locutionary > in > > their force, because the pragmatic purpose and the resulting event, which > > is the giving of linguistic examples and their reception, is the same. > And > > yet they are different. How so? > > > > They are different in the nature of the commodity which is put at risk. > In > > a) that commodity is goods and services, while in b) and c) that > commodity > > is information. This means that in a) language is ancillary--we can often > > perform the same "speech act" (to use the behavioristic terminology of > > Austin, Searle, and their disciples in pragmatics) using gesticulation, > > gesture, "eye language", or just intonation. But in b) and c) the use of > > lexicogrammar is central--we cannot successfully exchange propositions > > without encoding them lexicogrammatically. > > > > This is not the same difference that Austin is discussing. Austin is not > a > > linguist, so he wants to transfer meaning from language to context: to > > speech roles, to social recognition and to social outcomes. That's simply > > not possible in this situation: the meaning of b) and c) lies in the > > lexico-grammar and nowhere else. Speech act theory is to linguistics what > > behaviorism is to psychology. > > > > David Kellogg > > Macquarie University > > > > > > On Sun, Mar 12, 2017 at 6:33 AM, Rein Raud rein.raud@tlu.ee>> wrote: > > > > These differences have been discussed quite some time ago in J.L.Austin's > > "How to Do Things with Words" (1962), from which speech act theory > > originated. Austin distinguishes between locutionary (primary semantical) > > meaning, illocutionary meaning (what is being meant) and perlocutionary > > meaning (any event is being produced by the utterance). Thus when you say > > "Do you have some time?" you might mean "Can you spare some time for me?" > > and the perlocutionary result of this is that you will actually help me > > (because you are in a position where you cannot say "no" to me, f.ex. > > because I am your boss). A lot of speech act theory has evolved from > this, > > notably in the work of Searle. Best to all, Rein Raud > > > > On Mar 11, 2017, at 21:18 , David Kellogg wrote: > > > > Ulvi, Mike... > > > > We started this thread with Ulvi's important remark that there is a > > difference between: > > > > "Don't do it." > > > > and > > > > "it is not necessary." > > > > Ulvi said that the difference does not lie in their polarity--they are > > both > > negative. Nor does it lie in their representational (referential, or > > "ideational" meaning). They both refer to "it" and to the advisability of > > "it". Ulvi said that the first was imperative, and the second was not > > (the > > technical term for the non-imperative form of the second is > > "indicative-declarative", as opposed to "indicative-interrogative" which > > would be a question). > > > > I shall call this form of meaning--for meaning it is--"interpersonal" > > meaning, in order to distinguish it from "ideational" meaning. I think > > that > > interpersonal meaning is meaning, but it is meaning which is directed > > towards organizing an interaction as the giving or getting of information > > or goods and services. Ideational meaning is meaning too, but it is > > directed towards the representation (hence, "indication") of human > > experience and logic. They're equally meaningful, but they are filled > > with > > different kinds of meanings. > > > > The difference is qualitative, and that is another way of saying that it > > is > > "revolutionary" (because revolution originally meant turning around axis; > > the first political "revolution" was the rather pathetic "turning" of > > Latin-speaking civilization from a republican to an imperial form under > > Augustus). The difference is between making a proposal and offering a > > proposition--i.e. between realizing a potential state and simply > > discussing > > an actual one. > > > > One of the interesting aspects of Professor Jang's paper is that it is > > about adolescents who are in the process of forming concepts, but who are > > not there yet. And one way in which an adolescent forms a concept about > > the > > difficult concept of a social contract, of citizenship, of nationality is > > pseudoconceptual: it is based on discussing "actual" perceptual > > differences > > between races. This might seem irrelevant to current political discourse. > > Unfortunately, it isn't. > > > > What does a teacher say to kids who are thinking this way? Do we say > > "Don't > > do it"? Or is it better to show them that it is not necessary? > > > > David Kellogg > > Macquarie University > > > > > > On Sat, Mar 11, 2017 at 7:58 PM, Ulvi ??il ulvi.icil@gmail.com>> wrote: > > > > Mike, please corrct me if i wrongly take this meaning that revolutions > > causes big numbers of death, death in masses, so we would not prefer > > them. > > > > But, what if we sum up all the deaths because of occupatinal murders in > > workplaces, deaths from drugs, murders of women and early death because > > of > > lack of sufficient health care and all the deaths due to the bad > > orgsanisation of society under capitalism and what is more turning of > > tens > > of millions of children into ignorant and fanatic human beings who are > > brought up able to kill anyone on the street etc > > > > Is it not more rational to put en end to this state of human society > > rather > > than to perpetruate it, allow it to exist. > > > > Unemployment itself 20 % in Turkey. > > > > > > > > > > > > 11 Mar 2017 03:14 tarihinde "mike cole" ucsd.edu>> yazd?: > > > > From my personal web page, Ulvi: > > > > *Apropos Thoughts on Revolutions and Their Causes* > > > > (From C. Dickens, *A Tale of Two Cities*, Ch 15) > > > > Along the Paris streets, the death carts rumble, hollow and harsh. > > > > Six tumbrels carry the day's wine to La Guillotine. All the devouring > > and > > insatiate monsters imagined since imagination could record itself, are > > fused in the one realization, Guillotine. And yet there is not in > > France, > > with its rich variety of soil and climate, a blade, a leaf, a root, a > > sprig, a peppercorn, which will grow to maturity under conditions more > > certain than those that have produced this horror. Crush human humanity > > out > > of shape once more, under similar hammers, and it will twist itself > > into > > the same tortured forms. Sow the same seed of rapacious license and > > oppression over again, and it will surely yield the same fruit, > > according > > to its kind. > > > > It is the nature of the fruits sewn by the French Revolution that give > > pause for thought. And perhaps accounts for the lack of reply to your > > articulately formulated note. > > > > mike > > > > > > > > On Wed, Mar 8, 2017 at 1:32 PM, Ulvi ??il vi.icil@gmail.com>> wrote: > > > > If I say > > > > don't do it, it is imperative. > > > > But if I say, > > > > It is not realistic and you do not need it. > > > > It is affirmative and even though negative, it is again affirmative, > > to > > demobilize you. > > > > What I mean is Revolution. > > > > Addressed to a married couple with two children. > > > > With 3 thousand Turkish liras in Istanbul in a rented home of at > > least > > 1000 tl for rent. > > > > 1 usd = 4 Turkish liras > > > > Survival economics. > > > > Any prospect? > > > > No. > > > > That simple. > > > > What is socialist revolution? > > > > It is neither an intention nor a wish. > > > > It is simple necessity. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From lpscholar2@gmail.com Mon Mar 13 06:31:00 2017 From: lpscholar2@gmail.com (lpscholar2@gmail.com) Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2017 06:31:00 -0700 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Don't do it In-Reply-To: References: <10944955-53C6-4C28-AECA-87EA5BF2BCB1@uniandes.edu.co> <4E54E642-1A2D-439D-A9E7-01756CFB0835@tlu.ee> Message-ID: <58c69f16.519c620a.c1f04.6a1e@mx.google.com> David, My echoing what you say is in appreciation for your opening a space to explore?: *some larger whole from which both the interpersonal and ideational metafunctions emerge * looking at the Pepperian idea of contextualism/dispersive and organicism/integrative ? together *this togetherness in actual speech being ? textualism (devices for integrating service *giving service (and) getting service These focal points for analysis (exploring what has already occurred in development). I hope my echo is faithful? To your intent Opening a door Sent from my Windows 10 phone From: David Kellogg Sent: March 13, 2017 12:39 AM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Don't do it In my own (unpublished) study, it was the interpersonal metafunction which emerged first, not the ideational one. That is, children grasped the idea of giving and getting goods and services before they had the idea that experience could be encoded in language and shared with somebody who didn't actually have it. (This study just confirmed work by Clare Painter, Jane Torr, and Halliday himself.) However, I think that Rein is right in one sense: there is some larger whole from which BOTH the interpersonal and the ideational must be co-differentiated. I don't think this differentiation is what happens in development, though: it's an artefact of analysis. I don't think that this larger whole exists in infants, or even in early childhood; to use the Pepperian idea in Karimi-Aghdam article, it's a kind of artefact that arises post hoc, from looking at contextualism (which is dispersive) and organicism (which is integrative) together. By looking at an integrated whole and by thinking about it as development-in-context, we infer it, but to assume that it actually happens, that all word meanings are "given" to children, is to commit the Augustinian fallacy (that Wittgenstein criticizes at the beginning of Philosophical Investigations) Halliday's got a name for this larger whole, at least once it arises in actual speech. It's the TEXTUAL metafunction, that is, the textual devices that we use to integrate interpersonal functions and ideational ones into a single clause. To return to the example I gave earlier: a) Don't do it. (interpersonal proposal, ideational material process, "you" and "it" are Actor and Goal, textually unmarked) b) It's not necessary (interpersonal proposition, ideational relational process "it" and "necessary" are Carrier and Attribute, textually unmarked) c) Don't do it, because it's not necessary. ("because" is a conjunctive adjunct which integrates the two propositions--it has neither interpersonal nor ideational function, but is a purely textual element). (I've got a study on how this metafunction arises in Korean kids--it seems to me that it's not explicit until quite late, in sixth grade, in my data. This one will actually be PUBLISHED...in Language and Education! (DOI: 10.1080/09500782.2017.1306074) David Kellogg Macquarie University On Sun, Mar 12, 2017 at 7:51 AM, Rein Raud wrote: > Yes, this I can agree with - especially as this is fairly close to my own > theory of meaning ("Meaning in Action", Polity 2016, ch.2), except that in > my opinion the ideational is already given to us interpersonally (as when > someone explains to us what a word means), while there is also an > "experiential" meaning with which this ideational claims identity. But what > you say makes sense. Best, Rein > > On Mar 11, 2017, at 22:41 , Martin John Packer wrote: > > > Rein, > > > > David is building here on Halliday?s analysis of the two fundamental > ?functions? of language, the ideational and the interpersonal. It is when > the child becomes able to combine the two in the same utterance that > grammar emerges. (That was not David?s point; I just find it a very > interesting idea!) > > > > Martin > > > > > > > > > > On Mar 11, 2017, at 3:27 PM, Rein Raud raud@tlu.ee>> wrote: > > > > David, I was only reacting to what you wrote: > > > > I shall call this form of meaning--for meaning it is--"interpersonal" > > meaning, in order to distinguish it from "ideational" meaning. I think > that > > interpersonal meaning is meaning, but it is meaning which is directed > > towards organizing an interaction as the giving or getting of information > > or goods and services. Ideational meaning is meaning too, but it is > > directed towards the representation (hence, "indication") of human > > experience and logic. They're equally meaningful, but they are filled > with > > different kinds of meanings. > > > > "Ideational" here seems to be what Austin calls "locutionary". > "Interpersonal", in turn, seems to be what Austin called "performative" (in > the illocutionary and perlocutionary varieties) and indeed you define it > as "directed towards organizing an interaction". Thus I don't think your > counter-argument here is wholly legitimate, or perhaps I've missed the > point. > > > > Best, > > > > Rein > > > > On Mar 11, 2017, at 22:09 , David Kellogg wrote: > > > > Here I'm talking about the difference between: > > > > a) Don't do it. > > b) You are doing it. > > c) Are you doing it? > > > > This is not a difference between locutionary, illocutionary, and > > perlocutionary force--Austin would say that all of these are locutionary > in > > their force, because the pragmatic purpose and the resulting event, which > > is the giving of linguistic examples and their reception, is the same. > And > > yet they are different. How so? > > > > They are different in the nature of the commodity which is put at risk. > In > > a) that commodity is goods and services, while in b) and c) that > commodity > > is information. This means that in a) language is ancillary--we can often > > perform the same "speech act" (to use the behavioristic terminology of > > Austin, Searle, and their disciples in pragmatics) using gesticulation, > > gesture, "eye language", or just intonation. But in b) and c) the use of > > lexicogrammar is central--we cannot successfully exchange propositions > > without encoding them lexicogrammatically. > > > > This is not the same difference that Austin is discussing. Austin is not > a > > linguist, so he wants to transfer meaning from language to context: to > > speech roles, to social recognition and to social outcomes. That's simply > > not possible in this situation: the meaning of b) and c) lies in the > > lexico-grammar and nowhere else. Speech act theory is to linguistics what > > behaviorism is to psychology. > > > > David Kellogg > > Macquarie University > > > > > > On Sun, Mar 12, 2017 at 6:33 AM, Rein Raud rein.raud@tlu.ee>> wrote: > > > > These differences have been discussed quite some time ago in J.L.Austin's > > "How to Do Things with Words" (1962), from which speech act theory > > originated. Austin distinguishes between locutionary (primary semantical) > > meaning, illocutionary meaning (what is being meant) and perlocutionary > > meaning (any event is being produced by the utterance). Thus when you say > > "Do you have some time?" you might mean "Can you spare some time for me?" > > and the perlocutionary result of this is that you will actually help me > > (because you are in a position where you cannot say "no" to me, f.ex. > > because I am your boss). A lot of speech act theory has evolved from > this, > > notably in the work of Searle. Best to all, Rein Raud > > > > On Mar 11, 2017, at 21:18 , David Kellogg wrote: > > > > Ulvi, Mike... > > > > We started this thread with Ulvi's important remark that there is a > > difference between: > > > > "Don't do it." > > > > and > > > > "it is not necessary." > > > > Ulvi said that the difference does not lie in their polarity--they are > > both > > negative. Nor does it lie in their representational (referential, or > > "ideational" meaning). They both refer to "it" and to the advisability of > > "it". Ulvi said that the first was imperative, and the second was not > > (the > > technical term for the non-imperative form of the second is > > "indicative-declarative", as opposed to "indicative-interrogative" which > > would be a question). > > > > I shall call this form of meaning--for meaning it is--"interpersonal" > > meaning, in order to distinguish it from "ideational" meaning. I think > > that > > interpersonal meaning is meaning, but it is meaning which is directed > > towards organizing an interaction as the giving or getting of information > > or goods and services. Ideational meaning is meaning too, but it is > > directed towards the representation (hence, "indication") of human > > experience and logic. They're equally meaningful, but they are filled > > with > > different kinds of meanings. > > > > The difference is qualitative, and that is another way of saying that it > > is > > "revolutionary" (because revolution originally meant turning around axis; > > the first political "revolution" was the rather pathetic "turning" of > > Latin-speaking civilization from a republican to an imperial form under > > Augustus). The difference is between making a proposal and offering a > > proposition--i.e. between realizing a potential state and simply > > discussing > > an actual one. > > > > One of the interesting aspects of Professor Jang's paper is that it is > > about adolescents who are in the process of forming concepts, but who are > > not there yet. And one way in which an adolescent forms a concept about > > the > > difficult concept of a social contract, of citizenship, of nationality is > > pseudoconceptual: it is based on discussing "actual" perceptual > > differences > > between races. This might seem irrelevant to current political discourse. > > Unfortunately, it isn't. > > > > What does a teacher say to kids who are thinking this way? Do we say > > "Don't > > do it"? Or is it better to show them that it is not necessary? > > > > David Kellogg > > Macquarie University > > > > > > On Sat, Mar 11, 2017 at 7:58 PM, Ulvi ??il ulvi.icil@gmail.com>> wrote: > > > > Mike, please corrct me if i wrongly take this meaning that revolutions > > causes big numbers of death, death in masses, so we would not prefer > > them. > > > > But, what if we sum up all the deaths because of occupatinal murders in > > workplaces, deaths from drugs, murders of women and early death because > > of > > lack of sufficient health care and all the deaths due to the bad > > orgsanisation of society under capitalism and what is more turning of > > tens > > of millions of children into ignorant and fanatic human beings who are > > brought up able to kill anyone on the street etc > > > > Is it not more rational to put en end to this state of human society > > rather > > than to perpetruate it, allow it to exist. > > > > Unemployment itself 20 % in Turkey. > > > > > > > > > > > > 11 Mar 2017 03:14 tarihinde "mike cole" ucsd.edu>> yazd?: > > > > From my personal web page, Ulvi: > > > > *Apropos Thoughts on Revolutions and Their Causes* > > > > (From C. Dickens, *A Tale of Two Cities*, Ch 15) > > > > Along the Paris streets, the death carts rumble, hollow and harsh. > > > > Six tumbrels carry the day's wine to La Guillotine. All the devouring > > and > > insatiate monsters imagined since imagination could record itself, are > > fused in the one realization, Guillotine. And yet there is not in > > France, > > with its rich variety of soil and climate, a blade, a leaf, a root, a > > sprig, a peppercorn, which will grow to maturity under conditions more > > certain than those that have produced this horror. Crush human humanity > > out > > of shape once more, under similar hammers, and it will twist itself > > into > > the same tortured forms. Sow the same seed of rapacious license and > > oppression over again, and it will surely yield the same fruit, > > according > > to its kind. > > > > It is the nature of the fruits sewn by the French Revolution that give > > pause for thought. And perhaps accounts for the lack of reply to your > > articulately formulated note. > > > > mike > > > > > > > > On Wed, Mar 8, 2017 at 1:32 PM, Ulvi ??il vi.icil@gmail.com>> wrote: > > > > If I say > > > > don't do it, it is imperative. > > > > But if I say, > > > > It is not realistic and you do not need it. > > > > It is affirmative and even though negative, it is again affirmative, > > to > > demobilize you. > > > > What I mean is Revolution. > > > > Addressed to a married couple with two children. > > > > With 3 thousand Turkish liras in Istanbul in a rented home of at > > least > > 1000 tl for rent. > > > > 1 usd = 4 Turkish liras > > > > Survival economics. > > > > Any prospect? > > > > No. > > > > That simple. > > > > What is socialist revolution? > > > > It is neither an intention nor a wish. > > > > It is simple necessity. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From a.j.gil@iped.uio.no Mon Mar 13 09:14:32 2017 From: a.j.gil@iped.uio.no (Alfredo Jornet Gil) Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2017 16:14:32 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Don't do it In-Reply-To: References: <10944955-53C6-4C28-AECA-87EA5BF2BCB1@uniandes.edu.co> <4E54E642-1A2D-439D-A9E7-01756CFB0835@tlu.ee>, Message-ID: <1489421671879.72049@iped.uio.no> David, make sure you share the link with us again once your article in Language and Education on meta function comes online. I tried the DOI you gave us but it does not work. I am looking forward to read it! Alfredo ________________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of David Kellogg Sent: 13 March 2017 08:37 To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Don't do it In my own (unpublished) study, it was the interpersonal metafunction which emerged first, not the ideational one. That is, children grasped the idea of giving and getting goods and services before they had the idea that experience could be encoded in language and shared with somebody who didn't actually have it. (This study just confirmed work by Clare Painter, Jane Torr, and Halliday himself.) However, I think that Rein is right in one sense: there is some larger whole from which BOTH the interpersonal and the ideational must be co-differentiated. I don't think this differentiation is what happens in development, though: it's an artefact of analysis. I don't think that this larger whole exists in infants, or even in early childhood; to use the Pepperian idea in Karimi-Aghdam article, it's a kind of artefact that arises post hoc, from looking at contextualism (which is dispersive) and organicism (which is integrative) together. By looking at an integrated whole and by thinking about it as development-in-context, we infer it, but to assume that it actually happens, that all word meanings are "given" to children, is to commit the Augustinian fallacy (that Wittgenstein criticizes at the beginning of Philosophical Investigations) Halliday's got a name for this larger whole, at least once it arises in actual speech. It's the TEXTUAL metafunction, that is, the textual devices that we use to integrate interpersonal functions and ideational ones into a single clause. To return to the example I gave earlier: a) Don't do it. (interpersonal proposal, ideational material process, "you" and "it" are Actor and Goal, textually unmarked) b) It's not necessary (interpersonal proposition, ideational relational process "it" and "necessary" are Carrier and Attribute, textually unmarked) c) Don't do it, because it's not necessary. ("because" is a conjunctive adjunct which integrates the two propositions--it has neither interpersonal nor ideational function, but is a purely textual element). (I've got a study on how this metafunction arises in Korean kids--it seems to me that it's not explicit until quite late, in sixth grade, in my data. This one will actually be PUBLISHED...in Language and Education! (DOI: 10.1080/09500782.2017.1306074) David Kellogg Macquarie University On Sun, Mar 12, 2017 at 7:51 AM, Rein Raud wrote: > Yes, this I can agree with - especially as this is fairly close to my own > theory of meaning ("Meaning in Action", Polity 2016, ch.2), except that in > my opinion the ideational is already given to us interpersonally (as when > someone explains to us what a word means), while there is also an > "experiential" meaning with which this ideational claims identity. But what > you say makes sense. Best, Rein > > On Mar 11, 2017, at 22:41 , Martin John Packer wrote: > > > Rein, > > > > David is building here on Halliday?s analysis of the two fundamental > ?functions? of language, the ideational and the interpersonal. It is when > the child becomes able to combine the two in the same utterance that > grammar emerges. (That was not David?s point; I just find it a very > interesting idea!) > > > > Martin > > > > > > > > > > On Mar 11, 2017, at 3:27 PM, Rein Raud raud@tlu.ee>> wrote: > > > > David, I was only reacting to what you wrote: > > > > I shall call this form of meaning--for meaning it is--"interpersonal" > > meaning, in order to distinguish it from "ideational" meaning. I think > that > > interpersonal meaning is meaning, but it is meaning which is directed > > towards organizing an interaction as the giving or getting of information > > or goods and services. Ideational meaning is meaning too, but it is > > directed towards the representation (hence, "indication") of human > > experience and logic. They're equally meaningful, but they are filled > with > > different kinds of meanings. > > > > "Ideational" here seems to be what Austin calls "locutionary". > "Interpersonal", in turn, seems to be what Austin called "performative" (in > the illocutionary and perlocutionary varieties) and indeed you define it > as "directed towards organizing an interaction". Thus I don't think your > counter-argument here is wholly legitimate, or perhaps I've missed the > point. > > > > Best, > > > > Rein > > > > On Mar 11, 2017, at 22:09 , David Kellogg wrote: > > > > Here I'm talking about the difference between: > > > > a) Don't do it. > > b) You are doing it. > > c) Are you doing it? > > > > This is not a difference between locutionary, illocutionary, and > > perlocutionary force--Austin would say that all of these are locutionary > in > > their force, because the pragmatic purpose and the resulting event, which > > is the giving of linguistic examples and their reception, is the same. > And > > yet they are different. How so? > > > > They are different in the nature of the commodity which is put at risk. > In > > a) that commodity is goods and services, while in b) and c) that > commodity > > is information. This means that in a) language is ancillary--we can often > > perform the same "speech act" (to use the behavioristic terminology of > > Austin, Searle, and their disciples in pragmatics) using gesticulation, > > gesture, "eye language", or just intonation. But in b) and c) the use of > > lexicogrammar is central--we cannot successfully exchange propositions > > without encoding them lexicogrammatically. > > > > This is not the same difference that Austin is discussing. Austin is not > a > > linguist, so he wants to transfer meaning from language to context: to > > speech roles, to social recognition and to social outcomes. That's simply > > not possible in this situation: the meaning of b) and c) lies in the > > lexico-grammar and nowhere else. Speech act theory is to linguistics what > > behaviorism is to psychology. > > > > David Kellogg > > Macquarie University > > > > > > On Sun, Mar 12, 2017 at 6:33 AM, Rein Raud rein.raud@tlu.ee>> wrote: > > > > These differences have been discussed quite some time ago in J.L.Austin's > > "How to Do Things with Words" (1962), from which speech act theory > > originated. Austin distinguishes between locutionary (primary semantical) > > meaning, illocutionary meaning (what is being meant) and perlocutionary > > meaning (any event is being produced by the utterance). Thus when you say > > "Do you have some time?" you might mean "Can you spare some time for me?" > > and the perlocutionary result of this is that you will actually help me > > (because you are in a position where you cannot say "no" to me, f.ex. > > because I am your boss). A lot of speech act theory has evolved from > this, > > notably in the work of Searle. Best to all, Rein Raud > > > > On Mar 11, 2017, at 21:18 , David Kellogg wrote: > > > > Ulvi, Mike... > > > > We started this thread with Ulvi's important remark that there is a > > difference between: > > > > "Don't do it." > > > > and > > > > "it is not necessary." > > > > Ulvi said that the difference does not lie in their polarity--they are > > both > > negative. Nor does it lie in their representational (referential, or > > "ideational" meaning). They both refer to "it" and to the advisability of > > "it". Ulvi said that the first was imperative, and the second was not > > (the > > technical term for the non-imperative form of the second is > > "indicative-declarative", as opposed to "indicative-interrogative" which > > would be a question). > > > > I shall call this form of meaning--for meaning it is--"interpersonal" > > meaning, in order to distinguish it from "ideational" meaning. I think > > that > > interpersonal meaning is meaning, but it is meaning which is directed > > towards organizing an interaction as the giving or getting of information > > or goods and services. Ideational meaning is meaning too, but it is > > directed towards the representation (hence, "indication") of human > > experience and logic. They're equally meaningful, but they are filled > > with > > different kinds of meanings. > > > > The difference is qualitative, and that is another way of saying that it > > is > > "revolutionary" (because revolution originally meant turning around axis; > > the first political "revolution" was the rather pathetic "turning" of > > Latin-speaking civilization from a republican to an imperial form under > > Augustus). The difference is between making a proposal and offering a > > proposition--i.e. between realizing a potential state and simply > > discussing > > an actual one. > > > > One of the interesting aspects of Professor Jang's paper is that it is > > about adolescents who are in the process of forming concepts, but who are > > not there yet. And one way in which an adolescent forms a concept about > > the > > difficult concept of a social contract, of citizenship, of nationality is > > pseudoconceptual: it is based on discussing "actual" perceptual > > differences > > between races. This might seem irrelevant to current political discourse. > > Unfortunately, it isn't. > > > > What does a teacher say to kids who are thinking this way? Do we say > > "Don't > > do it"? Or is it better to show them that it is not necessary? > > > > David Kellogg > > Macquarie University > > > > > > On Sat, Mar 11, 2017 at 7:58 PM, Ulvi ??il ulvi.icil@gmail.com>> wrote: > > > > Mike, please corrct me if i wrongly take this meaning that revolutions > > causes big numbers of death, death in masses, so we would not prefer > > them. > > > > But, what if we sum up all the deaths because of occupatinal murders in > > workplaces, deaths from drugs, murders of women and early death because > > of > > lack of sufficient health care and all the deaths due to the bad > > orgsanisation of society under capitalism and what is more turning of > > tens > > of millions of children into ignorant and fanatic human beings who are > > brought up able to kill anyone on the street etc > > > > Is it not more rational to put en end to this state of human society > > rather > > than to perpetruate it, allow it to exist. > > > > Unemployment itself 20 % in Turkey. > > > > > > > > > > > > 11 Mar 2017 03:14 tarihinde "mike cole" ucsd.edu>> yazd?: > > > > From my personal web page, Ulvi: > > > > *Apropos Thoughts on Revolutions and Their Causes* > > > > (From C. Dickens, *A Tale of Two Cities*, Ch 15) > > > > Along the Paris streets, the death carts rumble, hollow and harsh. > > > > Six tumbrels carry the day's wine to La Guillotine. All the devouring > > and > > insatiate monsters imagined since imagination could record itself, are > > fused in the one realization, Guillotine. And yet there is not in > > France, > > with its rich variety of soil and climate, a blade, a leaf, a root, a > > sprig, a peppercorn, which will grow to maturity under conditions more > > certain than those that have produced this horror. Crush human humanity > > out > > of shape once more, under similar hammers, and it will twist itself > > into > > the same tortured forms. Sow the same seed of rapacious license and > > oppression over again, and it will surely yield the same fruit, > > according > > to its kind. > > > > It is the nature of the fruits sewn by the French Revolution that give > > pause for thought. And perhaps accounts for the lack of reply to your > > articulately formulated note. > > > > mike > > > > > > > > On Wed, Mar 8, 2017 at 1:32 PM, Ulvi ??il vi.icil@gmail.com>> wrote: > > > > If I say > > > > don't do it, it is imperative. > > > > But if I say, > > > > It is not realistic and you do not need it. > > > > It is affirmative and even though negative, it is again affirmative, > > to > > demobilize you. > > > > What I mean is Revolution. > > > > Addressed to a married couple with two children. > > > > With 3 thousand Turkish liras in Istanbul in a rented home of at > > least > > 1000 tl for rent. > > > > 1 usd = 4 Turkish liras > > > > Survival economics. > > > > Any prospect? > > > > No. > > > > That simple. > > > > What is socialist revolution? > > > > It is neither an intention nor a wish. > > > > It is simple necessity. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From tom.richardson3@googlemail.com Mon Mar 13 10:25:43 2017 From: tom.richardson3@googlemail.com (Tom Richardson) Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2017 17:25:43 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Don't do it In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi xmca-ers Looks to me like Ulci is on to a hiding to nowhere with his conviction that socialist revolution is a necessity. Strange to imply that *all *revolutions will *inevitably *result in social-human conditions worse that the overthrown ones, when the quoted French overturning of society was a bourgeois revolution. IMO Ulci adduces evidence that Turkish social conditions are at present intolerable. A literate debate about speech acts seems a strange displacement of her/his original anguished cry for changes that result in greater justice for oppressed populations. But then I believe that the current capitalist anarchy is unconditionally intolerable. [No strawpersons please - Stalinism was an brutally disastrously dysfunctional anti-social formation.] Cordialement Tom Richardson Middlesbrough UK On 8 March 2017 at 21:32, Ulvi ??il wrote: > If I say > > don't do it, it is imperative. > > But if I say, > > It is not realistic and you do not need it. > > It is affirmative and even though negative, it is again affirmative, to > demobilize you. > > What I mean is Revolution. > > Addressed to a married couple with two children. > > With 3 thousand Turkish liras in Istanbul in a rented home of at least > 1000 tl for rent. > > 1 usd = 4 Turkish liras > > Survival economics. > > Any prospect? > > No. > > That simple. > > What is socialist revolution? > > It is neither an intention nor a wish. > > It is simple necessity. > From tom.richardson3@googlemail.com Mon Mar 13 10:33:54 2017 From: tom.richardson3@googlemail.com (Tom Richardson) Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2017 17:33:54 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Don't do it In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Sorry* Ulvi* - I've got it right this time. Tom On 13 March 2017 at 17:25, Tom Richardson wrote: > Hi xmca-ers > Looks to me like Ulci is on to a hiding to nowhere with his conviction > that socialist revolution is a necessity. > Strange to imply that *all *revolutions will *inevitably *result in > social-human conditions worse that the overthrown ones, when the quoted > French overturning of society was a bourgeois revolution. > IMO Ulci adduces evidence that Turkish social conditions are at present > intolerable. > A literate debate about speech acts seems a strange displacement of > her/his original anguished cry for changes that result in greater justice > for oppressed populations. > But then I believe that the current capitalist anarchy is unconditionally > intolerable. > [No strawpersons please - Stalinism was an brutally disastrously > dysfunctional anti-social formation.] > > Cordialement > Tom Richardson > Middlesbrough UK > > On 8 March 2017 at 21:32, Ulvi ??il wrote: > >> If I say >> >> don't do it, it is imperative. >> >> But if I say, >> >> It is not realistic and you do not need it. >> >> It is affirmative and even though negative, it is again affirmative, to >> demobilize you. >> >> What I mean is Revolution. >> >> Addressed to a married couple with two children. >> >> With 3 thousand Turkish liras in Istanbul in a rented home of at least >> 1000 tl for rent. >> >> 1 usd = 4 Turkish liras >> >> Survival economics. >> >> Any prospect? >> >> No. >> >> That simple. >> >> What is socialist revolution? >> >> It is neither an intention nor a wish. >> >> It is simple necessity. >> > > From a.j.gil@iped.uio.no Mon Mar 13 10:48:46 2017 From: a.j.gil@iped.uio.no (Alfredo Jornet Gil) Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2017 17:48:46 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Jang's SL Article Discussion Message-ID: <1489427326574.46980@iped.uio.no> ?Dear all, David has started some very interesting comments on the current article for discussion on Tensions in Second Language Learning, which attach again here. Because some of these comments have been given at a different thread, I am starting here a thread that shall more centrally concern Jang's article. I copy below all what David has so far written about the article. I hope this will ?make it easy for Eun-Young and everyone else to follow on her article. I know ?Eun-Young is challenged time-wise by course responsibilities and I hope this will make it easier for her. Eun-Young, David mentions an article from 2011. If you wanted, you could also share the PDF with us for background, although the current article gives more than enough material for discussion, I think. Alfredo --------------------David Kellogg wrote: ------------------ t's very interesting to compare this paper with Professor Jang's 2011 paper co-authored with Robert T. Jimenez: Eun-Young Jang & Robert T. Jim?nez (2011) A Sociocultural Perspective on Second Language Learner Strategies: Focus on the Impact of Social Context, Theory Into Practice, 50:2, 141-148, DOI: 10.1080/00405841.2011.558443 In some ways, the papers are very similar--the data is identical in one place (p. 42), and the conclusions are for the most part congruent. But consider how different the titles are. "Impact" in one place, and "tension" in the other. There is this note to the 1935 version of Vygotsky's report on preschools, where Zankov, Elkonin and Shif complain about Vygotsky's idea that the child directs his or her own learning before preschool, the environment directs it after preschool, and preschool therefore represents a kind of transitional stage. On the one hand, if the child is directing his or her own learning, how can we say that the environment is the ultimate source of learning? And if the environment is the ultimate source of learning, as Vygotsky says, how can we say that the child is himself or herself part of the environment? Professor Jang gets around this problem just as Vygotsky does--adroitly. On the one hand, strategies are expanded to include "sets of actions performed to deal with problems (perceived by the researcher, indicated by the learners)". On the other, contexts are expanded to include "pedagogical assumptions, power relations, and interracial conflict". I think this solution to the problem is the correct one: when we consider the relationship of the child and the environment, we cannot treat it like an unstoppable force meeting an unmoveable object. But for me that means that both the child and the environment have to be considered in "internal" (that is, abstract, linguistic) terms. We can't think of speech as actions; it's more useful to think of actions as speech. We can't think of the social situation of development as a material setting: it's a relationship with others. Contrariwise, it seems to me that when we consider "racism", it is more helpful to consider it in "external", that is, concrete, nonlinguistic terms. In the 2011 paper, Professor Jang and her co-author are willing to openly criticize the idea that languages are learned in exactly the same way whether they are first or second languages. Here, they just quote the teacher's comments on "mommy skills". It's a very revealing quote. One thing it reveals is why it's probably not helpful to refer to "racist" as an "insult" (p. 40) or to imply that racism and anti-racism is really just a matter of having the right attitude (as the Republicans did in the Sessions debate or as Bernie Sanders did when he referred to Trump supporters who voted for Obama as "not having a racist bone in their bodies"). You can see that subjectively, the teacher is being anti-racist--all students, French, Turkish, Egyptian, Korean, use the same strategies, just like we all have mommies.She has all the right attitudes, and probably doesn't have a racist bone in her body. But that doesn't diminish by one jot the terrible damage that this kind of indiscriminate discrimination does in the classroom. David Kellogg Macquarie University ------------------------ On a related thread (Subject: Don't do it), David K. wrote:-------------- It seems to me that we need to clearly distinguish between "racism" and "racist sentiment". One of the interesting problems that comes up in Eunhee Jang's excellent article on second language learning strategies from a sociocultural point of view--a wonderful piece of "inside" work, introducing racial issues into an area where they have never been seriously discussed--is the use of "racist" (by the Korean kids to describe their teacher) as an "insult". I like the article. I think it's important work. But for that very reason, I think that it's important to resist any attempt to reduce "racist" to a personal insult. I think we've seen very very clearly, both in the Sessions confirmation hearing, and in the discussion of Trump's own anti-semitic behavior--that this kind of reduction of the political to the personal is precisely the kind of reducing the sociocultural to the cognitive that Professor Jang is trying to resist. David Kellogg Macquarie University ------------------------- Idem as above---------------------------------------- One of the interesting aspects of Professor Jang's paper is that it is about adolescents who are in the process of forming concepts, but who are not there yet. And one way in which an adolescent forms a concept about the difficult concept of a social contract, of citizenship, of nationality is pseudoconceptual: it is based on discussing "actual" perceptual differences between races. This might seem irrelevant to current political discourse. Unfortunately, it isn't.? David Kellogg -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Jang 2017 second-language strategies Tensions.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 1311334 bytes Desc: Jang 2017 second-language strategies Tensions.pdf Url : https://mailman.ucsd.edu/mailman/private/xmca-l/attachments/20170313/6115b75d/attachment-0001.pdf From ulvi.icil@gmail.com Mon Mar 13 11:06:45 2017 From: ulvi.icil@gmail.com (=?UTF-8?B?VWx2aSDEsMOnaWw=?=) Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2017 20:06:45 +0200 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Don't do it In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Thank you Tom. 13 Mar 2017 20:36 tarihinde "Tom Richardson" yazd?: > Sorry* Ulvi* - I've got it right this time. > Tom > > On 13 March 2017 at 17:25, Tom Richardson > wrote: > > > Hi xmca-ers > > Looks to me like Ulci is on to a hiding to nowhere with his conviction > > that socialist revolution is a necessity. > > Strange to imply that *all *revolutions will *inevitably *result in > > social-human conditions worse that the overthrown ones, when the quoted > > French overturning of society was a bourgeois revolution. > > IMO Ulci adduces evidence that Turkish social conditions are at present > > intolerable. > > A literate debate about speech acts seems a strange displacement of > > her/his original anguished cry for changes that result in greater justice > > for oppressed populations. > > But then I believe that the current capitalist anarchy is unconditionally > > intolerable. > > [No strawpersons please - Stalinism was an brutally disastrously > > dysfunctional anti-social formation.] > > > > Cordialement > > Tom Richardson > > Middlesbrough UK > > > > On 8 March 2017 at 21:32, Ulvi ??il wrote: > > > >> If I say > >> > >> don't do it, it is imperative. > >> > >> But if I say, > >> > >> It is not realistic and you do not need it. > >> > >> It is affirmative and even though negative, it is again affirmative, to > >> demobilize you. > >> > >> What I mean is Revolution. > >> > >> Addressed to a married couple with two children. > >> > >> With 3 thousand Turkish liras in Istanbul in a rented home of at least > >> 1000 tl for rent. > >> > >> 1 usd = 4 Turkish liras > >> > >> Survival economics. > >> > >> Any prospect? > >> > >> No. > >> > >> That simple. > >> > >> What is socialist revolution? > >> > >> It is neither an intention nor a wish. > >> > >> It is simple necessity. > >> > > > > > From a.j.gil@iped.uio.no Mon Mar 13 11:53:53 2017 From: a.j.gil@iped.uio.no (Alfredo Jornet Gil) Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2017 18:53:53 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Jang's SL Article Discussion In-Reply-To: <1489427326574.46980@iped.uio.no> References: <1489427326574.46980@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: <1489431232770.89078@iped.uio.no> Hi again, one thing that I find interesting in Jang's article, and which may connect to comments in the other thread (by David, Haydi...) concerning 'not reducing the political to the personal', is the issue of *ideology.* In particular, Jang discusses and empirically examines what she coins as a *Prescriptive* language ideology. As she describes in her paper, and as any educator will immediately recognise, this ideology exists as the classroom's orientations to a correct/incorrect form. In her article, she exhibits this through a number of sequences in which teacher-student and student-student relations involve *evaluations* with regard to proficiently using two rules: making connections between sentences and staying on the topic. As Jang shows, the prescriptive approach, which sets the final linguist form as the criterion for positively or negatively evaluating any response by any student, is such that more proficient readers/speakers will have easier access to positive evaluation. The ideology here then exists as a regime of power and differential access, of inequality. By treating all equally, we get to inequality. I was thinking that it seems that the prescriptive approach does focus on the final product, whereas the sociocultural approach that Jang pursues and Vygotsky first set forth has it that we should not focus on the final product but on its genesis, on the way the verbal form exists first as a social relation between people. Thus, in Episodes 1 and 2 in the article, if the participants had oriented towards a possible process of development, Ji-Woo's responses would have been heard and responded to as moments in a developmental trajectory. There would have been a very different social situation in which work would have been directed to make visible and available the dynamics of Ji-Woo's learning process. But the prescriptive orientation evaluates and makes salient only deficiency and achievement. On the other hand, and consistent with those (e.g., Stetsenko, Holzman) who have referred to Vygotsky's legacy as *revolutionary,* an orientation consistent with Vygotsky's teachings would bring with it not only a different situation, but also an *emancipatory* one. Instead of inequality brought about by treating all equally, we would have an equalitarian approach whose power resides in acknowledging and caring for history and diversity. On a side thought, and connected to David's (Halliday's) distinction between ideational and interpersonal functions of language, I was wondering what is the relation/difference between ideational and ideological. In the article, it seems clear that the language related competence on putting names to things and thereby building categories seems a condition for the racial/ethnic tension to exist. But of course, the tension is a relational, not just a lexical one. Thoughts? Alfredo ________________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil Sent: 13 March 2017 18:48 To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Jang's SL Article Discussion ?Dear all, David has started some very interesting comments on the current article for discussion on Tensions in Second Language Learning, which attach again here. Because some of these comments have been given at a different thread, I am starting here a thread that shall more centrally concern Jang's article. I copy below all what David has so far written about the article. I hope this will ?make it easy for Eun-Young and everyone else to follow on her article. I know ?Eun-Young is challenged time-wise by course responsibilities and I hope this will make it easier for her. Eun-Young, David mentions an article from 2011. If you wanted, you could also share the PDF with us for background, although the current article gives more than enough material for discussion, I think. Alfredo --------------------David Kellogg wrote: ------------------ t's very interesting to compare this paper with Professor Jang's 2011 paper co-authored with Robert T. Jimenez: Eun-Young Jang & Robert T. Jim?nez (2011) A Sociocultural Perspective on Second Language Learner Strategies: Focus on the Impact of Social Context, Theory Into Practice, 50:2, 141-148, DOI: 10.1080/00405841.2011.558443 In some ways, the papers are very similar--the data is identical in one place (p. 42), and the conclusions are for the most part congruent. But consider how different the titles are. "Impact" in one place, and "tension" in the other. There is this note to the 1935 version of Vygotsky's report on preschools, where Zankov, Elkonin and Shif complain about Vygotsky's idea that the child directs his or her own learning before preschool, the environment directs it after preschool, and preschool therefore represents a kind of transitional stage. On the one hand, if the child is directing his or her own learning, how can we say that the environment is the ultimate source of learning? And if the environment is the ultimate source of learning, as Vygotsky says, how can we say that the child is himself or herself part of the environment? Professor Jang gets around this problem just as Vygotsky does--adroitly. On the one hand, strategies are expanded to include "sets of actions performed to deal with problems (perceived by the researcher, indicated by the learners)". On the other, contexts are expanded to include "pedagogical assumptions, power relations, and interracial conflict". I think this solution to the problem is the correct one: when we consider the relationship of the child and the environment, we cannot treat it like an unstoppable force meeting an unmoveable object. But for me that means that both the child and the environment have to be considered in "internal" (that is, abstract, linguistic) terms. We can't think of speech as actions; it's more useful to think of actions as speech. We can't think of the social situation of development as a material setting: it's a relationship with others. Contrariwise, it seems to me that when we consider "racism", it is more helpful to consider it in "external", that is, concrete, nonlinguistic terms. In the 2011 paper, Professor Jang and her co-author are willing to openly criticize the idea that languages are learned in exactly the same way whether they are first or second languages. Here, they just quote the teacher's comments on "mommy skills". It's a very revealing quote. One thing it reveals is why it's probably not helpful to refer to "racist" as an "insult" (p. 40) or to imply that racism and anti-racism is really just a matter of having the right attitude (as the Republicans did in the Sessions debate or as Bernie Sanders did when he referred to Trump supporters who voted for Obama as "not having a racist bone in their bodies"). You can see that subjectively, the teacher is being anti-racist--all students, French, Turkish, Egyptian, Korean, use the same strategies, just like we all have mommies.She has all the right attitudes, and probably doesn't have a racist bone in her body. But that doesn't diminish by one jot the terrible damage that this kind of indiscriminate discrimination does in the classroom. David Kellogg Macquarie University ------------------------ On a related thread (Subject: Don't do it), David K. wrote:-------------- It seems to me that we need to clearly distinguish between "racism" and "racist sentiment". One of the interesting problems that comes up in Eunhee Jang's excellent article on second language learning strategies from a sociocultural point of view--a wonderful piece of "inside" work, introducing racial issues into an area where they have never been seriously discussed--is the use of "racist" (by the Korean kids to describe their teacher) as an "insult". I like the article. I think it's important work. But for that very reason, I think that it's important to resist any attempt to reduce "racist" to a personal insult. I think we've seen very very clearly, both in the Sessions confirmation hearing, and in the discussion of Trump's own anti-semitic behavior--that this kind of reduction of the political to the personal is precisely the kind of reducing the sociocultural to the cognitive that Professor Jang is trying to resist. David Kellogg Macquarie University ------------------------- Idem as above---------------------------------------- One of the interesting aspects of Professor Jang's paper is that it is about adolescents who are in the process of forming concepts, but who are not there yet. And one way in which an adolescent forms a concept about the difficult concept of a social contract, of citizenship, of nationality is pseudoconceptual: it is based on discussing "actual" perceptual differences between races. This might seem irrelevant to current political discourse. Unfortunately, it isn't.? David Kellogg From dkellogg60@gmail.com Mon Mar 13 14:50:05 2017 From: dkellogg60@gmail.com (David Kellogg) Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2017 08:50:05 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Don't do it In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: ("Ulvi" is a beautiful Turkish name. I think it means "uplifted" or "enlightened", or something like that.) We just had a revolution in South Korea, but in (at least) three ways it was a rather disappointing one. Most obviously, it was a political revolution and not a social revolution. On March 10 (at eleven in the morning precisely!) the Constitutional Court upheld the December impeachment of President Park Geunhye for high crimes and misdemeanours (a phrase that will stir the blood of our American friends!) and removed her from power. But of course the underlying social conditions, which are pretty close to what Ulvi described, are pretty much the same. Ulvi says that a family of four in Istanbul has an income of, say, 750 dollars a month, of which about a third goes for rent. In South Korea the median income is about twice that, but housing is a great deal more--the figure Ulvi gives us is about a weekly rent in Seoul). Social polarization means that hardly anybody even has a median income--the richest fifth of the population make six times what the bottom fifth makes. Secondly, the Constitutional Court upheld all the wrong articles of impeachment. The President was removed for peddling influence on behalf of a friend of her youth, whose father, a religious charlatan who claimed to speak for the President's murdered mother, helped the young orphan through a more than usually privileged, but more than usually difficult, childhood. The actual influence peddling, in this instance, consisted mostly of taxing the rich to give to fake charities set up for the upcoming Olympics in Pyeongchang and for various other sporting events--not an ideal form of social redistribution, but much to be preferred to profits as usual, and very much less than male politicians in South Korea routinely get away with. In contrast, the articles on blacklisting leftist opponents (including at least two members of our Vygotsky group in Seoul) and her grotesque dereliction of duty during the Seweol disaster (about which I wrote on this list at the time) were set aside. Thirdly, it's really not over. There's going to be a presidential election in sixty days, and unless something changes very fast we will simply get Mun Jae-in, the candidate that Park defeated by judicious election rigging and having the National Security Agency flood the country with...you guessed it...slanderous tweets. I have had many friends, including devoted members of our Vygotsky group, try to explain to me, for example, the difference between Mun's health care plan and Park's, and they usually end up (as Peg did not too long ago) simply intoning that equating the two is "wroooong" and that's it. The party I voted for, which at the time was the third largest in South Korea and the only working class party in parliament, remains dissolved and its leaders remain jailed. But there WAS one thing in this revolution which I think was not at all disappointing. Nobody got killed. I know, there were two people who died on the last day, but it's not at all clear to me that they were killed: I don't mean to sound heartless, and I know that Seoul weather is pretty harsh at this time of year, but the president's supporters are mostly--well, of a certain age, the age that remembers her father fondly; on the one hand, they often not in the best of health and on the other they tend to be excitable (in America, Korean students call them the "gas tank grandpas", because they show up at demos with jerry cans of petrol and lighters). Actually, Tom, this bloodlessness was the point that really got obscured in the linguistic discussion. It was Ulvi himself who introduced the idea that the arguments against revolution are usually imperatives, because they are so manifestly untrue when they are put to rent-paying working class families as declaratives. I don't see this as an irrelevance at all; quite the contrary. Mike then introduced a long quote from Dickens about how the psychological nature of people is immutable and fixed, and when placed in revolutionary conditions it will always act more or less the same: barbarously and bloodily. On the contrary! I think that the bloodlessness of the South Korean revolution is the rule, not the exception. When a tiny minority tries to cow the vast majority, they use terror, but when the vast majority at last turns on their tormentors and turns them out, violence is largely beside the point. Historically, the bloodshed of the French Revolution WASN'T mostly Parisian. Yes, there were thousands of executions in Paris, mostly because the bourgeoisie had little to offer the working masses except heads on pikes. But the real violence--a little less than half a million people--took place in the Vendee areas, south of Nantes and north of La Rochelle, where the religious wars happened under Henri III and Henri IV. It was ordinary peasants who did the dying on both sides. It happened precisely because Paris had little to offer these people besides rationalistic mumbo-jumbo nobody could really understand. As intellectuals, it's easy to feel irrelevant, and to want to make yourself more relevant by going down in the street and shouting. It alleviates some of the frustration we feel bystanding and handwringing and the guilt we feel as the "most dangerous" people that Ulvi spoke of. But I think that disasters like the Vendee happen precisely because although revolutionary workers do what they have to do, sometimes revolutionary intellectuals are too busy being revolutionary workers and not doing their real jobs. Part of that job is pointing out the real (that is, actual) role of violence in a revolutionary transformation. It is mostly potential and not real at all. As Shelley wrote after the terrible massacre at Peterloo: Little fear and less surprise Folded arms and steady eyes Look upon them as they slay Till their rage has died away Then.... Rise like lions, after slumbers Shake your chains away like dew In unvanquishable numbers You are many. They are few. David Kellogg Macquarie University On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 4:33 AM, Tom Richardson < tom.richardson3@googlemail.com> wrote: > Sorry* Ulvi* - I've got it right this time. > Tom > > On 13 March 2017 at 17:25, Tom Richardson > wrote: > > > Hi xmca-ers > > Looks to me like Ulci is on to a hiding to nowhere with his conviction > > that socialist revolution is a necessity. > > Strange to imply that *all *revolutions will *inevitably *result in > > social-human conditions worse that the overthrown ones, when the quoted > > French overturning of society was a bourgeois revolution. > > IMO Ulci adduces evidence that Turkish social conditions are at present > > intolerable. > > A literate debate about speech acts seems a strange displacement of > > her/his original anguished cry for changes that result in greater justice > > for oppressed populations. > > But then I believe that the current capitalist anarchy is unconditionally > > intolerable. > > [No strawpersons please - Stalinism was an brutally disastrously > > dysfunctional anti-social formation.] > > > > Cordialement > > Tom Richardson > > Middlesbrough UK > > > > On 8 March 2017 at 21:32, Ulvi ??il wrote: > > > >> If I say > >> > >> don't do it, it is imperative. > >> > >> But if I say, > >> > >> It is not realistic and you do not need it. > >> > >> It is affirmative and even though negative, it is again affirmative, to > >> demobilize you. > >> > >> What I mean is Revolution. > >> > >> Addressed to a married couple with two children. > >> > >> With 3 thousand Turkish liras in Istanbul in a rented home of at least > >> 1000 tl for rent. > >> > >> 1 usd = 4 Turkish liras > >> > >> Survival economics. > >> > >> Any prospect? > >> > >> No. > >> > >> That simple. > >> > >> What is socialist revolution? > >> > >> It is neither an intention nor a wish. > >> > >> It is simple necessity. > >> > > > > > From Peg.Griffin@att.net Mon Mar 13 15:27:09 2017 From: Peg.Griffin@att.net (Peg Griffin) Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2017 18:27:09 -0400 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Don't do it In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <009d01d29c48$f506af00$df140d00$@att.net> Please, David, leave me out of your claims as in your aside "and they usually end up (as Peg did not too long ago) simply intoning that equating the two is "wroooong" and that's it." I do more than intone and it is not an "ending up" and it is not simple. So, just leave me out of your claims. -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of David Kellogg Sent: Monday, March 13, 2017 5:50 PM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Don't do it ("Ulvi" is a beautiful Turkish name. I think it means "uplifted" or "enlightened", or something like that.) We just had a revolution in South Korea, but in (at least) three ways it was a rather disappointing one. Most obviously, it was a political revolution and not a social revolution. On March 10 (at eleven in the morning precisely!) the Constitutional Court upheld the December impeachment of President Park Geunhye for high crimes and misdemeanours (a phrase that will stir the blood of our American friends!) and removed her from power. But of course the underlying social conditions, which are pretty close to what Ulvi described, are pretty much the same. Ulvi says that a family of four in Istanbul has an income of, say, 750 dollars a month, of which about a third goes for rent. In South Korea the median income is about twice that, but housing is a great deal more--the figure Ulvi gives us is about a weekly rent in Seoul). Social polarization means that hardly anybody even has a median income--the richest fifth of the population make six times what the bottom fifth makes. Secondly, the Constitutional Court upheld all the wrong articles of impeachment. The President was removed for peddling influence on behalf of a friend of her youth, whose father, a religious charlatan who claimed to speak for the President's murdered mother, helped the young orphan through a more than usually privileged, but more than usually difficult, childhood. The actual influence peddling, in this instance, consisted mostly of taxing the rich to give to fake charities set up for the upcoming Olympics in Pyeongchang and for various other sporting events--not an ideal form of social redistribution, but much to be preferred to profits as usual, and very much less than male politicians in South Korea routinely get away with. In contrast, the articles on blacklisting leftist opponents (including at least two members of our Vygotsky group in Seoul) and her grotesque dereliction of duty during the Seweol disaster (about which I wrote on this list at the time) were set aside. Thirdly, it's really not over. There's going to be a presidential election in sixty days, and unless something changes very fast we will simply get Mun Jae-in, the candidate that Park defeated by judicious election rigging and having the National Security Agency flood the country with...you guessed it...slanderous tweets. I have had many friends, including devoted members of our Vygotsky group, try to explain to me, for example, the difference between Mun's health care plan and Park's, and they usually end up (as Peg did not too long ago) simply intoning that equating the two is "wroooong" and that's it. The party I voted for, which at the time was the third largest in South Korea and the only working class party in parliament, remains dissolved and its leaders remain jailed. But there WAS one thing in this revolution which I think was not at all disappointing. Nobody got killed. I know, there were two people who died on the last day, but it's not at all clear to me that they were killed: I don't mean to sound heartless, and I know that Seoul weather is pretty harsh at this time of year, but the president's supporters are mostly--well, of a certain age, the age that remembers her father fondly; on the one hand, they often not in the best of health and on the other they tend to be excitable (in America, Korean students call them the "gas tank grandpas", because they show up at demos with jerry cans of petrol and lighters). Actually, Tom, this bloodlessness was the point that really got obscured in the linguistic discussion. It was Ulvi himself who introduced the idea that the arguments against revolution are usually imperatives, because they are so manifestly untrue when they are put to rent-paying working class families as declaratives. I don't see this as an irrelevance at all; quite the contrary. Mike then introduced a long quote from Dickens about how the psychological nature of people is immutable and fixed, and when placed in revolutionary conditions it will always act more or less the same: barbarously and bloodily. On the contrary! I think that the bloodlessness of the South Korean revolution is the rule, not the exception. When a tiny minority tries to cow the vast majority, they use terror, but when the vast majority at last turns on their tormentors and turns them out, violence is largely beside the point. Historically, the bloodshed of the French Revolution WASN'T mostly Parisian. Yes, there were thousands of executions in Paris, mostly because the bourgeoisie had little to offer the working masses except heads on pikes. But the real violence--a little less than half a million people--took place in the Vendee areas, south of Nantes and north of La Rochelle, where the religious wars happened under Henri III and Henri IV. It was ordinary peasants who did the dying on both sides. It happened precisely because Paris had little to offer these people besides rationalistic mumbo-jumbo nobody could really understand. As intellectuals, it's easy to feel irrelevant, and to want to make yourself more relevant by going down in the street and shouting. It alleviates some of the frustration we feel bystanding and handwringing and the guilt we feel as the "most dangerous" people that Ulvi spoke of. But I think that disasters like the Vendee happen precisely because although revolutionary workers do what they have to do, sometimes revolutionary intellectuals are too busy being revolutionary workers and not doing their real jobs. Part of that job is pointing out the real (that is, actual) role of violence in a revolutionary transformation. It is mostly potential and not real at all. As Shelley wrote after the terrible massacre at Peterloo: Little fear and less surprise Folded arms and steady eyes Look upon them as they slay Till their rage has died away Then.... Rise like lions, after slumbers Shake your chains away like dew In unvanquishable numbers You are many. They are few. David Kellogg Macquarie University On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 4:33 AM, Tom Richardson < tom.richardson3@googlemail.com> wrote: > Sorry* Ulvi* - I've got it right this time. > Tom > > On 13 March 2017 at 17:25, Tom Richardson > > wrote: > > > Hi xmca-ers > > Looks to me like Ulci is on to a hiding to nowhere with his > > conviction that socialist revolution is a necessity. > > Strange to imply that *all *revolutions will *inevitably *result in > > social-human conditions worse that the overthrown ones, when the > > quoted French overturning of society was a bourgeois revolution. > > IMO Ulci adduces evidence that Turkish social conditions are at > > present intolerable. > > A literate debate about speech acts seems a strange displacement of > > her/his original anguished cry for changes that result in greater > > justice for oppressed populations. > > But then I believe that the current capitalist anarchy is > > unconditionally intolerable. > > [No strawpersons please - Stalinism was an brutally disastrously > > dysfunctional anti-social formation.] > > > > Cordialement > > Tom Richardson > > Middlesbrough UK > > > > On 8 March 2017 at 21:32, Ulvi ??il wrote: > > > >> If I say > >> > >> don't do it, it is imperative. > >> > >> But if I say, > >> > >> It is not realistic and you do not need it. > >> > >> It is affirmative and even though negative, it is again > >> affirmative, to demobilize you. > >> > >> What I mean is Revolution. > >> > >> Addressed to a married couple with two children. > >> > >> With 3 thousand Turkish liras in Istanbul in a rented home of at > >> least > >> 1000 tl for rent. > >> > >> 1 usd = 4 Turkish liras > >> > >> Survival economics. > >> > >> Any prospect? > >> > >> No. > >> > >> That simple. > >> > >> What is socialist revolution? > >> > >> It is neither an intention nor a wish. > >> > >> It is simple necessity. > >> > > > > > From dkellogg60@gmail.com Mon Mar 13 15:43:57 2017 From: dkellogg60@gmail.com (David Kellogg) Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2017 09:43:57 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Don't do it In-Reply-To: <1489421671879.72049@iped.uio.no> References: <10944955-53C6-4C28-AECA-87EA5BF2BCB1@uniandes.edu.co> <4E54E642-1A2D-439D-A9E7-01756CFB0835@tlu.ee> <1489421671879.72049@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: Alfredo: Here's an early draft I uploaded to Academia.edu: https://www.academia.edu/31850352/Thinking_of_Feeling_Hasans_Complaints_Vygotskys_Late_Lectures_and_the_Development_of_Narrative_in_Children Sometimes I prefer this version to the one that got accepted: it's a lot chattier and less IMRADish (I mean, less IntroMethodResultandDiscussion-ish). But the reviewers didn't like it and I can see their point too: part of the meaning of an academic is sounding like an academic, just as part of the meaning of a Frenchman is sounding like a Frenchman. This is relevant to another point: ideology and ideation, prescriptive vs transformative, and more generally perjorative vs. descriptive use of language. But that's another thread. David Kellogg Macquarie University On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 3:14 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil wrote: > David, make sure you share the link with us again once your article in > Language and Education on meta function comes online. I tried the DOI you > gave us but it does not work. I am looking forward to read it! > > Alfredo > ________________________________________ > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > on behalf of David Kellogg > Sent: 13 March 2017 08:37 > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Don't do it > > In my own (unpublished) study, it was the interpersonal metafunction which > emerged first, not the ideational one. That is, children grasped the idea > of giving and getting goods and services before they had the idea that > experience could be encoded in language and shared with somebody who didn't > actually have it. (This study just confirmed work by Clare Painter, Jane > Torr, and Halliday himself.) > > However, I think that Rein is right in one sense: there is some larger > whole from which BOTH the interpersonal and the ideational must be > co-differentiated. I don't think this differentiation is what happens in > development, though: it's an artefact of analysis. I don't think that this > larger whole exists in infants, or even in early childhood; to use the > Pepperian idea in Karimi-Aghdam article, it's a kind of artefact that > arises post hoc, from looking at contextualism (which is dispersive) and > organicism (which is integrative) together. By looking at an integrated > whole and by thinking about it as development-in-context, we infer it, but > to assume that it actually happens, that all word meanings are "given" to > children, is to commit the Augustinian fallacy (that Wittgenstein > criticizes at the beginning of Philosophical Investigations) > > Halliday's got a name for this larger whole, at least once it arises in > actual speech. It's the TEXTUAL metafunction, that is, the textual devices > that we use to integrate interpersonal functions and ideational ones into a > single clause. To return to the example I gave earlier: > > a) Don't do it. (interpersonal proposal, ideational material process, "you" > and "it" are Actor and Goal, textually unmarked) > b) It's not necessary (interpersonal proposition, ideational relational > process "it" and "necessary" are Carrier and Attribute, textually unmarked) > c) Don't do it, because it's not necessary. ("because" is a conjunctive > adjunct which integrates the two propositions--it has neither interpersonal > nor ideational function, but is a purely textual element). > > (I've got a study on how this metafunction arises in Korean kids--it seems > to me that it's not explicit until quite late, in sixth grade, in my data. > This one will actually be PUBLISHED...in Language and Education! (DOI: > 10.1080/09500782.2017.1306074) > > David Kellogg > Macquarie University > > On Sun, Mar 12, 2017 at 7:51 AM, Rein Raud wrote: > > > Yes, this I can agree with - especially as this is fairly close to my own > > theory of meaning ("Meaning in Action", Polity 2016, ch.2), except that > in > > my opinion the ideational is already given to us interpersonally (as when > > someone explains to us what a word means), while there is also an > > "experiential" meaning with which this ideational claims identity. But > what > > you say makes sense. Best, Rein > > > > On Mar 11, 2017, at 22:41 , Martin John Packer wrote: > > > > > Rein, > > > > > > David is building here on Halliday?s analysis of the two fundamental > > ?functions? of language, the ideational and the interpersonal. It is when > > the child becomes able to combine the two in the same utterance that > > grammar emerges. (That was not David?s point; I just find it a very > > interesting idea!) > > > > > > Martin > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mar 11, 2017, at 3:27 PM, Rein Raud > raud@tlu.ee>> wrote: > > > > > > David, I was only reacting to what you wrote: > > > > > > I shall call this form of meaning--for meaning it is--"interpersonal" > > > meaning, in order to distinguish it from "ideational" meaning. I think > > that > > > interpersonal meaning is meaning, but it is meaning which is directed > > > towards organizing an interaction as the giving or getting of > information > > > or goods and services. Ideational meaning is meaning too, but it is > > > directed towards the representation (hence, "indication") of human > > > experience and logic. They're equally meaningful, but they are filled > > with > > > different kinds of meanings. > > > > > > "Ideational" here seems to be what Austin calls "locutionary". > > "Interpersonal", in turn, seems to be what Austin called "performative" > (in > > the illocutionary and perlocutionary varieties) and indeed you define it > > as "directed towards organizing an interaction". Thus I don't think your > > counter-argument here is wholly legitimate, or perhaps I've missed the > > point. > > > > > > Best, > > > > > > Rein > > > > > > On Mar 11, 2017, at 22:09 , David Kellogg wrote: > > > > > > Here I'm talking about the difference between: > > > > > > a) Don't do it. > > > b) You are doing it. > > > c) Are you doing it? > > > > > > This is not a difference between locutionary, illocutionary, and > > > perlocutionary force--Austin would say that all of these are > locutionary > > in > > > their force, because the pragmatic purpose and the resulting event, > which > > > is the giving of linguistic examples and their reception, is the same. > > And > > > yet they are different. How so? > > > > > > They are different in the nature of the commodity which is put at risk. > > In > > > a) that commodity is goods and services, while in b) and c) that > > commodity > > > is information. This means that in a) language is ancillary--we can > often > > > perform the same "speech act" (to use the behavioristic terminology of > > > Austin, Searle, and their disciples in pragmatics) using gesticulation, > > > gesture, "eye language", or just intonation. But in b) and c) the use > of > > > lexicogrammar is central--we cannot successfully exchange propositions > > > without encoding them lexicogrammatically. > > > > > > This is not the same difference that Austin is discussing. Austin is > not > > a > > > linguist, so he wants to transfer meaning from language to context: to > > > speech roles, to social recognition and to social outcomes. That's > simply > > > not possible in this situation: the meaning of b) and c) lies in the > > > lexico-grammar and nowhere else. Speech act theory is to linguistics > what > > > behaviorism is to psychology. > > > > > > David Kellogg > > > Macquarie University > > > > > > > > > On Sun, Mar 12, 2017 at 6:33 AM, Rein Raud > rein.raud@tlu.ee>> wrote: > > > > > > These differences have been discussed quite some time ago in > J.L.Austin's > > > "How to Do Things with Words" (1962), from which speech act theory > > > originated. Austin distinguishes between locutionary (primary > semantical) > > > meaning, illocutionary meaning (what is being meant) and perlocutionary > > > meaning (any event is being produced by the utterance). Thus when you > say > > > "Do you have some time?" you might mean "Can you spare some time for > me?" > > > and the perlocutionary result of this is that you will actually help me > > > (because you are in a position where you cannot say "no" to me, f.ex. > > > because I am your boss). A lot of speech act theory has evolved from > > this, > > > notably in the work of Searle. Best to all, Rein Raud > > > > > > On Mar 11, 2017, at 21:18 , David Kellogg wrote: > > > > > > Ulvi, Mike... > > > > > > We started this thread with Ulvi's important remark that there is a > > > difference between: > > > > > > "Don't do it." > > > > > > and > > > > > > "it is not necessary." > > > > > > Ulvi said that the difference does not lie in their polarity--they are > > > both > > > negative. Nor does it lie in their representational (referential, or > > > "ideational" meaning). They both refer to "it" and to the advisability > of > > > "it". Ulvi said that the first was imperative, and the second was not > > > (the > > > technical term for the non-imperative form of the second is > > > "indicative-declarative", as opposed to "indicative-interrogative" > which > > > would be a question). > > > > > > I shall call this form of meaning--for meaning it is--"interpersonal" > > > meaning, in order to distinguish it from "ideational" meaning. I think > > > that > > > interpersonal meaning is meaning, but it is meaning which is directed > > > towards organizing an interaction as the giving or getting of > information > > > or goods and services. Ideational meaning is meaning too, but it is > > > directed towards the representation (hence, "indication") of human > > > experience and logic. They're equally meaningful, but they are filled > > > with > > > different kinds of meanings. > > > > > > The difference is qualitative, and that is another way of saying that > it > > > is > > > "revolutionary" (because revolution originally meant turning around > axis; > > > the first political "revolution" was the rather pathetic "turning" of > > > Latin-speaking civilization from a republican to an imperial form under > > > Augustus). The difference is between making a proposal and offering a > > > proposition--i.e. between realizing a potential state and simply > > > discussing > > > an actual one. > > > > > > One of the interesting aspects of Professor Jang's paper is that it is > > > about adolescents who are in the process of forming concepts, but who > are > > > not there yet. And one way in which an adolescent forms a concept about > > > the > > > difficult concept of a social contract, of citizenship, of nationality > is > > > pseudoconceptual: it is based on discussing "actual" perceptual > > > differences > > > between races. This might seem irrelevant to current political > discourse. > > > Unfortunately, it isn't. > > > > > > What does a teacher say to kids who are thinking this way? Do we say > > > "Don't > > > do it"? Or is it better to show them that it is not necessary? > > > > > > David Kellogg > > > Macquarie University > > > > > > > > > On Sat, Mar 11, 2017 at 7:58 PM, Ulvi ??il > ulvi.icil@gmail.com>> wrote: > > > > > > Mike, please corrct me if i wrongly take this meaning that revolutions > > > causes big numbers of death, death in masses, so we would not prefer > > > them. > > > > > > But, what if we sum up all the deaths because of occupatinal murders in > > > workplaces, deaths from drugs, murders of women and early death because > > > of > > > lack of sufficient health care and all the deaths due to the bad > > > orgsanisation of society under capitalism and what is more turning of > > > tens > > > of millions of children into ignorant and fanatic human beings who are > > > brought up able to kill anyone on the street etc > > > > > > Is it not more rational to put en end to this state of human society > > > rather > > > than to perpetruate it, allow it to exist. > > > > > > Unemployment itself 20 % in Turkey. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 11 Mar 2017 03:14 tarihinde "mike cole" > ucsd.edu>> yazd?: > > > > > > From my personal web page, Ulvi: > > > > > > *Apropos Thoughts on Revolutions and Their Causes* > > > > > > (From C. Dickens, *A Tale of Two Cities*, Ch 15) > > > > > > Along the Paris streets, the death carts rumble, hollow and harsh. > > > > > > Six tumbrels carry the day's wine to La Guillotine. All the devouring > > > and > > > insatiate monsters imagined since imagination could record itself, are > > > fused in the one realization, Guillotine. And yet there is not in > > > France, > > > with its rich variety of soil and climate, a blade, a leaf, a root, a > > > sprig, a peppercorn, which will grow to maturity under conditions more > > > certain than those that have produced this horror. Crush human humanity > > > out > > > of shape once more, under similar hammers, and it will twist itself > > > into > > > the same tortured forms. Sow the same seed of rapacious license and > > > oppression over again, and it will surely yield the same fruit, > > > according > > > to its kind. > > > > > > It is the nature of the fruits sewn by the French Revolution that give > > > pause for thought. And perhaps accounts for the lack of reply to your > > > articulately formulated note. > > > > > > mike > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Mar 8, 2017 at 1:32 PM, Ulvi ??il ul > > vi.icil@gmail.com>> wrote: > > > > > > If I say > > > > > > don't do it, it is imperative. > > > > > > But if I say, > > > > > > It is not realistic and you do not need it. > > > > > > It is affirmative and even though negative, it is again affirmative, > > > to > > > demobilize you. > > > > > > What I mean is Revolution. > > > > > > Addressed to a married couple with two children. > > > > > > With 3 thousand Turkish liras in Istanbul in a rented home of at > > > least > > > 1000 tl for rent. > > > > > > 1 usd = 4 Turkish liras > > > > > > Survival economics. > > > > > > Any prospect? > > > > > > No. > > > > > > That simple. > > > > > > What is socialist revolution? > > > > > > It is neither an intention nor a wish. > > > > > > It is simple necessity. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From dkellogg60@gmail.com Mon Mar 13 16:12:11 2017 From: dkellogg60@gmail.com (David Kellogg) Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2017 10:12:11 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Jang's SL Article Discussion In-Reply-To: <1489431232770.89078@iped.uio.no> References: <1489427326574.46980@iped.uio.no> <1489431232770.89078@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: Alfredo: Down the hall one of the Chinese translators is working on translations of the Chinese "State of the Union" address into English. The Chinese goes something like this: ????????? xi?och? p?nk?n q?d? j?nzh?n. Literally: "Eradicate Poverty Achieve Progress", i.e. "(The government) (made) some progress in the eradication of poverty." In Chinese we don't have to specify the agent, and we don't need to use the effective verb "made"; it's a happening and not a doing. This used to be because the agent went without saying--it's encoded in the grammar. Partly thanks to a poetic tradition going back more than a thousand years, Chinese lends itself to four-syllable slogan-like objects like "Eradicate Poverty" and "Achieve Progress", and putting them together sounds natural. We don't usually use a subject unless we want to stress it; it's much more common to just have a nominal topic and then a comment, like in this example. Because the government has a well established role in mobilizing the masses to carry out actions like famine relief and flood prevention and so on, the agent and the "doing" don't need to be specified: everybody knows it was the government, even if that weren't clear in the context of a government report. So we simply say it's a happening. Now that's changing. In fact, the government does relatively little to alleviate poverty. There are regional enterprises, and there are private businesses and so on. After the Sichuan earthquake, my brother-in-law loaded up his SUV with bottled water and drove down to the earthquake area to distribute it, and he says there was a huge traffic jam of other SUVs by entrepreneurs like him who had exactly the same idea. And for precisely this reason, we find that in the government report there is more and more explicit stipulation of the government's agency and of the effective means. Instead of just happening, the government does things. There is a similar link between ideology and ideation in English if you think about it. When something GOOD happens, it's because somebody DID it, but when something bad happens, "Stuff happens". Here's the point. We usually use "ideology" to mean something like conscious and deliberate ideation, usually of an intentionally deceitful or misleading variety. I don't really accept that. It seems to me that "ideology" really is equivalent to ideation, that is, to the communicative, representational function of speech, except that it is somewhat larger, both because the interpersonal and the textual functions also encode ideas and are also therefore ideological and because a lot of ideology is simply NOT specifying things. For example, when you say "it's raining", you are conveying the idea that rain is an event that just happens, and is not caused by any nameable entity. You don't normally say "it's birding" or even "it's shining". Similarly, we usually use "prescriptivism" to mean something like conscious and deliberate transformativism, usually of an authoritarian and dictatorial, and deceptive, sort. I don't really accept that either. On the contrary, what is really deceptive is to pretend that the process of education is meaningful without attending to its ultimate product. To me, "Eradicate Poverty Achieve Progress" is a perfect balance of process and product, and agency and effective means are only meaningful with respect to both. David Kellogg Macquarie University On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 5:53 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil wrote: > Hi again, > > one thing that I find interesting in Jang's article, and which may connect > to comments in the other thread (by David, Haydi...) concerning 'not > reducing the political to the personal', is the issue of *ideology.* In > particular, Jang discusses and empirically examines what she coins as a > *Prescriptive* language ideology. As she describes in her paper, and as any > educator will immediately recognise, this ideology exists as the > classroom's orientations to a correct/incorrect form. In her article, she > exhibits this through a number of sequences in which teacher-student and > student-student relations involve *evaluations* with regard to proficiently > using two rules: making connections between sentences and staying on the > topic. > > As Jang shows, the prescriptive approach, which sets the final linguist > form as the criterion for positively or negatively evaluating any response > by any student, is such that more proficient readers/speakers will have > easier access to positive evaluation. The ideology here then exists as a > regime of power and differential access, of inequality. By treating all > equally, we get to inequality. > > I was thinking that it seems that the prescriptive approach does focus on > the final product, whereas the sociocultural approach that Jang pursues and > Vygotsky first set forth has it that we should not focus on the final > product but on its genesis, on the way the verbal form exists first as a > social relation between people. Thus, in Episodes 1 and 2 in the article, > if the participants had oriented towards a possible process of development, > Ji-Woo's responses would have been heard and responded to as moments in a > developmental trajectory. There would have been a very different social > situation in which work would have been directed to make visible and > available the dynamics of Ji-Woo's learning process. But the prescriptive > orientation evaluates and makes salient only deficiency and achievement. On > the other hand, and consistent with those (e.g., Stetsenko, Holzman) who > have referred to Vygotsky's legacy as *revolutionary,* an orientation > consistent with Vygotsky's teachings would bring with it not only a > different situation, but also an *emancipatory* one. Instead of inequality > brought about by treating all equally, we would have an equalitarian > approach whose power resides in acknowledging and caring for history and > diversity. > > On a side thought, and connected to David's (Halliday's) distinction > between ideational and interpersonal functions of language, I was wondering > what is the relation/difference between ideational and ideological. In the > article, it seems clear that the language related competence on putting > names to things and thereby building categories seems a condition for the > racial/ethnic tension to exist. But of course, the tension is a relational, > not just a lexical one. Thoughts? > > Alfredo > > ________________________________________ > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil > Sent: 13 March 2017 18:48 > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Jang's SL Article Discussion > > ?Dear all, > > > David has started some very interesting comments on the current article > for discussion on Tensions in Second Language Learning, which attach again > here. Because some of these comments have been given at a different thread, > I am starting here a thread that shall more centrally concern Jang's > article. I copy below all what David has so far written about the article. > I hope this will ?make it easy for Eun-Young and everyone else to follow on > her article. I know ?Eun-Young is challenged time-wise by course > responsibilities and I hope this will make it easier for her. > > > Eun-Young, David mentions an article from 2011. If you wanted, you could > also share the PDF with us for background, although the current article > gives more than enough material for discussion, I think. > > > Alfredo > > > --------------------David Kellogg wrote: ------------------ > > > t's very interesting to compare this paper with Professor Jang's 2011 > paper co-authored with Robert T. Jimenez: > > Eun-Young Jang & Robert T. Jim?nez (2011) A Sociocultural Perspective on > Second Language Learner Strategies: Focus on the Impact of Social Context, > Theory Into Practice, > 50:2, 141-148, DOI: 10.1080/00405841.2011.558443 > > In some ways, the papers are very similar--the data is identical in one > place (p. 42), and the conclusions are for the most part congruent. But > consider how different the titles are. "Impact" in one place, and "tension" > in the other. > > There is this note to the 1935 version of Vygotsky's report on preschools, > where Zankov, Elkonin and Shif complain about Vygotsky's idea that the > child directs his or her own learning before preschool, the environment > directs it after preschool, and preschool therefore represents a kind of > transitional stage. On the one hand, if the child is directing his or her > own learning, how can we say that the environment is the ultimate source of > learning? And if the environment is the ultimate source of learning, as > Vygotsky says, how can we say that the child is himself or herself part of > the environment? > > Professor Jang gets around this problem just as Vygotsky does--adroitly. On > the one hand, strategies are expanded to include "sets of actions performed > to deal with problems (perceived by the researcher, indicated by the > learners)". On the other, contexts are expanded to include "pedagogical > assumptions, power relations, and interracial conflict". > > I think this solution to the problem is the correct one: when we consider > the relationship of the child and the environment, we cannot treat it like > an unstoppable force meeting an unmoveable object. But for me that means > that both the child and the environment have to be considered in "internal" > (that is, abstract, linguistic) terms. We can't think of speech as actions; > it's more useful to think of actions as speech. We can't think of the > social situation of development as a material setting: it's a relationship > with others. > > Contrariwise, it seems to me that when we consider "racism", it is more > helpful to consider it in "external", that is, concrete, nonlinguistic > terms. In the 2011 paper, Professor Jang and her co-author are willing to > openly criticize the idea that languages are learned in exactly the same > way whether they are first or second languages. Here, they just quote the > teacher's comments on "mommy skills". > > It's a very revealing quote. One thing it reveals is why it's probably not > helpful to refer to "racist" as an "insult" (p. 40) or to imply that racism > and anti-racism is really just a matter of having the right attitude (as > the Republicans did in the Sessions debate or as Bernie Sanders did when he > referred to Trump supporters who voted for Obama as "not having a racist > bone in their bodies"). > > You can see that subjectively, the teacher is being anti-racist--all > students, French, Turkish, Egyptian, Korean, use the same strategies, just > like we all have mommies.She has all the right attitudes, and probably > doesn't have a racist bone in her body. But that doesn't diminish by one > jot the terrible damage that this kind of indiscriminate discrimination > does in the classroom. > > David Kellogg > Macquarie University > > > ------------------------ On a related thread (Subject: Don't do it), David > K. wrote:-------------- > > > It seems to me that we need to clearly distinguish between "racism" and > "racist sentiment". One of the interesting problems that comes up in Eunhee > Jang's excellent article on second language learning strategies from a > sociocultural point of view--a wonderful piece of "inside" work, > introducing racial issues into an area where they have never been seriously > discussed--is the use of "racist" (by the Korean kids to describe their > teacher) as an "insult". > > I like the article. I think it's important work. But for that very reason, > I think that it's important to resist any attempt to reduce "racist" to a > personal insult. I think we've seen very very clearly, both in the Sessions > confirmation hearing, and in the discussion of Trump's own anti-semitic > behavior--that this kind of reduction of the political to the personal is > precisely the kind of reducing the sociocultural to the cognitive that > Professor Jang is trying to resist. > > David Kellogg > Macquarie University > > > ------------------------- Idem as above------------------------- > --------------- > > > One of the interesting aspects of Professor Jang's paper is that it is > about adolescents who are in the process of forming concepts, but who are > not there yet. And one way in which an adolescent forms a concept about the > difficult concept of a social contract, of citizenship, of nationality is > pseudoconceptual: it is based on discussing "actual" perceptual differences > between races. This might seem irrelevant to current political discourse. > Unfortunately, it isn't.? > > > David Kellogg > > From dkellogg60@gmail.com Mon Mar 13 16:28:03 2017 From: dkellogg60@gmail.com (David Kellogg) Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2017 10:28:03 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Don't do it In-Reply-To: <009d01d29c48$f506af00$df140d00$@att.net> References: <009d01d29c48$f506af00$df140d00$@att.net> Message-ID: Sorry, Peg. I really just meant to stress my own befuddlement. I am sure that these distinctions are clear to others somewhere (e.g., as Andy says, they are probably pretty clear to people who die as a result of them). dk On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 9:27 AM, Peg Griffin wrote: > Please, David, leave me out of your claims as in your aside "and they > usually end up (as Peg did not too long ago) simply intoning that equating > the two is "wroooong" and that's it." > I do more than intone and it is not an "ending up" and it is not simple. > So, just leave me out of your claims. > > -----Original Message----- > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@ > mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of David Kellogg > Sent: Monday, March 13, 2017 5:50 PM > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Don't do it > > ("Ulvi" is a beautiful Turkish name. I think it means "uplifted" or > "enlightened", or something like that.) > > We just had a revolution in South Korea, but in (at least) three ways it > was a rather disappointing one. > > Most obviously, it was a political revolution and not a social revolution. > On March 10 (at eleven in the morning precisely!) the Constitutional Court > upheld the December impeachment of President Park Geunhye for high crimes > and misdemeanours (a phrase that will stir the blood of our American > friends!) and removed her from power. But of course the underlying social > conditions, which are pretty close to what Ulvi described, are pretty much > the same. Ulvi says that a family of four in Istanbul has an income of, > say, 750 dollars a month, of which about a third goes for rent. In South > Korea the median income is about twice that, but housing is a great deal > more--the figure Ulvi gives us is about a weekly rent in Seoul). Social > polarization means that hardly anybody even has a median income--the > richest fifth of the population make six times what the bottom fifth makes. > > Secondly, the Constitutional Court upheld all the wrong articles of > impeachment. The President was removed for peddling influence on behalf of > a friend of her youth, whose father, a religious charlatan who claimed to > speak for the President's murdered mother, helped the young orphan through > a more than usually privileged, but more than usually difficult, childhood. > The actual influence peddling, in this instance, consisted mostly of > taxing the rich to give to fake charities set up for the upcoming Olympics > in Pyeongchang and for various other sporting events--not an ideal form of > social redistribution, but much to be preferred to profits as usual, and > very much less than male politicians in South Korea routinely get away > with. In contrast, the articles on blacklisting leftist opponents > (including at least two members of our Vygotsky group in Seoul) and her > grotesque dereliction of duty during the Seweol disaster (about which I > wrote on this list at the time) were set aside. > > Thirdly, it's really not over. There's going to be a presidential election > in sixty days, and unless something changes very fast we will simply get > Mun Jae-in, the candidate that Park defeated by judicious election rigging > and having the National Security Agency flood the country with...you > guessed it...slanderous tweets. I have had many friends, including devoted > members of our Vygotsky group, try to explain to me, for example, the > difference between Mun's health care plan and Park's, and they usually end > up (as Peg did not too long ago) simply intoning that equating the two is > "wroooong" and that's it. The party I voted for, which at the time was the > third largest in South Korea and the only working class party in > parliament, remains dissolved and its leaders remain jailed. > > But there WAS one thing in this revolution which I think was not at all > disappointing. Nobody got killed. I know, there were two people who died on > the last day, but it's not at all clear to me that they were killed: I > don't mean to sound heartless, and I know that Seoul weather is pretty > harsh at this time of year, but the president's supporters are > mostly--well, of a certain age, the age that remembers her father fondly; > on the one hand, they often not in the best of health and on the other they > tend to be excitable (in America, Korean students call them the "gas tank > grandpas", because they show up at demos with jerry cans of petrol and > lighters). > > Actually, Tom, this bloodlessness was the point that really got obscured > in the linguistic discussion. It was Ulvi himself who introduced the idea > that the arguments against revolution are usually imperatives, because they > are so manifestly untrue when they are put to rent-paying working class > families as declaratives. I don't see this as an irrelevance at all; quite > the contrary. Mike then introduced a long quote from Dickens about how the > psychological nature of people is immutable and fixed, and when placed in > revolutionary conditions it will always act more or less the same: > barbarously and bloodily. > > On the contrary! I think that the bloodlessness of the South Korean > revolution is the rule, not the exception. When a tiny minority tries to > cow the vast majority, they use terror, but when the vast majority at last > turns on their tormentors and turns them out, violence is largely beside > the point. Historically, the bloodshed of the French Revolution WASN'T > mostly Parisian. Yes, there were thousands of executions in Paris, mostly > because the bourgeoisie had little to offer the working masses except heads > on pikes. But the real violence--a little less than half a million > people--took place in the Vendee areas, south of Nantes and north of La > Rochelle, where the religious wars happened under Henri III and Henri IV. > It was ordinary peasants who did the dying on both sides. It happened > precisely because Paris had little to offer these people besides > rationalistic mumbo-jumbo nobody could really understand. > > As intellectuals, it's easy to feel irrelevant, and to want to make > yourself more relevant by going down in the street and shouting. It > alleviates some of the frustration we feel bystanding and handwringing and > the guilt we feel as the "most dangerous" people that Ulvi spoke of. But I > think that disasters like the Vendee happen precisely because although > revolutionary workers do what they have to do, sometimes revolutionary > intellectuals are too busy being revolutionary workers and not doing their > real jobs. Part of that job is pointing out the real (that is, actual) role > of violence in a revolutionary transformation. It is mostly potential and > not real at all. > > As Shelley wrote after the terrible massacre at Peterloo: > > Little fear and less surprise > Folded arms and steady eyes > Look upon them as they slay > Till their rage has died away > > Then.... > > Rise like lions, after slumbers > Shake your chains away like dew > In unvanquishable numbers > You are many. They are few. > > David Kellogg > Macquarie University > > > On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 4:33 AM, Tom Richardson < > tom.richardson3@googlemail.com> wrote: > > > Sorry* Ulvi* - I've got it right this time. > > Tom > > > > On 13 March 2017 at 17:25, Tom Richardson > > > > wrote: > > > > > Hi xmca-ers > > > Looks to me like Ulci is on to a hiding to nowhere with his > > > conviction that socialist revolution is a necessity. > > > Strange to imply that *all *revolutions will *inevitably *result in > > > social-human conditions worse that the overthrown ones, when the > > > quoted French overturning of society was a bourgeois revolution. > > > IMO Ulci adduces evidence that Turkish social conditions are at > > > present intolerable. > > > A literate debate about speech acts seems a strange displacement of > > > her/his original anguished cry for changes that result in greater > > > justice for oppressed populations. > > > But then I believe that the current capitalist anarchy is > > > unconditionally intolerable. > > > [No strawpersons please - Stalinism was an brutally disastrously > > > dysfunctional anti-social formation.] > > > > > > Cordialement > > > Tom Richardson > > > Middlesbrough UK > > > > > > On 8 March 2017 at 21:32, Ulvi ??il wrote: > > > > > >> If I say > > >> > > >> don't do it, it is imperative. > > >> > > >> But if I say, > > >> > > >> It is not realistic and you do not need it. > > >> > > >> It is affirmative and even though negative, it is again > > >> affirmative, to demobilize you. > > >> > > >> What I mean is Revolution. > > >> > > >> Addressed to a married couple with two children. > > >> > > >> With 3 thousand Turkish liras in Istanbul in a rented home of at > > >> least > > >> 1000 tl for rent. > > >> > > >> 1 usd = 4 Turkish liras > > >> > > >> Survival economics. > > >> > > >> Any prospect? > > >> > > >> No. > > >> > > >> That simple. > > >> > > >> What is socialist revolution? > > >> > > >> It is neither an intention nor a wish. > > >> > > >> It is simple necessity. > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > From rakahu@utu.fi Tue Mar 14 02:27:47 2017 From: rakahu@utu.fi (Rauno Huttunen) Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2017 09:27:47 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: FW: Vygotsky in Dialogue with Pepper! In-Reply-To: References: <4A593EF7722A9A40AAEF667E0FDC0EE2141502AB@mbs1.ad.jyu.fi> Message-ID: <6CE2A477-4834-438B-A3C8-844B78764C04@utu.fi> Hello, This very interesting article. I have never heard about Stephen C. Pepper although I am a philosopher. Thank you! Rauno Huttunen Jyv?skyl? Finland L?hetetty iPadista > Peter Smagorinsky kirjoitti 8.3.2017 kello 21.35: > > I haven?t read this (it just arrived), but hope it finds readers on this list. p > > From: Karimi Aghdam Ordaklou, Saeed [mailto:saeed.s.karimi-aghdam-ordaklou@student.jyu.fi] > Sent: Wednesday, March 8, 2017 10:02 AM > To: Peter Smagorinsky > Subject: Vygotsky in Dialogue with Pepper! > > Dear Prof. Smagorinsky, > > Warm greetings from cold Jyv?skyl?! > > I hope this finds you well. > > I write to send you a copy of my paper on Vygotsky which is published very recently with ?Human Development?. I hope it piques your interest to read it. > > Please kindly note that Anna Stetsenko of the City University of New York has written a commentary paper on this which is published in the same issue: https://www.karger.com/Journal/Issue/274647 > > Sincerely, > > Saeed > From ulvi.icil@gmail.com Tue Mar 14 05:10:59 2017 From: ulvi.icil@gmail.com (=?UTF-8?B?VWx2aSDEsMOnaWw=?=) Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2017 14:10:59 +0200 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Don't do it In-Reply-To: References: <009d01d29c48$f506af00$df140d00$@att.net> Message-ID: Just for information: When I wrote "the best educated and the most dangerous", I never thought to anybody in terms of "the most dangerous" for any xmca'ers. I did not in any way any idea to imply that. I thought mainly to that corporate life especially, e.g. chocolate firms in which child slavery in Cote d'Ivoire's cacao plantations is very consciously ignored by middle class managers who serve capital or to Zara for which child labor is exploited and also to the capitalist state apparatus, to EU, to NATO, etc Also in the "Don't do it", I did not the intention to imply that we are doing intellectual chat here whereas outside the world is burning. I am quite far away of such an anti-intellectualism. On the contrary, I am fully well aware that the xmca community is one of the best educated and most sensitive ones to humanity's problems. And even though my formation allows me to understand only a small part of it, I really appreciate very much the scientific work being done here for years. It is really incredible. Ulvi On 14 March 2017 at 01:28, David Kellogg wrote: > Sorry, Peg. I really just meant to stress my own befuddlement. I am sure > that these distinctions are clear to others somewhere (e.g., as Andy says, > they are probably pretty clear to people who die as a result of them). > > dk > > On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 9:27 AM, Peg Griffin wrote: > > > Please, David, leave me out of your claims as in your aside "and they > > usually end up (as Peg did not too long ago) simply intoning that > equating > > the two is "wroooong" and that's it." > > I do more than intone and it is not an "ending up" and it is not simple. > > So, just leave me out of your claims. > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@ > > mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of David Kellogg > > Sent: Monday, March 13, 2017 5:50 PM > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Don't do it > > > > ("Ulvi" is a beautiful Turkish name. I think it means "uplifted" or > > "enlightened", or something like that.) > > > > We just had a revolution in South Korea, but in (at least) three ways it > > was a rather disappointing one. > > > > Most obviously, it was a political revolution and not a social > revolution. > > On March 10 (at eleven in the morning precisely!) the Constitutional > Court > > upheld the December impeachment of President Park Geunhye for high crimes > > and misdemeanours (a phrase that will stir the blood of our American > > friends!) and removed her from power. But of course the underlying social > > conditions, which are pretty close to what Ulvi described, are pretty > much > > the same. Ulvi says that a family of four in Istanbul has an income of, > > say, 750 dollars a month, of which about a third goes for rent. In South > > Korea the median income is about twice that, but housing is a great deal > > more--the figure Ulvi gives us is about a weekly rent in Seoul). Social > > polarization means that hardly anybody even has a median income--the > > richest fifth of the population make six times what the bottom fifth > makes. > > > > Secondly, the Constitutional Court upheld all the wrong articles of > > impeachment. The President was removed for peddling influence on behalf > of > > a friend of her youth, whose father, a religious charlatan who claimed to > > speak for the President's murdered mother, helped the young orphan > through > > a more than usually privileged, but more than usually difficult, > childhood. > > The actual influence peddling, in this instance, consisted mostly of > > taxing the rich to give to fake charities set up for the upcoming > Olympics > > in Pyeongchang and for various other sporting events--not an ideal form > of > > social redistribution, but much to be preferred to profits as usual, and > > very much less than male politicians in South Korea routinely get away > > with. In contrast, the articles on blacklisting leftist opponents > > (including at least two members of our Vygotsky group in Seoul) and her > > grotesque dereliction of duty during the Seweol disaster (about which I > > wrote on this list at the time) were set aside. > > > > Thirdly, it's really not over. There's going to be a presidential > election > > in sixty days, and unless something changes very fast we will simply get > > Mun Jae-in, the candidate that Park defeated by judicious election > rigging > > and having the National Security Agency flood the country with...you > > guessed it...slanderous tweets. I have had many friends, including > devoted > > members of our Vygotsky group, try to explain to me, for example, the > > difference between Mun's health care plan and Park's, and they usually > end > > up (as Peg did not too long ago) simply intoning that equating the two is > > "wroooong" and that's it. The party I voted for, which at the time was > the > > third largest in South Korea and the only working class party in > > parliament, remains dissolved and its leaders remain jailed. > > > > But there WAS one thing in this revolution which I think was not at all > > disappointing. Nobody got killed. I know, there were two people who died > on > > the last day, but it's not at all clear to me that they were killed: I > > don't mean to sound heartless, and I know that Seoul weather is pretty > > harsh at this time of year, but the president's supporters are > > mostly--well, of a certain age, the age that remembers her father fondly; > > on the one hand, they often not in the best of health and on the other > they > > tend to be excitable (in America, Korean students call them the "gas tank > > grandpas", because they show up at demos with jerry cans of petrol and > > lighters). > > > > Actually, Tom, this bloodlessness was the point that really got obscured > > in the linguistic discussion. It was Ulvi himself who introduced the idea > > that the arguments against revolution are usually imperatives, because > they > > are so manifestly untrue when they are put to rent-paying working class > > families as declaratives. I don't see this as an irrelevance at all; > quite > > the contrary. Mike then introduced a long quote from Dickens about how > the > > psychological nature of people is immutable and fixed, and when placed in > > revolutionary conditions it will always act more or less the same: > > barbarously and bloodily. > > > > On the contrary! I think that the bloodlessness of the South Korean > > revolution is the rule, not the exception. When a tiny minority tries to > > cow the vast majority, they use terror, but when the vast majority at > last > > turns on their tormentors and turns them out, violence is largely beside > > the point. Historically, the bloodshed of the French Revolution WASN'T > > mostly Parisian. Yes, there were thousands of executions in Paris, mostly > > because the bourgeoisie had little to offer the working masses except > heads > > on pikes. But the real violence--a little less than half a million > > people--took place in the Vendee areas, south of Nantes and north of La > > Rochelle, where the religious wars happened under Henri III and Henri IV. > > It was ordinary peasants who did the dying on both sides. It happened > > precisely because Paris had little to offer these people besides > > rationalistic mumbo-jumbo nobody could really understand. > > > > As intellectuals, it's easy to feel irrelevant, and to want to make > > yourself more relevant by going down in the street and shouting. It > > alleviates some of the frustration we feel bystanding and handwringing > and > > the guilt we feel as the "most dangerous" people that Ulvi spoke of. But > I > > think that disasters like the Vendee happen precisely because although > > revolutionary workers do what they have to do, sometimes revolutionary > > intellectuals are too busy being revolutionary workers and not doing > their > > real jobs. Part of that job is pointing out the real (that is, actual) > role > > of violence in a revolutionary transformation. It is mostly potential and > > not real at all. > > > > As Shelley wrote after the terrible massacre at Peterloo: > > > > Little fear and less surprise > > Folded arms and steady eyes > > Look upon them as they slay > > Till their rage has died away > > > > Then.... > > > > Rise like lions, after slumbers > > Shake your chains away like dew > > In unvanquishable numbers > > You are many. They are few. > > > > David Kellogg > > Macquarie University > > > > > > On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 4:33 AM, Tom Richardson < > > tom.richardson3@googlemail.com> wrote: > > > > > Sorry* Ulvi* - I've got it right this time. > > > Tom > > > > > > On 13 March 2017 at 17:25, Tom Richardson > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Hi xmca-ers > > > > Looks to me like Ulci is on to a hiding to nowhere with his > > > > conviction that socialist revolution is a necessity. > > > > Strange to imply that *all *revolutions will *inevitably *result in > > > > social-human conditions worse that the overthrown ones, when the > > > > quoted French overturning of society was a bourgeois revolution. > > > > IMO Ulci adduces evidence that Turkish social conditions are at > > > > present intolerable. > > > > A literate debate about speech acts seems a strange displacement of > > > > her/his original anguished cry for changes that result in greater > > > > justice for oppressed populations. > > > > But then I believe that the current capitalist anarchy is > > > > unconditionally intolerable. > > > > [No strawpersons please - Stalinism was an brutally disastrously > > > > dysfunctional anti-social formation.] > > > > > > > > Cordialement > > > > Tom Richardson > > > > Middlesbrough UK > > > > > > > > On 8 March 2017 at 21:32, Ulvi ??il wrote: > > > > > > > >> If I say > > > >> > > > >> don't do it, it is imperative. > > > >> > > > >> But if I say, > > > >> > > > >> It is not realistic and you do not need it. > > > >> > > > >> It is affirmative and even though negative, it is again > > > >> affirmative, to demobilize you. > > > >> > > > >> What I mean is Revolution. > > > >> > > > >> Addressed to a married couple with two children. > > > >> > > > >> With 3 thousand Turkish liras in Istanbul in a rented home of at > > > >> least > > > >> 1000 tl for rent. > > > >> > > > >> 1 usd = 4 Turkish liras > > > >> > > > >> Survival economics. > > > >> > > > >> Any prospect? > > > >> > > > >> No. > > > >> > > > >> That simple. > > > >> > > > >> What is socialist revolution? > > > >> > > > >> It is neither an intention nor a wish. > > > >> > > > >> It is simple necessity. > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From haydizulfei@rocketmail.com Tue Mar 14 06:00:28 2017 From: haydizulfei@rocketmail.com (=?UTF-8?Q?=E2=80=AAHaydi_Zulfei=E2=80=AC_=E2=80=AA?=) Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2017 13:00:28 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Jang's SL Article Discussion In-Reply-To: <1489427326574.46980@iped.uio.no> References: <1489427326574.46980@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: <1484280397.9012782.1489496428618@mail.yahoo.com> Dear Alfred,Here's , I think , the other article you're referring to .BestHaydi From: Alfredo Jornet Gil To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" Sent: Monday, 13 March 2017, 21:20:28 Subject: [Xmca-l] Jang's SL Article Discussion ?Dear all, David has started some very interesting comments on the current article for discussion on Tensions in Second Language Learning, which attach again here. Because some of these comments have been given at a different thread, I am starting here a thread that shall more centrally concern Jang's article. I copy below all what David has so far written about the article. I hope this will ?make it easy for Eun-Young and everyone else to follow on her article. I know ?Eun-Young is challenged time-wise by course responsibilities and I hope this will make it easier for her. Eun-Young, David mentions an article from 2011. If you wanted, you could also share the PDF with us for background, although the current article gives more than enough material for discussion, I think. Alfredo --------------------David Kellogg wrote: ------------------ t's very interesting to compare this paper with Professor Jang's 2011 paper co-authored with Robert T. Jimenez: Eun-Young Jang & Robert T. Jim?nez (2011) A Sociocultural Perspective on Second Language Learner Strategies: Focus on the Impact of Social Context, Theory Into Practice, 50:2, 141-148, DOI: 10.1080/00405841.2011.558443 In some ways, the papers are very similar--the data is identical in one place (p. 42), and the conclusions are for the most part congruent. But consider how different the titles are. "Impact" in one place, and "tension" in the other. There is this note to the 1935 version of Vygotsky's report on preschools, where Zankov, Elkonin and Shif complain about Vygotsky's idea that the child directs his or her own learning before preschool, the environment directs it after preschool, and preschool therefore represents a kind of transitional stage. On the one hand, if the child is directing his or her own learning, how can we say that the environment is the ultimate source of learning? And if the environment is the ultimate source of learning, as Vygotsky says, how can we say that the child is himself or herself part of the environment? Professor Jang gets around this problem just as Vygotsky does--adroitly. On the one hand, strategies are expanded to include "sets of actions performed to deal with problems (perceived by the researcher, indicated by the learners)". On the other, contexts are expanded to include "pedagogical assumptions, power relations, and interracial conflict". I think this solution to the problem is the correct one: when we consider the relationship of the child and the environment, we cannot treat it like an unstoppable force meeting an unmoveable object. But for me that means that both the child and the environment have to be considered in "internal" (that is, abstract, linguistic) terms. We can't think of speech as actions; it's more useful to think of actions as speech. We can't think of the social situation of development as a material setting: it's a relationship with others. Contrariwise, it seems to me that when we consider "racism", it is more helpful to consider it in "external", that is, concrete, nonlinguistic terms. In the 2011 paper, Professor Jang and her co-author are willing to openly criticize the idea that languages are learned in exactly the same way whether they are first or second languages. Here, they just quote the teacher's comments on "mommy skills". It's a very revealing quote. One thing it reveals is why it's probably not helpful to refer to "racist" as an "insult" (p. 40) or to imply that racism and anti-racism is really just a matter of having the right attitude (as the Republicans did in the Sessions debate or as Bernie Sanders did when he referred to Trump supporters who voted for Obama as "not having a racist bone in their bodies"). You can see that subjectively, the teacher is being anti-racist--all students, French, Turkish, Egyptian, Korean, use the same strategies, just like we all have mommies.She has all the right attitudes, and probably doesn't have a racist bone in her body. But that doesn't diminish by one jot the terrible damage that this kind of indiscriminate discrimination does in the classroom. David Kellogg Macquarie University ------------------------ On a related thread (Subject: Don't do it), David K. wrote:-------------- It seems to me that we need to clearly distinguish between "racism" and "racist sentiment". One of the interesting problems that comes up in Eunhee Jang's excellent article on second language learning strategies from a sociocultural point of view--a wonderful piece of "inside" work, introducing racial issues into an area where they have never been seriously discussed--is the use of "racist" (by the Korean kids to describe their teacher) as an "insult". I like the article. I think it's important work. But for that very reason, I think that it's important to resist any attempt to reduce "racist" to a personal insult. I think we've seen very very clearly, both in the Sessions confirmation hearing, and in the discussion of Trump's own anti-semitic behavior--that this kind of reduction of the political to the personal is precisely the kind of reducing the sociocultural to the cognitive that Professor Jang is trying to resist. David Kellogg Macquarie University ------------------------- Idem as above---------------------------------------- One of the interesting aspects of Professor Jang's paper is that it is about adolescents who are in the process of forming concepts, but who are not there yet. And one way in which an adolescent forms a concept about the difficult concept of a social contract, of citizenship, of nationality is pseudoconceptual: it is based on discussing "actual" perceptual differences between races. This might seem irrelevant to current political discourse. Unfortunately, it isn't.? David Kellogg From haydizulfei@rocketmail.com Tue Mar 14 06:04:14 2017 From: haydizulfei@rocketmail.com (=?UTF-8?Q?=E2=80=AAHaydi_Zulfei=E2=80=AC_=E2=80=AA?=) Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2017 13:04:14 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [Xmca-l] Fw: Jang's SL Article Discussion In-Reply-To: <1484280397.9012782.1489496428618@mail.yahoo.com> References: <1489427326574.46980@iped.uio.no> <1484280397.9012782.1489496428618@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <770912206.9017492.1489496654615@mail.yahoo.com> Oops! forgot to attach! ----- Forwarded Message ----- From: ?Haydi Zulfei? ? To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" Sent: Tuesday, 14 March 2017, 16:30:28 Subject: Re: [Xmca-l] Jang's SL Article Discussion Dear Alfred,Here's , I think , the other article you're referring to .BestHaydi From: Alfredo Jornet Gil To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" Sent: Monday, 13 March 2017, 21:20:28 Subject: [Xmca-l] Jang's SL Article Discussion ?Dear all, David has started some very interesting comments on the current article for discussion on Tensions in Second Language Learning, which attach again here. Because some of these comments have been given at a different thread, I am starting here a thread that shall more centrally concern Jang's article. I copy below all what David has so far written about the article. I hope this will ?make it easy for Eun-Young and everyone else to follow on her article. I know ?Eun-Young is challenged time-wise by course responsibilities and I hope this will make it easier for her. Eun-Young, David mentions an article from 2011. If you wanted, you could also share the PDF with us for background, although the current article gives more than enough material for discussion, I think. Alfredo --------------------David Kellogg wrote: ------------------ t's very interesting to compare this paper with Professor Jang's 2011 paper co-authored with Robert T. Jimenez: Eun-Young Jang & Robert T. Jim?nez (2011) A Sociocultural Perspective on Second Language Learner Strategies: Focus on the Impact of Social Context, Theory Into Practice, 50:2, 141-148, DOI: 10.1080/00405841.2011.558443 In some ways, the papers are very similar--the data is identical in one place (p. 42), and the conclusions are for the most part congruent. But consider how different the titles are. "Impact" in one place, and "tension" in the other. There is this note to the 1935 version of Vygotsky's report on preschools, where Zankov, Elkonin and Shif complain about Vygotsky's idea that the child directs his or her own learning before preschool, the environment directs it after preschool, and preschool therefore represents a kind of transitional stage. On the one hand, if the child is directing his or her own learning, how can we say that the environment is the ultimate source of learning? And if the environment is the ultimate source of learning, as Vygotsky says, how can we say that the child is himself or herself part of the environment? Professor Jang gets around this problem just as Vygotsky does--adroitly. On the one hand, strategies are expanded to include "sets of actions performed to deal with problems (perceived by the researcher, indicated by the learners)". On the other, contexts are expanded to include "pedagogical assumptions, power relations, and interracial conflict". I think this solution to the problem is the correct one: when we consider the relationship of the child and the environment, we cannot treat it like an unstoppable force meeting an unmoveable object. But for me that means that both the child and the environment have to be considered in "internal" (that is, abstract, linguistic) terms. We can't think of speech as actions; it's more useful to think of actions as speech. We can't think of the social situation of development as a material setting: it's a relationship with others. Contrariwise, it seems to me that when we consider "racism", it is more helpful to consider it in "external", that is, concrete, nonlinguistic terms. In the 2011 paper, Professor Jang and her co-author are willing to openly criticize the idea that languages are learned in exactly the same way whether they are first or second languages. Here, they just quote the teacher's comments on "mommy skills". It's a very revealing quote. One thing it reveals is why it's probably not helpful to refer to "racist" as an "insult" (p. 40) or to imply that racism and anti-racism is really just a matter of having the right attitude (as the Republicans did in the Sessions debate or as Bernie Sanders did when he referred to Trump supporters who voted for Obama as "not having a racist bone in their bodies"). You can see that subjectively, the teacher is being anti-racist--all students, French, Turkish, Egyptian, Korean, use the same strategies, just like we all have mommies.She has all the right attitudes, and probably doesn't have a racist bone in her body. But that doesn't diminish by one jot the terrible damage that this kind of indiscriminate discrimination does in the classroom. David Kellogg Macquarie University ------------------------ On a related thread (Subject: Don't do it), David K. wrote:-------------- It seems to me that we need to clearly distinguish between "racism" and "racist sentiment". One of the interesting problems that comes up in Eunhee Jang's excellent article on second language learning strategies from a sociocultural point of view--a wonderful piece of "inside" work, introducing racial issues into an area where they have never been seriously discussed--is the use of "racist" (by the Korean kids to describe their teacher) as an "insult". I like the article. I think it's important work. But for that very reason, I think that it's important to resist any attempt to reduce "racist" to a personal insult. I think we've seen very very clearly, both in the Sessions confirmation hearing, and in the discussion of Trump's own anti-semitic behavior--that this kind of reduction of the political to the personal is precisely the kind of reducing the sociocultural to the cognitive that Professor Jang is trying to resist. David Kellogg Macquarie University ------------------------- Idem as above---------------------------------------- One of the interesting aspects of Professor Jang's paper is that it is about adolescents who are in the process of forming concepts, but who are not there yet. And one way in which an adolescent forms a concept about the difficult concept of a social contract, of citizenship, of nationality is pseudoconceptual: it is based on discussing "actual" perceptual differences between races. This might seem irrelevant to current political discourse. Unfortunately, it isn't.? David Kellogg -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Jang, Eun-Young; Jim?nez, Robert T. A Sociocultural Perspective on Seco =?UTF-8?Q?n Type: application/pdf Size: 127530 bytes Desc: not available Url : https://mailman.ucsd.edu/mailman/private/xmca-l/attachments/20170314/e290d5bd/attachment.pdf From lpscholar2@gmail.com Tue Mar 14 06:55:01 2017 From: lpscholar2@gmail.com (lpscholar2@gmail.com) Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2017 06:55:01 -0700 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: FW: Vygotsky in Dialogue with Pepper! In-Reply-To: <6CE2A477-4834-438B-A3C8-844B78764C04@utu.fi> References: <4A593EF7722A9A40AAEF667E0FDC0EE2141502AB@mbs1.ad.jyu.fi> <6CE2A477-4834-438B-A3C8-844B78764C04@utu.fi> Message-ID: <58c7f638.47ae630a.2ab85.634c@mx.google.com> So... The basis of the dialogue through *root metaphor theory*. What are persons thoughts on this way of approaching or moving in our practices. Guided or lead within root metaphors? Then the next step of their existing two synthesizing root metaphors (contextualism) and (organicism). Next, exploring if these two synthesizing movements can creat *hybrids*. Sent from my Windows 10 phone From: Rauno Huttunen Sent: March 14, 2017 2:29 AM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: FW: Vygotsky in Dialogue with Pepper! Hello, This very interesting article. I have never heard about Stephen C. Pepper although I am a philosopher. Thank you! Rauno Huttunen Jyv?skyl? Finland L?hetetty iPadista > Peter Smagorinsky kirjoitti 8.3.2017 kello 21.35: > > I haven?t read this (it just arrived), but hope it finds readers on this list. p > > From: Karimi Aghdam Ordaklou, Saeed [mailto:saeed.s.karimi-aghdam-ordaklou@student.jyu.fi] > Sent: Wednesday, March 8, 2017 10:02 AM > To: Peter Smagorinsky > Subject: Vygotsky in Dialogue with Pepper! > > Dear Prof. Smagorinsky, > > Warm greetings from cold Jyv?skyl?! > > I hope this finds you well. > > I write to send you a copy of my paper on Vygotsky which is published very recently with ?Human Development?. I hope it piques your interest to read it. > > Please kindly note that Anna Stetsenko of the City University of New York has written a commentary paper on this which is published in the same issue: https://www.karger.com/Journal/Issue/274647 > > Sincerely, > > Saeed > From lpscholar2@gmail.com Tue Mar 14 08:11:15 2017 From: lpscholar2@gmail.com (lpscholar2@gmail.com) Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2017 08:11:15 -0700 Subject: [Xmca-l] What is axiology and how does it relate to ontology and epistemology?, 03/06/15, CES PHD Support Group Message-ID: <58c80817.dd90620a.be0b9.63ee@mx.google.com> HERE IS A VERY BRIEF COMPANION TO GO WITH PEPPER?S ROOT METAPHOR THEORY What is axiology and how does it relate to ontology and epistemology?, 03/06/15, CES PHD Support Group This blog is aimed at the PHD students at the Centre for Education Studies and is part of the CESPHD support group. Typical entries include group meetings' discussions, links to articles and book and conference suggestions. https://blogs.warwick.ac.uk/cesphd/entry/what_is_axiology_1 Sent from my Windows 10 phone From lpscholar2@gmail.com Tue Mar 14 08:16:31 2017 From: lpscholar2@gmail.com (lpscholar2@gmail.com) Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2017 08:16:31 -0700 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: FW: Vygotsky in Dialogue with Pepper! In-Reply-To: <58c7f638.47ae630a.2ab85.634c@mx.google.com> References: <4A593EF7722A9A40AAEF667E0FDC0EE2141502AB@mbs1.ad.jyu.fi> <6CE2A477-4834-438B-A3C8-844B78764C04@utu.fi> <58c7f638.47ae630a.2ab85.634c@mx.google.com> Message-ID: <58c80952.15dc630a.770b4.7a0d@mx.google.com> Rauno, As Peter also recommends, Anna Stetsenko?s 7 page commentary to this interesting article is valuable. Fleshes out her lens of perception concerning agency and actors Sent from my Windows 10 phone From: lpscholar2@gmail.com Sent: March 14, 2017 6:55 AM To: Rauno Huttunen; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: RE: [Xmca-l] Re: FW: Vygotsky in Dialogue with Pepper! So... The basis of the dialogue through *root metaphor theory*. What are persons thoughts on this way of approaching or moving in our practices. Guided or lead within root metaphors? Then the next step of their existing two synthesizing root metaphors (contextualism) and (organicism). Next, exploring if these two synthesizing movements can creat *hybrids*. Sent from my Windows 10 phone From: Rauno Huttunen Sent: March 14, 2017 2:29 AM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: FW: Vygotsky in Dialogue with Pepper! Hello, This very interesting article. I have never heard about Stephen C. Pepper although I am a philosopher. Thank you! Rauno Huttunen Jyv?skyl? Finland L?hetetty iPadista > Peter Smagorinsky kirjoitti 8.3.2017 kello 21.35: > > I haven?t read this (it just arrived), but hope it finds readers on this list. p > > From: Karimi Aghdam Ordaklou, Saeed [mailto:saeed.s.karimi-aghdam-ordaklou@student.jyu.fi] > Sent: Wednesday, March 8, 2017 10:02 AM > To: Peter Smagorinsky > Subject: Vygotsky in Dialogue with Pepper! > > Dear Prof. Smagorinsky, > > Warm greetings from cold Jyv?skyl?! > > I hope this finds you well. > > I write to send you a copy of my paper on Vygotsky which is published very recently with ?Human Development?. I hope it piques your interest to read it. > > Please kindly note that Anna Stetsenko of the City University of New York? has written a commentary paper on this which is published in the same issue: https://www.karger.com/Journal/Issue/274647 > > Sincerely, > > Saeed > From carolmacdon@gmail.com Tue Mar 14 08:38:55 2017 From: carolmacdon@gmail.com (Carol Macdonald) Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2017 17:38:55 +0200 Subject: [Xmca-l] The Mathematics of Mathematics Message-ID: Wolff-Michael Roth's new book has just come to my notice. Wolff-Michael, would you like to explain a bit to our whole community? It looks very interesting indeed. Regards Carol -- Carol A Macdonald Ph.D (Edin) Cultural Historical Activity Theory Honorary Research Fellow: Department of Linguistics, Unisa alternative email address: tmacdoca@unisa.ac.za From carolmacdon@gmail.com Tue Mar 14 08:38:55 2017 From: carolmacdon@gmail.com (Carol Macdonald) Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2017 17:38:55 +0200 Subject: [Xmca-l] The Mathematics of Mathematics Message-ID: Wolff-Michael Roth's new book has just come to my notice. Wolff-Michael, would you like to explain a bit to our whole community? It looks very interesting indeed. Regards Carol -- Carol A Macdonald Ph.D (Edin) Cultural Historical Activity Theory Honorary Research Fellow: Department of Linguistics, Unisa alternative email address: tmacdoca@unisa.ac.za From a.j.gil@iped.uio.no Tue Mar 14 09:57:06 2017 From: a.j.gil@iped.uio.no (Alfredo Jornet Gil) Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2017 16:57:06 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Don't do it In-Reply-To: References: <10944955-53C6-4C28-AECA-87EA5BF2BCB1@uniandes.edu.co> <4E54E642-1A2D-439D-A9E7-01756CFB0835@tlu.ee> <1489421671879.72049@iped.uio.no>, Message-ID: <1489510627048.8055@iped.uio.no> thanks for sharing David, A ________________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of David Kellogg Sent: 13 March 2017 23:43 To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Don't do it Alfredo: Here's an early draft I uploaded to Academia.edu: https://www.academia.edu/31850352/Thinking_of_Feeling_Hasans_Complaints_Vygotskys_Late_Lectures_and_the_Development_of_Narrative_in_Children Sometimes I prefer this version to the one that got accepted: it's a lot chattier and less IMRADish (I mean, less IntroMethodResultandDiscussion-ish). But the reviewers didn't like it and I can see their point too: part of the meaning of an academic is sounding like an academic, just as part of the meaning of a Frenchman is sounding like a Frenchman. This is relevant to another point: ideology and ideation, prescriptive vs transformative, and more generally perjorative vs. descriptive use of language. But that's another thread. David Kellogg Macquarie University On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 3:14 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil wrote: > David, make sure you share the link with us again once your article in > Language and Education on meta function comes online. I tried the DOI you > gave us but it does not work. I am looking forward to read it! > > Alfredo > ________________________________________ > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > on behalf of David Kellogg > Sent: 13 March 2017 08:37 > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Don't do it > > In my own (unpublished) study, it was the interpersonal metafunction which > emerged first, not the ideational one. That is, children grasped the idea > of giving and getting goods and services before they had the idea that > experience could be encoded in language and shared with somebody who didn't > actually have it. (This study just confirmed work by Clare Painter, Jane > Torr, and Halliday himself.) > > However, I think that Rein is right in one sense: there is some larger > whole from which BOTH the interpersonal and the ideational must be > co-differentiated. I don't think this differentiation is what happens in > development, though: it's an artefact of analysis. I don't think that this > larger whole exists in infants, or even in early childhood; to use the > Pepperian idea in Karimi-Aghdam article, it's a kind of artefact that > arises post hoc, from looking at contextualism (which is dispersive) and > organicism (which is integrative) together. By looking at an integrated > whole and by thinking about it as development-in-context, we infer it, but > to assume that it actually happens, that all word meanings are "given" to > children, is to commit the Augustinian fallacy (that Wittgenstein > criticizes at the beginning of Philosophical Investigations) > > Halliday's got a name for this larger whole, at least once it arises in > actual speech. It's the TEXTUAL metafunction, that is, the textual devices > that we use to integrate interpersonal functions and ideational ones into a > single clause. To return to the example I gave earlier: > > a) Don't do it. (interpersonal proposal, ideational material process, "you" > and "it" are Actor and Goal, textually unmarked) > b) It's not necessary (interpersonal proposition, ideational relational > process "it" and "necessary" are Carrier and Attribute, textually unmarked) > c) Don't do it, because it's not necessary. ("because" is a conjunctive > adjunct which integrates the two propositions--it has neither interpersonal > nor ideational function, but is a purely textual element). > > (I've got a study on how this metafunction arises in Korean kids--it seems > to me that it's not explicit until quite late, in sixth grade, in my data. > This one will actually be PUBLISHED...in Language and Education! (DOI: > 10.1080/09500782.2017.1306074) > > David Kellogg > Macquarie University > > On Sun, Mar 12, 2017 at 7:51 AM, Rein Raud wrote: > > > Yes, this I can agree with - especially as this is fairly close to my own > > theory of meaning ("Meaning in Action", Polity 2016, ch.2), except that > in > > my opinion the ideational is already given to us interpersonally (as when > > someone explains to us what a word means), while there is also an > > "experiential" meaning with which this ideational claims identity. But > what > > you say makes sense. Best, Rein > > > > On Mar 11, 2017, at 22:41 , Martin John Packer wrote: > > > > > Rein, > > > > > > David is building here on Halliday?s analysis of the two fundamental > > ?functions? of language, the ideational and the interpersonal. It is when > > the child becomes able to combine the two in the same utterance that > > grammar emerges. (That was not David?s point; I just find it a very > > interesting idea!) > > > > > > Martin > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mar 11, 2017, at 3:27 PM, Rein Raud > raud@tlu.ee>> wrote: > > > > > > David, I was only reacting to what you wrote: > > > > > > I shall call this form of meaning--for meaning it is--"interpersonal" > > > meaning, in order to distinguish it from "ideational" meaning. I think > > that > > > interpersonal meaning is meaning, but it is meaning which is directed > > > towards organizing an interaction as the giving or getting of > information > > > or goods and services. Ideational meaning is meaning too, but it is > > > directed towards the representation (hence, "indication") of human > > > experience and logic. They're equally meaningful, but they are filled > > with > > > different kinds of meanings. > > > > > > "Ideational" here seems to be what Austin calls "locutionary". > > "Interpersonal", in turn, seems to be what Austin called "performative" > (in > > the illocutionary and perlocutionary varieties) and indeed you define it > > as "directed towards organizing an interaction". Thus I don't think your > > counter-argument here is wholly legitimate, or perhaps I've missed the > > point. > > > > > > Best, > > > > > > Rein > > > > > > On Mar 11, 2017, at 22:09 , David Kellogg wrote: > > > > > > Here I'm talking about the difference between: > > > > > > a) Don't do it. > > > b) You are doing it. > > > c) Are you doing it? > > > > > > This is not a difference between locutionary, illocutionary, and > > > perlocutionary force--Austin would say that all of these are > locutionary > > in > > > their force, because the pragmatic purpose and the resulting event, > which > > > is the giving of linguistic examples and their reception, is the same. > > And > > > yet they are different. How so? > > > > > > They are different in the nature of the commodity which is put at risk. > > In > > > a) that commodity is goods and services, while in b) and c) that > > commodity > > > is information. This means that in a) language is ancillary--we can > often > > > perform the same "speech act" (to use the behavioristic terminology of > > > Austin, Searle, and their disciples in pragmatics) using gesticulation, > > > gesture, "eye language", or just intonation. But in b) and c) the use > of > > > lexicogrammar is central--we cannot successfully exchange propositions > > > without encoding them lexicogrammatically. > > > > > > This is not the same difference that Austin is discussing. Austin is > not > > a > > > linguist, so he wants to transfer meaning from language to context: to > > > speech roles, to social recognition and to social outcomes. That's > simply > > > not possible in this situation: the meaning of b) and c) lies in the > > > lexico-grammar and nowhere else. Speech act theory is to linguistics > what > > > behaviorism is to psychology. > > > > > > David Kellogg > > > Macquarie University > > > > > > > > > On Sun, Mar 12, 2017 at 6:33 AM, Rein Raud > rein.raud@tlu.ee>> wrote: > > > > > > These differences have been discussed quite some time ago in > J.L.Austin's > > > "How to Do Things with Words" (1962), from which speech act theory > > > originated. Austin distinguishes between locutionary (primary > semantical) > > > meaning, illocutionary meaning (what is being meant) and perlocutionary > > > meaning (any event is being produced by the utterance). Thus when you > say > > > "Do you have some time?" you might mean "Can you spare some time for > me?" > > > and the perlocutionary result of this is that you will actually help me > > > (because you are in a position where you cannot say "no" to me, f.ex. > > > because I am your boss). A lot of speech act theory has evolved from > > this, > > > notably in the work of Searle. Best to all, Rein Raud > > > > > > On Mar 11, 2017, at 21:18 , David Kellogg wrote: > > > > > > Ulvi, Mike... > > > > > > We started this thread with Ulvi's important remark that there is a > > > difference between: > > > > > > "Don't do it." > > > > > > and > > > > > > "it is not necessary." > > > > > > Ulvi said that the difference does not lie in their polarity--they are > > > both > > > negative. Nor does it lie in their representational (referential, or > > > "ideational" meaning). They both refer to "it" and to the advisability > of > > > "it". Ulvi said that the first was imperative, and the second was not > > > (the > > > technical term for the non-imperative form of the second is > > > "indicative-declarative", as opposed to "indicative-interrogative" > which > > > would be a question). > > > > > > I shall call this form of meaning--for meaning it is--"interpersonal" > > > meaning, in order to distinguish it from "ideational" meaning. I think > > > that > > > interpersonal meaning is meaning, but it is meaning which is directed > > > towards organizing an interaction as the giving or getting of > information > > > or goods and services. Ideational meaning is meaning too, but it is > > > directed towards the representation (hence, "indication") of human > > > experience and logic. They're equally meaningful, but they are filled > > > with > > > different kinds of meanings. > > > > > > The difference is qualitative, and that is another way of saying that > it > > > is > > > "revolutionary" (because revolution originally meant turning around > axis; > > > the first political "revolution" was the rather pathetic "turning" of > > > Latin-speaking civilization from a republican to an imperial form under > > > Augustus). The difference is between making a proposal and offering a > > > proposition--i.e. between realizing a potential state and simply > > > discussing > > > an actual one. > > > > > > One of the interesting aspects of Professor Jang's paper is that it is > > > about adolescents who are in the process of forming concepts, but who > are > > > not there yet. And one way in which an adolescent forms a concept about > > > the > > > difficult concept of a social contract, of citizenship, of nationality > is > > > pseudoconceptual: it is based on discussing "actual" perceptual > > > differences > > > between races. This might seem irrelevant to current political > discourse. > > > Unfortunately, it isn't. > > > > > > What does a teacher say to kids who are thinking this way? Do we say > > > "Don't > > > do it"? Or is it better to show them that it is not necessary? > > > > > > David Kellogg > > > Macquarie University > > > > > > > > > On Sat, Mar 11, 2017 at 7:58 PM, Ulvi ??il > ulvi.icil@gmail.com>> wrote: > > > > > > Mike, please corrct me if i wrongly take this meaning that revolutions > > > causes big numbers of death, death in masses, so we would not prefer > > > them. > > > > > > But, what if we sum up all the deaths because of occupatinal murders in > > > workplaces, deaths from drugs, murders of women and early death because > > > of > > > lack of sufficient health care and all the deaths due to the bad > > > orgsanisation of society under capitalism and what is more turning of > > > tens > > > of millions of children into ignorant and fanatic human beings who are > > > brought up able to kill anyone on the street etc > > > > > > Is it not more rational to put en end to this state of human society > > > rather > > > than to perpetruate it, allow it to exist. > > > > > > Unemployment itself 20 % in Turkey. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 11 Mar 2017 03:14 tarihinde "mike cole" > ucsd.edu>> yazd?: > > > > > > From my personal web page, Ulvi: > > > > > > *Apropos Thoughts on Revolutions and Their Causes* > > > > > > (From C. Dickens, *A Tale of Two Cities*, Ch 15) > > > > > > Along the Paris streets, the death carts rumble, hollow and harsh. > > > > > > Six tumbrels carry the day's wine to La Guillotine. All the devouring > > > and > > > insatiate monsters imagined since imagination could record itself, are > > > fused in the one realization, Guillotine. And yet there is not in > > > France, > > > with its rich variety of soil and climate, a blade, a leaf, a root, a > > > sprig, a peppercorn, which will grow to maturity under conditions more > > > certain than those that have produced this horror. Crush human humanity > > > out > > > of shape once more, under similar hammers, and it will twist itself > > > into > > > the same tortured forms. Sow the same seed of rapacious license and > > > oppression over again, and it will surely yield the same fruit, > > > according > > > to its kind. > > > > > > It is the nature of the fruits sewn by the French Revolution that give > > > pause for thought. And perhaps accounts for the lack of reply to your > > > articulately formulated note. > > > > > > mike > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Mar 8, 2017 at 1:32 PM, Ulvi ??il ul > > vi.icil@gmail.com>> wrote: > > > > > > If I say > > > > > > don't do it, it is imperative. > > > > > > But if I say, > > > > > > It is not realistic and you do not need it. > > > > > > It is affirmative and even though negative, it is again affirmative, > > > to > > > demobilize you. > > > > > > What I mean is Revolution. > > > > > > Addressed to a married couple with two children. > > > > > > With 3 thousand Turkish liras in Istanbul in a rented home of at > > > least > > > 1000 tl for rent. > > > > > > 1 usd = 4 Turkish liras > > > > > > Survival economics. > > > > > > Any prospect? > > > > > > No. > > > > > > That simple. > > > > > > What is socialist revolution? > > > > > > It is neither an intention nor a wish. > > > > > > It is simple necessity. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From mcole@ucsd.edu Tue Mar 14 10:42:52 2017 From: mcole@ucsd.edu (mike cole) Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2017 10:42:52 -0700 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Don't do it In-Reply-To: <1489510627048.8055@iped.uio.no> References: <10944955-53C6-4C28-AECA-87EA5BF2BCB1@uniandes.edu.co> <4E54E642-1A2D-439D-A9E7-01756CFB0835@tlu.ee> <1489421671879.72049@iped.uio.no> <1489510627048.8055@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: Ulvi- I have been slow to respond to your question about what I meant by sending you the quotation about revolution from Dickens and a surmise about the questions you raised. I sent the Dickens as a gesture of sympathy with your search for understanding how deliberately imposed misery by the rich and powerful can be tolerated and not revolted against. My comment was intended as a suggestion of why people might hesitate at your solution, however inevitable it must seem to you. Tom Richardson expressed the view that I was gesturing towards. With respect to the relation of the educational system and its human products to the rich and powerful. I suggest that the history of literacy/education at least in the West, was intricately interconnection with the development of class divisions reaching back to about or at least 4000 BCE. Academics are highly educated/literate and their association with the rich and powerful reflects it, although their actions and desires vis a vis power may seek other interests. Since posting that passage from Dickens, I have become less certain of the conditions that must seem, inevitably, to induce violent (if necessary) revolution. A book by Katherine Boo called *Behind the beautiful forevers** : life, death, and hope in a Mumbai undercity. * The book is a kind of ethnographic account of people living in a slum next to the highway that leads to the Mumbai airport in India. The title comes from a large sign on a tall, long wall next to the Road, an ad for Italian tiles that reads BEAUTIFUL FOREVER BEAUTIFUL FOREVER BEAUTIFUL FOREVER... The wall obscures from view a slum where the misery seems every bit as deep as that of situations in the world today where the people do not revolt, but are successfully suppressed. Millions of people in Sudan are suffering agonizing starvation, refuges roam in many parts of the world, the list is as long as this listserve and longer. Its a very disturbing and upsetting world, and threatening to get a lot worse. History does not make me optimistic in this regard. So everyone does the best they can and on fora such as this, explore that familiar question, What Is To Be Done? Repeating old errors under new and much more dangerous-to-the-species conditions is presumably what we would like to think that our scholarship is helping us to avoid, even as we debate how best to achieve a humane alternative. Maintaining international scholarly, collegial, and committed contacts seems the very least we can do. And we are doing it, as we type. I am off to see some Russian colleagues to talk about imagination. And some Canadians to talk about culture and development. And among the very privileged to be able to do so. En iyi dileklerimle mike On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 9:57 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil wrote: > thanks for sharing David, > A > ________________________________________ > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > on behalf of David Kellogg > Sent: 13 March 2017 23:43 > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Don't do it > > Alfredo: > > Here's an early draft I uploaded to Academia.edu: > > https://www.academia.edu/31850352/Thinking_of_Feeling_ > Hasans_Complaints_Vygotskys_Late_Lectures_and_the_ > Development_of_Narrative_in_Children > > Sometimes I prefer this version to the one that got accepted: it's a lot > chattier and less IMRADish (I mean, less > IntroMethodResultandDiscussion-ish). But the reviewers didn't like it and > I > can see their point too: part of the meaning of an academic is sounding > like an academic, just as part of the meaning of a Frenchman is sounding > like a Frenchman. > > This is relevant to another point: ideology and ideation, prescriptive vs > transformative, and more generally perjorative vs. descriptive use of > language. But that's another thread. > > David Kellogg > Macquarie University > > On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 3:14 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil > wrote: > > > David, make sure you share the link with us again once your article in > > Language and Education on meta function comes online. I tried the DOI you > > gave us but it does not work. I am looking forward to read it! > > > > Alfredo > > ________________________________________ > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > on behalf of David Kellogg > > Sent: 13 March 2017 08:37 > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Don't do it > > > > In my own (unpublished) study, it was the interpersonal metafunction > which > > emerged first, not the ideational one. That is, children grasped the idea > > of giving and getting goods and services before they had the idea that > > experience could be encoded in language and shared with somebody who > didn't > > actually have it. (This study just confirmed work by Clare Painter, Jane > > Torr, and Halliday himself.) > > > > However, I think that Rein is right in one sense: there is some larger > > whole from which BOTH the interpersonal and the ideational must be > > co-differentiated. I don't think this differentiation is what happens in > > development, though: it's an artefact of analysis. I don't think that > this > > larger whole exists in infants, or even in early childhood; to use the > > Pepperian idea in Karimi-Aghdam article, it's a kind of artefact that > > arises post hoc, from looking at contextualism (which is dispersive) and > > organicism (which is integrative) together. By looking at an integrated > > whole and by thinking about it as development-in-context, we infer it, > but > > to assume that it actually happens, that all word meanings are "given" to > > children, is to commit the Augustinian fallacy (that Wittgenstein > > criticizes at the beginning of Philosophical Investigations) > > > > Halliday's got a name for this larger whole, at least once it arises in > > actual speech. It's the TEXTUAL metafunction, that is, the textual > devices > > that we use to integrate interpersonal functions and ideational ones > into a > > single clause. To return to the example I gave earlier: > > > > a) Don't do it. (interpersonal proposal, ideational material process, > "you" > > and "it" are Actor and Goal, textually unmarked) > > b) It's not necessary (interpersonal proposition, ideational relational > > process "it" and "necessary" are Carrier and Attribute, textually > unmarked) > > c) Don't do it, because it's not necessary. ("because" is a conjunctive > > adjunct which integrates the two propositions--it has neither > interpersonal > > nor ideational function, but is a purely textual element). > > > > (I've got a study on how this metafunction arises in Korean kids--it > seems > > to me that it's not explicit until quite late, in sixth grade, in my > data. > > This one will actually be PUBLISHED...in Language and Education! (DOI: > > 10.1080/09500782.2017.1306074) > > > > David Kellogg > > Macquarie University > > > > On Sun, Mar 12, 2017 at 7:51 AM, Rein Raud wrote: > > > > > Yes, this I can agree with - especially as this is fairly close to my > own > > > theory of meaning ("Meaning in Action", Polity 2016, ch.2), except that > > in > > > my opinion the ideational is already given to us interpersonally (as > when > > > someone explains to us what a word means), while there is also an > > > "experiential" meaning with which this ideational claims identity. But > > what > > > you say makes sense. Best, Rein > > > > > > On Mar 11, 2017, at 22:41 , Martin John Packer wrote: > > > > > > > Rein, > > > > > > > > David is building here on Halliday?s analysis of the two fundamental > > > ?functions? of language, the ideational and the interpersonal. It is > when > > > the child becomes able to combine the two in the same utterance that > > > grammar emerges. (That was not David?s point; I just find it a very > > > interesting idea!) > > > > > > > > Martin > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mar 11, 2017, at 3:27 PM, Rein Raud . > > > raud@tlu.ee>> wrote: > > > > > > > > David, I was only reacting to what you wrote: > > > > > > > > I shall call this form of meaning--for meaning it is--"interpersonal" > > > > meaning, in order to distinguish it from "ideational" meaning. I > think > > > that > > > > interpersonal meaning is meaning, but it is meaning which is directed > > > > towards organizing an interaction as the giving or getting of > > information > > > > or goods and services. Ideational meaning is meaning too, but it is > > > > directed towards the representation (hence, "indication") of human > > > > experience and logic. They're equally meaningful, but they are filled > > > with > > > > different kinds of meanings. > > > > > > > > "Ideational" here seems to be what Austin calls "locutionary". > > > "Interpersonal", in turn, seems to be what Austin called "performative" > > (in > > > the illocutionary and perlocutionary varieties) and indeed you define > it > > > as "directed towards organizing an interaction". Thus I don't think > your > > > counter-argument here is wholly legitimate, or perhaps I've missed the > > > point. > > > > > > > > Best, > > > > > > > > Rein > > > > > > > > On Mar 11, 2017, at 22:09 , David Kellogg wrote: > > > > > > > > Here I'm talking about the difference between: > > > > > > > > a) Don't do it. > > > > b) You are doing it. > > > > c) Are you doing it? > > > > > > > > This is not a difference between locutionary, illocutionary, and > > > > perlocutionary force--Austin would say that all of these are > > locutionary > > > in > > > > their force, because the pragmatic purpose and the resulting event, > > which > > > > is the giving of linguistic examples and their reception, is the > same. > > > And > > > > yet they are different. How so? > > > > > > > > They are different in the nature of the commodity which is put at > risk. > > > In > > > > a) that commodity is goods and services, while in b) and c) that > > > commodity > > > > is information. This means that in a) language is ancillary--we can > > often > > > > perform the same "speech act" (to use the behavioristic terminology > of > > > > Austin, Searle, and their disciples in pragmatics) using > gesticulation, > > > > gesture, "eye language", or just intonation. But in b) and c) the use > > of > > > > lexicogrammar is central--we cannot successfully exchange > propositions > > > > without encoding them lexicogrammatically. > > > > > > > > This is not the same difference that Austin is discussing. Austin is > > not > > > a > > > > linguist, so he wants to transfer meaning from language to context: > to > > > > speech roles, to social recognition and to social outcomes. That's > > simply > > > > not possible in this situation: the meaning of b) and c) lies in the > > > > lexico-grammar and nowhere else. Speech act theory is to linguistics > > what > > > > behaviorism is to psychology. > > > > > > > > David Kellogg > > > > Macquarie University > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sun, Mar 12, 2017 at 6:33 AM, Rein Raud > > rein.raud@tlu.ee>> wrote: > > > > > > > > These differences have been discussed quite some time ago in > > J.L.Austin's > > > > "How to Do Things with Words" (1962), from which speech act theory > > > > originated. Austin distinguishes between locutionary (primary > > semantical) > > > > meaning, illocutionary meaning (what is being meant) and > perlocutionary > > > > meaning (any event is being produced by the utterance). Thus when you > > say > > > > "Do you have some time?" you might mean "Can you spare some time for > > me?" > > > > and the perlocutionary result of this is that you will actually help > me > > > > (because you are in a position where you cannot say "no" to me, f.ex. > > > > because I am your boss). A lot of speech act theory has evolved from > > > this, > > > > notably in the work of Searle. Best to all, Rein Raud > > > > > > > > On Mar 11, 2017, at 21:18 , David Kellogg wrote: > > > > > > > > Ulvi, Mike... > > > > > > > > We started this thread with Ulvi's important remark that there is a > > > > difference between: > > > > > > > > "Don't do it." > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > "it is not necessary." > > > > > > > > Ulvi said that the difference does not lie in their polarity--they > are > > > > both > > > > negative. Nor does it lie in their representational (referential, or > > > > "ideational" meaning). They both refer to "it" and to the > advisability > > of > > > > "it". Ulvi said that the first was imperative, and the second was > not > > > > (the > > > > technical term for the non-imperative form of the second is > > > > "indicative-declarative", as opposed to "indicative-interrogative" > > which > > > > would be a question). > > > > > > > > I shall call this form of meaning--for meaning it is--"interpersonal" > > > > meaning, in order to distinguish it from "ideational" meaning. I > think > > > > that > > > > interpersonal meaning is meaning, but it is meaning which is directed > > > > towards organizing an interaction as the giving or getting of > > information > > > > or goods and services. Ideational meaning is meaning too, but it is > > > > directed towards the representation (hence, "indication") of human > > > > experience and logic. They're equally meaningful, but they are filled > > > > with > > > > different kinds of meanings. > > > > > > > > The difference is qualitative, and that is another way of saying that > > it > > > > is > > > > "revolutionary" (because revolution originally meant turning around > > axis; > > > > the first political "revolution" was the rather pathetic "turning" of > > > > Latin-speaking civilization from a republican to an imperial form > under > > > > Augustus). The difference is between making a proposal and offering a > > > > proposition--i.e. between realizing a potential state and simply > > > > discussing > > > > an actual one. > > > > > > > > One of the interesting aspects of Professor Jang's paper is that it > is > > > > about adolescents who are in the process of forming concepts, but who > > are > > > > not there yet. And one way in which an adolescent forms a concept > about > > > > the > > > > difficult concept of a social contract, of citizenship, of > nationality > > is > > > > pseudoconceptual: it is based on discussing "actual" perceptual > > > > differences > > > > between races. This might seem irrelevant to current political > > discourse. > > > > Unfortunately, it isn't. > > > > > > > > What does a teacher say to kids who are thinking this way? Do we say > > > > "Don't > > > > do it"? Or is it better to show them that it is not necessary? > > > > > > > > David Kellogg > > > > Macquarie University > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sat, Mar 11, 2017 at 7:58 PM, Ulvi ??il > > > ulvi.icil@gmail.com>> wrote: > > > > > > > > Mike, please corrct me if i wrongly take this meaning that > revolutions > > > > causes big numbers of death, death in masses, so we would not prefer > > > > them. > > > > > > > > But, what if we sum up all the deaths because of occupatinal murders > in > > > > workplaces, deaths from drugs, murders of women and early death > because > > > > of > > > > lack of sufficient health care and all the deaths due to the bad > > > > orgsanisation of society under capitalism and what is more turning > of > > > > tens > > > > of millions of children into ignorant and fanatic human beings who > are > > > > brought up able to kill anyone on the street etc > > > > > > > > Is it not more rational to put en end to this state of human society > > > > rather > > > > than to perpetruate it, allow it to exist. > > > > > > > > Unemployment itself 20 % in Turkey. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 11 Mar 2017 03:14 tarihinde "mike cole" mcole@ > > > ucsd.edu>> yazd?: > > > > > > > > From my personal web page, Ulvi: > > > > > > > > *Apropos Thoughts on Revolutions and Their Causes* > > > > > > > > (From C. Dickens, *A Tale of Two Cities*, Ch 15) > > > > > > > > Along the Paris streets, the death carts rumble, hollow and harsh. > > > > > > > > Six tumbrels carry the day's wine to La Guillotine. All the devouring > > > > and > > > > insatiate monsters imagined since imagination could record itself, > are > > > > fused in the one realization, Guillotine. And yet there is not in > > > > France, > > > > with its rich variety of soil and climate, a blade, a leaf, a root, a > > > > sprig, a peppercorn, which will grow to maturity under conditions > more > > > > certain than those that have produced this horror. Crush human > humanity > > > > out > > > > of shape once more, under similar hammers, and it will twist itself > > > > into > > > > the same tortured forms. Sow the same seed of rapacious license and > > > > oppression over again, and it will surely yield the same fruit, > > > > according > > > > to its kind. > > > > > > > > It is the nature of the fruits sewn by the French Revolution that > give > > > > pause for thought. And perhaps accounts for the lack of reply to your > > > > articulately formulated note. > > > > > > > > mike > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Mar 8, 2017 at 1:32 PM, Ulvi ??il > ul > > > vi.icil@gmail.com>> wrote: > > > > > > > > If I say > > > > > > > > don't do it, it is imperative. > > > > > > > > But if I say, > > > > > > > > It is not realistic and you do not need it. > > > > > > > > It is affirmative and even though negative, it is again affirmative, > > > > to > > > > demobilize you. > > > > > > > > What I mean is Revolution. > > > > > > > > Addressed to a married couple with two children. > > > > > > > > With 3 thousand Turkish liras in Istanbul in a rented home of at > > > > least > > > > 1000 tl for rent. > > > > > > > > 1 usd = 4 Turkish liras > > > > > > > > Survival economics. > > > > > > > > Any prospect? > > > > > > > > No. > > > > > > > > That simple. > > > > > > > > What is socialist revolution? > > > > > > > > It is neither an intention nor a wish. > > > > > > > > It is simple necessity. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From wolffmichael.roth@gmail.com Tue Mar 14 11:12:08 2017 From: wolffmichael.roth@gmail.com (Wolff-Michael Roth) Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2017 11:12:08 -0700 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Mathematics of Mathematics In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Carol, the key point is to look at that in what people do that lets mathematicians see that something mathematically is happening. The genetic origin of that --- like *mathematical *reasoning first IS a social relation (not IN relation, which is the social in a weak sense). I am developing some of the ideas that Vygotsky sketched in the last chapter of thinking and speech (including the Marx quotations, the marks of which have been removed from all English translations, and paraphrases. I am situating this in a Marxian-Spinozist perspective, not the dualist Spinoza that some say he was, but the one who emphasized the plural singular or singular plural nature of being. And thus the Vygotsky who writes in his personal notes about "affect in concept," the Vygotsky who seeks to develop a A Spinozist approach to Marxian psychology etc etc. I am copying the contents and the cover below. Cheers, Michael Preface vii 1 Vygotsky?s Marxist-Spinozist Re/Orientations 1 2 The Thinking Body 33 3 The Mathematics of Mathematics 55 4 Sociogenesis 77 5 Intra-Intersubjective Field 101 6 Pere?ivanie ? Experience 131 7 Affect and Emotion 151 8 Obu?enie ? Teaching | Learning 179 9 Mathematics in the Drama of Life 197 10 Overcoming Dualism 217 Appendix 225 References 227 Index 233 [image: Inline image 1] -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Wolff-Michael Roth, Lansdowne Professor Applied Cognitive Science MacLaurin Building A567 University of Victoria Victoria, BC, V8P 5C2 http://web.uvic.ca/~mroth New book: *The Mathematics of Mathematics * On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 8:38 AM, Carol Macdonald wrote: > Wolff-Michael Roth's new book has just come to my notice. > > Wolff-Michael, would you like to explain a bit to our whole community? It > looks very interesting indeed. > > Regards > Carol > > > > -- > Carol A Macdonald Ph.D (Edin) > Cultural Historical Activity Theory > Honorary Research Fellow: Department of Linguistics, Unisa > alternative email address: tmacdoca@unisa.ac.za > -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image.png Type: image/png Size: 93652 bytes Desc: not available Url : https://mailman.ucsd.edu/mailman/private/xmca-l/attachments/20170314/6b9fd599/attachment.png From ulvi.icil@gmail.com Tue Mar 14 11:16:39 2017 From: ulvi.icil@gmail.com (=?UTF-8?B?VWx2aSDEsMOnaWw=?=) Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2017 20:16:39 +0200 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Don't do it In-Reply-To: References: <10944955-53C6-4C28-AECA-87EA5BF2BCB1@uniandes.edu.co> <4E54E642-1A2D-439D-A9E7-01756CFB0835@tlu.ee> <1489421671879.72049@iped.uio.no> <1489510627048.8055@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: Thank you Mike! After Cigdem Kagitcibasi, mainstream media preferred to mention only the long list of awards she received. In a short article in Turkish, I preferred to remind that she worked a lot for working-class children, and especially for girls, that she emphasized the importance of social class context in social sciences. Best wishes Ulvi Best wishes Ulvi 14 Mar 2017 20:45 tarihinde "mike cole" yazd?: > Ulvi- > > I have been slow to respond to your question about what I meant by sending > you the quotation about revolution from Dickens and a surmise about the > questions you raised. > > I sent the Dickens as a gesture of sympathy with your > search for understanding how deliberately imposed misery by the rich and > powerful can be tolerated and not revolted against. > > My comment was intended as a suggestion of why people might hesitate at > your solution, however inevitable it must seem to you. Tom Richardson > expressed the view that I was gesturing towards. > > With respect to the relation of the educational system and its human > products to the rich and powerful. I suggest that the history of > literacy/education at least in the West, was intricately interconnection > with the development of class divisions reaching back to about > or at least 4000 BCE. Academics are highly educated/literate and their > association with the rich and powerful reflects it, although their actions > and desires vis a vis power may seek other interests. > > Since posting that passage from Dickens, I have become less certain of the > conditions that must seem, inevitably, to induce violent (if necessary) > revolution. A book by Katherine Boo called *Behind the beautiful > forevers** : > life, death, and hope in a Mumbai undercity. * > > The book is a kind of ethnographic account of people living in a slum next > to the highway that leads to the Mumbai airport in India. The title comes > from a large sign on a tall, long wall next to the Road, an ad for Italian > tiles that reads > > BEAUTIFUL FOREVER BEAUTIFUL FOREVER BEAUTIFUL FOREVER... > > The wall obscures from view a slum where the misery seems every bit as deep > as that of situations in the world today where the people do not revolt, > but are successfully suppressed. > > Millions of people in Sudan are suffering agonizing starvation, refuges > roam in many parts of the world, the list is as long as this listserve and > longer. > > Its a very disturbing and upsetting world, and threatening to get a lot > worse. History does not make me optimistic in this regard. > > So everyone does the best they can and on fora such as this, explore that > familiar question, What Is To Be Done? > > Repeating old errors under new and much more dangerous-to-the-species > conditions is presumably what we would like to think that our scholarship > is helping us to avoid, even as we debate how best to achieve a humane > alternative. > > Maintaining international scholarly, collegial, and committed contacts > seems the very least we can do. And we are doing it, as we type. > > I am off to see some Russian colleagues to talk about imagination. And some > Canadians to talk about culture and development. And among the very > privileged to be able to do so. > > En iyi dileklerimle > > mike > > > > > On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 9:57 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil > wrote: > > > thanks for sharing David, > > A > > ________________________________________ > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > on behalf of David Kellogg > > Sent: 13 March 2017 23:43 > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Don't do it > > > > Alfredo: > > > > Here's an early draft I uploaded to Academia.edu: > > > > https://www.academia.edu/31850352/Thinking_of_Feeling_ > > Hasans_Complaints_Vygotskys_Late_Lectures_and_the_ > > Development_of_Narrative_in_Children > > > > Sometimes I prefer this version to the one that got accepted: it's a lot > > chattier and less IMRADish (I mean, less > > IntroMethodResultandDiscussion-ish). But the reviewers didn't like it > and > > I > > can see their point too: part of the meaning of an academic is sounding > > like an academic, just as part of the meaning of a Frenchman is sounding > > like a Frenchman. > > > > This is relevant to another point: ideology and ideation, prescriptive vs > > transformative, and more generally perjorative vs. descriptive use of > > language. But that's another thread. > > > > David Kellogg > > Macquarie University > > > > On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 3:14 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil > > > wrote: > > > > > David, make sure you share the link with us again once your article in > > > Language and Education on meta function comes online. I tried the DOI > you > > > gave us but it does not work. I am looking forward to read it! > > > > > > Alfredo > > > ________________________________________ > > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > on behalf of David Kellogg > > > Sent: 13 March 2017 08:37 > > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Don't do it > > > > > > In my own (unpublished) study, it was the interpersonal metafunction > > which > > > emerged first, not the ideational one. That is, children grasped the > idea > > > of giving and getting goods and services before they had the idea that > > > experience could be encoded in language and shared with somebody who > > didn't > > > actually have it. (This study just confirmed work by Clare Painter, > Jane > > > Torr, and Halliday himself.) > > > > > > However, I think that Rein is right in one sense: there is some larger > > > whole from which BOTH the interpersonal and the ideational must be > > > co-differentiated. I don't think this differentiation is what happens > in > > > development, though: it's an artefact of analysis. I don't think that > > this > > > larger whole exists in infants, or even in early childhood; to use the > > > Pepperian idea in Karimi-Aghdam article, it's a kind of artefact that > > > arises post hoc, from looking at contextualism (which is dispersive) > and > > > organicism (which is integrative) together. By looking at an integrated > > > whole and by thinking about it as development-in-context, we infer it, > > but > > > to assume that it actually happens, that all word meanings are "given" > to > > > children, is to commit the Augustinian fallacy (that Wittgenstein > > > criticizes at the beginning of Philosophical Investigations) > > > > > > Halliday's got a name for this larger whole, at least once it arises in > > > actual speech. It's the TEXTUAL metafunction, that is, the textual > > devices > > > that we use to integrate interpersonal functions and ideational ones > > into a > > > single clause. To return to the example I gave earlier: > > > > > > a) Don't do it. (interpersonal proposal, ideational material process, > > "you" > > > and "it" are Actor and Goal, textually unmarked) > > > b) It's not necessary (interpersonal proposition, ideational relational > > > process "it" and "necessary" are Carrier and Attribute, textually > > unmarked) > > > c) Don't do it, because it's not necessary. ("because" is a conjunctive > > > adjunct which integrates the two propositions--it has neither > > interpersonal > > > nor ideational function, but is a purely textual element). > > > > > > (I've got a study on how this metafunction arises in Korean kids--it > > seems > > > to me that it's not explicit until quite late, in sixth grade, in my > > data. > > > This one will actually be PUBLISHED...in Language and Education! (DOI: > > > 10.1080/09500782.2017.1306074) > > > > > > David Kellogg > > > Macquarie University > > > > > > On Sun, Mar 12, 2017 at 7:51 AM, Rein Raud wrote: > > > > > > > Yes, this I can agree with - especially as this is fairly close to my > > own > > > > theory of meaning ("Meaning in Action", Polity 2016, ch.2), except > that > > > in > > > > my opinion the ideational is already given to us interpersonally (as > > when > > > > someone explains to us what a word means), while there is also an > > > > "experiential" meaning with which this ideational claims identity. > But > > > what > > > > you say makes sense. Best, Rein > > > > > > > > On Mar 11, 2017, at 22:41 , Martin John Packer wrote: > > > > > > > > > Rein, > > > > > > > > > > David is building here on Halliday?s analysis of the two > fundamental > > > > ?functions? of language, the ideational and the interpersonal. It is > > when > > > > the child becomes able to combine the two in the same utterance that > > > > grammar emerges. (That was not David?s point; I just find it a very > > > > interesting idea!) > > > > > > > > > > Martin > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mar 11, 2017, at 3:27 PM, Rein Raud rein > > . > > > > raud@tlu.ee>> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > David, I was only reacting to what you wrote: > > > > > > > > > > I shall call this form of meaning--for meaning it > is--"interpersonal" > > > > > meaning, in order to distinguish it from "ideational" meaning. I > > think > > > > that > > > > > interpersonal meaning is meaning, but it is meaning which is > directed > > > > > towards organizing an interaction as the giving or getting of > > > information > > > > > or goods and services. Ideational meaning is meaning too, but it is > > > > > directed towards the representation (hence, "indication") of human > > > > > experience and logic. They're equally meaningful, but they are > filled > > > > with > > > > > different kinds of meanings. > > > > > > > > > > "Ideational" here seems to be what Austin calls "locutionary". > > > > "Interpersonal", in turn, seems to be what Austin called > "performative" > > > (in > > > > the illocutionary and perlocutionary varieties) and indeed you define > > it > > > > as "directed towards organizing an interaction". Thus I don't think > > your > > > > counter-argument here is wholly legitimate, or perhaps I've missed > the > > > > point. > > > > > > > > > > Best, > > > > > > > > > > Rein > > > > > > > > > > On Mar 11, 2017, at 22:09 , David Kellogg wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Here I'm talking about the difference between: > > > > > > > > > > a) Don't do it. > > > > > b) You are doing it. > > > > > c) Are you doing it? > > > > > > > > > > This is not a difference between locutionary, illocutionary, and > > > > > perlocutionary force--Austin would say that all of these are > > > locutionary > > > > in > > > > > their force, because the pragmatic purpose and the resulting event, > > > which > > > > > is the giving of linguistic examples and their reception, is the > > same. > > > > And > > > > > yet they are different. How so? > > > > > > > > > > They are different in the nature of the commodity which is put at > > risk. > > > > In > > > > > a) that commodity is goods and services, while in b) and c) that > > > > commodity > > > > > is information. This means that in a) language is ancillary--we can > > > often > > > > > perform the same "speech act" (to use the behavioristic terminology > > of > > > > > Austin, Searle, and their disciples in pragmatics) using > > gesticulation, > > > > > gesture, "eye language", or just intonation. But in b) and c) the > use > > > of > > > > > lexicogrammar is central--we cannot successfully exchange > > propositions > > > > > without encoding them lexicogrammatically. > > > > > > > > > > This is not the same difference that Austin is discussing. Austin > is > > > not > > > > a > > > > > linguist, so he wants to transfer meaning from language to context: > > to > > > > > speech roles, to social recognition and to social outcomes. That's > > > simply > > > > > not possible in this situation: the meaning of b) and c) lies in > the > > > > > lexico-grammar and nowhere else. Speech act theory is to > linguistics > > > what > > > > > behaviorism is to psychology. > > > > > > > > > > David Kellogg > > > > > Macquarie University > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sun, Mar 12, 2017 at 6:33 AM, Rein Raud > > > rein.raud@tlu.ee>> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > These differences have been discussed quite some time ago in > > > J.L.Austin's > > > > > "How to Do Things with Words" (1962), from which speech act theory > > > > > originated. Austin distinguishes between locutionary (primary > > > semantical) > > > > > meaning, illocutionary meaning (what is being meant) and > > perlocutionary > > > > > meaning (any event is being produced by the utterance). Thus when > you > > > say > > > > > "Do you have some time?" you might mean "Can you spare some time > for > > > me?" > > > > > and the perlocutionary result of this is that you will actually > help > > me > > > > > (because you are in a position where you cannot say "no" to me, > f.ex. > > > > > because I am your boss). A lot of speech act theory has evolved > from > > > > this, > > > > > notably in the work of Searle. Best to all, Rein Raud > > > > > > > > > > On Mar 11, 2017, at 21:18 , David Kellogg wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Ulvi, Mike... > > > > > > > > > > We started this thread with Ulvi's important remark that there is a > > > > > difference between: > > > > > > > > > > "Don't do it." > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > "it is not necessary." > > > > > > > > > > Ulvi said that the difference does not lie in their polarity--they > > are > > > > > both > > > > > negative. Nor does it lie in their representational (referential, > or > > > > > "ideational" meaning). They both refer to "it" and to the > > advisability > > > of > > > > > "it". Ulvi said that the first was imperative, and the second was > > not > > > > > (the > > > > > technical term for the non-imperative form of the second is > > > > > "indicative-declarative", as opposed to "indicative-interrogative" > > > which > > > > > would be a question). > > > > > > > > > > I shall call this form of meaning--for meaning it > is--"interpersonal" > > > > > meaning, in order to distinguish it from "ideational" meaning. I > > think > > > > > that > > > > > interpersonal meaning is meaning, but it is meaning which is > directed > > > > > towards organizing an interaction as the giving or getting of > > > information > > > > > or goods and services. Ideational meaning is meaning too, but it is > > > > > directed towards the representation (hence, "indication") of human > > > > > experience and logic. They're equally meaningful, but they are > filled > > > > > with > > > > > different kinds of meanings. > > > > > > > > > > The difference is qualitative, and that is another way of saying > that > > > it > > > > > is > > > > > "revolutionary" (because revolution originally meant turning around > > > axis; > > > > > the first political "revolution" was the rather pathetic "turning" > of > > > > > Latin-speaking civilization from a republican to an imperial form > > under > > > > > Augustus). The difference is between making a proposal and > offering a > > > > > proposition--i.e. between realizing a potential state and simply > > > > > discussing > > > > > an actual one. > > > > > > > > > > One of the interesting aspects of Professor Jang's paper is that it > > is > > > > > about adolescents who are in the process of forming concepts, but > who > > > are > > > > > not there yet. And one way in which an adolescent forms a concept > > about > > > > > the > > > > > difficult concept of a social contract, of citizenship, of > > nationality > > > is > > > > > pseudoconceptual: it is based on discussing "actual" perceptual > > > > > differences > > > > > between races. This might seem irrelevant to current political > > > discourse. > > > > > Unfortunately, it isn't. > > > > > > > > > > What does a teacher say to kids who are thinking this way? Do we > say > > > > > "Don't > > > > > do it"? Or is it better to show them that it is not necessary? > > > > > > > > > > David Kellogg > > > > > Macquarie University > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sat, Mar 11, 2017 at 7:58 PM, Ulvi ??il > > > > > ulvi.icil@gmail.com>> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Mike, please corrct me if i wrongly take this meaning that > > revolutions > > > > > causes big numbers of death, death in masses, so we would not > prefer > > > > > them. > > > > > > > > > > But, what if we sum up all the deaths because of occupatinal > murders > > in > > > > > workplaces, deaths from drugs, murders of women and early death > > because > > > > > of > > > > > lack of sufficient health care and all the deaths due to the bad > > > > > orgsanisation of society under capitalism and what is more turning > > of > > > > > tens > > > > > of millions of children into ignorant and fanatic human beings who > > are > > > > > brought up able to kill anyone on the street etc > > > > > > > > > > Is it not more rational to put en end to this state of human > society > > > > > rather > > > > > than to perpetruate it, allow it to exist. > > > > > > > > > > Unemployment itself 20 % in Turkey. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 11 Mar 2017 03:14 tarihinde "mike cole" > mcole@ > > > > ucsd.edu>> yazd?: > > > > > > > > > > From my personal web page, Ulvi: > > > > > > > > > > *Apropos Thoughts on Revolutions and Their Causes* > > > > > > > > > > (From C. Dickens, *A Tale of Two Cities*, Ch 15) > > > > > > > > > > Along the Paris streets, the death carts rumble, hollow and harsh. > > > > > > > > > > Six tumbrels carry the day's wine to La Guillotine. All the > devouring > > > > > and > > > > > insatiate monsters imagined since imagination could record itself, > > are > > > > > fused in the one realization, Guillotine. And yet there is not in > > > > > France, > > > > > with its rich variety of soil and climate, a blade, a leaf, a > root, a > > > > > sprig, a peppercorn, which will grow to maturity under conditions > > more > > > > > certain than those that have produced this horror. Crush human > > humanity > > > > > out > > > > > of shape once more, under similar hammers, and it will twist itself > > > > > into > > > > > the same tortured forms. Sow the same seed of rapacious license and > > > > > oppression over again, and it will surely yield the same fruit, > > > > > according > > > > > to its kind. > > > > > > > > > > It is the nature of the fruits sewn by the French Revolution that > > give > > > > > pause for thought. And perhaps accounts for the lack of reply to > your > > > > > articulately formulated note. > > > > > > > > > > mike > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Mar 8, 2017 at 1:32 PM, Ulvi ??il > > > ul > > > > vi.icil@gmail.com>> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > If I say > > > > > > > > > > don't do it, it is imperative. > > > > > > > > > > But if I say, > > > > > > > > > > It is not realistic and you do not need it. > > > > > > > > > > It is affirmative and even though negative, it is again > affirmative, > > > > > to > > > > > demobilize you. > > > > > > > > > > What I mean is Revolution. > > > > > > > > > > Addressed to a married couple with two children. > > > > > > > > > > With 3 thousand Turkish liras in Istanbul in a rented home of at > > > > > least > > > > > 1000 tl for rent. > > > > > > > > > > 1 usd = 4 Turkish liras > > > > > > > > > > Survival economics. > > > > > > > > > > Any prospect? > > > > > > > > > > No. > > > > > > > > > > That simple. > > > > > > > > > > What is socialist revolution? > > > > > > > > > > It is neither an intention nor a wish. > > > > > > > > > > It is simple necessity. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From mcole@ucsd.edu Tue Mar 14 12:09:36 2017 From: mcole@ucsd.edu (mike cole) Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2017 12:09:36 -0700 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Mathematics of Mathematics In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: What Marx quotations are those who have access only to the English translation missing, Michael? mike On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 11:12 AM, Wolff-Michael Roth < wolffmichael.roth@gmail.com> wrote: > Carol, > > the key point is to look at that in what people do that lets mathematicians > see that something mathematically is happening. The genetic origin of that > --- like *mathematical *reasoning first IS a social relation (not IN > relation, which is the social in a weak sense). I am developing some of the > ideas that Vygotsky sketched in the last chapter of thinking and speech > (including the Marx quotations, the marks of which have been removed from > all English translations, and paraphrases. I am situating this in a > Marxian-Spinozist perspective, not the dualist Spinoza that some say he > was, but the one who emphasized the plural singular or singular plural > nature of being. And thus the Vygotsky who writes in his personal notes > about "affect in concept," the Vygotsky who seeks to develop a A Spinozist > approach to Marxian psychology etc etc. I am copying the contents and the > cover below. > > Cheers, > Michael > > > Preface vii > 1 Vygotsky?s Marxist-Spinozist Re/Orientations 1 > 2 The Thinking Body 33 > 3 The Mathematics of Mathematics 55 > 4 Sociogenesis 77 > 5 Intra-Intersubjective Field 101 > 6 Pere?ivanie ? Experience 131 > 7 Affect and Emotion 151 > 8 Obu?enie ? Teaching | Learning 179 > 9 Mathematics in the Drama of Life 197 > 10 Overcoming Dualism 217 > Appendix 225 > References 227 > Index 233 > > [image: Inline image 1] > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > -------------------- > Wolff-Michael Roth, Lansdowne Professor > Applied Cognitive Science > MacLaurin Building A567 > University of Victoria > Victoria, BC, V8P 5C2 > http://web.uvic.ca/~mroth > > New book: *The Mathematics of Mathematics > directions-in-mathematics-and-science-education/the- > mathematics-of-mathematics/>* > > On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 8:38 AM, Carol Macdonald > wrote: > > > Wolff-Michael Roth's new book has just come to my notice. > > > > Wolff-Michael, would you like to explain a bit to our whole community? > It > > looks very interesting indeed. > > > > Regards > > Carol > > > > > > > > -- > > Carol A Macdonald Ph.D (Edin) > > Cultural Historical Activity Theory > > Honorary Research Fellow: Department of Linguistics, Unisa > > alternative email address: tmacdoca@unisa.ac.za > > > From wolffmichael.roth@gmail.com Tue Mar 14 12:29:02 2017 From: wolffmichael.roth@gmail.com (Wolff-Michael Roth) Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2017 12:29:02 -0700 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Mathematics of Mathematics In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Mike, there are parts of the text in Vygotsky (Thinking and speech), which, in the original (1934, also the 2005 compilation, the German version), have quotation marks. In the English translation the quotation marks have disappeared (as in the 1984 Russian version). Also disappeared has the paraphrase of consciousness being cursed by matter, which is in the original, but which has been purged from the later Russian and all English translations. Anton and someone else have published a piece with all the changes that have been implemented with respect to the 1934 publication. I am pasting here from the original. You see the quotation marks. The green part is about the curse of matter on consciousness, which is missing in the English versions. The quotations are from Marx and Engels, *The German Ideology*, at least the German and Russian version. (Not all English translations do justice to the reference publications by the Institute for Marxism-Leninism, which was published in Moscow in German, 1932, and Russian, 1933): ???? ????? ??? ?? ??????, ??? ?????????, ???? ????? ? ???? ????????????, ???????????? ??? ?????? ?????, ? ?????????????, ? ??? ???? ??????, ?????????, ???? ?????????? ???????, ????????? ?????????? ????? ???????????????? ???????? ??? ?????? ??????????, ?? ????????, ??? Hope this helps. Michael -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Wolff-Michael Roth, Lansdowne Professor Applied Cognitive Science MacLaurin Building A567 University of Victoria Victoria, BC, V8P 5C2 http://web.uvic.ca/~mroth New book: *The Mathematics of Mathematics * On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 12:09 PM, mike cole wrote: > What Marx quotations are those who have access only to the English > translation missing, Michael? > > mike > > On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 11:12 AM, Wolff-Michael Roth < > wolffmichael.roth@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Carol, > > > > the key point is to look at that in what people do that lets > mathematicians > > see that something mathematically is happening. The genetic origin of > that > > --- like *mathematical *reasoning first IS a social relation (not IN > > relation, which is the social in a weak sense). I am developing some of > the > > ideas that Vygotsky sketched in the last chapter of thinking and speech > > (including the Marx quotations, the marks of which have been removed from > > all English translations, and paraphrases. I am situating this in a > > Marxian-Spinozist perspective, not the dualist Spinoza that some say he > > was, but the one who emphasized the plural singular or singular plural > > nature of being. And thus the Vygotsky who writes in his personal notes > > about "affect in concept," the Vygotsky who seeks to develop a A > Spinozist > > approach to Marxian psychology etc etc. I am copying the contents and the > > cover below. > > > > Cheers, > > Michael > > > > > > Preface vii > > 1 Vygotsky?s Marxist-Spinozist Re/Orientations 1 > > 2 The Thinking Body 33 > > 3 The Mathematics of Mathematics 55 > > 4 Sociogenesis 77 > > 5 Intra-Intersubjective Field 101 > > 6 Pere?ivanie ? Experience 131 > > 7 Affect and Emotion 151 > > 8 Obu?enie ? Teaching | Learning 179 > > 9 Mathematics in the Drama of Life 197 > > 10 Overcoming Dualism 217 > > Appendix 225 > > References 227 > > Index 233 > > > > [image: Inline image 1] > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > -------------------- > > Wolff-Michael Roth, Lansdowne Professor > > Applied Cognitive Science > > MacLaurin Building A567 > > University of Victoria > > Victoria, BC, V8P 5C2 > > http://web.uvic.ca/~mroth > > > > New book: *The Mathematics of Mathematics > > > directions-in-mathematics-and-science-education/the- > > mathematics-of-mathematics/>* > > > > On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 8:38 AM, Carol Macdonald > > wrote: > > > > > Wolff-Michael Roth's new book has just come to my notice. > > > > > > Wolff-Michael, would you like to explain a bit to our whole community? > > It > > > looks very interesting indeed. > > > > > > Regards > > > Carol > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Carol A Macdonald Ph.D (Edin) > > > Cultural Historical Activity Theory > > > Honorary Research Fellow: Department of Linguistics, Unisa > > > alternative email address: tmacdoca@unisa.ac.za > > > > > > From wolffmichael.roth@gmail.com Tue Mar 14 12:37:17 2017 From: wolffmichael.roth@gmail.com (Wolff-Michael Roth) Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2017 12:37:17 -0700 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Mathematics of Mathematics In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: You also might find interesting that on page X of the German version of the *Ideology*, in the introduction by the Central Committee, there is a phrase on the function of thinking, the "needs, interests, inclinations, and feelings of man...", which you can easily relate to the introduction of *Thinking and Speech*, where Vygotsky writes about the fundamental problem of psychology. I don't know whether Vygotsky read the German version (1932) or the Russian (1933), but much of what he writes in the last 2 paragraphs of the book (3 paragraphs in the English translations, 1986, 1987), the "bigger problem" of conscioussnes, and parts of the first chapter, are "inspired" by the *Ideology*. Michael -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Wolff-Michael Roth, Lansdowne Professor Applied Cognitive Science MacLaurin Building A567 University of Victoria Victoria, BC, V8P 5C2 http://web.uvic.ca/~mroth New book: *The Mathematics of Mathematics * On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 12:29 PM, Wolff-Michael Roth < wolffmichael.roth@gmail.com> wrote: > Mike, there are parts of the text in Vygotsky (Thinking and speech), > which, in the original (1934, also the 2005 compilation, the German > version), have quotation marks. In the English translation the quotation > marks have disappeared (as in the 1984 Russian version). Also disappeared > has the paraphrase of consciousness being cursed by matter, which is in the > original, but which has been purged from the later Russian and all English > translations. > > Anton and someone else have published a piece with all the changes that > have been implemented with respect to the 1934 publication. > > I am pasting here from the original. You see the quotation marks. The > green part is about the curse of matter on consciousness, which is missing > in the English versions. The quotations are from Marx and Engels, *The > German Ideology*, at least the German and Russian version. (Not all > English translations do justice to the reference publications by the > Institute for Marxism-Leninism, which was published in Moscow in German, > 1932, and Russian, 1933): > > ???? ????? ??? ?? ??????, ??? ?????????, ???? ????? ? ???? ????????????, > ???????????? ??? ?????? ?????, ? ?????????????, ? ??? ???? ??????, ???????? > ?, ???? ?????????? ???????, ????????? ?????????? ????? ???????????????? > ???????? ??? ?????? ??????????, ?? ????????, ??? > Hope this helps. > > Michael > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > -------------------- > Wolff-Michael Roth, Lansdowne Professor > Applied Cognitive Science > MacLaurin Building A567 > University of Victoria > Victoria, BC, V8P 5C2 > http://web.uvic.ca/~mroth > > New book: *The Mathematics of Mathematics > * > > On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 12:09 PM, mike cole wrote: > >> What Marx quotations are those who have access only to the English >> translation missing, Michael? >> >> mike >> >> On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 11:12 AM, Wolff-Michael Roth < >> wolffmichael.roth@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> > Carol, >> > >> > the key point is to look at that in what people do that lets >> mathematicians >> > see that something mathematically is happening. The genetic origin of >> that >> > --- like *mathematical *reasoning first IS a social relation (not IN >> > relation, which is the social in a weak sense). I am developing some of >> the >> > ideas that Vygotsky sketched in the last chapter of thinking and speech >> > (including the Marx quotations, the marks of which have been removed >> from >> > all English translations, and paraphrases. I am situating this in a >> > Marxian-Spinozist perspective, not the dualist Spinoza that some say he >> > was, but the one who emphasized the plural singular or singular plural >> > nature of being. And thus the Vygotsky who writes in his personal notes >> > about "affect in concept," the Vygotsky who seeks to develop a A >> Spinozist >> > approach to Marxian psychology etc etc. I am copying the contents and >> the >> > cover below. >> > >> > Cheers, >> > Michael >> > >> > >> > Preface vii >> > 1 Vygotsky?s Marxist-Spinozist Re/Orientations 1 >> > 2 The Thinking Body 33 >> > 3 The Mathematics of Mathematics 55 >> > 4 Sociogenesis 77 >> > 5 Intra-Intersubjective Field 101 >> > 6 Pere?ivanie ? Experience 131 >> > 7 Affect and Emotion 151 >> > 8 Obu?enie ? Teaching | Learning 179 >> > 9 Mathematics in the Drama of Life 197 >> > 10 Overcoming Dualism 217 >> > Appendix 225 >> > References 227 >> > Index 233 >> > >> > [image: Inline image 1] >> > >> > >> > ------------------------------------------------------------ >> > -------------------- >> > Wolff-Michael Roth, Lansdowne Professor >> > Applied Cognitive Science >> > MacLaurin Building A567 >> > University of Victoria >> > Victoria, BC, V8P 5C2 >> > http://web.uvic.ca/~mroth >> > >> > New book: *The Mathematics of Mathematics >> > > > directions-in-mathematics-and-science-education/the- >> > mathematics-of-mathematics/>* >> > >> > On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 8:38 AM, Carol Macdonald > > >> > wrote: >> > >> > > Wolff-Michael Roth's new book has just come to my notice. >> > > >> > > Wolff-Michael, would you like to explain a bit to our whole community? >> > It >> > > looks very interesting indeed. >> > > >> > > Regards >> > > Carol >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > -- >> > > Carol A Macdonald Ph.D (Edin) >> > > Cultural Historical Activity Theory >> > > Honorary Research Fellow: Department of Linguistics, Unisa >> > > alternative email address: tmacdoca@unisa.ac.za >> > > >> > >> > > From mcole@ucsd.edu Tue Mar 14 12:51:50 2017 From: mcole@ucsd.edu (mike cole) Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2017 19:51:50 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Mathematics of Mathematics In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Thanks! It's hard to follow all the twists in translation. Mike On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 12:39 PM Wolff-Michael Roth < wolffmichael.roth@gmail.com> wrote: > You also might find interesting that on page X of the German version of the > *Ideology*, in the introduction by the Central Committee, there is a phrase > on the function of thinking, the "needs, interests, inclinations, and > feelings of man...", which you can easily relate to the introduction > of *Thinking > and Speech*, where Vygotsky writes about the fundamental problem of > psychology. I don't know whether Vygotsky read the German version (1932) or > the Russian (1933), but much of what he writes in the last 2 paragraphs of > the book (3 paragraphs in the English translations, 1986, 1987), the > "bigger problem" of conscioussnes, and parts of the first chapter, are > "inspired" by the *Ideology*. Michael > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > Wolff-Michael Roth, Lansdowne Professor > Applied Cognitive Science > MacLaurin Building A567 > University of Victoria > Victoria, BC, V8P 5C2 > http://web.uvic.ca/~mroth > > New book: *The Mathematics of Mathematics > < > https://www.sensepublishers.com/catalogs/bookseries/new-directions-in-mathematics-and-science-education/the-mathematics-of-mathematics/ > >* > > On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 12:29 PM, Wolff-Michael Roth < > wolffmichael.roth@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Mike, there are parts of the text in Vygotsky (Thinking and speech), > > which, in the original (1934, also the 2005 compilation, the German > > version), have quotation marks. In the English translation the quotation > > marks have disappeared (as in the 1984 Russian version). Also disappeared > > has the paraphrase of consciousness being cursed by matter, which is in > the > > original, but which has been purged from the later Russian and all > English > > translations. > > > > Anton and someone else have published a piece with all the changes that > > have been implemented with respect to the 1934 publication. > > > > I am pasting here from the original. You see the quotation marks. The > > green part is about the curse of matter on consciousness, which is > missing > > in the English versions. The quotations are from Marx and Engels, *The > > German Ideology*, at least the German and Russian version. (Not all > > English translations do justice to the reference publications by the > > Institute for Marxism-Leninism, which was published in Moscow in German, > > 1932, and Russian, 1933): > > > > ???? ????? ??? ?? ??????, ??? ?????????, ???? ????? ? ???? ????????????, > > ???????????? ??? ?????? ?????, ? ?????????????, ? ??? ???? ??????, > ???????? > > ?, ???? ?????????? ???????, ????????? ?????????? ????? ???????????????? > > ???????? ??? ?????? ??????????, ?? ????????, ??? > > Hope this helps. > > > > Michael > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > -------------------- > > Wolff-Michael Roth, Lansdowne Professor > > Applied Cognitive Science > > MacLaurin Building A567 > > University of Victoria > > Victoria, BC, V8P 5C2 > > http://web.uvic.ca/~mroth > > > > New book: *The Mathematics of Mathematics > > < > https://www.sensepublishers.com/catalogs/bookseries/new-directions-in-mathematics-and-science-education/the-mathematics-of-mathematics/ > >* > > > > On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 12:09 PM, mike cole wrote: > > > >> What Marx quotations are those who have access only to the English > >> translation missing, Michael? > >> > >> mike > >> > >> On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 11:12 AM, Wolff-Michael Roth < > >> wolffmichael.roth@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > >> > Carol, > >> > > >> > the key point is to look at that in what people do that lets > >> mathematicians > >> > see that something mathematically is happening. The genetic origin of > >> that > >> > --- like *mathematical *reasoning first IS a social relation (not IN > >> > relation, which is the social in a weak sense). I am developing some > of > >> the > >> > ideas that Vygotsky sketched in the last chapter of thinking and > speech > >> > (including the Marx quotations, the marks of which have been removed > >> from > >> > all English translations, and paraphrases. I am situating this in a > >> > Marxian-Spinozist perspective, not the dualist Spinoza that some say > he > >> > was, but the one who emphasized the plural singular or singular plural > >> > nature of being. And thus the Vygotsky who writes in his personal > notes > >> > about "affect in concept," the Vygotsky who seeks to develop a A > >> Spinozist > >> > approach to Marxian psychology etc etc. I am copying the contents and > >> the > >> > cover below. > >> > > >> > Cheers, > >> > Michael > >> > > >> > > >> > Preface vii > >> > 1 Vygotsky?s Marxist-Spinozist Re/Orientations 1 > >> > 2 The Thinking Body 33 > >> > 3 The Mathematics of Mathematics 55 > >> > 4 Sociogenesis 77 > >> > 5 Intra-Intersubjective Field 101 > >> > 6 Pere?ivanie ? Experience 131 > >> > 7 Affect and Emotion 151 > >> > 8 Obu?enie ? Teaching | Learning 179 > >> > 9 Mathematics in the Drama of Life 197 > >> > 10 Overcoming Dualism 217 > >> > Appendix 225 > >> > References 227 > >> > Index 233 > >> > > >> > [image: Inline image 1] > >> > > >> > > >> > ------------------------------------------------------------ > >> > -------------------- > >> > Wolff-Michael Roth, Lansdowne Professor > >> > Applied Cognitive Science > >> > MacLaurin Building A567 > >> > University of Victoria > >> > Victoria, BC, V8P 5C2 > >> > http://web.uvic.ca/~mroth > >> > > >> > New book: *The Mathematics of Mathematics > >> > >> > directions-in-mathematics-and-science-education/the- > >> > mathematics-of-mathematics/>* > >> > > >> > On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 8:38 AM, Carol Macdonald < > carolmacdon@gmail.com > >> > > >> > wrote: > >> > > >> > > Wolff-Michael Roth's new book has just come to my notice. > >> > > > >> > > Wolff-Michael, would you like to explain a bit to our whole > community? > >> > It > >> > > looks very interesting indeed. > >> > > > >> > > Regards > >> > > Carol > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > -- > >> > > Carol A Macdonald Ph.D (Edin) > >> > > Cultural Historical Activity Theory > >> > > Honorary Research Fellow: Department of Linguistics, Unisa > >> > > alternative email address: tmacdoca@unisa.ac.za > >> > > > >> > > >> > > > > > From wolffmichael.roth@gmail.com Tue Mar 14 13:04:13 2017 From: wolffmichael.roth@gmail.com (Wolff-Michael Roth) Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2017 13:04:13 -0700 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Mathematics of Mathematics In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Mike, here the paragraph from the Russian edition of vol. 3 (German Ideology), where Vygotsky got the quoted materials: ?? ? ?? ??????? ???????? ? ???? ????????? ???????? ?? ? ?????? ??????. ?? ?????? ? ?????? ?????? ????? ????????? - ???? ????????????? ????????, ??????? ????????? ????? ? ???? ?????????? ????? ???????, ?????? - ??????, ? ???? ?????. ???? ??? ?? ??????, ??? ? ????????; ???? ???? ????????????, ???????????? ? ??? ?????? ????? ? ???? ??? ????? ???????????? ????? ? ??? ???? ??????, ?????????????? ????????, ?, ??????? ????????, ???? ????????? ???? ?? ???????????, ?? ????????????? ????????????? ??????? ? ??????? ??????**. And here from page 11 of the foreword, to which I referred earlier, about the design of a dialectical materialist psychology ??????? ???????? ? ???? ????????, ?????????? ????????????, ?????????, ???????? ? ?????? ????????, ?????????, ??? ???????? ??????? ?? ????????? ? ???????? ??????????? ? ???????????? ????? ????????, ????? ? ??????? ??????????? ?????? ????????????, ??????????-?????????????????? ??????????. and here Vygotsky: ??? ??????? ???????? ? ?????? ?????? ?? ???????, ??? ???????? ?????? ???? ?????? ? ?????????? ??????????? ????????, ?????? ??? ?????????????????? ?????? ???????? ??????-???? ???????????? ???????? ???????? ??????? ?????, ???????????? ? ?????????, ?????????? ? ?????????, ??????? ?????????? ???????? ????? ? ?? ??? ?????? ???????. Cheers, Michael -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Wolff-Michael Roth, Lansdowne Professor Applied Cognitive Science MacLaurin Building A567 University of Victoria Victoria, BC, V8P 5C2 http://web.uvic.ca/~mroth New book: *The Mathematics of Mathematics * On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 12:37 PM, Wolff-Michael Roth < wolffmichael.roth@gmail.com> wrote: > You also might find interesting that on page X of the German version of > the *Ideology*, in the introduction by the Central Committee, there is a > phrase on the function of thinking, the "needs, interests, inclinations, > and feelings of man...", which you can easily relate to the introduction of *Thinking > and Speech*, where Vygotsky writes about the fundamental problem of > psychology. I don't know whether Vygotsky read the German version (1932) or > the Russian (1933), but much of what he writes in the last 2 paragraphs of > the book (3 paragraphs in the English translations, 1986, 1987), the > "bigger problem" of conscioussnes, and parts of the first chapter, are > "inspired" by the *Ideology*. Michael > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > -------------------- > Wolff-Michael Roth, Lansdowne Professor > Applied Cognitive Science > MacLaurin Building A567 > University of Victoria > Victoria, BC, V8P 5C2 > http://web.uvic.ca/~mroth > > New book: *The Mathematics of Mathematics > * > > On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 12:29 PM, Wolff-Michael Roth < > wolffmichael.roth@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Mike, there are parts of the text in Vygotsky (Thinking and speech), >> which, in the original (1934, also the 2005 compilation, the German >> version), have quotation marks. In the English translation the quotation >> marks have disappeared (as in the 1984 Russian version). Also disappeared >> has the paraphrase of consciousness being cursed by matter, which is in the >> original, but which has been purged from the later Russian and all English >> translations. >> >> Anton and someone else have published a piece with all the changes that >> have been implemented with respect to the 1934 publication. >> >> I am pasting here from the original. You see the quotation marks. The >> green part is about the curse of matter on consciousness, which is missing >> in the English versions. The quotations are from Marx and Engels, *The >> German Ideology*, at least the German and Russian version. (Not all >> English translations do justice to the reference publications by the >> Institute for Marxism-Leninism, which was published in Moscow in German, >> 1932, and Russian, 1933): >> >> ???? ????? ??? ?? ??????, ??? ?????????, ???? ????? ? ???? ????????????, >> ???????????? ??? ?????? ?????, ? ?????????????, ? ??? ???? ??????, ???????? >> ?, ???? ?????????? ???????, ????????? ?????????? ????? ???????????????? >> ???????? ??? ?????? ??????????, ?? ????????, ??? >> Hope this helps. >> >> Michael >> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------ >> -------------------- >> Wolff-Michael Roth, Lansdowne Professor >> Applied Cognitive Science >> MacLaurin Building A567 >> University of Victoria >> Victoria, BC, V8P 5C2 >> http://web.uvic.ca/~mroth >> >> New book: *The Mathematics of Mathematics >> * >> >> On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 12:09 PM, mike cole wrote: >> >>> What Marx quotations are those who have access only to the English >>> translation missing, Michael? >>> >>> mike >>> >>> On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 11:12 AM, Wolff-Michael Roth < >>> wolffmichael.roth@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> > Carol, >>> > >>> > the key point is to look at that in what people do that lets >>> mathematicians >>> > see that something mathematically is happening. The genetic origin of >>> that >>> > --- like *mathematical *reasoning first IS a social relation (not IN >>> > relation, which is the social in a weak sense). I am developing some >>> of the >>> > ideas that Vygotsky sketched in the last chapter of thinking and speech >>> > (including the Marx quotations, the marks of which have been removed >>> from >>> > all English translations, and paraphrases. I am situating this in a >>> > Marxian-Spinozist perspective, not the dualist Spinoza that some say he >>> > was, but the one who emphasized the plural singular or singular plural >>> > nature of being. And thus the Vygotsky who writes in his personal notes >>> > about "affect in concept," the Vygotsky who seeks to develop a A >>> Spinozist >>> > approach to Marxian psychology etc etc. I am copying the contents and >>> the >>> > cover below. >>> > >>> > Cheers, >>> > Michael >>> > >>> > >>> > Preface vii >>> > 1 Vygotsky?s Marxist-Spinozist Re/Orientations 1 >>> > 2 The Thinking Body 33 >>> > 3 The Mathematics of Mathematics 55 >>> > 4 Sociogenesis 77 >>> > 5 Intra-Intersubjective Field 101 >>> > 6 Pere?ivanie ? Experience 131 >>> > 7 Affect and Emotion 151 >>> > 8 Obu?enie ? Teaching | Learning 179 >>> > 9 Mathematics in the Drama of Life 197 >>> > 10 Overcoming Dualism 217 >>> > Appendix 225 >>> > References 227 >>> > Index 233 >>> > >>> > [image: Inline image 1] >>> > >>> > >>> > ------------------------------------------------------------ >>> > -------------------- >>> > Wolff-Michael Roth, Lansdowne Professor >>> > Applied Cognitive Science >>> > MacLaurin Building A567 >>> > University of Victoria >>> > Victoria, BC, V8P 5C2 >>> > http://web.uvic.ca/~mroth >>> > >>> > New book: *The Mathematics of Mathematics >>> > >> > directions-in-mathematics-and-science-education/the- >>> > mathematics-of-mathematics/>* >>> > >>> > On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 8:38 AM, Carol Macdonald < >>> carolmacdon@gmail.com> >>> > wrote: >>> > >>> > > Wolff-Michael Roth's new book has just come to my notice. >>> > > >>> > > Wolff-Michael, would you like to explain a bit to our whole >>> community? >>> > It >>> > > looks very interesting indeed. >>> > > >>> > > Regards >>> > > Carol >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > -- >>> > > Carol A Macdonald Ph.D (Edin) >>> > > Cultural Historical Activity Theory >>> > > Honorary Research Fellow: Department of Linguistics, Unisa >>> > > alternative email address: tmacdoca@unisa.ac.za >>> > > >>> > >>> >> >> > From dkellogg60@gmail.com Tue Mar 14 15:49:52 2017 From: dkellogg60@gmail.com (David Kellogg) Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2017 09:49:52 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Don't do it In-Reply-To: <58c69f16.519c620a.c1f04.6a1e@mx.google.com> References: <10944955-53C6-4C28-AECA-87EA5BF2BCB1@uniandes.edu.co> <4E54E642-1A2D-439D-A9E7-01756CFB0835@tlu.ee> <58c69f16.519c620a.c1f04.6a1e@mx.google.com> Message-ID: Larry: I think it's not hard for people to hear how intonation (i.e. pitch rises and falls) and articulation (i.e. vowels and consonants) are both distinct and linked. When people want to be sarcastic or ironic or just mildly humorous, they do it by having the intonation (which is chiefly interpersonal in meaning) say one thing and the articulation (which is chiefly ideational in meaning) say another. That shows they are distinguishable: that is, potentially distinct. But we more typically use intonation to mark certainty ("Don't do it!") and uncertainty ("Is it necessary?") and this is often linked to the articulation ("Don't..." and "Necessary..."), so much so that we have invented a special kind of articulation, called punctuation, to render it in writing. When you sing, you sing with intonation, but what you sing is the vowels (and, but to a much lesser degree, the consonants); every burst of song shows us how, in the human voice, intonation and articulation form what Vygotsky called a "complex whole": that is, they are both linked and distinct. I also think it's not hard for people to see how imperatives and interrogatives (grammatical mood, which is mostly interpersonal) are both linked to and distinct from nouns, adjectives and verbs (transitivity, which is mostly ideational). There are differences between the differences: the difference between "!" and "?" is one difference, and the difference between "Don't...(!)" and "Necessary...(?)" is another, but you can see that once again they can be seen as part of a complex whole ("Don't do it, because it's not necessary"). That is just how Ulvi was seeing it, because in order to disarticulate an argument into a negative proposal and a negative proposition on the one hand, and into a doing verb and a happening noun on the other, you first have to see them as a complex whole. Here's the hard part (for me, anyway). The "perezhivanie" of the infant is whole, but it's not particularly complex: it's pretty hard to take apart the feeling of the infant drinking milk and the infant's pleasure, and if you try to do it, you may find that the one disappears just as soon as the other does. Some "perezhivanie" are definitely like that: when a car jumps the curb and threatens to run me over, I find it very hard to distinguish between the self that perceives, the self who fears and the self who runs away (though I will admit I do not spend a lot of time trying to do this). On one level, the living of life is like that: I cannot take apart "living" and "life" no matter how hard I try. But there are also all these activities, like trying to make sense of what has happened, where I must. It is interesting (to me) that these other activities all seem to involve language. Yet language too is part of the living of life. So it seems to me that we need a unit of semantics that is a complex whole at one end (at the end of context) and a whole complex at the other (at the end of grammar). Sort of like the way that the perezhivanie of the infant is whole and only prospectivelly differentiable but that of the adolescent is complex and only retrospectively whole. But allatthesametime. David Kellogg Macquarie University On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 12:31 AM, wrote: > David, > > My echoing what you say is in appreciation for your opening a space to > explore : > > *some larger whole from which both the interpersonal and ideational > metafunctions emerge > > * looking at the Pepperian idea of contextualism/dispersive and > organicism/integrative ? together > > *this togetherness in actual speech being ? textualism (devices for > integrating service > > *giving service (and) getting service > > > > These focal points for analysis (exploring what has already occurred in > development). > > I hope my echo is faithful? To your intent > > Opening a door > > > > > > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > > > *From: *David Kellogg > *Sent: *March 13, 2017 12:39 AM > *To: *eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > *Subject: *[Xmca-l] Re: Don't do it > > > > In my own (unpublished) study, it was the interpersonal metafunction which > > emerged first, not the ideational one. That is, children grasped the idea > > of giving and getting goods and services before they had the idea that > > experience could be encoded in language and shared with somebody who didn't > > actually have it. (This study just confirmed work by Clare Painter, Jane > > Torr, and Halliday himself.) > > > > However, I think that Rein is right in one sense: there is some larger > > whole from which BOTH the interpersonal and the ideational must be > > co-differentiated. I don't think this differentiation is what happens in > > development, though: it's an artefact of analysis. I don't think that this > > larger whole exists in infants, or even in early childhood; to use the > > Pepperian idea in Karimi-Aghdam article, it's a kind of artefact that > > arises post hoc, from looking at contextualism (which is dispersive) and > > organicism (which is integrative) together. By looking at an integrated > > whole and by thinking about it as development-in-context, we infer it, but > > to assume that it actually happens, that all word meanings are "given" to > > children, is to commit the Augustinian fallacy (that Wittgenstein > > criticizes at the beginning of Philosophical Investigations) > > > > Halliday's got a name for this larger whole, at least once it arises in > > actual speech. It's the TEXTUAL metafunction, that is, the textual devices > > that we use to integrate interpersonal functions and ideational ones into a > > single clause. To return to the example I gave earlier: > > > > a) Don't do it. (interpersonal proposal, ideational material process, "you" > > and "it" are Actor and Goal, textually unmarked) > > b) It's not necessary (interpersonal proposition, ideational relational > > process "it" and "necessary" are Carrier and Attribute, textually unmarked) > > c) Don't do it, because it's not necessary. ("because" is a conjunctive > > adjunct which integrates the two propositions--it has neither interpersonal > > nor ideational function, but is a purely textual element). > > > > (I've got a study on how this metafunction arises in Korean kids--it seems > > to me that it's not explicit until quite late, in sixth grade, in my data. > > This one will actually be PUBLISHED...in Language and Education! (DOI: > > 10.1080/09500782.2017.1306074) > > > > David Kellogg > > Macquarie University > > > > On Sun, Mar 12, 2017 at 7:51 AM, Rein Raud wrote: > > > > > Yes, this I can agree with - especially as this is fairly close to my own > > > theory of meaning ("Meaning in Action", Polity 2016, ch.2), except that > in > > > my opinion the ideational is already given to us interpersonally (as when > > > someone explains to us what a word means), while there is also an > > > "experiential" meaning with which this ideational claims identity. But > what > > > you say makes sense. Best, Rein > > > > > > On Mar 11, 2017, at 22:41 , Martin John Packer wrote: > > > > > > > Rein, > > > > > > > > David is building here on Halliday?s analysis of the two fundamental > > > ?functions? of language, the ideational and the interpersonal. It is when > > > the child becomes able to combine the two in the same utterance that > > > grammar emerges. (That was not David?s point; I just find it a very > > > interesting idea!) > > > > > > > > Martin > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mar 11, 2017, at 3:27 PM, Rein Raud > > raud@tlu.ee>> wrote: > > > > > > > > David, I was only reacting to what you wrote: > > > > > > > > I shall call this form of meaning--for meaning it is--"interpersonal" > > > > meaning, in order to distinguish it from "ideational" meaning. I think > > > that > > > > interpersonal meaning is meaning, but it is meaning which is directed > > > > towards organizing an interaction as the giving or getting of > information > > > > or goods and services. Ideational meaning is meaning too, but it is > > > > directed towards the representation (hence, "indication") of human > > > > experience and logic. They're equally meaningful, but they are filled > > > with > > > > different kinds of meanings. > > > > > > > > "Ideational" here seems to be what Austin calls "locutionary". > > > "Interpersonal", in turn, seems to be what Austin called "performative" > (in > > > the illocutionary and perlocutionary varieties) and indeed you define it > > > as "directed towards organizing an interaction". Thus I don't think your > > > counter-argument here is wholly legitimate, or perhaps I've missed the > > > point. > > > > > > > > Best, > > > > > > > > Rein > > > > > > > > On Mar 11, 2017, at 22:09 , David Kellogg wrote: > > > > > > > > Here I'm talking about the difference between: > > > > > > > > a) Don't do it. > > > > b) You are doing it. > > > > c) Are you doing it? > > > > > > > > This is not a difference between locutionary, illocutionary, and > > > > perlocutionary force--Austin would say that all of these are > locutionary > > > in > > > > their force, because the pragmatic purpose and the resulting event, > which > > > > is the giving of linguistic examples and their reception, is the same. > > > And > > > > yet they are different. How so? > > > > > > > > They are different in the nature of the commodity which is put at risk. > > > In > > > > a) that commodity is goods and services, while in b) and c) that > > > commodity > > > > is information. This means that in a) language is ancillary--we can > often > > > > perform the same "speech act" (to use the behavioristic terminology of > > > > Austin, Searle, and their disciples in pragmatics) using gesticulation, > > > > gesture, "eye language", or just intonation. But in b) and c) the use > of > > > > lexicogrammar is central--we cannot successfully exchange propositions > > > > without encoding them lexicogrammatically. > > > > > > > > This is not the same difference that Austin is discussing. Austin is > not > > > a > > > > linguist, so he wants to transfer meaning from language to context: to > > > > speech roles, to social recognition and to social outcomes. That's > simply > > > > not possible in this situation: the meaning of b) and c) lies in the > > > > lexico-grammar and nowhere else. Speech act theory is to linguistics > what > > > > behaviorism is to psychology. > > > > > > > > David Kellogg > > > > Macquarie University > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sun, Mar 12, 2017 at 6:33 AM, Rein Raud > > rein.raud@tlu.ee>> wrote: > > > > > > > > These differences have been discussed quite some time ago in > J.L.Austin's > > > > "How to Do Things with Words" (1962), from which speech act theory > > > > originated. Austin distinguishes between locutionary (primary > semantical) > > > > meaning, illocutionary meaning (what is being meant) and perlocutionary > > > > meaning (any event is being produced by the utterance). Thus when you > say > > > > "Do you have some time?" you might mean "Can you spare some time for > me?" > > > > and the perlocutionary result of this is that you will actually help me > > > > (because you are in a position where you cannot say "no" to me, f.ex. > > > > because I am your boss). A lot of speech act theory has evolved from > > > this, > > > > notably in the work of Searle. Best to all, Rein Raud > > > > > > > > On Mar 11, 2017, at 21:18 , David Kellogg wrote: > > > > > > > > Ulvi, Mike... > > > > > > > > We started this thread with Ulvi's important remark that there is a > > > > difference between: > > > > > > > > "Don't do it." > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > "it is not necessary." > > > > > > > > Ulvi said that the difference does not lie in their polarity--they are > > > > both > > > > negative. Nor does it lie in their representational (referential, or > > > > "ideational" meaning). They both refer to "it" and to the advisability > of > > > > "it". Ulvi said that the first was imperative, and the second was not > > > > (the > > > > technical term for the non-imperative form of the second is > > > > "indicative-declarative", as opposed to "indicative-interrogative" > which > > > > would be a question). > > > > > > > > I shall call this form of meaning--for meaning it is--"interpersonal" > > > > meaning, in order to distinguish it from "ideational" meaning. I think > > > > that > > > > interpersonal meaning is meaning, but it is meaning which is directed > > > > towards organizing an interaction as the giving or getting of > information > > > > or goods and services. Ideational meaning is meaning too, but it is > > > > directed towards the representation (hence, "indication") of human > > > > experience and logic. They're equally meaningful, but they are filled > > > > with > > > > different kinds of meanings. > > > > > > > > The difference is qualitative, and that is another way of saying that > it > > > > is > > > > "revolutionary" (because revolution originally meant turning around > axis; > > > > the first political "revolution" was the rather pathetic "turning" of > > > > Latin-speaking civilization from a republican to an imperial form under > > > > Augustus). The difference is between making a proposal and offering a > > > > proposition--i.e. between realizing a potential state and simply > > > > discussing > > > > an actual one. > > > > > > > > One of the interesting aspects of Professor Jang's paper is that it is > > > > about adolescents who are in the process of forming concepts, but who > are > > > > not there yet. And one way in which an adolescent forms a concept about > > > > the > > > > difficult concept of a social contract, of citizenship, of nationality > is > > > > pseudoconceptual: it is based on discussing "actual" perceptual > > > > differences > > > > between races. This might seem irrelevant to current political > discourse. > > > > Unfortunately, it isn't. > > > > > > > > What does a teacher say to kids who are thinking this way? Do we say > > > > "Don't > > > > do it"? Or is it better to show them that it is not necessary? > > > > > > > > David Kellogg > > > > Macquarie University > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sat, Mar 11, 2017 at 7:58 PM, Ulvi ??il > > ulvi.icil@gmail.com>> wrote: > > > > > > > > Mike, please corrct me if i wrongly take this meaning that revolutions > > > > causes big numbers of death, death in masses, so we would not prefer > > > > them. > > > > > > > > But, what if we sum up all the deaths because of occupatinal murders in > > > > workplaces, deaths from drugs, murders of women and early death because > > > > of > > > > lack of sufficient health care and all the deaths due to the bad > > > > orgsanisation of society under capitalism and what is more turning of > > > > tens > > > > of millions of children into ignorant and fanatic human beings who are > > > > brought up able to kill anyone on the street etc > > > > > > > > Is it not more rational to put en end to this state of human society > > > > rather > > > > than to perpetruate it, allow it to exist. > > > > > > > > Unemployment itself 20 % in Turkey. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 11 Mar 2017 03:14 tarihinde "mike cole" > > ucsd.edu>> yazd?: > > > > > > > > From my personal web page, Ulvi: > > > > > > > > *Apropos Thoughts on Revolutions and Their Causes* > > > > > > > > (From C. Dickens, *A Tale of Two Cities*, Ch 15) > > > > > > > > Along the Paris streets, the death carts rumble, hollow and harsh. > > > > > > > > Six tumbrels carry the day's wine to La Guillotine. All the devouring > > > > and > > > > insatiate monsters imagined since imagination could record itself, are > > > > fused in the one realization, Guillotine. And yet there is not in > > > > France, > > > > with its rich variety of soil and climate, a blade, a leaf, a root, a > > > > sprig, a peppercorn, which will grow to maturity under conditions more > > > > certain than those that have produced this horror. Crush human humanity > > > > out > > > > of shape once more, under similar hammers, and it will twist itself > > > > into > > > > the same tortured forms. Sow the same seed of rapacious license and > > > > oppression over again, and it will surely yield the same fruit, > > > > according > > > > to its kind. > > > > > > > > It is the nature of the fruits sewn by the French Revolution that give > > > > pause for thought. And perhaps accounts for the lack of reply to your > > > > articulately formulated note. > > > > > > > > mike > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Mar 8, 2017 at 1:32 PM, Ulvi ??il ul > > > vi.icil@gmail.com>> wrote: > > > > > > > > If I say > > > > > > > > don't do it, it is imperative. > > > > > > > > But if I say, > > > > > > > > It is not realistic and you do not need it. > > > > > > > > It is affirmative and even though negative, it is again affirmative, > > > > to > > > > demobilize you. > > > > > > > > What I mean is Revolution. > > > > > > > > Addressed to a married couple with two children. > > > > > > > > With 3 thousand Turkish liras in Istanbul in a rented home of at > > > > least > > > > 1000 tl for rent. > > > > > > > > 1 usd = 4 Turkish liras > > > > > > > > Survival economics. > > > > > > > > Any prospect? > > > > > > > > No. > > > > > > > > That simple. > > > > > > > > What is socialist revolution? > > > > > > > > It is neither an intention nor a wish. > > > > > > > > It is simple necessity. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From eunyoung1112@gmail.com Tue Mar 14 20:14:13 2017 From: eunyoung1112@gmail.com (Eun Young Jang) Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2017 12:14:13 +0900 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Jang's SL Article Discussion In-Reply-To: References: <1489427326574.46980@iped.uio.no> <1489431232770.89078@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: ? Hi everyone, thank you very much for reading my article. This is such a great opportunity for me to introduce my work and receive comments from wonderful colleagues. First, let me introduce myself briefly. I earned my doctorate in Language, Literacy, and Culture in the Department of Teaching and Learning at Vanderbilt University. I am currently working as an assistant professor in Multicultural Education at Seoul National University of Education located in Seoul, South Korea. My research interests are in the impact of the social context on second language teaching and learning. Another paper published recently deals with sustainable globalization of higher education focusing on cultures and languages in a foreign professor?s classroom in S. Korea. My current research project is about North Korean refugee students learning English in South Korea. My article for xmca discussion was initiated from my observation that ESL students were not actually focusing on learning English in the ESL classroom but instead, on ?acting? learning with an attempt to achieve certain social position (as an individual or a group). In particular, I noted that they were quite skillful in using ?seemingly? academic strategies to conceal what they were actually doing. The ESL students were very sensitive to things happening to them in terms of marginalization and discrimination but did not reveal to others explicitly what they really thought. Instead, they took advantage of the school discourse that was legitimized in the context, that was, acting like motivated and strategic learners by participating in class activities actively and strategically. In spite of regular observations of ESL classes back then, I could not figure out what was happening in the classroom for the first couple of months. Later on, the social dynamics among students and between students and the teacher surfaced to me and also they began to open their minds and told me how they felt isolated and discriminated. Then, I was able to see the meanings of their actions. In effect, the ESL teacher tried hard to be fair and in a sense, the French student was isolated and discriminated by the Korean students in the ESL classroom. Nevertheless, Korean students victimized themselves. I thought that it was still important and valuable to acknowledge how the Korean students felt simply because the feelings were there and they made some consequences (such as silencing the French student). I wanted to reveal that how the students felt and why they felt that way and how they reacted to their feelings. Whether the discrimination was real or not was not important. A reviewer from other journal has criticized my article badly for teacher bashing. But definitely I did not mean it. Also, some readers of my article said that because I am Korean, I was on the Korean students? side. The fact was, the ESL teacher and I were good friends and this even made the Korean students suspicious of my position (like a spy from the ?white? teacher side). Anyway, honestly, the comments from other scholars made me feel constrained conducting research about the same ethnic group. Now, I?d like to know about your opinion about this issue. Again, the fact that the participants were Korean was not the main focus of my study. I wanted to show how they used strategies, which were typically categorized as individual and cognitive traits, for social purposes. So, the bigger agenda of my study was to explore ?a? way to bridge the dichotomy between individual and sociocultural camps. Thanks! EY. On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 8:12 AM, David Kellogg wrote: > Alfredo: > > Down the hall one of the Chinese translators is working on translations of > the Chinese "State of the Union" address into English. The Chinese goes > something like this: > > ????????? > xi?och? p?nk?n q?d? j?nzh?n. > > Literally: > > "Eradicate Poverty Achieve Progress", i.e. "(The government) (made) some > progress in the eradication of poverty." > > In Chinese we don't have to specify the agent, and we don't need to use the > effective verb "made"; it's a happening and not a doing. This used to be > because the agent went without saying--it's encoded in the grammar. Partly > thanks to a poetic tradition going back more than a thousand years, Chinese > lends itself to four-syllable slogan-like objects like "Eradicate Poverty" > and "Achieve Progress", and putting them together sounds natural. We don't > usually use a subject unless we want to stress it; it's much more common to > just have a nominal topic and then a comment, like in this example. Because > the government has a well established role in mobilizing the masses to > carry out actions like famine relief and flood prevention and so on, the > agent and the "doing" don't need to be specified: everybody knows it was > the government, even if that weren't clear in the context of a government > report. So we simply say it's a happening. > > Now that's changing. In fact, the government does relatively little to > alleviate poverty. There are regional enterprises, and there are private > businesses and so on. After the Sichuan earthquake, my brother-in-law > loaded up his SUV with bottled water and drove down to the earthquake area > to distribute it, and he says there was a huge traffic jam of other SUVs by > entrepreneurs like him who had exactly the same idea. And for precisely > this reason, we find that in the government report there is more and more > explicit stipulation of the government's agency and of the effective means. > Instead of just happening, the government does things. There is a similar > link between ideology and ideation in English if you think about it. When > something GOOD happens, it's because somebody DID it, but when something > bad happens, "Stuff happens". > > Here's the point. We usually use "ideology" to mean something like > conscious and deliberate ideation, usually of an intentionally deceitful or > misleading variety. I don't really accept that. It seems to me that > "ideology" really is equivalent to ideation, that is, to the communicative, > representational function of speech, except that it is somewhat larger, > both because the interpersonal and the textual functions also encode ideas > and are also therefore ideological and because a lot of ideology is simply > NOT specifying things. For example, when you say "it's raining", you are > conveying the idea that rain is an event that just happens, and is not > caused by any nameable entity. You don't normally say "it's birding" or > even "it's shining". > > Similarly, we usually use "prescriptivism" to mean something like conscious > and deliberate transformativism, usually of an authoritarian and > dictatorial, and deceptive, sort. I don't really accept that either. On the > contrary, what is really deceptive is to pretend that the process of > education is meaningful without attending to its ultimate product. To me, > "Eradicate Poverty Achieve Progress" is a perfect balance of process and > product, and agency and effective means are only meaningful with respect to > both. > > David Kellogg > Macquarie University > > On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 5:53 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil > wrote: > > > Hi again, > > > > one thing that I find interesting in Jang's article, and which may > connect > > to comments in the other thread (by David, Haydi...) concerning 'not > > reducing the political to the personal', is the issue of *ideology.* In > > particular, Jang discusses and empirically examines what she coins as a > > *Prescriptive* language ideology. As she describes in her paper, and as > any > > educator will immediately recognise, this ideology exists as the > > classroom's orientations to a correct/incorrect form. In her article, she > > exhibits this through a number of sequences in which teacher-student and > > student-student relations involve *evaluations* with regard to > proficiently > > using two rules: making connections between sentences and staying on the > > topic. > > > > As Jang shows, the prescriptive approach, which sets the final linguist > > form as the criterion for positively or negatively evaluating any > response > > by any student, is such that more proficient readers/speakers will have > > easier access to positive evaluation. The ideology here then exists as a > > regime of power and differential access, of inequality. By treating all > > equally, we get to inequality. > > > > I was thinking that it seems that the prescriptive approach does focus on > > the final product, whereas the sociocultural approach that Jang pursues > and > > Vygotsky first set forth has it that we should not focus on the final > > product but on its genesis, on the way the verbal form exists first as a > > social relation between people. Thus, in Episodes 1 and 2 in the article, > > if the participants had oriented towards a possible process of > development, > > Ji-Woo's responses would have been heard and responded to as moments in a > > developmental trajectory. There would have been a very different social > > situation in which work would have been directed to make visible and > > available the dynamics of Ji-Woo's learning process. But the prescriptive > > orientation evaluates and makes salient only deficiency and achievement. > On > > the other hand, and consistent with those (e.g., Stetsenko, Holzman) who > > have referred to Vygotsky's legacy as *revolutionary,* an orientation > > consistent with Vygotsky's teachings would bring with it not only a > > different situation, but also an *emancipatory* one. Instead of > inequality > > brought about by treating all equally, we would have an equalitarian > > approach whose power resides in acknowledging and caring for history and > > diversity. > > > > On a side thought, and connected to David's (Halliday's) distinction > > between ideational and interpersonal functions of language, I was > wondering > > what is the relation/difference between ideational and ideological. In > the > > article, it seems clear that the language related competence on putting > > names to things and thereby building categories seems a condition for the > > racial/ethnic tension to exist. But of course, the tension is a > relational, > > not just a lexical one. Thoughts? > > > > Alfredo > > > > ________________________________________ > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil > > Sent: 13 March 2017 18:48 > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Jang's SL Article Discussion > > > > ?Dear all, > > > > > > David has started some very interesting comments on the current article > > for discussion on Tensions in Second Language Learning, which attach > again > > here. Because some of these comments have been given at a different > thread, > > I am starting here a thread that shall more centrally concern Jang's > > article. I copy below all what David has so far written about the > article. > > I hope this will ?make it easy for Eun-Young and everyone else to follow > on > > her article. I know ?Eun-Young is challenged time-wise by course > > responsibilities and I hope this will make it easier for her. > > > > > > Eun-Young, David mentions an article from 2011. If you wanted, you could > > also share the PDF with us for background, although the current article > > gives more than enough material for discussion, I think. > > > > > > Alfredo > > > > > > --------------------David Kellogg wrote: ------------------ > > > > > > t's very interesting to compare this paper with Professor Jang's 2011 > > paper co-authored with Robert T. Jimenez: > > > > Eun-Young Jang & Robert T. Jim?nez (2011) A Sociocultural Perspective on > > Second Language Learner Strategies: Focus on the Impact of Social > Context, > > Theory Into Practice, > > 50:2, 141-148, DOI: 10.1080/00405841.2011.558443 > > > > In some ways, the papers are very similar--the data is identical in one > > place (p. 42), and the conclusions are for the most part congruent. But > > consider how different the titles are. "Impact" in one place, and > "tension" > > in the other. > > > > There is this note to the 1935 version of Vygotsky's report on > preschools, > > where Zankov, Elkonin and Shif complain about Vygotsky's idea that the > > child directs his or her own learning before preschool, the environment > > directs it after preschool, and preschool therefore represents a kind of > > transitional stage. On the one hand, if the child is directing his or her > > own learning, how can we say that the environment is the ultimate source > of > > learning? And if the environment is the ultimate source of learning, as > > Vygotsky says, how can we say that the child is himself or herself part > of > > the environment? > > > > Professor Jang gets around this problem just as Vygotsky does--adroitly. > On > > the one hand, strategies are expanded to include "sets of actions > performed > > to deal with problems (perceived by the researcher, indicated by the > > learners)". On the other, contexts are expanded to include "pedagogical > > assumptions, power relations, and interracial conflict". > > > > I think this solution to the problem is the correct one: when we consider > > the relationship of the child and the environment, we cannot treat it > like > > an unstoppable force meeting an unmoveable object. But for me that means > > that both the child and the environment have to be considered in > "internal" > > (that is, abstract, linguistic) terms. We can't think of speech as > actions; > > it's more useful to think of actions as speech. We can't think of the > > social situation of development as a material setting: it's a > relationship > > with others. > > > > Contrariwise, it seems to me that when we consider "racism", it is more > > helpful to consider it in "external", that is, concrete, nonlinguistic > > terms. In the 2011 paper, Professor Jang and her co-author are willing to > > openly criticize the idea that languages are learned in exactly the same > > way whether they are first or second languages. Here, they just quote the > > teacher's comments on "mommy skills". > > > > It's a very revealing quote. One thing it reveals is why it's probably > not > > helpful to refer to "racist" as an "insult" (p. 40) or to imply that > racism > > and anti-racism is really just a matter of having the right attitude (as > > the Republicans did in the Sessions debate or as Bernie Sanders did when > he > > referred to Trump supporters who voted for Obama as "not having a racist > > bone in their bodies"). > > > > You can see that subjectively, the teacher is being anti-racist--all > > students, French, Turkish, Egyptian, Korean, use the same strategies, > just > > like we all have mommies.She has all the right attitudes, and probably > > doesn't have a racist bone in her body. But that doesn't diminish by one > > jot the terrible damage that this kind of indiscriminate discrimination > > does in the classroom. > > > > David Kellogg > > Macquarie University > > > > > > ------------------------ On a related thread (Subject: Don't do it), > David > > K. wrote:-------------- > > > > > > It seems to me that we need to clearly distinguish between "racism" and > > "racist sentiment". One of the interesting problems that comes up in > Eunhee > > Jang's excellent article on second language learning strategies from a > > sociocultural point of view--a wonderful piece of "inside" work, > > introducing racial issues into an area where they have never been > seriously > > discussed--is the use of "racist" (by the Korean kids to describe their > > teacher) as an "insult". > > > > I like the article. I think it's important work. But for that very > reason, > > I think that it's important to resist any attempt to reduce "racist" to a > > personal insult. I think we've seen very very clearly, both in the > Sessions > > confirmation hearing, and in the discussion of Trump's own anti-semitic > > behavior--that this kind of reduction of the political to the personal is > > precisely the kind of reducing the sociocultural to the cognitive that > > Professor Jang is trying to resist. > > > > David Kellogg > > Macquarie University > > > > > > ------------------------- Idem as above------------------------- > > --------------- > > > > > > One of the interesting aspects of Professor Jang's paper is that it is > > about adolescents who are in the process of forming concepts, but who are > > not there yet. And one way in which an adolescent forms a concept about > the > > difficult concept of a social contract, of citizenship, of nationality is > > pseudoconceptual: it is based on discussing "actual" perceptual > differences > > between races. This might seem irrelevant to current political discourse. > > Unfortunately, it isn't.? > > > > > > David Kellogg > > > > > -- Jang, Eun-Young. Ph.D. Assistant Professor, Graduate School of Education Seoul National University of Education Seoul, S. Korea From dkellogg60@gmail.com Wed Mar 15 14:28:26 2017 From: dkellogg60@gmail.com (David Kellogg) Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2017 08:28:26 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Jang's SL Article Discussion In-Reply-To: References: <1489427326574.46980@iped.uio.no> <1489431232770.89078@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: Dear Professor Jang: Relax, you are among friends and co-thinkers. Well, a lot of friends, some of whom are probably very close co-thinkers. It's a very big list, but I doubt if anybody who read your article would accuse you of teacher bashing. I also don't think anybody who read it would think that you used your Korean-ness in any other way than a good researcher uses any resource that affords empathy with the researched. And I DO think that you provided "a" way of bridging a socioculural and a cognitivist approach to the second language classroom. Perhaps even two ways. It seems to me that one way is from the "contextualist" end; that is, to redefine a context in abstract terms, including things like attitudes, motivations, and teaching ideologies right in the context. I think this is actually much more difficult than it looks: some people will consider this behavioristic, because it assumes that attitudes, motivations and ideologies can be treated as external to mind. I think it actually only considers them as external to text. Other people will consider it upwardly reductionistic, because it assumes that attitudes, motivations and ideologies can be reduced to society and to culture and to context of situation. I think that society and culture and context of situation must always be considered as a complex whole, including cognition, but not subsuming it. It also seems to me that another is from the "organicist" end; that is, to define attitudes, motivations, and ideologies as something in some way independent of cognition (the "distributed cognition" people are good at this). Again, this isn't so easy, particularly in an American context. America is now going through a kind of crisis, because racism has previously been defined in only one of two ways. Either racism is part of cognition--in which case it really only exists in people who subscribe, paradoxically, to "objective" scientific racism, to the belief that non-whites are actually inferior. Or racism is part of culture--in which case it really only exists in the debilitating effects it has on the oppressed, and it doesn't really matter what it is that racists believe (or, for that matter, what non-racists believe: Obama was just as guilty of black unemployment as Bush). What I suggest is, rather perversely, a third way. It's from the "pedological, defectological" end. That is, attitudes, motivations and the teaching ideologies which derive from them need to be understood not only as part of the context but also as part of pedology, a whole science of the child. Unfortunately, Vygotsky's writings on this are not available in English, but they ARE available in good Korean: http://www.aladin.co.kr/shop/common/wseriesitem.aspx?SRID=25565 Similarly, the ravages of racism (including the "damunhwa kyoyuk" developed in Korea under Yi Myeongbak and Park Geunhye, which was concerned with providing "equal opportunity" to the majority as well as to the minority) need to be considered not simply as stigma on the dominant race or as stigmata of the oppressed but more defectologically. "Defect" wasn't an insult in the USSR: Vygotsky actually considers "yeongje kyoyuk" (that is, "genius education"), education of the blind, education of the deaf, so-called "learning disabilities" not as "disabilities" but as defects--that is, normal disadvantages to be overcome in the same way as any other obstacle in learning, through "circuitous and indirect", that is, mediated, means of learning. We have evolved our means of education, as Vygotsky says, to cater to the needs of the psychophysiological dominant group, but the mark of higher forms of social progress is how it can develop the niches within this and the needs of those who are not psychophysiologically dominant. (Do you know Professor Kim Jinseok? I worked at SNUE for over ten years myself, and our Vygotsky group still meets there every Saturday to translate the work of Vygotsky into Korean. If you are on campus on a Saturday, we are usually in room 315, over "Dasomchae" near the front gate, from noon until about four!) David Kellogg Macquarie University On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 2:14 PM, Eun Young Jang wrote: > ? > > Hi everyone, thank you very much for reading my article. This is such a > great opportunity for me to introduce my work and receive comments from > wonderful colleagues. > > First, let me introduce myself briefly. I earned my doctorate in Language, > Literacy, and Culture in the Department of Teaching and Learning at > Vanderbilt University. I am currently working as an assistant professor in > Multicultural Education at Seoul National University of Education located > in Seoul, South Korea. My research interests are in the impact of the > social context on second language teaching and learning. Another paper > published recently deals with sustainable globalization of higher education > focusing on cultures and languages in a foreign professor?s classroom in S. > Korea. My current research project is about North Korean refugee students > learning English in South Korea. > > > My article for xmca discussion was initiated from my observation that ESL > students were not actually focusing on learning English in the ESL > classroom but instead, on ?acting? learning with an attempt to achieve > certain social position (as an individual or a group). In particular, I > noted that they were quite skillful in using ?seemingly? academic > strategies to conceal what they were actually doing. > > > > The ESL students were very sensitive to things happening to them in terms > of marginalization and discrimination but did not reveal to others > explicitly what they really thought. Instead, they took advantage of the > school discourse that was legitimized in the context, that was, acting like > motivated and strategic learners by participating in class activities > actively and strategically. In spite of regular observations of ESL classes > back then, I could not figure out what was happening in the classroom for > the first couple of months. Later on, the social dynamics among students > and between students and the teacher surfaced to me and also they began to > open their minds and told me how they felt isolated and discriminated. > Then, I was able to see the meanings of their actions. > > > > In effect, the ESL teacher tried hard to be fair and in a sense, the French > student was isolated and discriminated by the Korean students in the ESL > classroom. Nevertheless, Korean students victimized themselves. I thought > that it was still important and valuable to acknowledge how the Korean > students felt simply because the feelings were there and they made some > consequences (such as silencing the French student). I wanted to reveal > that how the students felt and why they felt that way and how they reacted > to their feelings. Whether the discrimination was real or not was not > important. > > > > A reviewer from other journal has criticized my article badly for teacher > bashing. But definitely I did not mean it. Also, some readers of my article > said that because I am Korean, I was on the Korean students? side. The fact > was, the ESL teacher and I were good friends and this even made the Korean > students suspicious of my position (like a spy from the ?white? teacher > side). Anyway, honestly, the comments from other scholars made me feel > constrained conducting research about the same ethnic group. Now, I?d like > to know about your opinion about this issue. > > Again, the fact that the participants were Korean was not the main focus of > my study. I wanted to show how they used strategies, which were typically > categorized as individual and cognitive traits, for social purposes. So, > the bigger agenda of my study was to explore ?a? way to bridge the > dichotomy between individual and sociocultural camps. > > Thanks! > > EY. > > On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 8:12 AM, David Kellogg > wrote: > > > Alfredo: > > > > Down the hall one of the Chinese translators is working on translations > of > > the Chinese "State of the Union" address into English. The Chinese goes > > something like this: > > > > ????????? > > xi?och? p?nk?n q?d? j?nzh?n. > > > > Literally: > > > > "Eradicate Poverty Achieve Progress", i.e. "(The government) (made) some > > progress in the eradication of poverty." > > > > In Chinese we don't have to specify the agent, and we don't need to use > the > > effective verb "made"; it's a happening and not a doing. This used to be > > because the agent went without saying--it's encoded in the grammar. > Partly > > thanks to a poetic tradition going back more than a thousand years, > Chinese > > lends itself to four-syllable slogan-like objects like "Eradicate > Poverty" > > and "Achieve Progress", and putting them together sounds natural. We > don't > > usually use a subject unless we want to stress it; it's much more common > to > > just have a nominal topic and then a comment, like in this example. > Because > > the government has a well established role in mobilizing the masses to > > carry out actions like famine relief and flood prevention and so on, the > > agent and the "doing" don't need to be specified: everybody knows it was > > the government, even if that weren't clear in the context of a government > > report. So we simply say it's a happening. > > > > Now that's changing. In fact, the government does relatively little to > > alleviate poverty. There are regional enterprises, and there are private > > businesses and so on. After the Sichuan earthquake, my brother-in-law > > loaded up his SUV with bottled water and drove down to the earthquake > area > > to distribute it, and he says there was a huge traffic jam of other SUVs > by > > entrepreneurs like him who had exactly the same idea. And for precisely > > this reason, we find that in the government report there is more and more > > explicit stipulation of the government's agency and of the effective > means. > > Instead of just happening, the government does things. There is a similar > > link between ideology and ideation in English if you think about it. When > > something GOOD happens, it's because somebody DID it, but when something > > bad happens, "Stuff happens". > > > > Here's the point. We usually use "ideology" to mean something like > > conscious and deliberate ideation, usually of an intentionally deceitful > or > > misleading variety. I don't really accept that. It seems to me that > > "ideology" really is equivalent to ideation, that is, to the > communicative, > > representational function of speech, except that it is somewhat larger, > > both because the interpersonal and the textual functions also encode > ideas > > and are also therefore ideological and because a lot of ideology is > simply > > NOT specifying things. For example, when you say "it's raining", you are > > conveying the idea that rain is an event that just happens, and is not > > caused by any nameable entity. You don't normally say "it's birding" or > > even "it's shining". > > > > Similarly, we usually use "prescriptivism" to mean something like > conscious > > and deliberate transformativism, usually of an authoritarian and > > dictatorial, and deceptive, sort. I don't really accept that either. On > the > > contrary, what is really deceptive is to pretend that the process of > > education is meaningful without attending to its ultimate product. To me, > > "Eradicate Poverty Achieve Progress" is a perfect balance of process and > > product, and agency and effective means are only meaningful with respect > to > > both. > > > > David Kellogg > > Macquarie University > > > > On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 5:53 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil > > > wrote: > > > > > Hi again, > > > > > > one thing that I find interesting in Jang's article, and which may > > connect > > > to comments in the other thread (by David, Haydi...) concerning 'not > > > reducing the political to the personal', is the issue of *ideology.* > In > > > particular, Jang discusses and empirically examines what she coins as a > > > *Prescriptive* language ideology. As she describes in her paper, and as > > any > > > educator will immediately recognise, this ideology exists as the > > > classroom's orientations to a correct/incorrect form. In her article, > she > > > exhibits this through a number of sequences in which teacher-student > and > > > student-student relations involve *evaluations* with regard to > > proficiently > > > using two rules: making connections between sentences and staying on > the > > > topic. > > > > > > As Jang shows, the prescriptive approach, which sets the final linguist > > > form as the criterion for positively or negatively evaluating any > > response > > > by any student, is such that more proficient readers/speakers will have > > > easier access to positive evaluation. The ideology here then exists as > a > > > regime of power and differential access, of inequality. By treating all > > > equally, we get to inequality. > > > > > > I was thinking that it seems that the prescriptive approach does focus > on > > > the final product, whereas the sociocultural approach that Jang pursues > > and > > > Vygotsky first set forth has it that we should not focus on the final > > > product but on its genesis, on the way the verbal form exists first as > a > > > social relation between people. Thus, in Episodes 1 and 2 in the > article, > > > if the participants had oriented towards a possible process of > > development, > > > Ji-Woo's responses would have been heard and responded to as moments > in a > > > developmental trajectory. There would have been a very different social > > > situation in which work would have been directed to make visible and > > > available the dynamics of Ji-Woo's learning process. But the > prescriptive > > > orientation evaluates and makes salient only deficiency and > achievement. > > On > > > the other hand, and consistent with those (e.g., Stetsenko, Holzman) > who > > > have referred to Vygotsky's legacy as *revolutionary,* an orientation > > > consistent with Vygotsky's teachings would bring with it not only a > > > different situation, but also an *emancipatory* one. Instead of > > inequality > > > brought about by treating all equally, we would have an equalitarian > > > approach whose power resides in acknowledging and caring for history > and > > > diversity. > > > > > > On a side thought, and connected to David's (Halliday's) distinction > > > between ideational and interpersonal functions of language, I was > > wondering > > > what is the relation/difference between ideational and ideological. In > > the > > > article, it seems clear that the language related competence on putting > > > names to things and thereby building categories seems a condition for > the > > > racial/ethnic tension to exist. But of course, the tension is a > > relational, > > > not just a lexical one. Thoughts? > > > > > > Alfredo > > > > > > ________________________________________ > > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil > > > Sent: 13 March 2017 18:48 > > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Jang's SL Article Discussion > > > > > > ?Dear all, > > > > > > > > > David has started some very interesting comments on the current article > > > for discussion on Tensions in Second Language Learning, which attach > > again > > > here. Because some of these comments have been given at a different > > thread, > > > I am starting here a thread that shall more centrally concern Jang's > > > article. I copy below all what David has so far written about the > > article. > > > I hope this will ?make it easy for Eun-Young and everyone else to > follow > > on > > > her article. I know ?Eun-Young is challenged time-wise by course > > > responsibilities and I hope this will make it easier for her. > > > > > > > > > Eun-Young, David mentions an article from 2011. If you wanted, you > could > > > also share the PDF with us for background, although the current article > > > gives more than enough material for discussion, I think. > > > > > > > > > Alfredo > > > > > > > > > --------------------David Kellogg wrote: ------------------ > > > > > > > > > t's very interesting to compare this paper with Professor Jang's 2011 > > > paper co-authored with Robert T. Jimenez: > > > > > > Eun-Young Jang & Robert T. Jim?nez (2011) A Sociocultural Perspective > on > > > Second Language Learner Strategies: Focus on the Impact of Social > > Context, > > > Theory Into Practice, > > > 50:2, 141-148, DOI: 10.1080/00405841.2011.558443 > > > > > > In some ways, the papers are very similar--the data is identical in one > > > place (p. 42), and the conclusions are for the most part congruent. But > > > consider how different the titles are. "Impact" in one place, and > > "tension" > > > in the other. > > > > > > There is this note to the 1935 version of Vygotsky's report on > > preschools, > > > where Zankov, Elkonin and Shif complain about Vygotsky's idea that the > > > child directs his or her own learning before preschool, the environment > > > directs it after preschool, and preschool therefore represents a kind > of > > > transitional stage. On the one hand, if the child is directing his or > her > > > own learning, how can we say that the environment is the ultimate > source > > of > > > learning? And if the environment is the ultimate source of learning, as > > > Vygotsky says, how can we say that the child is himself or herself part > > of > > > the environment? > > > > > > Professor Jang gets around this problem just as Vygotsky > does--adroitly. > > On > > > the one hand, strategies are expanded to include "sets of actions > > performed > > > to deal with problems (perceived by the researcher, indicated by the > > > learners)". On the other, contexts are expanded to include "pedagogical > > > assumptions, power relations, and interracial conflict". > > > > > > I think this solution to the problem is the correct one: when we > consider > > > the relationship of the child and the environment, we cannot treat it > > like > > > an unstoppable force meeting an unmoveable object. But for me that > means > > > that both the child and the environment have to be considered in > > "internal" > > > (that is, abstract, linguistic) terms. We can't think of speech as > > actions; > > > it's more useful to think of actions as speech. We can't think of the > > > social situation of development as a material setting: it's a > > relationship > > > with others. > > > > > > Contrariwise, it seems to me that when we consider "racism", it is more > > > helpful to consider it in "external", that is, concrete, nonlinguistic > > > terms. In the 2011 paper, Professor Jang and her co-author are willing > to > > > openly criticize the idea that languages are learned in exactly the > same > > > way whether they are first or second languages. Here, they just quote > the > > > teacher's comments on "mommy skills". > > > > > > It's a very revealing quote. One thing it reveals is why it's probably > > not > > > helpful to refer to "racist" as an "insult" (p. 40) or to imply that > > racism > > > and anti-racism is really just a matter of having the right attitude > (as > > > the Republicans did in the Sessions debate or as Bernie Sanders did > when > > he > > > referred to Trump supporters who voted for Obama as "not having a > racist > > > bone in their bodies"). > > > > > > You can see that subjectively, the teacher is being anti-racist--all > > > students, French, Turkish, Egyptian, Korean, use the same strategies, > > just > > > like we all have mommies.She has all the right attitudes, and probably > > > doesn't have a racist bone in her body. But that doesn't diminish by > one > > > jot the terrible damage that this kind of indiscriminate discrimination > > > does in the classroom. > > > > > > David Kellogg > > > Macquarie University > > > > > > > > > ------------------------ On a related thread (Subject: Don't do it), > > David > > > K. wrote:-------------- > > > > > > > > > It seems to me that we need to clearly distinguish between "racism" and > > > "racist sentiment". One of the interesting problems that comes up in > > Eunhee > > > Jang's excellent article on second language learning strategies from a > > > sociocultural point of view--a wonderful piece of "inside" work, > > > introducing racial issues into an area where they have never been > > seriously > > > discussed--is the use of "racist" (by the Korean kids to describe their > > > teacher) as an "insult". > > > > > > I like the article. I think it's important work. But for that very > > reason, > > > I think that it's important to resist any attempt to reduce "racist" > to a > > > personal insult. I think we've seen very very clearly, both in the > > Sessions > > > confirmation hearing, and in the discussion of Trump's own anti-semitic > > > behavior--that this kind of reduction of the political to the personal > is > > > precisely the kind of reducing the sociocultural to the cognitive that > > > Professor Jang is trying to resist. > > > > > > David Kellogg > > > Macquarie University > > > > > > > > > ------------------------- Idem as above------------------------- > > > --------------- > > > > > > > > > One of the interesting aspects of Professor Jang's paper is that it is > > > about adolescents who are in the process of forming concepts, but who > are > > > not there yet. And one way in which an adolescent forms a concept about > > the > > > difficult concept of a social contract, of citizenship, of nationality > is > > > pseudoconceptual: it is based on discussing "actual" perceptual > > differences > > > between races. This might seem irrelevant to current political > discourse. > > > Unfortunately, it isn't.? > > > > > > > > > David Kellogg > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Jang, Eun-Young. Ph.D. > > Assistant Professor, Graduate School of Education > > Seoul National University of Education > > Seoul, S. Korea > From ablunden@mira.net Thu Mar 16 08:04:02 2017 From: ablunden@mira.net (Andy Blunden) Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2017 02:04:02 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Our continuing concern about Trump Message-ID: <2580e82e-07d0-d310-bf10-0166a2fb7727@mira.net> I know that restraint is needed when thinking of introducing current political issues to this list but I suspect that we are all still worrying about this issue and trying to figure it out. I have recently read a couple of articles on vox.com by a fellow called Zack Beauchamp which really need to be read. I don't know anything about vox.com or Mr. Beauchamp and I suspect he has nothing to do with CHAT or Marxism, but it is well researched, challenging and rings true. See http://www.vox.com/2016/9/19/12933072/far-right-white-riot-trump-brexit and http://www.vox.com/world/2017/3/13/14698812/bernie-trump-corbyn-left-wing-populism Andy -- ------------------------------------------------------------ Andy Blunden http://home.mira.net/~andy http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making From greg.a.thompson@gmail.com Thu Mar 16 08:33:30 2017 From: greg.a.thompson@gmail.com (Greg Thompson) Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2017 09:33:30 -0600 Subject: [Xmca-l] Children as caregivers art gallery Message-ID: Apologies for the off-topic post, given the various discussions currently happening, but I wanted to share with you some work that might be of interest to many on the listserve. This is research from Jean Hunleth regarding child caregivers in Zambia who are helping care for their parents afflicted by HIV related tuberculosis. Of particular interest is an online (Flickr) gallery of 200 photos made by the children and which she has made available with commentary (both from her and from the children). See the link below (along with a brief comment from Jean about how to approach it - note I've also cc'd Jean on this email in case anyone is interested in contacting her directly - and just briefly, Jean is an anthropologist and is currently a professor in the Medical School at Washington University - St. Louis). Anyway, I thought that this might be of interest to some on the list. -greg >From Jean: "Here is the link to my art gallery. There are various ways to view it. I describe these in the first document Make sure to read the descriptions under the drawings. I'd love to hear any and all input, including ways I might improve it." https://www.flickr.com/photos/childrenascaregivers/ -- Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D. Assistant Professor Department of Anthropology 880 Spencer W. Kimball Tower Brigham Young University Provo, UT 84602 http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson From laure.kloetzer@gmail.com Thu Mar 16 08:44:43 2017 From: laure.kloetzer@gmail.com (Laure Kloetzer) Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2017 16:44:43 +0100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Children as caregivers art gallery In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Thanks a lot Greg, wonderful work, I share it immediately with one good colleague here in Neuch?tel working on children as caregivers ! Best LK 2017-03-16 16:33 GMT+01:00 Greg Thompson : > Apologies for the off-topic post, given the various discussions currently > happening, but I wanted to share with you some work that might be of > interest to many on the listserve. This is research from Jean Hunleth > regarding child caregivers in Zambia who are helping care for their parents > afflicted by HIV related tuberculosis. > > Of particular interest is an online (Flickr) gallery of 200 photos made by > the children and which she has made available with commentary (both from > her and from the children). See the link below (along with a brief comment > from Jean about how to approach it - note I've also cc'd Jean on this email > in case anyone is interested in contacting her directly - and just briefly, > Jean is an anthropologist and is currently a professor in the Medical > School at Washington University - St. Louis). > > Anyway, I thought that this might be of interest to some on the list. > -greg > > >From Jean: > "Here is the link to my art gallery. There are various ways to view it. I > describe these in the first document Make sure to read the descriptions > under the drawings. I'd love to hear any and all input, including ways I > might improve it." > https://www.flickr.com/photos/childrenascaregivers/ > > -- > Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D. > Assistant Professor > Department of Anthropology > 880 Spencer W. Kimball Tower > Brigham Young University > Provo, UT 84602 > http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson > From ajrajala@gmail.com Thu Mar 16 08:52:40 2017 From: ajrajala@gmail.com (Antti Rajala) Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2017 17:52:40 +0200 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Children as caregivers art gallery In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hello I join Laure in thanking Greg about this. Lasse Lipponen, Jaakko Hilpp? and I have a project in which we study cultures of compassion in early childhood education. This is very relevant for us. Best, Antti On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 5:44 PM, Laure Kloetzer wrote: > Thanks a lot Greg, wonderful work, I share it immediately with one good > colleague here in Neuch?tel working on children as caregivers ! > Best > LK > > > 2017-03-16 16:33 GMT+01:00 Greg Thompson : > > > Apologies for the off-topic post, given the various discussions currently > > happening, but I wanted to share with you some work that might be of > > interest to many on the listserve. This is research from Jean Hunleth > > regarding child caregivers in Zambia who are helping care for their > parents > > afflicted by HIV related tuberculosis. > > > > Of particular interest is an online (Flickr) gallery of 200 photos made > by > > the children and which she has made available with commentary (both from > > her and from the children). See the link below (along with a brief > comment > > from Jean about how to approach it - note I've also cc'd Jean on this > email > > in case anyone is interested in contacting her directly - and just > briefly, > > Jean is an anthropologist and is currently a professor in the Medical > > School at Washington University - St. Louis). > > > > Anyway, I thought that this might be of interest to some on the list. > > -greg > > > > >From Jean: > > "Here is the link to my art gallery. There are various ways to view it. I > > describe these in the first document Make sure to read the descriptions > > under the drawings. I'd love to hear any and all input, including ways I > > might improve it." > > https://www.flickr.com/photos/childrenascaregivers/ > > > > -- > > Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D. > > Assistant Professor > > Department of Anthropology > > 880 Spencer W. Kimball Tower > > Brigham Young University > > Provo, UT 84602 > > http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson > > > From Peg.Griffin@att.net Thu Mar 16 09:32:51 2017 From: Peg.Griffin@att.net (Peg Griffin) Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2017 12:32:51 -0400 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Children as caregivers art gallery In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <006701d29e72$f7b7e490$e727adb0$@att.net> Thank you, Greg, and even louder thanks to Jean Hunleth and the families in Zambia. More than research, it is mute testimony about issues world-wide, including right now the US. How soon will tRump?s plans (especially to change and cut NSF research and foreign health care funding in other agencies) impose further affliction on families and children like these? When tRump appointed agency and department personnel (either ignorant of or opposed to the agency and department missions) are told to decide what is duplicated and wasted and then cut it, we are in the self-fulfilling prophecy vortex that consumes so much and makes us all so frustrated, fearful, angry, resistant. Save our past and through it our future. Peg -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Greg Thompson Sent: Thursday, March 16, 2017 11:34 AM To: xmca-l@ucsd.edu Cc: Hunleth, Jean Marie Subject: [Xmca-l] Children as caregivers art gallery Apologies for the off-topic post, given the various discussions currently happening, but I wanted to share with you some work that might be of interest to many on the listserve. This is research from Jean Hunleth regarding child caregivers in Zambia who are helping care for their parents afflicted by HIV related tuberculosis. Of particular interest is an online (Flickr) gallery of 200 photos made by the children and which she has made available with commentary (both from her and from the children). See the link below (along with a brief comment from Jean about how to approach it - note I've also cc'd Jean on this email in case anyone is interested in contacting her directly - and just briefly, Jean is an anthropologist and is currently a professor in the Medical School at Washington University - St. Louis). Anyway, I thought that this might be of interest to some on the list. -greg >From Jean: "Here is the link to my art gallery. There are various ways to view it. I describe these in the first document Make sure to read the descriptions under the drawings. I'd love to hear any and all input, including ways I might improve it." https://www.flickr.com/photos/childrenascaregivers/ -- Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D. Assistant Professor Department of Anthropology 880 Spencer W. Kimball Tower Brigham Young University Provo, UT 84602 http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson From Peg.Griffin@att.net Thu Mar 16 09:58:33 2017 From: Peg.Griffin@att.net (Peg Griffin) Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2017 12:58:33 -0400 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Our continuing concern about Trump In-Reply-To: <2580e82e-07d0-d310-bf10-0166a2fb7727@mira.net> References: <2580e82e-07d0-d310-bf10-0166a2fb7727@mira.net> Message-ID: <007101d29e76$8c9fad10$a5df0730$@att.net> Thanks for the post calling attention to Vox, Andy. Vox (including Beauchamp) has proven interesting to think with (for agreement or productive disagreement) for many of us in my little intersection of the world at this time! (BTW: The thing that irritates me a lot about Vox is that I can't figure out how to get a PDF downloaded of articles I want to work on carefully off-line! DO you see a way to do it that I am missing?) Peg -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Andy Blunden Sent: Thursday, March 16, 2017 11:04 AM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Our continuing concern about Trump I know that restraint is needed when thinking of introducing current political issues to this list but I suspect that we are all still worrying about this issue and trying to figure it out. I have recently read a couple of articles on vox.com by a fellow called Zack Beauchamp which really need to be read. I don't know anything about vox.com or Mr. Beauchamp and I suspect he has nothing to do with CHAT or Marxism, but it is well researched, challenging and rings true. See http://www.vox.com/2016/9/19/12933072/far-right-white-riot-trump-brexit and http://www.vox.com/world/2017/3/13/14698812/bernie-trump-corbyn-left-wing-populism Andy -- ------------------------------------------------------------ Andy Blunden http://home.mira.net/~andy http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making From babson@gse.upenn.edu Thu Mar 16 10:20:10 2017 From: babson@gse.upenn.edu (Andrew Babson) Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2017 13:20:10 -0400 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Our continuing concern about Trump In-Reply-To: <2580e82e-07d0-d310-bf10-0166a2fb7727@mira.net> References: <2580e82e-07d0-d310-bf10-0166a2fb7727@mira.net> Message-ID: Andy, Thanks for starting this thread, albeit non-Vygotsky-related. If there's anything Marx-ish to be gleaned from current political developments, it's that workers, white collar, blue collar and otherwise, would do well to organize or join unions. This does not mean prioritizing economic issues to the exclusion of other interests. It just means that right now, there's an urgent need for workers---the 99% so to speak---to organize and counterbalance the plutocracy taking shape. Re Vox, I have not read the first piece. But I have read the second piece and I'm highly critical of it. The broad problem is that it is based on a faulty zero-sum rationale, namely that the US Democratic Party somehow must sacrifice economic justice for social justice or vice versa. But on specifics: Beauchamp asks why the hard right is rising in states with generous social safety nets, and then says "it?s a hard question to answer if you believe people cast their ballots principally on the basis of their perceived economic interests." HA! We all know from our experience in the USA that if people DID vote "principally on the basis of their perceived economic interests", the GOP wouldn't keep winning, everywhere. And no mention whatsoever about the austerian attacks on the welfare state over the past 5-10 years (In Europe: Cameron, Osborne, Sarkozy, Sch?uble, Trichet; in the States, the Koch donor network/GOP, IMF, Word Bank et al.). Then, Beauchamp employs straw men, discussing UK, Holland and France but ignoring the "strongest" welfare states which are located in Scandinavia. Beauchamp also ignores the legacy of COLONIALISM and the rise of far-right parties in France and Holland and the UK. But the article is useful for pointing out the faultiness of thinking the US Democratic Party must choose BETWEEN economic and social justice. It does point out how the strategy or becoming, basically, Rockefeller Republicans (social libertarians meets moderate "fiscal conservative") has made the Democratic Party rudderless with no clear moral/political vision, because party elites are too beholden to Wall Street. This mostly explains the popularity of Bernie Sanders. Andrew On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 11:04 AM, Andy Blunden wrote: > I know that restraint is needed when thinking of introducing current > political issues to this list but I suspect that we are all still worrying > about this issue and trying to figure it out. I have recently read a couple > of articles on vox.com by a fellow called Zack Beauchamp which really > need to be read. I don't know anything about vox.com or Mr. Beauchamp and > I suspect he has nothing to do with CHAT or Marxism, but it is well > researched, challenging and rings true. See > > http://www.vox.com/2016/9/19/12933072/far-right-white-riot-trump-brexit > > and > > http://www.vox.com/world/2017/3/13/14698812/bernie-trump-cor > byn-left-wing-populism > > Andy > -- > ------------------------------------------------------------ > Andy Blunden > http://home.mira.net/~andy > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making > From a.j.gil@iped.uio.no Thu Mar 16 10:48:49 2017 From: a.j.gil@iped.uio.no (Alfredo Jornet Gil) Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2017 17:48:49 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Our continuing concern about Trump In-Reply-To: <2580e82e-07d0-d310-bf10-0166a2fb7727@mira.net> References: <2580e82e-07d0-d310-bf10-0166a2fb7727@mira.net> Message-ID: <1489686535468.1933@iped.uio.no> Hi Andy, all, relevant to share, thanks. I don't read the full, they are too long to do just at once. But I look over them and see interesting that both article provide alternative accounts that share in common a focus on social-psychological issues, as opposed to only looking at economics. In the first one, the issue of intolerance, fear and defensive feelings towards immigration, takes primacy. In the second, the issue of economy is given its due weight, but again is shifted towards a psychological issue: the issue of how central economy is in the awareness and concern of citizens. I particularly like of the first that among the solutions to the problem it mentions Canada's model (because of its resistance to right-wing raises) of investing in educating for integration equity... Alfredo ________________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of Andy Blunden Sent: 16 March 2017 16:04 To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Our continuing concern about Trump I know that restraint is needed when thinking of introducing current political issues to this list but I suspect that we are all still worrying about this issue and trying to figure it out. I have recently read a couple of articles on vox.com by a fellow called Zack Beauchamp which really need to be read. I don't know anything about vox.com or Mr. Beauchamp and I suspect he has nothing to do with CHAT or Marxism, but it is well researched, challenging and rings true. See http://www.vox.com/2016/9/19/12933072/far-right-white-riot-trump-brexit and http://www.vox.com/world/2017/3/13/14698812/bernie-trump-corbyn-left-wing-populism Andy -- ------------------------------------------------------------ Andy Blunden http://home.mira.net/~andy http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making From a.j.gil@iped.uio.no Thu Mar 16 10:51:14 2017 From: a.j.gil@iped.uio.no (Alfredo Jornet Gil) Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2017 17:51:14 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Children as caregivers art gallery In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1489686680055.22132@iped.uio.no> Greg, nothing to apologize, thanks for sharing! I too am collaborating with an arts-based primary school and the issue of kindness (of being kind) to others (which relates to care) is very salient to the community. I really think that the image of (and the supporting of) children as care givers can help us so much. Alfredo ________________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of Greg Thompson Sent: 16 March 2017 16:33 To: xmca-l@ucsd.edu Cc: Hunleth, Jean Marie Subject: [Xmca-l] Children as caregivers art gallery Apologies for the off-topic post, given the various discussions currently happening, but I wanted to share with you some work that might be of interest to many on the listserve. This is research from Jean Hunleth regarding child caregivers in Zambia who are helping care for their parents afflicted by HIV related tuberculosis. Of particular interest is an online (Flickr) gallery of 200 photos made by the children and which she has made available with commentary (both from her and from the children). See the link below (along with a brief comment from Jean about how to approach it - note I've also cc'd Jean on this email in case anyone is interested in contacting her directly - and just briefly, Jean is an anthropologist and is currently a professor in the Medical School at Washington University - St. Louis). Anyway, I thought that this might be of interest to some on the list. -greg >From Jean: "Here is the link to my art gallery. There are various ways to view it. I describe these in the first document Make sure to read the descriptions under the drawings. I'd love to hear any and all input, including ways I might improve it." https://www.flickr.com/photos/childrenascaregivers/ -- Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D. Assistant Professor Department of Anthropology 880 Spencer W. Kimball Tower Brigham Young University Provo, UT 84602 http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson From a.j.gil@iped.uio.no Thu Mar 16 10:51:14 2017 From: a.j.gil@iped.uio.no (Alfredo Jornet Gil) Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2017 17:51:14 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Children as caregivers art gallery In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1489686680055.22132@iped.uio.no> Greg, nothing to apologize, thanks for sharing! I too am collaborating with an arts-based primary school and the issue of kindness (of being kind) to others (which relates to care) is very salient to the community. I really think that the image of (and the supporting of) children as care givers can help us so much. Alfredo ________________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of Greg Thompson Sent: 16 March 2017 16:33 To: xmca-l@ucsd.edu Cc: Hunleth, Jean Marie Subject: [Xmca-l] Children as caregivers art gallery Apologies for the off-topic post, given the various discussions currently happening, but I wanted to share with you some work that might be of interest to many on the listserve. This is research from Jean Hunleth regarding child caregivers in Zambia who are helping care for their parents afflicted by HIV related tuberculosis. Of particular interest is an online (Flickr) gallery of 200 photos made by the children and which she has made available with commentary (both from her and from the children). See the link below (along with a brief comment from Jean about how to approach it - note I've also cc'd Jean on this email in case anyone is interested in contacting her directly - and just briefly, Jean is an anthropologist and is currently a professor in the Medical School at Washington University - St. Louis). Anyway, I thought that this might be of interest to some on the list. -greg >From Jean: "Here is the link to my art gallery. There are various ways to view it. I describe these in the first document Make sure to read the descriptions under the drawings. I'd love to hear any and all input, including ways I might improve it." https://www.flickr.com/photos/childrenascaregivers/ -- Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D. Assistant Professor Department of Anthropology 880 Spencer W. Kimball Tower Brigham Young University Provo, UT 84602 http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson From mcole@ucsd.edu Fri Mar 17 20:12:54 2017 From: mcole@ucsd.edu (mike cole) Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2017 20:12:54 -0700 Subject: [Xmca-l] Fwd: [COGDEVSOC] Post-doctoral positions in Language and Literacy, NYU In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Seems fit for many xmca-o-phytes mike ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Melissa Koenig Date: Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 8:09 PM Subject: [COGDEVSOC] Post-do ?x? ctoral positions in Language and Literacy, NYU To: cogdevsoc@lists.cogdevsoc.org Please see below on behalf of Susan Neuman: Post-Doctoral Positions in Language and Literacy, New York University, Steinhardt School The NYU research program in language and literacy seeks to hire a post-doctoral fellow under the direction of Professor Susan Neuman in the Department of Teaching and Learning. The position will begin in late-August, early September, 2017-August, 2018. The post-doctoral fellow will take leading roles in designing and conducting experimental work on early language and literacy development in low-income populations. The post-doctoral fellow will play a major role in an IES project designed to examine educational media supports for low-income children, ages 4-5 years old. The focus of the grant is to understand the pedagogical supports that enhance children?s learning of vocabulary and comprehension. The post-doctoral fellows will be expected to participate fully in the design, implementation and analysis of data in the study and provide mentorship to graduate students in the data collection process. The candidate must have a Ph.D. or Ed.D. in psychology or education (or a related field) and substantive knowledge and background in education sciences, particularly in the areas of early childhood and early literacy development. The candidate should also have strong quantitative research and writing-for-publication skills. Candidates will be considered based upon demonstrated research skills, potential for impact, and match to the interests of the research program. The appointment will begin September 2016 for an initial period of one year; positions are eligible for renewal. Salary and benefits are competitive. Review of materials will begin immediately and will continue until the position is filled. Candidates should submit: - Curriculum vitae - Two letters of recommendation - Samples of written work - Research statement describing your training and research interests, including why your background and interests are a match for this position Please send questions and applications to Susan Neuman at sbneuman@nyu.edu _______________________________________________ To post to the CDS listserv, send your message to: cogdevsoc@lists.cogdevsoc.org (If you belong to the listserv and have not included any large attachments, your message will be posted without moderation--so be careful!) To subscribe or unsubscribe from the listserv, visit: http://lists.cogdevsoc.org/listinfo.cgi/cogdevsoc-cogdevsoc.org From lpscholar2@gmail.com Sat Mar 18 23:55:34 2017 From: lpscholar2@gmail.com (lpscholar2@gmail.com) Date: Sat, 18 Mar 2017 23:55:34 -0700 Subject: [Xmca-l] The Reclusive Hedge-Fund Tycoon Behind the Trump Presidency Message-ID: <58ce2b6b.431c620a.85948.4a94@mx.google.com> I hesitate to send this link as it is so depressing. However, it fits with other exposes on the context of Trump?s improbable election The Reclusive Hedge-Fund Tycoon Behind the Trump Presidency How Robert Mercer exploited America?s populist insurgency. http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/03/27/the-reclusive-hedge-fund-tycoon-behind-the-trump-presidency Sent from my Windows 10 phone From pmocombe@mocombeian.com Sun Mar 19 16:17:56 2017 From: pmocombe@mocombeian.com (Dr. Paul C. Mocombe) Date: Sun, 19 Mar 2017 19:17:56 -0400 Subject: [Xmca-l] You have received a YouTube video! Message-ID: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pwn11cgdkAI&sns=em Sent via the Samsung Galaxy Note? 4, an AT&T 4G LTE smartphone From eunyoung1112@gmail.com Mon Mar 20 00:21:35 2017 From: eunyoung1112@gmail.com (Eun Young Jang) Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2017 16:21:35 +0900 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Jang's SL Article Discussion In-Reply-To: References: <1489427326574.46980@iped.uio.no> <1489431232770.89078@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: Dear David Thank you for the interesting and helpful comments on my paper! I really enjoyed your comments and was also pleased to receive your questions about Juan in my earlier paper (TESOL Quarterly). I attach my paper here so that other colleagues can read it if they want. Yes, I do think that what happened in the ESL classroom can be understood from the "pedological" end as well, as you said. The point that I wanted to make in my study was that we should understand 'why a learner acts in certain way' from multiple perspectives. It is just like a piece of a multilayered cake. By the way, I think I need to learn more about what you meant by 'defectological' end. When you said 'defect', did you mean some problems that people might have in their development? If so, I would like to share my opinion. Everyone might have some problems that they must handle (and problems that can be handled by some great pedagogical methods). Sometimes the problems are minor (curable) and sometimes they are not (such as blindness). However, not all of them are on the same level or same dimension. In other words, I think we cannot equate some life's challenges (such as illness) and racial discrimination. They are on different levels. The latter is intrinsically social, I think. Further, in multicultural education, 'deficit' has very negative connotation because it alludes that there are some 'perfect' things in opposition. Here, I also pasted my response to your earlier email (off the xmca list) below to share it with otehrs. Thank you very much for your ?off-list? email and interests in my articles. Thanks to you, I was happy to remind of Juan, the lovely little boy who I was with for more than a year. Yes, we did have an interview with Juan. The other author, Chris Iddings? first language was Spanish so she was able to communicate with Juan with no problem. But I remember that whether Juan understood the situation or not was decided from our observations of his actions. In particular, the focus of our observations was on the ways the joint attentional frames were formed because we thought the frames played a critical role as a mediational means in facilitating Juan?s learning. Oh, I also recall that when we say Juan?s learning, it was not always learning of English but also learning of the classroom discourses. About the quiet mouse events, Juan wanted to be picked eagerly by pointing his finger to his own chest and contacting eyes with the student with the mouse. About the testing, I remember that Juan did understand the procedure of the testing and acted like a student but in fact, it appeared that he was not able to get the right answers in terms of English. Well, this should not be a problem because understanding the classroom discourses would serve a scaffolding for him to learn contents eventually. Hope my brief answer has satisfied your curiosity about my study a bit. David, I think we have a lot in common. Let?s keep in touch. I?d love to drop by the Dasomcha meeting some day! By the way, I have been in SIG for Critical Pedagogy for almost 6years. If you have a plan to visit Korea again, you are invited to our Critical Pedagogy meeting as well! Best, EY. On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 6:28 AM, David Kellogg wrote: > Dear Professor Jang: > > Relax, you are among friends and co-thinkers. Well, a lot of friends, some > of whom are probably very close co-thinkers. It's a very big list, but I > doubt if anybody who read your article would accuse you of teacher bashing. > I also don't think anybody who read it would think that you used your > Korean-ness in any other way than a good researcher uses any resource that > affords empathy with the researched. And I DO think that you provided "a" > way of bridging a socioculural and a cognitivist approach to the second > language classroom. Perhaps even two ways. > > It seems to me that one way is from the "contextualist" end; that is, to > redefine a context in abstract terms, including things like attitudes, > motivations, and teaching ideologies right in the context. I think this is > actually much more difficult than it looks: some people will consider this > behavioristic, because it assumes that attitudes, motivations and > ideologies can be treated as external to mind. I think it actually only > considers them as external to text. Other people will consider it upwardly > reductionistic, because it assumes that attitudes, motivations and > ideologies can be reduced to society and to culture and to context of > situation. I think that society and culture and context of situation must > always be considered as a complex whole, including cognition, but not > subsuming it. > > It also seems to me that another is from the "organicist" end; that is, to > define attitudes, motivations, and ideologies as something in some way > independent of cognition (the "distributed cognition" people are good at > this). Again, this isn't so easy, particularly in an American context. > America is now going through a kind of crisis, because racism has > previously been defined in only one of two ways. Either racism is part of > cognition--in which case it really only exists in people who subscribe, > paradoxically, to "objective" scientific racism, to the belief that > non-whites are actually inferior. Or racism is part of culture--in which > case it really only exists in the debilitating effects it has on the > oppressed, and it doesn't really matter what it is that racists believe > (or, for that matter, what non-racists believe: Obama was just as guilty of > black unemployment as Bush). > > What I suggest is, rather perversely, a third way. It's from the > "pedological, defectological" end. That is, attitudes, motivations and the > teaching ideologies which derive from them need to be understood not only > as part of the context but also as part of pedology, a whole science of the > child. Unfortunately, Vygotsky's writings on this are not available in > English, but they ARE available in good Korean: > > http://www.aladin.co.kr/shop/common/wseriesitem.aspx?SRID=25565 > > Similarly, the ravages of racism (including the "damunhwa kyoyuk" developed > in Korea under Yi Myeongbak and Park Geunhye, which was concerned with > providing "equal opportunity" to the majority as well as to the minority) > need to be considered not simply as stigma on the dominant race or as > stigmata of the oppressed but more defectologically. "Defect" wasn't an > insult in the USSR: Vygotsky actually considers "yeongje kyoyuk" (that is, > "genius education"), education of the blind, education of the deaf, > so-called "learning disabilities" not as "disabilities" but as > defects--that is, normal disadvantages to be overcome in the same way as > any other obstacle in learning, through "circuitous and indirect", that is, > mediated, means of learning. We have evolved our means of education, as > Vygotsky says, to cater to the needs of the psychophysiological dominant > group, but the mark of higher forms of social progress is how it can > develop the niches within this and the needs of those who are not > psychophysiologically dominant. > > (Do you know Professor Kim Jinseok? I worked at SNUE for over ten years > myself, and our Vygotsky group still meets there every Saturday to > translate the work of Vygotsky into Korean. If you are on campus on a > Saturday, we are usually in room 315, over "Dasomchae" near the front gate, > from noon until about four!) > > David Kellogg > Macquarie University > > On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 2:14 PM, Eun Young Jang > wrote: > > > ? > > > > Hi everyone, thank you very much for reading my article. This is such a > > great opportunity for me to introduce my work and receive comments from > > wonderful colleagues. > > > > First, let me introduce myself briefly. I earned my doctorate in > Language, > > Literacy, and Culture in the Department of Teaching and Learning at > > Vanderbilt University. I am currently working as an assistant professor > in > > Multicultural Education at Seoul National University of Education located > > in Seoul, South Korea. My research interests are in the impact of the > > social context on second language teaching and learning. Another paper > > published recently deals with sustainable globalization of higher > education > > focusing on cultures and languages in a foreign professor?s classroom in > S. > > Korea. My current research project is about North Korean refugee students > > learning English in South Korea. > > > > > > My article for xmca discussion was initiated from my observation that ESL > > students were not actually focusing on learning English in the ESL > > classroom but instead, on ?acting? learning with an attempt to achieve > > certain social position (as an individual or a group). In particular, I > > noted that they were quite skillful in using ?seemingly? academic > > strategies to conceal what they were actually doing. > > > > > > > > The ESL students were very sensitive to things happening to them in terms > > of marginalization and discrimination but did not reveal to others > > explicitly what they really thought. Instead, they took advantage of the > > school discourse that was legitimized in the context, that was, acting > like > > motivated and strategic learners by participating in class activities > > actively and strategically. In spite of regular observations of ESL > classes > > back then, I could not figure out what was happening in the classroom for > > the first couple of months. Later on, the social dynamics among students > > and between students and the teacher surfaced to me and also they began > to > > open their minds and told me how they felt isolated and discriminated. > > Then, I was able to see the meanings of their actions. > > > > > > > > In effect, the ESL teacher tried hard to be fair and in a sense, the > French > > student was isolated and discriminated by the Korean students in the ESL > > classroom. Nevertheless, Korean students victimized themselves. I thought > > that it was still important and valuable to acknowledge how the Korean > > students felt simply because the feelings were there and they made some > > consequences (such as silencing the French student). I wanted to reveal > > that how the students felt and why they felt that way and how they > reacted > > to their feelings. Whether the discrimination was real or not was not > > important. > > > > > > > > A reviewer from other journal has criticized my article badly for teacher > > bashing. But definitely I did not mean it. Also, some readers of my > article > > said that because I am Korean, I was on the Korean students? side. The > fact > > was, the ESL teacher and I were good friends and this even made the > Korean > > students suspicious of my position (like a spy from the ?white? teacher > > side). Anyway, honestly, the comments from other scholars made me feel > > constrained conducting research about the same ethnic group. Now, I?d > like > > to know about your opinion about this issue. > > > > Again, the fact that the participants were Korean was not the main focus > of > > my study. I wanted to show how they used strategies, which were typically > > categorized as individual and cognitive traits, for social purposes. So, > > the bigger agenda of my study was to explore ?a? way to bridge the > > dichotomy between individual and sociocultural camps. > > > > Thanks! > > > > EY. > > > > On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 8:12 AM, David Kellogg > > wrote: > > > > > Alfredo: > > > > > > Down the hall one of the Chinese translators is working on translations > > of > > > the Chinese "State of the Union" address into English. The Chinese goes > > > something like this: > > > > > > ????????? > > > xi?och? p?nk?n q?d? j?nzh?n. > > > > > > Literally: > > > > > > "Eradicate Poverty Achieve Progress", i.e. "(The government) (made) > some > > > progress in the eradication of poverty." > > > > > > In Chinese we don't have to specify the agent, and we don't need to use > > the > > > effective verb "made"; it's a happening and not a doing. This used to > be > > > because the agent went without saying--it's encoded in the grammar. > > Partly > > > thanks to a poetic tradition going back more than a thousand years, > > Chinese > > > lends itself to four-syllable slogan-like objects like "Eradicate > > Poverty" > > > and "Achieve Progress", and putting them together sounds natural. We > > don't > > > usually use a subject unless we want to stress it; it's much more > common > > to > > > just have a nominal topic and then a comment, like in this example. > > Because > > > the government has a well established role in mobilizing the masses to > > > carry out actions like famine relief and flood prevention and so on, > the > > > agent and the "doing" don't need to be specified: everybody knows it > was > > > the government, even if that weren't clear in the context of a > government > > > report. So we simply say it's a happening. > > > > > > Now that's changing. In fact, the government does relatively little to > > > alleviate poverty. There are regional enterprises, and there are > private > > > businesses and so on. After the Sichuan earthquake, my brother-in-law > > > loaded up his SUV with bottled water and drove down to the earthquake > > area > > > to distribute it, and he says there was a huge traffic jam of other > SUVs > > by > > > entrepreneurs like him who had exactly the same idea. And for precisely > > > this reason, we find that in the government report there is more and > more > > > explicit stipulation of the government's agency and of the effective > > means. > > > Instead of just happening, the government does things. There is a > similar > > > link between ideology and ideation in English if you think about it. > When > > > something GOOD happens, it's because somebody DID it, but when > something > > > bad happens, "Stuff happens". > > > > > > Here's the point. We usually use "ideology" to mean something like > > > conscious and deliberate ideation, usually of an intentionally > deceitful > > or > > > misleading variety. I don't really accept that. It seems to me that > > > "ideology" really is equivalent to ideation, that is, to the > > communicative, > > > representational function of speech, except that it is somewhat larger, > > > both because the interpersonal and the textual functions also encode > > ideas > > > and are also therefore ideological and because a lot of ideology is > > simply > > > NOT specifying things. For example, when you say "it's raining", you > are > > > conveying the idea that rain is an event that just happens, and is not > > > caused by any nameable entity. You don't normally say "it's birding" or > > > even "it's shining". > > > > > > Similarly, we usually use "prescriptivism" to mean something like > > conscious > > > and deliberate transformativism, usually of an authoritarian and > > > dictatorial, and deceptive, sort. I don't really accept that either. On > > the > > > contrary, what is really deceptive is to pretend that the process of > > > education is meaningful without attending to its ultimate product. To > me, > > > "Eradicate Poverty Achieve Progress" is a perfect balance of process > and > > > product, and agency and effective means are only meaningful with > respect > > to > > > both. > > > > > > David Kellogg > > > Macquarie University > > > > > > On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 5:53 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil < > a.j.gil@iped.uio.no > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Hi again, > > > > > > > > one thing that I find interesting in Jang's article, and which may > > > connect > > > > to comments in the other thread (by David, Haydi...) concerning 'not > > > > reducing the political to the personal', is the issue of *ideology.* > > In > > > > particular, Jang discusses and empirically examines what she coins > as a > > > > *Prescriptive* language ideology. As she describes in her paper, and > as > > > any > > > > educator will immediately recognise, this ideology exists as the > > > > classroom's orientations to a correct/incorrect form. In her article, > > she > > > > exhibits this through a number of sequences in which teacher-student > > and > > > > student-student relations involve *evaluations* with regard to > > > proficiently > > > > using two rules: making connections between sentences and staying on > > the > > > > topic. > > > > > > > > As Jang shows, the prescriptive approach, which sets the final > linguist > > > > form as the criterion for positively or negatively evaluating any > > > response > > > > by any student, is such that more proficient readers/speakers will > have > > > > easier access to positive evaluation. The ideology here then exists > as > > a > > > > regime of power and differential access, of inequality. By treating > all > > > > equally, we get to inequality. > > > > > > > > I was thinking that it seems that the prescriptive approach does > focus > > on > > > > the final product, whereas the sociocultural approach that Jang > pursues > > > and > > > > Vygotsky first set forth has it that we should not focus on the final > > > > product but on its genesis, on the way the verbal form exists first > as > > a > > > > social relation between people. Thus, in Episodes 1 and 2 in the > > article, > > > > if the participants had oriented towards a possible process of > > > development, > > > > Ji-Woo's responses would have been heard and responded to as moments > > in a > > > > developmental trajectory. There would have been a very different > social > > > > situation in which work would have been directed to make visible and > > > > available the dynamics of Ji-Woo's learning process. But the > > prescriptive > > > > orientation evaluates and makes salient only deficiency and > > achievement. > > > On > > > > the other hand, and consistent with those (e.g., Stetsenko, Holzman) > > who > > > > have referred to Vygotsky's legacy as *revolutionary,* an orientation > > > > consistent with Vygotsky's teachings would bring with it not only a > > > > different situation, but also an *emancipatory* one. Instead of > > > inequality > > > > brought about by treating all equally, we would have an equalitarian > > > > approach whose power resides in acknowledging and caring for history > > and > > > > diversity. > > > > > > > > On a side thought, and connected to David's (Halliday's) distinction > > > > between ideational and interpersonal functions of language, I was > > > wondering > > > > what is the relation/difference between ideational and ideological. > In > > > the > > > > article, it seems clear that the language related competence on > putting > > > > names to things and thereby building categories seems a condition for > > the > > > > racial/ethnic tension to exist. But of course, the tension is a > > > relational, > > > > not just a lexical one. Thoughts? > > > > > > > > Alfredo > > > > > > > > ________________________________________ > > > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu edu > > > > > > > on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil > > > > Sent: 13 March 2017 18:48 > > > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Jang's SL Article Discussion > > > > > > > > ?Dear all, > > > > > > > > > > > > David has started some very interesting comments on the current > article > > > > for discussion on Tensions in Second Language Learning, which attach > > > again > > > > here. Because some of these comments have been given at a different > > > thread, > > > > I am starting here a thread that shall more centrally concern Jang's > > > > article. I copy below all what David has so far written about the > > > article. > > > > I hope this will ?make it easy for Eun-Young and everyone else to > > follow > > > on > > > > her article. I know ?Eun-Young is challenged time-wise by course > > > > responsibilities and I hope this will make it easier for her. > > > > > > > > > > > > Eun-Young, David mentions an article from 2011. If you wanted, you > > could > > > > also share the PDF with us for background, although the current > article > > > > gives more than enough material for discussion, I think. > > > > > > > > > > > > Alfredo > > > > > > > > > > > > --------------------David Kellogg wrote: ------------------ > > > > > > > > > > > > t's very interesting to compare this paper with Professor Jang's 2011 > > > > paper co-authored with Robert T. Jimenez: > > > > > > > > Eun-Young Jang & Robert T. Jim?nez (2011) A Sociocultural Perspective > > on > > > > Second Language Learner Strategies: Focus on the Impact of Social > > > Context, > > > > Theory Into Practice, > > > > 50:2, 141-148, DOI: 10.1080/00405841.2011.558443 > > > > > > > > In some ways, the papers are very similar--the data is identical in > one > > > > place (p. 42), and the conclusions are for the most part congruent. > But > > > > consider how different the titles are. "Impact" in one place, and > > > "tension" > > > > in the other. > > > > > > > > There is this note to the 1935 version of Vygotsky's report on > > > preschools, > > > > where Zankov, Elkonin and Shif complain about Vygotsky's idea that > the > > > > child directs his or her own learning before preschool, the > environment > > > > directs it after preschool, and preschool therefore represents a kind > > of > > > > transitional stage. On the one hand, if the child is directing his or > > her > > > > own learning, how can we say that the environment is the ultimate > > source > > > of > > > > learning? And if the environment is the ultimate source of learning, > as > > > > Vygotsky says, how can we say that the child is himself or herself > part > > > of > > > > the environment? > > > > > > > > Professor Jang gets around this problem just as Vygotsky > > does--adroitly. > > > On > > > > the one hand, strategies are expanded to include "sets of actions > > > performed > > > > to deal with problems (perceived by the researcher, indicated by the > > > > learners)". On the other, contexts are expanded to include > "pedagogical > > > > assumptions, power relations, and interracial conflict". > > > > > > > > I think this solution to the problem is the correct one: when we > > consider > > > > the relationship of the child and the environment, we cannot treat it > > > like > > > > an unstoppable force meeting an unmoveable object. But for me that > > means > > > > that both the child and the environment have to be considered in > > > "internal" > > > > (that is, abstract, linguistic) terms. We can't think of speech as > > > actions; > > > > it's more useful to think of actions as speech. We can't think of the > > > > social situation of development as a material setting: it's a > > > relationship > > > > with others. > > > > > > > > Contrariwise, it seems to me that when we consider "racism", it is > more > > > > helpful to consider it in "external", that is, concrete, > nonlinguistic > > > > terms. In the 2011 paper, Professor Jang and her co-author are > willing > > to > > > > openly criticize the idea that languages are learned in exactly the > > same > > > > way whether they are first or second languages. Here, they just quote > > the > > > > teacher's comments on "mommy skills". > > > > > > > > It's a very revealing quote. One thing it reveals is why it's > probably > > > not > > > > helpful to refer to "racist" as an "insult" (p. 40) or to imply that > > > racism > > > > and anti-racism is really just a matter of having the right attitude > > (as > > > > the Republicans did in the Sessions debate or as Bernie Sanders did > > when > > > he > > > > referred to Trump supporters who voted for Obama as "not having a > > racist > > > > bone in their bodies"). > > > > > > > > You can see that subjectively, the teacher is being anti-racist--all > > > > students, French, Turkish, Egyptian, Korean, use the same strategies, > > > just > > > > like we all have mommies.She has all the right attitudes, and > probably > > > > doesn't have a racist bone in her body. But that doesn't diminish by > > one > > > > jot the terrible damage that this kind of indiscriminate > discrimination > > > > does in the classroom. > > > > > > > > David Kellogg > > > > Macquarie University > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------ On a related thread (Subject: Don't do it), > > > David > > > > K. wrote:-------------- > > > > > > > > > > > > It seems to me that we need to clearly distinguish between "racism" > and > > > > "racist sentiment". One of the interesting problems that comes up in > > > Eunhee > > > > Jang's excellent article on second language learning strategies from > a > > > > sociocultural point of view--a wonderful piece of "inside" work, > > > > introducing racial issues into an area where they have never been > > > seriously > > > > discussed--is the use of "racist" (by the Korean kids to describe > their > > > > teacher) as an "insult". > > > > > > > > I like the article. I think it's important work. But for that very > > > reason, > > > > I think that it's important to resist any attempt to reduce "racist" > > to a > > > > personal insult. I think we've seen very very clearly, both in the > > > Sessions > > > > confirmation hearing, and in the discussion of Trump's own > anti-semitic > > > > behavior--that this kind of reduction of the political to the > personal > > is > > > > precisely the kind of reducing the sociocultural to the cognitive > that > > > > Professor Jang is trying to resist. > > > > > > > > David Kellogg > > > > Macquarie University > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------- Idem as above------------------------- > > > > --------------- > > > > > > > > > > > > One of the interesting aspects of Professor Jang's paper is that it > is > > > > about adolescents who are in the process of forming concepts, but who > > are > > > > not there yet. And one way in which an adolescent forms a concept > about > > > the > > > > difficult concept of a social contract, of citizenship, of > nationality > > is > > > > pseudoconceptual: it is based on discussing "actual" perceptual > > > differences > > > > between races. This might seem irrelevant to current political > > discourse. > > > > Unfortunately, it isn't.? > > > > > > > > > > > > David Kellogg > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Jang, Eun-Young. Ph.D. > > > > Assistant Professor, Graduate School of Education > > > > Seoul National University of Education > > > > Seoul, S. Korea > > > -- Jang, Eun-Young. Ph.D. Assistant Professor, Graduate School of Education Seoul National University of Education Seoul, S. Korea -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 2008 TESOL Quarterly Chris and EY.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 129011 bytes Desc: not available Url : https://mailman.ucsd.edu/mailman/private/xmca-l/attachments/20170320/5d87897e/attachment.pdf From smago@uga.edu Mon Mar 20 09:36:36 2017 From: smago@uga.edu (Peter Smagorinsky) Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2017 16:36:36 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] FW: [DPJ] : A new article was published by DPJ! In-Reply-To: <0ON400C6JFVHPT@smtp-prod-01.cssd.pitt.edu> References: <0ON400C6JFVHPT@smtp-prod-01.cssd.pitt.edu> Message-ID: More from W-M R. -----Original Message----- From: dpjournal@mail.pitt.edu [mailto:dpjournal@mail.pitt.edu] Sent: Monday, March 20, 2017 12:16 PM To: Peter Smagorinsky Subject: [DPJ] : A new article was published by DPJ! Dear?DPJ?Community member, A new article was?published?by?Dialogic Pedagogy Journal: ?Interchangeable Positions in Interaction Sequences in Science Classrooms? by Carol Rees and Wolff-Michael Roth To read this article visit http://dpj.pitt.edu/ojs/index.php/dpj1/article/view/184 Citation: Rees, C., & Roth, W. (2017). Interchangeable Positions in Interaction Sequences in Science Classrooms. Dialogic Pedagogy: An International Online Journal, 5. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.5195/dpj.2017.184 Managing Editors for this article were: Diana Arya Anselmo Lima James Cresswell We invite you to read it. We congratulate the authors and the managing editors on the publications. Eugene, Ana, Jim and Sue DPJ?Editors Eugene Matusov Ana Marjanovic-Shane Jim Cresswell Sue Brindley ___________________________________________________ ?Interchangeable Positions in Interaction Sequences in Science Classrooms? Abstract Triadic dialogue, the Initiation, Response, Evaluation sequence typical of teacher /student interactions in classrooms, has long been identified as a barrier to students? access to learning, including science learning. A large body of research on the subject has over the years led to projects and policies aimed at increasing opportunities for students to learn through interactive dialogue in classrooms. However, the triadic dialogue pattern continues to dominate, even when teachers intend changing this. Prior quantitative research on the subject has focused on identifying independent variables such as style of teacher questioning that have an impact, while qualitative researchers have worked to interpret the use of dialogue within the whole context of work in the classroom. A recent paper offers an alternative way to view the triadic dialogue pattern and its origin; the triadic dialogue pattern is an irreducible social phenomenon that arises in a particular situation regardless of the identity of the players who inhabit the roles in the turn-taking sequence (Roth & Gardner, 2012). According to this perspective, alternative patterns of dialogue would exist which are alternative irreducible social phenomena that arise in association with different situations. The aim of this paper is to examine as precisely as possible, the characteristics of dialogue patterns in a seventh-eighth grade classroom during science inquiry, and the precise situations from which these dialogue patterns emerge, regardless of the staffing (teacher or students) in the turn-taking sequence. Three different patterns were identified each predominating in a particular situation. This fine-grained analysis could offer valuable insights into ways to support teachers working to alter the kinds of dialogue patterns that arise in their classrooms. ________________________________________________________________________ Dialogic Pedagogy: An International Online Journal http://dpj.pitt.edu/ From dkellogg60@gmail.com Mon Mar 20 13:45:41 2017 From: dkellogg60@gmail.com (David Kellogg) Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2017 07:45:41 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Jang's SL Article Discussion In-Reply-To: References: <1489427326574.46980@iped.uio.no> <1489431232770.89078@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: When I was a teenager, my best friend played piano. Tommy didn't just play: he composed--I'd get cassette letters from him where he would forget to talk, and just improvise a whole side of beautiful music. He also had perfect pitch--I'd play a random note on the bass and he would start talking about "my" B flat; somebody behind us in the traffic would honk, and he'd call out "C!". He was color blind. He could tell the traffic lights by their position, of course. But he couldn't tell a blue from a green, a yellow from an orange, or even a yellow from a green. They were just unnameable colors. He'd say "green" and you'd correct him with "blue" and he'd say "whatever". I'd ask him--Can't you SEE the difference? And he'd smile and ask me what note my word "see" was. If I said "C", I'd get a lecture on the major scales. You might think that these are purely physiological differences without social dimensions, and I'm sure, in Tommy's case anyway, something genetic was going on. But if you think a minute, you'll see that a lot of his "blindness" and my "deafness" is about naming things, not perceiving them. You will also see that in both cases there is a certain "social" overcompensation going on: both of us used our strong points to overcome our weak ones, and this led to "circuitous and indirect" ways of social functioning: Tommy went on to the Berklee School of Music, and I wrote lyrics for his songs and eventually became a painter. Vygotsky's transdisciplinary, but perhaps involuntarily so. He worked in defectology on the one hand and in pedology on the other. The common thread was--development, non-canonical and more typical. So he was really a developmentologist. That is a color, or a note, that doesn't actually exist for academics today, so in our color-blind, tone-deaf way we just call him a psychologist. I think you're right that racism has an additional social dimension, and I will call this politico-social, since Tommy's inability to name is certainly social, and so is his circumlocution. This politico-social dimension of racism is really just an ideological correlate of the fact that social progress is not planned: we have, in a rather willy-nilly way, evolved tools and signs to fit one dominant type of culture and one dominant type of psychophysiology rather than another. Sometimes this politico-social dimension also attaches itself to disabilities like (total) blindness and deafness. But it doesn't have to. >From a defectological perspective, these people are not "disabled", but only "pre-abled"--that is, we have invented circuitous and indirect" ways of circumventing these "defects" (e.g. Braille, ASL) but we haven't yet socially evolved them as mainstream abilities. In Seattle there was a loggers'union whose members were from many different language backgrounds (Swedish, Chinook, Russian, and a few English speakers like my grandfather, who was a book keeper). People used American Sign Language in the sawmill; if you weren't deaf when you started, you would be within a year, because the conditions in the sawmills were so awful. But they strongly resisted any suggestion that this made them "disabled". At one point, the union wanted to condemn Helen Keller, because she was consorting with Alexander Graham Bell, the inventor of the telephone, who wanted to force deaf children to lip-read instead of learning ASL. Some people excused her: after all, she's disabled, because she's blind. Most articles (especially most articles in TESOL Q!) use "mediation" as a subcategory of teaching-learning (the "good" kind, the kind of teaching-learning that is sensitive to learner needs on the one hand and context on the other). One of the things I liked about your article is that you recognized that "mediation" is not a subcategory but an enormous supercategory, including "being a student" in a set of social roles. What we think of as teaching-learning is only a very small subcategory: a planned, deliberate, and as a result highly atypical form of mediation. To me, though, this makes "mediation" a very baggy pair of trousers--not a good fit for most of what goes on in classrooms! David Kellogg Macquarie University one shadow is different from another. . I once It just wasn't there. . On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 6:21 PM, Eun Young Jang wrote: > Dear David > > > > Thank you for the interesting and helpful comments on my paper! I really > enjoyed your comments and was also pleased to receive your questions about > Juan in my earlier paper (TESOL Quarterly). I attach my paper here so that > other colleagues can read it if they want. > > > > Yes, I do think that what happened in the ESL classroom can be understood > from the "pedological" end as well, as you said. The point that I wanted > to make in my study was that we should understand 'why a learner acts in > certain way' from multiple perspectives. It is just like a piece of a > multilayered cake. > > By the way, I think I need to learn more about what you meant by > 'defectological' end. When you said 'defect', did you mean some problems > that people might have in their development? If so, I would like to share > my opinion. Everyone might have some problems that they must handle (and > problems that can be handled by some great pedagogical methods). Sometimes > the problems are minor (curable) and sometimes they are not (such as > blindness). However, not all of them are on the same level or same > dimension. In other words, I think we cannot equate some life's challenges > (such as illness) and racial discrimination. They are on different levels. > The latter is intrinsically social, I think. Further, in multicultural > education, 'deficit' has very negative connotation because it alludes that > there are some 'perfect' things in opposition. > > > > Here, I also pasted my response to your earlier email (off the xmca list) > below to share it with otehrs. > > > > Thank you very much for your ?off-list? email and interests in my articles. > Thanks to you, I was happy to remind of Juan, the lovely little boy who I > was with for more than a year. > > > > Yes, we did have an interview with Juan. The other author, Chris Iddings? > first language was Spanish so she was able to communicate with Juan with no > problem. But I remember that whether Juan understood the situation or not > was decided from our observations of his actions. In particular, the focus > of our observations was on the ways the joint attentional frames were > formed because we thought the frames played a critical role as a > mediational means in facilitating Juan?s learning. Oh, I also recall that > when we say Juan?s learning, it was not always learning of English but also > learning of the classroom discourses. About the quiet mouse events, Juan > wanted to be picked eagerly by pointing his finger to his own chest and > contacting eyes with the student with the mouse. About the testing, I > remember that Juan did understand the procedure of the testing and acted > like a student but in fact, it appeared that he was not able to get the > right answers in terms of English. Well, this should not be a problem > because understanding the classroom discourses would serve a scaffolding > for him to learn contents eventually. Hope my brief answer has satisfied > your curiosity about my study a bit. > > > > David, I think we have a lot in common. Let?s keep in touch. I?d love to > drop by the Dasomcha meeting some day! By the way, I have been in SIG for > Critical Pedagogy for almost 6years. If you have a plan to visit Korea > again, you are invited to our Critical Pedagogy meeting as well! > > > > Best, > > EY. > > > > > > > > On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 6:28 AM, David Kellogg > wrote: > > > Dear Professor Jang: > > > > Relax, you are among friends and co-thinkers. Well, a lot of friends, > some > > of whom are probably very close co-thinkers. It's a very big list, but I > > doubt if anybody who read your article would accuse you of teacher > bashing. > > I also don't think anybody who read it would think that you used your > > Korean-ness in any other way than a good researcher uses any resource > that > > affords empathy with the researched. And I DO think that you provided "a" > > way of bridging a socioculural and a cognitivist approach to the second > > language classroom. Perhaps even two ways. > > > > It seems to me that one way is from the "contextualist" end; that is, to > > redefine a context in abstract terms, including things like attitudes, > > motivations, and teaching ideologies right in the context. I think this > is > > actually much more difficult than it looks: some people will consider > this > > behavioristic, because it assumes that attitudes, motivations and > > ideologies can be treated as external to mind. I think it actually only > > considers them as external to text. Other people will consider it > upwardly > > reductionistic, because it assumes that attitudes, motivations and > > ideologies can be reduced to society and to culture and to context of > > situation. I think that society and culture and context of situation must > > always be considered as a complex whole, including cognition, but not > > subsuming it. > > > > It also seems to me that another is from the "organicist" end; that is, > to > > define attitudes, motivations, and ideologies as something in some way > > independent of cognition (the "distributed cognition" people are good at > > this). Again, this isn't so easy, particularly in an American context. > > America is now going through a kind of crisis, because racism has > > previously been defined in only one of two ways. Either racism is part of > > cognition--in which case it really only exists in people who subscribe, > > paradoxically, to "objective" scientific racism, to the belief that > > non-whites are actually inferior. Or racism is part of culture--in which > > case it really only exists in the debilitating effects it has on the > > oppressed, and it doesn't really matter what it is that racists believe > > (or, for that matter, what non-racists believe: Obama was just as guilty > of > > black unemployment as Bush). > > > > What I suggest is, rather perversely, a third way. It's from the > > "pedological, defectological" end. That is, attitudes, motivations and > the > > teaching ideologies which derive from them need to be understood not only > > as part of the context but also as part of pedology, a whole science of > the > > child. Unfortunately, Vygotsky's writings on this are not available in > > English, but they ARE available in good Korean: > > > > http://www.aladin.co.kr/shop/common/wseriesitem.aspx?SRID=25565 > > > > Similarly, the ravages of racism (including the "damunhwa kyoyuk" > developed > > in Korea under Yi Myeongbak and Park Geunhye, which was concerned with > > providing "equal opportunity" to the majority as well as to the minority) > > need to be considered not simply as stigma on the dominant race or as > > stigmata of the oppressed but more defectologically. "Defect" wasn't an > > insult in the USSR: Vygotsky actually considers "yeongje kyoyuk" (that > is, > > "genius education"), education of the blind, education of the deaf, > > so-called "learning disabilities" not as "disabilities" but as > > defects--that is, normal disadvantages to be overcome in the same way as > > any other obstacle in learning, through "circuitous and indirect", that > is, > > mediated, means of learning. We have evolved our means of education, as > > Vygotsky says, to cater to the needs of the psychophysiological dominant > > group, but the mark of higher forms of social progress is how it can > > develop the niches within this and the needs of those who are not > > psychophysiologically dominant. > > > > (Do you know Professor Kim Jinseok? I worked at SNUE for over ten years > > myself, and our Vygotsky group still meets there every Saturday to > > translate the work of Vygotsky into Korean. If you are on campus on a > > Saturday, we are usually in room 315, over "Dasomchae" near the front > gate, > > from noon until about four!) > > > > David Kellogg > > Macquarie University > > > > On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 2:14 PM, Eun Young Jang > > wrote: > > > > > ? > > > > > > Hi everyone, thank you very much for reading my article. This is such a > > > great opportunity for me to introduce my work and receive comments from > > > wonderful colleagues. > > > > > > First, let me introduce myself briefly. I earned my doctorate in > > Language, > > > Literacy, and Culture in the Department of Teaching and Learning at > > > Vanderbilt University. I am currently working as an assistant professor > > in > > > Multicultural Education at Seoul National University of Education > located > > > in Seoul, South Korea. My research interests are in the impact of the > > > social context on second language teaching and learning. Another paper > > > published recently deals with sustainable globalization of higher > > education > > > focusing on cultures and languages in a foreign professor?s classroom > in > > S. > > > Korea. My current research project is about North Korean refugee > students > > > learning English in South Korea. > > > > > > > > > My article for xmca discussion was initiated from my observation that > ESL > > > students were not actually focusing on learning English in the ESL > > > classroom but instead, on ?acting? learning with an attempt to achieve > > > certain social position (as an individual or a group). In particular, I > > > noted that they were quite skillful in using ?seemingly? academic > > > strategies to conceal what they were actually doing. > > > > > > > > > > > > The ESL students were very sensitive to things happening to them in > terms > > > of marginalization and discrimination but did not reveal to others > > > explicitly what they really thought. Instead, they took advantage of > the > > > school discourse that was legitimized in the context, that was, acting > > like > > > motivated and strategic learners by participating in class activities > > > actively and strategically. In spite of regular observations of ESL > > classes > > > back then, I could not figure out what was happening in the classroom > for > > > the first couple of months. Later on, the social dynamics among > students > > > and between students and the teacher surfaced to me and also they began > > to > > > open their minds and told me how they felt isolated and discriminated. > > > Then, I was able to see the meanings of their actions. > > > > > > > > > > > > In effect, the ESL teacher tried hard to be fair and in a sense, the > > French > > > student was isolated and discriminated by the Korean students in the > ESL > > > classroom. Nevertheless, Korean students victimized themselves. I > thought > > > that it was still important and valuable to acknowledge how the Korean > > > students felt simply because the feelings were there and they made some > > > consequences (such as silencing the French student). I wanted to reveal > > > that how the students felt and why they felt that way and how they > > reacted > > > to their feelings. Whether the discrimination was real or not was not > > > important. > > > > > > > > > > > > A reviewer from other journal has criticized my article badly for > teacher > > > bashing. But definitely I did not mean it. Also, some readers of my > > article > > > said that because I am Korean, I was on the Korean students? side. The > > fact > > > was, the ESL teacher and I were good friends and this even made the > > Korean > > > students suspicious of my position (like a spy from the ?white? teacher > > > side). Anyway, honestly, the comments from other scholars made me feel > > > constrained conducting research about the same ethnic group. Now, I?d > > like > > > to know about your opinion about this issue. > > > > > > Again, the fact that the participants were Korean was not the main > focus > > of > > > my study. I wanted to show how they used strategies, which were > typically > > > categorized as individual and cognitive traits, for social purposes. > So, > > > the bigger agenda of my study was to explore ?a? way to bridge the > > > dichotomy between individual and sociocultural camps. > > > > > > Thanks! > > > > > > EY. > > > > > > On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 8:12 AM, David Kellogg > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Alfredo: > > > > > > > > Down the hall one of the Chinese translators is working on > translations > > > of > > > > the Chinese "State of the Union" address into English. The Chinese > goes > > > > something like this: > > > > > > > > ????????? > > > > xi?och? p?nk?n q?d? j?nzh?n. > > > > > > > > Literally: > > > > > > > > "Eradicate Poverty Achieve Progress", i.e. "(The government) (made) > > some > > > > progress in the eradication of poverty." > > > > > > > > In Chinese we don't have to specify the agent, and we don't need to > use > > > the > > > > effective verb "made"; it's a happening and not a doing. This used to > > be > > > > because the agent went without saying--it's encoded in the grammar. > > > Partly > > > > thanks to a poetic tradition going back more than a thousand years, > > > Chinese > > > > lends itself to four-syllable slogan-like objects like "Eradicate > > > Poverty" > > > > and "Achieve Progress", and putting them together sounds natural. We > > > don't > > > > usually use a subject unless we want to stress it; it's much more > > common > > > to > > > > just have a nominal topic and then a comment, like in this example. > > > Because > > > > the government has a well established role in mobilizing the masses > to > > > > carry out actions like famine relief and flood prevention and so on, > > the > > > > agent and the "doing" don't need to be specified: everybody knows it > > was > > > > the government, even if that weren't clear in the context of a > > government > > > > report. So we simply say it's a happening. > > > > > > > > Now that's changing. In fact, the government does relatively little > to > > > > alleviate poverty. There are regional enterprises, and there are > > private > > > > businesses and so on. After the Sichuan earthquake, my brother-in-law > > > > loaded up his SUV with bottled water and drove down to the earthquake > > > area > > > > to distribute it, and he says there was a huge traffic jam of other > > SUVs > > > by > > > > entrepreneurs like him who had exactly the same idea. And for > precisely > > > > this reason, we find that in the government report there is more and > > more > > > > explicit stipulation of the government's agency and of the effective > > > means. > > > > Instead of just happening, the government does things. There is a > > similar > > > > link between ideology and ideation in English if you think about it. > > When > > > > something GOOD happens, it's because somebody DID it, but when > > something > > > > bad happens, "Stuff happens". > > > > > > > > Here's the point. We usually use "ideology" to mean something like > > > > conscious and deliberate ideation, usually of an intentionally > > deceitful > > > or > > > > misleading variety. I don't really accept that. It seems to me that > > > > "ideology" really is equivalent to ideation, that is, to the > > > communicative, > > > > representational function of speech, except that it is somewhat > larger, > > > > both because the interpersonal and the textual functions also encode > > > ideas > > > > and are also therefore ideological and because a lot of ideology is > > > simply > > > > NOT specifying things. For example, when you say "it's raining", you > > are > > > > conveying the idea that rain is an event that just happens, and is > not > > > > caused by any nameable entity. You don't normally say "it's birding" > or > > > > even "it's shining". > > > > > > > > Similarly, we usually use "prescriptivism" to mean something like > > > conscious > > > > and deliberate transformativism, usually of an authoritarian and > > > > dictatorial, and deceptive, sort. I don't really accept that either. > On > > > the > > > > contrary, what is really deceptive is to pretend that the process of > > > > education is meaningful without attending to its ultimate product. To > > me, > > > > "Eradicate Poverty Achieve Progress" is a perfect balance of process > > and > > > > product, and agency and effective means are only meaningful with > > respect > > > to > > > > both. > > > > > > > > David Kellogg > > > > Macquarie University > > > > > > > > On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 5:53 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil < > > a.j.gil@iped.uio.no > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Hi again, > > > > > > > > > > one thing that I find interesting in Jang's article, and which may > > > > connect > > > > > to comments in the other thread (by David, Haydi...) concerning > 'not > > > > > reducing the political to the personal', is the issue of > *ideology.* > > > In > > > > > particular, Jang discusses and empirically examines what she coins > > as a > > > > > *Prescriptive* language ideology. As she describes in her paper, > and > > as > > > > any > > > > > educator will immediately recognise, this ideology exists as the > > > > > classroom's orientations to a correct/incorrect form. In her > article, > > > she > > > > > exhibits this through a number of sequences in which > teacher-student > > > and > > > > > student-student relations involve *evaluations* with regard to > > > > proficiently > > > > > using two rules: making connections between sentences and staying > on > > > the > > > > > topic. > > > > > > > > > > As Jang shows, the prescriptive approach, which sets the final > > linguist > > > > > form as the criterion for positively or negatively evaluating any > > > > response > > > > > by any student, is such that more proficient readers/speakers will > > have > > > > > easier access to positive evaluation. The ideology here then exists > > as > > > a > > > > > regime of power and differential access, of inequality. By treating > > all > > > > > equally, we get to inequality. > > > > > > > > > > I was thinking that it seems that the prescriptive approach does > > focus > > > on > > > > > the final product, whereas the sociocultural approach that Jang > > pursues > > > > and > > > > > Vygotsky first set forth has it that we should not focus on the > final > > > > > product but on its genesis, on the way the verbal form exists first > > as > > > a > > > > > social relation between people. Thus, in Episodes 1 and 2 in the > > > article, > > > > > if the participants had oriented towards a possible process of > > > > development, > > > > > Ji-Woo's responses would have been heard and responded to as > moments > > > in a > > > > > developmental trajectory. There would have been a very different > > social > > > > > situation in which work would have been directed to make visible > and > > > > > available the dynamics of Ji-Woo's learning process. But the > > > prescriptive > > > > > orientation evaluates and makes salient only deficiency and > > > achievement. > > > > On > > > > > the other hand, and consistent with those (e.g., Stetsenko, > Holzman) > > > who > > > > > have referred to Vygotsky's legacy as *revolutionary,* an > orientation > > > > > consistent with Vygotsky's teachings would bring with it not only a > > > > > different situation, but also an *emancipatory* one. Instead of > > > > inequality > > > > > brought about by treating all equally, we would have an > equalitarian > > > > > approach whose power resides in acknowledging and caring for > history > > > and > > > > > diversity. > > > > > > > > > > On a side thought, and connected to David's (Halliday's) > distinction > > > > > between ideational and interpersonal functions of language, I was > > > > wondering > > > > > what is the relation/difference between ideational and ideological. > > In > > > > the > > > > > article, it seems clear that the language related competence on > > putting > > > > > names to things and thereby building categories seems a condition > for > > > the > > > > > racial/ethnic tension to exist. But of course, the tension is a > > > > relational, > > > > > not just a lexical one. Thoughts? > > > > > > > > > > Alfredo > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________________ > > > > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > edu > > > > > > > > > on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil > > > > > Sent: 13 March 2017 18:48 > > > > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Jang's SL Article Discussion > > > > > > > > > > ?Dear all, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > David has started some very interesting comments on the current > > article > > > > > for discussion on Tensions in Second Language Learning, which > attach > > > > again > > > > > here. Because some of these comments have been given at a different > > > > thread, > > > > > I am starting here a thread that shall more centrally concern > Jang's > > > > > article. I copy below all what David has so far written about the > > > > article. > > > > > I hope this will ?make it easy for Eun-Young and everyone else to > > > follow > > > > on > > > > > her article. I know ?Eun-Young is challenged time-wise by course > > > > > responsibilities and I hope this will make it easier for her. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Eun-Young, David mentions an article from 2011. If you wanted, you > > > could > > > > > also share the PDF with us for background, although the current > > article > > > > > gives more than enough material for discussion, I think. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Alfredo > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --------------------David Kellogg wrote: ------------------ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > t's very interesting to compare this paper with Professor Jang's > 2011 > > > > > paper co-authored with Robert T. Jimenez: > > > > > > > > > > Eun-Young Jang & Robert T. Jim?nez (2011) A Sociocultural > Perspective > > > on > > > > > Second Language Learner Strategies: Focus on the Impact of Social > > > > Context, > > > > > Theory Into Practice, > > > > > 50:2, 141-148, DOI: 10.1080/00405841.2011.558443 > > > > > > > > > > In some ways, the papers are very similar--the data is identical in > > one > > > > > place (p. 42), and the conclusions are for the most part congruent. > > But > > > > > consider how different the titles are. "Impact" in one place, and > > > > "tension" > > > > > in the other. > > > > > > > > > > There is this note to the 1935 version of Vygotsky's report on > > > > preschools, > > > > > where Zankov, Elkonin and Shif complain about Vygotsky's idea that > > the > > > > > child directs his or her own learning before preschool, the > > environment > > > > > directs it after preschool, and preschool therefore represents a > kind > > > of > > > > > transitional stage. On the one hand, if the child is directing his > or > > > her > > > > > own learning, how can we say that the environment is the ultimate > > > source > > > > of > > > > > learning? And if the environment is the ultimate source of > learning, > > as > > > > > Vygotsky says, how can we say that the child is himself or herself > > part > > > > of > > > > > the environment? > > > > > > > > > > Professor Jang gets around this problem just as Vygotsky > > > does--adroitly. > > > > On > > > > > the one hand, strategies are expanded to include "sets of actions > > > > performed > > > > > to deal with problems (perceived by the researcher, indicated by > the > > > > > learners)". On the other, contexts are expanded to include > > "pedagogical > > > > > assumptions, power relations, and interracial conflict". > > > > > > > > > > I think this solution to the problem is the correct one: when we > > > consider > > > > > the relationship of the child and the environment, we cannot treat > it > > > > like > > > > > an unstoppable force meeting an unmoveable object. But for me that > > > means > > > > > that both the child and the environment have to be considered in > > > > "internal" > > > > > (that is, abstract, linguistic) terms. We can't think of speech as > > > > actions; > > > > > it's more useful to think of actions as speech. We can't think of > the > > > > > social situation of development as a material setting: it's a > > > > relationship > > > > > with others. > > > > > > > > > > Contrariwise, it seems to me that when we consider "racism", it is > > more > > > > > helpful to consider it in "external", that is, concrete, > > nonlinguistic > > > > > terms. In the 2011 paper, Professor Jang and her co-author are > > willing > > > to > > > > > openly criticize the idea that languages are learned in exactly the > > > same > > > > > way whether they are first or second languages. Here, they just > quote > > > the > > > > > teacher's comments on "mommy skills". > > > > > > > > > > It's a very revealing quote. One thing it reveals is why it's > > probably > > > > not > > > > > helpful to refer to "racist" as an "insult" (p. 40) or to imply > that > > > > racism > > > > > and anti-racism is really just a matter of having the right > attitude > > > (as > > > > > the Republicans did in the Sessions debate or as Bernie Sanders did > > > when > > > > he > > > > > referred to Trump supporters who voted for Obama as "not having a > > > racist > > > > > bone in their bodies"). > > > > > > > > > > You can see that subjectively, the teacher is being > anti-racist--all > > > > > students, French, Turkish, Egyptian, Korean, use the same > strategies, > > > > just > > > > > like we all have mommies.She has all the right attitudes, and > > probably > > > > > doesn't have a racist bone in her body. But that doesn't diminish > by > > > one > > > > > jot the terrible damage that this kind of indiscriminate > > discrimination > > > > > does in the classroom. > > > > > > > > > > David Kellogg > > > > > Macquarie University > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------ On a related thread (Subject: Don't do > it), > > > > David > > > > > K. wrote:-------------- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It seems to me that we need to clearly distinguish between "racism" > > and > > > > > "racist sentiment". One of the interesting problems that comes up > in > > > > Eunhee > > > > > Jang's excellent article on second language learning strategies > from > > a > > > > > sociocultural point of view--a wonderful piece of "inside" work, > > > > > introducing racial issues into an area where they have never been > > > > seriously > > > > > discussed--is the use of "racist" (by the Korean kids to describe > > their > > > > > teacher) as an "insult". > > > > > > > > > > I like the article. I think it's important work. But for that very > > > > reason, > > > > > I think that it's important to resist any attempt to reduce > "racist" > > > to a > > > > > personal insult. I think we've seen very very clearly, both in the > > > > Sessions > > > > > confirmation hearing, and in the discussion of Trump's own > > anti-semitic > > > > > behavior--that this kind of reduction of the political to the > > personal > > > is > > > > > precisely the kind of reducing the sociocultural to the cognitive > > that > > > > > Professor Jang is trying to resist. > > > > > > > > > > David Kellogg > > > > > Macquarie University > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------- Idem as above------------------------- > > > > > --------------- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > One of the interesting aspects of Professor Jang's paper is that it > > is > > > > > about adolescents who are in the process of forming concepts, but > who > > > are > > > > > not there yet. And one way in which an adolescent forms a concept > > about > > > > the > > > > > difficult concept of a social contract, of citizenship, of > > nationality > > > is > > > > > pseudoconceptual: it is based on discussing "actual" perceptual > > > > differences > > > > > between races. This might seem irrelevant to current political > > > discourse. > > > > > Unfortunately, it isn't.? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > David Kellogg > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > Jang, Eun-Young. Ph.D. > > > > > > Assistant Professor, Graduate School of Education > > > > > > Seoul National University of Education > > > > > > Seoul, S. Korea > > > > > > > > > -- > > Jang, Eun-Young. Ph.D. > > Assistant Professor, Graduate School of Education > > Seoul National University of Education > > Seoul, S. Korea > From lachnm@rpi.edu Tue Mar 21 07:50:41 2017 From: lachnm@rpi.edu (lachnm) Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2017 10:50:41 -0400 Subject: [Xmca-l] AAA 2017 CFP Panel - "Culturally Responsive STEM Education with Neoindigenous Communities" Message-ID: Dear XMCA Colleagues, KiMi Wilson and I are organizing a panel for the 2017 American Anthropological Association meeting in DC that explores culturally responsive STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics) education in the context of "neoindigenous" communities. Below is the CFP. Please submit and share if your networks! Call for Papers: Culturally Responsive STEM Education with Neoindigenous Communities American Anthropological Association 2017 Washington, D.C. November 29th - December 3rd. Chairs: KiMi Wilson (California State University, Los Angeles); Michael Lachney (Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute) Organizers: Michael Lachney (Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute); KiMi Wilson (California State University, Los Angeles) To emphasize 21st century education as both a colonizing and assimilationist project in United States? urban centers, Emdin (2016) advances the language of neoindigenous to conceptualize the institutional positions youths of color occupy when schools and teachers treat their cultural identities as deficits to classroom learning. What are the limitations and affordances of this conceptualization? American Indian boarding schools of the 19th and 20th centuries sought to assimilate indigenous children into cultural norms of the white colonizers. Similarly, urban schools often foster environments where the pathways for academic achievement come at the expense of students? authentic expressions of self and community. Unlike indigenous peoples?who are identified by associated geographical locations that predate colonial occupation?neoindigenous makes both different and overlapping facets of colonialism and racism explicit by positioning urban youths of color in school systems that exist at the intersections of cosmopolitanism, marginalization, displacement, and diaspora. Emdin argues that conceptualizing urban youth as neoindigenous creates new vantage points from which teachers and researchers can recognize the socio-historical complexities between dominant institutions and marginalized communities in the development of better culturally responsive education. This raises the question of application: How can the conceptualization of urban youths as neoindigenous innovate culturally responsive pedagogy in those subject areas where communities of color are most underrepresented, namely STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics)? While increasing the representation of communities of color in STEM has become a national priority in the U.S., less attention has been paid to overcoming the Eurocentric and white middle class standards of STEM education that (re)produce underrepresentation in the first place. To speak to the 2017 AAA meeting theme about why ?anthropology matters!? this panel highlights ethnographic and teacher action research on the development and implementation of culturally responsive STEM education in the context of neoindigenous communities. How can anthropological theory and practice help develop more nuanced understandings of neoindigenous communities for culturally responsive STEM instructional practices? What challenges and tensions arise between STEM education and the culturally situated knowledges of neoindigenous communities? To what extent can culturally responsive STEM education challenge colonialism and racism in schools? During this panel we will include but not limit discussion to the following: ? The limitations and affordances of conceptualizing urban youths of color as neoindigenous in the context of STEM education. ? The development and implementation of culturally responsive STEM lessons, curricula, technologies, art activities, and educational activism. ? The intersections of colonialism, patriarchy, racism, and wealth inequality in STEM and schools. ? Creating pathways toward de-colonial and anti-racist STEM education. Please e-mail proposed presentation titles and abstracts (a maximum of 250 words) to Michael Lachney (michael.lachney@gmail.com) and KiMi Wilson (kwilso26@calstatela.edu) by 5PM PST, April 5th. Please use the heading, ?AAA 2017? when you email your proposals. From a.j.gil@iped.uio.no Fri Mar 24 09:31:10 2017 From: a.j.gil@iped.uio.no (Alfredo Jornet Gil) Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2017 16:31:10 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Jang's SL Article Discussion In-Reply-To: References: <1489427326574.46980@iped.uio.no> <1489431232770.89078@iped.uio.no> , Message-ID: <1490373072177.47916@iped.uio.no> David, Eun-Young, all, I am so glad that David and Eun-Young have found a fruitful common ground in (and outside) the article's discussion. When I chose the paper for this Issue 1 discussion, I thought (perhaps wrongly) that many xmca'ers would be interested in the paper for several reasons, one being the intermingling of social (ideological) and subject-related (second language) aspects. I always find it very interesting the amount of learning that goes on in classrooms (and homes) that is not what canonical descriptions of teaching/learning would (and possibly could) have anticipated. I am talking about what Dewey refers to as 'collateral learning', that is, learning that is not intended nor prescribed by the curriculum, but which nonetheless is consequence of its application. Dewey (in Education and Experience) describes collateral learning as the 'formation of enduring attitudes, of likes and dislikes, [which] may be and often is much more important than the spelling lesson or lesson in geography or history that is learned' This is so absolutely obvious, and yet (in a expression Mike recently used in a talk at Vancouver's SFO) is universally ignored. David, you remind us that Vygotsky was trans-disciplinary in the sense that his field was development, that he was a 'developmentologist' (and you use the felicitous expression 'pre-able' as an example). I think, and this is something authors such as Newman and Holzman (in their Vygotsky as revolutionary scientist) have spelled out, that being a developmentologist is very much an ideology as well, one that is irreconcilable with the prescriptive ideology that Eun-Young describes in her article and that we find ourselves being part of in many occasions everyday. The latter seems to be based on the believe that social (and living) things exist in cause - effect relations pretty much in the same way that physical (non-living) things exist in the universe. Language then can be seen as a tool (and in fact often is described as a tool even in the sociocultural literature that cites Vygotsky) that an individual can use to do things. It is then possible to think of the teaching of second language as the teaching of one thing, rather than as the formation of whole persons, and not just whole persons but of societal forms of relating, indeed. But if you embrace Vygotsky's points on development, specially on the fact that what is developing is whole persons (with affects, motives) and not just isolated bits of information, then learning a (second) language is always so much more than learning to speak words and sentences in a second language. I applaud the author's call for challenging 'ESL educators and institutions ... to construct a learning environment in which diverse ESL students' voices are ... heard and discussed, not only about their English learning, but also about their social struggles' (p. 43). But, considering the prescriptive ideology that the classroom relations in the focus article realise, I am surprised by the author's use of the term 'illogical antagonism against other racial/ethnic groups'. Such antagonism seemed very logical to them, in fact, immediately logical. I am not as kin as the author is in attributing intentions to the individual participants (see, e.g., p. 41). Just as the teacher did not intend inequity, I don't think the Korean learners were being racist (which they effectively were) 'intentionally.' Logic here has to do with organic being, not with formal ideas. And that organic being is about developmental relations, not things (cause) against things (effect). The more I think about it, and the more I work with it, the more I understand that being an educator is one of the most complex, misunderstood and undervalued task in today's society. I hope the article continues to sparkle some interest in the coming days. Meanwhile, thanks Eun-Young and David for a sustained and productive dialogue. Alfredo ________________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of David Kellogg Sent: 20 March 2017 21:45 To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Jang's SL Article Discussion When I was a teenager, my best friend played piano. Tommy didn't just play: he composed--I'd get cassette letters from him where he would forget to talk, and just improvise a whole side of beautiful music. He also had perfect pitch--I'd play a random note on the bass and he would start talking about "my" B flat; somebody behind us in the traffic would honk, and he'd call out "C!". He was color blind. He could tell the traffic lights by their position, of course. But he couldn't tell a blue from a green, a yellow from an orange, or even a yellow from a green. They were just unnameable colors. He'd say "green" and you'd correct him with "blue" and he'd say "whatever". I'd ask him--Can't you SEE the difference? And he'd smile and ask me what note my word "see" was. If I said "C", I'd get a lecture on the major scales. You might think that these are purely physiological differences without social dimensions, and I'm sure, in Tommy's case anyway, something genetic was going on. But if you think a minute, you'll see that a lot of his "blindness" and my "deafness" is about naming things, not perceiving them. You will also see that in both cases there is a certain "social" overcompensation going on: both of us used our strong points to overcome our weak ones, and this led to "circuitous and indirect" ways of social functioning: Tommy went on to the Berklee School of Music, and I wrote lyrics for his songs and eventually became a painter. Vygotsky's transdisciplinary, but perhaps involuntarily so. He worked in defectology on the one hand and in pedology on the other. The common thread was--development, non-canonical and more typical. So he was really a developmentologist. That is a color, or a note, that doesn't actually exist for academics today, so in our color-blind, tone-deaf way we just call him a psychologist. I think you're right that racism has an additional social dimension, and I will call this politico-social, since Tommy's inability to name is certainly social, and so is his circumlocution. This politico-social dimension of racism is really just an ideological correlate of the fact that social progress is not planned: we have, in a rather willy-nilly way, evolved tools and signs to fit one dominant type of culture and one dominant type of psychophysiology rather than another. Sometimes this politico-social dimension also attaches itself to disabilities like (total) blindness and deafness. But it doesn't have to. >From a defectological perspective, these people are not "disabled", but only "pre-abled"--that is, we have invented circuitous and indirect" ways of circumventing these "defects" (e.g. Braille, ASL) but we haven't yet socially evolved them as mainstream abilities. In Seattle there was a loggers'union whose members were from many different language backgrounds (Swedish, Chinook, Russian, and a few English speakers like my grandfather, who was a book keeper). People used American Sign Language in the sawmill; if you weren't deaf when you started, you would be within a year, because the conditions in the sawmills were so awful. But they strongly resisted any suggestion that this made them "disabled". At one point, the union wanted to condemn Helen Keller, because she was consorting with Alexander Graham Bell, the inventor of the telephone, who wanted to force deaf children to lip-read instead of learning ASL. Some people excused her: after all, she's disabled, because she's blind. Most articles (especially most articles in TESOL Q!) use "mediation" as a subcategory of teaching-learning (the "good" kind, the kind of teaching-learning that is sensitive to learner needs on the one hand and context on the other). One of the things I liked about your article is that you recognized that "mediation" is not a subcategory but an enormous supercategory, including "being a student" in a set of social roles. What we think of as teaching-learning is only a very small subcategory: a planned, deliberate, and as a result highly atypical form of mediation. To me, though, this makes "mediation" a very baggy pair of trousers--not a good fit for most of what goes on in classrooms! David Kellogg Macquarie University one shadow is different from another. . I once It just wasn't there. . On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 6:21 PM, Eun Young Jang wrote: > Dear David > > > > Thank you for the interesting and helpful comments on my paper! I really > enjoyed your comments and was also pleased to receive your questions about > Juan in my earlier paper (TESOL Quarterly). I attach my paper here so that > other colleagues can read it if they want. > > > > Yes, I do think that what happened in the ESL classroom can be understood > from the "pedological" end as well, as you said. The point that I wanted > to make in my study was that we should understand 'why a learner acts in > certain way' from multiple perspectives. It is just like a piece of a > multilayered cake. > > By the way, I think I need to learn more about what you meant by > 'defectological' end. When you said 'defect', did you mean some problems > that people might have in their development? If so, I would like to share > my opinion. Everyone might have some problems that they must handle (and > problems that can be handled by some great pedagogical methods). Sometimes > the problems are minor (curable) and sometimes they are not (such as > blindness). However, not all of them are on the same level or same > dimension. In other words, I think we cannot equate some life's challenges > (such as illness) and racial discrimination. They are on different levels. > The latter is intrinsically social, I think. Further, in multicultural > education, 'deficit' has very negative connotation because it alludes that > there are some 'perfect' things in opposition. > > > > Here, I also pasted my response to your earlier email (off the xmca list) > below to share it with otehrs. > > > > Thank you very much for your ?off-list? email and interests in my articles. > Thanks to you, I was happy to remind of Juan, the lovely little boy who I > was with for more than a year. > > > > Yes, we did have an interview with Juan. The other author, Chris Iddings? > first language was Spanish so she was able to communicate with Juan with no > problem. But I remember that whether Juan understood the situation or not > was decided from our observations of his actions. In particular, the focus > of our observations was on the ways the joint attentional frames were > formed because we thought the frames played a critical role as a > mediational means in facilitating Juan?s learning. Oh, I also recall that > when we say Juan?s learning, it was not always learning of English but also > learning of the classroom discourses. About the quiet mouse events, Juan > wanted to be picked eagerly by pointing his finger to his own chest and > contacting eyes with the student with the mouse. About the testing, I > remember that Juan did understand the procedure of the testing and acted > like a student but in fact, it appeared that he was not able to get the > right answers in terms of English. Well, this should not be a problem > because understanding the classroom discourses would serve a scaffolding > for him to learn contents eventually. Hope my brief answer has satisfied > your curiosity about my study a bit. > > > > David, I think we have a lot in common. Let?s keep in touch. I?d love to > drop by the Dasomcha meeting some day! By the way, I have been in SIG for > Critical Pedagogy for almost 6years. If you have a plan to visit Korea > again, you are invited to our Critical Pedagogy meeting as well! > > > > Best, > > EY. > > > > > > > > On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 6:28 AM, David Kellogg > wrote: > > > Dear Professor Jang: > > > > Relax, you are among friends and co-thinkers. Well, a lot of friends, > some > > of whom are probably very close co-thinkers. It's a very big list, but I > > doubt if anybody who read your article would accuse you of teacher > bashing. > > I also don't think anybody who read it would think that you used your > > Korean-ness in any other way than a good researcher uses any resource > that > > affords empathy with the researched. And I DO think that you provided "a" > > way of bridging a socioculural and a cognitivist approach to the second > > language classroom. Perhaps even two ways. > > > > It seems to me that one way is from the "contextualist" end; that is, to > > redefine a context in abstract terms, including things like attitudes, > > motivations, and teaching ideologies right in the context. I think this > is > > actually much more difficult than it looks: some people will consider > this > > behavioristic, because it assumes that attitudes, motivations and > > ideologies can be treated as external to mind. I think it actually only > > considers them as external to text. Other people will consider it > upwardly > > reductionistic, because it assumes that attitudes, motivations and > > ideologies can be reduced to society and to culture and to context of > > situation. I think that society and culture and context of situation must > > always be considered as a complex whole, including cognition, but not > > subsuming it. > > > > It also seems to me that another is from the "organicist" end; that is, > to > > define attitudes, motivations, and ideologies as something in some way > > independent of cognition (the "distributed cognition" people are good at > > this). Again, this isn't so easy, particularly in an American context. > > America is now going through a kind of crisis, because racism has > > previously been defined in only one of two ways. Either racism is part of > > cognition--in which case it really only exists in people who subscribe, > > paradoxically, to "objective" scientific racism, to the belief that > > non-whites are actually inferior. Or racism is part of culture--in which > > case it really only exists in the debilitating effects it has on the > > oppressed, and it doesn't really matter what it is that racists believe > > (or, for that matter, what non-racists believe: Obama was just as guilty > of > > black unemployment as Bush). > > > > What I suggest is, rather perversely, a third way. It's from the > > "pedological, defectological" end. That is, attitudes, motivations and > the > > teaching ideologies which derive from them need to be understood not only > > as part of the context but also as part of pedology, a whole science of > the > > child. Unfortunately, Vygotsky's writings on this are not available in > > English, but they ARE available in good Korean: > > > > http://www.aladin.co.kr/shop/common/wseriesitem.aspx?SRID=25565 > > > > Similarly, the ravages of racism (including the "damunhwa kyoyuk" > developed > > in Korea under Yi Myeongbak and Park Geunhye, which was concerned with > > providing "equal opportunity" to the majority as well as to the minority) > > need to be considered not simply as stigma on the dominant race or as > > stigmata of the oppressed but more defectologically. "Defect" wasn't an > > insult in the USSR: Vygotsky actually considers "yeongje kyoyuk" (that > is, > > "genius education"), education of the blind, education of the deaf, > > so-called "learning disabilities" not as "disabilities" but as > > defects--that is, normal disadvantages to be overcome in the same way as > > any other obstacle in learning, through "circuitous and indirect", that > is, > > mediated, means of learning. We have evolved our means of education, as > > Vygotsky says, to cater to the needs of the psychophysiological dominant > > group, but the mark of higher forms of social progress is how it can > > develop the niches within this and the needs of those who are not > > psychophysiologically dominant. > > > > (Do you know Professor Kim Jinseok? I worked at SNUE for over ten years > > myself, and our Vygotsky group still meets there every Saturday to > > translate the work of Vygotsky into Korean. If you are on campus on a > > Saturday, we are usually in room 315, over "Dasomchae" near the front > gate, > > from noon until about four!) > > > > David Kellogg > > Macquarie University > > > > On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 2:14 PM, Eun Young Jang > > wrote: > > > > > ? > > > > > > Hi everyone, thank you very much for reading my article. This is such a > > > great opportunity for me to introduce my work and receive comments from > > > wonderful colleagues. > > > > > > First, let me introduce myself briefly. I earned my doctorate in > > Language, > > > Literacy, and Culture in the Department of Teaching and Learning at > > > Vanderbilt University. I am currently working as an assistant professor > > in > > > Multicultural Education at Seoul National University of Education > located > > > in Seoul, South Korea. My research interests are in the impact of the > > > social context on second language teaching and learning. Another paper > > > published recently deals with sustainable globalization of higher > > education > > > focusing on cultures and languages in a foreign professor?s classroom > in > > S. > > > Korea. My current research project is about North Korean refugee > students > > > learning English in South Korea. > > > > > > > > > My article for xmca discussion was initiated from my observation that > ESL > > > students were not actually focusing on learning English in the ESL > > > classroom but instead, on ?acting? learning with an attempt to achieve > > > certain social position (as an individual or a group). In particular, I > > > noted that they were quite skillful in using ?seemingly? academic > > > strategies to conceal what they were actually doing. > > > > > > > > > > > > The ESL students were very sensitive to things happening to them in > terms > > > of marginalization and discrimination but did not reveal to others > > > explicitly what they really thought. Instead, they took advantage of > the > > > school discourse that was legitimized in the context, that was, acting > > like > > > motivated and strategic learners by participating in class activities > > > actively and strategically. In spite of regular observations of ESL > > classes > > > back then, I could not figure out what was happening in the classroom > for > > > the first couple of months. Later on, the social dynamics among > students > > > and between students and the teacher surfaced to me and also they began > > to > > > open their minds and told me how they felt isolated and discriminated. > > > Then, I was able to see the meanings of their actions. > > > > > > > > > > > > In effect, the ESL teacher tried hard to be fair and in a sense, the > > French > > > student was isolated and discriminated by the Korean students in the > ESL > > > classroom. Nevertheless, Korean students victimized themselves. I > thought > > > that it was still important and valuable to acknowledge how the Korean > > > students felt simply because the feelings were there and they made some > > > consequences (such as silencing the French student). I wanted to reveal > > > that how the students felt and why they felt that way and how they > > reacted > > > to their feelings. Whether the discrimination was real or not was not > > > important. > > > > > > > > > > > > A reviewer from other journal has criticized my article badly for > teacher > > > bashing. But definitely I did not mean it. Also, some readers of my > > article > > > said that because I am Korean, I was on the Korean students? side. The > > fact > > > was, the ESL teacher and I were good friends and this even made the > > Korean > > > students suspicious of my position (like a spy from the ?white? teacher > > > side). Anyway, honestly, the comments from other scholars made me feel > > > constrained conducting research about the same ethnic group. Now, I?d > > like > > > to know about your opinion about this issue. > > > > > > Again, the fact that the participants were Korean was not the main > focus > > of > > > my study. I wanted to show how they used strategies, which were > typically > > > categorized as individual and cognitive traits, for social purposes. > So, > > > the bigger agenda of my study was to explore ?a? way to bridge the > > > dichotomy between individual and sociocultural camps. > > > > > > Thanks! > > > > > > EY. > > > > > > On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 8:12 AM, David Kellogg > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Alfredo: > > > > > > > > Down the hall one of the Chinese translators is working on > translations > > > of > > > > the Chinese "State of the Union" address into English. The Chinese > goes > > > > something like this: > > > > > > > > ????????? > > > > xi?och? p?nk?n q?d? j?nzh?n. > > > > > > > > Literally: > > > > > > > > "Eradicate Poverty Achieve Progress", i.e. "(The government) (made) > > some > > > > progress in the eradication of poverty." > > > > > > > > In Chinese we don't have to specify the agent, and we don't need to > use > > > the > > > > effective verb "made"; it's a happening and not a doing. This used to > > be > > > > because the agent went without saying--it's encoded in the grammar. > > > Partly > > > > thanks to a poetic tradition going back more than a thousand years, > > > Chinese > > > > lends itself to four-syllable slogan-like objects like "Eradicate > > > Poverty" > > > > and "Achieve Progress", and putting them together sounds natural. We > > > don't > > > > usually use a subject unless we want to stress it; it's much more > > common > > > to > > > > just have a nominal topic and then a comment, like in this example. > > > Because > > > > the government has a well established role in mobilizing the masses > to > > > > carry out actions like famine relief and flood prevention and so on, > > the > > > > agent and the "doing" don't need to be specified: everybody knows it > > was > > > > the government, even if that weren't clear in the context of a > > government > > > > report. So we simply say it's a happening. > > > > > > > > Now that's changing. In fact, the government does relatively little > to > > > > alleviate poverty. There are regional enterprises, and there are > > private > > > > businesses and so on. After the Sichuan earthquake, my brother-in-law > > > > loaded up his SUV with bottled water and drove down to the earthquake > > > area > > > > to distribute it, and he says there was a huge traffic jam of other > > SUVs > > > by > > > > entrepreneurs like him who had exactly the same idea. And for > precisely > > > > this reason, we find that in the government report there is more and > > more > > > > explicit stipulation of the government's agency and of the effective > > > means. > > > > Instead of just happening, the government does things. There is a > > similar > > > > link between ideology and ideation in English if you think about it. > > When > > > > something GOOD happens, it's because somebody DID it, but when > > something > > > > bad happens, "Stuff happens". > > > > > > > > Here's the point. We usually use "ideology" to mean something like > > > > conscious and deliberate ideation, usually of an intentionally > > deceitful > > > or > > > > misleading variety. I don't really accept that. It seems to me that > > > > "ideology" really is equivalent to ideation, that is, to the > > > communicative, > > > > representational function of speech, except that it is somewhat > larger, > > > > both because the interpersonal and the textual functions also encode > > > ideas > > > > and are also therefore ideological and because a lot of ideology is > > > simply > > > > NOT specifying things. For example, when you say "it's raining", you > > are > > > > conveying the idea that rain is an event that just happens, and is > not > > > > caused by any nameable entity. You don't normally say "it's birding" > or > > > > even "it's shining". > > > > > > > > Similarly, we usually use "prescriptivism" to mean something like > > > conscious > > > > and deliberate transformativism, usually of an authoritarian and > > > > dictatorial, and deceptive, sort. I don't really accept that either. > On > > > the > > > > contrary, what is really deceptive is to pretend that the process of > > > > education is meaningful without attending to its ultimate product. To > > me, > > > > "Eradicate Poverty Achieve Progress" is a perfect balance of process > > and > > > > product, and agency and effective means are only meaningful with > > respect > > > to > > > > both. > > > > > > > > David Kellogg > > > > Macquarie University > > > > > > > > On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 5:53 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil < > > a.j.gil@iped.uio.no > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Hi again, > > > > > > > > > > one thing that I find interesting in Jang's article, and which may > > > > connect > > > > > to comments in the other thread (by David, Haydi...) concerning > 'not > > > > > reducing the political to the personal', is the issue of > *ideology.* > > > In > > > > > particular, Jang discusses and empirically examines what she coins > > as a > > > > > *Prescriptive* language ideology. As she describes in her paper, > and > > as > > > > any > > > > > educator will immediately recognise, this ideology exists as the > > > > > classroom's orientations to a correct/incorrect form. In her > article, > > > she > > > > > exhibits this through a number of sequences in which > teacher-student > > > and > > > > > student-student relations involve *evaluations* with regard to > > > > proficiently > > > > > using two rules: making connections between sentences and staying > on > > > the > > > > > topic. > > > > > > > > > > As Jang shows, the prescriptive approach, which sets the final > > linguist > > > > > form as the criterion for positively or negatively evaluating any > > > > response > > > > > by any student, is such that more proficient readers/speakers will > > have > > > > > easier access to positive evaluation. The ideology here then exists > > as > > > a > > > > > regime of power and differential access, of inequality. By treating > > all > > > > > equally, we get to inequality. > > > > > > > > > > I was thinking that it seems that the prescriptive approach does > > focus > > > on > > > > > the final product, whereas the sociocultural approach that Jang > > pursues > > > > and > > > > > Vygotsky first set forth has it that we should not focus on the > final > > > > > product but on its genesis, on the way the verbal form exists first > > as > > > a > > > > > social relation between people. Thus, in Episodes 1 and 2 in the > > > article, > > > > > if the participants had oriented towards a possible process of > > > > development, > > > > > Ji-Woo's responses would have been heard and responded to as > moments > > > in a > > > > > developmental trajectory. There would have been a very different > > social > > > > > situation in which work would have been directed to make visible > and > > > > > available the dynamics of Ji-Woo's learning process. But the > > > prescriptive > > > > > orientation evaluates and makes salient only deficiency and > > > achievement. > > > > On > > > > > the other hand, and consistent with those (e.g., Stetsenko, > Holzman) > > > who > > > > > have referred to Vygotsky's legacy as *revolutionary,* an > orientation > > > > > consistent with Vygotsky's teachings would bring with it not only a > > > > > different situation, but also an *emancipatory* one. Instead of > > > > inequality > > > > > brought about by treating all equally, we would have an > equalitarian > > > > > approach whose power resides in acknowledging and caring for > history > > > and > > > > > diversity. > > > > > > > > > > On a side thought, and connected to David's (Halliday's) > distinction > > > > > between ideational and interpersonal functions of language, I was > > > > wondering > > > > > what is the relation/difference between ideational and ideological. > > In > > > > the > > > > > article, it seems clear that the language related competence on > > putting > > > > > names to things and thereby building categories seems a condition > for > > > the > > > > > racial/ethnic tension to exist. But of course, the tension is a > > > > relational, > > > > > not just a lexical one. Thoughts? > > > > > > > > > > Alfredo > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________________ > > > > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > edu > > > > > > > > > on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil > > > > > Sent: 13 March 2017 18:48 > > > > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Jang's SL Article Discussion > > > > > > > > > > ?Dear all, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > David has started some very interesting comments on the current > > article > > > > > for discussion on Tensions in Second Language Learning, which > attach > > > > again > > > > > here. Because some of these comments have been given at a different > > > > thread, > > > > > I am starting here a thread that shall more centrally concern > Jang's > > > > > article. I copy below all what David has so far written about the > > > > article. > > > > > I hope this will ?make it easy for Eun-Young and everyone else to > > > follow > > > > on > > > > > her article. I know ?Eun-Young is challenged time-wise by course > > > > > responsibilities and I hope this will make it easier for her. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Eun-Young, David mentions an article from 2011. If you wanted, you > > > could > > > > > also share the PDF with us for background, although the current > > article > > > > > gives more than enough material for discussion, I think. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Alfredo > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --------------------David Kellogg wrote: ------------------ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > t's very interesting to compare this paper with Professor Jang's > 2011 > > > > > paper co-authored with Robert T. Jimenez: > > > > > > > > > > Eun-Young Jang & Robert T. Jim?nez (2011) A Sociocultural > Perspective > > > on > > > > > Second Language Learner Strategies: Focus on the Impact of Social > > > > Context, > > > > > Theory Into Practice, > > > > > 50:2, 141-148, DOI: 10.1080/00405841.2011.558443 > > > > > > > > > > In some ways, the papers are very similar--the data is identical in > > one > > > > > place (p. 42), and the conclusions are for the most part congruent. > > But > > > > > consider how different the titles are. "Impact" in one place, and > > > > "tension" > > > > > in the other. > > > > > > > > > > There is this note to the 1935 version of Vygotsky's report on > > > > preschools, > > > > > where Zankov, Elkonin and Shif complain about Vygotsky's idea that > > the > > > > > child directs his or her own learning before preschool, the > > environment > > > > > directs it after preschool, and preschool therefore represents a > kind > > > of > > > > > transitional stage. On the one hand, if the child is directing his > or > > > her > > > > > own learning, how can we say that the environment is the ultimate > > > source > > > > of > > > > > learning? And if the environment is the ultimate source of > learning, > > as > > > > > Vygotsky says, how can we say that the child is himself or herself > > part > > > > of > > > > > the environment? > > > > > > > > > > Professor Jang gets around this problem just as Vygotsky > > > does--adroitly. > > > > On > > > > > the one hand, strategies are expanded to include "sets of actions > > > > performed > > > > > to deal with problems (perceived by the researcher, indicated by > the > > > > > learners)". On the other, contexts are expanded to include > > "pedagogical > > > > > assumptions, power relations, and interracial conflict". > > > > > > > > > > I think this solution to the problem is the correct one: when we > > > consider > > > > > the relationship of the child and the environment, we cannot treat > it > > > > like > > > > > an unstoppable force meeting an unmoveable object. But for me that > > > means > > > > > that both the child and the environment have to be considered in > > > > "internal" > > > > > (that is, abstract, linguistic) terms. We can't think of speech as > > > > actions; > > > > > it's more useful to think of actions as speech. We can't think of > the > > > > > social situation of development as a material setting: it's a > > > > relationship > > > > > with others. > > > > > > > > > > Contrariwise, it seems to me that when we consider "racism", it is > > more > > > > > helpful to consider it in "external", that is, concrete, > > nonlinguistic > > > > > terms. In the 2011 paper, Professor Jang and her co-author are > > willing > > > to > > > > > openly criticize the idea that languages are learned in exactly the > > > same > > > > > way whether they are first or second languages. Here, they just > quote > > > the > > > > > teacher's comments on "mommy skills". > > > > > > > > > > It's a very revealing quote. One thing it reveals is why it's > > probably > > > > not > > > > > helpful to refer to "racist" as an "insult" (p. 40) or to imply > that > > > > racism > > > > > and anti-racism is really just a matter of having the right > attitude > > > (as > > > > > the Republicans did in the Sessions debate or as Bernie Sanders did > > > when > > > > he > > > > > referred to Trump supporters who voted for Obama as "not having a > > > racist > > > > > bone in their bodies"). > > > > > > > > > > You can see that subjectively, the teacher is being > anti-racist--all > > > > > students, French, Turkish, Egyptian, Korean, use the same > strategies, > > > > just > > > > > like we all have mommies.She has all the right attitudes, and > > probably > > > > > doesn't have a racist bone in her body. But that doesn't diminish > by > > > one > > > > > jot the terrible damage that this kind of indiscriminate > > discrimination > > > > > does in the classroom. > > > > > > > > > > David Kellogg > > > > > Macquarie University > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------ On a related thread (Subject: Don't do > it), > > > > David > > > > > K. wrote:-------------- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It seems to me that we need to clearly distinguish between "racism" > > and > > > > > "racist sentiment". One of the interesting problems that comes up > in > > > > Eunhee > > > > > Jang's excellent article on second language learning strategies > from > > a > > > > > sociocultural point of view--a wonderful piece of "inside" work, > > > > > introducing racial issues into an area where they have never been > > > > seriously > > > > > discussed--is the use of "racist" (by the Korean kids to describe > > their > > > > > teacher) as an "insult". > > > > > > > > > > I like the article. I think it's important work. But for that very > > > > reason, > > > > > I think that it's important to resist any attempt to reduce > "racist" > > > to a > > > > > personal insult. I think we've seen very very clearly, both in the > > > > Sessions > > > > > confirmation hearing, and in the discussion of Trump's own > > anti-semitic > > > > > behavior--that this kind of reduction of the political to the > > personal > > > is > > > > > precisely the kind of reducing the sociocultural to the cognitive > > that > > > > > Professor Jang is trying to resist. > > > > > > > > > > David Kellogg > > > > > Macquarie University > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------- Idem as above------------------------- > > > > > --------------- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > One of the interesting aspects of Professor Jang's paper is that it > > is > > > > > about adolescents who are in the process of forming concepts, but > who > > > are > > > > > not there yet. And one way in which an adolescent forms a concept > > about > > > > the > > > > > difficult concept of a social contract, of citizenship, of > > nationality > > > is > > > > > pseudoconceptual: it is based on discussing "actual" perceptual > > > > differences > > > > > between races. This might seem irrelevant to current political > > > discourse. > > > > > Unfortunately, it isn't.? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > David Kellogg > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > Jang, Eun-Young. Ph.D. > > > > > > Assistant Professor, Graduate School of Education > > > > > > Seoul National University of Education > > > > > > Seoul, S. Korea > > > > > > > > > -- > > Jang, Eun-Young. Ph.D. > > Assistant Professor, Graduate School of Education > > Seoul National University of Education > > Seoul, S. Korea > From dkellogg60@gmail.com Fri Mar 24 14:26:42 2017 From: dkellogg60@gmail.com (David Kellogg) Date: Sat, 25 Mar 2017 08:26:42 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Jang's SL Article Discussion In-Reply-To: <1490373072177.47916@iped.uio.no> References: <1489427326574.46980@iped.uio.no> <1489431232770.89078@iped.uio.no> <1490373072177.47916@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: (It was a good article, Eun-young, and a great choice, Alfredo; but xmca's attention is elsewhere right now. This has happened so often in our Vygotsky group meetings in Seoul that we have a hyperbolic way of referring to the "rump" discussions that result: "Ekla Chalo Re".) In the "perezhivanie" discussion, Andy worried a little that when people are too polite, differences don't get clarified. I think that's one worry, but it's a rather predictable worry for those of us who just like a good knock-down fight. The other worry is that outsiders look on, can't really figure out what all the fuss is about, and don't want to get into the scrum. So I applaud Alfredo's polite focus on what we have in common; it's not really in my nature (I am more like Andy that way) but it seems right here. Besides, I really DO agree (emphatically--I was going to say violently!) with what Alfredo says about the fallacious formulation "language as tool". Yes, I know that there are passages--especially in the early, "instrumental" Vygotsky--where he does speak of language as a psychological tool. But part of development is turning language back on itself, and when Vygotsky does this at the end of Chapter Two of HDHMF, he emphasizes a "logical" link (both tools and language are mediating activities), a real difference (one is directed to "turning the tables" on the environment, and the other actually helps you "turn the tables" on your damn self), and tells us to work out the concrete differences genetically, historically, practically. But I have three possible points of (polite!) disagreement with what Alfredo says next. Here they are: a) I think that prescriptivism is a very important part of being a teacher. It's not just because you care about what happens to the learner next. It's because you have to be honest with yourself about what you are doing and why. Richard Shweder says there are only three possible positions about human differences: one is that we are all really the same (universalism). Another is that we are all different, but the differences don't matter (relativism). And the third is that there are differences, and they matter. Like it or not (and Shweder doesn't like it) being a developmentologist means you believe in the last of these. As a teacher you may believe in all three, but you know that the first two are about human potential, and the last is very concrete, very real, and has consequences for--for example--life expectancy, liberty and happiness that you cannot ignore. b) I think that the belief that the first language is learned in exactly the same way as the second language is objectively a racist belief. I agree with Alfredo that the intention is not racist: Stephen Krashen, who argued this position more forcefully than anyone in the last half century or so, has an exemplary record as a fighter for bilingual education and for the rights of minority languages. But if first languages are learned the same way as second languages, then the second language learners in your classroom are by definition retards and you as a teacher have the right to utterly ignore the way in which their first language mediates the second language. Like all objectively racist beliefs, this one is theoretically, empirically, and also ethically untenable. Refuting this kind of thing--theoretically, empirically, and ethically--for the benefit of teachers like the one in Eun-young's study--is the kind of thing that intellectuals who are transformatively inclined need to be preoccupied with, because it's the kind of action that only transformatively inclined intellectuals can take. c) I don't think that intentions count for much in the end, and I think that the Christian desire to move them to the forefront of every action and make them the moral touchstone is exactly what leads to the kind of thing we are seeing in the confirmation hearings of Jeff Sessions and now Neil Gorsuch. This move gives racism too much plausible deniability; it's incompatible with the concrete struggle against the effects of racism. The teacher in Eun-young's study probably has good intentions (but, as I said above, a totally inaccurate cognitive understanding of the dynamics of learning a second language and even of her own classroom). The students probably have bad intentions (but, actually, pretty accurate understandings of learning and classroom dynamics): racism is, in lots of teenagers, simply a pseudoconceptual understanding of nationhood and of citizenship, and this pseudoconceptual understanding does exist in Korea, which not only has a long and relatively "pure" racial history but also experienced, in very recent times, not one but two racially marked foreign occupations. The question is not how to act on intentions; the question is how to create a true concept. Negating a pseudoconceptual understanding is, of course, a kind of prescriptivism, but it's an essential one. And that brings me back to that hyperbolic, bitter, inappropriate poem by Rabindranath Tagore, which nevertheless manages to express pretty exactly the way we sometimes feel as teachers. This is Tagore's own translation from his original mother tongue, Bengali: If they answer not to your call, walk alone If they are afraid and cower mutely facing the wall,O thou unlucky one,open your mind and speak out alone.If they turn away, and desert you when crossing the wilderness,O thou unlucky one,trample the thorns under thy tread, and along the blood-lined track travel alone.If they shut doors and do not hold up the light when the night is troubled with storm,O thou unlucky one,with the thunder flame of pain ignite your own heart, and let it burn alone. Here's a musical version in the first language, by Shreya Ghosal (notice the various Indian politicians in the audience, including some communalists from the BJP!): *https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yPqdlR_X1Vk * David Kellogg Macquarie University : On Sat, Mar 25, 2017 at 3:31 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil wrote: > David, Eun-Young, all, > > I am so glad that David and Eun-Young have found a fruitful common ground > in (and outside) the article's discussion. > > When I chose the paper for this Issue 1 discussion, I thought (perhaps > wrongly) that many xmca'ers would be interested in the paper for several > reasons, one being the intermingling of social (ideological) and > subject-related (second language) aspects. I always find it very > interesting the amount of learning that goes on in classrooms (and homes) > that is not what canonical descriptions of teaching/learning would (and > possibly could) have anticipated. I am talking about what Dewey refers to > as 'collateral learning', that is, learning that is not intended nor > prescribed by the curriculum, but which nonetheless is consequence of its > application. > > Dewey (in Education and Experience) describes collateral learning as the > 'formation of enduring attitudes, of likes and dislikes, [which] may be and > often is much more important than the spelling lesson or lesson in > geography or history that is learned' This is so absolutely obvious, and > yet (in a expression Mike recently used in a talk at Vancouver's SFO) is > universally ignored. > > David, you remind us that Vygotsky was trans-disciplinary in the sense > that his field was development, that he was a 'developmentologist' (and you > use the felicitous expression 'pre-able' as an example). I think, and this > is something authors such as Newman and Holzman (in their Vygotsky as > revolutionary scientist) have spelled out, that being a developmentologist > is very much an ideology as well, one that is irreconcilable with the > prescriptive ideology that Eun-Young describes in her article and that we > find ourselves being part of in many occasions everyday. The latter seems > to be based on the believe that social (and living) things exist in cause - > effect relations pretty much in the same way that physical (non-living) > things exist in the universe. Language then can be seen as a tool (and in > fact often is described as a tool even in the sociocultural literature that > cites Vygotsky) that an individual can use to do things. It is then > possible to think of the teaching of second language as the teaching of one > thing, rather than as the formation of whole persons, and not just whole > persons but of societal forms of relating, indeed. But if you embrace > Vygotsky's points on development, specially on the fact that what is > developing is whole persons (with affects, motives) and not just isolated > bits of information, then learning a (second) language is always so much > more than learning to speak words and sentences in a second language. > > I applaud the author's call for challenging 'ESL educators and > institutions ... to construct a learning environment in which diverse ESL > students' voices are ... heard and discussed, not only about their English > learning, but also about their social struggles' (p. 43). But, considering > the prescriptive ideology that the classroom relations in the focus article > realise, I am surprised by the author's use of the term 'illogical > antagonism against other racial/ethnic groups'. Such antagonism seemed very > logical to them, in fact, immediately logical. I am not as kin as the > author is in attributing intentions to the individual participants (see, > e.g., p. 41). Just as the teacher did not intend inequity, I don't think > the Korean learners were being racist (which they effectively were) > 'intentionally.' Logic here has to do with organic being, not with formal > ideas. And that organic being is about developmental relations, not things > (cause) against things (effect). The more I think about it, and the more I > work with it, the more I understand that being an educator is one of the > most complex, misunderstood and undervalued task in today's society. > > I hope the article continues to sparkle some interest in the coming days. > Meanwhile, thanks Eun-Young and David for a sustained and productive > dialogue. > Alfredo > > ________________________________________ > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > on behalf of David Kellogg > Sent: 20 March 2017 21:45 > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Jang's SL Article Discussion > > When I was a teenager, my best friend played piano. Tommy didn't just play: > he composed--I'd get cassette letters from him where he would forget to > talk, and just improvise a whole side of beautiful music. He also had > perfect pitch--I'd play a random note on the bass and he would start > talking about "my" B flat; somebody behind us in the traffic would honk, > and he'd call out "C!". > > He was color blind. He could tell the traffic lights by their position, of > course. But he couldn't tell a blue from a green, a yellow from an orange, > or even a yellow from a green. They were just unnameable colors. He'd say > "green" and you'd correct him with "blue" and he'd say "whatever". I'd ask > him--Can't you SEE the difference? And he'd smile and ask me what note my > word "see" was. If I said "C", I'd get a lecture on the major scales. > > You might think that these are purely physiological differences without > social dimensions, and I'm sure, in Tommy's case anyway, something genetic > was going on. But if you think a minute, you'll see that a lot of his > "blindness" and my "deafness" is about naming things, not perceiving them. > You will also see that in both cases there is a certain "social" > overcompensation going on: both of us used our strong points to overcome > our weak ones, and this led to "circuitous and indirect" ways of social > functioning: Tommy went on to the Berklee School of Music, and I wrote > lyrics for his songs and eventually became a painter. > > Vygotsky's transdisciplinary, but perhaps involuntarily so. He worked in > defectology on the one hand and in pedology on the other. The common thread > was--development, non-canonical and more typical. So he was really a > developmentologist. That is a color, or a note, that doesn't actually exist > for academics today, so in our color-blind, tone-deaf way we just call him > a psychologist. > > I think you're right that racism has an additional social dimension, and I > will call this politico-social, since Tommy's inability to name is > certainly social, and so is his circumlocution. This politico-social > dimension of racism is really just an ideological correlate of the fact > that social progress is not planned: we have, in a rather willy-nilly way, > evolved tools and signs to fit one dominant type of culture and one > dominant type of psychophysiology rather than another. > > Sometimes this politico-social dimension also attaches itself to > disabilities like (total) blindness and deafness. But it doesn't have to. > >From a defectological perspective, these people are not "disabled", but > only "pre-abled"--that is, we have invented circuitous and indirect" ways > of circumventing these "defects" (e.g. Braille, ASL) but we haven't yet > socially evolved them as mainstream abilities. > > In Seattle there was a loggers'union whose members were from many different > language backgrounds (Swedish, Chinook, Russian, and a few English speakers > like my grandfather, who was a book keeper). People used American Sign > Language in the sawmill; if you weren't deaf when you started, you would be > within a year, because the conditions in the sawmills were so awful. But > they strongly resisted any suggestion that this made them "disabled". At > one point, the union wanted to condemn Helen Keller, because she was > consorting with Alexander Graham Bell, the inventor of the telephone, who > wanted to force deaf children to lip-read instead of learning ASL. Some > people excused her: after all, she's disabled, because she's blind. > > Most articles (especially most articles in TESOL Q!) use "mediation" as a > subcategory of teaching-learning (the "good" kind, the kind of > teaching-learning that is sensitive to learner needs on the one hand and > context on the other). One of the things I liked about your article is that > you recognized that "mediation" is not a subcategory but an enormous > supercategory, including "being a student" in a set of social roles. What > we think of as teaching-learning is only a very small subcategory: a > planned, deliberate, and as a result highly atypical form of mediation. To > me, though, this makes "mediation" a very baggy pair of trousers--not a > good fit for most of what goes on in classrooms! > > David Kellogg > Macquarie University > > > > one shadow is different from another. . I once It just wasn't there. . > > On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 6:21 PM, Eun Young Jang > wrote: > > > Dear David > > > > > > > > Thank you for the interesting and helpful comments on my paper! I really > > enjoyed your comments and was also pleased to receive your questions > about > > Juan in my earlier paper (TESOL Quarterly). I attach my paper here so > that > > other colleagues can read it if they want. > > > > > > > > Yes, I do think that what happened in the ESL classroom can be understood > > from the "pedological" end as well, as you said. The point that I wanted > > to make in my study was that we should understand 'why a learner acts in > > certain way' from multiple perspectives. It is just like a piece of a > > multilayered cake. > > > > By the way, I think I need to learn more about what you meant by > > 'defectological' end. When you said 'defect', did you mean some problems > > that people might have in their development? If so, I would like to share > > my opinion. Everyone might have some problems that they must handle (and > > problems that can be handled by some great pedagogical methods). > Sometimes > > the problems are minor (curable) and sometimes they are not (such as > > blindness). However, not all of them are on the same level or same > > dimension. In other words, I think we cannot equate some life's > challenges > > (such as illness) and racial discrimination. They are on different > levels. > > The latter is intrinsically social, I think. Further, in multicultural > > education, 'deficit' has very negative connotation because it alludes > that > > there are some 'perfect' things in opposition. > > > > > > > > Here, I also pasted my response to your earlier email (off the xmca list) > > below to share it with otehrs. > > > > > > > > Thank you very much for your ?off-list? email and interests in my > articles. > > Thanks to you, I was happy to remind of Juan, the lovely little boy who I > > was with for more than a year. > > > > > > > > Yes, we did have an interview with Juan. The other author, Chris Iddings? > > first language was Spanish so she was able to communicate with Juan with > no > > problem. But I remember that whether Juan understood the situation or not > > was decided from our observations of his actions. In particular, the > focus > > of our observations was on the ways the joint attentional frames were > > formed because we thought the frames played a critical role as a > > mediational means in facilitating Juan?s learning. Oh, I also recall that > > when we say Juan?s learning, it was not always learning of English but > also > > learning of the classroom discourses. About the quiet mouse events, Juan > > wanted to be picked eagerly by pointing his finger to his own chest and > > contacting eyes with the student with the mouse. About the testing, I > > remember that Juan did understand the procedure of the testing and acted > > like a student but in fact, it appeared that he was not able to get the > > right answers in terms of English. Well, this should not be a problem > > because understanding the classroom discourses would serve a scaffolding > > for him to learn contents eventually. Hope my brief answer has satisfied > > your curiosity about my study a bit. > > > > > > > > David, I think we have a lot in common. Let?s keep in touch. I?d love to > > drop by the Dasomcha meeting some day! By the way, I have been in SIG for > > Critical Pedagogy for almost 6years. If you have a plan to visit Korea > > again, you are invited to our Critical Pedagogy meeting as well! > > > > > > > > Best, > > > > EY. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 6:28 AM, David Kellogg > > wrote: > > > > > Dear Professor Jang: > > > > > > Relax, you are among friends and co-thinkers. Well, a lot of friends, > > some > > > of whom are probably very close co-thinkers. It's a very big list, but > I > > > doubt if anybody who read your article would accuse you of teacher > > bashing. > > > I also don't think anybody who read it would think that you used your > > > Korean-ness in any other way than a good researcher uses any resource > > that > > > affords empathy with the researched. And I DO think that you provided > "a" > > > way of bridging a socioculural and a cognitivist approach to the second > > > language classroom. Perhaps even two ways. > > > > > > It seems to me that one way is from the "contextualist" end; that is, > to > > > redefine a context in abstract terms, including things like attitudes, > > > motivations, and teaching ideologies right in the context. I think this > > is > > > actually much more difficult than it looks: some people will consider > > this > > > behavioristic, because it assumes that attitudes, motivations and > > > ideologies can be treated as external to mind. I think it actually only > > > considers them as external to text. Other people will consider it > > upwardly > > > reductionistic, because it assumes that attitudes, motivations and > > > ideologies can be reduced to society and to culture and to context of > > > situation. I think that society and culture and context of situation > must > > > always be considered as a complex whole, including cognition, but not > > > subsuming it. > > > > > > It also seems to me that another is from the "organicist" end; that is, > > to > > > define attitudes, motivations, and ideologies as something in some way > > > independent of cognition (the "distributed cognition" people are good > at > > > this). Again, this isn't so easy, particularly in an American context. > > > America is now going through a kind of crisis, because racism has > > > previously been defined in only one of two ways. Either racism is part > of > > > cognition--in which case it really only exists in people who subscribe, > > > paradoxically, to "objective" scientific racism, to the belief that > > > non-whites are actually inferior. Or racism is part of culture--in > which > > > case it really only exists in the debilitating effects it has on the > > > oppressed, and it doesn't really matter what it is that racists believe > > > (or, for that matter, what non-racists believe: Obama was just as > guilty > > of > > > black unemployment as Bush). > > > > > > What I suggest is, rather perversely, a third way. It's from the > > > "pedological, defectological" end. That is, attitudes, motivations and > > the > > > teaching ideologies which derive from them need to be understood not > only > > > as part of the context but also as part of pedology, a whole science of > > the > > > child. Unfortunately, Vygotsky's writings on this are not available in > > > English, but they ARE available in good Korean: > > > > > > http://www.aladin.co.kr/shop/common/wseriesitem.aspx?SRID=25565 > > > > > > Similarly, the ravages of racism (including the "damunhwa kyoyuk" > > developed > > > in Korea under Yi Myeongbak and Park Geunhye, which was concerned with > > > providing "equal opportunity" to the majority as well as to the > minority) > > > need to be considered not simply as stigma on the dominant race or as > > > stigmata of the oppressed but more defectologically. "Defect" wasn't an > > > insult in the USSR: Vygotsky actually considers "yeongje kyoyuk" (that > > is, > > > "genius education"), education of the blind, education of the deaf, > > > so-called "learning disabilities" not as "disabilities" but as > > > defects--that is, normal disadvantages to be overcome in the same way > as > > > any other obstacle in learning, through "circuitous and indirect", that > > is, > > > mediated, means of learning. We have evolved our means of education, as > > > Vygotsky says, to cater to the needs of the psychophysiological > dominant > > > group, but the mark of higher forms of social progress is how it can > > > develop the niches within this and the needs of those who are not > > > psychophysiologically dominant. > > > > > > (Do you know Professor Kim Jinseok? I worked at SNUE for over ten years > > > myself, and our Vygotsky group still meets there every Saturday to > > > translate the work of Vygotsky into Korean. If you are on campus on a > > > Saturday, we are usually in room 315, over "Dasomchae" near the front > > gate, > > > from noon until about four!) > > > > > > David Kellogg > > > Macquarie University > > > > > > On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 2:14 PM, Eun Young Jang < > eunyoung1112@gmail.com> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > ? > > > > > > > > Hi everyone, thank you very much for reading my article. This is > such a > > > > great opportunity for me to introduce my work and receive comments > from > > > > wonderful colleagues. > > > > > > > > First, let me introduce myself briefly. I earned my doctorate in > > > Language, > > > > Literacy, and Culture in the Department of Teaching and Learning at > > > > Vanderbilt University. I am currently working as an assistant > professor > > > in > > > > Multicultural Education at Seoul National University of Education > > located > > > > in Seoul, South Korea. My research interests are in the impact of the > > > > social context on second language teaching and learning. Another > paper > > > > published recently deals with sustainable globalization of higher > > > education > > > > focusing on cultures and languages in a foreign professor?s classroom > > in > > > S. > > > > Korea. My current research project is about North Korean refugee > > students > > > > learning English in South Korea. > > > > > > > > > > > > My article for xmca discussion was initiated from my observation that > > ESL > > > > students were not actually focusing on learning English in the ESL > > > > classroom but instead, on ?acting? learning with an attempt to > achieve > > > > certain social position (as an individual or a group). In > particular, I > > > > noted that they were quite skillful in using ?seemingly? academic > > > > strategies to conceal what they were actually doing. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The ESL students were very sensitive to things happening to them in > > terms > > > > of marginalization and discrimination but did not reveal to others > > > > explicitly what they really thought. Instead, they took advantage of > > the > > > > school discourse that was legitimized in the context, that was, > acting > > > like > > > > motivated and strategic learners by participating in class activities > > > > actively and strategically. In spite of regular observations of ESL > > > classes > > > > back then, I could not figure out what was happening in the classroom > > for > > > > the first couple of months. Later on, the social dynamics among > > students > > > > and between students and the teacher surfaced to me and also they > began > > > to > > > > open their minds and told me how they felt isolated and > discriminated. > > > > Then, I was able to see the meanings of their actions. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In effect, the ESL teacher tried hard to be fair and in a sense, the > > > French > > > > student was isolated and discriminated by the Korean students in the > > ESL > > > > classroom. Nevertheless, Korean students victimized themselves. I > > thought > > > > that it was still important and valuable to acknowledge how the > Korean > > > > students felt simply because the feelings were there and they made > some > > > > consequences (such as silencing the French student). I wanted to > reveal > > > > that how the students felt and why they felt that way and how they > > > reacted > > > > to their feelings. Whether the discrimination was real or not was not > > > > important. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > A reviewer from other journal has criticized my article badly for > > teacher > > > > bashing. But definitely I did not mean it. Also, some readers of my > > > article > > > > said that because I am Korean, I was on the Korean students? side. > The > > > fact > > > > was, the ESL teacher and I were good friends and this even made the > > > Korean > > > > students suspicious of my position (like a spy from the ?white? > teacher > > > > side). Anyway, honestly, the comments from other scholars made me > feel > > > > constrained conducting research about the same ethnic group. Now, I?d > > > like > > > > to know about your opinion about this issue. > > > > > > > > Again, the fact that the participants were Korean was not the main > > focus > > > of > > > > my study. I wanted to show how they used strategies, which were > > typically > > > > categorized as individual and cognitive traits, for social purposes. > > So, > > > > the bigger agenda of my study was to explore ?a? way to bridge the > > > > dichotomy between individual and sociocultural camps. > > > > > > > > Thanks! > > > > > > > > EY. > > > > > > > > On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 8:12 AM, David Kellogg > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Alfredo: > > > > > > > > > > Down the hall one of the Chinese translators is working on > > translations > > > > of > > > > > the Chinese "State of the Union" address into English. The Chinese > > goes > > > > > something like this: > > > > > > > > > > ????????? > > > > > xi?och? p?nk?n q?d? j?nzh?n. > > > > > > > > > > Literally: > > > > > > > > > > "Eradicate Poverty Achieve Progress", i.e. "(The government) (made) > > > some > > > > > progress in the eradication of poverty." > > > > > > > > > > In Chinese we don't have to specify the agent, and we don't need to > > use > > > > the > > > > > effective verb "made"; it's a happening and not a doing. This used > to > > > be > > > > > because the agent went without saying--it's encoded in the grammar. > > > > Partly > > > > > thanks to a poetic tradition going back more than a thousand years, > > > > Chinese > > > > > lends itself to four-syllable slogan-like objects like "Eradicate > > > > Poverty" > > > > > and "Achieve Progress", and putting them together sounds natural. > We > > > > don't > > > > > usually use a subject unless we want to stress it; it's much more > > > common > > > > to > > > > > just have a nominal topic and then a comment, like in this example. > > > > Because > > > > > the government has a well established role in mobilizing the masses > > to > > > > > carry out actions like famine relief and flood prevention and so > on, > > > the > > > > > agent and the "doing" don't need to be specified: everybody knows > it > > > was > > > > > the government, even if that weren't clear in the context of a > > > government > > > > > report. So we simply say it's a happening. > > > > > > > > > > Now that's changing. In fact, the government does relatively little > > to > > > > > alleviate poverty. There are regional enterprises, and there are > > > private > > > > > businesses and so on. After the Sichuan earthquake, my > brother-in-law > > > > > loaded up his SUV with bottled water and drove down to the > earthquake > > > > area > > > > > to distribute it, and he says there was a huge traffic jam of other > > > SUVs > > > > by > > > > > entrepreneurs like him who had exactly the same idea. And for > > precisely > > > > > this reason, we find that in the government report there is more > and > > > more > > > > > explicit stipulation of the government's agency and of the > effective > > > > means. > > > > > Instead of just happening, the government does things. There is a > > > similar > > > > > link between ideology and ideation in English if you think about > it. > > > When > > > > > something GOOD happens, it's because somebody DID it, but when > > > something > > > > > bad happens, "Stuff happens". > > > > > > > > > > Here's the point. We usually use "ideology" to mean something like > > > > > conscious and deliberate ideation, usually of an intentionally > > > deceitful > > > > or > > > > > misleading variety. I don't really accept that. It seems to me that > > > > > "ideology" really is equivalent to ideation, that is, to the > > > > communicative, > > > > > representational function of speech, except that it is somewhat > > larger, > > > > > both because the interpersonal and the textual functions also > encode > > > > ideas > > > > > and are also therefore ideological and because a lot of ideology is > > > > simply > > > > > NOT specifying things. For example, when you say "it's raining", > you > > > are > > > > > conveying the idea that rain is an event that just happens, and is > > not > > > > > caused by any nameable entity. You don't normally say "it's > birding" > > or > > > > > even "it's shining". > > > > > > > > > > Similarly, we usually use "prescriptivism" to mean something like > > > > conscious > > > > > and deliberate transformativism, usually of an authoritarian and > > > > > dictatorial, and deceptive, sort. I don't really accept that > either. > > On > > > > the > > > > > contrary, what is really deceptive is to pretend that the process > of > > > > > education is meaningful without attending to its ultimate product. > To > > > me, > > > > > "Eradicate Poverty Achieve Progress" is a perfect balance of > process > > > and > > > > > product, and agency and effective means are only meaningful with > > > respect > > > > to > > > > > both. > > > > > > > > > > David Kellogg > > > > > Macquarie University > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 5:53 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil < > > > a.j.gil@iped.uio.no > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Hi again, > > > > > > > > > > > > one thing that I find interesting in Jang's article, and which > may > > > > > connect > > > > > > to comments in the other thread (by David, Haydi...) concerning > > 'not > > > > > > reducing the political to the personal', is the issue of > > *ideology.* > > > > In > > > > > > particular, Jang discusses and empirically examines what she > coins > > > as a > > > > > > *Prescriptive* language ideology. As she describes in her paper, > > and > > > as > > > > > any > > > > > > educator will immediately recognise, this ideology exists as the > > > > > > classroom's orientations to a correct/incorrect form. In her > > article, > > > > she > > > > > > exhibits this through a number of sequences in which > > teacher-student > > > > and > > > > > > student-student relations involve *evaluations* with regard to > > > > > proficiently > > > > > > using two rules: making connections between sentences and staying > > on > > > > the > > > > > > topic. > > > > > > > > > > > > As Jang shows, the prescriptive approach, which sets the final > > > linguist > > > > > > form as the criterion for positively or negatively evaluating any > > > > > response > > > > > > by any student, is such that more proficient readers/speakers > will > > > have > > > > > > easier access to positive evaluation. The ideology here then > exists > > > as > > > > a > > > > > > regime of power and differential access, of inequality. By > treating > > > all > > > > > > equally, we get to inequality. > > > > > > > > > > > > I was thinking that it seems that the prescriptive approach does > > > focus > > > > on > > > > > > the final product, whereas the sociocultural approach that Jang > > > pursues > > > > > and > > > > > > Vygotsky first set forth has it that we should not focus on the > > final > > > > > > product but on its genesis, on the way the verbal form exists > first > > > as > > > > a > > > > > > social relation between people. Thus, in Episodes 1 and 2 in the > > > > article, > > > > > > if the participants had oriented towards a possible process of > > > > > development, > > > > > > Ji-Woo's responses would have been heard and responded to as > > moments > > > > in a > > > > > > developmental trajectory. There would have been a very different > > > social > > > > > > situation in which work would have been directed to make visible > > and > > > > > > available the dynamics of Ji-Woo's learning process. But the > > > > prescriptive > > > > > > orientation evaluates and makes salient only deficiency and > > > > achievement. > > > > > On > > > > > > the other hand, and consistent with those (e.g., Stetsenko, > > Holzman) > > > > who > > > > > > have referred to Vygotsky's legacy as *revolutionary,* an > > orientation > > > > > > consistent with Vygotsky's teachings would bring with it not > only a > > > > > > different situation, but also an *emancipatory* one. Instead of > > > > > inequality > > > > > > brought about by treating all equally, we would have an > > equalitarian > > > > > > approach whose power resides in acknowledging and caring for > > history > > > > and > > > > > > diversity. > > > > > > > > > > > > On a side thought, and connected to David's (Halliday's) > > distinction > > > > > > between ideational and interpersonal functions of language, I was > > > > > wondering > > > > > > what is the relation/difference between ideational and > ideological. > > > In > > > > > the > > > > > > article, it seems clear that the language related competence on > > > putting > > > > > > names to things and thereby building categories seems a condition > > for > > > > the > > > > > > racial/ethnic tension to exist. But of course, the tension is a > > > > > relational, > > > > > > not just a lexical one. Thoughts? > > > > > > > > > > > > Alfredo > > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________________ > > > > > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > edu > > > > > > > > > > > on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil > > > > > > Sent: 13 March 2017 18:48 > > > > > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Jang's SL Article Discussion > > > > > > > > > > > > ?Dear all, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > David has started some very interesting comments on the current > > > article > > > > > > for discussion on Tensions in Second Language Learning, which > > attach > > > > > again > > > > > > here. Because some of these comments have been given at a > different > > > > > thread, > > > > > > I am starting here a thread that shall more centrally concern > > Jang's > > > > > > article. I copy below all what David has so far written about the > > > > > article. > > > > > > I hope this will ?make it easy for Eun-Young and everyone else to > > > > follow > > > > > on > > > > > > her article. I know ?Eun-Young is challenged time-wise by course > > > > > > responsibilities and I hope this will make it easier for her. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Eun-Young, David mentions an article from 2011. If you wanted, > you > > > > could > > > > > > also share the PDF with us for background, although the current > > > article > > > > > > gives more than enough material for discussion, I think. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Alfredo > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --------------------David Kellogg wrote: ------------------ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > t's very interesting to compare this paper with Professor Jang's > > 2011 > > > > > > paper co-authored with Robert T. Jimenez: > > > > > > > > > > > > Eun-Young Jang & Robert T. Jim?nez (2011) A Sociocultural > > Perspective > > > > on > > > > > > Second Language Learner Strategies: Focus on the Impact of Social > > > > > Context, > > > > > > Theory Into Practice, > > > > > > 50:2, 141-148, DOI: 10.1080/00405841.2011.558443 > > > > > > > > > > > > In some ways, the papers are very similar--the data is identical > in > > > one > > > > > > place (p. 42), and the conclusions are for the most part > congruent. > > > But > > > > > > consider how different the titles are. "Impact" in one place, and > > > > > "tension" > > > > > > in the other. > > > > > > > > > > > > There is this note to the 1935 version of Vygotsky's report on > > > > > preschools, > > > > > > where Zankov, Elkonin and Shif complain about Vygotsky's idea > that > > > the > > > > > > child directs his or her own learning before preschool, the > > > environment > > > > > > directs it after preschool, and preschool therefore represents a > > kind > > > > of > > > > > > transitional stage. On the one hand, if the child is directing > his > > or > > > > her > > > > > > own learning, how can we say that the environment is the ultimate > > > > source > > > > > of > > > > > > learning? And if the environment is the ultimate source of > > learning, > > > as > > > > > > Vygotsky says, how can we say that the child is himself or > herself > > > part > > > > > of > > > > > > the environment? > > > > > > > > > > > > Professor Jang gets around this problem just as Vygotsky > > > > does--adroitly. > > > > > On > > > > > > the one hand, strategies are expanded to include "sets of actions > > > > > performed > > > > > > to deal with problems (perceived by the researcher, indicated by > > the > > > > > > learners)". On the other, contexts are expanded to include > > > "pedagogical > > > > > > assumptions, power relations, and interracial conflict". > > > > > > > > > > > > I think this solution to the problem is the correct one: when we > > > > consider > > > > > > the relationship of the child and the environment, we cannot > treat > > it > > > > > like > > > > > > an unstoppable force meeting an unmoveable object. But for me > that > > > > means > > > > > > that both the child and the environment have to be considered in > > > > > "internal" > > > > > > (that is, abstract, linguistic) terms. We can't think of speech > as > > > > > actions; > > > > > > it's more useful to think of actions as speech. We can't think of > > the > > > > > > social situation of development as a material setting: it's a > > > > > relationship > > > > > > with others. > > > > > > > > > > > > Contrariwise, it seems to me that when we consider "racism", it > is > > > more > > > > > > helpful to consider it in "external", that is, concrete, > > > nonlinguistic > > > > > > terms. In the 2011 paper, Professor Jang and her co-author are > > > willing > > > > to > > > > > > openly criticize the idea that languages are learned in exactly > the > > > > same > > > > > > way whether they are first or second languages. Here, they just > > quote > > > > the > > > > > > teacher's comments on "mommy skills". > > > > > > > > > > > > It's a very revealing quote. One thing it reveals is why it's > > > probably > > > > > not > > > > > > helpful to refer to "racist" as an "insult" (p. 40) or to imply > > that > > > > > racism > > > > > > and anti-racism is really just a matter of having the right > > attitude > > > > (as > > > > > > the Republicans did in the Sessions debate or as Bernie Sanders > did > > > > when > > > > > he > > > > > > referred to Trump supporters who voted for Obama as "not having a > > > > racist > > > > > > bone in their bodies"). > > > > > > > > > > > > You can see that subjectively, the teacher is being > > anti-racist--all > > > > > > students, French, Turkish, Egyptian, Korean, use the same > > strategies, > > > > > just > > > > > > like we all have mommies.She has all the right attitudes, and > > > probably > > > > > > doesn't have a racist bone in her body. But that doesn't diminish > > by > > > > one > > > > > > jot the terrible damage that this kind of indiscriminate > > > discrimination > > > > > > does in the classroom. > > > > > > > > > > > > David Kellogg > > > > > > Macquarie University > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------ On a related thread (Subject: Don't do > > it), > > > > > David > > > > > > K. wrote:-------------- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It seems to me that we need to clearly distinguish between > "racism" > > > and > > > > > > "racist sentiment". One of the interesting problems that comes up > > in > > > > > Eunhee > > > > > > Jang's excellent article on second language learning strategies > > from > > > a > > > > > > sociocultural point of view--a wonderful piece of "inside" work, > > > > > > introducing racial issues into an area where they have never been > > > > > seriously > > > > > > discussed--is the use of "racist" (by the Korean kids to describe > > > their > > > > > > teacher) as an "insult". > > > > > > > > > > > > I like the article. I think it's important work. But for that > very > > > > > reason, > > > > > > I think that it's important to resist any attempt to reduce > > "racist" > > > > to a > > > > > > personal insult. I think we've seen very very clearly, both in > the > > > > > Sessions > > > > > > confirmation hearing, and in the discussion of Trump's own > > > anti-semitic > > > > > > behavior--that this kind of reduction of the political to the > > > personal > > > > is > > > > > > precisely the kind of reducing the sociocultural to the cognitive > > > that > > > > > > Professor Jang is trying to resist. > > > > > > > > > > > > David Kellogg > > > > > > Macquarie University > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------- Idem as above------------------------- > > > > > > --------------- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > One of the interesting aspects of Professor Jang's paper is that > it > > > is > > > > > > about adolescents who are in the process of forming concepts, but > > who > > > > are > > > > > > not there yet. And one way in which an adolescent forms a concept > > > about > > > > > the > > > > > > difficult concept of a social contract, of citizenship, of > > > nationality > > > > is > > > > > > pseudoconceptual: it is based on discussing "actual" perceptual > > > > > differences > > > > > > between races. This might seem irrelevant to current political > > > > discourse. > > > > > > Unfortunately, it isn't.? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > David Kellogg > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > Jang, Eun-Young. Ph.D. > > > > > > > > Assistant Professor, Graduate School of Education > > > > > > > > Seoul National University of Education > > > > > > > > Seoul, S. Korea > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Jang, Eun-Young. Ph.D. > > > > Assistant Professor, Graduate School of Education > > > > Seoul National University of Education > > > > Seoul, S. Korea > > > > From a.j.gil@iped.uio.no Fri Mar 24 15:42:00 2017 From: a.j.gil@iped.uio.no (Alfredo Jornet Gil) Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2017 22:42:00 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Jang's SL Article Discussion In-Reply-To: References: <1489427326574.46980@iped.uio.no> <1489431232770.89078@iped.uio.no> <1490373072177.47916@iped.uio.no>, Message-ID: <1490395321846.61546@iped.uio.no> David, thanks! I don't think that having a goal in education, or if you will use Vygotsky's words, being aware that there is an 'ideal form' on the one hand, and prescriptivism (at least in the way is treated in Eun-Young's article) on the other hand, are the same. A ________________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of David Kellogg Sent: 24 March 2017 22:26 To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Jang's SL Article Discussion (It was a good article, Eun-young, and a great choice, Alfredo; but xmca's attention is elsewhere right now. This has happened so often in our Vygotsky group meetings in Seoul that we have a hyperbolic way of referring to the "rump" discussions that result: "Ekla Chalo Re".) In the "perezhivanie" discussion, Andy worried a little that when people are too polite, differences don't get clarified. I think that's one worry, but it's a rather predictable worry for those of us who just like a good knock-down fight. The other worry is that outsiders look on, can't really figure out what all the fuss is about, and don't want to get into the scrum. So I applaud Alfredo's polite focus on what we have in common; it's not really in my nature (I am more like Andy that way) but it seems right here. Besides, I really DO agree (emphatically--I was going to say violently!) with what Alfredo says about the fallacious formulation "language as tool". Yes, I know that there are passages--especially in the early, "instrumental" Vygotsky--where he does speak of language as a psychological tool. But part of development is turning language back on itself, and when Vygotsky does this at the end of Chapter Two of HDHMF, he emphasizes a "logical" link (both tools and language are mediating activities), a real difference (one is directed to "turning the tables" on the environment, and the other actually helps you "turn the tables" on your damn self), and tells us to work out the concrete differences genetically, historically, practically. But I have three possible points of (polite!) disagreement with what Alfredo says next. Here they are: a) I think that prescriptivism is a very important part of being a teacher. It's not just because you care about what happens to the learner next. It's because you have to be honest with yourself about what you are doing and why. Richard Shweder says there are only three possible positions about human differences: one is that we are all really the same (universalism). Another is that we are all different, but the differences don't matter (relativism). And the third is that there are differences, and they matter. Like it or not (and Shweder doesn't like it) being a developmentologist means you believe in the last of these. As a teacher you may believe in all three, but you know that the first two are about human potential, and the last is very concrete, very real, and has consequences for--for example--life expectancy, liberty and happiness that you cannot ignore. b) I think that the belief that the first language is learned in exactly the same way as the second language is objectively a racist belief. I agree with Alfredo that the intention is not racist: Stephen Krashen, who argued this position more forcefully than anyone in the last half century or so, has an exemplary record as a fighter for bilingual education and for the rights of minority languages. But if first languages are learned the same way as second languages, then the second language learners in your classroom are by definition retards and you as a teacher have the right to utterly ignore the way in which their first language mediates the second language. Like all objectively racist beliefs, this one is theoretically, empirically, and also ethically untenable. Refuting this kind of thing--theoretically, empirically, and ethically--for the benefit of teachers like the one in Eun-young's study--is the kind of thing that intellectuals who are transformatively inclined need to be preoccupied with, because it's the kind of action that only transformatively inclined intellectuals can take. c) I don't think that intentions count for much in the end, and I think that the Christian desire to move them to the forefront of every action and make them the moral touchstone is exactly what leads to the kind of thing we are seeing in the confirmation hearings of Jeff Sessions and now Neil Gorsuch. This move gives racism too much plausible deniability; it's incompatible with the concrete struggle against the effects of racism. The teacher in Eun-young's study probably has good intentions (but, as I said above, a totally inaccurate cognitive understanding of the dynamics of learning a second language and even of her own classroom). The students probably have bad intentions (but, actually, pretty accurate understandings of learning and classroom dynamics): racism is, in lots of teenagers, simply a pseudoconceptual understanding of nationhood and of citizenship, and this pseudoconceptual understanding does exist in Korea, which not only has a long and relatively "pure" racial history but also experienced, in very recent times, not one but two racially marked foreign occupations. The question is not how to act on intentions; the question is how to create a true concept. Negating a pseudoconceptual understanding is, of course, a kind of prescriptivism, but it's an essential one. And that brings me back to that hyperbolic, bitter, inappropriate poem by Rabindranath Tagore, which nevertheless manages to express pretty exactly the way we sometimes feel as teachers. This is Tagore's own translation from his original mother tongue, Bengali: If they answer not to your call, walk alone If they are afraid and cower mutely facing the wall,O thou unlucky one,open your mind and speak out alone.If they turn away, and desert you when crossing the wilderness,O thou unlucky one,trample the thorns under thy tread, and along the blood-lined track travel alone.If they shut doors and do not hold up the light when the night is troubled with storm,O thou unlucky one,with the thunder flame of pain ignite your own heart, and let it burn alone. Here's a musical version in the first language, by Shreya Ghosal (notice the various Indian politicians in the audience, including some communalists from the BJP!): *https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yPqdlR_X1Vk * David Kellogg Macquarie University : On Sat, Mar 25, 2017 at 3:31 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil wrote: > David, Eun-Young, all, > > I am so glad that David and Eun-Young have found a fruitful common ground > in (and outside) the article's discussion. > > When I chose the paper for this Issue 1 discussion, I thought (perhaps > wrongly) that many xmca'ers would be interested in the paper for several > reasons, one being the intermingling of social (ideological) and > subject-related (second language) aspects. I always find it very > interesting the amount of learning that goes on in classrooms (and homes) > that is not what canonical descriptions of teaching/learning would (and > possibly could) have anticipated. I am talking about what Dewey refers to > as 'collateral learning', that is, learning that is not intended nor > prescribed by the curriculum, but which nonetheless is consequence of its > application. > > Dewey (in Education and Experience) describes collateral learning as the > 'formation of enduring attitudes, of likes and dislikes, [which] may be and > often is much more important than the spelling lesson or lesson in > geography or history that is learned' This is so absolutely obvious, and > yet (in a expression Mike recently used in a talk at Vancouver's SFO) is > universally ignored. > > David, you remind us that Vygotsky was trans-disciplinary in the sense > that his field was development, that he was a 'developmentologist' (and you > use the felicitous expression 'pre-able' as an example). I think, and this > is something authors such as Newman and Holzman (in their Vygotsky as > revolutionary scientist) have spelled out, that being a developmentologist > is very much an ideology as well, one that is irreconcilable with the > prescriptive ideology that Eun-Young describes in her article and that we > find ourselves being part of in many occasions everyday. The latter seems > to be based on the believe that social (and living) things exist in cause - > effect relations pretty much in the same way that physical (non-living) > things exist in the universe. Language then can be seen as a tool (and in > fact often is described as a tool even in the sociocultural literature that > cites Vygotsky) that an individual can use to do things. It is then > possible to think of the teaching of second language as the teaching of one > thing, rather than as the formation of whole persons, and not just whole > persons but of societal forms of relating, indeed. But if you embrace > Vygotsky's points on development, specially on the fact that what is > developing is whole persons (with affects, motives) and not just isolated > bits of information, then learning a (second) language is always so much > more than learning to speak words and sentences in a second language. > > I applaud the author's call for challenging 'ESL educators and > institutions ... to construct a learning environment in which diverse ESL > students' voices are ... heard and discussed, not only about their English > learning, but also about their social struggles' (p. 43). But, considering > the prescriptive ideology that the classroom relations in the focus article > realise, I am surprised by the author's use of the term 'illogical > antagonism against other racial/ethnic groups'. Such antagonism seemed very > logical to them, in fact, immediately logical. I am not as kin as the > author is in attributing intentions to the individual participants (see, > e.g., p. 41). Just as the teacher did not intend inequity, I don't think > the Korean learners were being racist (which they effectively were) > 'intentionally.' Logic here has to do with organic being, not with formal > ideas. And that organic being is about developmental relations, not things > (cause) against things (effect). The more I think about it, and the more I > work with it, the more I understand that being an educator is one of the > most complex, misunderstood and undervalued task in today's society. > > I hope the article continues to sparkle some interest in the coming days. > Meanwhile, thanks Eun-Young and David for a sustained and productive > dialogue. > Alfredo > > ________________________________________ > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > on behalf of David Kellogg > Sent: 20 March 2017 21:45 > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Jang's SL Article Discussion > > When I was a teenager, my best friend played piano. Tommy didn't just play: > he composed--I'd get cassette letters from him where he would forget to > talk, and just improvise a whole side of beautiful music. He also had > perfect pitch--I'd play a random note on the bass and he would start > talking about "my" B flat; somebody behind us in the traffic would honk, > and he'd call out "C!". > > He was color blind. He could tell the traffic lights by their position, of > course. But he couldn't tell a blue from a green, a yellow from an orange, > or even a yellow from a green. They were just unnameable colors. He'd say > "green" and you'd correct him with "blue" and he'd say "whatever". I'd ask > him--Can't you SEE the difference? And he'd smile and ask me what note my > word "see" was. If I said "C", I'd get a lecture on the major scales. > > You might think that these are purely physiological differences without > social dimensions, and I'm sure, in Tommy's case anyway, something genetic > was going on. But if you think a minute, you'll see that a lot of his > "blindness" and my "deafness" is about naming things, not perceiving them. > You will also see that in both cases there is a certain "social" > overcompensation going on: both of us used our strong points to overcome > our weak ones, and this led to "circuitous and indirect" ways of social > functioning: Tommy went on to the Berklee School of Music, and I wrote > lyrics for his songs and eventually became a painter. > > Vygotsky's transdisciplinary, but perhaps involuntarily so. He worked in > defectology on the one hand and in pedology on the other. The common thread > was--development, non-canonical and more typical. So he was really a > developmentologist. That is a color, or a note, that doesn't actually exist > for academics today, so in our color-blind, tone-deaf way we just call him > a psychologist. > > I think you're right that racism has an additional social dimension, and I > will call this politico-social, since Tommy's inability to name is > certainly social, and so is his circumlocution. This politico-social > dimension of racism is really just an ideological correlate of the fact > that social progress is not planned: we have, in a rather willy-nilly way, > evolved tools and signs to fit one dominant type of culture and one > dominant type of psychophysiology rather than another. > > Sometimes this politico-social dimension also attaches itself to > disabilities like (total) blindness and deafness. But it doesn't have to. > >From a defectological perspective, these people are not "disabled", but > only "pre-abled"--that is, we have invented circuitous and indirect" ways > of circumventing these "defects" (e.g. Braille, ASL) but we haven't yet > socially evolved them as mainstream abilities. > > In Seattle there was a loggers'union whose members were from many different > language backgrounds (Swedish, Chinook, Russian, and a few English speakers > like my grandfather, who was a book keeper). People used American Sign > Language in the sawmill; if you weren't deaf when you started, you would be > within a year, because the conditions in the sawmills were so awful. But > they strongly resisted any suggestion that this made them "disabled". At > one point, the union wanted to condemn Helen Keller, because she was > consorting with Alexander Graham Bell, the inventor of the telephone, who > wanted to force deaf children to lip-read instead of learning ASL. Some > people excused her: after all, she's disabled, because she's blind. > > Most articles (especially most articles in TESOL Q!) use "mediation" as a > subcategory of teaching-learning (the "good" kind, the kind of > teaching-learning that is sensitive to learner needs on the one hand and > context on the other). One of the things I liked about your article is that > you recognized that "mediation" is not a subcategory but an enormous > supercategory, including "being a student" in a set of social roles. What > we think of as teaching-learning is only a very small subcategory: a > planned, deliberate, and as a result highly atypical form of mediation. To > me, though, this makes "mediation" a very baggy pair of trousers--not a > good fit for most of what goes on in classrooms! > > David Kellogg > Macquarie University > > > > one shadow is different from another. . I once It just wasn't there. . > > On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 6:21 PM, Eun Young Jang > wrote: > > > Dear David > > > > > > > > Thank you for the interesting and helpful comments on my paper! I really > > enjoyed your comments and was also pleased to receive your questions > about > > Juan in my earlier paper (TESOL Quarterly). I attach my paper here so > that > > other colleagues can read it if they want. > > > > > > > > Yes, I do think that what happened in the ESL classroom can be understood > > from the "pedological" end as well, as you said. The point that I wanted > > to make in my study was that we should understand 'why a learner acts in > > certain way' from multiple perspectives. It is just like a piece of a > > multilayered cake. > > > > By the way, I think I need to learn more about what you meant by > > 'defectological' end. When you said 'defect', did you mean some problems > > that people might have in their development? If so, I would like to share > > my opinion. Everyone might have some problems that they must handle (and > > problems that can be handled by some great pedagogical methods). > Sometimes > > the problems are minor (curable) and sometimes they are not (such as > > blindness). However, not all of them are on the same level or same > > dimension. In other words, I think we cannot equate some life's > challenges > > (such as illness) and racial discrimination. They are on different > levels. > > The latter is intrinsically social, I think. Further, in multicultural > > education, 'deficit' has very negative connotation because it alludes > that > > there are some 'perfect' things in opposition. > > > > > > > > Here, I also pasted my response to your earlier email (off the xmca list) > > below to share it with otehrs. > > > > > > > > Thank you very much for your ?off-list? email and interests in my > articles. > > Thanks to you, I was happy to remind of Juan, the lovely little boy who I > > was with for more than a year. > > > > > > > > Yes, we did have an interview with Juan. The other author, Chris Iddings? > > first language was Spanish so she was able to communicate with Juan with > no > > problem. But I remember that whether Juan understood the situation or not > > was decided from our observations of his actions. In particular, the > focus > > of our observations was on the ways the joint attentional frames were > > formed because we thought the frames played a critical role as a > > mediational means in facilitating Juan?s learning. Oh, I also recall that > > when we say Juan?s learning, it was not always learning of English but > also > > learning of the classroom discourses. About the quiet mouse events, Juan > > wanted to be picked eagerly by pointing his finger to his own chest and > > contacting eyes with the student with the mouse. About the testing, I > > remember that Juan did understand the procedure of the testing and acted > > like a student but in fact, it appeared that he was not able to get the > > right answers in terms of English. Well, this should not be a problem > > because understanding the classroom discourses would serve a scaffolding > > for him to learn contents eventually. Hope my brief answer has satisfied > > your curiosity about my study a bit. > > > > > > > > David, I think we have a lot in common. Let?s keep in touch. I?d love to > > drop by the Dasomcha meeting some day! By the way, I have been in SIG for > > Critical Pedagogy for almost 6years. If you have a plan to visit Korea > > again, you are invited to our Critical Pedagogy meeting as well! > > > > > > > > Best, > > > > EY. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 6:28 AM, David Kellogg > > wrote: > > > > > Dear Professor Jang: > > > > > > Relax, you are among friends and co-thinkers. Well, a lot of friends, > > some > > > of whom are probably very close co-thinkers. It's a very big list, but > I > > > doubt if anybody who read your article would accuse you of teacher > > bashing. > > > I also don't think anybody who read it would think that you used your > > > Korean-ness in any other way than a good researcher uses any resource > > that > > > affords empathy with the researched. And I DO think that you provided > "a" > > > way of bridging a socioculural and a cognitivist approach to the second > > > language classroom. Perhaps even two ways. > > > > > > It seems to me that one way is from the "contextualist" end; that is, > to > > > redefine a context in abstract terms, including things like attitudes, > > > motivations, and teaching ideologies right in the context. I think this > > is > > > actually much more difficult than it looks: some people will consider > > this > > > behavioristic, because it assumes that attitudes, motivations and > > > ideologies can be treated as external to mind. I think it actually only > > > considers them as external to text. Other people will consider it > > upwardly > > > reductionistic, because it assumes that attitudes, motivations and > > > ideologies can be reduced to society and to culture and to context of > > > situation. I think that society and culture and context of situation > must > > > always be considered as a complex whole, including cognition, but not > > > subsuming it. > > > > > > It also seems to me that another is from the "organicist" end; that is, > > to > > > define attitudes, motivations, and ideologies as something in some way > > > independent of cognition (the "distributed cognition" people are good > at > > > this). Again, this isn't so easy, particularly in an American context. > > > America is now going through a kind of crisis, because racism has > > > previously been defined in only one of two ways. Either racism is part > of > > > cognition--in which case it really only exists in people who subscribe, > > > paradoxically, to "objective" scientific racism, to the belief that > > > non-whites are actually inferior. Or racism is part of culture--in > which > > > case it really only exists in the debilitating effects it has on the > > > oppressed, and it doesn't really matter what it is that racists believe > > > (or, for that matter, what non-racists believe: Obama was just as > guilty > > of > > > black unemployment as Bush). > > > > > > What I suggest is, rather perversely, a third way. It's from the > > > "pedological, defectological" end. That is, attitudes, motivations and > > the > > > teaching ideologies which derive from them need to be understood not > only > > > as part of the context but also as part of pedology, a whole science of > > the > > > child. Unfortunately, Vygotsky's writings on this are not available in > > > English, but they ARE available in good Korean: > > > > > > http://www.aladin.co.kr/shop/common/wseriesitem.aspx?SRID=25565 > > > > > > Similarly, the ravages of racism (including the "damunhwa kyoyuk" > > developed > > > in Korea under Yi Myeongbak and Park Geunhye, which was concerned with > > > providing "equal opportunity" to the majority as well as to the > minority) > > > need to be considered not simply as stigma on the dominant race or as > > > stigmata of the oppressed but more defectologically. "Defect" wasn't an > > > insult in the USSR: Vygotsky actually considers "yeongje kyoyuk" (that > > is, > > > "genius education"), education of the blind, education of the deaf, > > > so-called "learning disabilities" not as "disabilities" but as > > > defects--that is, normal disadvantages to be overcome in the same way > as > > > any other obstacle in learning, through "circuitous and indirect", that > > is, > > > mediated, means of learning. We have evolved our means of education, as > > > Vygotsky says, to cater to the needs of the psychophysiological > dominant > > > group, but the mark of higher forms of social progress is how it can > > > develop the niches within this and the needs of those who are not > > > psychophysiologically dominant. > > > > > > (Do you know Professor Kim Jinseok? I worked at SNUE for over ten years > > > myself, and our Vygotsky group still meets there every Saturday to > > > translate the work of Vygotsky into Korean. If you are on campus on a > > > Saturday, we are usually in room 315, over "Dasomchae" near the front > > gate, > > > from noon until about four!) > > > > > > David Kellogg > > > Macquarie University > > > > > > On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 2:14 PM, Eun Young Jang < > eunyoung1112@gmail.com> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > ? > > > > > > > > Hi everyone, thank you very much for reading my article. This is > such a > > > > great opportunity for me to introduce my work and receive comments > from > > > > wonderful colleagues. > > > > > > > > First, let me introduce myself briefly. I earned my doctorate in > > > Language, > > > > Literacy, and Culture in the Department of Teaching and Learning at > > > > Vanderbilt University. I am currently working as an assistant > professor > > > in > > > > Multicultural Education at Seoul National University of Education > > located > > > > in Seoul, South Korea. My research interests are in the impact of the > > > > social context on second language teaching and learning. Another > paper > > > > published recently deals with sustainable globalization of higher > > > education > > > > focusing on cultures and languages in a foreign professor?s classroom > > in > > > S. > > > > Korea. My current research project is about North Korean refugee > > students > > > > learning English in South Korea. > > > > > > > > > > > > My article for xmca discussion was initiated from my observation that > > ESL > > > > students were not actually focusing on learning English in the ESL > > > > classroom but instead, on ?acting? learning with an attempt to > achieve > > > > certain social position (as an individual or a group). In > particular, I > > > > noted that they were quite skillful in using ?seemingly? academic > > > > strategies to conceal what they were actually doing. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The ESL students were very sensitive to things happening to them in > > terms > > > > of marginalization and discrimination but did not reveal to others > > > > explicitly what they really thought. Instead, they took advantage of > > the > > > > school discourse that was legitimized in the context, that was, > acting > > > like > > > > motivated and strategic learners by participating in class activities > > > > actively and strategically. In spite of regular observations of ESL > > > classes > > > > back then, I could not figure out what was happening in the classroom > > for > > > > the first couple of months. Later on, the social dynamics among > > students > > > > and between students and the teacher surfaced to me and also they > began > > > to > > > > open their minds and told me how they felt isolated and > discriminated. > > > > Then, I was able to see the meanings of their actions. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In effect, the ESL teacher tried hard to be fair and in a sense, the > > > French > > > > student was isolated and discriminated by the Korean students in the > > ESL > > > > classroom. Nevertheless, Korean students victimized themselves. I > > thought > > > > that it was still important and valuable to acknowledge how the > Korean > > > > students felt simply because the feelings were there and they made > some > > > > consequences (such as silencing the French student). I wanted to > reveal > > > > that how the students felt and why they felt that way and how they > > > reacted > > > > to their feelings. Whether the discrimination was real or not was not > > > > important. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > A reviewer from other journal has criticized my article badly for > > teacher > > > > bashing. But definitely I did not mean it. Also, some readers of my > > > article > > > > said that because I am Korean, I was on the Korean students? side. > The > > > fact > > > > was, the ESL teacher and I were good friends and this even made the > > > Korean > > > > students suspicious of my position (like a spy from the ?white? > teacher > > > > side). Anyway, honestly, the comments from other scholars made me > feel > > > > constrained conducting research about the same ethnic group. Now, I?d > > > like > > > > to know about your opinion about this issue. > > > > > > > > Again, the fact that the participants were Korean was not the main > > focus > > > of > > > > my study. I wanted to show how they used strategies, which were > > typically > > > > categorized as individual and cognitive traits, for social purposes. > > So, > > > > the bigger agenda of my study was to explore ?a? way to bridge the > > > > dichotomy between individual and sociocultural camps. > > > > > > > > Thanks! > > > > > > > > EY. > > > > > > > > On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 8:12 AM, David Kellogg > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Alfredo: > > > > > > > > > > Down the hall one of the Chinese translators is working on > > translations > > > > of > > > > > the Chinese "State of the Union" address into English. The Chinese > > goes > > > > > something like this: > > > > > > > > > > ????????? > > > > > xiaoch? p?nk?n qud? j?nzhan. > > > > > > > > > > Literally: > > > > > > > > > > "Eradicate Poverty Achieve Progress", i.e. "(The government) (made) > > > some > > > > > progress in the eradication of poverty." > > > > > > > > > > In Chinese we don't have to specify the agent, and we don't need to > > use > > > > the > > > > > effective verb "made"; it's a happening and not a doing. This used > to > > > be > > > > > because the agent went without saying--it's encoded in the grammar. > > > > Partly > > > > > thanks to a poetic tradition going back more than a thousand years, > > > > Chinese > > > > > lends itself to four-syllable slogan-like objects like "Eradicate > > > > Poverty" > > > > > and "Achieve Progress", and putting them together sounds natural. > We > > > > don't > > > > > usually use a subject unless we want to stress it; it's much more > > > common > > > > to > > > > > just have a nominal topic and then a comment, like in this example. > > > > Because > > > > > the government has a well established role in mobilizing the masses > > to > > > > > carry out actions like famine relief and flood prevention and so > on, > > > the > > > > > agent and the "doing" don't need to be specified: everybody knows > it > > > was > > > > > the government, even if that weren't clear in the context of a > > > government > > > > > report. So we simply say it's a happening. > > > > > > > > > > Now that's changing. In fact, the government does relatively little > > to > > > > > alleviate poverty. There are regional enterprises, and there are > > > private > > > > > businesses and so on. After the Sichuan earthquake, my > brother-in-law > > > > > loaded up his SUV with bottled water and drove down to the > earthquake > > > > area > > > > > to distribute it, and he says there was a huge traffic jam of other > > > SUVs > > > > by > > > > > entrepreneurs like him who had exactly the same idea. And for > > precisely > > > > > this reason, we find that in the government report there is more > and > > > more > > > > > explicit stipulation of the government's agency and of the > effective > > > > means. > > > > > Instead of just happening, the government does things. There is a > > > similar > > > > > link between ideology and ideation in English if you think about > it. > > > When > > > > > something GOOD happens, it's because somebody DID it, but when > > > something > > > > > bad happens, "Stuff happens". > > > > > > > > > > Here's the point. We usually use "ideology" to mean something like > > > > > conscious and deliberate ideation, usually of an intentionally > > > deceitful > > > > or > > > > > misleading variety. I don't really accept that. It seems to me that > > > > > "ideology" really is equivalent to ideation, that is, to the > > > > communicative, > > > > > representational function of speech, except that it is somewhat > > larger, > > > > > both because the interpersonal and the textual functions also > encode > > > > ideas > > > > > and are also therefore ideological and because a lot of ideology is > > > > simply > > > > > NOT specifying things. For example, when you say "it's raining", > you > > > are > > > > > conveying the idea that rain is an event that just happens, and is > > not > > > > > caused by any nameable entity. You don't normally say "it's > birding" > > or > > > > > even "it's shining". > > > > > > > > > > Similarly, we usually use "prescriptivism" to mean something like > > > > conscious > > > > > and deliberate transformativism, usually of an authoritarian and > > > > > dictatorial, and deceptive, sort. I don't really accept that > either. > > On > > > > the > > > > > contrary, what is really deceptive is to pretend that the process > of > > > > > education is meaningful without attending to its ultimate product. > To > > > me, > > > > > "Eradicate Poverty Achieve Progress" is a perfect balance of > process > > > and > > > > > product, and agency and effective means are only meaningful with > > > respect > > > > to > > > > > both. > > > > > > > > > > David Kellogg > > > > > Macquarie University > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 5:53 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil < > > > a.j.gil@iped.uio.no > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Hi again, > > > > > > > > > > > > one thing that I find interesting in Jang's article, and which > may > > > > > connect > > > > > > to comments in the other thread (by David, Haydi...) concerning > > 'not > > > > > > reducing the political to the personal', is the issue of > > *ideology.* > > > > In > > > > > > particular, Jang discusses and empirically examines what she > coins > > > as a > > > > > > *Prescriptive* language ideology. As she describes in her paper, > > and > > > as > > > > > any > > > > > > educator will immediately recognise, this ideology exists as the > > > > > > classroom's orientations to a correct/incorrect form. In her > > article, > > > > she > > > > > > exhibits this through a number of sequences in which > > teacher-student > > > > and > > > > > > student-student relations involve *evaluations* with regard to > > > > > proficiently > > > > > > using two rules: making connections between sentences and staying > > on > > > > the > > > > > > topic. > > > > > > > > > > > > As Jang shows, the prescriptive approach, which sets the final > > > linguist > > > > > > form as the criterion for positively or negatively evaluating any > > > > > response > > > > > > by any student, is such that more proficient readers/speakers > will > > > have > > > > > > easier access to positive evaluation. The ideology here then > exists > > > as > > > > a > > > > > > regime of power and differential access, of inequality. By > treating > > > all > > > > > > equally, we get to inequality. > > > > > > > > > > > > I was thinking that it seems that the prescriptive approach does > > > focus > > > > on > > > > > > the final product, whereas the sociocultural approach that Jang > > > pursues > > > > > and > > > > > > Vygotsky first set forth has it that we should not focus on the > > final > > > > > > product but on its genesis, on the way the verbal form exists > first > > > as > > > > a > > > > > > social relation between people. Thus, in Episodes 1 and 2 in the > > > > article, > > > > > > if the participants had oriented towards a possible process of > > > > > development, > > > > > > Ji-Woo's responses would have been heard and responded to as > > moments > > > > in a > > > > > > developmental trajectory. There would have been a very different > > > social > > > > > > situation in which work would have been directed to make visible > > and > > > > > > available the dynamics of Ji-Woo's learning process. But the > > > > prescriptive > > > > > > orientation evaluates and makes salient only deficiency and > > > > achievement. > > > > > On > > > > > > the other hand, and consistent with those (e.g., Stetsenko, > > Holzman) > > > > who > > > > > > have referred to Vygotsky's legacy as *revolutionary,* an > > orientation > > > > > > consistent with Vygotsky's teachings would bring with it not > only a > > > > > > different situation, but also an *emancipatory* one. Instead of > > > > > inequality > > > > > > brought about by treating all equally, we would have an > > equalitarian > > > > > > approach whose power resides in acknowledging and caring for > > history > > > > and > > > > > > diversity. > > > > > > > > > > > > On a side thought, and connected to David's (Halliday's) > > distinction > > > > > > between ideational and interpersonal functions of language, I was > > > > > wondering > > > > > > what is the relation/difference between ideational and > ideological. > > > In > > > > > the > > > > > > article, it seems clear that the language related competence on > > > putting > > > > > > names to things and thereby building categories seems a condition > > for > > > > the > > > > > > racial/ethnic tension to exist. But of course, the tension is a > > > > > relational, > > > > > > not just a lexical one. Thoughts? > > > > > > > > > > > > Alfredo > > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________________ > > > > > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > edu > > > > > > > > > > > on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil > > > > > > Sent: 13 March 2017 18:48 > > > > > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Jang's SL Article Discussion > > > > > > > > > > > > ?Dear all, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > David has started some very interesting comments on the current > > > article > > > > > > for discussion on Tensions in Second Language Learning, which > > attach > > > > > again > > > > > > here. Because some of these comments have been given at a > different > > > > > thread, > > > > > > I am starting here a thread that shall more centrally concern > > Jang's > > > > > > article. I copy below all what David has so far written about the > > > > > article. > > > > > > I hope this will ?make it easy for Eun-Young and everyone else to > > > > follow > > > > > on > > > > > > her article. I know ?Eun-Young is challenged time-wise by course > > > > > > responsibilities and I hope this will make it easier for her. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Eun-Young, David mentions an article from 2011. If you wanted, > you > > > > could > > > > > > also share the PDF with us for background, although the current > > > article > > > > > > gives more than enough material for discussion, I think. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Alfredo > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --------------------David Kellogg wrote: ------------------ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > t's very interesting to compare this paper with Professor Jang's > > 2011 > > > > > > paper co-authored with Robert T. Jimenez: > > > > > > > > > > > > Eun-Young Jang & Robert T. Jim?nez (2011) A Sociocultural > > Perspective > > > > on > > > > > > Second Language Learner Strategies: Focus on the Impact of Social > > > > > Context, > > > > > > Theory Into Practice, > > > > > > 50:2, 141-148, DOI: 10.1080/00405841.2011.558443 > > > > > > > > > > > > In some ways, the papers are very similar--the data is identical > in > > > one > > > > > > place (p. 42), and the conclusions are for the most part > congruent. > > > But > > > > > > consider how different the titles are. "Impact" in one place, and > > > > > "tension" > > > > > > in the other. > > > > > > > > > > > > There is this note to the 1935 version of Vygotsky's report on > > > > > preschools, > > > > > > where Zankov, Elkonin and Shif complain about Vygotsky's idea > that > > > the > > > > > > child directs his or her own learning before preschool, the > > > environment > > > > > > directs it after preschool, and preschool therefore represents a > > kind > > > > of > > > > > > transitional stage. On the one hand, if the child is directing > his > > or > > > > her > > > > > > own learning, how can we say that the environment is the ultimate > > > > source > > > > > of > > > > > > learning? And if the environment is the ultimate source of > > learning, > > > as > > > > > > Vygotsky says, how can we say that the child is himself or > herself > > > part > > > > > of > > > > > > the environment? > > > > > > > > > > > > Professor Jang gets around this problem just as Vygotsky > > > > does--adroitly. > > > > > On > > > > > > the one hand, strategies are expanded to include "sets of actions > > > > > performed > > > > > > to deal with problems (perceived by the researcher, indicated by > > the > > > > > > learners)". On the other, contexts are expanded to include > > > "pedagogical > > > > > > assumptions, power relations, and interracial conflict". > > > > > > > > > > > > I think this solution to the problem is the correct one: when we > > > > consider > > > > > > the relationship of the child and the environment, we cannot > treat > > it > > > > > like > > > > > > an unstoppable force meeting an unmoveable object. But for me > that > > > > means > > > > > > that both the child and the environment have to be considered in > > > > > "internal" > > > > > > (that is, abstract, linguistic) terms. We can't think of speech > as > > > > > actions; > > > > > > it's more useful to think of actions as speech. We can't think of > > the > > > > > > social situation of development as a material setting: it's a > > > > > relationship > > > > > > with others. > > > > > > > > > > > > Contrariwise, it seems to me that when we consider "racism", it > is > > > more > > > > > > helpful to consider it in "external", that is, concrete, > > > nonlinguistic > > > > > > terms. In the 2011 paper, Professor Jang and her co-author are > > > willing > > > > to > > > > > > openly criticize the idea that languages are learned in exactly > the > > > > same > > > > > > way whether they are first or second languages. Here, they just > > quote > > > > the > > > > > > teacher's comments on "mommy skills". > > > > > > > > > > > > It's a very revealing quote. One thing it reveals is why it's > > > probably > > > > > not > > > > > > helpful to refer to "racist" as an "insult" (p. 40) or to imply > > that > > > > > racism > > > > > > and anti-racism is really just a matter of having the right > > attitude > > > > (as > > > > > > the Republicans did in the Sessions debate or as Bernie Sanders > did > > > > when > > > > > he > > > > > > referred to Trump supporters who voted for Obama as "not having a > > > > racist > > > > > > bone in their bodies"). > > > > > > > > > > > > You can see that subjectively, the teacher is being > > anti-racist--all > > > > > > students, French, Turkish, Egyptian, Korean, use the same > > strategies, > > > > > just > > > > > > like we all have mommies.She has all the right attitudes, and > > > probably > > > > > > doesn't have a racist bone in her body. But that doesn't diminish > > by > > > > one > > > > > > jot the terrible damage that this kind of indiscriminate > > > discrimination > > > > > > does in the classroom. > > > > > > > > > > > > David Kellogg > > > > > > Macquarie University > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------ On a related thread (Subject: Don't do > > it), > > > > > David > > > > > > K. wrote:-------------- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It seems to me that we need to clearly distinguish between > "racism" > > > and > > > > > > "racist sentiment". One of the interesting problems that comes up > > in > > > > > Eunhee > > > > > > Jang's excellent article on second language learning strategies > > from > > > a > > > > > > sociocultural point of view--a wonderful piece of "inside" work, > > > > > > introducing racial issues into an area where they have never been > > > > > seriously > > > > > > discussed--is the use of "racist" (by the Korean kids to describe > > > their > > > > > > teacher) as an "insult". > > > > > > > > > > > > I like the article. I think it's important work. But for that > very > > > > > reason, > > > > > > I think that it's important to resist any attempt to reduce > > "racist" > > > > to a > > > > > > personal insult. I think we've seen very very clearly, both in > the > > > > > Sessions > > > > > > confirmation hearing, and in the discussion of Trump's own > > > anti-semitic > > > > > > behavior--that this kind of reduction of the political to the > > > personal > > > > is > > > > > > precisely the kind of reducing the sociocultural to the cognitive > > > that > > > > > > Professor Jang is trying to resist. > > > > > > > > > > > > David Kellogg > > > > > > Macquarie University > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------- Idem as above------------------------- > > > > > > --------------- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > One of the interesting aspects of Professor Jang's paper is that > it > > > is > > > > > > about adolescents who are in the process of forming concepts, but > > who > > > > are > > > > > > not there yet. And one way in which an adolescent forms a concept > > > about > > > > > the > > > > > > difficult concept of a social contract, of citizenship, of > > > nationality > > > > is > > > > > > pseudoconceptual: it is based on discussing "actual" perceptual > > > > > differences > > > > > > between races. This might seem irrelevant to current political > > > > discourse. > > > > > > Unfortunately, it isn't.? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > David Kellogg > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > Jang, Eun-Young. Ph.D. > > > > > > > > Assistant Professor, Graduate School of Education > > > > > > > > Seoul National University of Education > > > > > > > > Seoul, S. Korea > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Jang, Eun-Young. Ph.D. > > > > Assistant Professor, Graduate School of Education > > > > Seoul National University of Education > > > > Seoul, S. Korea > > > > From lpscholar2@gmail.com Sun Mar 26 10:17:33 2017 From: lpscholar2@gmail.com (lpscholar2@gmail.com) Date: Sun, 26 Mar 2017 10:17:33 -0700 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Jang's SL Article Discussion In-Reply-To: <1490373072177.47916@iped.uio.no> References: <1489427326574.46980@iped.uio.no> <1489431232770.89078@iped.uio.no> , <1490373072177.47916@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: <58d7f7b6.0dd6620a.2f98a.802f@mx.google.com> Alfredo, Your highlighting and drawing our attention to learning (as) developing enduring attitudes, of likes and dislikes, is something you are referring to in passing that i hope we can slow down or pause and consider further. Another word for this is dis-positions in contrast to positions taken. This type of learning occurring in situations that Dewey referred to as (collateral) learning. What may be considered unintended learning? THIS type of learning that is not prescribed or found in textbooks outlining a discipline as a system already made. Why is this dis/positional learning so universally ignored? How do we refocus on dis/positional learning of attiudes as central or core intentions of schooling and higher education? Was there an historical time when this type of dis-positional learning took center stage? If so, can we continue to learn from these traditions? More questions than answers but does seem to *spiral* around notion of *bildung*? This tradition has a deep shadow side (in nationalism) and civilizing notions. However, does Dewey?s mention of collateral learning continue to have relevance while mostly being ignored? Sent from my Windows 10 phone From: Alfredo Jornet Gil Sent: March 24, 2017 9:32 AM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Jang's SL Article Discussion David, Eun-Young, all, I am so glad that David and Eun-Young have found a fruitful common ground in (and outside) the article's discussion. When I chose the paper for this Issue 1 discussion, I thought (perhaps wrongly) that many xmca'ers would be interested in the paper for several reasons, one being the intermingling of social (ideological) and subject-related (second language) aspects. I always find it very interesting the amount of learning that goes on in classrooms (and homes) that is not what canonical descriptions of teaching/learning would (and possibly could) have anticipated. I am talking about what Dewey refers to as 'collateral learning', that is, learning that is not intended nor prescribed by the curriculum, but which nonetheless is consequence of its application. Dewey (in Education and Experience) describes collateral learning as the 'formation of enduring attitudes, of likes and dislikes, [which] may be and often is much more important than the spelling lesson or lesson in geography or history that is learned' This is so absolutely obvious, and yet (in a expression Mike recently used in a talk at Vancouver's SFO) is universally ignored. David, you remind us that Vygotsky was trans-disciplinary in the sense that his field was development, that he was a 'developmentologist' (and you use the felicitous expression 'pre-able' as an example). I think, and this is something authors such as Newman and Holzman (in their Vygotsky as revolutionary scientist) have spelled out, that being a developmentologist is very much an ideology as well, one that is irreconcilable with the prescriptive ideology that Eun-Young describes in her article and that we find ourselves being part of in many occasions everyday. The latter seems to be based on the believe that social (and living) things exist in cause - effect relations pretty much in the same way that physical (non-living) things exist in the universe. Language then can be seen as a tool (and in fact often is described as a tool even in the sociocultural literature that cites Vygotsky) that an individual can use to do things. It is then possible to think of the teaching of second language as the teaching of one thing, rather than as the formation of whole persons, and not just whole persons but of societal forms of relating, indeed. But if you embrace Vygotsky's points on development, specially on the fact that what is developing is whole persons (with affects, motives) and not just isolated bits of information, then learning a (second) language is always so much more than learning to speak words and sentences in a second language. I applaud the author's call for challenging 'ESL educators and institutions ... to construct a learning environment in which diverse ESL students' voices are ... heard and discussed, not only about their English learning, but also about their social struggles' (p. 43). But, considering the prescriptive ideology that the classroom relations in the focus article realise, I am surprised by the author's use of the term 'illogical antagonism against other racial/ethnic groups'. Such antagonism seemed very logical to them, in fact, immediately logical. I am not as kin as the author is in attributing intentions to the individual participants (see, e.g., p. 41). Just as the teacher did not intend inequity, I don't think the Korean learners were being racist (which they effectively were) 'intentionally.' Logic here has to do with organic being, not with formal ideas. And that organic being is about developmental relations, not things (cause) against things (effect). The more I think about it, and the more I work with it, the more I understand that being an educator is one of the most complex, misunderstood and undervalued task in today's society. I hope the article continues to sparkle some interest in the coming days. Meanwhile, thanks Eun-Young and David for a sustained and productive dialogue. Alfredo ________________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of David Kellogg Sent: 20 March 2017 21:45 To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Jang's SL Article Discussion When I was a teenager, my best friend played piano. Tommy didn't just play: he composed--I'd get cassette letters from him where he would forget to talk, and just improvise a whole side of beautiful music. He also had perfect pitch--I'd play a random note on the bass and he would start talking about "my" B flat; somebody behind us in the traffic would honk, and he'd call out "C!". He was color blind. He could tell the traffic lights by their position, of course. But he couldn't tell a blue from a green, a yellow from an orange, or even a yellow from a green. They were just unnameable colors. He'd say "green" and you'd correct him with "blue" and he'd say "whatever". I'd ask him--Can't you SEE the difference? And he'd smile and ask me what note my word "see" was. If I said "C", I'd get a lecture on the major scales. You might think that these are purely physiological differences without social dimensions, and I'm sure, in Tommy's case anyway, something genetic was going on. But if you think a minute, you'll see that a lot of his "blindness" and my "deafness" is about naming things, not perceiving them. You will also see that in both cases there is a certain "social" overcompensation going on: both of us used our strong points to overcome our weak ones, and this led to "circuitous and indirect" ways of social functioning: Tommy went on to the Berklee School of Music, and I wrote lyrics for his songs and eventually became a painter. Vygotsky's transdisciplinary, but perhaps involuntarily so. He worked in defectology on the one hand and in pedology on the other. The common thread was--development, non-canonical and more typical. So he was really a developmentologist. That is a color, or a note, that doesn't actually exist for academics today, so in our color-blind, tone-deaf way we just call him a psychologist. I think you're right that racism has an additional social dimension, and I will call this politico-social, since Tommy's inability to name is certainly social, and so is his circumlocution. This politico-social dimension of racism is really just an ideological correlate of the fact that social progress is not planned: we have, in a rather willy-nilly way, evolved tools and signs to fit one dominant type of culture and one dominant type of psychophysiology rather than another. Sometimes this politico-social dimension also attaches itself to disabilities like (total) blindness and deafness. But it doesn't have to. >From a defectological perspective, these people are not "disabled", but only "pre-abled"--that is, we have invented circuitous and indirect" ways of circumventing these "defects" (e.g. Braille, ASL) but we haven't yet socially evolved them as mainstream abilities. In Seattle there was a loggers'union whose members were from many different language backgrounds (Swedish, Chinook, Russian, and a few English speakers like my grandfather, who was a book keeper). People used American Sign Language in the sawmill; if you weren't deaf when you started, you would be within a year, because the conditions in the sawmills were so awful. But they strongly resisted any suggestion that this made them "disabled". At one point, the union wanted to condemn Helen Keller, because she was consorting with Alexander Graham Bell, the inventor of the telephone, who wanted to force deaf children to lip-read instead of learning ASL. Some people excused her: after all, she's disabled, because she's blind. Most articles (especially most articles in TESOL Q!) use "mediation" as a subcategory of teaching-learning (the "good" kind, the kind of teaching-learning that is sensitive to learner needs on the one hand and context on the other). One of the things I liked about your article is that you recognized that "mediation" is not a subcategory but an enormous supercategory, including "being a student" in a set of social roles. What we think of as teaching-learning is only a very small subcategory: a planned, deliberate, and as a result highly atypical form of mediation. To me, though, this makes "mediation" a very baggy pair of trousers--not a good fit for most of what goes on in classrooms! David Kellogg Macquarie University one shadow is different from another. . I once It just wasn't there. . On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 6:21 PM, Eun Young Jang wrote: > Dear David > > > > Thank you for the interesting and helpful comments on my paper! I really > enjoyed your comments and was also pleased to receive your questions about > Juan in my earlier paper (TESOL Quarterly). I attach my paper here so that > other colleagues can read it if they want. > > > > Yes, I do think that what happened in the ESL classroom can be understood > from the "pedological" end as well, as you said. The point that I wanted > to make in my study was that we should understand 'why a learner acts in > certain way' from multiple perspectives. It is just like a piece of a > multilayered cake. > > By the way, I think I need to learn more about what you meant by > 'defectological' end. When you said 'defect', did you mean some problems > that people might have in their development? If so, I would like to share > my opinion. Everyone might have some problems that they must handle (and > problems that can be handled by some great pedagogical methods). Sometimes > the problems are minor (curable) and sometimes they are not (such as > blindness). However, not all of them are on the same level or same > dimension. In other words, I think we cannot equate some life's challenges > (such as illness) and racial discrimination. They are on different levels. > The latter is intrinsically social, I think. Further, in multicultural > education, 'deficit' has very negative connotation because it alludes that > there are some 'perfect' things in opposition. > > > > Here, I also pasted my response to your earlier email (off the xmca list) > below to share it with otehrs. > > > > Thank you very much for your ?off-list? email and interests in my articles. > Thanks to you, I was happy to remind of Juan, the lovely little boy who I > was with for more than a year. > > > > Yes, we did have an interview with Juan. The other author, Chris Iddings? > first language was Spanish so she was able to communicate with Juan with no > problem. But I remember that whether Juan understood the situation or not > was decided from our observations of his actions. In particular, the focus > of our observations was on the ways the joint attentional frames were > formed because we thought the frames played a critical role as a > mediational means in facilitating Juan?s learning. Oh, I also recall that > when we say Juan?s learning, it was not always learning of English but also > learning of the classroom discourses. About the quiet mouse events, Juan > wanted to be picked eagerly by pointing his finger to his own chest and > contacting eyes with the student with the mouse. About the testing, I > remember that Juan did understand the procedure of the testing and acted > like a student but in fact, it appeared that he was not able to get the > right answers in terms of English. Well, this should not be a problem > because understanding the classroom discourses would serve a scaffolding > for him to learn contents eventually. Hope my brief answer has satisfied > your curiosity about my study a bit. > > > > David, I think we have a lot in common. Let?s keep in touch. I?d love to > drop by the Dasomcha meeting some day! By the way, I have been in SIG for > Critical Pedagogy for almost 6years. If you have a plan to visit Korea > again, you are invited to our Critical Pedagogy meeting as well! > > > > Best, > > EY. > > > > > > > > On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 6:28 AM, David Kellogg > wrote: > > > Dear Professor Jang: > > > > Relax, you are among friends and co-thinkers. Well, a lot of friends, > some > > of whom are probably very close co-thinkers. It's a very big list, but I > > doubt if anybody who read your article would accuse you of teacher > bashing. > > I also don't think anybody who read it would think that you used your > > Korean-ness in any other way than a good researcher uses any resource > that > > affords empathy with the researched. And I DO think that you provided "a" > > way of bridging a socioculural and a cognitivist approach to the second > > language classroom. Perhaps even two ways. > > > > It seems to me that one way is from the "contextualist" end; that is, to > > redefine a context in abstract terms, including things like attitudes, > > motivations, and teaching ideologies right in the context. I think this > is > > actually much more difficult than it looks: some people will consider > this > > behavioristic, because it assumes that attitudes, motivations and > > ideologies can be treated as external to mind. I think it actually only > > considers them as external to text. Other people will consider it > upwardly > > reductionistic, because it assumes that attitudes, motivations and > > ideologies can be reduced to society and to culture and to context of > > situation. I think that society and culture and context of situation must > > always be considered as a complex whole, including cognition, but not > > subsuming it. > > > > It also seems to me that another is from the "organicist" end; that is, > to > > define attitudes, motivations, and ideologies as something in some way > > independent of cognition (the "distributed cognition" people are good at > > this). Again, this isn't so easy, particularly in an American context. > > America is now going through a kind of crisis, because racism has > > previously been defined in only one of two ways. Either racism is part of > > cognition--in which case it really only exists in people who subscribe, > > paradoxically, to "objective" scientific racism, to the belief that > > non-whites are actually inferior. Or racism is part of culture--in which > > case it really only exists in the debilitating effects it has on the > > oppressed, and it doesn't really matter what it is that racists believe > > (or, for that matter, what non-racists believe: Obama was just as guilty > of > > black unemployment as Bush). > > > > What I suggest is, rather perversely, a third way. It's from the > > "pedological, defectological" end. That is, attitudes, motivations and > the > > teaching ideologies which derive from them need to be understood not only > > as part of the context but also as part of pedology, a whole science of > the > > child. Unfortunately, Vygotsky's writings on this are not available in > > English, but they ARE available in good Korean: > > > > http://www.aladin.co.kr/shop/common/wseriesitem.aspx?SRID=25565 > > > > Similarly, the ravages of racism (including the "damunhwa kyoyuk" > developed > > in Korea under Yi Myeongbak and Park Geunhye, which was concerned with > > providing "equal opportunity" to the majority as well as to the minority) > > need to be considered not simply as stigma on the dominant race or as > > stigmata of the oppressed but more defectologically. "Defect" wasn't an > > insult in the USSR: Vygotsky actually considers "yeongje kyoyuk" (that > is, > > "genius education"), education of the blind, education of the deaf, > > so-called "learning disabilities" not as "disabilities" but as > > defects--that is, normal disadvantages to be overcome in the same way as > > any other obstacle in learning, through "circuitous and indirect", that > is, > > mediated, means of learning. We have evolved our means of education, as > > Vygotsky says, to cater to the needs of the psychophysiological dominant > > group, but the mark of higher forms of social progress is how it can > > develop the niches within this and the needs of those who are not > > psychophysiologically dominant. > > > > (Do you know Professor Kim Jinseok? I worked at SNUE for over ten years > > myself, and our Vygotsky group still meets there every Saturday to > > translate the work of Vygotsky into Korean. If you are on campus on a > > Saturday, we are usually in room 315, over "Dasomchae" near the front > gate, > > from noon until about four!) > > > > David Kellogg > > Macquarie University > > > > On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 2:14 PM, Eun Young Jang > > wrote: > > > > > ? > > > > > > Hi everyone, thank you very much for reading my article. This is such a > > > great opportunity for me to introduce my work and receive comments from > > > wonderful colleagues. > > > > > > First, let me introduce myself briefly. I earned my doctorate in > > Language, > > > Literacy, and Culture in the Department of Teaching and Learning at > > > Vanderbilt University. I am currently working as an assistant professor > > in > > > Multicultural Education at Seoul National University of Education > located > > > in Seoul, South Korea. My research interests are in the impact of the > > > social context on second language teaching and learning. Another paper > > > published recently deals with sustainable globalization of higher > > education > > > focusing on cultures and languages in a foreign professor?s classroom > in > > S. > > > Korea. My current research project is about North Korean refugee > students > > > learning English in South Korea. > > > > > > > > > My article for xmca discussion was initiated from my observation that > ESL > > > students were not actually focusing on learning English in the ESL > > > classroom but instead, on ?acting? learning with an attempt to achieve > > > certain social position (as an individual or a group). In particular, I > > > noted that they were quite skillful in using ?seemingly? academic > > > strategies to conceal what they were actually doing. > > > > > > > > > > > > The ESL students were very sensitive to things happening to them in > terms > > > of marginalization and discrimination but did not reveal to others > > > explicitly what they really thought. Instead, they took advantage of > the > > > school discourse that was legitimized in the context, that was, acting > > like > > > motivated and strategic learners by participating in class activities > > > actively and strategically. In spite of regular observations of ESL > > classes > > > back then, I could not figure out what was happening in the classroom > for > > > the first couple of months. Later on, the social dynamics among > students > > > and between students and the teacher surfaced to me and also they began > > to > > > open their minds and told me how they felt isolated and discriminated. > > > Then, I was able to see the meanings of their actions. > > > > > > > > > > > > In effect, the ESL teacher tried hard to be fair and in a sense, the > > French > > > student was isolated and discriminated by the Korean students in the > ESL > > > classroom. Nevertheless, Korean students victimized themselves. I > thought > > > that it was still important and valuable to acknowledge how the Korean > > > students felt simply because the feelings were there and they made some > > > consequences (such as silencing the French student). I wanted to reveal > > > that how the students felt and why they felt that way and how they > > reacted > > > to their feelings. Whether the discrimination was real or not was not > > > important. > > > > > > > > > > > > A reviewer from other journal has criticized my article badly for > teacher > > > bashing. But definitely I did not mean it. Also, some readers of my > > article > > > said that because I am Korean, I was on the Korean students? side. The > > fact > > > was, the ESL teacher and I were good friends and this even made the > > Korean > > > students suspicious of my position (like a spy from the ?white? teacher > > > side). Anyway, honestly, the comments from other scholars made me feel > > > constrained conducting research about the same ethnic group. Now, I?d > > like > > > to know about your opinion about this issue. > > > > > > Again, the fact that the participants were Korean was not the main > focus > > of > > > my study. I wanted to show how they used strategies, which were > typically > > > categorized as individual and cognitive traits, for social purposes. > So, > > > the bigger agenda of my study was to explore ?a? way to bridge the > > > dichotomy between individual and sociocultural camps. > > > > > > Thanks! > > > > > > EY. > > > > > > On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 8:12 AM, David Kellogg > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Alfredo: > > > > > > > > Down the hall one of the Chinese translators is working on > translations > > > of > > > > the Chinese "State of the Union" address into English. The Chinese > goes > > > > something like this: > > > > > > > > ????????? > > > > xi?och? p?nk?n q?d? j?nzh?n. > > > > > > > > Literally: > > > > > > > > "Eradicate Poverty Achieve Progress", i.e. "(The government) (made) > > some > > > > progress in the eradication of poverty." > > > > > > > > In Chinese we don't have to specify the agent, and we don't need to > use > > > the > > > > effective verb "made"; it's a happening and not a doing. This used to > > be > > > > because the agent went without saying--it's encoded in the grammar. > > > Partly > > > > thanks to a poetic tradition going back more than a thousand years, > > > Chinese > > > > lends itself to four-syllable slogan-like objects like "Eradicate > > > Poverty" > > > > and "Achieve Progress", and putting them together sounds natural. We > > > don't > > > > usually use a subject unless we want to stress it; it's much more > > common > > > to > > > > just have a nominal topic and then a comment, like in this example. > > > Because > > > > the government has a well established role in mobilizing the masses > to > > > > carry out actions like famine relief and flood prevention and so on, > > the > > > > agent and the "doing" don't need to be specified: everybody knows it > > was > > > > the government, even if that weren't clear in the context of a > > government > > > > report. So we simply say it's a happening. > > > > > > > > Now that's changing. In fact, the government does relatively little > to > > > > alleviate poverty. There are regional enterprises, and there are > > private > > > > businesses and so on. After the Sichuan earthquake, my brother-in-law > > > > loaded up his SUV with bottled water and drove down to the earthquake > > > area > > > > to distribute it, and he says there was a huge traffic jam of other > > SUVs > > > by > > > > entrepreneurs like him who had exactly the same idea. And for > precisely > > > > this reason, we find that in the government report there is more and > > more > > > > explicit stipulation of the government's agency and of the effective > > > means. > > > > Instead of just happening, the government does things. There is a > > similar > > > > link between ideology and ideation in English if you think about it. > > When > > > > something GOOD happens, it's because somebody DID it, but when > > something > > > > bad happens, "Stuff happens". > > > > > > > > Here's the point. We usually use "ideology" to mean something like > > > > conscious and deliberate ideation, usually of an intentionally > > deceitful > > > or > > > > misleading variety. I don't really accept that. It seems to me that > > > > "ideology" really is equivalent to ideation, that is, to the > > > communicative, > > > > representational function of speech, except that it is somewhat > larger, > > > > both because the interpersonal and the textual functions also encode > > > ideas > > > > and are also therefore ideological and because a lot of ideology is > > > simply > > > > NOT specifying things. For example, when you say "it's raining", you > > are > > > > conveying the idea that rain is an event that just happens, and is > not > > > > caused by any nameable entity. You don't normally say "it's birding" > or > > > > even "it's shining". > > > > > > > > Similarly, we usually use "prescriptivism" to mean something like > > > conscious > > > > and deliberate transformativism, usually of an authoritarian and > > > > dictatorial, and deceptive, sort. I don't really accept that either. > On > > > the > > > > contrary, what is really deceptive is to pretend that the process of > > > > education is meaningful without attending to its ultimate product. To > > me, > > > > "Eradicate Poverty Achieve Progress" is a perfect balance of process > > and > > > > product, and agency and effective means are only meaningful with > > respect > > > to > > > > both. > > > > > > > > David Kellogg > > > > Macquarie University > > > > > > > > On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 5:53 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil < > > a.j.gil@iped.uio.no > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Hi again, > > > > > > > > > > one thing that I find interesting in Jang's article, and which may > > > > connect > > > > > to comments in the other thread (by David, Haydi...) concerning > 'not > > > > > reducing the political to the personal', is the issue of > *ideology.* > > > In > > > > > particular, Jang discusses and empirically examines what she coins > > as a > > > > > *Prescriptive* language ideology. As she describes in her paper, > and > > as > > > > any > > > > > educator will immediately recognise, this ideology exists as the > > > > > classroom's orientations to a correct/incorrect form. In her > article, > > > she > > > > > exhibits this through a number of sequences in which > teacher-student > > > and > > > > > student-student relations involve *evaluations* with regard to > > > > proficiently > > > > > using two rules: making connections between sentences and staying > on > > > the > > > > > topic. > > > > > > > > > > As Jang shows, the prescriptive approach, which sets the final > > linguist > > > > > form as the criterion for positively or negatively evaluating any > > > > response > > > > > by any student, is such that more proficient readers/speakers will > > have > > > > > easier access to positive evaluation. The ideology here then exists > > as > > > a > > > > > regime of power and differential access, of inequality. By treating > > all > > > > > equally, we get to inequality. > > > > > > > > > > I was thinking that it seems that the prescriptive approach does > > focus > > > on > > > > > the final product, whereas the sociocultural approach that Jang > > pursues > > > > and > > > > > Vygotsky first set forth has it that we should not focus on the > final > > > > > product but on its genesis, on the way the verbal form exists first > > as > > > a > > > > > social relation between people. Thus, in Episodes 1 and 2 in the > > > article, > > > > > if the participants had oriented towards a possible process of > > > > development, > > > > > Ji-Woo's responses would have been heard and responded to as > moments > > > in a > > > > > developmental trajectory. There would have been a very different > > social > > > > > situation in which work would have been directed to make visible > and > > > > > available the dynamics of Ji-Woo's learning process. But the > > > prescriptive > > > > > orientation evaluates and makes salient only deficiency and > > > achievement. > > > > On > > > > > the other hand, and consistent with those (e.g., Stetsenko, > Holzman) > > > who > > > > > have referred to Vygotsky's legacy as *revolutionary,* an > orientation > > > > > consistent with Vygotsky's teachings would bring with it not only a > > > > > different situation, but also an *emancipatory* one. Instead of > > > > inequality > > > > > brought about by treating all equally, we would have an > equalitarian > > > > > approach whose power resides in acknowledging and caring for > history > > > and > > > > > diversity. > > > > > > > > > > On a side thought, and connected to David's (Halliday's) > distinction > > > > > between ideational and interpersonal functions of language, I was > > > > wondering > > > > > what is the relation/difference between ideational and ideological. > > In > > > > the > > > > > article, it seems clear that the language related competence on > > putting > > > > > names to things and thereby building categories seems a condition > for > > > the > > > > > racial/ethnic tension to exist. But of course, the tension is a > > > > relational, > > > > > not just a lexical one. Thoughts? > > > > > > > > > > Alfredo > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________________ > > > > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > edu > > > > > > > > > on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil > > > > > Sent: 13 March 2017 18:48 > > > > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Jang's SL Article Discussion > > > > > > > > > > ?Dear all, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > David has started some very interesting comments on the current > > article > > > > > for discussion on Tensions in Second Language Learning, which > attach > > > > again > > > > > here. Because some of these comments have been given at a different > > > > thread, > > > > > I am starting here a thread that shall more centrally concern > Jang's > > > > > article. I copy below all what David has so far written about the > > > > article. > > > > > I hope this will ?make it easy for Eun-Young and everyone else to > > > follow > > > > on > > > > > her article. I know ?Eun-Young is challenged time-wise by course > > > > > responsibilities and I hope this will make it easier for her. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Eun-Young, David mentions an article from 2011. If you wanted, you > > > could > > > > > also share the PDF with us for background, although the current > > article > > > > > gives more than enough material for discussion, I think. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Alfredo > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --------------------David Kellogg wrote: ------------------ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > t's very interesting to compare this paper with Professor Jang's > 2011 > > > > > paper co-authored with Robert T. Jimenez: > > > > > > > > > > Eun-Young Jang & Robert T. Jim?nez (2011) A Sociocultural > Perspective > > > on > > > > > Second Language Learner Strategies: Focus on the Impact of Social > > > > Context, > > > > > Theory Into Practice, > > > > > 50:2, 141-148, DOI: 10.1080/00405841.2011.558443 > > > > > > > > > > In some ways, the papers are very similar--the data is identical in > > one > > > > > place (p. 42), and the conclusions are for the most part congruent. > > But > > > > > consider how different the titles are. "Impact" in one place, and > > > > "tension" > > > > > in the other. > > > > > > > > > > There is this note to the 1935 version of Vygotsky's report on > > > > preschools, > > > > > where Zankov, Elkonin and Shif complain about Vygotsky's idea that > > the > > > > > child directs his or her own learning before preschool, the > > environment > > > > > directs it after preschool, and preschool therefore represents a > kind > > > of > > > > > transitional stage. On the one hand, if the child is directing his > or > > > her > > > > > own learning, how can we say that the environment is the ultimate > > > source > > > > of > > > > > learning? And if the environment is the ultimate source of > learning, > > as > > > > > Vygotsky says, how can we say that the child is himself or herself > > part > > > > of > > > > > the environment? > > > > > > > > > > Professor Jang gets around this problem just as Vygotsky > > > does--adroitly. > > > > On > > > > > the one hand, strategies are expanded to include "sets of actions > > > > performed > > > > > to deal with problems (perceived by the researcher, indicated by > the > > > > > learners)". On the other, contexts are expanded to include > > "pedagogical > > > > > assumptions, power relations, and interracial conflict". > > > > > > > > > > I think this solution to the problem is the correct one: when we > > > consider > > > > > the relationship of the child and the environment, we cannot treat > it > > > > like > > > > > an unstoppable force meeting an unmoveable object. But for me that > > > means > > > > > that both the child and the environment have to be considered in > > > > "internal" > > > > > (that is, abstract, linguistic) terms. We can't think of speech as > > > > actions; > > > > > it's more useful to think of actions as speech. We can't think of > the > > > > > social situation of development as a material setting: it's a > > > > relationship > > > > > with others. > > > > > > > > > > Contrariwise, it seems to me that when we consider "racism", it is > > more > > > > > helpful to consider it in "external", that is, concrete, > > nonlinguistic > > > > > terms. In the 2011 paper, Professor Jang and her co-author are > > willing > > > to > > > > > openly criticize the idea that languages are learned in exactly the > > > same > > > > > way whether they are first or second languages. Here, they just > quote > > > the > > > > > teacher's comments on "mommy skills". > > > > > > > > > > It's a very revealing quote. One thing it reveals is why it's > > probably > > > > not > > > > > helpful to refer to "racist" as an "insult" (p. 40) or to imply > that > > > > racism > > > > > and anti-racism is really just a matter of having the right > attitude > > > (as > > > > > the Republicans did in the Sessions debate or as Bernie Sanders did > > > when > > > > he > > > > > referred to Trump supporters who voted for Obama as "not having a > > > racist > > > > > bone in their bodies"). > > > > > > > > > > You can see that subjectively, the teacher is being > anti-racist--all > > > > > students, French, Turkish, Egyptian, Korean, use the same > strategies, > > > > just > > > > > like we all have mommies.She has all the right attitudes, and > > probably > > > > > doesn't have a racist bone in her body. But that doesn't diminish > by > > > one > > > > > jot the terrible damage that this kind of indiscriminate > > discrimination > > > > > does in the classroom. > > > > > > > > > > David Kellogg > > > > > Macquarie University > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------ On a related thread (Subject: Don't do > it), > > > > David > > > > > K. wrote:-------------- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It seems to me that we need to clearly distinguish between "racism" > > and > > > > > "racist sentiment". One of the interesting problems that comes up > in > > > > Eunhee > > > > > Jang's excellent article on second language learning strategies > from > > a > > > > > sociocultural point of view--a wonderful piece of "inside" work, > > > > > introducing racial issues into an area where they have never been > > > > seriously > > > > > discussed--is the use of "racist" (by the Korean kids to describe > > their > > > > > teacher) as an "insult". > > > > > > > > > > I like the article. I think it's important work. But for that very > > > > reason, > > > > > I think that it's important to resist any attempt to reduce > "racist" > > > to a > > > > > personal insult. I think we've seen very very clearly, both in the > > > > Sessions > > > > > confirmation hearing, and in the discussion of Trump's own > > anti-semitic > > > > > behavior--that this kind of reduction of the political to the > > personal > > > is > > > > > precisely the kind of reducing the sociocultural to the cognitive > > that > > > > > Professor Jang is trying to resist. > > > > > > > > > > David Kellogg > > > > > Macquarie University > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------- Idem as above------------------------- > > > > > --------------- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > One of the interesting aspects of Professor Jang's paper is that it > > is > > > > > about adolescents who are in the process of forming concepts, but > who > > > are > > > > > not there yet. And one way in which an adolescent forms a concept > > about > > > > the > > > > > difficult concept of a social contract, of citizenship, of > > nationality > > > is > > > > > pseudoconceptual: it is based on discussing "actual" perceptual > > > > differences > > > > > between races. This might seem irrelevant to current political > > > discourse. > > > > > Unfortunately, it isn't.? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > David Kellogg > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > Jang, Eun-Young. Ph.D. > > > > > > Assistant Professor, Graduate School of Education > > > > > > Seoul National University of Education > > > > > > Seoul, S. Korea > > > > > > > > > -- > > Jang, Eun-Young. Ph.D. > > Assistant Professor, Graduate School of Education > > Seoul National University of Education > > Seoul, S. Korea > From ulvi.icil@gmail.com Sun Mar 26 14:18:15 2017 From: ulvi.icil@gmail.com (=?UTF-8?B?VWx2aSDEsMOnaWw=?=) Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2017 00:18:15 +0300 Subject: [Xmca-l] Max Edwards - A great heart, a permanent voice and an immortal, communist youth In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: https://www.marxists.org/glossary/people/e/d.htm#edwards-max I know that this should not be a thanks. But anyway great thanks to Andy for this page at MIA for Max Edwards on his death anniversary. Text written by his mother and father. His mother said that of all the tributes, this one at MIA would surely be the greatest one to him since he himself made also to MIA for Marxist classics. What I wrote in Turkey about him today is that he is one of the most beautiful and clever concretizations of a young human being with Marxism, Leninism, international proletariat and communism. He dedicated his book "to the international proletariat". Let's appreciate that he thought on the emancipation of a whole humanity, unfolding the sails for this latter towards an immense horizon. From a.j.gil@iped.uio.no Mon Mar 27 08:23:50 2017 From: a.j.gil@iped.uio.no (Alfredo Jornet Gil) Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2017 15:23:50 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Jang's SL Article Discussion In-Reply-To: <58d7f7b6.0dd6620a.2f98a.802f@mx.google.com> References: <1489427326574.46980@iped.uio.no> <1489431232770.89078@iped.uio.no> , <1490373072177.47916@iped.uio.no>, <58d7f7b6.0dd6620a.2f98a.802f@mx.google.com> Message-ID: <1490628233852.2628@iped.uio.no> ?Larry, very interesting questions. One of them seems particularly relevant. You ask, was there an historical time when dis-positional aspects of learning take centre stage? I guess that the notion of *apprenticeship* (as developed by, e.g., Lave) partly ??addresses the issue, for it attempts to capture some of that which goes on when you learn a craft, or when you learn to play an instrument, where the instructional focus is on attentional qualities of the work of *doing* crafting or playing. But still, in those situations, the ?relation between the expert and the learner may very much be focused on a quite narrow band of competence with respect to all what may be developing in such teaching/learning situations. As David was mentioning, I think that the 'prescriptive' (in the sense of having and 'end in mind') character of instructional situations should not be just dismissed and thrown away. Yes, *bildung* seems a relevant concept here. But then again, the point of collateral learning is that much of what is being learned is learned despite the fact that its 'content,' the nature and consequences of that learning, are outside the participant's immediate awareness. If, while playing to play a tune on a guitar, you focus too much on each and every motor-sensory aspect of playing, you will have a hard time learning to play it, just as it becomes difficult to walk 'naturally' once you begin to try to walk purposefully. Big questions open here. Connecting them to inequity issues in the classroom takes also work... Alfredo ________________________________ From: lpscholar2@gmail.com Sent: 26 March 2017 19:17 To: Alfredo Jornet Gil; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: RE: [Xmca-l] Re: Jang's SL Article Discussion Alfredo, Your highlighting and drawing our attention to learning (as) developing enduring attitudes, of likes and dislikes, is something you are referring to in passing that i hope we can slow down or pause and consider further. Another word for this is dis-positions in contrast to positions taken. This type of learning occurring in situations that Dewey referred to as (collateral) learning. What may be considered unintended learning? THIS type of learning that is not prescribed or found in textbooks outlining a discipline as a system already made. Why is this dis/positional learning so universally ignored? How do we refocus on dis/positional learning of attiudes as central or core intentions of schooling and higher education? Was there an historical time when this type of dis-positional learning took center stage? If so, can we continue to learn from these traditions? More questions than answers but does seem to *spiral* around notion of *bildung*? This tradition has a deep shadow side (in nationalism) and civilizing notions. However, does Dewey?s mention of collateral learning continue to have relevance while mostly being ignored? Sent from my Windows 10 phone From: Alfredo Jornet Gil Sent: March 24, 2017 9:32 AM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Jang's SL Article Discussion David, Eun-Young, all, I am so glad that David and Eun-Young have found a fruitful common ground in (and outside) the article's discussion. When I chose the paper for this Issue 1 discussion, I thought (perhaps wrongly) that many xmca'ers would be interested in the paper for several reasons, one being the intermingling of social (ideological) and subject-related (second language) aspects. I always find it very interesting the amount of learning that goes on in classrooms (and homes) that is not what canonical descriptions of teaching/learning would (and possibly could) have anticipated. I am talking about what Dewey refers to as 'collateral learning', that is, learning that is not intended nor prescribed by the curriculum, but which nonetheless is consequence of its application. Dewey (in Education and Experience) describes collateral learning as the 'formation of enduring attitudes, of likes and dislikes, [which] may be and often is much more important than the spelling lesson or lesson in geography or history that is learned' This is so absolutely obvious, and yet (in a expression Mike recently used in a talk at Vancouver's SFO) is universally ignored. David, you remind us that Vygotsky was trans-disciplinary in the sense that his field was development, that he was a 'developmentologist' (and you use the felicitous expression 'pre-able' as an example). I think, and this is something authors such as Newman and Holzman (in their Vygotsky as revolutionary scientist) have spelled out, that being a developmentologist is very much an ideology as well, one that is irreconcilable with the prescriptive ideology that Eun-Young describes in her article and that we find ourselves being part of in many occasions everyday. The latter seems to be based on the believe that social (and living) things exist in cause - effect relations pretty much in the same way that physical (non-living) things exist in the universe. Language then can be seen as a tool (and in fact often is described as a tool even in the sociocultural literature that cites Vygotsky) that an individual can use to do things. It is then possible to think of the teaching of second language as the teaching of one thing, rather than as the formation of whole persons, and not just whole persons but of societal forms of relating, indeed. But if you embrace Vygotsky's points on development, specially on the fact that what is developing is whole persons (with affects, motives) and not just isolated bits of information, then learning a (second) language is always so much more than learning to speak words and sentences in a second language. I applaud the author's call for challenging 'ESL educators and institutions ... to construct a learning environment in which diverse ESL students' voices are ... heard and discussed, not only about their English learning, but also about their social struggles' (p. 43). But, considering the prescriptive ideology that the classroom relations in the focus article realise, I am surprised by the author's use of the term 'illogical antagonism against other racial/ethnic groups'. Such antagonism seemed very logical to them, in fact, immediately logical. I am not as kin as the author is in attributing intentions to the individual participants (see, e.g., p. 41). Just as the teacher did not intend inequity, I don't think the Korean learners were being racist (which they effectively were) 'intentionally.' Logic here has to do with organic being, not with formal ideas. And that organic being is about developmental relations, not things (cause) against things (effect). The more I think about it, and the more I work with it, the more I understand that being an educator is one of the most complex, misunderstood and undervalued task in today's society. I hope the article continues to sparkle some interest in the coming days. Meanwhile, thanks Eun-Young and David for a sustained and productive dialogue. Alfredo ________________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of David Kellogg Sent: 20 March 2017 21:45 To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Jang's SL Article Discussion When I was a teenager, my best friend played piano. Tommy didn't just play: he composed--I'd get cassette letters from him where he would forget to talk, and just improvise a whole side of beautiful music. He also had perfect pitch--I'd play a random note on the bass and he would start talking about "my" B flat; somebody behind us in the traffic would honk, and he'd call out "C!". He was color blind. He could tell the traffic lights by their position, of course. But he couldn't tell a blue from a green, a yellow from an orange, or even a yellow from a green. They were just unnameable colors. He'd say "green" and you'd correct him with "blue" and he'd say "whatever". I'd ask him--Can't you SEE the difference? And he'd smile and ask me what note my word "see" was. If I said "C", I'd get a lecture on the major scales. You might think that these are purely physiological differences without social dimensions, and I'm sure, in Tommy's case anyway, something genetic was going on. But if you think a minute, you'll see that a lot of his "blindness" and my "deafness" is about naming things, not perceiving them. You will also see that in both cases there is a certain "social" overcompensation going on: both of us used our strong points to overcome our weak ones, and this led to "circuitous and indirect" ways of social functioning: Tommy went on to the Berklee School of Music, and I wrote lyrics for his songs and eventually became a painter. Vygotsky's transdisciplinary, but perhaps involuntarily so. He worked in defectology on the one hand and in pedology on the other. The common thread was--development, non-canonical and more typical. So he was really a developmentologist. That is a color, or a note, that doesn't actually exist for academics today, so in our color-blind, tone-deaf way we just call him a psychologist. I think you're right that racism has an additional social dimension, and I will call this politico-social, since Tommy's inability to name is certainly social, and so is his circumlocution. This politico-social dimension of racism is really just an ideological correlate of the fact that social progress is not planned: we have, in a rather willy-nilly way, evolved tools and signs to fit one dominant type of culture and one dominant type of psychophysiology rather than another. Sometimes this politico-social dimension also attaches itself to disabilities like (total) blindness and deafness. But it doesn't have to. >From a defectological perspective, these people are not "disabled", but only "pre-abled"--that is, we have invented circuitous and indirect" ways of circumventing these "defects" (e.g. Braille, ASL) but we haven't yet socially evolved them as mainstream abilities. In Seattle there was a loggers'union whose members were from many different language backgrounds (Swedish, Chinook, Russian, and a few English speakers like my grandfather, who was a book keeper). People used American Sign Language in the sawmill; if you weren't deaf when you started, you would be within a year, because the conditions in the sawmills were so awful. But they strongly resisted any suggestion that this made them "disabled". At one point, the union wanted to condemn Helen Keller, because she was consorting with Alexander Graham Bell, the inventor of the telephone, who wanted to force deaf children to lip-read instead of learning ASL. Some people excused her: after all, she's disabled, because she's blind. Most articles (especially most articles in TESOL Q!) use "mediation" as a subcategory of teaching-learning (the "good" kind, the kind of teaching-learning that is sensitive to learner needs on the one hand and context on the other). One of the things I liked about your article is that you recognized that "mediation" is not a subcategory but an enormous supercategory, including "being a student" in a set of social roles. What we think of as teaching-learning is only a very small subcategory: a planned, deliberate, and as a result highly atypical form of mediation. To me, though, this makes "mediation" a very baggy pair of trousers--not a good fit for most of what goes on in classrooms! David Kellogg Macquarie University one shadow is different from another. . I once It just wasn't there. . On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 6:21 PM, Eun Young Jang wrote: > Dear David > > > > Thank you for the interesting and helpful comments on my paper! I really > enjoyed your comments and was also pleased to receive your questions about > Juan in my earlier paper (TESOL Quarterly). I attach my paper here so that > other colleagues can read it if they want. > > > > Yes, I do think that what happened in the ESL classroom can be understood > from the "pedological" end as well, as you said. The point that I wanted > to make in my study was that we should understand 'why a learner acts in > certain way' from multiple perspectives. It is just like a piece of a > multilayered cake. > > By the way, I think I need to learn more about what you meant by > 'defectological' end. When you said 'defect', did you mean some problems > that people might have in their development? If so, I would like to share > my opinion. Everyone might have some problems that they must handle (and > problems that can be handled by some great pedagogical methods). Sometimes > the problems are minor (curable) and sometimes they are not (such as > blindness). However, not all of them are on the same level or same > dimension. In other words, I think we cannot equate some life's challenges > (such as illness) and racial discrimination. They are on different levels. > The latter is intrinsically social, I think. Further, in multicultural > education, 'deficit' has very negative connotation because it alludes that > there are some 'perfect' things in opposition. > > > > Here, I also pasted my response to your earlier email (off the xmca list) > below to share it with otehrs. > > > > Thank you very much for your ?off-list? email and interests in my articles. > Thanks to you, I was happy to remind of Juan, the lovely little boy who I > was with for more than a year. > > > > Yes, we did have an interview with Juan. The other author, Chris Iddings? > first language was Spanish so she was able to communicate with Juan with no > problem. But I remember that whether Juan understood the situation or not > was decided from our observations of his actions. In particular, the focus > of our observations was on the ways the joint attentional frames were > formed because we thought the frames played a critical role as a > mediational means in facilitating Juan?s learning. Oh, I also recall that > when we say Juan?s learning, it was not always learning of English but also > learning of the classroom discourses. About the quiet mouse events, Juan > wanted to be picked eagerly by pointing his finger to his own chest and > contacting eyes with the student with the mouse. About the testing, I > remember that Juan did understand the procedure of the testing and acted > like a student but in fact, it appeared that he was not able to get the > right answers in terms of English. Well, this should not be a problem > because understanding the classroom discourses would serve a scaffolding > for him to learn contents eventually. Hope my brief answer has satisfied > your curiosity about my study a bit. > > > > David, I think we have a lot in common. Let?s keep in touch. I?d love to > drop by the Dasomcha meeting some day! By the way, I have been in SIG for > Critical Pedagogy for almost 6years. If you have a plan to visit Korea > again, you are invited to our Critical Pedagogy meeting as well! > > > > Best, > > EY. > > > > > > > > On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 6:28 AM, David Kellogg > wrote: > > > Dear Professor Jang: > > > > Relax, you are among friends and co-thinkers. Well, a lot of friends, > some > > of whom are probably very close co-thinkers. It's a very big list, but I > > doubt if anybody who read your article would accuse you of teacher > bashing. > > I also don't think anybody who read it would think that you used your > > Korean-ness in any other way than a good researcher uses any resource > that > > affords empathy with the researched. And I DO think that you provided "a" > > way of bridging a socioculural and a cognitivist approach to the second > > language classroom. Perhaps even two ways. > > > > It seems to me that one way is from the "contextualist" end; that is, to > > redefine a context in abstract terms, including things like attitudes, > > motivations, and teaching ideologies right in the context. I think this > is > > actually much more difficult than it looks: some people will consider > this > > behavioristic, because it assumes that attitudes, motivations and > > ideologies can be treated as external to mind. I think it actually only > > considers them as external to text. Other people will consider it > upwardly > > reductionistic, because it assumes that attitudes, motivations and > > ideologies can be reduced to society and to culture and to context of > > situation. I think that society and culture and context of situation must > > always be considered as a complex whole, including cognition, but not > > subsuming it. > > > > It also seems to me that another is from the "organicist" end; that is, > to > > define attitudes, motivations, and ideologies as something in some way > > independent of cognition (the "distributed cognition" people are good at > > this). Again, this isn't so easy, particularly in an American context. > > America is now going through a kind of crisis, because racism has > > previously been defined in only one of two ways. Either racism is part of > > cognition--in which case it really only exists in people who subscribe, > > paradoxically, to "objective" scientific racism, to the belief that > > non-whites are actually inferior. Or racism is part of culture--in which > > case it really only exists in the debilitating effects it has on the > > oppressed, and it doesn't really matter what it is that racists believe > > (or, for that matter, what non-racists believe: Obama was just as guilty > of > > black unemployment as Bush). > > > > What I suggest is, rather perversely, a third way. It's from the > > "pedological, defectological" end. That is, attitudes, motivations and > the > > teaching ideologies which derive from them need to be understood not only > > as part of the context but also as part of pedology, a whole science of > the > > child. Unfortunately, Vygotsky's writings on this are not available in > > English, but they ARE available in good Korean: > > > > http://www.aladin.co.kr/shop/common/wseriesitem.aspx?SRID=25565 > > > > Similarly, the ravages of racism (including the "damunhwa kyoyuk" > developed > > in Korea under Yi Myeongbak and Park Geunhye, which was concerned with > > providing "equal opportunity" to the majority as well as to the minority) > > need to be considered not simply as stigma on the dominant race or as > > stigmata of the oppressed but more defectologically. "Defect" wasn't an > > insult in the USSR: Vygotsky actually considers "yeongje kyoyuk" (that > is, > > "genius education"), education of the blind, education of the deaf, > > so-called "learning disabilities" not as "disabilities" but as > > defects--that is, normal disadvantages to be overcome in the same way as > > any other obstacle in learning, through "circuitous and indirect", that > is, > > mediated, means of learning. We have evolved our means of education, as > > Vygotsky says, to cater to the needs of the psychophysiological dominant > > group, but the mark of higher forms of social progress is how it can > > develop the niches within this and the needs of those who are not > > psychophysiologically dominant. > > > > (Do you know Professor Kim Jinseok? I worked at SNUE for over ten years > > myself, and our Vygotsky group still meets there every Saturday to > > translate the work of Vygotsky into Korean. If you are on campus on a > > Saturday, we are usually in room 315, over "Dasomchae" near the front > gate, > > from noon until about four!) > > > > David Kellogg > > Macquarie University > > > > On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 2:14 PM, Eun Young Jang > > wrote: > > > > > ? > > > > > > Hi everyone, thank you very much for reading my article. This is such a > > > great opportunity for me to introduce my work and receive comments from > > > wonderful colleagues. > > > > > > First, let me introduce myself briefly. I earned my doctorate in > > Language, > > > Literacy, and Culture in the Department of Teaching and Learning at > > > Vanderbilt University. I am currently working as an assistant professor > > in > > > Multicultural Education at Seoul National University of Education > located > > > in Seoul, South Korea. My research interests are in the impact of the > > > social context on second language teaching and learning. Another paper > > > published recently deals with sustainable globalization of higher > > education > > > focusing on cultures and languages in a foreign professor?s classroom > in > > S. > > > Korea. My current research project is about North Korean refugee > students > > > learning English in South Korea. > > > > > > > > > My article for xmca discussion was initiated from my observation that > ESL > > > students were not actually focusing on learning English in the ESL > > > classroom but instead, on ?acting? learning with an attempt to achieve > > > certain social position (as an individual or a group). In particular, I > > > noted that they were quite skillful in using ?seemingly? academic > > > strategies to conceal what they were actually doing. > > > > > > > > > > > > The ESL students were very sensitive to things happening to them in > terms > > > of marginalization and discrimination but did not reveal to others > > > explicitly what they really thought. Instead, they took advantage of > the > > > school discourse that was legitimized in the context, that was, acting > > like > > > motivated and strategic learners by participating in class activities > > > actively and strategically. In spite of regular observations of ESL > > classes > > > back then, I could not figure out what was happening in the classroom > for > > > the first couple of months. Later on, the social dynamics among > students > > > and between students and the teacher surfaced to me and also they began > > to > > > open their minds and told me how they felt isolated and discriminated. > > > Then, I was able to see the meanings of their actions. > > > > > > > > > > > > In effect, the ESL teacher tried hard to be fair and in a sense, the > > French > > > student was isolated and discriminated by the Korean students in the > ESL > > > classroom. Nevertheless, Korean students victimized themselves. I > thought > > > that it was still important and valuable to acknowledge how the Korean > > > students felt simply because the feelings were there and they made some > > > consequences (such as silencing the French student). I wanted to reveal > > > that how the students felt and why they felt that way and how they > > reacted > > > to their feelings. Whether the discrimination was real or not was not > > > important. > > > > > > > > > > > > A reviewer from other journal has criticized my article badly for > teacher > > > bashing. But definitely I did not mean it. Also, some readers of my > > article > > > said that because I am Korean, I was on the Korean students? side. The > > fact > > > was, the ESL teacher and I were good friends and this even made the > > Korean > > > students suspicious of my position (like a spy from the ?white? teacher > > > side). Anyway, honestly, the comments from other scholars made me feel > > > constrained conducting research about the same ethnic group. Now, I?d > > like > > > to know about your opinion about this issue. > > > > > > Again, the fact that the participants were Korean was not the main > focus > > of > > > my study. I wanted to show how they used strategies, which were > typically > > > categorized as individual and cognitive traits, for social purposes. > So, > > > the bigger agenda of my study was to explore ?a? way to bridge the > > > dichotomy between individual and sociocultural camps. > > > > > > Thanks! > > > > > > EY. > > > > > > On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 8:12 AM, David Kellogg > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Alfredo: > > > > > > > > Down the hall one of the Chinese translators is working on > translations > > > of > > > > the Chinese "State of the Union" address into English. The Chinese > goes > > > > something like this: > > > > > > > > ????????? > > > > xi?och? p?nk?n q?d? j?nzh?n. > > > > > > > > Literally: > > > > > > > > "Eradicate Poverty Achieve Progress", i.e. "(The government) (made) > > some > > > > progress in the eradication of poverty." > > > > > > > > In Chinese we don't have to specify the agent, and we don't need to > use > > > the > > > > effective verb "made"; it's a happening and not a doing. This used to > > be > > > > because the agent went without saying--it's encoded in the grammar. > > > Partly > > > > thanks to a poetic tradition going back more than a thousand years, > > > Chinese > > > > lends itself to four-syllable slogan-like objects like "Eradicate > > > Poverty" > > > > and "Achieve Progress", and putting them together sounds natural. We > > > don't > > > > usually use a subject unless we want to stress it; it's much more > > common > > > to > > > > just have a nominal topic and then a comment, like in this example. > > > Because > > > > the government has a well established role in mobilizing the masses > to > > > > carry out actions like famine relief and flood prevention and so on, > > the > > > > agent and the "doing" don't need to be specified: everybody knows it > > was > > > > the government, even if that weren't clear in the context of a > > government > > > > report. So we simply say it's a happening. > > > > > > > > Now that's changing. In fact, the government does relatively little > to > > > > alleviate poverty. There are regional enterprises, and there are > > private > > > > businesses and so on. After the Sichuan earthquake, my brother-in-law > > > > loaded up his SUV with bottled water and drove down to the earthquake > > > area > > > > to distribute it, and he says there was a huge traffic jam of other > > SUVs > > > by > > > > entrepreneurs like him who had exactly the same idea. And for > precisely > > > > this reason, we find that in the government report there is more and > > more > > > > explicit stipulation of the government's agency and of the effective > > > means. > > > > Instead of just happening, the government does things. There is a > > similar > > > > link between ideology and ideation in English if you think about it. > > When > > > > something GOOD happens, it's because somebody DID it, but when > > something > > > > bad happens, "Stuff happens". > > > > > > > > Here's the point. We usually use "ideology" to mean something like > > > > conscious and deliberate ideation, usually of an intentionally > > deceitful > > > or > > > > misleading variety. I don't really accept that. It seems to me that > > > > "ideology" really is equivalent to ideation, that is, to the > > > communicative, > > > > representational function of speech, except that it is somewhat > larger, > > > > both because the interpersonal and the textual functions also encode > > > ideas > > > > and are also therefore ideological and because a lot of ideology is > > > simply > > > > NOT specifying things. For example, when you say "it's raining", you > > are > > > > conveying the idea that rain is an event that just happens, and is > not > > > > caused by any nameable entity. You don't normally say "it's birding" > or > > > > even "it's shining". > > > > > > > > Similarly, we usually use "prescriptivism" to mean something like > > > conscious > > > > and deliberate transformativism, usually of an authoritarian and > > > > dictatorial, and deceptive, sort. I don't really accept that either. > On > > > the > > > > contrary, what is really deceptive is to pretend that the process of > > > > education is meaningful without attending to its ultimate product. To > > me, > > > > "Eradicate Poverty Achieve Progress" is a perfect balance of process > > and > > > > product, and agency and effective means are only meaningful with > > respect > > > to > > > > both. > > > > > > > > David Kellogg > > > > Macquarie University > > > > > > > > On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 5:53 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil < > > a.j.gil@iped.uio.no > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Hi again, > > > > > > > > > > one thing that I find interesting in Jang's article, and which may > > > > connect > > > > > to comments in the other thread (by David, Haydi...) concerning > 'not > > > > > reducing the political to the personal', is the issue of > *ideology.* > > > In > > > > > particular, Jang discusses and empirically examines what she coins > > as a > > > > > *Prescriptive* language ideology. As she describes in her paper, > and > > as > > > > any > > > > > educator will immediately recognise, this ideology exists as the > > > > > classroom's orientations to a correct/incorrect form. In her > article, > > > she > > > > > exhibits this through a number of sequences in which > teacher-student > > > and > > > > > student-student relations involve *evaluations* with regard to > > > > proficiently > > > > > using two rules: making connections between sentences and staying > on > > > the > > > > > topic. > > > > > > > > > > As Jang shows, the prescriptive approach, which sets the final > > linguist > > > > > form as the criterion for positively or negatively evaluating any > > > > response > > > > > by any student, is such that more proficient readers/speakers will > > have > > > > > easier access to positive evaluation. The ideology here then exists > > as > > > a > > > > > regime of power and differential access, of inequality. By treating > > all > > > > > equally, we get to inequality. > > > > > > > > > > I was thinking that it seems that the prescriptive approach does > > focus > > > on > > > > > the final product, whereas the sociocultural approach that Jang > > pursues > > > > and > > > > > Vygotsky first set forth has it that we should not focus on the > final > > > > > product but on its genesis, on the way the verbal form exists first > > as > > > a > > > > > social relation between people. Thus, in Episodes 1 and 2 in the > > > article, > > > > > if the participants had oriented towards a possible process of > > > > development, > > > > > Ji-Woo's responses would have been heard and responded to as > moments > > > in a > > > > > developmental trajectory. There would have been a very different > > social > > > > > situation in which work would have been directed to make visible > and > > > > > available the dynamics of Ji-Woo's learning process. But the > > > prescriptive > > > > > orientation evaluates and makes salient only deficiency and > > > achievement. > > > > On > > > > > the other hand, and consistent with those (e.g., Stetsenko, > Holzman) > > > who > > > > > have referred to Vygotsky's legacy as *revolutionary,* an > orientation > > > > > consistent with Vygotsky's teachings would bring with it not only a > > > > > different situation, but also an *emancipatory* one. Instead of > > > > inequality > > > > > brought about by treating all equally, we would have an > equalitarian > > > > > approach whose power resides in acknowledging and caring for > history > > > and > > > > > diversity. > > > > > > > > > > On a side thought, and connected to David's (Halliday's) > distinction > > > > > between ideational and interpersonal functions of language, I was > > > > wondering > > > > > what is the relation/difference between ideational and ideological. > > In > > > > the > > > > > article, it seems clear that the language related competence on > > putting > > > > > names to things and thereby building categories seems a condition > for > > > the > > > > > racial/ethnic tension to exist. But of course, the tension is a > > > > relational, > > > > > not just a lexical one. Thoughts? > > > > > > > > > > Alfredo > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________________ > > > > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > edu > > > > > > > > > on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil > > > > > Sent: 13 March 2017 18:48 > > > > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Jang's SL Article Discussion > > > > > > > > > > ?Dear all, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > David has started some very interesting comments on the current > > article > > > > > for discussion on Tensions in Second Language Learning, which > attach > > > > again > > > > > here. Because some of these comments have been given at a different > > > > thread, > > > > > I am starting here a thread that shall more centrally concern > Jang's > > > > > article. I copy below all what David has so far written about the > > > > article. > > > > > I hope this will ?make it easy for Eun-Young and everyone else to > > > follow > > > > on > > > > > her article. I know ?Eun-Young is challenged time-wise by course > > > > > responsibilities and I hope this will make it easier for her. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Eun-Young, David mentions an article from 2011. If you wanted, you > > > could > > > > > also share the PDF with us for background, although the current > > article > > > > > gives more than enough material for discussion, I think. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Alfredo > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --------------------David Kellogg wrote: ------------------ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > t's very interesting to compare this paper with Professor Jang's > 2011 > > > > > paper co-authored with Robert T. Jimenez: > > > > > > > > > > Eun-Young Jang & Robert T. Jim?nez (2011) A Sociocultural > Perspective > > > on > > > > > Second Language Learner Strategies: Focus on the Impact of Social > > > > Context, > > > > > Theory Into Practice, > > > > > 50:2, 141-148, DOI: 10.1080/00405841.2011.558443 > > > > > > > > > > In some ways, the papers are very similar--the data is identical in > > one > > > > > place (p. 42), and the conclusions are for the most part congruent. > > But > > > > > consider how different the titles are. "Impact" in one place, and > > > > "tension" > > > > > in the other. > > > > > > > > > > There is this note to the 1935 version of Vygotsky's report on > > > > preschools, > > > > > where Zankov, Elkonin and Shif complain about Vygotsky's idea that > > the > > > > > child directs his or her own learning before preschool, the > > environment > > > > > directs it after preschool, and preschool therefore represents a > kind > > > of > > > > > transitional stage. On the one hand, if the child is directing his > or > > > her > > > > > own learning, how can we say that the environment is the ultimate > > > source > > > > of > > > > > learning? And if the environment is the ultimate source of > learning, > > as > > > > > Vygotsky says, how can we say that the child is himself or herself > > part > > > > of > > > > > the environment? > > > > > > > > > > Professor Jang gets around this problem just as Vygotsky > > > does--adroitly. > > > > On > > > > > the one hand, strategies are expanded to include "sets of actions > > > > performed > > > > > to deal with problems (perceived by the researcher, indicated by > the > > > > > learners)". On the other, contexts are expanded to include > > "pedagogical > > > > > assumptions, power relations, and interracial conflict". > > > > > > > > > > I think this solution to the problem is the correct one: when we > > > consider > > > > > the relationship of the child and the environment, we cannot treat > it > > > > like > > > > > an unstoppable force meeting an unmoveable object. But for me that > > > means > > > > > that both the child and the environment have to be considered in > > > > "internal" > > > > > (that is, abstract, linguistic) terms. We can't think of speech as > > > > actions; > > > > > it's more useful to think of actions as speech. We can't think of > the > > > > > social situation of development as a material setting: it's a > > > > relationship > > > > > with others. > > > > > > > > > > Contrariwise, it seems to me that when we consider "racism", it is > > more > > > > > helpful to consider it in "external", that is, concrete, > > nonlinguistic > > > > > terms. In the 2011 paper, Professor Jang and her co-author are > > willing > > > to > > > > > openly criticize the idea that languages are learned in exactly the > > > same > > > > > way whether they are first or second languages. Here, they just > quote > > > the > > > > > teacher's comments on "mommy skills". > > > > > > > > > > It's a very revealing quote. One thing it reveals is why it's > > probably > > > > not > > > > > helpful to refer to "racist" as an "insult" (p. 40) or to imply > that > > > > racism > > > > > and anti-racism is really just a matter of having the right > attitude > > > (as > > > > > the Republicans did in the Sessions debate or as Bernie Sanders did > > > when > > > > he > > > > > referred to Trump supporters who voted for Obama as "not having a > > > racist > > > > > bone in their bodies"). > > > > > > > > > > You can see that subjectively, the teacher is being > anti-racist--all > > > > > students, French, Turkish, Egyptian, Korean, use the same > strategies, > > > > just > > > > > like we all have mommies.She has all the right attitudes, and > > probably > > > > > doesn't have a racist bone in her body. But that doesn't diminish > by > > > one > > > > > jot the terrible damage that this kind of indiscriminate > > discrimination > > > > > does in the classroom. > > > > > > > > > > David Kellogg > > > > > Macquarie University > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------ On a related thread (Subject: Don't do > it), > > > > David > > > > > K. wrote:-------------- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It seems to me that we need to clearly distinguish between "racism" > > and > > > > > "racist sentiment". One of the interesting problems that comes up > in > > > > Eunhee > > > > > Jang's excellent article on second language learning strategies > from > > a > > > > > sociocultural point of view--a wonderful piece of "inside" work, > > > > > introducing racial issues into an area where they have never been > > > > seriously > > > > > discussed--is the use of "racist" (by the Korean kids to describe > > their > > > > > teacher) as an "insult". > > > > > > > > > > I like the article. I think it's important work. But for that very > > > > reason, > > > > > I think that it's important to resist any attempt to reduce > "racist" > > > to a > > > > > personal insult. I think we've seen very very clearly, both in the > > > > Sessions > > > > > confirmation hearing, and in the discussion of Trump's own > > anti-semitic > > > > > behavior--that this kind of reduction of the political to the > > personal > > > is > > > > > precisely the kind of reducing the sociocultural to the cognitive > > that > > > > > Professor Jang is trying to resist. > > > > > > > > > > David Kellogg > > > > > Macquarie University > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------- Idem as above------------------------- > > > > > --------------- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > One of the interesting aspects of Professor Jang's paper is that it > > is > > > > > about adolescents who are in the process of forming concepts, but > who > > > are > > > > > not there yet. And one way in which an adolescent forms a concept > > about > > > > the > > > > > difficult concept of a social contract, of citizenship, of > > nationality > > > is > > > > > pseudoconceptual: it is based on discussing "actual" perceptual > > > > differences > > > > > between races. This might seem irrelevant to current political > > > discourse. > > > > > Unfortunately, it isn't.? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > David Kellogg > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > Jang, Eun-Young. Ph.D. > > > > > > Assistant Professor, Graduate School of Education > > > > > > Seoul National University of Education > > > > > > Seoul, S. Korea > > > > > > > > > -- > > Jang, Eun-Young. Ph.D. > > Assistant Professor, Graduate School of Education > > Seoul National University of Education > > Seoul, S. Korea > From a.j.gil@iped.uio.no Mon Mar 27 08:27:53 2017 From: a.j.gil@iped.uio.no (Alfredo Jornet Gil) Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2017 15:27:53 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Max Edwards - A great heart, a permanent voice and an immortal, communist youth In-Reply-To: References: , Message-ID: <1490628477464.18140@iped.uio.no> Beautiful, Andy. Thanks so much. And thanks Ulvi for bringing it to the xmca spotlight. A ________________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of Ulvi ??il Sent: 26 March 2017 23:18 To: xmca-l@ucsd.edu Subject: [Xmca-l] Max Edwards - A great heart, a permanent voice and an immortal, communist youth https://www.marxists.org/glossary/people/e/d.htm#edwards-max I know that this should not be a thanks. But anyway great thanks to Andy for this page at MIA for Max Edwards on his death anniversary. Text written by his mother and father. His mother said that of all the tributes, this one at MIA would surely be the greatest one to him since he himself made also to MIA for Marxist classics. What I wrote in Turkey about him today is that he is one of the most beautiful and clever concretizations of a young human being with Marxism, Leninism, international proletariat and communism. He dedicated his book "to the international proletariat". Let's appreciate that he thought on the emancipation of a whole humanity, unfolding the sails for this latter towards an immense horizon. From a.j.gil@iped.uio.no Mon Mar 27 08:27:53 2017 From: a.j.gil@iped.uio.no (Alfredo Jornet Gil) Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2017 15:27:53 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Max Edwards - A great heart, a permanent voice and an immortal, communist youth In-Reply-To: References: , Message-ID: <1490628477464.18140@iped.uio.no> Beautiful, Andy. Thanks so much. And thanks Ulvi for bringing it to the xmca spotlight. A ________________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of Ulvi ??il Sent: 26 March 2017 23:18 To: xmca-l@ucsd.edu Subject: [Xmca-l] Max Edwards - A great heart, a permanent voice and an immortal, communist youth https://www.marxists.org/glossary/people/e/d.htm#edwards-max I know that this should not be a thanks. But anyway great thanks to Andy for this page at MIA for Max Edwards on his death anniversary. Text written by his mother and father. His mother said that of all the tributes, this one at MIA would surely be the greatest one to him since he himself made also to MIA for Marxist classics. What I wrote in Turkey about him today is that he is one of the most beautiful and clever concretizations of a young human being with Marxism, Leninism, international proletariat and communism. He dedicated his book "to the international proletariat". Let's appreciate that he thought on the emancipation of a whole humanity, unfolding the sails for this latter towards an immense horizon. From lpscholar2@gmail.com Mon Mar 27 13:57:55 2017 From: lpscholar2@gmail.com (lpscholar2@gmail.com) Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2017 13:57:55 -0700 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Max Edwards - A great heart, a permanent voice and animmortal, communist youth In-Reply-To: <1490628477464.18140@iped.uio.no> References: , <1490628477464.18140@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: <58d97cdb.4c8f630a.9213a.6d23@mx.google.com> Thanks Andy and Ulvi for sharing Max?s passion for justice and his self-effacing approach to social equality. How was Max able to find his ?voice? that resonated through his blog and not be silenced, even in the situation of his personal suffering. An example for others Sent from my Windows 10 phone From: Alfredo Jornet Gil Sent: March 27, 2017 8:29 AM To: xmca-l@ucsd.edu; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Max Edwards - A great heart, a permanent voice and animmortal, communist youth Beautiful, Andy. Thanks so much. And thanks Ulvi for bringing it to the xmca spotlight. A ________________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of Ulvi ??il Sent: 26 March 2017 23:18 To: xmca-l@ucsd.edu Subject: [Xmca-l] Max Edwards - A great heart, a permanent voice and an immortal, communist youth https://www.marxists.org/glossary/people/e/d.htm#edwards-max I know that this should not be a thanks. But anyway great thanks to Andy for this page at MIA for Max Edwards on his death anniversary. Text written by his mother and father. His mother said that of all the tributes, this one at MIA would surely be the greatest one to him since he himself made also to MIA for Marxist classics. What I wrote in Turkey about him today is that he is one of the most beautiful and clever concretizations of a young human being with Marxism, Leninism, international proletariat and communism. He dedicated his book "to the international proletariat". Let's appreciate that he thought on the emancipation of a whole humanity, unfolding the sails for this latter towards an immense horizon. From lpscholar2@gmail.com Mon Mar 27 13:57:55 2017 From: lpscholar2@gmail.com (lpscholar2@gmail.com) Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2017 13:57:55 -0700 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Max Edwards - A great heart, a permanent voice and animmortal, communist youth In-Reply-To: <1490628477464.18140@iped.uio.no> References: , <1490628477464.18140@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: <58d97cdb.4c8f630a.9213a.6d23@mx.google.com> Thanks Andy and Ulvi for sharing Max?s passion for justice and his self-effacing approach to social equality. How was Max able to find his ?voice? that resonated through his blog and not be silenced, even in the situation of his personal suffering. An example for others Sent from my Windows 10 phone From: Alfredo Jornet Gil Sent: March 27, 2017 8:29 AM To: xmca-l@ucsd.edu; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Max Edwards - A great heart, a permanent voice and animmortal, communist youth Beautiful, Andy. Thanks so much. And thanks Ulvi for bringing it to the xmca spotlight. A ________________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of Ulvi ??il Sent: 26 March 2017 23:18 To: xmca-l@ucsd.edu Subject: [Xmca-l] Max Edwards - A great heart, a permanent voice and an immortal, communist youth https://www.marxists.org/glossary/people/e/d.htm#edwards-max I know that this should not be a thanks. But anyway great thanks to Andy for this page at MIA for Max Edwards on his death anniversary. Text written by his mother and father. His mother said that of all the tributes, this one at MIA would surely be the greatest one to him since he himself made also to MIA for Marxist classics. What I wrote in Turkey about him today is that he is one of the most beautiful and clever concretizations of a young human being with Marxism, Leninism, international proletariat and communism. He dedicated his book "to the international proletariat". Let's appreciate that he thought on the emancipation of a whole humanity, unfolding the sails for this latter towards an immense horizon. From lpscholar2@gmail.com Tue Mar 28 06:37:21 2017 From: lpscholar2@gmail.com (lpscholar2@gmail.com) Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2017 06:37:21 -0700 Subject: [Xmca-l] HEGEL AND HERMENEUTICS a very short 7 page introduction Message-ID: <58da66ea.4731620a.baa1a.311c@mx.google.com> I am sharing this short article by John Russon that gives his take on hermeneutical interpretation, inter-subjectivity, and focus on recognition read through Hegel I leave open for discussion whether John Russon presents a fair rendition of Hegel?s approach? This is a clear exposition of the way Ruston engages with interpretation and mediation as [turtles all the way down]. May or may not be relevant?? Sent from Mail for Windows 10 -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: RUSSON JOHN MARCH 28 2017 Hegel_and_Hermeneutics.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 347635 bytes Desc: not available Url : https://mailman.ucsd.edu/mailman/private/xmca-l/attachments/20170328/ef30573c/attachment.pdf From greg.a.thompson@gmail.com Tue Mar 28 08:13:05 2017 From: greg.a.thompson@gmail.com (Greg Thompson) Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2017 09:13:05 -0600 Subject: [Xmca-l] Fwd: [AAA_ACYIG] New book on children as caregivers in the TB and HIV epidemics In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Just a follow-up on my previous post about the website regarding child caregivers in Zambia. Jean Hunleth has an accompanying new book, *Children as Caregivers: The Global Fight against Tuberculosis and HIV in Zambia*. Details (including discount codes) below. Best, greg ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Hunleth, Jean Marie Date: Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 7:57 AM Subject: [AAA_ACYIG] New book on children as caregivers in the TB and HIV epidemics To: "aaa_acyig@binhost.com" Dear Colleagues, My new book, *Children as Caregivers: The Global Fight against Tuberculosis and HIV in Zambia,* is now available from Rutgers University Press and other online booksellers. The book chronicles the experiences of children living with parents and guardians who suffered from tuberculosis and shows how their perspectives matter in the global debates about health care. Learn more and access a 30% discount code for purchases through Rutgers Press or 10% discount code for Eurospan here . I am equally excited to announce my online Children as Caregivers drawing gallery that accompanies the book. The gallery tells the story of the book through the children's drawings and is a free resource. Best, Jean ------------------------------ Jean Hunleth, PhD, MPH Research Scientist Division of Public Health Sciences Washington University in Saint Louis website: http://hunleth.wustl.edu Book: *Children as Caregivers: The Global Fight against Tuberculosis and HIV in Zambia*: https://www.rutgersuniversitypress.org/ children-as-caregivers/9780813588032 Check out my Children as Caregivers Art Gallery: https://www.flickr. com/photos/childrenascaregivers/albums ------------------------------ The materials in this email are private and may contain Protected Health Information. If you are not the intended recipient be advised that any unauthorized use, disclosure, copying, distribution or the taking of any action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please immediately notify the sender via return email. _______________________________________________ American Anthropological Association's Anthropology of Children and Youth Interest Group Listserv. AAA_ACYIG@binhost.com To view the message archives, please visit: https://lists.capalon.com/pipermail/aaa_acyig/ For help with this list, please contact the List Administrator acyig.aaa AT gmail DOT com You may also manage your own subscription preferences at: https://lists.capalon.com/lists/listinfo/aaa_acyig Note: To stop receiving email from this list, please set your account to DISABLED. ACYIG hosts Collaborative Research Networks! Visit the sites for CRN Mobilities, CRN Lifecourse, and/or CRN Students to sign up for their listservs (http://acyig.americananthro.org/crns/). AAA_ACYIG mailing list AAA_ACYIG@binhost.com https://lists.capalon.com/lists/listinfo/aaa_acyig -- Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D. Assistant Professor Department of Anthropology 880 Spencer W. Kimball Tower Brigham Young University Provo, UT 84602 http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson From dkellogg60@gmail.com Tue Mar 28 23:14:31 2017 From: dkellogg60@gmail.com (David Kellogg) Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2017 17:14:31 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Jang's SL Article Discussion In-Reply-To: <1490628233852.2628@iped.uio.no> References: <1489427326574.46980@iped.uio.no> <1489431232770.89078@iped.uio.no> <1490373072177.47916@iped.uio.no> <58d7f7b6.0dd6620a.2f98a.802f@mx.google.com> <1490628233852.2628@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: Well, the idea of "incidental learning" (which is, I think, what Larry means by dispositional learning) had a good run in foreign language teaching. Foreign language learning is hard, and that is rather paradoxical. Why should EVERYBODY master a first language seamlessly and hardly ANYBODY be able to do the same trick with a second? Especially since, as Vygotsky points out, we all bring more intellectual capital to bear the second go around? Since the hard-wiring critical period theories have more or less been disproven (because there ARE people who DO master a second language and even some who forget their first language), the consensus has moved towards the rather anti-intellectual idea that first language learning is painless because it is essentially incidental and dispositional: we learn our first language largely in the process of learning other things. Particularly in elementary school, that has meant trying to make second language learning much more like first language learning, and (as I argued earlier) this had led to well-intentioned but nevertheless highly discriminatory practices, including an emphasis on dispositional learning which native speakers must find too easy and foreigners coy and frustrating. Vygotsky's view is very different though. First of all, he denies that first language learning is painless. Second, he denies that learning a second language is completely distinguishable from learning the first. Just as the child's semantics are largely unchanged as the child moves from proto-language to language proper, we tend to import our own native language semantics when we pick up a second or third language. So learning a second language is really continuing the first language by second language means (in normal humans, the "vocabulary explosion" comes to a halt about age seventeen, but this isn't true if you start another language). Thirdly, and most interestingly, Vygotsky points out that although the MEANS of learning foreign language concepts appears similar to learning scientific concepts in in school (i.e. part to whole, voluntary and volitional, and organized in taxonomies), the actual RESULT is a set of everyday concepts! I was trying to develop this in a study for Applied Linguistics. They decided the study wasn't very interesting, but they did publish my critique: https://academic.oup.com/applij/article/3067194/The-D-Is- for-Development-Beyond-Pedagogical Also, the official version of "Thinking of Feeling" is out on Language and Education, and the first fifty to click THIS link will get free e-copies (so they say): http://www.tandfonline.com/eprint/8Vaq4HpJMi55DzsAyFCf/full David Kellogg Macquarie University On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 2:23 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil wrote: > ?Larry, very interesting questions. > > One of them seems particularly relevant. You ask, was there an historical > time when dis-positional aspects of learning take centre stage? > > > I guess that the notion of *apprenticeship* (as developed by, e.g., Lave) > partly ??addresses the issue, for it attempts to capture some of that which > goes on when you learn a craft, or when you learn to play an instrument, > where the instructional focus is on attentional qualities of the work of > *doing* crafting or playing. But still, in those situations, the ?relation > between the expert and the learner may very much be focused on a quite > narrow band of competence with respect to all what may be developing in > such teaching/learning situations. As David was mentioning, I think that > the 'prescriptive' (in the sense of having and 'end in mind') character of > instructional situations should not be just dismissed and thrown away. > > Yes, *bildung* seems a relevant concept here. But then again, the point of > collateral learning is that much of what is being learned is learned > despite the fact that its 'content,' the nature and consequences of that > learning, are outside the participant's immediate awareness. If, while > playing to play a tune on a guitar, you focus too much on each and every > motor-sensory aspect of playing, you will have a hard time learning to play > it, just as it becomes difficult to walk 'naturally' once you begin to try > to walk purposefully. Big questions open here. Connecting them to inequity > issues in the classroom takes also work... > > > Alfredo > > ________________________________ > From: lpscholar2@gmail.com > Sent: 26 March 2017 19:17 > To: Alfredo Jornet Gil; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: RE: [Xmca-l] Re: Jang's SL Article Discussion > > Alfredo, > Your highlighting and drawing our attention to learning (as) developing > enduring attitudes, of likes and dislikes, is something you are referring > to in passing that i hope we can slow down or pause and consider further. > Another word for this is dis-positions in contrast to positions taken. > This type of learning occurring in situations that Dewey referred to as > (collateral) learning. What may be considered unintended learning? > > THIS type of learning that is not prescribed or found in textbooks > outlining a discipline as a system already made. > > Why is this dis/positional learning so universally ignored? How do we > refocus on dis/positional learning of attiudes as central or core > intentions of schooling and higher education? > > Was there an historical time when this type of dis-positional learning > took center stage? If so, can we continue to learn from these traditions? > > More questions than answers but does seem to *spiral* around notion of > *bildung*? > This tradition has a deep shadow side (in nationalism) and civilizing > notions. > However, does Dewey?s mention of collateral learning continue to have > relevance while mostly being ignored? > > > > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > From: Alfredo Jornet Gil > Sent: March 24, 2017 9:32 AM > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Jang's SL Article Discussion > > David, Eun-Young, all, > > I am so glad that David and Eun-Young have found a fruitful common ground > in (and outside) the article's discussion. > > When I chose the paper for this Issue 1 discussion, I thought (perhaps > wrongly) that many xmca'ers would be interested in the paper for several > reasons, one being the intermingling of social (ideological) and > subject-related (second language) aspects. I always find it very > interesting the amount of learning that goes on in classrooms (and homes) > that is not what canonical descriptions of teaching/learning would (and > possibly could) have anticipated. I am talking about what Dewey refers to > as 'collateral learning', that is, learning that is not intended nor > prescribed by the curriculum, but which nonetheless is consequence of its > application. > > Dewey (in Education and Experience) describes collateral learning as the > 'formation of enduring attitudes, of likes and dislikes, [which] may be and > often is much more important than the spelling lesson or lesson in > geography or history that is learned' This is so absolutely obvious, and > yet (in a expression Mike recently used in a talk at Vancouver's SFO) is > universally ignored. > > David, you remind us that Vygotsky was trans-disciplinary in the sense > that his field was development, that he was a 'developmentologist' (and you > use the felicitous expression 'pre-able' as an example). I think, and this > is something authors such as Newman and Holzman (in their Vygotsky as > revolutionary scientist) have spelled out, that being a developmentologist > is very much an ideology as well, one that is irreconcilable with the > prescriptive ideology that Eun-Young describes in her article and that we > find ourselves being part of in many occasions everyday. The latter seems > to be based on the believe that social (and living) things exist in cause - > effect relations pretty much in the same way that physical (non-living) > things exist in the universe. Language then can be seen as a tool (and in > fact often is described as a tool even in the sociocultural literature that > cites Vygotsky) that an individual can use to do things. It is then > possible to think of the teaching of second language as the teaching of one > thing, rather than as the formation of whole persons, and not just whole > persons but of societal forms of relating, indeed. But if you embrace > Vygotsky's points on development, specially on the fact that what is > developing is whole persons (with affects, motives) and not just isolated > bits of information, then learning a (second) language is always so much > more than learning to speak words and sentences in a second language. > > I applaud the author's call for challenging 'ESL educators and > institutions ... to construct a learning environment in which diverse ESL > students' voices are ... heard and discussed, not only about their English > learning, but also about their social struggles' (p. 43). But, considering > the prescriptive ideology that the classroom relations in the focus article > realise, I am surprised by the author's use of the term 'illogical > antagonism against other racial/ethnic groups'. Such antagonism seemed very > logical to them, in fact, immediately logical. I am not as kin as the > author is in attributing intentions to the individual participants (see, > e.g., p. 41). Just as the teacher did not intend inequity, I don't think > the Korean learners were being racist (which they effectively were) > 'intentionally.' Logic here has to do with organic being, not with formal > ideas. And that organic being is about developmental relations, not things > (cause) against things (effect). The more I think about it, and the more I > work with it, the more I understand that being an educator is one of the > most complex, misunderstood and undervalued task in today's society. > > I hope the article continues to sparkle some interest in the coming days. > Meanwhile, thanks Eun-Young and David for a sustained and productive > dialogue. > Alfredo > > ________________________________________ > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > on behalf of David Kellogg > Sent: 20 March 2017 21:45 > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Jang's SL Article Discussion > > When I was a teenager, my best friend played piano. Tommy didn't just play: > he composed--I'd get cassette letters from him where he would forget to > talk, and just improvise a whole side of beautiful music. He also had > perfect pitch--I'd play a random note on the bass and he would start > talking about "my" B flat; somebody behind us in the traffic would honk, > and he'd call out "C!". > > He was color blind. He could tell the traffic lights by their position, of > course. But he couldn't tell a blue from a green, a yellow from an orange, > or even a yellow from a green. They were just unnameable colors. He'd say > "green" and you'd correct him with "blue" and he'd say "whatever". I'd ask > him--Can't you SEE the difference? And he'd smile and ask me what note my > word "see" was. If I said "C", I'd get a lecture on the major scales. > > You might think that these are purely physiological differences without > social dimensions, and I'm sure, in Tommy's case anyway, something genetic > was going on. But if you think a minute, you'll see that a lot of his > "blindness" and my "deafness" is about naming things, not perceiving them. > You will also see that in both cases there is a certain "social" > overcompensation going on: both of us used our strong points to overcome > our weak ones, and this led to "circuitous and indirect" ways of social > functioning: Tommy went on to the Berklee School of Music, and I wrote > lyrics for his songs and eventually became a painter. > > Vygotsky's transdisciplinary, but perhaps involuntarily so. He worked in > defectology on the one hand and in pedology on the other. The common thread > was--development, non-canonical and more typical. So he was really a > developmentologist. That is a color, or a note, that doesn't actually exist > for academics today, so in our color-blind, tone-deaf way we just call him > a psychologist. > > I think you're right that racism has an additional social dimension, and I > will call this politico-social, since Tommy's inability to name is > certainly social, and so is his circumlocution. This politico-social > dimension of racism is really just an ideological correlate of the fact > that social progress is not planned: we have, in a rather willy-nilly way, > evolved tools and signs to fit one dominant type of culture and one > dominant type of psychophysiology rather than another. > > Sometimes this politico-social dimension also attaches itself to > disabilities like (total) blindness and deafness. But it doesn't have to. > >From a defectological perspective, these people are not "disabled", but > only "pre-abled"--that is, we have invented circuitous and indirect" ways > of circumventing these "defects" (e.g. Braille, ASL) but we haven't yet > socially evolved them as mainstream abilities. > > In Seattle there was a loggers'union whose members were from many different > language backgrounds (Swedish, Chinook, Russian, and a few English speakers > like my grandfather, who was a book keeper). People used American Sign > Language in the sawmill; if you weren't deaf when you started, you would be > within a year, because the conditions in the sawmills were so awful. But > they strongly resisted any suggestion that this made them "disabled". At > one point, the union wanted to condemn Helen Keller, because she was > consorting with Alexander Graham Bell, the inventor of the telephone, who > wanted to force deaf children to lip-read instead of learning ASL. Some > people excused her: after all, she's disabled, because she's blind. > > Most articles (especially most articles in TESOL Q!) use "mediation" as a > subcategory of teaching-learning (the "good" kind, the kind of > teaching-learning that is sensitive to learner needs on the one hand and > context on the other). One of the things I liked about your article is that > you recognized that "mediation" is not a subcategory but an enormous > supercategory, including "being a student" in a set of social roles. What > we think of as teaching-learning is only a very small subcategory: a > planned, deliberate, and as a result highly atypical form of mediation. To > me, though, this makes "mediation" a very baggy pair of trousers--not a > good fit for most of what goes on in classrooms! > > David Kellogg > Macquarie University > > > > one shadow is different from another. . I once It just wasn't there. . > > On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 6:21 PM, Eun Young Jang > wrote: > > > Dear David > > > > > > > > Thank you for the interesting and helpful comments on my paper! I really > > enjoyed your comments and was also pleased to receive your questions > about > > Juan in my earlier paper (TESOL Quarterly). I attach my paper here so > that > > other colleagues can read it if they want. > > > > > > > > Yes, I do think that what happened in the ESL classroom can be understood > > from the "pedological" end as well, as you said. The point that I wanted > > to make in my study was that we should understand 'why a learner acts in > > certain way' from multiple perspectives. It is just like a piece of a > > multilayered cake. > > > > By the way, I think I need to learn more about what you meant by > > 'defectological' end. When you said 'defect', did you mean some problems > > that people might have in their development? If so, I would like to share > > my opinion. Everyone might have some problems that they must handle (and > > problems that can be handled by some great pedagogical methods). > Sometimes > > the problems are minor (curable) and sometimes they are not (such as > > blindness). However, not all of them are on the same level or same > > dimension. In other words, I think we cannot equate some life's > challenges > > (such as illness) and racial discrimination. They are on different > levels. > > The latter is intrinsically social, I think. Further, in multicultural > > education, 'deficit' has very negative connotation because it alludes > that > > there are some 'perfect' things in opposition. > > > > > > > > Here, I also pasted my response to your earlier email (off the xmca list) > > below to share it with otehrs. > > > > > > > > Thank you very much for your ?off-list? email and interests in my > articles. > > Thanks to you, I was happy to remind of Juan, the lovely little boy who I > > was with for more than a year. > > > > > > > > Yes, we did have an interview with Juan. The other author, Chris Iddings? > > first language was Spanish so she was able to communicate with Juan with > no > > problem. But I remember that whether Juan understood the situation or not > > was decided from our observations of his actions. In particular, the > focus > > of our observations was on the ways the joint attentional frames were > > formed because we thought the frames played a critical role as a > > mediational means in facilitating Juan?s learning. Oh, I also recall that > > when we say Juan?s learning, it was not always learning of English but > also > > learning of the classroom discourses. About the quiet mouse events, Juan > > wanted to be picked eagerly by pointing his finger to his own chest and > > contacting eyes with the student with the mouse. About the testing, I > > remember that Juan did understand the procedure of the testing and acted > > like a student but in fact, it appeared that he was not able to get the > > right answers in terms of English. Well, this should not be a problem > > because understanding the classroom discourses would serve a scaffolding > > for him to learn contents eventually. Hope my brief answer has satisfied > > your curiosity about my study a bit. > > > > > > > > David, I think we have a lot in common. Let?s keep in touch. I?d love to > > drop by the Dasomcha meeting some day! By the way, I have been in SIG for > > Critical Pedagogy for almost 6years. If you have a plan to visit Korea > > again, you are invited to our Critical Pedagogy meeting as well! > > > > > > > > Best, > > > > EY. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 6:28 AM, David Kellogg > > wrote: > > > > > Dear Professor Jang: > > > > > > Relax, you are among friends and co-thinkers. Well, a lot of friends, > > some > > > of whom are probably very close co-thinkers. It's a very big list, but > I > > > doubt if anybody who read your article would accuse you of teacher > > bashing. > > > I also don't think anybody who read it would think that you used your > > > Korean-ness in any other way than a good researcher uses any resource > > that > > > affords empathy with the researched. And I DO think that you provided > "a" > > > way of bridging a socioculural and a cognitivist approach to the second > > > language classroom. Perhaps even two ways. > > > > > > It seems to me that one way is from the "contextualist" end; that is, > to > > > redefine a context in abstract terms, including things like attitudes, > > > motivations, and teaching ideologies right in the context. I think this > > is > > > actually much more difficult than it looks: some people will consider > > this > > > behavioristic, because it assumes that attitudes, motivations and > > > ideologies can be treated as external to mind. I think it actually only > > > considers them as external to text. Other people will consider it > > upwardly > > > reductionistic, because it assumes that attitudes, motivations and > > > ideologies can be reduced to society and to culture and to context of > > > situation. I think that society and culture and context of situation > must > > > always be considered as a complex whole, including cognition, but not > > > subsuming it. > > > > > > It also seems to me that another is from the "organicist" end; that is, > > to > > > define attitudes, motivations, and ideologies as something in some way > > > independent of cognition (the "distributed cognition" people are good > at > > > this). Again, this isn't so easy, particularly in an American context. > > > America is now going through a kind of crisis, because racism has > > > previously been defined in only one of two ways. Either racism is part > of > > > cognition--in which case it really only exists in people who subscribe, > > > paradoxically, to "objective" scientific racism, to the belief that > > > non-whites are actually inferior. Or racism is part of culture--in > which > > > case it really only exists in the debilitating effects it has on the > > > oppressed, and it doesn't really matter what it is that racists believe > > > (or, for that matter, what non-racists believe: Obama was just as > guilty > > of > > > black unemployment as Bush). > > > > > > What I suggest is, rather perversely, a third way. It's from the > > > "pedological, defectological" end. That is, attitudes, motivations and > > the > > > teaching ideologies which derive from them need to be understood not > only > > > as part of the context but also as part of pedology, a whole science of > > the > > > child. Unfortunately, Vygotsky's writings on this are not available in > > > English, but they ARE available in good Korean: > > > > > > http://www.aladin.co.kr/shop/common/wseriesitem.aspx?SRID=25565 > > > > > > Similarly, the ravages of racism (including the "damunhwa kyoyuk" > > developed > > > in Korea under Yi Myeongbak and Park Geunhye, which was concerned with > > > providing "equal opportunity" to the majority as well as to the > minority) > > > need to be considered not simply as stigma on the dominant race or as > > > stigmata of the oppressed but more defectologically. "Defect" wasn't an > > > insult in the USSR: Vygotsky actually considers "yeongje kyoyuk" (that > > is, > > > "genius education"), education of the blind, education of the deaf, > > > so-called "learning disabilities" not as "disabilities" but as > > > defects--that is, normal disadvantages to be overcome in the same way > as > > > any other obstacle in learning, through "circuitous and indirect", that > > is, > > > mediated, means of learning. We have evolved our means of education, as > > > Vygotsky says, to cater to the needs of the psychophysiological > dominant > > > group, but the mark of higher forms of social progress is how it can > > > develop the niches within this and the needs of those who are not > > > psychophysiologically dominant. > > > > > > (Do you know Professor Kim Jinseok? I worked at SNUE for over ten years > > > myself, and our Vygotsky group still meets there every Saturday to > > > translate the work of Vygotsky into Korean. If you are on campus on a > > > Saturday, we are usually in room 315, over "Dasomchae" near the front > > gate, > > > from noon until about four!) > > > > > > David Kellogg > > > Macquarie University > > > > > > On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 2:14 PM, Eun Young Jang < > eunyoung1112@gmail.com> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > ? > > > > > > > > Hi everyone, thank you very much for reading my article. This is > such a > > > > great opportunity for me to introduce my work and receive comments > from > > > > wonderful colleagues. > > > > > > > > First, let me introduce myself briefly. I earned my doctorate in > > > Language, > > > > Literacy, and Culture in the Department of Teaching and Learning at > > > > Vanderbilt University. I am currently working as an assistant > professor > > > in > > > > Multicultural Education at Seoul National University of Education > > located > > > > in Seoul, South Korea. My research interests are in the impact of the > > > > social context on second language teaching and learning. Another > paper > > > > published recently deals with sustainable globalization of higher > > > education > > > > focusing on cultures and languages in a foreign professor?s classroom > > in > > > S. > > > > Korea. My current research project is about North Korean refugee > > students > > > > learning English in South Korea. > > > > > > > > > > > > My article for xmca discussion was initiated from my observation that > > ESL > > > > students were not actually focusing on learning English in the ESL > > > > classroom but instead, on ?acting? learning with an attempt to > achieve > > > > certain social position (as an individual or a group). In > particular, I > > > > noted that they were quite skillful in using ?seemingly? academic > > > > strategies to conceal what they were actually doing. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The ESL students were very sensitive to things happening to them in > > terms > > > > of marginalization and discrimination but did not reveal to others > > > > explicitly what they really thought. Instead, they took advantage of > > the > > > > school discourse that was legitimized in the context, that was, > acting > > > like > > > > motivated and strategic learners by participating in class activities > > > > actively and strategically. In spite of regular observations of ESL > > > classes > > > > back then, I could not figure out what was happening in the classroom > > for > > > > the first couple of months. Later on, the social dynamics among > > students > > > > and between students and the teacher surfaced to me and also they > began > > > to > > > > open their minds and told me how they felt isolated and > discriminated. > > > > Then, I was able to see the meanings of their actions. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In effect, the ESL teacher tried hard to be fair and in a sense, the > > > French > > > > student was isolated and discriminated by the Korean students in the > > ESL > > > > classroom. Nevertheless, Korean students victimized themselves. I > > thought > > > > that it was still important and valuable to acknowledge how the > Korean > > > > students felt simply because the feelings were there and they made > some > > > > consequences (such as silencing the French student). I wanted to > reveal > > > > that how the students felt and why they felt that way and how they > > > reacted > > > > to their feelings. Whether the discrimination was real or not was not > > > > important. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > A reviewer from other journal has criticized my article badly for > > teacher > > > > bashing. But definitely I did not mean it. Also, some readers of my > > > article > > > > said that because I am Korean, I was on the Korean students? side. > The > > > fact > > > > was, the ESL teacher and I were good friends and this even made the > > > Korean > > > > students suspicious of my position (like a spy from the ?white? > teacher > > > > side). Anyway, honestly, the comments from other scholars made me > feel > > > > constrained conducting research about the same ethnic group. Now, I?d > > > like > > > > to know about your opinion about this issue. > > > > > > > > Again, the fact that the participants were Korean was not the main > > focus > > > of > > > > my study. I wanted to show how they used strategies, which were > > typically > > > > categorized as individual and cognitive traits, for social purposes. > > So, > > > > the bigger agenda of my study was to explore ?a? way to bridge the > > > > dichotomy between individual and sociocultural camps. > > > > > > > > Thanks! > > > > > > > > EY. > > > > > > > > On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 8:12 AM, David Kellogg > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Alfredo: > > > > > > > > > > Down the hall one of the Chinese translators is working on > > translations > > > > of > > > > > the Chinese "State of the Union" address into English. The Chinese > > goes > > > > > something like this: > > > > > > > > > > ????????? > > > > > xi?och? p?nk?n q?d? j?nzh?n. > > > > > > > > > > Literally: > > > > > > > > > > "Eradicate Poverty Achieve Progress", i.e. "(The government) (made) > > > some > > > > > progress in the eradication of poverty." > > > > > > > > > > In Chinese we don't have to specify the agent, and we don't need to > > use > > > > the > > > > > effective verb "made"; it's a happening and not a doing. This used > to > > > be > > > > > because the agent went without saying--it's encoded in the grammar. > > > > Partly > > > > > thanks to a poetic tradition going back more than a thousand years, > > > > Chinese > > > > > lends itself to four-syllable slogan-like objects like "Eradicate > > > > Poverty" > > > > > and "Achieve Progress", and putting them together sounds natural. > We > > > > don't > > > > > usually use a subject unless we want to stress it; it's much more > > > common > > > > to > > > > > just have a nominal topic and then a comment, like in this example. > > > > Because > > > > > the government has a well established role in mobilizing the masses > > to > > > > > carry out actions like famine relief and flood prevention and so > on, > > > the > > > > > agent and the "doing" don't need to be specified: everybody knows > it > > > was > > > > > the government, even if that weren't clear in the context of a > > > government > > > > > report. So we simply say it's a happening. > > > > > > > > > > Now that's changing. In fact, the government does relatively little > > to > > > > > alleviate poverty. There are regional enterprises, and there are > > > private > > > > > businesses and so on. After the Sichuan earthquake, my > brother-in-law > > > > > loaded up his SUV with bottled water and drove down to the > earthquake > > > > area > > > > > to distribute it, and he says there was a huge traffic jam of other > > > SUVs > > > > by > > > > > entrepreneurs like him who had exactly the same idea. And for > > precisely > > > > > this reason, we find that in the government report there is more > and > > > more > > > > > explicit stipulation of the government's agency and of the > effective > > > > means. > > > > > Instead of just happening, the government does things. There is a > > > similar > > > > > link between ideology and ideation in English if you think about > it. > > > When > > > > > something GOOD happens, it's because somebody DID it, but when > > > something > > > > > bad happens, "Stuff happens". > > > > > > > > > > Here's the point. We usually use "ideology" to mean something like > > > > > conscious and deliberate ideation, usually of an intentionally > > > deceitful > > > > or > > > > > misleading variety. I don't really accept that. It seems to me that > > > > > "ideology" really is equivalent to ideation, that is, to the > > > > communicative, > > > > > representational function of speech, except that it is somewhat > > larger, > > > > > both because the interpersonal and the textual functions also > encode > > > > ideas > > > > > and are also therefore ideological and because a lot of ideology is > > > > simply > > > > > NOT specifying things. For example, when you say "it's raining", > you > > > are > > > > > conveying the idea that rain is an event that just happens, and is > > not > > > > > caused by any nameable entity. You don't normally say "it's > birding" > > or > > > > > even "it's shining". > > > > > > > > > > Similarly, we usually use "prescriptivism" to mean something like > > > > conscious > > > > > and deliberate transformativism, usually of an authoritarian and > > > > > dictatorial, and deceptive, sort. I don't really accept that > either. > > On > > > > the > > > > > contrary, what is really deceptive is to pretend that the process > of > > > > > education is meaningful without attending to its ultimate product. > To > > > me, > > > > > "Eradicate Poverty Achieve Progress" is a perfect balance of > process > > > and > > > > > product, and agency and effective means are only meaningful with > > > respect > > > > to > > > > > both. > > > > > > > > > > David Kellogg > > > > > Macquarie University > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 5:53 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil < > > > a.j.gil@iped.uio.no > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Hi again, > > > > > > > > > > > > one thing that I find interesting in Jang's article, and which > may > > > > > connect > > > > > > to comments in the other thread (by David, Haydi...) concerning > > 'not > > > > > > reducing the political to the personal', is the issue of > > *ideology.* > > > > In > > > > > > particular, Jang discusses and empirically examines what she > coins > > > as a > > > > > > *Prescriptive* language ideology. As she describes in her paper, > > and > > > as > > > > > any > > > > > > educator will immediately recognise, this ideology exists as the > > > > > > classroom's orientations to a correct/incorrect form. In her > > article, > > > > she > > > > > > exhibits this through a number of sequences in which > > teacher-student > > > > and > > > > > > student-student relations involve *evaluations* with regard to > > > > > proficiently > > > > > > using two rules: making connections between sentences and staying > > on > > > > the > > > > > > topic. > > > > > > > > > > > > As Jang shows, the prescriptive approach, which sets the final > > > linguist > > > > > > form as the criterion for positively or negatively evaluating any > > > > > response > > > > > > by any student, is such that more proficient readers/speakers > will > > > have > > > > > > easier access to positive evaluation. The ideology here then > exists > > > as > > > > a > > > > > > regime of power and differential access, of inequality. By > treating > > > all > > > > > > equally, we get to inequality. > > > > > > > > > > > > I was thinking that it seems that the prescriptive approach does > > > focus > > > > on > > > > > > the final product, whereas the sociocultural approach that Jang > > > pursues > > > > > and > > > > > > Vygotsky first set forth has it that we should not focus on the > > final > > > > > > product but on its genesis, on the way the verbal form exists > first > > > as > > > > a > > > > > > social relation between people. Thus, in Episodes 1 and 2 in the > > > > article, > > > > > > if the participants had oriented towards a possible process of > > > > > development, > > > > > > Ji-Woo's responses would have been heard and responded to as > > moments > > > > in a > > > > > > developmental trajectory. There would have been a very different > > > social > > > > > > situation in which work would have been directed to make visible > > and > > > > > > available the dynamics of Ji-Woo's learning process. But the > > > > prescriptive > > > > > > orientation evaluates and makes salient only deficiency and > > > > achievement. > > > > > On > > > > > > the other hand, and consistent with those (e.g., Stetsenko, > > Holzman) > > > > who > > > > > > have referred to Vygotsky's legacy as *revolutionary,* an > > orientation > > > > > > consistent with Vygotsky's teachings would bring with it not > only a > > > > > > different situation, but also an *emancipatory* one. Instead of > > > > > inequality > > > > > > brought about by treating all equally, we would have an > > equalitarian > > > > > > approach whose power resides in acknowledging and caring for > > history > > > > and > > > > > > diversity. > > > > > > > > > > > > On a side thought, and connected to David's (Halliday's) > > distinction > > > > > > between ideational and interpersonal functions of language, I was > > > > > wondering > > > > > > what is the relation/difference between ideational and > ideological. > > > In > > > > > the > > > > > > article, it seems clear that the language related competence on > > > putting > > > > > > names to things and thereby building categories seems a condition > > for > > > > the > > > > > > racial/ethnic tension to exist. But of course, the tension is a > > > > > relational, > > > > > > not just a lexical one. Thoughts? > > > > > > > > > > > > Alfredo > > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________________ > > > > > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > edu > > > > > > > > > > > on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil > > > > > > Sent: 13 March 2017 18:48 > > > > > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Jang's SL Article Discussion > > > > > > > > > > > > ?Dear all, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > David has started some very interesting comments on the current > > > article > > > > > > for discussion on Tensions in Second Language Learning, which > > attach > > > > > again > > > > > > here. Because some of these comments have been given at a > different > > > > > thread, > > > > > > I am starting here a thread that shall more centrally concern > > Jang's > > > > > > article. I copy below all what David has so far written about the > > > > > article. > > > > > > I hope this will ?make it easy for Eun-Young and everyone else to > > > > follow > > > > > on > > > > > > her article. I know ?Eun-Young is challenged time-wise by course > > > > > > responsibilities and I hope this will make it easier for her. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Eun-Young, David mentions an article from 2011. If you wanted, > you > > > > could > > > > > > also share the PDF with us for background, although the current > > > article > > > > > > gives more than enough material for discussion, I think. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Alfredo > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --------------------David Kellogg wrote: ------------------ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > t's very interesting to compare this paper with Professor Jang's > > 2011 > > > > > > paper co-authored with Robert T. Jimenez: > > > > > > > > > > > > Eun-Young Jang & Robert T. Jim?nez (2011) A Sociocultural > > Perspective > > > > on > > > > > > Second Language Learner Strategies: Focus on the Impact of Social > > > > > Context, > > > > > > Theory Into Practice, > > > > > > 50:2, 141-148, DOI: 10.1080/00405841.2011.558443 > > > > > > > > > > > > In some ways, the papers are very similar--the data is identical > in > > > one > > > > > > place (p. 42), and the conclusions are for the most part > congruent. > > > But > > > > > > consider how different the titles are. "Impact" in one place, and > > > > > "tension" > > > > > > in the other. > > > > > > > > > > > > There is this note to the 1935 version of Vygotsky's report on > > > > > preschools, > > > > > > where Zankov, Elkonin and Shif complain about Vygotsky's idea > that > > > the > > > > > > child directs his or her own learning before preschool, the > > > environment > > > > > > directs it after preschool, and preschool therefore represents a > > kind > > > > of > > > > > > transitional stage. On the one hand, if the child is directing > his > > or > > > > her > > > > > > own learning, how can we say that the environment is the ultimate > > > > source > > > > > of > > > > > > learning? And if the environment is the ultimate source of > > learning, > > > as > > > > > > Vygotsky says, how can we say that the child is himself or > herself > > > part > > > > > of > > > > > > the environment? > > > > > > > > > > > > Professor Jang gets around this problem just as Vygotsky > > > > does--adroitly. > > > > > On > > > > > > the one hand, strategies are expanded to include "sets of actions > > > > > performed > > > > > > to deal with problems (perceived by the researcher, indicated by > > the > > > > > > learners)". On the other, contexts are expanded to include > > > "pedagogical > > > > > > assumptions, power relations, and interracial conflict". > > > > > > > > > > > > I think this solution to the problem is the correct one: when we > > > > consider > > > > > > the relationship of the child and the environment, we cannot > treat > > it > > > > > like > > > > > > an unstoppable force meeting an unmoveable object. But for me > that > > > > means > > > > > > that both the child and the environment have to be considered in > > > > > "internal" > > > > > > (that is, abstract, linguistic) terms. We can't think of speech > as > > > > > actions; > > > > > > it's more useful to think of actions as speech. We can't think of > > the > > > > > > social situation of development as a material setting: it's a > > > > > relationship > > > > > > with others. > > > > > > > > > > > > Contrariwise, it seems to me that when we consider "racism", it > is > > > more > > > > > > helpful to consider it in "external", that is, concrete, > > > nonlinguistic > > > > > > terms. In the 2011 paper, Professor Jang and her co-author are > > > willing > > > > to > > > > > > openly criticize the idea that languages are learned in exactly > the > > > > same > > > > > > way whether they are first or second languages. Here, they just > > quote > > > > the > > > > > > teacher's comments on "mommy skills". > > > > > > > > > > > > It's a very revealing quote. One thing it reveals is why it's > > > probably > > > > > not > > > > > > helpful to refer to "racist" as an "insult" (p. 40) or to imply > > that > > > > > racism > > > > > > and anti-racism is really just a matter of having the right > > attitude > > > > (as > > > > > > the Republicans did in the Sessions debate or as Bernie Sanders > did > > > > when > > > > > he > > > > > > referred to Trump supporters who voted for Obama as "not having a > > > > racist > > > > > > bone in their bodies"). > > > > > > > > > > > > You can see that subjectively, the teacher is being > > anti-racist--all > > > > > > students, French, Turkish, Egyptian, Korean, use the same > > strategies, > > > > > just > > > > > > like we all have mommies.She has all the right attitudes, and > > > probably > > > > > > doesn't have a racist bone in her body. But that doesn't diminish > > by > > > > one > > > > > > jot the terrible damage that this kind of indiscriminate > > > discrimination > > > > > > does in the classroom. > > > > > > > > > > > > David Kellogg > > > > > > Macquarie University > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------ On a related thread (Subject: Don't do > > it), > > > > > David > > > > > > K. wrote:-------------- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It seems to me that we need to clearly distinguish between > "racism" > > > and > > > > > > "racist sentiment". One of the interesting problems that comes up > > in > > > > > Eunhee > > > > > > Jang's excellent article on second language learning strategies > > from > > > a > > > > > > sociocultural point of view--a wonderful piece of "inside" work, > > > > > > introducing racial issues into an area where they have never been > > > > > seriously > > > > > > discussed--is the use of "racist" (by the Korean kids to describe > > > their > > > > > > teacher) as an "insult". > > > > > > > > > > > > I like the article. I think it's important work. But for that > very > > > > > reason, > > > > > > I think that it's important to resist any attempt to reduce > > "racist" > > > > to a > > > > > > personal insult. I think we've seen very very clearly, both in > the > > > > > Sessions > > > > > > confirmation hearing, and in the discussion of Trump's own > > > anti-semitic > > > > > > behavior--that this kind of reduction of the political to the > > > personal > > > > is > > > > > > precisely the kind of reducing the sociocultural to the cognitive > > > that > > > > > > Professor Jang is trying to resist. > > > > > > > > > > > > David Kellogg > > > > > > Macquarie University > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------- Idem as above------------------------- > > > > > > --------------- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > One of the interesting aspects of Professor Jang's paper is that > it > > > is > > > > > > about adolescents who are in the process of forming concepts, but > > who > > > > are > > > > > > not there yet. And one way in which an adolescent forms a concept > > > about > > > > > the > > > > > > difficult concept of a social contract, of citizenship, of > > > nationality > > > > is > > > > > > pseudoconceptual: it is based on discussing "actual" perceptual > > > > > differences > > > > > > between races. This might seem irrelevant to current political > > > > discourse. > > > > > > Unfortunately, it isn't.? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > David Kellogg > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > Jang, Eun-Young. Ph.D. > > > > > > > > Assistant Professor, Graduate School of Education > > > > > > > > Seoul National University of Education > > > > > > > > Seoul, S. Korea > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Jang, Eun-Young. Ph.D. > > > > Assistant Professor, Graduate School of Education > > > > Seoul National University of Education > > > > Seoul, S. Korea > > > > > From smago@uga.edu Wed Mar 29 02:21:32 2017 From: smago@uga.edu (Peter Smagorinsky) Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2017 09:21:32 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] FW: ZDP and DST! In-Reply-To: <4A593EF7722A9A40AAEF667E0FDC0EE232F96527@mbs1.ad.jyu.fi> References: <4A593EF7722A9A40AAEF667E0FDC0EE232F96527@mbs1.ad.jyu.fi> Message-ID: More from Finland: From: Karimi Aghdam Ordaklou, Saeed [mailto:saeed.s.karimi-aghdam-ordaklou@student.jyu.fi] Sent: Wednesday, March 29, 2017 3:18 AM To: Peter Smagorinsky Subject: ZDP and DST! Dear Prof. Smagorinsky, I hope this finds you well. I thought that you might be interested in having a look at my paper which has looked at ZPD from dynamic systems theory perspective. Thanks for your attention in advance. Sincerely, Saeed Saeed Karimi-Aghdam PhD Candidate & Junior Researcher ( Applied Linguistics/ Language Learning & Teaching) Department of Languages, University of Jyvaskyla, Finland https://www.jyu.fi/hum/laitokset/kielet/meidan-laitoksemme/kielten-laitoksen-henkilosto/karimi-aghdam-saeed Co-Editor ( Book Review), Apples: Journal of Applied Language Studies, http://apples.jyu.fi/ -------------- next part -------------- -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.gif Type: image/gif Size: 1117 bytes Desc: image001.gif Url : https://mailman.ucsd.edu/mailman/private/xmca-l/attachments/20170329/73bf0c89/attachment-0001.gif -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: ZDP as an Emergent System.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 443196 bytes Desc: ZDP as an Emergent System.pdf Url : https://mailman.ucsd.edu/mailman/private/xmca-l/attachments/20170329/73bf0c89/attachment-0001.pdf From lpscholar2@gmail.com Wed Mar 29 04:28:03 2017 From: lpscholar2@gmail.com (lpscholar2@gmail.com) Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2017 04:28:03 -0700 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: FW: ZDP and DST! In-Reply-To: References: <4A593EF7722A9A40AAEF667E0FDC0EE232F96527@mbs1.ad.jyu.fi> Message-ID: <58db9a4c.cf60630a.2de46.0ef6@mx.google.com> Peter Thanks for bringing this article to our table for consideration. Reading (Zpd) through dynamic-systems theory puts the accent on zones (Z) that are proximate. I will add the word (transitional) to go with (zone) to emphasize the fluid boundaries of zones. We are in the (realm) of places when exploring zones and this theme has many avenues (or traditions) of approach. I am looking forward to exploring places through the notions of *dynamic *systems *theory These notions in (relation) to zones as places and the quality or character or mood of these zones. Some would shift places to situations Sent from my Windows 10 phone From: Peter Smagorinsky Sent: March 29, 2017 2:23 AM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] FW: ZDP and DST! More from Finland: From: Karimi Aghdam Ordaklou, Saeed [mailto:saeed.s.karimi-aghdam-ordaklou@student.jyu.fi] Sent: Wednesday, March 29, 2017 3:18 AM To: Peter Smagorinsky Subject: ZDP and DST! Dear Prof. Smagorinsky, I hope this finds you well. I thought that you might be interested in having a look at my paper which has looked at ZPD from dynamic systems theory perspective. Thanks for your attention in advance. Sincerely, Saeed Saeed Karimi-Aghdam PhD Candidate & Junior Researcher ( Applied Linguistics/ Language Learning & Teaching) Department of Languages, University of Jyvaskyla, Finland https://www.jyu.fi/hum/laitokset/kielet/meidan-laitoksemme/kielten-laitoksen-henkilosto/karimi-aghdam-saeed Co-Editor ( Book Review), Apples: Journal of Applied Language Studies, http://apples.jyu.fi/ From wolffmichael.roth@gmail.com Wed Mar 29 04:57:23 2017 From: wolffmichael.roth@gmail.com (Wolff-Michael Roth) Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2017 04:57:23 -0700 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: FW: ZDP and DST! In-Reply-To: <58db9a4c.cf60630a.2de46.0ef6@mx.google.com> References: <4A593EF7722A9A40AAEF667E0FDC0EE232F96527@mbs1.ad.jyu.fi> <58db9a4c.cf60630a.2de46.0ef6@mx.google.com> Message-ID: Peter, this is the point about ZPD that Luis and I made 7 years ago in this editorial of MCA. Michael -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Wolff-Michael Roth, Lansdowne Professor Applied Cognitive Science MacLaurin Building A567 University of Victoria Victoria, BC, V8P 5C2 http://web.uvic.ca/~mroth New book: *The Mathematics of Mathematics * On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 4:28 AM, wrote: > Peter > Thanks for bringing this article to our table for consideration. > Reading (Zpd) through dynamic-systems theory puts the accent on zones (Z) > that are proximate. > I will add the word (transitional) to go with (zone) to emphasize the > fluid boundaries of zones. > We are in the (realm) of places when exploring zones and this theme has > many avenues (or traditions) of approach. > I am looking forward to exploring places through the notions of > *dynamic > *systems > *theory > > These notions in (relation) to zones as places and the quality or > character or mood of these zones. > Some would shift places to situations > > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > From: Peter Smagorinsky > Sent: March 29, 2017 2:23 AM > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] FW: ZDP and DST! > > > More from Finland: > > From: Karimi Aghdam Ordaklou, Saeed [mailto:saeed.s.karimi-aghdam- > ordaklou@student.jyu.fi] > Sent: Wednesday, March 29, 2017 3:18 AM > To: Peter Smagorinsky > Subject: ZDP and DST! > > Dear Prof. Smagorinsky, > > I hope this finds you well. > > I thought that you might be interested in having a look at my paper which > has looked at ZPD from dynamic systems theory perspective. > > Thanks for your attention in advance. > > Sincerely, > > Saeed > > > > Saeed Karimi-Aghdam > PhD Candidate & Junior Researcher ( Applied Linguistics/ Language Learning > & Teaching) > Department of Languages, University of Jyvaskyla, Finland > https://www.jyu.fi/hum/laitokset/kielet/meidan- > laitoksemme/kielten-laitoksen-henkilosto/karimi-aghdam-saeed > Co-Editor ( Book Review), Apples: Journal of Applied Language Studies, > http://apples.jyu.fi/ > > > > -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Roth_Radford_2010.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 209530 bytes Desc: not available Url : https://mailman.ucsd.edu/mailman/private/xmca-l/attachments/20170329/8a51c01a/attachment.pdf From lpscholar2@gmail.com Wed Mar 29 06:06:59 2017 From: lpscholar2@gmail.com (lpscholar2@gmail.com) Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2017 06:06:59 -0700 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: FW: ZDP and DST! In-Reply-To: References: <4A593EF7722A9A40AAEF667E0FDC0EE232F96527@mbs1.ad.jyu.fi> <58db9a4c.cf60630a.2de46.0ef6@mx.google.com> Message-ID: <58dbb14a.1144620a.18ee0.23b9@mx.google.com> Thanks for this article. I want to highlight this contribution elaborating zone on page 303: By responding Conner comes to inhabit the public space of interaction AND opens up ?possibilities? for inter-subjectivity to appear. Engaging in actions that are not premeditated Conner exposes himself. Both participants are engaged in the co/formation of an emerging intersubjective attunement ? creating ?this? zone. I appreciate this way of approaching [zone] Sent from Mail for Windows 10 From: Wolff-Michael Roth Sent: March 29, 2017 4:59 AM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: FW: ZDP and DST! Peter, this is the point about ZPD that Luis and I made 7 years ago in this editorial of MCA. Michael -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Wolff-Michael Roth, Lansdowne Professor Applied Cognitive Science MacLaurin Building A567 University of Victoria Victoria, BC, V8P 5C2 http://web.uvic.ca/~mroth New book: *The Mathematics of Mathematics * On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 4:28 AM, wrote: > Peter > Thanks for bringing this article to our table for consideration. > Reading (Zpd) through dynamic-systems theory puts the accent on zones (Z) > that are proximate. > I will add the word (transitional) to go with (zone) to emphasize the > fluid boundaries of zones. > We are in the (realm) of places when exploring zones and this theme has > many avenues (or traditions) of approach. > I am looking forward to exploring places through the notions of > *dynamic > *systems > *theory > > These notions in (relation) to zones as places and the quality or > character or mood of these zones. > Some would shift places to situations > > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > From: Peter Smagorinsky > Sent: March 29, 2017 2:23 AM > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] FW: ZDP and DST! > > > More from Finland: > > From: Karimi Aghdam Ordaklou, Saeed [mailto:saeed.s.karimi-aghdam- > ordaklou@student.jyu.fi] > Sent: Wednesday, March 29, 2017 3:18 AM > To: Peter Smagorinsky > Subject: ZDP and DST! > > Dear Prof. Smagorinsky, > > I hope this finds you well. > > I thought that you might be interested in having a look at my paper which > has looked at ZPD from dynamic systems theory perspective. > > Thanks for your attention in advance. > > Sincerely, > > Saeed > > > > Saeed Karimi-Aghdam > PhD Candidate & Junior Researcher ( Applied Linguistics/ Language Learning > & Teaching) > Department of Languages, University of Jyvaskyla, Finland > https://www.jyu.fi/hum/laitokset/kielet/meidan- > laitoksemme/kielten-laitoksen-henkilosto/karimi-aghdam-saeed > Co-Editor ( Book Review), Apples: Journal of Applied Language Studies, > http://apples.jyu.fi/ > > > > From ggladduck@gmail.com Wed Mar 29 16:45:36 2017 From: ggladduck@gmail.com (=?UTF-8?B?67Cw7Z2s7LKg?=) Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2017 08:45:36 +0900 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Jang's SL Article Discussion In-Reply-To: References: <1489427326574.46980@iped.uio.no> <1489431232770.89078@iped.uio.no> <1490373072177.47916@iped.uio.no> <58d7f7b6.0dd6620a.2f98a.802f@mx.google.com> <1490628233852.2628@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: ??? ???, ? ?????? ?? ?? ????. ?? ?? ?? ???. ???? ???? ???. https://academic.oup.com/applij/article/3067194/The-D-Is- for-Development-Beyond-Pedagogical 2017-03-29 15:14 GMT+09:00 David Kellogg : > Well, the idea of "incidental learning" (which is, I think, what Larry > means by dispositional learning) had a good run in foreign language > teaching. > > Foreign language learning is hard, and that is rather paradoxical. Why > should EVERYBODY master a first language seamlessly and hardly ANYBODY be > able to do the same trick with a second? Especially since, as Vygotsky > points out, we all bring more intellectual capital to bear the second go > around? Since the hard-wiring critical period theories have more or less > been disproven (because there ARE people who DO master a second language > and even some who forget their first language), the consensus has moved > towards the rather anti-intellectual idea that first language learning is > painless because it is essentially incidental and dispositional: we learn > our first language largely in the process of learning other things. > Particularly in elementary school, that has meant trying to make second > language learning much more like first language learning, and (as I argued > earlier) this had led to well-intentioned but nevertheless highly > discriminatory practices, including an emphasis on dispositional learning > which native speakers must find too easy and foreigners coy and > frustrating. > > Vygotsky's view is very different though. First of all, he denies that > first language learning is painless. Second, he denies that learning a > second language is completely distinguishable from learning the first. Just > as the child's semantics are largely unchanged as the child moves from > proto-language to language proper, we tend to import our own native > language semantics when we pick up a second or third language. So learning > a second language is really continuing the first language by second > language means (in normal humans, the "vocabulary explosion" comes to a > halt about age seventeen, but this isn't true if you start another > language). Thirdly, and most interestingly, Vygotsky points out that > although the MEANS of learning foreign language concepts appears similar to > learning scientific concepts in in school (i.e. part to whole, voluntary > and volitional, and organized in taxonomies), the actual RESULT is a set of > everyday concepts! > > I was trying to develop this in a study for Applied Linguistics. They > decided the study wasn't very interesting, but they did publish my > critique: > > https://academic.oup.com/applij/article/3067194/The-D-Is- > for-Development-Beyond-Pedagogical > > Also, the official version of "Thinking of Feeling" is out on Language and > Education, and the first fifty to click THIS link will get free e-copies > (so they say): > > http://www.tandfonline.com/eprint/8Vaq4HpJMi55DzsAyFCf/full > > David Kellogg > Macquarie University > > > > > On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 2:23 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil > wrote: > > > ?Larry, very interesting questions. > > > > One of them seems particularly relevant. You ask, was there an historical > > time when dis-positional aspects of learning take centre stage? > > > > > > I guess that the notion of *apprenticeship* (as developed by, e.g., Lave) > > partly ??addresses the issue, for it attempts to capture some of that > which > > goes on when you learn a craft, or when you learn to play an instrument, > > where the instructional focus is on attentional qualities of the work of > > *doing* crafting or playing. But still, in those situations, the > ?relation > > between the expert and the learner may very much be focused on a quite > > narrow band of competence with respect to all what may be developing in > > such teaching/learning situations. As David was mentioning, I think that > > the 'prescriptive' (in the sense of having and 'end in mind') character > of > > instructional situations should not be just dismissed and thrown away. > > > > Yes, *bildung* seems a relevant concept here. But then again, the point > of > > collateral learning is that much of what is being learned is learned > > despite the fact that its 'content,' the nature and consequences of that > > learning, are outside the participant's immediate awareness. If, while > > playing to play a tune on a guitar, you focus too much on each and every > > motor-sensory aspect of playing, you will have a hard time learning to > play > > it, just as it becomes difficult to walk 'naturally' once you begin to > try > > to walk purposefully. Big questions open here. Connecting them to > inequity > > issues in the classroom takes also work... > > > > > > Alfredo > > > > ________________________________ > > From: lpscholar2@gmail.com > > Sent: 26 March 2017 19:17 > > To: Alfredo Jornet Gil; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > Subject: RE: [Xmca-l] Re: Jang's SL Article Discussion > > > > Alfredo, > > Your highlighting and drawing our attention to learning (as) developing > > enduring attitudes, of likes and dislikes, is something you are referring > > to in passing that i hope we can slow down or pause and consider further. > > Another word for this is dis-positions in contrast to positions taken. > > This type of learning occurring in situations that Dewey referred to as > > (collateral) learning. What may be considered unintended learning? > > > > THIS type of learning that is not prescribed or found in textbooks > > outlining a discipline as a system already made. > > > > Why is this dis/positional learning so universally ignored? How do we > > refocus on dis/positional learning of attiudes as central or core > > intentions of schooling and higher education? > > > > Was there an historical time when this type of dis-positional learning > > took center stage? If so, can we continue to learn from these traditions? > > > > More questions than answers but does seem to *spiral* around notion of > > *bildung*? > > This tradition has a deep shadow side (in nationalism) and civilizing > > notions. > > However, does Dewey?s mention of collateral learning continue to have > > relevance while mostly being ignored? > > > > > > > > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > > > From: Alfredo Jornet Gil > > Sent: March 24, 2017 9:32 AM > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Jang's SL Article Discussion > > > > David, Eun-Young, all, > > > > I am so glad that David and Eun-Young have found a fruitful common ground > > in (and outside) the article's discussion. > > > > When I chose the paper for this Issue 1 discussion, I thought (perhaps > > wrongly) that many xmca'ers would be interested in the paper for several > > reasons, one being the intermingling of social (ideological) and > > subject-related (second language) aspects. I always find it very > > interesting the amount of learning that goes on in classrooms (and homes) > > that is not what canonical descriptions of teaching/learning would (and > > possibly could) have anticipated. I am talking about what Dewey refers to > > as 'collateral learning', that is, learning that is not intended nor > > prescribed by the curriculum, but which nonetheless is consequence of its > > application. > > > > Dewey (in Education and Experience) describes collateral learning as the > > 'formation of enduring attitudes, of likes and dislikes, [which] may be > and > > often is much more important than the spelling lesson or lesson in > > geography or history that is learned' This is so absolutely obvious, and > > yet (in a expression Mike recently used in a talk at Vancouver's SFO) is > > universally ignored. > > > > David, you remind us that Vygotsky was trans-disciplinary in the sense > > that his field was development, that he was a 'developmentologist' (and > you > > use the felicitous expression 'pre-able' as an example). I think, and > this > > is something authors such as Newman and Holzman (in their Vygotsky as > > revolutionary scientist) have spelled out, that being a > developmentologist > > is very much an ideology as well, one that is irreconcilable with the > > prescriptive ideology that Eun-Young describes in her article and that we > > find ourselves being part of in many occasions everyday. The latter seems > > to be based on the believe that social (and living) things exist in > cause - > > effect relations pretty much in the same way that physical (non-living) > > things exist in the universe. Language then can be seen as a tool (and in > > fact often is described as a tool even in the sociocultural literature > that > > cites Vygotsky) that an individual can use to do things. It is then > > possible to think of the teaching of second language as the teaching of > one > > thing, rather than as the formation of whole persons, and not just whole > > persons but of societal forms of relating, indeed. But if you embrace > > Vygotsky's points on development, specially on the fact that what is > > developing is whole persons (with affects, motives) and not just > isolated > > bits of information, then learning a (second) language is always so much > > more than learning to speak words and sentences in a second language. > > > > I applaud the author's call for challenging 'ESL educators and > > institutions ... to construct a learning environment in which diverse ESL > > students' voices are ... heard and discussed, not only about their > English > > learning, but also about their social struggles' (p. 43). But, > considering > > the prescriptive ideology that the classroom relations in the focus > article > > realise, I am surprised by the author's use of the term 'illogical > > antagonism against other racial/ethnic groups'. Such antagonism seemed > very > > logical to them, in fact, immediately logical. I am not as kin as the > > author is in attributing intentions to the individual participants (see, > > e.g., p. 41). Just as the teacher did not intend inequity, I don't think > > the Korean learners were being racist (which they effectively were) > > 'intentionally.' Logic here has to do with organic being, not with formal > > ideas. And that organic being is about developmental relations, not > things > > (cause) against things (effect). The more I think about it, and the more > I > > work with it, the more I understand that being an educator is one of the > > most complex, misunderstood and undervalued task in today's society. > > > > I hope the article continues to sparkle some interest in the coming days. > > Meanwhile, thanks Eun-Young and David for a sustained and productive > > dialogue. > > Alfredo > > > > ________________________________________ > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > on behalf of David Kellogg > > Sent: 20 March 2017 21:45 > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Jang's SL Article Discussion > > > > When I was a teenager, my best friend played piano. Tommy didn't just > play: > > he composed--I'd get cassette letters from him where he would forget to > > talk, and just improvise a whole side of beautiful music. He also had > > perfect pitch--I'd play a random note on the bass and he would start > > talking about "my" B flat; somebody behind us in the traffic would honk, > > and he'd call out "C!". > > > > He was color blind. He could tell the traffic lights by their position, > of > > course. But he couldn't tell a blue from a green, a yellow from an > orange, > > or even a yellow from a green. They were just unnameable colors. He'd > say > > "green" and you'd correct him with "blue" and he'd say "whatever". I'd > ask > > him--Can't you SEE the difference? And he'd smile and ask me what note my > > word "see" was. If I said "C", I'd get a lecture on the major scales. > > > > You might think that these are purely physiological differences without > > social dimensions, and I'm sure, in Tommy's case anyway, something > genetic > > was going on. But if you think a minute, you'll see that a lot of his > > "blindness" and my "deafness" is about naming things, not perceiving > them. > > You will also see that in both cases there is a certain "social" > > overcompensation going on: both of us used our strong points to overcome > > our weak ones, and this led to "circuitous and indirect" ways of social > > functioning: Tommy went on to the Berklee School of Music, and I wrote > > lyrics for his songs and eventually became a painter. > > > > Vygotsky's transdisciplinary, but perhaps involuntarily so. He worked in > > defectology on the one hand and in pedology on the other. The common > thread > > was--development, non-canonical and more typical. So he was really a > > developmentologist. That is a color, or a note, that doesn't actually > exist > > for academics today, so in our color-blind, tone-deaf way we just call > him > > a psychologist. > > > > I think you're right that racism has an additional social dimension, and > I > > will call this politico-social, since Tommy's inability to name is > > certainly social, and so is his circumlocution. This politico-social > > dimension of racism is really just an ideological correlate of the fact > > that social progress is not planned: we have, in a rather willy-nilly > way, > > evolved tools and signs to fit one dominant type of culture and one > > dominant type of psychophysiology rather than another. > > > > Sometimes this politico-social dimension also attaches itself to > > disabilities like (total) blindness and deafness. But it doesn't have to. > > >From a defectological perspective, these people are not "disabled", but > > only "pre-abled"--that is, we have invented circuitous and indirect" ways > > of circumventing these "defects" (e.g. Braille, ASL) but we haven't yet > > socially evolved them as mainstream abilities. > > > > In Seattle there was a loggers'union whose members were from many > different > > language backgrounds (Swedish, Chinook, Russian, and a few English > speakers > > like my grandfather, who was a book keeper). People used American Sign > > Language in the sawmill; if you weren't deaf when you started, you would > be > > within a year, because the conditions in the sawmills were so awful. But > > they strongly resisted any suggestion that this made them "disabled". At > > one point, the union wanted to condemn Helen Keller, because she was > > consorting with Alexander Graham Bell, the inventor of the telephone, who > > wanted to force deaf children to lip-read instead of learning ASL. Some > > people excused her: after all, she's disabled, because she's blind. > > > > Most articles (especially most articles in TESOL Q!) use "mediation" as a > > subcategory of teaching-learning (the "good" kind, the kind of > > teaching-learning that is sensitive to learner needs on the one hand and > > context on the other). One of the things I liked about your article is > that > > you recognized that "mediation" is not a subcategory but an enormous > > supercategory, including "being a student" in a set of social roles. What > > we think of as teaching-learning is only a very small subcategory: a > > planned, deliberate, and as a result highly atypical form of mediation. > To > > me, though, this makes "mediation" a very baggy pair of trousers--not a > > good fit for most of what goes on in classrooms! > > > > David Kellogg > > Macquarie University > > > > > > > > one shadow is different from another. . I once It just wasn't there. . > > > > On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 6:21 PM, Eun Young Jang > > wrote: > > > > > Dear David > > > > > > > > > > > > Thank you for the interesting and helpful comments on my paper! I > really > > > enjoyed your comments and was also pleased to receive your questions > > about > > > Juan in my earlier paper (TESOL Quarterly). I attach my paper here so > > that > > > other colleagues can read it if they want. > > > > > > > > > > > > Yes, I do think that what happened in the ESL classroom can be > understood > > > from the "pedological" end as well, as you said. The point that I > wanted > > > to make in my study was that we should understand 'why a learner acts > in > > > certain way' from multiple perspectives. It is just like a piece of a > > > multilayered cake. > > > > > > By the way, I think I need to learn more about what you meant by > > > 'defectological' end. When you said 'defect', did you mean some > problems > > > that people might have in their development? If so, I would like to > share > > > my opinion. Everyone might have some problems that they must handle > (and > > > problems that can be handled by some great pedagogical methods). > > Sometimes > > > the problems are minor (curable) and sometimes they are not (such as > > > blindness). However, not all of them are on the same level or same > > > dimension. In other words, I think we cannot equate some life's > > challenges > > > (such as illness) and racial discrimination. They are on different > > levels. > > > The latter is intrinsically social, I think. Further, in multicultural > > > education, 'deficit' has very negative connotation because it alludes > > that > > > there are some 'perfect' things in opposition. > > > > > > > > > > > > Here, I also pasted my response to your earlier email (off the xmca > list) > > > below to share it with otehrs. > > > > > > > > > > > > Thank you very much for your ?off-list? email and interests in my > > articles. > > > Thanks to you, I was happy to remind of Juan, the lovely little boy > who I > > > was with for more than a year. > > > > > > > > > > > > Yes, we did have an interview with Juan. The other author, Chris > Iddings? > > > first language was Spanish so she was able to communicate with Juan > with > > no > > > problem. But I remember that whether Juan understood the situation or > not > > > was decided from our observations of his actions. In particular, the > > focus > > > of our observations was on the ways the joint attentional frames were > > > formed because we thought the frames played a critical role as a > > > mediational means in facilitating Juan?s learning. Oh, I also recall > that > > > when we say Juan?s learning, it was not always learning of English but > > also > > > learning of the classroom discourses. About the quiet mouse events, > Juan > > > wanted to be picked eagerly by pointing his finger to his own chest and > > > contacting eyes with the student with the mouse. About the testing, I > > > remember that Juan did understand the procedure of the testing and > acted > > > like a student but in fact, it appeared that he was not able to get the > > > right answers in terms of English. Well, this should not be a problem > > > because understanding the classroom discourses would serve a > scaffolding > > > for him to learn contents eventually. Hope my brief answer has > satisfied > > > your curiosity about my study a bit. > > > > > > > > > > > > David, I think we have a lot in common. Let?s keep in touch. I?d love > to > > > drop by the Dasomcha meeting some day! By the way, I have been in SIG > for > > > Critical Pedagogy for almost 6years. If you have a plan to visit Korea > > > again, you are invited to our Critical Pedagogy meeting as well! > > > > > > > > > > > > Best, > > > > > > EY. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 6:28 AM, David Kellogg > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Dear Professor Jang: > > > > > > > > Relax, you are among friends and co-thinkers. Well, a lot of friends, > > > some > > > > of whom are probably very close co-thinkers. It's a very big list, > but > > I > > > > doubt if anybody who read your article would accuse you of teacher > > > bashing. > > > > I also don't think anybody who read it would think that you used your > > > > Korean-ness in any other way than a good researcher uses any resource > > > that > > > > affords empathy with the researched. And I DO think that you provided > > "a" > > > > way of bridging a socioculural and a cognitivist approach to the > second > > > > language classroom. Perhaps even two ways. > > > > > > > > It seems to me that one way is from the "contextualist" end; that is, > > to > > > > redefine a context in abstract terms, including things like > attitudes, > > > > motivations, and teaching ideologies right in the context. I think > this > > > is > > > > actually much more difficult than it looks: some people will consider > > > this > > > > behavioristic, because it assumes that attitudes, motivations and > > > > ideologies can be treated as external to mind. I think it actually > only > > > > considers them as external to text. Other people will consider it > > > upwardly > > > > reductionistic, because it assumes that attitudes, motivations and > > > > ideologies can be reduced to society and to culture and to context of > > > > situation. I think that society and culture and context of situation > > must > > > > always be considered as a complex whole, including cognition, but not > > > > subsuming it. > > > > > > > > It also seems to me that another is from the "organicist" end; that > is, > > > to > > > > define attitudes, motivations, and ideologies as something in some > way > > > > independent of cognition (the "distributed cognition" people are good > > at > > > > this). Again, this isn't so easy, particularly in an American > context. > > > > America is now going through a kind of crisis, because racism has > > > > previously been defined in only one of two ways. Either racism is > part > > of > > > > cognition--in which case it really only exists in people who > subscribe, > > > > paradoxically, to "objective" scientific racism, to the belief that > > > > non-whites are actually inferior. Or racism is part of culture--in > > which > > > > case it really only exists in the debilitating effects it has on the > > > > oppressed, and it doesn't really matter what it is that racists > believe > > > > (or, for that matter, what non-racists believe: Obama was just as > > guilty > > > of > > > > black unemployment as Bush). > > > > > > > > What I suggest is, rather perversely, a third way. It's from the > > > > "pedological, defectological" end. That is, attitudes, motivations > and > > > the > > > > teaching ideologies which derive from them need to be understood not > > only > > > > as part of the context but also as part of pedology, a whole science > of > > > the > > > > child. Unfortunately, Vygotsky's writings on this are not available > in > > > > English, but they ARE available in good Korean: > > > > > > > > http://www.aladin.co.kr/shop/common/wseriesitem.aspx?SRID=25565 > > > > > > > > Similarly, the ravages of racism (including the "damunhwa kyoyuk" > > > developed > > > > in Korea under Yi Myeongbak and Park Geunhye, which was concerned > with > > > > providing "equal opportunity" to the majority as well as to the > > minority) > > > > need to be considered not simply as stigma on the dominant race or as > > > > stigmata of the oppressed but more defectologically. "Defect" wasn't > an > > > > insult in the USSR: Vygotsky actually considers "yeongje kyoyuk" > (that > > > is, > > > > "genius education"), education of the blind, education of the deaf, > > > > so-called "learning disabilities" not as "disabilities" but as > > > > defects--that is, normal disadvantages to be overcome in the same way > > as > > > > any other obstacle in learning, through "circuitous and indirect", > that > > > is, > > > > mediated, means of learning. We have evolved our means of education, > as > > > > Vygotsky says, to cater to the needs of the psychophysiological > > dominant > > > > group, but the mark of higher forms of social progress is how it can > > > > develop the niches within this and the needs of those who are not > > > > psychophysiologically dominant. > > > > > > > > (Do you know Professor Kim Jinseok? I worked at SNUE for over ten > years > > > > myself, and our Vygotsky group still meets there every Saturday to > > > > translate the work of Vygotsky into Korean. If you are on campus on a > > > > Saturday, we are usually in room 315, over "Dasomchae" near the front > > > gate, > > > > from noon until about four!) > > > > > > > > David Kellogg > > > > Macquarie University > > > > > > > > On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 2:14 PM, Eun Young Jang < > > eunyoung1112@gmail.com> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > ? > > > > > > > > > > Hi everyone, thank you very much for reading my article. This is > > such a > > > > > great opportunity for me to introduce my work and receive comments > > from > > > > > wonderful colleagues. > > > > > > > > > > First, let me introduce myself briefly. I earned my doctorate in > > > > Language, > > > > > Literacy, and Culture in the Department of Teaching and Learning at > > > > > Vanderbilt University. I am currently working as an assistant > > professor > > > > in > > > > > Multicultural Education at Seoul National University of Education > > > located > > > > > in Seoul, South Korea. My research interests are in the impact of > the > > > > > social context on second language teaching and learning. Another > > paper > > > > > published recently deals with sustainable globalization of higher > > > > education > > > > > focusing on cultures and languages in a foreign professor?s > classroom > > > in > > > > S. > > > > > Korea. My current research project is about North Korean refugee > > > students > > > > > learning English in South Korea. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > My article for xmca discussion was initiated from my observation > that > > > ESL > > > > > students were not actually focusing on learning English in the ESL > > > > > classroom but instead, on ?acting? learning with an attempt to > > achieve > > > > > certain social position (as an individual or a group). In > > particular, I > > > > > noted that they were quite skillful in using ?seemingly? academic > > > > > strategies to conceal what they were actually doing. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The ESL students were very sensitive to things happening to them in > > > terms > > > > > of marginalization and discrimination but did not reveal to others > > > > > explicitly what they really thought. Instead, they took advantage > of > > > the > > > > > school discourse that was legitimized in the context, that was, > > acting > > > > like > > > > > motivated and strategic learners by participating in class > activities > > > > > actively and strategically. In spite of regular observations of ESL > > > > classes > > > > > back then, I could not figure out what was happening in the > classroom > > > for > > > > > the first couple of months. Later on, the social dynamics among > > > students > > > > > and between students and the teacher surfaced to me and also they > > began > > > > to > > > > > open their minds and told me how they felt isolated and > > discriminated. > > > > > Then, I was able to see the meanings of their actions. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In effect, the ESL teacher tried hard to be fair and in a sense, > the > > > > French > > > > > student was isolated and discriminated by the Korean students in > the > > > ESL > > > > > classroom. Nevertheless, Korean students victimized themselves. I > > > thought > > > > > that it was still important and valuable to acknowledge how the > > Korean > > > > > students felt simply because the feelings were there and they made > > some > > > > > consequences (such as silencing the French student). I wanted to > > reveal > > > > > that how the students felt and why they felt that way and how they > > > > reacted > > > > > to their feelings. Whether the discrimination was real or not was > not > > > > > important. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > A reviewer from other journal has criticized my article badly for > > > teacher > > > > > bashing. But definitely I did not mean it. Also, some readers of my > > > > article > > > > > said that because I am Korean, I was on the Korean students? side. > > The > > > > fact > > > > > was, the ESL teacher and I were good friends and this even made the > > > > Korean > > > > > students suspicious of my position (like a spy from the ?white? > > teacher > > > > > side). Anyway, honestly, the comments from other scholars made me > > feel > > > > > constrained conducting research about the same ethnic group. Now, > I?d > > > > like > > > > > to know about your opinion about this issue. > > > > > > > > > > Again, the fact that the participants were Korean was not the main > > > focus > > > > of > > > > > my study. I wanted to show how they used strategies, which were > > > typically > > > > > categorized as individual and cognitive traits, for social > purposes. > > > So, > > > > > the bigger agenda of my study was to explore ?a? way to bridge the > > > > > dichotomy between individual and sociocultural camps. > > > > > > > > > > Thanks! > > > > > > > > > > EY. > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 8:12 AM, David Kellogg < > dkellogg60@gmail.com > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Alfredo: > > > > > > > > > > > > Down the hall one of the Chinese translators is working on > > > translations > > > > > of > > > > > > the Chinese "State of the Union" address into English. The > Chinese > > > goes > > > > > > something like this: > > > > > > > > > > > > ????????? > > > > > > xi?och? p?nk?n q?d? j?nzh?n. > > > > > > > > > > > > Literally: > > > > > > > > > > > > "Eradicate Poverty Achieve Progress", i.e. "(The government) > (made) > > > > some > > > > > > progress in the eradication of poverty." > > > > > > > > > > > > In Chinese we don't have to specify the agent, and we don't need > to > > > use > > > > > the > > > > > > effective verb "made"; it's a happening and not a doing. This > used > > to > > > > be > > > > > > because the agent went without saying--it's encoded in the > grammar. > > > > > Partly > > > > > > thanks to a poetic tradition going back more than a thousand > years, > > > > > Chinese > > > > > > lends itself to four-syllable slogan-like objects like "Eradicate > > > > > Poverty" > > > > > > and "Achieve Progress", and putting them together sounds natural. > > We > > > > > don't > > > > > > usually use a subject unless we want to stress it; it's much more > > > > common > > > > > to > > > > > > just have a nominal topic and then a comment, like in this > example. > > > > > Because > > > > > > the government has a well established role in mobilizing the > masses > > > to > > > > > > carry out actions like famine relief and flood prevention and so > > on, > > > > the > > > > > > agent and the "doing" don't need to be specified: everybody knows > > it > > > > was > > > > > > the government, even if that weren't clear in the context of a > > > > government > > > > > > report. So we simply say it's a happening. > > > > > > > > > > > > Now that's changing. In fact, the government does relatively > little > > > to > > > > > > alleviate poverty. There are regional enterprises, and there are > > > > private > > > > > > businesses and so on. After the Sichuan earthquake, my > > brother-in-law > > > > > > loaded up his SUV with bottled water and drove down to the > > earthquake > > > > > area > > > > > > to distribute it, and he says there was a huge traffic jam of > other > > > > SUVs > > > > > by > > > > > > entrepreneurs like him who had exactly the same idea. And for > > > precisely > > > > > > this reason, we find that in the government report there is more > > and > > > > more > > > > > > explicit stipulation of the government's agency and of the > > effective > > > > > means. > > > > > > Instead of just happening, the government does things. There is a > > > > similar > > > > > > link between ideology and ideation in English if you think about > > it. > > > > When > > > > > > something GOOD happens, it's because somebody DID it, but when > > > > something > > > > > > bad happens, "Stuff happens". > > > > > > > > > > > > Here's the point. We usually use "ideology" to mean something > like > > > > > > conscious and deliberate ideation, usually of an intentionally > > > > deceitful > > > > > or > > > > > > misleading variety. I don't really accept that. It seems to me > that > > > > > > "ideology" really is equivalent to ideation, that is, to the > > > > > communicative, > > > > > > representational function of speech, except that it is somewhat > > > larger, > > > > > > both because the interpersonal and the textual functions also > > encode > > > > > ideas > > > > > > and are also therefore ideological and because a lot of ideology > is > > > > > simply > > > > > > NOT specifying things. For example, when you say "it's raining", > > you > > > > are > > > > > > conveying the idea that rain is an event that just happens, and > is > > > not > > > > > > caused by any nameable entity. You don't normally say "it's > > birding" > > > or > > > > > > even "it's shining". > > > > > > > > > > > > Similarly, we usually use "prescriptivism" to mean something like > > > > > conscious > > > > > > and deliberate transformativism, usually of an authoritarian and > > > > > > dictatorial, and deceptive, sort. I don't really accept that > > either. > > > On > > > > > the > > > > > > contrary, what is really deceptive is to pretend that the process > > of > > > > > > education is meaningful without attending to its ultimate > product. > > To > > > > me, > > > > > > "Eradicate Poverty Achieve Progress" is a perfect balance of > > process > > > > and > > > > > > product, and agency and effective means are only meaningful with > > > > respect > > > > > to > > > > > > both. > > > > > > > > > > > > David Kellogg > > > > > > Macquarie University > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 5:53 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil < > > > > a.j.gil@iped.uio.no > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi again, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > one thing that I find interesting in Jang's article, and which > > may > > > > > > connect > > > > > > > to comments in the other thread (by David, Haydi...) concerning > > > 'not > > > > > > > reducing the political to the personal', is the issue of > > > *ideology.* > > > > > In > > > > > > > particular, Jang discusses and empirically examines what she > > coins > > > > as a > > > > > > > *Prescriptive* language ideology. As she describes in her > paper, > > > and > > > > as > > > > > > any > > > > > > > educator will immediately recognise, this ideology exists as > the > > > > > > > classroom's orientations to a correct/incorrect form. In her > > > article, > > > > > she > > > > > > > exhibits this through a number of sequences in which > > > teacher-student > > > > > and > > > > > > > student-student relations involve *evaluations* with regard to > > > > > > proficiently > > > > > > > using two rules: making connections between sentences and > staying > > > on > > > > > the > > > > > > > topic. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As Jang shows, the prescriptive approach, which sets the final > > > > linguist > > > > > > > form as the criterion for positively or negatively evaluating > any > > > > > > response > > > > > > > by any student, is such that more proficient readers/speakers > > will > > > > have > > > > > > > easier access to positive evaluation. The ideology here then > > exists > > > > as > > > > > a > > > > > > > regime of power and differential access, of inequality. By > > treating > > > > all > > > > > > > equally, we get to inequality. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I was thinking that it seems that the prescriptive approach > does > > > > focus > > > > > on > > > > > > > the final product, whereas the sociocultural approach that Jang > > > > pursues > > > > > > and > > > > > > > Vygotsky first set forth has it that we should not focus on the > > > final > > > > > > > product but on its genesis, on the way the verbal form exists > > first > > > > as > > > > > a > > > > > > > social relation between people. Thus, in Episodes 1 and 2 in > the > > > > > article, > > > > > > > if the participants had oriented towards a possible process of > > > > > > development, > > > > > > > Ji-Woo's responses would have been heard and responded to as > > > moments > > > > > in a > > > > > > > developmental trajectory. There would have been a very > different > > > > social > > > > > > > situation in which work would have been directed to make > visible > > > and > > > > > > > available the dynamics of Ji-Woo's learning process. But the > > > > > prescriptive > > > > > > > orientation evaluates and makes salient only deficiency and > > > > > achievement. > > > > > > On > > > > > > > the other hand, and consistent with those (e.g., Stetsenko, > > > Holzman) > > > > > who > > > > > > > have referred to Vygotsky's legacy as *revolutionary,* an > > > orientation > > > > > > > consistent with Vygotsky's teachings would bring with it not > > only a > > > > > > > different situation, but also an *emancipatory* one. Instead of > > > > > > inequality > > > > > > > brought about by treating all equally, we would have an > > > equalitarian > > > > > > > approach whose power resides in acknowledging and caring for > > > history > > > > > and > > > > > > > diversity. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On a side thought, and connected to David's (Halliday's) > > > distinction > > > > > > > between ideational and interpersonal functions of language, I > was > > > > > > wondering > > > > > > > what is the relation/difference between ideational and > > ideological. > > > > In > > > > > > the > > > > > > > article, it seems clear that the language related competence on > > > > putting > > > > > > > names to things and thereby building categories seems a > condition > > > for > > > > > the > > > > > > > racial/ethnic tension to exist. But of course, the tension is a > > > > > > relational, > > > > > > > not just a lexical one. Thoughts? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Alfredo > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________________ > > > > > > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > > > edu > > > > > > > > > > > > > on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil > > > > > > > Sent: 13 March 2017 18:48 > > > > > > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > > > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Jang's SL Article Discussion > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ?Dear all, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > David has started some very interesting comments on the current > > > > article > > > > > > > for discussion on Tensions in Second Language Learning, which > > > attach > > > > > > again > > > > > > > here. Because some of these comments have been given at a > > different > > > > > > thread, > > > > > > > I am starting here a thread that shall more centrally concern > > > Jang's > > > > > > > article. I copy below all what David has so far written about > the > > > > > > article. > > > > > > > I hope this will ?make it easy for Eun-Young and everyone else > to > > > > > follow > > > > > > on > > > > > > > her article. I know ?Eun-Young is challenged time-wise by > course > > > > > > > responsibilities and I hope this will make it easier for her. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Eun-Young, David mentions an article from 2011. If you wanted, > > you > > > > > could > > > > > > > also share the PDF with us for background, although the current > > > > article > > > > > > > gives more than enough material for discussion, I think. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Alfredo > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --------------------David Kellogg wrote: ------------------ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > t's very interesting to compare this paper with Professor > Jang's > > > 2011 > > > > > > > paper co-authored with Robert T. Jimenez: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Eun-Young Jang & Robert T. Jim?nez (2011) A Sociocultural > > > Perspective > > > > > on > > > > > > > Second Language Learner Strategies: Focus on the Impact of > Social > > > > > > Context, > > > > > > > Theory Into Practice, > > > > > > > 50:2, 141-148, DOI: 10.1080/00405841.2011.558443 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In some ways, the papers are very similar--the data is > identical > > in > > > > one > > > > > > > place (p. 42), and the conclusions are for the most part > > congruent. > > > > But > > > > > > > consider how different the titles are. "Impact" in one place, > and > > > > > > "tension" > > > > > > > in the other. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > There is this note to the 1935 version of Vygotsky's report on > > > > > > preschools, > > > > > > > where Zankov, Elkonin and Shif complain about Vygotsky's idea > > that > > > > the > > > > > > > child directs his or her own learning before preschool, the > > > > environment > > > > > > > directs it after preschool, and preschool therefore represents > a > > > kind > > > > > of > > > > > > > transitional stage. On the one hand, if the child is directing > > his > > > or > > > > > her > > > > > > > own learning, how can we say that the environment is the > ultimate > > > > > source > > > > > > of > > > > > > > learning? And if the environment is the ultimate source of > > > learning, > > > > as > > > > > > > Vygotsky says, how can we say that the child is himself or > > herself > > > > part > > > > > > of > > > > > > > the environment? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Professor Jang gets around this problem just as Vygotsky > > > > > does--adroitly. > > > > > > On > > > > > > > the one hand, strategies are expanded to include "sets of > actions > > > > > > performed > > > > > > > to deal with problems (perceived by the researcher, indicated > by > > > the > > > > > > > learners)". On the other, contexts are expanded to include > > > > "pedagogical > > > > > > > assumptions, power relations, and interracial conflict". > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think this solution to the problem is the correct one: when > we > > > > > consider > > > > > > > the relationship of the child and the environment, we cannot > > treat > > > it > > > > > > like > > > > > > > an unstoppable force meeting an unmoveable object. But for me > > that > > > > > means > > > > > > > that both the child and the environment have to be considered > in > > > > > > "internal" > > > > > > > (that is, abstract, linguistic) terms. We can't think of speech > > as > > > > > > actions; > > > > > > > it's more useful to think of actions as speech. We can't think > of > > > the > > > > > > > social situation of development as a material setting: it's a > > > > > > relationship > > > > > > > with others. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Contrariwise, it seems to me that when we consider "racism", it > > is > > > > more > > > > > > > helpful to consider it in "external", that is, concrete, > > > > nonlinguistic > > > > > > > terms. In the 2011 paper, Professor Jang and her co-author are > > > > willing > > > > > to > > > > > > > openly criticize the idea that languages are learned in exactly > > the > > > > > same > > > > > > > way whether they are first or second languages. Here, they just > > > quote > > > > > the > > > > > > > teacher's comments on "mommy skills". > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It's a very revealing quote. One thing it reveals is why it's > > > > probably > > > > > > not > > > > > > > helpful to refer to "racist" as an "insult" (p. 40) or to imply > > > that > > > > > > racism > > > > > > > and anti-racism is really just a matter of having the right > > > attitude > > > > > (as > > > > > > > the Republicans did in the Sessions debate or as Bernie Sanders > > did > > > > > when > > > > > > he > > > > > > > referred to Trump supporters who voted for Obama as "not > having a > > > > > racist > > > > > > > bone in their bodies"). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You can see that subjectively, the teacher is being > > > anti-racist--all > > > > > > > students, French, Turkish, Egyptian, Korean, use the same > > > strategies, > > > > > > just > > > > > > > like we all have mommies.She has all the right attitudes, and > > > > probably > > > > > > > doesn't have a racist bone in her body. But that doesn't > diminish > > > by > > > > > one > > > > > > > jot the terrible damage that this kind of indiscriminate > > > > discrimination > > > > > > > does in the classroom. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > David Kellogg > > > > > > > Macquarie University > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------ On a related thread (Subject: Don't do > > > it), > > > > > > David > > > > > > > K. wrote:-------------- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It seems to me that we need to clearly distinguish between > > "racism" > > > > and > > > > > > > "racist sentiment". One of the interesting problems that comes > up > > > in > > > > > > Eunhee > > > > > > > Jang's excellent article on second language learning strategies > > > from > > > > a > > > > > > > sociocultural point of view--a wonderful piece of "inside" > work, > > > > > > > introducing racial issues into an area where they have never > been > > > > > > seriously > > > > > > > discussed--is the use of "racist" (by the Korean kids to > describe > > > > their > > > > > > > teacher) as an "insult". > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I like the article. I think it's important work. But for that > > very > > > > > > reason, > > > > > > > I think that it's important to resist any attempt to reduce > > > "racist" > > > > > to a > > > > > > > personal insult. I think we've seen very very clearly, both in > > the > > > > > > Sessions > > > > > > > confirmation hearing, and in the discussion of Trump's own > > > > anti-semitic > > > > > > > behavior--that this kind of reduction of the political to the > > > > personal > > > > > is > > > > > > > precisely the kind of reducing the sociocultural to the > cognitive > > > > that > > > > > > > Professor Jang is trying to resist. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > David Kellogg > > > > > > > Macquarie University > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------- Idem as > above------------------------- > > > > > > > --------------- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > One of the interesting aspects of Professor Jang's paper is > that > > it > > > > is > > > > > > > about adolescents who are in the process of forming concepts, > but > > > who > > > > > are > > > > > > > not there yet. And one way in which an adolescent forms a > concept > > > > about > > > > > > the > > > > > > > difficult concept of a social contract, of citizenship, of > > > > nationality > > > > > is > > > > > > > pseudoconceptual: it is based on discussing "actual" perceptual > > > > > > differences > > > > > > > between races. This might seem irrelevant to current political > > > > > discourse. > > > > > > > Unfortunately, it isn't.? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > David Kellogg > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > > > Jang, Eun-Young. Ph.D. > > > > > > > > > > Assistant Professor, Graduate School of Education > > > > > > > > > > Seoul National University of Education > > > > > > > > > > Seoul, S. Korea > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > Jang, Eun-Young. Ph.D. > > > > > > Assistant Professor, Graduate School of Education > > > > > > Seoul National University of Education > > > > > > Seoul, S. Korea > > > > > > > > > > From dkellogg60@gmail.com Wed Mar 29 16:51:58 2017 From: dkellogg60@gmail.com (David Kellogg) Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2017 10:51:58 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Jang's SL Article Discussion In-Reply-To: References: <1489427326574.46980@iped.uio.no> <1489431232770.89078@iped.uio.no> <1490373072177.47916@iped.uio.no> <58d7f7b6.0dd6620a.2f98a.802f@mx.google.com> <1490628233852.2628@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: Sure, Mr. Bae. I'll send it off list! Best Wishes, David On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 10:45 AM, ??? wrote: > ??? ???, > ? ?????? > ?? ?? ????. ?? ?? ?? ???. ???? ???? ???. > > https://academic.oup.com/applij/article/3067194/The-D-Is- > for-Development-Beyond-Pedagogical > > 2017-03-29 15:14 GMT+09:00 David Kellogg : > > > Well, the idea of "incidental learning" (which is, I think, what Larry > > means by dispositional learning) had a good run in foreign language > > teaching. > > > > Foreign language learning is hard, and that is rather paradoxical. Why > > should EVERYBODY master a first language seamlessly and hardly ANYBODY be > > able to do the same trick with a second? Especially since, as Vygotsky > > points out, we all bring more intellectual capital to bear the second go > > around? Since the hard-wiring critical period theories have more or less > > been disproven (because there ARE people who DO master a second language > > and even some who forget their first language), the consensus has moved > > towards the rather anti-intellectual idea that first language learning is > > painless because it is essentially incidental and dispositional: we learn > > our first language largely in the process of learning other things. > > Particularly in elementary school, that has meant trying to make second > > language learning much more like first language learning, and (as I > argued > > earlier) this had led to well-intentioned but nevertheless highly > > discriminatory practices, including an emphasis on dispositional learning > > which native speakers must find too easy and foreigners coy and > > frustrating. > > > > Vygotsky's view is very different though. First of all, he denies that > > first language learning is painless. Second, he denies that learning a > > second language is completely distinguishable from learning the first. > Just > > as the child's semantics are largely unchanged as the child moves from > > proto-language to language proper, we tend to import our own native > > language semantics when we pick up a second or third language. So > learning > > a second language is really continuing the first language by second > > language means (in normal humans, the "vocabulary explosion" comes to a > > halt about age seventeen, but this isn't true if you start another > > language). Thirdly, and most interestingly, Vygotsky points out that > > although the MEANS of learning foreign language concepts appears similar > to > > learning scientific concepts in in school (i.e. part to whole, voluntary > > and volitional, and organized in taxonomies), the actual RESULT is a set > of > > everyday concepts! > > > > I was trying to develop this in a study for Applied Linguistics. They > > decided the study wasn't very interesting, but they did publish my > > critique: > > > > https://academic.oup.com/applij/article/3067194/The-D-Is- > > for-Development-Beyond-Pedagogical > > > > Also, the official version of "Thinking of Feeling" is out on Language > and > > Education, and the first fifty to click THIS link will get free e-copies > > (so they say): > > > > http://www.tandfonline.com/eprint/8Vaq4HpJMi55DzsAyFCf/full > > > > David Kellogg > > Macquarie University > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 2:23 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil > > > wrote: > > > > > ?Larry, very interesting questions. > > > > > > One of them seems particularly relevant. You ask, was there an > historical > > > time when dis-positional aspects of learning take centre stage? > > > > > > > > > I guess that the notion of *apprenticeship* (as developed by, e.g., > Lave) > > > partly ??addresses the issue, for it attempts to capture some of that > > which > > > goes on when you learn a craft, or when you learn to play an > instrument, > > > where the instructional focus is on attentional qualities of the work > of > > > *doing* crafting or playing. But still, in those situations, the > > ?relation > > > between the expert and the learner may very much be focused on a quite > > > narrow band of competence with respect to all what may be developing in > > > such teaching/learning situations. As David was mentioning, I think > that > > > the 'prescriptive' (in the sense of having and 'end in mind') character > > of > > > instructional situations should not be just dismissed and thrown away. > > > > > > Yes, *bildung* seems a relevant concept here. But then again, the point > > of > > > collateral learning is that much of what is being learned is learned > > > despite the fact that its 'content,' the nature and consequences of > that > > > learning, are outside the participant's immediate awareness. If, while > > > playing to play a tune on a guitar, you focus too much on each and > every > > > motor-sensory aspect of playing, you will have a hard time learning to > > play > > > it, just as it becomes difficult to walk 'naturally' once you begin to > > try > > > to walk purposefully. Big questions open here. Connecting them to > > inequity > > > issues in the classroom takes also work... > > > > > > > > > Alfredo > > > > > > ________________________________ > > > From: lpscholar2@gmail.com > > > Sent: 26 March 2017 19:17 > > > To: Alfredo Jornet Gil; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > Subject: RE: [Xmca-l] Re: Jang's SL Article Discussion > > > > > > Alfredo, > > > Your highlighting and drawing our attention to learning (as) developing > > > enduring attitudes, of likes and dislikes, is something you are > referring > > > to in passing that i hope we can slow down or pause and consider > further. > > > Another word for this is dis-positions in contrast to positions taken. > > > This type of learning occurring in situations that Dewey referred to as > > > (collateral) learning. What may be considered unintended learning? > > > > > > THIS type of learning that is not prescribed or found in textbooks > > > outlining a discipline as a system already made. > > > > > > Why is this dis/positional learning so universally ignored? How do we > > > refocus on dis/positional learning of attiudes as central or core > > > intentions of schooling and higher education? > > > > > > Was there an historical time when this type of dis-positional learning > > > took center stage? If so, can we continue to learn from these > traditions? > > > > > > More questions than answers but does seem to *spiral* around notion of > > > *bildung*? > > > This tradition has a deep shadow side (in nationalism) and civilizing > > > notions. > > > However, does Dewey?s mention of collateral learning continue to have > > > relevance while mostly being ignored? > > > > > > > > > > > > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > > > > > From: Alfredo Jornet Gil > > > Sent: March 24, 2017 9:32 AM > > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Jang's SL Article Discussion > > > > > > David, Eun-Young, all, > > > > > > I am so glad that David and Eun-Young have found a fruitful common > ground > > > in (and outside) the article's discussion. > > > > > > When I chose the paper for this Issue 1 discussion, I thought (perhaps > > > wrongly) that many xmca'ers would be interested in the paper for > several > > > reasons, one being the intermingling of social (ideological) and > > > subject-related (second language) aspects. I always find it very > > > interesting the amount of learning that goes on in classrooms (and > homes) > > > that is not what canonical descriptions of teaching/learning would (and > > > possibly could) have anticipated. I am talking about what Dewey refers > to > > > as 'collateral learning', that is, learning that is not intended nor > > > prescribed by the curriculum, but which nonetheless is consequence of > its > > > application. > > > > > > Dewey (in Education and Experience) describes collateral learning as > the > > > 'formation of enduring attitudes, of likes and dislikes, [which] may be > > and > > > often is much more important than the spelling lesson or lesson in > > > geography or history that is learned' This is so absolutely obvious, > and > > > yet (in a expression Mike recently used in a talk at Vancouver's SFO) > is > > > universally ignored. > > > > > > David, you remind us that Vygotsky was trans-disciplinary in the sense > > > that his field was development, that he was a 'developmentologist' (and > > you > > > use the felicitous expression 'pre-able' as an example). I think, and > > this > > > is something authors such as Newman and Holzman (in their Vygotsky as > > > revolutionary scientist) have spelled out, that being a > > developmentologist > > > is very much an ideology as well, one that is irreconcilable with the > > > prescriptive ideology that Eun-Young describes in her article and that > we > > > find ourselves being part of in many occasions everyday. The latter > seems > > > to be based on the believe that social (and living) things exist in > > cause - > > > effect relations pretty much in the same way that physical (non-living) > > > things exist in the universe. Language then can be seen as a tool (and > in > > > fact often is described as a tool even in the sociocultural literature > > that > > > cites Vygotsky) that an individual can use to do things. It is then > > > possible to think of the teaching of second language as the teaching of > > one > > > thing, rather than as the formation of whole persons, and not just > whole > > > persons but of societal forms of relating, indeed. But if you embrace > > > Vygotsky's points on development, specially on the fact that what is > > > developing is whole persons (with affects, motives) and not just > > isolated > > > bits of information, then learning a (second) language is always so > much > > > more than learning to speak words and sentences in a second language. > > > > > > I applaud the author's call for challenging 'ESL educators and > > > institutions ... to construct a learning environment in which diverse > ESL > > > students' voices are ... heard and discussed, not only about their > > English > > > learning, but also about their social struggles' (p. 43). But, > > considering > > > the prescriptive ideology that the classroom relations in the focus > > article > > > realise, I am surprised by the author's use of the term 'illogical > > > antagonism against other racial/ethnic groups'. Such antagonism seemed > > very > > > logical to them, in fact, immediately logical. I am not as kin as the > > > author is in attributing intentions to the individual participants > (see, > > > e.g., p. 41). Just as the teacher did not intend inequity, I don't > think > > > the Korean learners were being racist (which they effectively were) > > > 'intentionally.' Logic here has to do with organic being, not with > formal > > > ideas. And that organic being is about developmental relations, not > > things > > > (cause) against things (effect). The more I think about it, and the > more > > I > > > work with it, the more I understand that being an educator is one of > the > > > most complex, misunderstood and undervalued task in today's society. > > > > > > I hope the article continues to sparkle some interest in the coming > days. > > > Meanwhile, thanks Eun-Young and David for a sustained and productive > > > dialogue. > > > Alfredo > > > > > > ________________________________________ > > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > on behalf of David Kellogg > > > Sent: 20 March 2017 21:45 > > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Jang's SL Article Discussion > > > > > > When I was a teenager, my best friend played piano. Tommy didn't just > > play: > > > he composed--I'd get cassette letters from him where he would forget to > > > talk, and just improvise a whole side of beautiful music. He also had > > > perfect pitch--I'd play a random note on the bass and he would start > > > talking about "my" B flat; somebody behind us in the traffic would > honk, > > > and he'd call out "C!". > > > > > > He was color blind. He could tell the traffic lights by their position, > > of > > > course. But he couldn't tell a blue from a green, a yellow from an > > orange, > > > or even a yellow from a green. They were just unnameable colors. He'd > > say > > > "green" and you'd correct him with "blue" and he'd say "whatever". I'd > > ask > > > him--Can't you SEE the difference? And he'd smile and ask me what note > my > > > word "see" was. If I said "C", I'd get a lecture on the major scales. > > > > > > You might think that these are purely physiological differences without > > > social dimensions, and I'm sure, in Tommy's case anyway, something > > genetic > > > was going on. But if you think a minute, you'll see that a lot of his > > > "blindness" and my "deafness" is about naming things, not perceiving > > them. > > > You will also see that in both cases there is a certain "social" > > > overcompensation going on: both of us used our strong points to > overcome > > > our weak ones, and this led to "circuitous and indirect" ways of social > > > functioning: Tommy went on to the Berklee School of Music, and I wrote > > > lyrics for his songs and eventually became a painter. > > > > > > Vygotsky's transdisciplinary, but perhaps involuntarily so. He worked > in > > > defectology on the one hand and in pedology on the other. The common > > thread > > > was--development, non-canonical and more typical. So he was really a > > > developmentologist. That is a color, or a note, that doesn't actually > > exist > > > for academics today, so in our color-blind, tone-deaf way we just call > > him > > > a psychologist. > > > > > > I think you're right that racism has an additional social dimension, > and > > I > > > will call this politico-social, since Tommy's inability to name is > > > certainly social, and so is his circumlocution. This politico-social > > > dimension of racism is really just an ideological correlate of the fact > > > that social progress is not planned: we have, in a rather willy-nilly > > way, > > > evolved tools and signs to fit one dominant type of culture and one > > > dominant type of psychophysiology rather than another. > > > > > > Sometimes this politico-social dimension also attaches itself to > > > disabilities like (total) blindness and deafness. But it doesn't have > to. > > > >From a defectological perspective, these people are not "disabled", > but > > > only "pre-abled"--that is, we have invented circuitous and indirect" > ways > > > of circumventing these "defects" (e.g. Braille, ASL) but we haven't > yet > > > socially evolved them as mainstream abilities. > > > > > > In Seattle there was a loggers'union whose members were from many > > different > > > language backgrounds (Swedish, Chinook, Russian, and a few English > > speakers > > > like my grandfather, who was a book keeper). People used American Sign > > > Language in the sawmill; if you weren't deaf when you started, you > would > > be > > > within a year, because the conditions in the sawmills were so awful. > But > > > they strongly resisted any suggestion that this made them "disabled". > At > > > one point, the union wanted to condemn Helen Keller, because she was > > > consorting with Alexander Graham Bell, the inventor of the telephone, > who > > > wanted to force deaf children to lip-read instead of learning ASL. Some > > > people excused her: after all, she's disabled, because she's blind. > > > > > > Most articles (especially most articles in TESOL Q!) use "mediation" > as a > > > subcategory of teaching-learning (the "good" kind, the kind of > > > teaching-learning that is sensitive to learner needs on the one hand > and > > > context on the other). One of the things I liked about your article is > > that > > > you recognized that "mediation" is not a subcategory but an enormous > > > supercategory, including "being a student" in a set of social roles. > What > > > we think of as teaching-learning is only a very small subcategory: a > > > planned, deliberate, and as a result highly atypical form of mediation. > > To > > > me, though, this makes "mediation" a very baggy pair of trousers--not a > > > good fit for most of what goes on in classrooms! > > > > > > David Kellogg > > > Macquarie University > > > > > > > > > > > > one shadow is different from another. . I once It just wasn't there. . > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 6:21 PM, Eun Young Jang < > eunyoung1112@gmail.com> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Dear David > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thank you for the interesting and helpful comments on my paper! I > > really > > > > enjoyed your comments and was also pleased to receive your questions > > > about > > > > Juan in my earlier paper (TESOL Quarterly). I attach my paper here so > > > that > > > > other colleagues can read it if they want. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yes, I do think that what happened in the ESL classroom can be > > understood > > > > from the "pedological" end as well, as you said. The point that I > > wanted > > > > to make in my study was that we should understand 'why a learner acts > > in > > > > certain way' from multiple perspectives. It is just like a piece of a > > > > multilayered cake. > > > > > > > > By the way, I think I need to learn more about what you meant by > > > > 'defectological' end. When you said 'defect', did you mean some > > problems > > > > that people might have in their development? If so, I would like to > > share > > > > my opinion. Everyone might have some problems that they must handle > > (and > > > > problems that can be handled by some great pedagogical methods). > > > Sometimes > > > > the problems are minor (curable) and sometimes they are not (such as > > > > blindness). However, not all of them are on the same level or same > > > > dimension. In other words, I think we cannot equate some life's > > > challenges > > > > (such as illness) and racial discrimination. They are on different > > > levels. > > > > The latter is intrinsically social, I think. Further, in > multicultural > > > > education, 'deficit' has very negative connotation because it alludes > > > that > > > > there are some 'perfect' things in opposition. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Here, I also pasted my response to your earlier email (off the xmca > > list) > > > > below to share it with otehrs. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thank you very much for your ?off-list? email and interests in my > > > articles. > > > > Thanks to you, I was happy to remind of Juan, the lovely little boy > > who I > > > > was with for more than a year. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yes, we did have an interview with Juan. The other author, Chris > > Iddings? > > > > first language was Spanish so she was able to communicate with Juan > > with > > > no > > > > problem. But I remember that whether Juan understood the situation or > > not > > > > was decided from our observations of his actions. In particular, the > > > focus > > > > of our observations was on the ways the joint attentional frames were > > > > formed because we thought the frames played a critical role as a > > > > mediational means in facilitating Juan?s learning. Oh, I also recall > > that > > > > when we say Juan?s learning, it was not always learning of English > but > > > also > > > > learning of the classroom discourses. About the quiet mouse events, > > Juan > > > > wanted to be picked eagerly by pointing his finger to his own chest > and > > > > contacting eyes with the student with the mouse. About the testing, I > > > > remember that Juan did understand the procedure of the testing and > > acted > > > > like a student but in fact, it appeared that he was not able to get > the > > > > right answers in terms of English. Well, this should not be a problem > > > > because understanding the classroom discourses would serve a > > scaffolding > > > > for him to learn contents eventually. Hope my brief answer has > > satisfied > > > > your curiosity about my study a bit. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > David, I think we have a lot in common. Let?s keep in touch. I?d love > > to > > > > drop by the Dasomcha meeting some day! By the way, I have been in SIG > > for > > > > Critical Pedagogy for almost 6years. If you have a plan to visit > Korea > > > > again, you are invited to our Critical Pedagogy meeting as well! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Best, > > > > > > > > EY. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 6:28 AM, David Kellogg > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Dear Professor Jang: > > > > > > > > > > Relax, you are among friends and co-thinkers. Well, a lot of > friends, > > > > some > > > > > of whom are probably very close co-thinkers. It's a very big list, > > but > > > I > > > > > doubt if anybody who read your article would accuse you of teacher > > > > bashing. > > > > > I also don't think anybody who read it would think that you used > your > > > > > Korean-ness in any other way than a good researcher uses any > resource > > > > that > > > > > affords empathy with the researched. And I DO think that you > provided > > > "a" > > > > > way of bridging a socioculural and a cognitivist approach to the > > second > > > > > language classroom. Perhaps even two ways. > > > > > > > > > > It seems to me that one way is from the "contextualist" end; that > is, > > > to > > > > > redefine a context in abstract terms, including things like > > attitudes, > > > > > motivations, and teaching ideologies right in the context. I think > > this > > > > is > > > > > actually much more difficult than it looks: some people will > consider > > > > this > > > > > behavioristic, because it assumes that attitudes, motivations and > > > > > ideologies can be treated as external to mind. I think it actually > > only > > > > > considers them as external to text. Other people will consider it > > > > upwardly > > > > > reductionistic, because it assumes that attitudes, motivations and > > > > > ideologies can be reduced to society and to culture and to context > of > > > > > situation. I think that society and culture and context of > situation > > > must > > > > > always be considered as a complex whole, including cognition, but > not > > > > > subsuming it. > > > > > > > > > > It also seems to me that another is from the "organicist" end; that > > is, > > > > to > > > > > define attitudes, motivations, and ideologies as something in some > > way > > > > > independent of cognition (the "distributed cognition" people are > good > > > at > > > > > this). Again, this isn't so easy, particularly in an American > > context. > > > > > America is now going through a kind of crisis, because racism has > > > > > previously been defined in only one of two ways. Either racism is > > part > > > of > > > > > cognition--in which case it really only exists in people who > > subscribe, > > > > > paradoxically, to "objective" scientific racism, to the belief that > > > > > non-whites are actually inferior. Or racism is part of culture--in > > > which > > > > > case it really only exists in the debilitating effects it has on > the > > > > > oppressed, and it doesn't really matter what it is that racists > > believe > > > > > (or, for that matter, what non-racists believe: Obama was just as > > > guilty > > > > of > > > > > black unemployment as Bush). > > > > > > > > > > What I suggest is, rather perversely, a third way. It's from the > > > > > "pedological, defectological" end. That is, attitudes, motivations > > and > > > > the > > > > > teaching ideologies which derive from them need to be understood > not > > > only > > > > > as part of the context but also as part of pedology, a whole > science > > of > > > > the > > > > > child. Unfortunately, Vygotsky's writings on this are not available > > in > > > > > English, but they ARE available in good Korean: > > > > > > > > > > http://www.aladin.co.kr/shop/common/wseriesitem.aspx?SRID=25565 > > > > > > > > > > Similarly, the ravages of racism (including the "damunhwa kyoyuk" > > > > developed > > > > > in Korea under Yi Myeongbak and Park Geunhye, which was concerned > > with > > > > > providing "equal opportunity" to the majority as well as to the > > > minority) > > > > > need to be considered not simply as stigma on the dominant race or > as > > > > > stigmata of the oppressed but more defectologically. "Defect" > wasn't > > an > > > > > insult in the USSR: Vygotsky actually considers "yeongje kyoyuk" > > (that > > > > is, > > > > > "genius education"), education of the blind, education of the deaf, > > > > > so-called "learning disabilities" not as "disabilities" but as > > > > > defects--that is, normal disadvantages to be overcome in the same > way > > > as > > > > > any other obstacle in learning, through "circuitous and indirect", > > that > > > > is, > > > > > mediated, means of learning. We have evolved our means of > education, > > as > > > > > Vygotsky says, to cater to the needs of the psychophysiological > > > dominant > > > > > group, but the mark of higher forms of social progress is how it > can > > > > > develop the niches within this and the needs of those who are not > > > > > psychophysiologically dominant. > > > > > > > > > > (Do you know Professor Kim Jinseok? I worked at SNUE for over ten > > years > > > > > myself, and our Vygotsky group still meets there every Saturday to > > > > > translate the work of Vygotsky into Korean. If you are on campus > on a > > > > > Saturday, we are usually in room 315, over "Dasomchae" near the > front > > > > gate, > > > > > from noon until about four!) > > > > > > > > > > David Kellogg > > > > > Macquarie University > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 2:14 PM, Eun Young Jang < > > > eunyoung1112@gmail.com> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > ? > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi everyone, thank you very much for reading my article. This is > > > such a > > > > > > great opportunity for me to introduce my work and receive > comments > > > from > > > > > > wonderful colleagues. > > > > > > > > > > > > First, let me introduce myself briefly. I earned my doctorate in > > > > > Language, > > > > > > Literacy, and Culture in the Department of Teaching and Learning > at > > > > > > Vanderbilt University. I am currently working as an assistant > > > professor > > > > > in > > > > > > Multicultural Education at Seoul National University of Education > > > > located > > > > > > in Seoul, South Korea. My research interests are in the impact of > > the > > > > > > social context on second language teaching and learning. Another > > > paper > > > > > > published recently deals with sustainable globalization of higher > > > > > education > > > > > > focusing on cultures and languages in a foreign professor?s > > classroom > > > > in > > > > > S. > > > > > > Korea. My current research project is about North Korean refugee > > > > students > > > > > > learning English in South Korea. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > My article for xmca discussion was initiated from my observation > > that > > > > ESL > > > > > > students were not actually focusing on learning English in the > ESL > > > > > > classroom but instead, on ?acting? learning with an attempt to > > > achieve > > > > > > certain social position (as an individual or a group). In > > > particular, I > > > > > > noted that they were quite skillful in using ?seemingly? academic > > > > > > strategies to conceal what they were actually doing. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The ESL students were very sensitive to things happening to them > in > > > > terms > > > > > > of marginalization and discrimination but did not reveal to > others > > > > > > explicitly what they really thought. Instead, they took advantage > > of > > > > the > > > > > > school discourse that was legitimized in the context, that was, > > > acting > > > > > like > > > > > > motivated and strategic learners by participating in class > > activities > > > > > > actively and strategically. In spite of regular observations of > ESL > > > > > classes > > > > > > back then, I could not figure out what was happening in the > > classroom > > > > for > > > > > > the first couple of months. Later on, the social dynamics among > > > > students > > > > > > and between students and the teacher surfaced to me and also they > > > began > > > > > to > > > > > > open their minds and told me how they felt isolated and > > > discriminated. > > > > > > Then, I was able to see the meanings of their actions. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In effect, the ESL teacher tried hard to be fair and in a sense, > > the > > > > > French > > > > > > student was isolated and discriminated by the Korean students in > > the > > > > ESL > > > > > > classroom. Nevertheless, Korean students victimized themselves. I > > > > thought > > > > > > that it was still important and valuable to acknowledge how the > > > Korean > > > > > > students felt simply because the feelings were there and they > made > > > some > > > > > > consequences (such as silencing the French student). I wanted to > > > reveal > > > > > > that how the students felt and why they felt that way and how > they > > > > > reacted > > > > > > to their feelings. Whether the discrimination was real or not was > > not > > > > > > important. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > A reviewer from other journal has criticized my article badly for > > > > teacher > > > > > > bashing. But definitely I did not mean it. Also, some readers of > my > > > > > article > > > > > > said that because I am Korean, I was on the Korean students? > side. > > > The > > > > > fact > > > > > > was, the ESL teacher and I were good friends and this even made > the > > > > > Korean > > > > > > students suspicious of my position (like a spy from the ?white? > > > teacher > > > > > > side). Anyway, honestly, the comments from other scholars made me > > > feel > > > > > > constrained conducting research about the same ethnic group. Now, > > I?d > > > > > like > > > > > > to know about your opinion about this issue. > > > > > > > > > > > > Again, the fact that the participants were Korean was not the > main > > > > focus > > > > > of > > > > > > my study. I wanted to show how they used strategies, which were > > > > typically > > > > > > categorized as individual and cognitive traits, for social > > purposes. > > > > So, > > > > > > the bigger agenda of my study was to explore ?a? way to bridge > the > > > > > > dichotomy between individual and sociocultural camps. > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks! > > > > > > > > > > > > EY. > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 8:12 AM, David Kellogg < > > dkellogg60@gmail.com > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > Alfredo: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Down the hall one of the Chinese translators is working on > > > > translations > > > > > > of > > > > > > > the Chinese "State of the Union" address into English. The > > Chinese > > > > goes > > > > > > > something like this: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ????????? > > > > > > > xi?och? p?nk?n q?d? j?nzh?n. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Literally: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > "Eradicate Poverty Achieve Progress", i.e. "(The government) > > (made) > > > > > some > > > > > > > progress in the eradication of poverty." > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In Chinese we don't have to specify the agent, and we don't > need > > to > > > > use > > > > > > the > > > > > > > effective verb "made"; it's a happening and not a doing. This > > used > > > to > > > > > be > > > > > > > because the agent went without saying--it's encoded in the > > grammar. > > > > > > Partly > > > > > > > thanks to a poetic tradition going back more than a thousand > > years, > > > > > > Chinese > > > > > > > lends itself to four-syllable slogan-like objects like > "Eradicate > > > > > > Poverty" > > > > > > > and "Achieve Progress", and putting them together sounds > natural. > > > We > > > > > > don't > > > > > > > usually use a subject unless we want to stress it; it's much > more > > > > > common > > > > > > to > > > > > > > just have a nominal topic and then a comment, like in this > > example. > > > > > > Because > > > > > > > the government has a well established role in mobilizing the > > masses > > > > to > > > > > > > carry out actions like famine relief and flood prevention and > so > > > on, > > > > > the > > > > > > > agent and the "doing" don't need to be specified: everybody > knows > > > it > > > > > was > > > > > > > the government, even if that weren't clear in the context of a > > > > > government > > > > > > > report. So we simply say it's a happening. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Now that's changing. In fact, the government does relatively > > little > > > > to > > > > > > > alleviate poverty. There are regional enterprises, and there > are > > > > > private > > > > > > > businesses and so on. After the Sichuan earthquake, my > > > brother-in-law > > > > > > > loaded up his SUV with bottled water and drove down to the > > > earthquake > > > > > > area > > > > > > > to distribute it, and he says there was a huge traffic jam of > > other > > > > > SUVs > > > > > > by > > > > > > > entrepreneurs like him who had exactly the same idea. And for > > > > precisely > > > > > > > this reason, we find that in the government report there is > more > > > and > > > > > more > > > > > > > explicit stipulation of the government's agency and of the > > > effective > > > > > > means. > > > > > > > Instead of just happening, the government does things. There > is a > > > > > similar > > > > > > > link between ideology and ideation in English if you think > about > > > it. > > > > > When > > > > > > > something GOOD happens, it's because somebody DID it, but when > > > > > something > > > > > > > bad happens, "Stuff happens". > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Here's the point. We usually use "ideology" to mean something > > like > > > > > > > conscious and deliberate ideation, usually of an intentionally > > > > > deceitful > > > > > > or > > > > > > > misleading variety. I don't really accept that. It seems to me > > that > > > > > > > "ideology" really is equivalent to ideation, that is, to the > > > > > > communicative, > > > > > > > representational function of speech, except that it is somewhat > > > > larger, > > > > > > > both because the interpersonal and the textual functions also > > > encode > > > > > > ideas > > > > > > > and are also therefore ideological and because a lot of > ideology > > is > > > > > > simply > > > > > > > NOT specifying things. For example, when you say "it's > raining", > > > you > > > > > are > > > > > > > conveying the idea that rain is an event that just happens, and > > is > > > > not > > > > > > > caused by any nameable entity. You don't normally say "it's > > > birding" > > > > or > > > > > > > even "it's shining". > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Similarly, we usually use "prescriptivism" to mean something > like > > > > > > conscious > > > > > > > and deliberate transformativism, usually of an authoritarian > and > > > > > > > dictatorial, and deceptive, sort. I don't really accept that > > > either. > > > > On > > > > > > the > > > > > > > contrary, what is really deceptive is to pretend that the > process > > > of > > > > > > > education is meaningful without attending to its ultimate > > product. > > > To > > > > > me, > > > > > > > "Eradicate Poverty Achieve Progress" is a perfect balance of > > > process > > > > > and > > > > > > > product, and agency and effective means are only meaningful > with > > > > > respect > > > > > > to > > > > > > > both. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > David Kellogg > > > > > > > Macquarie University > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 5:53 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil < > > > > > a.j.gil@iped.uio.no > > > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi again, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > one thing that I find interesting in Jang's article, and > which > > > may > > > > > > > connect > > > > > > > > to comments in the other thread (by David, Haydi...) > concerning > > > > 'not > > > > > > > > reducing the political to the personal', is the issue of > > > > *ideology.* > > > > > > In > > > > > > > > particular, Jang discusses and empirically examines what she > > > coins > > > > > as a > > > > > > > > *Prescriptive* language ideology. As she describes in her > > paper, > > > > and > > > > > as > > > > > > > any > > > > > > > > educator will immediately recognise, this ideology exists as > > the > > > > > > > > classroom's orientations to a correct/incorrect form. In her > > > > article, > > > > > > she > > > > > > > > exhibits this through a number of sequences in which > > > > teacher-student > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > student-student relations involve *evaluations* with regard > to > > > > > > > proficiently > > > > > > > > using two rules: making connections between sentences and > > staying > > > > on > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > topic. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As Jang shows, the prescriptive approach, which sets the > final > > > > > linguist > > > > > > > > form as the criterion for positively or negatively evaluating > > any > > > > > > > response > > > > > > > > by any student, is such that more proficient readers/speakers > > > will > > > > > have > > > > > > > > easier access to positive evaluation. The ideology here then > > > exists > > > > > as > > > > > > a > > > > > > > > regime of power and differential access, of inequality. By > > > treating > > > > > all > > > > > > > > equally, we get to inequality. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I was thinking that it seems that the prescriptive approach > > does > > > > > focus > > > > > > on > > > > > > > > the final product, whereas the sociocultural approach that > Jang > > > > > pursues > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > Vygotsky first set forth has it that we should not focus on > the > > > > final > > > > > > > > product but on its genesis, on the way the verbal form exists > > > first > > > > > as > > > > > > a > > > > > > > > social relation between people. Thus, in Episodes 1 and 2 in > > the > > > > > > article, > > > > > > > > if the participants had oriented towards a possible process > of > > > > > > > development, > > > > > > > > Ji-Woo's responses would have been heard and responded to as > > > > moments > > > > > > in a > > > > > > > > developmental trajectory. There would have been a very > > different > > > > > social > > > > > > > > situation in which work would have been directed to make > > visible > > > > and > > > > > > > > available the dynamics of Ji-Woo's learning process. But the > > > > > > prescriptive > > > > > > > > orientation evaluates and makes salient only deficiency and > > > > > > achievement. > > > > > > > On > > > > > > > > the other hand, and consistent with those (e.g., Stetsenko, > > > > Holzman) > > > > > > who > > > > > > > > have referred to Vygotsky's legacy as *revolutionary,* an > > > > orientation > > > > > > > > consistent with Vygotsky's teachings would bring with it not > > > only a > > > > > > > > different situation, but also an *emancipatory* one. Instead > of > > > > > > > inequality > > > > > > > > brought about by treating all equally, we would have an > > > > equalitarian > > > > > > > > approach whose power resides in acknowledging and caring for > > > > history > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > diversity. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On a side thought, and connected to David's (Halliday's) > > > > distinction > > > > > > > > between ideational and interpersonal functions of language, I > > was > > > > > > > wondering > > > > > > > > what is the relation/difference between ideational and > > > ideological. > > > > > In > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > article, it seems clear that the language related competence > on > > > > > putting > > > > > > > > names to things and thereby building categories seems a > > condition > > > > for > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > racial/ethnic tension to exist. But of course, the tension > is a > > > > > > > relational, > > > > > > > > not just a lexical one. Thoughts? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Alfredo > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________________ > > > > > > > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > > > > > edu > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil > > > > > > > > Sent: 13 March 2017 18:48 > > > > > > > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > > > > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Jang's SL Article Discussion > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ?Dear all, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > David has started some very interesting comments on the > current > > > > > article > > > > > > > > for discussion on Tensions in Second Language Learning, which > > > > attach > > > > > > > again > > > > > > > > here. Because some of these comments have been given at a > > > different > > > > > > > thread, > > > > > > > > I am starting here a thread that shall more centrally concern > > > > Jang's > > > > > > > > article. I copy below all what David has so far written about > > the > > > > > > > article. > > > > > > > > I hope this will ?make it easy for Eun-Young and everyone > else > > to > > > > > > follow > > > > > > > on > > > > > > > > her article. I know ?Eun-Young is challenged time-wise by > > course > > > > > > > > responsibilities and I hope this will make it easier for her. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Eun-Young, David mentions an article from 2011. If you > wanted, > > > you > > > > > > could > > > > > > > > also share the PDF with us for background, although the > current > > > > > article > > > > > > > > gives more than enough material for discussion, I think. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Alfredo > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --------------------David Kellogg wrote: ------------------ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > t's very interesting to compare this paper with Professor > > Jang's > > > > 2011 > > > > > > > > paper co-authored with Robert T. Jimenez: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Eun-Young Jang & Robert T. Jim?nez (2011) A Sociocultural > > > > Perspective > > > > > > on > > > > > > > > Second Language Learner Strategies: Focus on the Impact of > > Social > > > > > > > Context, > > > > > > > > Theory Into Practice, > > > > > > > > 50:2, 141-148, DOI: 10.1080/00405841.2011.558443 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In some ways, the papers are very similar--the data is > > identical > > > in > > > > > one > > > > > > > > place (p. 42), and the conclusions are for the most part > > > congruent. > > > > > But > > > > > > > > consider how different the titles are. "Impact" in one place, > > and > > > > > > > "tension" > > > > > > > > in the other. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > There is this note to the 1935 version of Vygotsky's report > on > > > > > > > preschools, > > > > > > > > where Zankov, Elkonin and Shif complain about Vygotsky's idea > > > that > > > > > the > > > > > > > > child directs his or her own learning before preschool, the > > > > > environment > > > > > > > > directs it after preschool, and preschool therefore > represents > > a > > > > kind > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > transitional stage. On the one hand, if the child is > directing > > > his > > > > or > > > > > > her > > > > > > > > own learning, how can we say that the environment is the > > ultimate > > > > > > source > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > learning? And if the environment is the ultimate source of > > > > learning, > > > > > as > > > > > > > > Vygotsky says, how can we say that the child is himself or > > > herself > > > > > part > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > the environment? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Professor Jang gets around this problem just as Vygotsky > > > > > > does--adroitly. > > > > > > > On > > > > > > > > the one hand, strategies are expanded to include "sets of > > actions > > > > > > > performed > > > > > > > > to deal with problems (perceived by the researcher, indicated > > by > > > > the > > > > > > > > learners)". On the other, contexts are expanded to include > > > > > "pedagogical > > > > > > > > assumptions, power relations, and interracial conflict". > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think this solution to the problem is the correct one: when > > we > > > > > > consider > > > > > > > > the relationship of the child and the environment, we cannot > > > treat > > > > it > > > > > > > like > > > > > > > > an unstoppable force meeting an unmoveable object. But for me > > > that > > > > > > means > > > > > > > > that both the child and the environment have to be considered > > in > > > > > > > "internal" > > > > > > > > (that is, abstract, linguistic) terms. We can't think of > speech > > > as > > > > > > > actions; > > > > > > > > it's more useful to think of actions as speech. We can't > think > > of > > > > the > > > > > > > > social situation of development as a material setting: it's a > > > > > > > relationship > > > > > > > > with others. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Contrariwise, it seems to me that when we consider "racism", > it > > > is > > > > > more > > > > > > > > helpful to consider it in "external", that is, concrete, > > > > > nonlinguistic > > > > > > > > terms. In the 2011 paper, Professor Jang and her co-author > are > > > > > willing > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > openly criticize the idea that languages are learned in > exactly > > > the > > > > > > same > > > > > > > > way whether they are first or second languages. Here, they > just > > > > quote > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > teacher's comments on "mommy skills". > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It's a very revealing quote. One thing it reveals is why it's > > > > > probably > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > helpful to refer to "racist" as an "insult" (p. 40) or to > imply > > > > that > > > > > > > racism > > > > > > > > and anti-racism is really just a matter of having the right > > > > attitude > > > > > > (as > > > > > > > > the Republicans did in the Sessions debate or as Bernie > Sanders > > > did > > > > > > when > > > > > > > he > > > > > > > > referred to Trump supporters who voted for Obama as "not > > having a > > > > > > racist > > > > > > > > bone in their bodies"). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You can see that subjectively, the teacher is being > > > > anti-racist--all > > > > > > > > students, French, Turkish, Egyptian, Korean, use the same > > > > strategies, > > > > > > > just > > > > > > > > like we all have mommies.She has all the right attitudes, and > > > > > probably > > > > > > > > doesn't have a racist bone in her body. But that doesn't > > diminish > > > > by > > > > > > one > > > > > > > > jot the terrible damage that this kind of indiscriminate > > > > > discrimination > > > > > > > > does in the classroom. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > David Kellogg > > > > > > > > Macquarie University > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------ On a related thread (Subject: Don't > do > > > > it), > > > > > > > David > > > > > > > > K. wrote:-------------- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It seems to me that we need to clearly distinguish between > > > "racism" > > > > > and > > > > > > > > "racist sentiment". One of the interesting problems that > comes > > up > > > > in > > > > > > > Eunhee > > > > > > > > Jang's excellent article on second language learning > strategies > > > > from > > > > > a > > > > > > > > sociocultural point of view--a wonderful piece of "inside" > > work, > > > > > > > > introducing racial issues into an area where they have never > > been > > > > > > > seriously > > > > > > > > discussed--is the use of "racist" (by the Korean kids to > > describe > > > > > their > > > > > > > > teacher) as an "insult". > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I like the article. I think it's important work. But for that > > > very > > > > > > > reason, > > > > > > > > I think that it's important to resist any attempt to reduce > > > > "racist" > > > > > > to a > > > > > > > > personal insult. I think we've seen very very clearly, both > in > > > the > > > > > > > Sessions > > > > > > > > confirmation hearing, and in the discussion of Trump's own > > > > > anti-semitic > > > > > > > > behavior--that this kind of reduction of the political to the > > > > > personal > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > precisely the kind of reducing the sociocultural to the > > cognitive > > > > > that > > > > > > > > Professor Jang is trying to resist. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > David Kellogg > > > > > > > > Macquarie University > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------- Idem as > > above------------------------- > > > > > > > > --------------- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > One of the interesting aspects of Professor Jang's paper is > > that > > > it > > > > > is > > > > > > > > about adolescents who are in the process of forming concepts, > > but > > > > who > > > > > > are > > > > > > > > not there yet. And one way in which an adolescent forms a > > concept > > > > > about > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > difficult concept of a social contract, of citizenship, of > > > > > nationality > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > pseudoconceptual: it is based on discussing "actual" > perceptual > > > > > > > differences > > > > > > > > between races. This might seem irrelevant to current > political > > > > > > discourse. > > > > > > > > Unfortunately, it isn't.? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > David Kellogg > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > > > > > Jang, Eun-Young. Ph.D. > > > > > > > > > > > > Assistant Professor, Graduate School of Education > > > > > > > > > > > > Seoul National University of Education > > > > > > > > > > > > Seoul, S. Korea > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > Jang, Eun-Young. Ph.D. > > > > > > > > Assistant Professor, Graduate School of Education > > > > > > > > Seoul National University of Education > > > > > > > > Seoul, S. Korea > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From dkellogg60@gmail.com Thu Mar 30 14:22:52 2017 From: dkellogg60@gmail.com (David Kellogg) Date: Fri, 31 Mar 2017 08:22:52 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] ZPD and DST! Message-ID: I think the Roth article I would recommend isn't the editorial, but rather this one: Roth, W-M. 2007. On Mediation: Towards a Cultural Historical Understanding. Theory and Psychology 17 (5): 655-680. There's a lot I disagree with in this paper (e.g. I disagree with the idea that if mediation "explains" everything then it explains nothing--it is like saying that if perception applies to all visible phenomena then it applies to none of them). But here's why I prefer it to Saeed's paper: a) Roth gets to concrete examples from direct experience almost immediately (fish feeding, on p. 656). This gives me something to go back to when I get lost in abstraction, and I need it. b) Instead of using Theory A to illuminate Theory B, Roth goes back into the historical origins of Theory A and discovers, immanently, Theory B, C, etc.. This has two advantages: it avoids chalk-and-cheese eclecticism, and it helps me understand how Theory A was formed in the first place. With Saeed's paper, I find myself missing: 1) an account of the CRITICAL DISTINCTIONS between the two theories, 2) an explanation of how each MAKES UP for what the other lacks, and 3) some argument for long term COMPATABILITY, some explication of why the emulsion will not re-separate, like vinegar and oil. c) For Vygotsky--no, for mediation more generally--the key problem is volition, free will, choice. Vygotsky once said that the most interesting problem in the whole of psychology, bar none, is what a human being would really do in the situation of Buridan's donkey (that is a situation of volition, of free will, of choice where the outcomes were either apparently equal or equally unknown). This isn't true of DST, which has, as Saeed admits, an "emergentist" account of volition (to put it uncharitably, handwaving and magic). At the very least, choice is late emerging in a DST account, and that makes, for example, the child's early and successful acquisition of speech very hard to explain. That said, Saeed--I DID appreciate the part on p. 86 where you remind us that learning and development are distinct but linked. As Wolff-Michael says, the point has been made before, but I think that we've got to keep saying this, until people really see that mixing up "microgenesis" and ontogenesis is, in our own time, the same kind of error that mixing up ontogenesis and phylogenesis was in Vygotsky's. If I read one more article which invokes the ZPD for some trivial incident of learning, I'm getting a tattoo that says: "Look here, mate, just because it didn't kill ya doesn't mean it made ya any stronger". David Kellogg Macquarie University From wolffmichael.roth@gmail.com Thu Mar 30 14:33:03 2017 From: wolffmichael.roth@gmail.com (Wolff-Michael Roth) Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2017 14:33:03 -0700 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: ZPD and DST! In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi David, you will disagree even more with this one: Roth, W.-M., & Jornet, A. (in press). Theorizing with/out "mediators." Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science. But people like Feliks Mikhailov, and also Ekaterina Zavershneva indicate that toward the end of his life, Vygotsy was moving away from mediation. We give an extended argument for theorizing without mediators in the article. But I hope you understand that I am not out to interpret and find out what Vygotsky really said even if he did not say it. I think you are well positioned to do THAT kind of research. I want to move on. And, frankly, I have no clue what people are saying when they write that something is mediated. It seems to me that they are hiding or refraining from going after what I am interested in. I am not interested in knowing that a tool mediates something. I am interested in what the tool actually does, what are the events in which tools participate, shape people and get shaped by them. In the end, all this is about finding suitable discourses, and descriptions, for doing the kinds of things we want to do. m -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Wolff-Michael Roth, Lansdowne Professor Applied Cognitive Science MacLaurin Building A567 University of Victoria Victoria, BC, V8P 5C2 http://web.uvic.ca/~mroth New book: *The Mathematics of Mathematics * On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 2:22 PM, David Kellogg wrote: > I think the Roth article I would recommend isn't the editorial, but rather > this one: > > Roth, W-M. 2007. On Mediation: Towards a Cultural Historical Understanding. > Theory and Psychology 17 (5): 655-680. > > There's a lot I disagree with in this paper (e.g. I disagree with the idea > that if mediation "explains" everything then it explains nothing--it is > like saying that if perception applies to all visible phenomena then it > applies to none of them). But here's why I prefer it to Saeed's paper: > > a) Roth gets to concrete examples from direct experience almost immediately > (fish feeding, on p. 656). This gives me something to go back to when I get > lost in abstraction, and I need it. > > b) Instead of using Theory A to illuminate Theory B, Roth goes back into > the historical origins of Theory A and discovers, immanently, Theory B, C, > etc.. This has two advantages: it avoids chalk-and-cheese eclecticism, and > it helps me understand how Theory A was formed in the first place. With > Saeed's paper, I find myself missing: 1) an account of the CRITICAL > DISTINCTIONS between the two theories, 2) an explanation of how each MAKES > UP for what the other lacks, and 3) some argument for long term > COMPATABILITY, some explication of why the emulsion will not re-separate, > like vinegar and oil. > > c) For Vygotsky--no, for mediation more generally--the key problem is > volition, free will, choice. Vygotsky once said that the most interesting > problem in the whole of psychology, bar none, is what a human being would > really do in the situation of Buridan's donkey (that is a situation of > volition, of free will, of choice where the outcomes were either apparently > equal or equally unknown). This isn't true of DST, which has, as Saeed > admits, an "emergentist" account of volition (to put it uncharitably, > handwaving and magic). At the very least, choice is late emerging in a DST > account, and that makes, for example, the child's early and > successful acquisition of speech very hard to explain. > > That said, Saeed--I DID appreciate the part on p. 86 where you remind us > that learning and development are distinct but linked. As Wolff-Michael > says, the point has been made before, but I think that we've got to keep > saying this, until people really see that mixing up "microgenesis" and > ontogenesis is, in our own time, the same kind of error that mixing up > ontogenesis and phylogenesis was in Vygotsky's. If I read one more article > which invokes the ZPD for some trivial incident of learning, I'm getting a > tattoo that says: "Look here, mate, just because it didn't kill ya doesn't > mean it made ya any stronger". > > David Kellogg > Macquarie University > From wolffmichael.roth@gmail.com Thu Mar 30 15:26:40 2017 From: wolffmichael.roth@gmail.com (Wolff-Michael Roth) Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2017 15:26:40 -0700 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: ZPD and DST! In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi all, I did not realize that my reference wasn't updated. The paper is here: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12124-016-9376-0 and by personal request Alfredo or I will mail a copy to those not operating at a uni with access to Springer Link. Michael -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Wolff-Michael Roth, Lansdowne Professor Applied Cognitive Science MacLaurin Building A567 University of Victoria Victoria, BC, V8P 5C2 http://web.uvic.ca/~mroth New book: *The Mathematics of Mathematics * On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 2:33 PM, Wolff-Michael Roth < wolffmichael.roth@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi David, you will disagree even more with this one: > > > Roth, W.-M., & Jornet, A. (in press). Theorizing with/out "mediators." > Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science. > > But people like Feliks Mikhailov, and also Ekaterina Zavershneva indicate > that toward the end of his life, Vygotsy was moving away from mediation. We > give an extended argument for theorizing without mediators in the article. > > But I hope you understand that I am not out to interpret and find out what > Vygotsky really said even if he did not say it. I think you are well > positioned to do THAT kind of research. I want to move on. And, frankly, I > have no clue what people are saying when they write that something is > mediated. It seems to me that they are hiding or refraining from going > after what I am interested in. I am not interested in knowing that a tool > mediates something. I am interested in what the tool actually does, what > are the events in which tools participate, shape people and get shaped by > them. > > In the end, all this is about finding suitable discourses, and > descriptions, for doing the kinds of things we want to do. > > m > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > -------------------- > Wolff-Michael Roth, Lansdowne Professor > Applied Cognitive Science > MacLaurin Building A567 > University of Victoria > Victoria, BC, V8P 5C2 > http://web.uvic.ca/~mroth > > New book: *The Mathematics of Mathematics > * > > On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 2:22 PM, David Kellogg > wrote: > >> I think the Roth article I would recommend isn't the editorial, but rather >> this one: >> >> Roth, W-M. 2007. On Mediation: Towards a Cultural Historical >> Understanding. >> Theory and Psychology 17 (5): 655-680. >> >> There's a lot I disagree with in this paper (e.g. I disagree with the idea >> that if mediation "explains" everything then it explains nothing--it is >> like saying that if perception applies to all visible phenomena then it >> applies to none of them). But here's why I prefer it to Saeed's paper: >> >> a) Roth gets to concrete examples from direct experience almost >> immediately >> (fish feeding, on p. 656). This gives me something to go back to when I >> get >> lost in abstraction, and I need it. >> >> b) Instead of using Theory A to illuminate Theory B, Roth goes back into >> the historical origins of Theory A and discovers, immanently, Theory B, C, >> etc.. This has two advantages: it avoids chalk-and-cheese eclecticism, and >> it helps me understand how Theory A was formed in the first place. With >> Saeed's paper, I find myself missing: 1) an account of the CRITICAL >> DISTINCTIONS between the two theories, 2) an explanation of how each MAKES >> UP for what the other lacks, and 3) some argument for long term >> COMPATABILITY, some explication of why the emulsion will not re-separate, >> like vinegar and oil. >> >> c) For Vygotsky--no, for mediation more generally--the key problem is >> volition, free will, choice. Vygotsky once said that the most interesting >> problem in the whole of psychology, bar none, is what a human being would >> really do in the situation of Buridan's donkey (that is a situation of >> volition, of free will, of choice where the outcomes were either >> apparently >> equal or equally unknown). This isn't true of DST, which has, as Saeed >> admits, an "emergentist" account of volition (to put it uncharitably, >> handwaving and magic). At the very least, choice is late emerging in a DST >> account, and that makes, for example, the child's early and >> successful acquisition of speech very hard to explain. >> >> That said, Saeed--I DID appreciate the part on p. 86 where you remind us >> that learning and development are distinct but linked. As Wolff-Michael >> says, the point has been made before, but I think that we've got to keep >> saying this, until people really see that mixing up "microgenesis" and >> ontogenesis is, in our own time, the same kind of error that mixing up >> ontogenesis and phylogenesis was in Vygotsky's. If I read one more article >> which invokes the ZPD for some trivial incident of learning, I'm getting a >> tattoo that says: "Look here, mate, just because it didn't kill ya doesn't >> mean it made ya any stronger". >> >> David Kellogg >> Macquarie University >> > > From huw.softdesigns@gmail.com Thu Mar 30 15:54:02 2017 From: huw.softdesigns@gmail.com (Huw Lloyd) Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2017 23:54:02 +0100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: ZPD and DST! In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Please send me a copy, Michael, and I shall aim for a terse reply. Best, Huw On 30 March 2017 at 23:26, Wolff-Michael Roth wrote: > Hi all, I did not realize that my reference wasn't updated. The paper is > here: > https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12124-016-9376-0 > > and by personal request Alfredo or I will mail a copy to those not > operating at a uni with access to Springer Link. > > Michael > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > -------------------- > Wolff-Michael Roth, Lansdowne Professor > Applied Cognitive Science > MacLaurin Building A567 > University of Victoria > Victoria, BC, V8P 5C2 > http://web.uvic.ca/~mroth > > New book: *The Mathematics of Mathematics > directions-in-mathematics-and-science-education/the- > mathematics-of-mathematics/>* > > On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 2:33 PM, Wolff-Michael Roth < > wolffmichael.roth@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Hi David, you will disagree even more with this one: > > > > > > Roth, W.-M., & Jornet, A. (in press). Theorizing with/out "mediators." > > Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science. > > > > But people like Feliks Mikhailov, and also Ekaterina Zavershneva indicate > > that toward the end of his life, Vygotsy was moving away from mediation. > We > > give an extended argument for theorizing without mediators in the > article. > > > > But I hope you understand that I am not out to interpret and find out > what > > Vygotsky really said even if he did not say it. I think you are well > > positioned to do THAT kind of research. I want to move on. And, frankly, > I > > have no clue what people are saying when they write that something is > > mediated. It seems to me that they are hiding or refraining from going > > after what I am interested in. I am not interested in knowing that a tool > > mediates something. I am interested in what the tool actually does, what > > are the events in which tools participate, shape people and get shaped by > > them. > > > > In the end, all this is about finding suitable discourses, and > > descriptions, for doing the kinds of things we want to do. > > > > m > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > -------------------- > > Wolff-Michael Roth, Lansdowne Professor > > Applied Cognitive Science > > MacLaurin Building A567 > > University of Victoria > > Victoria, BC, V8P 5C2 > > http://web.uvic.ca/~mroth > > > > New book: *The Mathematics of Mathematics > > directions-in-mathematics-and-science-education/the- > mathematics-of-mathematics/>* > > > > On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 2:22 PM, David Kellogg > > wrote: > > > >> I think the Roth article I would recommend isn't the editorial, but > rather > >> this one: > >> > >> Roth, W-M. 2007. On Mediation: Towards a Cultural Historical > >> Understanding. > >> Theory and Psychology 17 (5): 655-680. > >> > >> There's a lot I disagree with in this paper (e.g. I disagree with the > idea > >> that if mediation "explains" everything then it explains nothing--it is > >> like saying that if perception applies to all visible phenomena then it > >> applies to none of them). But here's why I prefer it to Saeed's paper: > >> > >> a) Roth gets to concrete examples from direct experience almost > >> immediately > >> (fish feeding, on p. 656). This gives me something to go back to when I > >> get > >> lost in abstraction, and I need it. > >> > >> b) Instead of using Theory A to illuminate Theory B, Roth goes back into > >> the historical origins of Theory A and discovers, immanently, Theory B, > C, > >> etc.. This has two advantages: it avoids chalk-and-cheese eclecticism, > and > >> it helps me understand how Theory A was formed in the first place. With > >> Saeed's paper, I find myself missing: 1) an account of the CRITICAL > >> DISTINCTIONS between the two theories, 2) an explanation of how each > MAKES > >> UP for what the other lacks, and 3) some argument for long term > >> COMPATABILITY, some explication of why the emulsion will not > re-separate, > >> like vinegar and oil. > >> > >> c) For Vygotsky--no, for mediation more generally--the key problem is > >> volition, free will, choice. Vygotsky once said that the most > interesting > >> problem in the whole of psychology, bar none, is what a human being > would > >> really do in the situation of Buridan's donkey (that is a situation of > >> volition, of free will, of choice where the outcomes were either > >> apparently > >> equal or equally unknown). This isn't true of DST, which has, as Saeed > >> admits, an "emergentist" account of volition (to put it uncharitably, > >> handwaving and magic). At the very least, choice is late emerging in a > DST > >> account, and that makes, for example, the child's early and > >> successful acquisition of speech very hard to explain. > >> > >> That said, Saeed--I DID appreciate the part on p. 86 where you remind us > >> that learning and development are distinct but linked. As Wolff-Michael > >> says, the point has been made before, but I think that we've got to keep > >> saying this, until people really see that mixing up "microgenesis" and > >> ontogenesis is, in our own time, the same kind of error that mixing up > >> ontogenesis and phylogenesis was in Vygotsky's. If I read one more > article > >> which invokes the ZPD for some trivial incident of learning, I'm > getting a > >> tattoo that says: "Look here, mate, just because it didn't kill ya > doesn't > >> mean it made ya any stronger". > >> > >> David Kellogg > >> Macquarie University > >> > > > > > From ggladduck@gmail.com Thu Mar 30 16:42:52 2017 From: ggladduck@gmail.com (=?UTF-8?B?67Cw7Z2s7LKg?=) Date: Fri, 31 Mar 2017 08:42:52 +0900 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: ZPD and DST! In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi, Roth. I want a copy. 2017-03-31 7:26 GMT+09:00 Wolff-Michael Roth : > Hi all, I did not realize that my reference wasn't updated. The paper is > here: > https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12124-016-9376-0 > > and by personal request Alfredo or I will mail a copy to those not > operating at a uni with access to Springer Link. > > Michael > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > -------------------- > Wolff-Michael Roth, Lansdowne Professor > Applied Cognitive Science > MacLaurin Building A567 > University of Victoria > Victoria, BC, V8P 5C2 > http://web.uvic.ca/~mroth > > New book: *The Mathematics of Mathematics > directions-in-mathematics-and-science-education/the- > mathematics-of-mathematics/>* > > On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 2:33 PM, Wolff-Michael Roth < > wolffmichael.roth@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Hi David, you will disagree even more with this one: > > > > > > Roth, W.-M., & Jornet, A. (in press). Theorizing with/out "mediators." > > Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science. > > > > But people like Feliks Mikhailov, and also Ekaterina Zavershneva indicate > > that toward the end of his life, Vygotsy was moving away from mediation. > We > > give an extended argument for theorizing without mediators in the > article. > > > > But I hope you understand that I am not out to interpret and find out > what > > Vygotsky really said even if he did not say it. I think you are well > > positioned to do THAT kind of research. I want to move on. And, frankly, > I > > have no clue what people are saying when they write that something is > > mediated. It seems to me that they are hiding or refraining from going > > after what I am interested in. I am not interested in knowing that a tool > > mediates something. I am interested in what the tool actually does, what > > are the events in which tools participate, shape people and get shaped by > > them. > > > > In the end, all this is about finding suitable discourses, and > > descriptions, for doing the kinds of things we want to do. > > > > m > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > -------------------- > > Wolff-Michael Roth, Lansdowne Professor > > Applied Cognitive Science > > MacLaurin Building A567 > > University of Victoria > > Victoria, BC, V8P 5C2 > > http://web.uvic.ca/~mroth > > > > New book: *The Mathematics of Mathematics > > directions-in-mathematics-and-science-education/the- > mathematics-of-mathematics/>* > > > > On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 2:22 PM, David Kellogg > > wrote: > > > >> I think the Roth article I would recommend isn't the editorial, but > rather > >> this one: > >> > >> Roth, W-M. 2007. On Mediation: Towards a Cultural Historical > >> Understanding. > >> Theory and Psychology 17 (5): 655-680. > >> > >> There's a lot I disagree with in this paper (e.g. I disagree with the > idea > >> that if mediation "explains" everything then it explains nothing--it is > >> like saying that if perception applies to all visible phenomena then it > >> applies to none of them). But here's why I prefer it to Saeed's paper: > >> > >> a) Roth gets to concrete examples from direct experience almost > >> immediately > >> (fish feeding, on p. 656). This gives me something to go back to when I > >> get > >> lost in abstraction, and I need it. > >> > >> b) Instead of using Theory A to illuminate Theory B, Roth goes back into > >> the historical origins of Theory A and discovers, immanently, Theory B, > C, > >> etc.. This has two advantages: it avoids chalk-and-cheese eclecticism, > and > >> it helps me understand how Theory A was formed in the first place. With > >> Saeed's paper, I find myself missing: 1) an account of the CRITICAL > >> DISTINCTIONS between the two theories, 2) an explanation of how each > MAKES > >> UP for what the other lacks, and 3) some argument for long term > >> COMPATABILITY, some explication of why the emulsion will not > re-separate, > >> like vinegar and oil. > >> > >> c) For Vygotsky--no, for mediation more generally--the key problem is > >> volition, free will, choice. Vygotsky once said that the most > interesting > >> problem in the whole of psychology, bar none, is what a human being > would > >> really do in the situation of Buridan's donkey (that is a situation of > >> volition, of free will, of choice where the outcomes were either > >> apparently > >> equal or equally unknown). This isn't true of DST, which has, as Saeed > >> admits, an "emergentist" account of volition (to put it uncharitably, > >> handwaving and magic). At the very least, choice is late emerging in a > DST > >> account, and that makes, for example, the child's early and > >> successful acquisition of speech very hard to explain. > >> > >> That said, Saeed--I DID appreciate the part on p. 86 where you remind us > >> that learning and development are distinct but linked. As Wolff-Michael > >> says, the point has been made before, but I think that we've got to keep > >> saying this, until people really see that mixing up "microgenesis" and > >> ontogenesis is, in our own time, the same kind of error that mixing up > >> ontogenesis and phylogenesis was in Vygotsky's. If I read one more > article > >> which invokes the ZPD for some trivial incident of learning, I'm > getting a > >> tattoo that says: "Look here, mate, just because it didn't kill ya > doesn't > >> mean it made ya any stronger". > >> > >> David Kellogg > >> Macquarie University > >> > > > > > From mcole@ucsd.edu Thu Mar 30 17:09:21 2017 From: mcole@ucsd.edu (mike cole) Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2017 17:09:21 -0700 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: ZPD and DST! In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Michael -- XMCA has been operating as an educational collective among whom relevant written materials are circulated as they are needed for the the members' education. Would it incur Springer's wrath to make the paper directly available? mike On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 3:26 PM, Wolff-Michael Roth < wolffmichael.roth@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi all, I did not realize that my reference wasn't updated. The paper is > here: > https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12124-016-9376-0 > > and by personal request Alfredo or I will mail a copy to those not > operating at a uni with access to Springer Link. > > Michael > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > -------------------- > Wolff-Michael Roth, Lansdowne Professor > Applied Cognitive Science > MacLaurin Building A567 > University of Victoria > Victoria, BC, V8P 5C2 > http://web.uvic.ca/~mroth > > New book: *The Mathematics of Mathematics > directions-in-mathematics-and-science-education/the- > mathematics-of-mathematics/>* > > On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 2:33 PM, Wolff-Michael Roth < > wolffmichael.roth@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Hi David, you will disagree even more with this one: > > > > > > Roth, W.-M., & Jornet, A. (in press). Theorizing with/out "mediators." > > Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science. > > > > But people like Feliks Mikhailov, and also Ekaterina Zavershneva indicate > > that toward the end of his life, Vygotsy was moving away from mediation. > We > > give an extended argument for theorizing without mediators in the > article. > > > > But I hope you understand that I am not out to interpret and find out > what > > Vygotsky really said even if he did not say it. I think you are well > > positioned to do THAT kind of research. I want to move on. And, frankly, > I > > have no clue what people are saying when they write that something is > > mediated. It seems to me that they are hiding or refraining from going > > after what I am interested in. I am not interested in knowing that a tool > > mediates something. I am interested in what the tool actually does, what > > are the events in which tools participate, shape people and get shaped by > > them. > > > > In the end, all this is about finding suitable discourses, and > > descriptions, for doing the kinds of things we want to do. > > > > m > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > -------------------- > > Wolff-Michael Roth, Lansdowne Professor > > Applied Cognitive Science > > MacLaurin Building A567 > > University of Victoria > > Victoria, BC, V8P 5C2 > > http://web.uvic.ca/~mroth > > > > New book: *The Mathematics of Mathematics > > directions-in-mathematics-and-science-education/the- > mathematics-of-mathematics/>* > > > > On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 2:22 PM, David Kellogg > > wrote: > > > >> I think the Roth article I would recommend isn't the editorial, but > rather > >> this one: > >> > >> Roth, W-M. 2007. On Mediation: Towards a Cultural Historical > >> Understanding. > >> Theory and Psychology 17 (5): 655-680. > >> > >> There's a lot I disagree with in this paper (e.g. I disagree with the > idea > >> that if mediation "explains" everything then it explains nothing--it is > >> like saying that if perception applies to all visible phenomena then it > >> applies to none of them). But here's why I prefer it to Saeed's paper: > >> > >> a) Roth gets to concrete examples from direct experience almost > >> immediately > >> (fish feeding, on p. 656). This gives me something to go back to when I > >> get > >> lost in abstraction, and I need it. > >> > >> b) Instead of using Theory A to illuminate Theory B, Roth goes back into > >> the historical origins of Theory A and discovers, immanently, Theory B, > C, > >> etc.. This has two advantages: it avoids chalk-and-cheese eclecticism, > and > >> it helps me understand how Theory A was formed in the first place. With > >> Saeed's paper, I find myself missing: 1) an account of the CRITICAL > >> DISTINCTIONS between the two theories, 2) an explanation of how each > MAKES > >> UP for what the other lacks, and 3) some argument for long term > >> COMPATABILITY, some explication of why the emulsion will not > re-separate, > >> like vinegar and oil. > >> > >> c) For Vygotsky--no, for mediation more generally--the key problem is > >> volition, free will, choice. Vygotsky once said that the most > interesting > >> problem in the whole of psychology, bar none, is what a human being > would > >> really do in the situation of Buridan's donkey (that is a situation of > >> volition, of free will, of choice where the outcomes were either > >> apparently > >> equal or equally unknown). This isn't true of DST, which has, as Saeed > >> admits, an "emergentist" account of volition (to put it uncharitably, > >> handwaving and magic). At the very least, choice is late emerging in a > DST > >> account, and that makes, for example, the child's early and > >> successful acquisition of speech very hard to explain. > >> > >> That said, Saeed--I DID appreciate the part on p. 86 where you remind us > >> that learning and development are distinct but linked. As Wolff-Michael > >> says, the point has been made before, but I think that we've got to keep > >> saying this, until people really see that mixing up "microgenesis" and > >> ontogenesis is, in our own time, the same kind of error that mixing up > >> ontogenesis and phylogenesis was in Vygotsky's. If I read one more > article > >> which invokes the ZPD for some trivial incident of learning, I'm > getting a > >> tattoo that says: "Look here, mate, just because it didn't kill ya > doesn't > >> mean it made ya any stronger". > >> > >> David Kellogg > >> Macquarie University > >> > > > > > From huw.softdesigns@gmail.com Thu Mar 30 17:25:30 2017 From: huw.softdesigns@gmail.com (Huw Lloyd) Date: Fri, 31 Mar 2017 01:25:30 +0100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: ZPD and DST! In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Thank you for the paper, Michael. I have skim-read this and am largely in agreement with the content. However, I think I disagree about some implied premises. My sense is that these issues are largely a symptom of undeveloped systems and theoretical skills in this area, which I would say is essential for real progress. On that basis I would not suggest that people omit the use of certain terms, but rather that they keep tripping over them until they study them more carefully. A few pointers, perhaps: 1. Field is synonymous with medium (a cognate of media in the non-fashionable sense). 2. The 'mis-use' of tool/sign mediation as in non-unitary forms in CHAT is, I believe, largely a result of construing the object of activity socially rather than psychologically, i.e. in which orientation is the field/medium. (Some elaboration here: https://www.academia.edu/24660665/A_Comparison_of_Seven_Historical_Research_Orientations_within_CHAT_up_to_2001_ ) 3. In "thesis-antithesis" dialectics there is a medium implicated. Best, Huw On 31 March 2017 at 00:42, ??? wrote: > Hi, Roth. > I want a copy. > > 2017-03-31 7:26 GMT+09:00 Wolff-Michael Roth >: > > > Hi all, I did not realize that my reference wasn't updated. The paper is > > here: > > https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12124-016-9376-0 > > > > and by personal request Alfredo or I will mail a copy to those not > > operating at a uni with access to Springer Link. > > > > Michael > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > -------------------- > > Wolff-Michael Roth, Lansdowne Professor > > Applied Cognitive Science > > MacLaurin Building A567 > > University of Victoria > > Victoria, BC, V8P 5C2 > > http://web.uvic.ca/~mroth > > > > New book: *The Mathematics of Mathematics > > > directions-in-mathematics-and-science-education/the- > > mathematics-of-mathematics/>* > > > > On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 2:33 PM, Wolff-Michael Roth < > > wolffmichael.roth@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > Hi David, you will disagree even more with this one: > > > > > > > > > Roth, W.-M., & Jornet, A. (in press). Theorizing with/out "mediators." > > > Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science. > > > > > > But people like Feliks Mikhailov, and also Ekaterina Zavershneva > indicate > > > that toward the end of his life, Vygotsy was moving away from > mediation. > > We > > > give an extended argument for theorizing without mediators in the > > article. > > > > > > But I hope you understand that I am not out to interpret and find out > > what > > > Vygotsky really said even if he did not say it. I think you are well > > > positioned to do THAT kind of research. I want to move on. And, > frankly, > > I > > > have no clue what people are saying when they write that something is > > > mediated. It seems to me that they are hiding or refraining from going > > > after what I am interested in. I am not interested in knowing that a > tool > > > mediates something. I am interested in what the tool actually does, > what > > > are the events in which tools participate, shape people and get shaped > by > > > them. > > > > > > In the end, all this is about finding suitable discourses, and > > > descriptions, for doing the kinds of things we want to do. > > > > > > m > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > -------------------- > > > Wolff-Michael Roth, Lansdowne Professor > > > Applied Cognitive Science > > > MacLaurin Building A567 > > > University of Victoria > > > Victoria, BC, V8P 5C2 > > > http://web.uvic.ca/~mroth > > > > > > New book: *The Mathematics of Mathematics > > > > directions-in-mathematics-and-science-education/the- > > mathematics-of-mathematics/>* > > > > > > On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 2:22 PM, David Kellogg > > > wrote: > > > > > >> I think the Roth article I would recommend isn't the editorial, but > > rather > > >> this one: > > >> > > >> Roth, W-M. 2007. On Mediation: Towards a Cultural Historical > > >> Understanding. > > >> Theory and Psychology 17 (5): 655-680. > > >> > > >> There's a lot I disagree with in this paper (e.g. I disagree with the > > idea > > >> that if mediation "explains" everything then it explains nothing--it > is > > >> like saying that if perception applies to all visible phenomena then > it > > >> applies to none of them). But here's why I prefer it to Saeed's paper: > > >> > > >> a) Roth gets to concrete examples from direct experience almost > > >> immediately > > >> (fish feeding, on p. 656). This gives me something to go back to when > I > > >> get > > >> lost in abstraction, and I need it. > > >> > > >> b) Instead of using Theory A to illuminate Theory B, Roth goes back > into > > >> the historical origins of Theory A and discovers, immanently, Theory > B, > > C, > > >> etc.. This has two advantages: it avoids chalk-and-cheese eclecticism, > > and > > >> it helps me understand how Theory A was formed in the first place. > With > > >> Saeed's paper, I find myself missing: 1) an account of the CRITICAL > > >> DISTINCTIONS between the two theories, 2) an explanation of how each > > MAKES > > >> UP for what the other lacks, and 3) some argument for long term > > >> COMPATABILITY, some explication of why the emulsion will not > > re-separate, > > >> like vinegar and oil. > > >> > > >> c) For Vygotsky--no, for mediation more generally--the key problem is > > >> volition, free will, choice. Vygotsky once said that the most > > interesting > > >> problem in the whole of psychology, bar none, is what a human being > > would > > >> really do in the situation of Buridan's donkey (that is a situation of > > >> volition, of free will, of choice where the outcomes were either > > >> apparently > > >> equal or equally unknown). This isn't true of DST, which has, as Saeed > > >> admits, an "emergentist" account of volition (to put it uncharitably, > > >> handwaving and magic). At the very least, choice is late emerging in a > > DST > > >> account, and that makes, for example, the child's early and > > >> successful acquisition of speech very hard to explain. > > >> > > >> That said, Saeed--I DID appreciate the part on p. 86 where you remind > us > > >> that learning and development are distinct but linked. As > Wolff-Michael > > >> says, the point has been made before, but I think that we've got to > keep > > >> saying this, until people really see that mixing up "microgenesis" and > > >> ontogenesis is, in our own time, the same kind of error that mixing up > > >> ontogenesis and phylogenesis was in Vygotsky's. If I read one more > > article > > >> which invokes the ZPD for some trivial incident of learning, I'm > > getting a > > >> tattoo that says: "Look here, mate, just because it didn't kill ya > > doesn't > > >> mean it made ya any stronger". > > >> > > >> David Kellogg > > >> Macquarie University > > >> > > > > > > > > > From wolffmichael.roth@gmail.com Thu Mar 30 17:29:53 2017 From: wolffmichael.roth@gmail.com (Wolff-Michael Roth) Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2017 17:29:53 -0700 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: ZPD and DST! In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi Mike, all, Because I don't know what big companies can do to us if we violate signed copyright release, I am more than hesitant to send the type-set version they published. However, I am appending the final version of the manuscript that prior to acceptance. Cheers, Michael -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Wolff-Michael Roth, Lansdowne Professor Applied Cognitive Science MacLaurin Building A567 University of Victoria Victoria, BC, V8P 5C2 http://web.uvic.ca/~mroth New book: *The Mathematics of Mathematics * On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 5:09 PM, mike cole wrote: > Michael -- > > XMCA has been operating as an educational collective among whom relevant > written materials are circulated as they are needed for the the members' > education. > > Would it incur Springer's wrath to make the paper directly available? > > mike > > On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 3:26 PM, Wolff-Michael Roth < > wolffmichael.roth@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Hi all, I did not realize that my reference wasn't updated. The paper is > > here: > > https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12124-016-9376-0 > > > > and by personal request Alfredo or I will mail a copy to those not > > operating at a uni with access to Springer Link. > > > > Michael > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > -------------------- > > Wolff-Michael Roth, Lansdowne Professor > > Applied Cognitive Science > > MacLaurin Building A567 > > University of Victoria > > Victoria, BC, V8P 5C2 > > http://web.uvic.ca/~mroth > > > > New book: *The Mathematics of Mathematics > > > directions-in-mathematics-and-science-education/the- > > mathematics-of-mathematics/>* > > > > On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 2:33 PM, Wolff-Michael Roth < > > wolffmichael.roth@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > Hi David, you will disagree even more with this one: > > > > > > > > > Roth, W.-M., & Jornet, A. (in press). Theorizing with/out "mediators." > > > Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science. > > > > > > But people like Feliks Mikhailov, and also Ekaterina Zavershneva > indicate > > > that toward the end of his life, Vygotsy was moving away from > mediation. > > We > > > give an extended argument for theorizing without mediators in the > > article. > > > > > > But I hope you understand that I am not out to interpret and find out > > what > > > Vygotsky really said even if he did not say it. I think you are well > > > positioned to do THAT kind of research. I want to move on. And, > frankly, > > I > > > have no clue what people are saying when they write that something is > > > mediated. It seems to me that they are hiding or refraining from going > > > after what I am interested in. I am not interested in knowing that a > tool > > > mediates something. I am interested in what the tool actually does, > what > > > are the events in which tools participate, shape people and get shaped > by > > > them. > > > > > > In the end, all this is about finding suitable discourses, and > > > descriptions, for doing the kinds of things we want to do. > > > > > > m > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > -------------------- > > > Wolff-Michael Roth, Lansdowne Professor > > > Applied Cognitive Science > > > MacLaurin Building A567 > > > University of Victoria > > > Victoria, BC, V8P 5C2 > > > http://web.uvic.ca/~mroth > > > > > > New book: *The Mathematics of Mathematics > > > > directions-in-mathematics-and-science-education/the- > > mathematics-of-mathematics/>* > > > > > > On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 2:22 PM, David Kellogg > > > wrote: > > > > > >> I think the Roth article I would recommend isn't the editorial, but > > rather > > >> this one: > > >> > > >> Roth, W-M. 2007. On Mediation: Towards a Cultural Historical > > >> Understanding. > > >> Theory and Psychology 17 (5): 655-680. > > >> > > >> There's a lot I disagree with in this paper (e.g. I disagree with the > > idea > > >> that if mediation "explains" everything then it explains nothing--it > is > > >> like saying that if perception applies to all visible phenomena then > it > > >> applies to none of them). But here's why I prefer it to Saeed's paper: > > >> > > >> a) Roth gets to concrete examples from direct experience almost > > >> immediately > > >> (fish feeding, on p. 656). This gives me something to go back to when > I > > >> get > > >> lost in abstraction, and I need it. > > >> > > >> b) Instead of using Theory A to illuminate Theory B, Roth goes back > into > > >> the historical origins of Theory A and discovers, immanently, Theory > B, > > C, > > >> etc.. This has two advantages: it avoids chalk-and-cheese eclecticism, > > and > > >> it helps me understand how Theory A was formed in the first place. > With > > >> Saeed's paper, I find myself missing: 1) an account of the CRITICAL > > >> DISTINCTIONS between the two theories, 2) an explanation of how each > > MAKES > > >> UP for what the other lacks, and 3) some argument for long term > > >> COMPATABILITY, some explication of why the emulsion will not > > re-separate, > > >> like vinegar and oil. > > >> > > >> c) For Vygotsky--no, for mediation more generally--the key problem is > > >> volition, free will, choice. Vygotsky once said that the most > > interesting > > >> problem in the whole of psychology, bar none, is what a human being > > would > > >> really do in the situation of Buridan's donkey (that is a situation of > > >> volition, of free will, of choice where the outcomes were either > > >> apparently > > >> equal or equally unknown). This isn't true of DST, which has, as Saeed > > >> admits, an "emergentist" account of volition (to put it uncharitably, > > >> handwaving and magic). At the very least, choice is late emerging in a > > DST > > >> account, and that makes, for example, the child's early and > > >> successful acquisition of speech very hard to explain. > > >> > > >> That said, Saeed--I DID appreciate the part on p. 86 where you remind > us > > >> that learning and development are distinct but linked. As > Wolff-Michael > > >> says, the point has been made before, but I think that we've got to > keep > > >> saying this, until people really see that mixing up "microgenesis" and > > >> ontogenesis is, in our own time, the same kind of error that mixing up > > >> ontogenesis and phylogenesis was in Vygotsky's. If I read one more > > article > > >> which invokes the ZPD for some trivial incident of learning, I'm > > getting a > > >> tattoo that says: "Look here, mate, just because it didn't kill ya > > doesn't > > >> mean it made ya any stronger". > > >> > > >> David Kellogg > > >> Macquarie University > > >> > > > > > > > > > -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Roth_Jornet_ms.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 761419 bytes Desc: not available Url : https://mailman.ucsd.edu/mailman/private/xmca-l/attachments/20170330/c33f5ecf/attachment-0001.pdf From mcole@ucsd.edu Thu Mar 30 17:38:26 2017 From: mcole@ucsd.edu (mike cole) Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2017 17:38:26 -0700 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: ZPD and DST! In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Thanks Michael. Establishing fair use in the xmca community seems an important task. Your solution works given current uncertainties. mike On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 5:29 PM, Wolff-Michael Roth < wolffmichael.roth@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Mike, all, > Because I don't know what big companies can do to us if we violate signed > copyright release, I am more than hesitant to send the type-set version > they published. However, I am appending the final version of the manuscript > that prior to acceptance. > Cheers, > Michael > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > -------------------- > Wolff-Michael Roth, Lansdowne Professor > Applied Cognitive Science > MacLaurin Building A567 > University of Victoria > Victoria, BC, V8P 5C2 > http://web.uvic.ca/~mroth > > New book: *The Mathematics of Mathematics > directions-in-mathematics-and-science-education/the- > mathematics-of-mathematics/>* > > On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 5:09 PM, mike cole wrote: > > > Michael -- > > > > XMCA has been operating as an educational collective among whom relevant > > written materials are circulated as they are needed for the the members' > > education. > > > > Would it incur Springer's wrath to make the paper directly available? > > > > mike > > > > On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 3:26 PM, Wolff-Michael Roth < > > wolffmichael.roth@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > Hi all, I did not realize that my reference wasn't updated. The paper > is > > > here: > > > https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12124-016-9376-0 > > > > > > and by personal request Alfredo or I will mail a copy to those not > > > operating at a uni with access to Springer Link. > > > > > > Michael > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > -------------------- > > > Wolff-Michael Roth, Lansdowne Professor > > > Applied Cognitive Science > > > MacLaurin Building A567 > > > University of Victoria > > > Victoria, BC, V8P 5C2 > > > http://web.uvic.ca/~mroth > > > > > > New book: *The Mathematics of Mathematics > > > > > directions-in-mathematics-and-science-education/the- > > > mathematics-of-mathematics/>* > > > > > > On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 2:33 PM, Wolff-Michael Roth < > > > wolffmichael.roth@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > Hi David, you will disagree even more with this one: > > > > > > > > > > > > Roth, W.-M., & Jornet, A. (in press). Theorizing with/out > "mediators." > > > > Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science. > > > > > > > > But people like Feliks Mikhailov, and also Ekaterina Zavershneva > > indicate > > > > that toward the end of his life, Vygotsy was moving away from > > mediation. > > > We > > > > give an extended argument for theorizing without mediators in the > > > article. > > > > > > > > But I hope you understand that I am not out to interpret and find out > > > what > > > > Vygotsky really said even if he did not say it. I think you are well > > > > positioned to do THAT kind of research. I want to move on. And, > > frankly, > > > I > > > > have no clue what people are saying when they write that something is > > > > mediated. It seems to me that they are hiding or refraining from > going > > > > after what I am interested in. I am not interested in knowing that a > > tool > > > > mediates something. I am interested in what the tool actually does, > > what > > > > are the events in which tools participate, shape people and get > shaped > > by > > > > them. > > > > > > > > In the end, all this is about finding suitable discourses, and > > > > descriptions, for doing the kinds of things we want to do. > > > > > > > > m > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > -------------------- > > > > Wolff-Michael Roth, Lansdowne Professor > > > > Applied Cognitive Science > > > > MacLaurin Building A567 > > > > University of Victoria > > > > Victoria, BC, V8P 5C2 > > > > http://web.uvic.ca/~mroth > > > > > > > > New book: *The Mathematics of Mathematics > > > > > > directions-in-mathematics-and-science-education/the- > > > mathematics-of-mathematics/>* > > > > > > > > On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 2:22 PM, David Kellogg > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > >> I think the Roth article I would recommend isn't the editorial, but > > > rather > > > >> this one: > > > >> > > > >> Roth, W-M. 2007. On Mediation: Towards a Cultural Historical > > > >> Understanding. > > > >> Theory and Psychology 17 (5): 655-680. > > > >> > > > >> There's a lot I disagree with in this paper (e.g. I disagree with > the > > > idea > > > >> that if mediation "explains" everything then it explains nothing--it > > is > > > >> like saying that if perception applies to all visible phenomena then > > it > > > >> applies to none of them). But here's why I prefer it to Saeed's > paper: > > > >> > > > >> a) Roth gets to concrete examples from direct experience almost > > > >> immediately > > > >> (fish feeding, on p. 656). This gives me something to go back to > when > > I > > > >> get > > > >> lost in abstraction, and I need it. > > > >> > > > >> b) Instead of using Theory A to illuminate Theory B, Roth goes back > > into > > > >> the historical origins of Theory A and discovers, immanently, Theory > > B, > > > C, > > > >> etc.. This has two advantages: it avoids chalk-and-cheese > eclecticism, > > > and > > > >> it helps me understand how Theory A was formed in the first place. > > With > > > >> Saeed's paper, I find myself missing: 1) an account of the CRITICAL > > > >> DISTINCTIONS between the two theories, 2) an explanation of how each > > > MAKES > > > >> UP for what the other lacks, and 3) some argument for long term > > > >> COMPATABILITY, some explication of why the emulsion will not > > > re-separate, > > > >> like vinegar and oil. > > > >> > > > >> c) For Vygotsky--no, for mediation more generally--the key problem > is > > > >> volition, free will, choice. Vygotsky once said that the most > > > interesting > > > >> problem in the whole of psychology, bar none, is what a human being > > > would > > > >> really do in the situation of Buridan's donkey (that is a situation > of > > > >> volition, of free will, of choice where the outcomes were either > > > >> apparently > > > >> equal or equally unknown). This isn't true of DST, which has, as > Saeed > > > >> admits, an "emergentist" account of volition (to put it > uncharitably, > > > >> handwaving and magic). At the very least, choice is late emerging > in a > > > DST > > > >> account, and that makes, for example, the child's early and > > > >> successful acquisition of speech very hard to explain. > > > >> > > > >> That said, Saeed--I DID appreciate the part on p. 86 where you > remind > > us > > > >> that learning and development are distinct but linked. As > > Wolff-Michael > > > >> says, the point has been made before, but I think that we've got to > > keep > > > >> saying this, until people really see that mixing up "microgenesis" > and > > > >> ontogenesis is, in our own time, the same kind of error that mixing > up > > > >> ontogenesis and phylogenesis was in Vygotsky's. If I read one more > > > article > > > >> which invokes the ZPD for some trivial incident of learning, I'm > > > getting a > > > >> tattoo that says: "Look here, mate, just because it didn't kill ya > > > doesn't > > > >> mean it made ya any stronger". > > > >> > > > >> David Kellogg > > > >> Macquarie University > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From a.j.gil@iped.uio.no Thu Mar 30 22:21:44 2017 From: a.j.gil@iped.uio.no (Alfredo Jornet Gil) Date: Fri, 31 Mar 2017 05:21:44 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: ZPD and DST! In-Reply-To: References: , Message-ID: <1490937703564.50878@iped.uio.no> Thanks a lot for sharing the article, Michael. And yes, considering those copy-distribution issues is important in a forum like this. Is nice to be able to check with you/us authors on how to best share our work. On the issue of Theorizing with/out mediators, Huw, in the article we do recognize the viability of the option you suggest: not dismissing but pursuing an 'adequate' (or 'more developed' that may mean) understanding of the concept. Still, we recommend the other route, and this is part of my view. I think the problem concerns a confusion between treating mediation as a sort of universal premise that 'applies' to everything or as an analytical concept that 'explains' everything. For example, David K. in his post treats the phrase that 'if mediation explains everything then it explains nothing' as being analog to the sentence 'if perception applies to all visible phenomena then it applies to none of them.' 'Applies' and 'Explain', however, seem two very different words to me. You may want to say that mediation applies to all and every human action/relation. But then this is not to say that you are explaining any of them. As I view it, mediation should not be thought of as an analytical unit in the same sense that perezhivanie is, for it is not a concrete unit. In fact, following on David's example, *perception* can indeed be accounted for if you develop and further understand the category perezhivanie. And still, you will not want to use perezhivanie to account for every and any aspect of human existence. Nor every instance of 'human(ing)' will be perezhivanie (unless you reserve the term 'human' to a very specific set of all the things we human-looking animals do.). Alfredo ________________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of mike cole Sent: 31 March 2017 02:38 To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: ZPD and DST! Thanks Michael. Establishing fair use in the xmca community seems an important task. Your solution works given current uncertainties. mike On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 5:29 PM, Wolff-Michael Roth < wolffmichael.roth@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Mike, all, > Because I don't know what big companies can do to us if we violate signed > copyright release, I am more than hesitant to send the type-set version > they published. However, I am appending the final version of the manuscript > that prior to acceptance. > Cheers, > Michael > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > -------------------- > Wolff-Michael Roth, Lansdowne Professor > Applied Cognitive Science > MacLaurin Building A567 > University of Victoria > Victoria, BC, V8P 5C2 > http://web.uvic.ca/~mroth > > New book: *The Mathematics of Mathematics > directions-in-mathematics-and-science-education/the- > mathematics-of-mathematics/>* > > On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 5:09 PM, mike cole wrote: > > > Michael -- > > > > XMCA has been operating as an educational collective among whom relevant > > written materials are circulated as they are needed for the the members' > > education. > > > > Would it incur Springer's wrath to make the paper directly available? > > > > mike > > > > On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 3:26 PM, Wolff-Michael Roth < > > wolffmichael.roth@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > Hi all, I did not realize that my reference wasn't updated. The paper > is > > > here: > > > https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12124-016-9376-0 > > > > > > and by personal request Alfredo or I will mail a copy to those not > > > operating at a uni with access to Springer Link. > > > > > > Michael > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > -------------------- > > > Wolff-Michael Roth, Lansdowne Professor > > > Applied Cognitive Science > > > MacLaurin Building A567 > > > University of Victoria > > > Victoria, BC, V8P 5C2 > > > http://web.uvic.ca/~mroth > > > > > > New book: *The Mathematics of Mathematics > > > > > directions-in-mathematics-and-science-education/the- > > > mathematics-of-mathematics/>* > > > > > > On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 2:33 PM, Wolff-Michael Roth < > > > wolffmichael.roth@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > Hi David, you will disagree even more with this one: > > > > > > > > > > > > Roth, W.-M., & Jornet, A. (in press). Theorizing with/out > "mediators." > > > > Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science. > > > > > > > > But people like Feliks Mikhailov, and also Ekaterina Zavershneva > > indicate > > > > that toward the end of his life, Vygotsy was moving away from > > mediation. > > > We > > > > give an extended argument for theorizing without mediators in the > > > article. > > > > > > > > But I hope you understand that I am not out to interpret and find out > > > what > > > > Vygotsky really said even if he did not say it. I think you are well > > > > positioned to do THAT kind of research. I want to move on. And, > > frankly, > > > I > > > > have no clue what people are saying when they write that something is > > > > mediated. It seems to me that they are hiding or refraining from > going > > > > after what I am interested in. I am not interested in knowing that a > > tool > > > > mediates something. I am interested in what the tool actually does, > > what > > > > are the events in which tools participate, shape people and get > shaped > > by > > > > them. > > > > > > > > In the end, all this is about finding suitable discourses, and > > > > descriptions, for doing the kinds of things we want to do. > > > > > > > > m > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > -------------------- > > > > Wolff-Michael Roth, Lansdowne Professor > > > > Applied Cognitive Science > > > > MacLaurin Building A567 > > > > University of Victoria > > > > Victoria, BC, V8P 5C2 > > > > http://web.uvic.ca/~mroth > > > > > > > > New book: *The Mathematics of Mathematics > > > > > > directions-in-mathematics-and-science-education/the- > > > mathematics-of-mathematics/>* > > > > > > > > On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 2:22 PM, David Kellogg > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > >> I think the Roth article I would recommend isn't the editorial, but > > > rather > > > >> this one: > > > >> > > > >> Roth, W-M. 2007. On Mediation: Towards a Cultural Historical > > > >> Understanding. > > > >> Theory and Psychology 17 (5): 655-680. > > > >> > > > >> There's a lot I disagree with in this paper (e.g. I disagree with > the > > > idea > > > >> that if mediation "explains" everything then it explains nothing--it > > is > > > >> like saying that if perception applies to all visible phenomena then > > it > > > >> applies to none of them). But here's why I prefer it to Saeed's > paper: > > > >> > > > >> a) Roth gets to concrete examples from direct experience almost > > > >> immediately > > > >> (fish feeding, on p. 656). This gives me something to go back to > when > > I > > > >> get > > > >> lost in abstraction, and I need it. > > > >> > > > >> b) Instead of using Theory A to illuminate Theory B, Roth goes back > > into > > > >> the historical origins of Theory A and discovers, immanently, Theory > > B, > > > C, > > > >> etc.. This has two advantages: it avoids chalk-and-cheese > eclecticism, > > > and > > > >> it helps me understand how Theory A was formed in the first place. > > With > > > >> Saeed's paper, I find myself missing: 1) an account of the CRITICAL > > > >> DISTINCTIONS between the two theories, 2) an explanation of how each > > > MAKES > > > >> UP for what the other lacks, and 3) some argument for long term > > > >> COMPATABILITY, some explication of why the emulsion will not > > > re-separate, > > > >> like vinegar and oil. > > > >> > > > >> c) For Vygotsky--no, for mediation more generally--the key problem > is > > > >> volition, free will, choice. Vygotsky once said that the most > > > interesting > > > >> problem in the whole of psychology, bar none, is what a human being > > > would > > > >> really do in the situation of Buridan's donkey (that is a situation > of > > > >> volition, of free will, of choice where the outcomes were either > > > >> apparently > > > >> equal or equally unknown). This isn't true of DST, which has, as > Saeed > > > >> admits, an "emergentist" account of volition (to put it > uncharitably, > > > >> handwaving and magic). At the very least, choice is late emerging > in a > > > DST > > > >> account, and that makes, for example, the child's early and > > > >> successful acquisition of speech very hard to explain. > > > >> > > > >> That said, Saeed--I DID appreciate the part on p. 86 where you > remind > > us > > > >> that learning and development are distinct but linked. As > > Wolff-Michael > > > >> says, the point has been made before, but I think that we've got to > > keep > > > >> saying this, until people really see that mixing up "microgenesis" > and > > > >> ontogenesis is, in our own time, the same kind of error that mixing > up > > > >> ontogenesis and phylogenesis was in Vygotsky's. If I read one more > > > article > > > >> which invokes the ZPD for some trivial incident of learning, I'm > > > getting a > > > >> tattoo that says: "Look here, mate, just because it didn't kill ya > > > doesn't > > > >> mean it made ya any stronger". > > > >> > > > >> David Kellogg > > > >> Macquarie University > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From huw.softdesigns@gmail.com Fri Mar 31 02:44:59 2017 From: huw.softdesigns@gmail.com (Huw Lloyd) Date: Fri, 31 Mar 2017 10:44:59 +0100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: ZPD and DST! In-Reply-To: <1490937703564.50878@iped.uio.no> References: <1490937703564.50878@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: The title has a somewhat oxymoronic flavour to it, Alfredo. Theorising gets more interesting when it consists of a minimum of a 3-term system, and in such a system one term can always be indexed as a mediating one in relation to the other two. All the problems arise when these terms are reduced to 2-term systems (formal logic, statistical associations, descriptions based upon typed categories) in which the mediators are elements of a non-unitary analysis. The issues of misuse of 'mediators' as elements rather than as part of a unit is structurally similar to applying formal logic categories such as "every" and "there exists" to thinking in terms of complexes, in which these phrases merely limit the (1 term) bonding rather than applying to the (2 term) hierarchical constructs that they are about. In LSV Vol. 1 we have a 3+ term analysis (dialectic) of the development of 1-term thinking (complexes) towards 2-term thinking (formal logic). Best, Huw On 31 March 2017 at 06:21, Alfredo Jornet Gil wrote: > Thanks a lot for sharing the article, Michael. And yes, considering those > copy-distribution issues is important in a forum like this. Is nice to be > able to check with you/us authors on how to best share our work. > > On the issue of Theorizing with/out mediators, Huw, in the article we do > recognize the viability of the option you suggest: not dismissing but > pursuing an 'adequate' (or 'more developed' that may mean) understanding > of the concept. Still, we recommend the other route, and this is part of my > view. > > I think the problem concerns a confusion between treating mediation as a > sort of universal premise that 'applies' to everything or as an analytical > concept that 'explains' everything. For example, David K. in his post > treats the phrase that 'if mediation explains everything then it explains > nothing' as being analog to the sentence 'if perception applies to all > visible phenomena then it applies to none of them.' 'Applies' and > 'Explain', however, seem two very different words to me. You may want to > say that mediation applies to all and every human action/relation. But then > this is not to say that you are explaining any of them. As I view it, > mediation should not be thought of as an analytical unit in the same sense > that perezhivanie is, for it is not a concrete unit. In fact, following on > David's example, *perception* can indeed be accounted for if you develop > and further understand the category perezhivanie. And still, you will not > want to use perezhivanie to account for every and any aspect of human > existence. Nor every instance of 'human(ing)' will be perezhivanie (unless > you reserve the term 'human' to a very specific set of all the things we > human-looking animals do.). > > Alfredo > > > ________________________________________ > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > on behalf of mike cole > Sent: 31 March 2017 02:38 > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: ZPD and DST! > > Thanks Michael. > Establishing fair use in the xmca community seems an important task. > > Your solution works given current uncertainties. > > mike > > On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 5:29 PM, Wolff-Michael Roth < > wolffmichael.roth@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Hi Mike, all, > > Because I don't know what big companies can do to us if we violate signed > > copyright release, I am more than hesitant to send the type-set version > > they published. However, I am appending the final version of the > manuscript > > that prior to acceptance. > > Cheers, > > Michael > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > -------------------- > > Wolff-Michael Roth, Lansdowne Professor > > Applied Cognitive Science > > MacLaurin Building A567 > > University of Victoria > > Victoria, BC, V8P 5C2 > > http://web.uvic.ca/~mroth > > > > New book: *The Mathematics of Mathematics > > > directions-in-mathematics-and-science-education/the- > > mathematics-of-mathematics/>* > > > > On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 5:09 PM, mike cole wrote: > > > > > Michael -- > > > > > > XMCA has been operating as an educational collective among whom > relevant > > > written materials are circulated as they are needed for the the > members' > > > education. > > > > > > Would it incur Springer's wrath to make the paper directly available? > > > > > > mike > > > > > > On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 3:26 PM, Wolff-Michael Roth < > > > wolffmichael.roth@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > Hi all, I did not realize that my reference wasn't updated. The paper > > is > > > > here: > > > > https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12124-016-9376-0 > > > > > > > > and by personal request Alfredo or I will mail a copy to those not > > > > operating at a uni with access to Springer Link. > > > > > > > > Michael > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > -------------------- > > > > Wolff-Michael Roth, Lansdowne Professor > > > > Applied Cognitive Science > > > > MacLaurin Building A567 > > > > University of Victoria > > > > Victoria, BC, V8P 5C2 > > > > http://web.uvic.ca/~mroth > > > > > > > > New book: *The Mathematics of Mathematics > > > > > > > directions-in-mathematics-and-science-education/the- > > > > mathematics-of-mathematics/>* > > > > > > > > On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 2:33 PM, Wolff-Michael Roth < > > > > wolffmichael.roth@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Hi David, you will disagree even more with this one: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Roth, W.-M., & Jornet, A. (in press). Theorizing with/out > > "mediators." > > > > > Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science. > > > > > > > > > > But people like Feliks Mikhailov, and also Ekaterina Zavershneva > > > indicate > > > > > that toward the end of his life, Vygotsy was moving away from > > > mediation. > > > > We > > > > > give an extended argument for theorizing without mediators in the > > > > article. > > > > > > > > > > But I hope you understand that I am not out to interpret and find > out > > > > what > > > > > Vygotsky really said even if he did not say it. I think you are > well > > > > > positioned to do THAT kind of research. I want to move on. And, > > > frankly, > > > > I > > > > > have no clue what people are saying when they write that something > is > > > > > mediated. It seems to me that they are hiding or refraining from > > going > > > > > after what I am interested in. I am not interested in knowing that > a > > > tool > > > > > mediates something. I am interested in what the tool actually does, > > > what > > > > > are the events in which tools participate, shape people and get > > shaped > > > by > > > > > them. > > > > > > > > > > In the end, all this is about finding suitable discourses, and > > > > > descriptions, for doing the kinds of things we want to do. > > > > > > > > > > m > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > -------------------- > > > > > Wolff-Michael Roth, Lansdowne Professor > > > > > Applied Cognitive Science > > > > > MacLaurin Building A567 > > > > > University of Victoria > > > > > Victoria, BC, V8P 5C2 > > > > > http://web.uvic.ca/~mroth faculty/mroth/> > > > > > > > > > > New book: *The Mathematics of Mathematics > > > > > > > > directions-in-mathematics-and-science-education/the- > > > > mathematics-of-mathematics/>* > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 2:22 PM, David Kellogg < > dkellogg60@gmail.com > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > >> I think the Roth article I would recommend isn't the editorial, > but > > > > rather > > > > >> this one: > > > > >> > > > > >> Roth, W-M. 2007. On Mediation: Towards a Cultural Historical > > > > >> Understanding. > > > > >> Theory and Psychology 17 (5): 655-680. > > > > >> > > > > >> There's a lot I disagree with in this paper (e.g. I disagree with > > the > > > > idea > > > > >> that if mediation "explains" everything then it explains > nothing--it > > > is > > > > >> like saying that if perception applies to all visible phenomena > then > > > it > > > > >> applies to none of them). But here's why I prefer it to Saeed's > > paper: > > > > >> > > > > >> a) Roth gets to concrete examples from direct experience almost > > > > >> immediately > > > > >> (fish feeding, on p. 656). This gives me something to go back to > > when > > > I > > > > >> get > > > > >> lost in abstraction, and I need it. > > > > >> > > > > >> b) Instead of using Theory A to illuminate Theory B, Roth goes > back > > > into > > > > >> the historical origins of Theory A and discovers, immanently, > Theory > > > B, > > > > C, > > > > >> etc.. This has two advantages: it avoids chalk-and-cheese > > eclecticism, > > > > and > > > > >> it helps me understand how Theory A was formed in the first place. > > > With > > > > >> Saeed's paper, I find myself missing: 1) an account of the > CRITICAL > > > > >> DISTINCTIONS between the two theories, 2) an explanation of how > each > > > > MAKES > > > > >> UP for what the other lacks, and 3) some argument for long term > > > > >> COMPATABILITY, some explication of why the emulsion will not > > > > re-separate, > > > > >> like vinegar and oil. > > > > >> > > > > >> c) For Vygotsky--no, for mediation more generally--the key problem > > is > > > > >> volition, free will, choice. Vygotsky once said that the most > > > > interesting > > > > >> problem in the whole of psychology, bar none, is what a human > being > > > > would > > > > >> really do in the situation of Buridan's donkey (that is a > situation > > of > > > > >> volition, of free will, of choice where the outcomes were either > > > > >> apparently > > > > >> equal or equally unknown). This isn't true of DST, which has, as > > Saeed > > > > >> admits, an "emergentist" account of volition (to put it > > uncharitably, > > > > >> handwaving and magic). At the very least, choice is late emerging > > in a > > > > DST > > > > >> account, and that makes, for example, the child's early and > > > > >> successful acquisition of speech very hard to explain. > > > > >> > > > > >> That said, Saeed--I DID appreciate the part on p. 86 where you > > remind > > > us > > > > >> that learning and development are distinct but linked. As > > > Wolff-Michael > > > > >> says, the point has been made before, but I think that we've got > to > > > keep > > > > >> saying this, until people really see that mixing up "microgenesis" > > and > > > > >> ontogenesis is, in our own time, the same kind of error that > mixing > > up > > > > >> ontogenesis and phylogenesis was in Vygotsky's. If I read one more > > > > article > > > > >> which invokes the ZPD for some trivial incident of learning, I'm > > > > getting a > > > > >> tattoo that says: "Look here, mate, just because it didn't kill ya > > > > doesn't > > > > >> mean it made ya any stronger". > > > > >> > > > > >> David Kellogg > > > > >> Macquarie University > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From ablunden@mira.net Fri Mar 31 03:52:51 2017 From: ablunden@mira.net (Andy Blunden) Date: Fri, 31 Mar 2017 21:52:51 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: ZPD and DST! In-Reply-To: References: <1490937703564.50878@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: <3cad925a-75c7-a749-53fd-3bf49519a07e@mira.net> My 2 cents ... 1. Both Hegel and C. S. Peirce promoted mediation not only as essentially ubiquitous, but as *generative*, in the sense that since every relation is mediated, every new relation generates a new (mediating) relation. It is a method of enquiry which is forever uncovering new relations. I would call this the methodological aspect of mediation. To fail to enquire into mediation is effectively to close off enquiry and settle for some kind of dichotomy or taxonomy. 2. Vygotsky's *artefact mediation*, is a distinctive type of mediation, to which other approaches to mind are largely blind. Artefact mediation is not the answer to every problem of psychology. And it wasn't for Vygotsky either. Andy ------------------------------------------------------------ Andy Blunden http://home.mira.net/~andy http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making On 31/03/2017 8:44 PM, Huw Lloyd wrote: > The title has a somewhat oxymoronic flavour to it, Alfredo. Theorising > gets more interesting when it consists of a minimum of a 3-term system, and > in such a system one term can always be indexed as a mediating one in > relation to the other two. All the problems arise when these terms are > reduced to 2-term systems (formal logic, statistical associations, > descriptions based upon typed categories) in which the mediators are > elements of a non-unitary analysis. > > The issues of misuse of 'mediators' as elements rather than as part of a > unit is structurally similar to applying formal logic categories such as > "every" and "there exists" to thinking in terms of complexes, in which > these phrases merely limit the (1 term) bonding rather than applying to the > (2 term) hierarchical constructs that they are about. In LSV Vol. 1 we > have a 3+ term analysis (dialectic) of the development of 1-term thinking > (complexes) towards 2-term thinking (formal logic). > > Best, > Huw > > On 31 March 2017 at 06:21, Alfredo Jornet Gil wrote: > >> Thanks a lot for sharing the article, Michael. And yes, considering those >> copy-distribution issues is important in a forum like this. Is nice to be >> able to check with you/us authors on how to best share our work. >> >> On the issue of Theorizing with/out mediators, Huw, in the article we do >> recognize the viability of the option you suggest: not dismissing but >> pursuing an 'adequate' (or 'more developed' that may mean) understanding >> of the concept. Still, we recommend the other route, and this is part of my >> view. >> >> I think the problem concerns a confusion between treating mediation as a >> sort of universal premise that 'applies' to everything or as an analytical >> concept that 'explains' everything. For example, David K. in his post >> treats the phrase that 'if mediation explains everything then it explains >> nothing' as being analog to the sentence 'if perception applies to all >> visible phenomena then it applies to none of them.' 'Applies' and >> 'Explain', however, seem two very different words to me. You may want to >> say that mediation applies to all and every human action/relation. But then >> this is not to say that you are explaining any of them. As I view it, >> mediation should not be thought of as an analytical unit in the same sense >> that perezhivanie is, for it is not a concrete unit. In fact, following on >> David's example, *perception* can indeed be accounted for if you develop >> and further understand the category perezhivanie. And still, you will not >> want to use perezhivanie to account for every and any aspect of human >> existence. Nor every instance of 'human(ing)' will be perezhivanie (unless >> you reserve the term 'human' to a very specific set of all the things we >> human-looking animals do.). >> >> Alfredo >> >> >> ________________________________________ >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> on behalf of mike cole >> Sent: 31 March 2017 02:38 >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: ZPD and DST! >> >> Thanks Michael. >> Establishing fair use in the xmca community seems an important task. >> >> Your solution works given current uncertainties. >> >> mike >> >> On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 5:29 PM, Wolff-Michael Roth < >> wolffmichael.roth@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> Hi Mike, all, >>> Because I don't know what big companies can do to us if we violate signed >>> copyright release, I am more than hesitant to send the type-set version >>> they published. However, I am appending the final version of the >> manuscript >>> that prior to acceptance. >>> Cheers, >>> Michael >>> >>> >>> ------------------------------------------------------------ >>> -------------------- >>> Wolff-Michael Roth, Lansdowne Professor >>> Applied Cognitive Science >>> MacLaurin Building A567 >>> University of Victoria >>> Victoria, BC, V8P 5C2 >>> http://web.uvic.ca/~mroth >>> >>> New book: *The Mathematics of Mathematics >>> >> directions-in-mathematics-and-science-education/the- >>> mathematics-of-mathematics/>* >>> >>> On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 5:09 PM, mike cole wrote: >>> >>>> Michael -- >>>> >>>> XMCA has been operating as an educational collective among whom >> relevant >>>> written materials are circulated as they are needed for the the >> members' >>>> education. >>>> >>>> Would it incur Springer's wrath to make the paper directly available? >>>> >>>> mike >>>> >>>> On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 3:26 PM, Wolff-Michael Roth < >>>> wolffmichael.roth@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hi all, I did not realize that my reference wasn't updated. The paper >>> is >>>>> here: >>>>> https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12124-016-9376-0 >>>>> >>>>> and by personal request Alfredo or I will mail a copy to those not >>>>> operating at a uni with access to Springer Link. >>>>> >>>>> Michael >>>>> >>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------ >>>>> -------------------- >>>>> Wolff-Michael Roth, Lansdowne Professor >>>>> Applied Cognitive Science >>>>> MacLaurin Building A567 >>>>> University of Victoria >>>>> Victoria, BC, V8P 5C2 >>>>> http://web.uvic.ca/~mroth >>>>> >>>>> New book: *The Mathematics of Mathematics >>>>> >>>> directions-in-mathematics-and-science-education/the- >>>>> mathematics-of-mathematics/>* >>>>> >>>>> On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 2:33 PM, Wolff-Michael Roth < >>>>> wolffmichael.roth@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Hi David, you will disagree even more with this one: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Roth, W.-M., & Jornet, A. (in press). Theorizing with/out >>> "mediators." >>>>>> Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science. >>>>>> >>>>>> But people like Feliks Mikhailov, and also Ekaterina Zavershneva >>>> indicate >>>>>> that toward the end of his life, Vygotsy was moving away from >>>> mediation. >>>>> We >>>>>> give an extended argument for theorizing without mediators in the >>>>> article. >>>>>> But I hope you understand that I am not out to interpret and find >> out >>>>> what >>>>>> Vygotsky really said even if he did not say it. I think you are >> well >>>>>> positioned to do THAT kind of research. I want to move on. And, >>>> frankly, >>>>> I >>>>>> have no clue what people are saying when they write that something >> is >>>>>> mediated. It seems to me that they are hiding or refraining from >>> going >>>>>> after what I am interested in. I am not interested in knowing that >> a >>>> tool >>>>>> mediates something. I am interested in what the tool actually does, >>>> what >>>>>> are the events in which tools participate, shape people and get >>> shaped >>>> by >>>>>> them. >>>>>> >>>>>> In the end, all this is about finding suitable discourses, and >>>>>> descriptions, for doing the kinds of things we want to do. >>>>>> >>>>>> m >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------ >>>>>> -------------------- >>>>>> Wolff-Michael Roth, Lansdowne Professor >>>>>> Applied Cognitive Science >>>>>> MacLaurin Building A567 >>>>>> University of Victoria >>>>>> Victoria, BC, V8P 5C2 >>>>>> http://web.uvic.ca/~mroth > faculty/mroth/> >>>>>> New book: *The Mathematics of Mathematics >>>>>> >>>> directions-in-mathematics-and-science-education/the- >>>>> mathematics-of-mathematics/>* >>>>>> On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 2:22 PM, David Kellogg < >> dkellogg60@gmail.com >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> I think the Roth article I would recommend isn't the editorial, >> but >>>>> rather >>>>>>> this one: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Roth, W-M. 2007. On Mediation: Towards a Cultural Historical >>>>>>> Understanding. >>>>>>> Theory and Psychology 17 (5): 655-680. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> There's a lot I disagree with in this paper (e.g. I disagree with >>> the >>>>> idea >>>>>>> that if mediation "explains" everything then it explains >> nothing--it >>>> is >>>>>>> like saying that if perception applies to all visible phenomena >> then >>>> it >>>>>>> applies to none of them). But here's why I prefer it to Saeed's >>> paper: >>>>>>> a) Roth gets to concrete examples from direct experience almost >>>>>>> immediately >>>>>>> (fish feeding, on p. 656). This gives me something to go back to >>> when >>>> I >>>>>>> get >>>>>>> lost in abstraction, and I need it. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> b) Instead of using Theory A to illuminate Theory B, Roth goes >> back >>>> into >>>>>>> the historical origins of Theory A and discovers, immanently, >> Theory >>>> B, >>>>> C, >>>>>>> etc.. This has two advantages: it avoids chalk-and-cheese >>> eclecticism, >>>>> and >>>>>>> it helps me understand how Theory A was formed in the first place. >>>> With >>>>>>> Saeed's paper, I find myself missing: 1) an account of the >> CRITICAL >>>>>>> DISTINCTIONS between the two theories, 2) an explanation of how >> each >>>>> MAKES >>>>>>> UP for what the other lacks, and 3) some argument for long term >>>>>>> COMPATABILITY, some explication of why the emulsion will not >>>>> re-separate, >>>>>>> like vinegar and oil. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> c) For Vygotsky--no, for mediation more generally--the key problem >>> is >>>>>>> volition, free will, choice. Vygotsky once said that the most >>>>> interesting >>>>>>> problem in the whole of psychology, bar none, is what a human >> being >>>>> would >>>>>>> really do in the situation of Buridan's donkey (that is a >> situation >>> of >>>>>>> volition, of free will, of choice where the outcomes were either >>>>>>> apparently >>>>>>> equal or equally unknown). This isn't true of DST, which has, as >>> Saeed >>>>>>> admits, an "emergentist" account of volition (to put it >>> uncharitably, >>>>>>> handwaving and magic). At the very least, choice is late emerging >>> in a >>>>> DST >>>>>>> account, and that makes, for example, the child's early and >>>>>>> successful acquisition of speech very hard to explain. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> That said, Saeed--I DID appreciate the part on p. 86 where you >>> remind >>>> us >>>>>>> that learning and development are distinct but linked. As >>>> Wolff-Michael >>>>>>> says, the point has been made before, but I think that we've got >> to >>>> keep >>>>>>> saying this, until people really see that mixing up "microgenesis" >>> and >>>>>>> ontogenesis is, in our own time, the same kind of error that >> mixing >>> up >>>>>>> ontogenesis and phylogenesis was in Vygotsky's. If I read one more >>>>> article >>>>>>> which invokes the ZPD for some trivial incident of learning, I'm >>>>> getting a >>>>>>> tattoo that says: "Look here, mate, just because it didn't kill ya >>>>> doesn't >>>>>>> mean it made ya any stronger". >>>>>>> >>>>>>> David Kellogg >>>>>>> Macquarie University >>>>>>> >>>>>> > From lpscholar2@gmail.com Fri Mar 31 06:30:01 2017 From: lpscholar2@gmail.com (lpscholar2@gmail.com) Date: Fri, 31 Mar 2017 06:30:01 -0700 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: ZPD and DST! In-Reply-To: References: <1490937703564.50878@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: <58de59a8.03c1620a.ff3a8.7c7c@mx.google.com> I would also like a copy [private or public] of the article Last month we explored various assumptions [approaches] engaging perezhivanie. This thread today approaching mediation through conversare [the middle voice] focusing on understanding mediation being equally active and passive. WM Roth indicating; This thread is on the threshold of exploring concept/word through the prism of consciousness refracted as asymmetrical moments within symmetrical units. Transforming the relation of asymmetrical and symmetrical ? moments and units. These multiple articles read through each other [opening a place] which we collectively and individually may [visit] and possibly inhabit? Will require slow reading through complex medium. Will begin with Wolff Michael and Luis Radford 9 page editorial ?re/thinking? Zpd ? a symmetrical reading Sent from Mail for Windows 10moments From: Huw Lloyd Sent: March 31, 2017 2:47 AM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: ZPD and DST! From boblake@georgiasouthern.edu Fri Mar 31 06:37:39 2017 From: boblake@georgiasouthern.edu (Robert Lake) Date: Fri, 31 Mar 2017 09:37:39 -0400 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: ZPD and DST! In-Reply-To: <3cad925a-75c7-a749-53fd-3bf49519a07e@mira.net> References: <1490937703564.50878@iped.uio.no> <3cad925a-75c7-a749-53fd-3bf49519a07e@mira.net> Message-ID: That 2 cents goes a long, long generative way Andy. Thanks! Robert On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 6:52 AM, Andy Blunden wrote: > My 2 cents ... > > 1. Both Hegel and C. S. Peirce promoted mediation not only as essentially > ubiquitous, but as *generative*, in the sense that since every relation is > mediated, every new relation generates a new (mediating) relation. It is a > method of enquiry which is forever uncovering new relations. I would call > this the methodological aspect of mediation. To fail to enquire into > mediation is effectively to close off enquiry and settle for some kind of > dichotomy or taxonomy. > > 2. Vygotsky's *artefact mediation*, is a distinctive type of mediation, to > which other approaches to mind are largely blind. Artefact mediation is not > the answer to every problem of psychology. And it wasn't for Vygotsky > either. > > Andy > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > Andy Blunden > http://home.mira.net/~andy > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making > On 31/03/2017 8:44 PM, Huw Lloyd wrote: > >> The title has a somewhat oxymoronic flavour to it, Alfredo. Theorising >> gets more interesting when it consists of a minimum of a 3-term system, >> and >> in such a system one term can always be indexed as a mediating one in >> relation to the other two. All the problems arise when these terms are >> reduced to 2-term systems (formal logic, statistical associations, >> descriptions based upon typed categories) in which the mediators are >> elements of a non-unitary analysis. >> >> The issues of misuse of 'mediators' as elements rather than as part of a >> unit is structurally similar to applying formal logic categories such as >> "every" and "there exists" to thinking in terms of complexes, in which >> these phrases merely limit the (1 term) bonding rather than applying to >> the >> (2 term) hierarchical constructs that they are about. In LSV Vol. 1 we >> have a 3+ term analysis (dialectic) of the development of 1-term thinking >> (complexes) towards 2-term thinking (formal logic). >> >> Best, >> Huw >> >> On 31 March 2017 at 06:21, Alfredo Jornet Gil >> wrote: >> >> Thanks a lot for sharing the article, Michael. And yes, considering those >>> copy-distribution issues is important in a forum like this. Is nice to be >>> able to check with you/us authors on how to best share our work. >>> >>> On the issue of Theorizing with/out mediators, Huw, in the article we do >>> recognize the viability of the option you suggest: not dismissing but >>> pursuing an 'adequate' (or 'more developed' that may mean) understanding >>> of the concept. Still, we recommend the other route, and this is part of >>> my >>> view. >>> >>> I think the problem concerns a confusion between treating mediation as a >>> sort of universal premise that 'applies' to everything or as an >>> analytical >>> concept that 'explains' everything. For example, David K. in his post >>> treats the phrase that 'if mediation explains everything then it explains >>> nothing' as being analog to the sentence 'if perception applies to all >>> visible phenomena then it applies to none of them.' 'Applies' and >>> 'Explain', however, seem two very different words to me. You may want to >>> say that mediation applies to all and every human action/relation. But >>> then >>> this is not to say that you are explaining any of them. As I view it, >>> mediation should not be thought of as an analytical unit in the same >>> sense >>> that perezhivanie is, for it is not a concrete unit. In fact, following >>> on >>> David's example, *perception* can indeed be accounted for if you develop >>> and further understand the category perezhivanie. And still, you will not >>> want to use perezhivanie to account for every and any aspect of human >>> existence. Nor every instance of 'human(ing)' will be perezhivanie >>> (unless >>> you reserve the term 'human' to a very specific set of all the things we >>> human-looking animals do.). >>> >>> Alfredo >>> >>> >>> ________________________________________ >>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>> on behalf of mike cole >>> Sent: 31 March 2017 02:38 >>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: ZPD and DST! >>> >>> Thanks Michael. >>> Establishing fair use in the xmca community seems an important task. >>> >>> Your solution works given current uncertainties. >>> >>> mike >>> >>> On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 5:29 PM, Wolff-Michael Roth < >>> wolffmichael.roth@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> Hi Mike, all, >>>> Because I don't know what big companies can do to us if we violate >>>> signed >>>> copyright release, I am more than hesitant to send the type-set version >>>> they published. However, I am appending the final version of the >>>> >>> manuscript >>> >>>> that prior to acceptance. >>>> Cheers, >>>> Michael >>>> >>>> >>>> ------------------------------------------------------------ >>>> -------------------- >>>> Wolff-Michael Roth, Lansdowne Professor >>>> Applied Cognitive Science >>>> MacLaurin Building A567 >>>> University of Victoria >>>> Victoria, BC, V8P 5C2 >>>> http://web.uvic.ca/~mroth >>>> >>>> New book: *The Mathematics of Mathematics >>>> >>> directions-in-mathematics-and-science-education/the- >>>> mathematics-of-mathematics/>* >>>> >>>> On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 5:09 PM, mike cole wrote: >>>> >>>> Michael -- >>>>> >>>>> XMCA has been operating as an educational collective among whom >>>>> >>>> relevant >>> >>>> written materials are circulated as they are needed for the the >>>>> >>>> members' >>> >>>> education. >>>>> >>>>> Would it incur Springer's wrath to make the paper directly available? >>>>> >>>>> mike >>>>> >>>>> On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 3:26 PM, Wolff-Michael Roth < >>>>> wolffmichael.roth@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Hi all, I did not realize that my reference wasn't updated. The paper >>>>>> >>>>> is >>>> >>>>> here: >>>>>> https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12124-016-9376-0 >>>>>> >>>>>> and by personal request Alfredo or I will mail a copy to those not >>>>>> operating at a uni with access to Springer Link. >>>>>> >>>>>> Michael >>>>>> >>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------ >>>>>> -------------------- >>>>>> Wolff-Michael Roth, Lansdowne Professor >>>>>> Applied Cognitive Science >>>>>> MacLaurin Building A567 >>>>>> University of Victoria >>>>>> Victoria, BC, V8P 5C2 >>>>>> http://web.uvic.ca/~mroth >>>>>> >>>>>> New book: *The Mathematics of Mathematics >>>>>> >>>>> directions-in-mathematics-and-science-education/the- >>>>>> mathematics-of-mathematics/>* >>>>>> >>>>>> On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 2:33 PM, Wolff-Michael Roth < >>>>>> wolffmichael.roth@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Hi David, you will disagree even more with this one: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Roth, W.-M., & Jornet, A. (in press). Theorizing with/out >>>>>>> >>>>>> "mediators." >>>> >>>>> Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> But people like Feliks Mikhailov, and also Ekaterina Zavershneva >>>>>>> >>>>>> indicate >>>>> >>>>>> that toward the end of his life, Vygotsy was moving away from >>>>>>> >>>>>> mediation. >>>>> >>>>>> We >>>>>> >>>>>>> give an extended argument for theorizing without mediators in the >>>>>>> >>>>>> article. >>>>>> >>>>>>> But I hope you understand that I am not out to interpret and find >>>>>>> >>>>>> out >>> >>>> what >>>>>> >>>>>>> Vygotsky really said even if he did not say it. I think you are >>>>>>> >>>>>> well >>> >>>> positioned to do THAT kind of research. I want to move on. And, >>>>>>> >>>>>> frankly, >>>>> >>>>>> I >>>>>> >>>>>>> have no clue what people are saying when they write that something >>>>>>> >>>>>> is >>> >>>> mediated. It seems to me that they are hiding or refraining from >>>>>>> >>>>>> going >>>> >>>>> after what I am interested in. I am not interested in knowing that >>>>>>> >>>>>> a >>> >>>> tool >>>>> >>>>>> mediates something. I am interested in what the tool actually does, >>>>>>> >>>>>> what >>>>> >>>>>> are the events in which tools participate, shape people and get >>>>>>> >>>>>> shaped >>>> >>>>> by >>>>> >>>>>> them. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> In the end, all this is about finding suitable discourses, and >>>>>>> descriptions, for doing the kinds of things we want to do. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> m >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------ >>>>>>> -------------------- >>>>>>> Wolff-Michael Roth, Lansdowne Professor >>>>>>> Applied Cognitive Science >>>>>>> MacLaurin Building A567 >>>>>>> University of Victoria >>>>>>> Victoria, BC, V8P 5C2 >>>>>>> http://web.uvic.ca/~mroth >>>>>> >>>>>> faculty/mroth/> >>> >>>> New book: *The Mathematics of Mathematics >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> directions-in-mathematics-and-science-education/the- >>>>>> mathematics-of-mathematics/>* >>>>>> >>>>>>> On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 2:22 PM, David Kellogg < >>>>>>> >>>>>> dkellogg60@gmail.com >>> >>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I think the Roth article I would recommend isn't the editorial, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> but >>> >>>> rather >>>>>> >>>>>>> this one: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Roth, W-M. 2007. On Mediation: Towards a Cultural Historical >>>>>>>> Understanding. >>>>>>>> Theory and Psychology 17 (5): 655-680. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> There's a lot I disagree with in this paper (e.g. I disagree with >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> the >>>> >>>>> idea >>>>>> >>>>>>> that if mediation "explains" everything then it explains >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> nothing--it >>> >>>> is >>>>> >>>>>> like saying that if perception applies to all visible phenomena >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> then >>> >>>> it >>>>> >>>>>> applies to none of them). But here's why I prefer it to Saeed's >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> paper: >>>> >>>>> a) Roth gets to concrete examples from direct experience almost >>>>>>>> immediately >>>>>>>> (fish feeding, on p. 656). This gives me something to go back to >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> when >>>> >>>>> I >>>>> >>>>>> get >>>>>>>> lost in abstraction, and I need it. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> b) Instead of using Theory A to illuminate Theory B, Roth goes >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> back >>> >>>> into >>>>> >>>>>> the historical origins of Theory A and discovers, immanently, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> Theory >>> >>>> B, >>>>> >>>>>> C, >>>>>> >>>>>>> etc.. This has two advantages: it avoids chalk-and-cheese >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> eclecticism, >>>> >>>>> and >>>>>> >>>>>>> it helps me understand how Theory A was formed in the first place. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> With >>>>> >>>>>> Saeed's paper, I find myself missing: 1) an account of the >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> CRITICAL >>> >>>> DISTINCTIONS between the two theories, 2) an explanation of how >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> each >>> >>>> MAKES >>>>>> >>>>>>> UP for what the other lacks, and 3) some argument for long term >>>>>>>> COMPATABILITY, some explication of why the emulsion will not >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> re-separate, >>>>>> >>>>>>> like vinegar and oil. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> c) For Vygotsky--no, for mediation more generally--the key problem >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> is >>>> >>>>> volition, free will, choice. Vygotsky once said that the most >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> interesting >>>>>> >>>>>>> problem in the whole of psychology, bar none, is what a human >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> being >>> >>>> would >>>>>> >>>>>>> really do in the situation of Buridan's donkey (that is a >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> situation >>> >>>> of >>>> >>>>> volition, of free will, of choice where the outcomes were either >>>>>>>> apparently >>>>>>>> equal or equally unknown). This isn't true of DST, which has, as >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> Saeed >>>> >>>>> admits, an "emergentist" account of volition (to put it >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> uncharitably, >>>> >>>>> handwaving and magic). At the very least, choice is late emerging >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> in a >>>> >>>>> DST >>>>>> >>>>>>> account, and that makes, for example, the child's early and >>>>>>>> successful acquisition of speech very hard to explain. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> That said, Saeed--I DID appreciate the part on p. 86 where you >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> remind >>>> >>>>> us >>>>> >>>>>> that learning and development are distinct but linked. As >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> Wolff-Michael >>>>> >>>>>> says, the point has been made before, but I think that we've got >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> to >>> >>>> keep >>>>> >>>>>> saying this, until people really see that mixing up "microgenesis" >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> and >>>> >>>>> ontogenesis is, in our own time, the same kind of error that >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> mixing >>> >>>> up >>>> >>>>> ontogenesis and phylogenesis was in Vygotsky's. If I read one more >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> article >>>>>> >>>>>>> which invokes the ZPD for some trivial incident of learning, I'm >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> getting a >>>>>> >>>>>>> tattoo that says: "Look here, mate, just because it didn't kill ya >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> doesn't >>>>>> >>>>>>> mean it made ya any stronger". >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> David Kellogg >>>>>>>> Macquarie University >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >> > -- Robert Lake Ed.D. Associate Professor Social Foundations of Education Dept. of Curriculum, Foundations, and Reading Georgia Southern University P. O. Box 8144, Statesboro, GA 30460 Secretary/Treasurer-AERA- Paulo Freire Special Interest Group Webpage: https://georgiasouthern.academia.edu/RobertLake*Democracy must be born anew in every generation, and education is its midwife.* John Dewey-*Democracy and Education*,1916, p. 139 From wolffmichael.roth@gmail.com Fri Mar 31 06:51:01 2017 From: wolffmichael.roth@gmail.com (Wolff-Michael Roth) Date: Fri, 31 Mar 2017 06:51:01 -0700 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: ZPD and DST! In-Reply-To: <58de59a8.03c1620a.ff3a8.7c7c@mx.google.com> References: <1490937703564.50878@iped.uio.no> <58de59a8.03c1620a.ff3a8.7c7c@mx.google.com> Message-ID: Those interested in mediation, might want to read Jean-Luc Nancy (in *Being Singular Plural*) and his extended meditation on mediation. I am pasting a couple of paragraphs. I can already see Larry mediate on this . . . Michael Jean-Luc Nancy, Being Singular Plural, p. 94: "Self" is not the relation of a "me" to "itself."8 1 "Self" is more originary than "me" and "you." "Self" is primarily nothing other than the "as such" of Being in general. Being is only its own "as Being." The "as" does not happen to Being; it does not add itself to Being; it does not intensify Being: it is Being, constitutively. Therefore, Being is directly and immediately mediated *by itself*; it is itself mediation; it is mediation without any instrument, and it is nondialectic: dia-lectic without dialectic. It is negativity without use, the *nothing* of the with and the *nothing* as the with. The with as with is nothing but the exposition of Being-as-such, each time singularly such and, therefore, always plurally such. Prior to "me" and "you," the "self" is like a "we" that is neither a collective subject nor "intersubjectivity," but rather the immediate mediation of Being in "(it)self," the plural fold of the origin. (Is mediation itself the "with"? Certainly, it is. The "with" is the permutation of what remains in its place, each one and each time. The "with" is the permutation without an Other. An Other is always the Mediator; its prototype is Christ. Here, on the contrary, it is a matter of mediation without a mediator, that is, without the "power of the negative" and its remarkable power to retain within itself its own contradiction, which always defines and fills in [plombe] the subject. Mediation without a mediator mediates nothing: it is the mid-point [mi-lieu], the place of sharing and crossing through [passage]; -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Wolff-Michael Roth, Lansdowne Professor Applied Cognitive Science MacLaurin Building A567 University of Victoria Victoria, BC, V8P 5C2 http://web.uvic.ca/~mroth New book: *The Mathematics of Mathematics * On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 6:30 AM, wrote: > I would also like a copy [private or public] of the article > Last month we explored various assumptions [approaches] engaging > perezhivanie. > This thread today approaching mediation through conversare [the middle > voice] focusing on understanding mediation being equally active and > passive. WM Roth indicating; > This thread is on the threshold of exploring concept/word through the > prism of consciousness refracted as asymmetrical moments within > symmetrical units. Transforming the relation of asymmetrical and > symmetrical ? moments and units. > > These multiple articles read through each other [opening a place] which we > collectively and individually may [visit] and possibly inhabit? > Will require slow reading through complex medium. Will begin with Wolff > Michael and Luis Radford 9 page editorial ?re/thinking? Zpd ? a symmetrical > reading > Sent from Mail for Windows 10moments > From: Huw Lloyd > Sent: March 31, 2017 2:47 AM > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: ZPD and DST! > > > > From wolffmichael.roth@gmail.com Fri Mar 31 06:54:44 2017 From: wolffmichael.roth@gmail.com (Wolff-Michael Roth) Date: Fri, 31 Mar 2017 06:54:44 -0700 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: ZPD and DST! In-Reply-To: References: <1490937703564.50878@iped.uio.no> <3cad925a-75c7-a749-53fd-3bf49519a07e@mira.net> Message-ID: Sorry, my last message crossed that of Andy, but is a response to it as well. For those who do not know Jean-Luc Nancy, he is probably one of the leading philosophers in Europe, who also has a lot to say of the body (not in the least in his *Corpus*). Michael -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Wolff-Michael Roth, Lansdowne Professor Applied Cognitive Science MacLaurin Building A567 University of Victoria Victoria, BC, V8P 5C2 http://web.uvic.ca/~mroth New book: *The Mathematics of Mathematics * On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 6:37 AM, Robert Lake wrote: > That 2 cents goes a long, long generative way Andy. Thanks! > > Robert > > On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 6:52 AM, Andy Blunden wrote: > > > My 2 cents ... > > > > 1. Both Hegel and C. S. Peirce promoted mediation not only as essentially > > ubiquitous, but as *generative*, in the sense that since every relation > is > > mediated, every new relation generates a new (mediating) relation. It is > a > > method of enquiry which is forever uncovering new relations. I would call > > this the methodological aspect of mediation. To fail to enquire into > > mediation is effectively to close off enquiry and settle for some kind of > > dichotomy or taxonomy. > > > > 2. Vygotsky's *artefact mediation*, is a distinctive type of mediation, > to > > which other approaches to mind are largely blind. Artefact mediation is > not > > the answer to every problem of psychology. And it wasn't for Vygotsky > > either. > > > > Andy > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > Andy Blunden > > http://home.mira.net/~andy > > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making > > On 31/03/2017 8:44 PM, Huw Lloyd wrote: > > > >> The title has a somewhat oxymoronic flavour to it, Alfredo. Theorising > >> gets more interesting when it consists of a minimum of a 3-term system, > >> and > >> in such a system one term can always be indexed as a mediating one in > >> relation to the other two. All the problems arise when these terms are > >> reduced to 2-term systems (formal logic, statistical associations, > >> descriptions based upon typed categories) in which the mediators are > >> elements of a non-unitary analysis. > >> > >> The issues of misuse of 'mediators' as elements rather than as part of a > >> unit is structurally similar to applying formal logic categories such as > >> "every" and "there exists" to thinking in terms of complexes, in which > >> these phrases merely limit the (1 term) bonding rather than applying to > >> the > >> (2 term) hierarchical constructs that they are about. In LSV Vol. 1 we > >> have a 3+ term analysis (dialectic) of the development of 1-term > thinking > >> (complexes) towards 2-term thinking (formal logic). > >> > >> Best, > >> Huw > >> > >> On 31 March 2017 at 06:21, Alfredo Jornet Gil > >> wrote: > >> > >> Thanks a lot for sharing the article, Michael. And yes, considering > those > >>> copy-distribution issues is important in a forum like this. Is nice to > be > >>> able to check with you/us authors on how to best share our work. > >>> > >>> On the issue of Theorizing with/out mediators, Huw, in the article we > do > >>> recognize the viability of the option you suggest: not dismissing but > >>> pursuing an 'adequate' (or 'more developed' that may mean) > understanding > >>> of the concept. Still, we recommend the other route, and this is part > of > >>> my > >>> view. > >>> > >>> I think the problem concerns a confusion between treating mediation as > a > >>> sort of universal premise that 'applies' to everything or as an > >>> analytical > >>> concept that 'explains' everything. For example, David K. in his post > >>> treats the phrase that 'if mediation explains everything then it > explains > >>> nothing' as being analog to the sentence 'if perception applies to all > >>> visible phenomena then it applies to none of them.' 'Applies' and > >>> 'Explain', however, seem two very different words to me. You may want > to > >>> say that mediation applies to all and every human action/relation. But > >>> then > >>> this is not to say that you are explaining any of them. As I view it, > >>> mediation should not be thought of as an analytical unit in the same > >>> sense > >>> that perezhivanie is, for it is not a concrete unit. In fact, following > >>> on > >>> David's example, *perception* can indeed be accounted for if you > develop > >>> and further understand the category perezhivanie. And still, you will > not > >>> want to use perezhivanie to account for every and any aspect of human > >>> existence. Nor every instance of 'human(ing)' will be perezhivanie > >>> (unless > >>> you reserve the term 'human' to a very specific set of all the things > we > >>> human-looking animals do.). > >>> > >>> Alfredo > >>> > >>> > >>> ________________________________________ > >>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > >>> on behalf of mike cole > >>> Sent: 31 March 2017 02:38 > >>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > >>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: ZPD and DST! > >>> > >>> Thanks Michael. > >>> Establishing fair use in the xmca community seems an important task. > >>> > >>> Your solution works given current uncertainties. > >>> > >>> mike > >>> > >>> On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 5:29 PM, Wolff-Michael Roth < > >>> wolffmichael.roth@gmail.com> wrote: > >>> > >>> Hi Mike, all, > >>>> Because I don't know what big companies can do to us if we violate > >>>> signed > >>>> copyright release, I am more than hesitant to send the type-set > version > >>>> they published. However, I am appending the final version of the > >>>> > >>> manuscript > >>> > >>>> that prior to acceptance. > >>>> Cheers, > >>>> Michael > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> ------------------------------------------------------------ > >>>> -------------------- > >>>> Wolff-Michael Roth, Lansdowne Professor > >>>> Applied Cognitive Science > >>>> MacLaurin Building A567 > >>>> University of Victoria > >>>> Victoria, BC, V8P 5C2 > >>>> http://web.uvic.ca/~mroth > >>>> > >>>> New book: *The Mathematics of Mathematics > >>>> >>>> directions-in-mathematics-and-science-education/the- > >>>> mathematics-of-mathematics/>* > >>>> > >>>> On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 5:09 PM, mike cole wrote: > >>>> > >>>> Michael -- > >>>>> > >>>>> XMCA has been operating as an educational collective among whom > >>>>> > >>>> relevant > >>> > >>>> written materials are circulated as they are needed for the the > >>>>> > >>>> members' > >>> > >>>> education. > >>>>> > >>>>> Would it incur Springer's wrath to make the paper directly available? > >>>>> > >>>>> mike > >>>>> > >>>>> On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 3:26 PM, Wolff-Michael Roth < > >>>>> wolffmichael.roth@gmail.com> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>> Hi all, I did not realize that my reference wasn't updated. The paper > >>>>>> > >>>>> is > >>>> > >>>>> here: > >>>>>> https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12124-016-9376-0 > >>>>>> > >>>>>> and by personal request Alfredo or I will mail a copy to those not > >>>>>> operating at a uni with access to Springer Link. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Michael > >>>>>> > >>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------ > >>>>>> -------------------- > >>>>>> Wolff-Michael Roth, Lansdowne Professor > >>>>>> Applied Cognitive Science > >>>>>> MacLaurin Building A567 > >>>>>> University of Victoria > >>>>>> Victoria, BC, V8P 5C2 > >>>>>> http://web.uvic.ca/~mroth > > >>>>>> > >>>>>> New book: *The Mathematics of Mathematics > >>>>>> >>>>>> directions-in-mathematics-and-science-education/the- > >>>>>> mathematics-of-mathematics/>* > >>>>>> > >>>>>> On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 2:33 PM, Wolff-Michael Roth < > >>>>>> wolffmichael.roth@gmail.com> wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Hi David, you will disagree even more with this one: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Roth, W.-M., & Jornet, A. (in press). Theorizing with/out > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> "mediators." > >>>> > >>>>> Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> But people like Feliks Mikhailov, and also Ekaterina Zavershneva > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> indicate > >>>>> > >>>>>> that toward the end of his life, Vygotsy was moving away from > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> mediation. > >>>>> > >>>>>> We > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> give an extended argument for theorizing without mediators in the > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> article. > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> But I hope you understand that I am not out to interpret and find > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> out > >>> > >>>> what > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> Vygotsky really said even if he did not say it. I think you are > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> well > >>> > >>>> positioned to do THAT kind of research. I want to move on. And, > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> frankly, > >>>>> > >>>>>> I > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> have no clue what people are saying when they write that something > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> is > >>> > >>>> mediated. It seems to me that they are hiding or refraining from > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> going > >>>> > >>>>> after what I am interested in. I am not interested in knowing that > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> a > >>> > >>>> tool > >>>>> > >>>>>> mediates something. I am interested in what the tool actually does, > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> what > >>>>> > >>>>>> are the events in which tools participate, shape people and get > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> shaped > >>>> > >>>>> by > >>>>> > >>>>>> them. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> In the end, all this is about finding suitable discourses, and > >>>>>>> descriptions, for doing the kinds of things we want to do. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> m > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------ > >>>>>>> -------------------- > >>>>>>> Wolff-Michael Roth, Lansdowne Professor > >>>>>>> Applied Cognitive Science > >>>>>>> MacLaurin Building A567 > >>>>>>> University of Victoria > >>>>>>> Victoria, BC, V8P 5C2 > >>>>>>> http://web.uvic.ca/~mroth >>>>>>> > >>>>>> faculty/mroth/> > >>> > >>>> New book: *The Mathematics of Mathematics > >>>>>>> >>>>>>> > >>>>>> directions-in-mathematics-and-science-education/the- > >>>>>> mathematics-of-mathematics/>* > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 2:22 PM, David Kellogg < > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> dkellogg60@gmail.com > >>> > >>>> wrote: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> I think the Roth article I would recommend isn't the editorial, > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> but > >>> > >>>> rather > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> this one: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Roth, W-M. 2007. On Mediation: Towards a Cultural Historical > >>>>>>>> Understanding. > >>>>>>>> Theory and Psychology 17 (5): 655-680. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> There's a lot I disagree with in this paper (e.g. I disagree with > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> the > >>>> > >>>>> idea > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> that if mediation "explains" everything then it explains > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> nothing--it > >>> > >>>> is > >>>>> > >>>>>> like saying that if perception applies to all visible phenomena > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> then > >>> > >>>> it > >>>>> > >>>>>> applies to none of them). But here's why I prefer it to Saeed's > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> paper: > >>>> > >>>>> a) Roth gets to concrete examples from direct experience almost > >>>>>>>> immediately > >>>>>>>> (fish feeding, on p. 656). This gives me something to go back to > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> when > >>>> > >>>>> I > >>>>> > >>>>>> get > >>>>>>>> lost in abstraction, and I need it. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> b) Instead of using Theory A to illuminate Theory B, Roth goes > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> back > >>> > >>>> into > >>>>> > >>>>>> the historical origins of Theory A and discovers, immanently, > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Theory > >>> > >>>> B, > >>>>> > >>>>>> C, > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> etc.. This has two advantages: it avoids chalk-and-cheese > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> eclecticism, > >>>> > >>>>> and > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> it helps me understand how Theory A was formed in the first place. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> With > >>>>> > >>>>>> Saeed's paper, I find myself missing: 1) an account of the > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> CRITICAL > >>> > >>>> DISTINCTIONS between the two theories, 2) an explanation of how > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> each > >>> > >>>> MAKES > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> UP for what the other lacks, and 3) some argument for long term > >>>>>>>> COMPATABILITY, some explication of why the emulsion will not > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> re-separate, > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> like vinegar and oil. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> c) For Vygotsky--no, for mediation more generally--the key problem > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> is > >>>> > >>>>> volition, free will, choice. Vygotsky once said that the most > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> interesting > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> problem in the whole of psychology, bar none, is what a human > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> being > >>> > >>>> would > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> really do in the situation of Buridan's donkey (that is a > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> situation > >>> > >>>> of > >>>> > >>>>> volition, of free will, of choice where the outcomes were either > >>>>>>>> apparently > >>>>>>>> equal or equally unknown). This isn't true of DST, which has, as > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Saeed > >>>> > >>>>> admits, an "emergentist" account of volition (to put it > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> uncharitably, > >>>> > >>>>> handwaving and magic). At the very least, choice is late emerging > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> in a > >>>> > >>>>> DST > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> account, and that makes, for example, the child's early and > >>>>>>>> successful acquisition of speech very hard to explain. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> That said, Saeed--I DID appreciate the part on p. 86 where you > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> remind > >>>> > >>>>> us > >>>>> > >>>>>> that learning and development are distinct but linked. As > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Wolff-Michael > >>>>> > >>>>>> says, the point has been made before, but I think that we've got > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> to > >>> > >>>> keep > >>>>> > >>>>>> saying this, until people really see that mixing up "microgenesis" > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> and > >>>> > >>>>> ontogenesis is, in our own time, the same kind of error that > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> mixing > >>> > >>>> up > >>>> > >>>>> ontogenesis and phylogenesis was in Vygotsky's. If I read one more > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> article > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> which invokes the ZPD for some trivial incident of learning, I'm > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> getting a > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> tattoo that says: "Look here, mate, just because it didn't kill ya > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> doesn't > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> mean it made ya any stronger". > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> David Kellogg > >>>>>>>> Macquarie University > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >> > > > > > -- > Robert Lake Ed.D. > Associate Professor > Social Foundations of Education > Dept. of Curriculum, Foundations, and Reading > Georgia Southern University > P. O. Box 8144, Statesboro, GA 30460 > Secretary/Treasurer-AERA- Paulo Freire Special Interest Group > Webpage: https://georgiasouthern.academia.edu/RobertLake*Democracy must be > born anew in every generation, and education is its midwife.* John > Dewey-*Democracy > and Education*,1916, p. 139 > From a.j.gil@iped.uio.no Fri Mar 31 11:50:51 2017 From: a.j.gil@iped.uio.no (Alfredo Jornet Gil) Date: Fri, 31 Mar 2017 18:50:51 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: ZPD and DST! In-Reply-To: References: , Message-ID: <1490986263115.53446@iped.uio.no> Huw, I also wanted to thank you and acknowledge your interesting work, which is very useful to overview a wide range of CHAT scholars and their use of notions scubas as mediation. I hope many others in this list also look at it. Thanks for sharing it! Alfredo ________________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of Huw Lloyd Sent: 31 March 2017 02:25 To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: ZPD and DST! Thank you for the paper, Michael. I have skim-read this and am largely in agreement with the content. However, I think I disagree about some implied premises. My sense is that these issues are largely a symptom of undeveloped systems and theoretical skills in this area, which I would say is essential for real progress. On that basis I would not suggest that people omit the use of certain terms, but rather that they keep tripping over them until they study them more carefully. A few pointers, perhaps: 1. Field is synonymous with medium (a cognate of media in the non-fashionable sense). 2. The 'mis-use' of tool/sign mediation as in non-unitary forms in CHAT is, I believe, largely a result of construing the object of activity socially rather than psychologically, i.e. in which orientation is the field/medium. (Some elaboration here: https://www.academia.edu/24660665/A_Comparison_of_Seven_Historical_Research_Orientations_within_CHAT_up_to_2001_ ) 3. In "thesis-antithesis" dialectics there is a medium implicated. Best, Huw On 31 March 2017 at 00:42, ??? wrote: > Hi, Roth. > I want a copy. > > 2017-03-31 7:26 GMT+09:00 Wolff-Michael Roth >: > > > Hi all, I did not realize that my reference wasn't updated. The paper is > > here: > > https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12124-016-9376-0 > > > > and by personal request Alfredo or I will mail a copy to those not > > operating at a uni with access to Springer Link. > > > > Michael > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > -------------------- > > Wolff-Michael Roth, Lansdowne Professor > > Applied Cognitive Science > > MacLaurin Building A567 > > University of Victoria > > Victoria, BC, V8P 5C2 > > http://web.uvic.ca/~mroth > > > > New book: *The Mathematics of Mathematics > > > directions-in-mathematics-and-science-education/the- > > mathematics-of-mathematics/>* > > > > On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 2:33 PM, Wolff-Michael Roth < > > wolffmichael.roth@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > Hi David, you will disagree even more with this one: > > > > > > > > > Roth, W.-M., & Jornet, A. (in press). Theorizing with/out "mediators." > > > Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science. > > > > > > But people like Feliks Mikhailov, and also Ekaterina Zavershneva > indicate > > > that toward the end of his life, Vygotsy was moving away from > mediation. > > We > > > give an extended argument for theorizing without mediators in the > > article. > > > > > > But I hope you understand that I am not out to interpret and find out > > what > > > Vygotsky really said even if he did not say it. I think you are well > > > positioned to do THAT kind of research. I want to move on. And, > frankly, > > I > > > have no clue what people are saying when they write that something is > > > mediated. It seems to me that they are hiding or refraining from going > > > after what I am interested in. I am not interested in knowing that a > tool > > > mediates something. I am interested in what the tool actually does, > what > > > are the events in which tools participate, shape people and get shaped > by > > > them. > > > > > > In the end, all this is about finding suitable discourses, and > > > descriptions, for doing the kinds of things we want to do. > > > > > > m > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > -------------------- > > > Wolff-Michael Roth, Lansdowne Professor > > > Applied Cognitive Science > > > MacLaurin Building A567 > > > University of Victoria > > > Victoria, BC, V8P 5C2 > > > http://web.uvic.ca/~mroth > > > > > > New book: *The Mathematics of Mathematics > > > > directions-in-mathematics-and-science-education/the- > > mathematics-of-mathematics/>* > > > > > > On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 2:22 PM, David Kellogg > > > wrote: > > > > > >> I think the Roth article I would recommend isn't the editorial, but > > rather > > >> this one: > > >> > > >> Roth, W-M. 2007. On Mediation: Towards a Cultural Historical > > >> Understanding. > > >> Theory and Psychology 17 (5): 655-680. > > >> > > >> There's a lot I disagree with in this paper (e.g. I disagree with the > > idea > > >> that if mediation "explains" everything then it explains nothing--it > is > > >> like saying that if perception applies to all visible phenomena then > it > > >> applies to none of them). But here's why I prefer it to Saeed's paper: > > >> > > >> a) Roth gets to concrete examples from direct experience almost > > >> immediately > > >> (fish feeding, on p. 656). This gives me something to go back to when > I > > >> get > > >> lost in abstraction, and I need it. > > >> > > >> b) Instead of using Theory A to illuminate Theory B, Roth goes back > into > > >> the historical origins of Theory A and discovers, immanently, Theory > B, > > C, > > >> etc.. This has two advantages: it avoids chalk-and-cheese eclecticism, > > and > > >> it helps me understand how Theory A was formed in the first place. > With > > >> Saeed's paper, I find myself missing: 1) an account of the CRITICAL > > >> DISTINCTIONS between the two theories, 2) an explanation of how each > > MAKES > > >> UP for what the other lacks, and 3) some argument for long term > > >> COMPATABILITY, some explication of why the emulsion will not > > re-separate, > > >> like vinegar and oil. > > >> > > >> c) For Vygotsky--no, for mediation more generally--the key problem is > > >> volition, free will, choice. Vygotsky once said that the most > > interesting > > >> problem in the whole of psychology, bar none, is what a human being > > would > > >> really do in the situation of Buridan's donkey (that is a situation of > > >> volition, of free will, of choice where the outcomes were either > > >> apparently > > >> equal or equally unknown). This isn't true of DST, which has, as Saeed > > >> admits, an "emergentist" account of volition (to put it uncharitably, > > >> handwaving and magic). At the very least, choice is late emerging in a > > DST > > >> account, and that makes, for example, the child's early and > > >> successful acquisition of speech very hard to explain. > > >> > > >> That said, Saeed--I DID appreciate the part on p. 86 where you remind > us > > >> that learning and development are distinct but linked. As > Wolff-Michael > > >> says, the point has been made before, but I think that we've got to > keep > > >> saying this, until people really see that mixing up "microgenesis" and > > >> ontogenesis is, in our own time, the same kind of error that mixing up > > >> ontogenesis and phylogenesis was in Vygotsky's. If I read one more > > article > > >> which invokes the ZPD for some trivial incident of learning, I'm > > getting a > > >> tattoo that says: "Look here, mate, just because it didn't kill ya > > doesn't > > >> mean it made ya any stronger". > > >> > > >> David Kellogg > > >> Macquarie University > > >> > > > > > > > > > From wolffmichael.roth@gmail.com Fri Mar 31 12:00:47 2017 From: wolffmichael.roth@gmail.com (Wolff-Michael Roth) Date: Fri, 31 Mar 2017 12:00:47 -0700 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: ZPD and DST! In-Reply-To: <1490986263115.53446@iped.uio.no> References: <1490986263115.53446@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: Huw, for some reason I didn't get your message. I am not accessing the paper right now. But I don't think I made the point #3. To me this is the problem of the thesis-antithesis approach, because it requires mediation. Philosophers have pointed this out. Michael -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Wolff-Michael Roth, Lansdowne Professor Applied Cognitive Science MacLaurin Building A567 University of Victoria Victoria, BC, V8P 5C2 http://web.uvic.ca/~mroth New book: *The Mathematics of Mathematics * On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 11:50 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil wrote: > Huw, I also wanted to thank you and acknowledge your interesting work, > which is very useful to overview a wide range of CHAT scholars and their > use of notions scubas as mediation. I hope many others in this list also > look at it. Thanks for sharing it! > Alfredo > ________________________________________ > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > on behalf of Huw Lloyd > Sent: 31 March 2017 02:25 > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: ZPD and DST! > > Thank you for the paper, Michael. I have skim-read this and am largely in > agreement with the content. However, I think I disagree about some implied > premises. My sense is that these issues are largely a symptom of > undeveloped systems and theoretical skills in this area, which I would say > is essential for real progress. On that basis I would not suggest that > people omit the use of certain terms, but rather that they keep tripping > over them until they study them more carefully. > > A few pointers, perhaps: > 1. Field is synonymous with medium (a cognate of media in the > non-fashionable sense). > 2. The 'mis-use' of tool/sign mediation as in non-unitary forms in CHAT is, > I believe, largely a result of construing the object of activity socially > rather than psychologically, i.e. in which orientation is the field/medium. > (Some elaboration here: > https://www.academia.edu/24660665/A_Comparison_of_ > Seven_Historical_Research_Orientations_within_CHAT_up_to_2001_ > ) > 3. In "thesis-antithesis" dialectics there is a medium implicated. > > Best, > Huw > > > On 31 March 2017 at 00:42, ??? wrote: > > > Hi, Roth. > > I want a copy. > > > > 2017-03-31 7:26 GMT+09:00 Wolff-Michael Roth < > wolffmichael.roth@gmail.com > > >: > > > > > Hi all, I did not realize that my reference wasn't updated. The paper > is > > > here: > > > https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12124-016-9376-0 > > > > > > and by personal request Alfredo or I will mail a copy to those not > > > operating at a uni with access to Springer Link. > > > > > > Michael > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > -------------------- > > > Wolff-Michael Roth, Lansdowne Professor > > > Applied Cognitive Science > > > MacLaurin Building A567 > > > University of Victoria > > > Victoria, BC, V8P 5C2 > > > http://web.uvic.ca/~mroth > > > > > > New book: *The Mathematics of Mathematics > > > > > directions-in-mathematics-and-science-education/the- > > > mathematics-of-mathematics/>* > > > > > > On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 2:33 PM, Wolff-Michael Roth < > > > wolffmichael.roth@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > Hi David, you will disagree even more with this one: > > > > > > > > > > > > Roth, W.-M., & Jornet, A. (in press). Theorizing with/out > "mediators." > > > > Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science. > > > > > > > > But people like Feliks Mikhailov, and also Ekaterina Zavershneva > > indicate > > > > that toward the end of his life, Vygotsy was moving away from > > mediation. > > > We > > > > give an extended argument for theorizing without mediators in the > > > article. > > > > > > > > But I hope you understand that I am not out to interpret and find out > > > what > > > > Vygotsky really said even if he did not say it. I think you are well > > > > positioned to do THAT kind of research. I want to move on. And, > > frankly, > > > I > > > > have no clue what people are saying when they write that something is > > > > mediated. It seems to me that they are hiding or refraining from > going > > > > after what I am interested in. I am not interested in knowing that a > > tool > > > > mediates something. I am interested in what the tool actually does, > > what > > > > are the events in which tools participate, shape people and get > shaped > > by > > > > them. > > > > > > > > In the end, all this is about finding suitable discourses, and > > > > descriptions, for doing the kinds of things we want to do. > > > > > > > > m > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > -------------------- > > > > Wolff-Michael Roth, Lansdowne Professor > > > > Applied Cognitive Science > > > > MacLaurin Building A567 > > > > University of Victoria > > > > Victoria, BC, V8P 5C2 > > > > http://web.uvic.ca/~mroth > > > > > > > > New book: *The Mathematics of Mathematics > > > > > > directions-in-mathematics-and-science-education/the- > > > mathematics-of-mathematics/>* > > > > > > > > On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 2:22 PM, David Kellogg > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > >> I think the Roth article I would recommend isn't the editorial, but > > > rather > > > >> this one: > > > >> > > > >> Roth, W-M. 2007. On Mediation: Towards a Cultural Historical > > > >> Understanding. > > > >> Theory and Psychology 17 (5): 655-680. > > > >> > > > >> There's a lot I disagree with in this paper (e.g. I disagree with > the > > > idea > > > >> that if mediation "explains" everything then it explains nothing--it > > is > > > >> like saying that if perception applies to all visible phenomena then > > it > > > >> applies to none of them). But here's why I prefer it to Saeed's > paper: > > > >> > > > >> a) Roth gets to concrete examples from direct experience almost > > > >> immediately > > > >> (fish feeding, on p. 656). This gives me something to go back to > when > > I > > > >> get > > > >> lost in abstraction, and I need it. > > > >> > > > >> b) Instead of using Theory A to illuminate Theory B, Roth goes back > > into > > > >> the historical origins of Theory A and discovers, immanently, Theory > > B, > > > C, > > > >> etc.. This has two advantages: it avoids chalk-and-cheese > eclecticism, > > > and > > > >> it helps me understand how Theory A was formed in the first place. > > With > > > >> Saeed's paper, I find myself missing: 1) an account of the CRITICAL > > > >> DISTINCTIONS between the two theories, 2) an explanation of how each > > > MAKES > > > >> UP for what the other lacks, and 3) some argument for long term > > > >> COMPATABILITY, some explication of why the emulsion will not > > > re-separate, > > > >> like vinegar and oil. > > > >> > > > >> c) For Vygotsky--no, for mediation more generally--the key problem > is > > > >> volition, free will, choice. Vygotsky once said that the most > > > interesting > > > >> problem in the whole of psychology, bar none, is what a human being > > > would > > > >> really do in the situation of Buridan's donkey (that is a situation > of > > > >> volition, of free will, of choice where the outcomes were either > > > >> apparently > > > >> equal or equally unknown). This isn't true of DST, which has, as > Saeed > > > >> admits, an "emergentist" account of volition (to put it > uncharitably, > > > >> handwaving and magic). At the very least, choice is late emerging > in a > > > DST > > > >> account, and that makes, for example, the child's early and > > > >> successful acquisition of speech very hard to explain. > > > >> > > > >> That said, Saeed--I DID appreciate the part on p. 86 where you > remind > > us > > > >> that learning and development are distinct but linked. As > > Wolff-Michael > > > >> says, the point has been made before, but I think that we've got to > > keep > > > >> saying this, until people really see that mixing up "microgenesis" > and > > > >> ontogenesis is, in our own time, the same kind of error that mixing > up > > > >> ontogenesis and phylogenesis was in Vygotsky's. If I read one more > > > article > > > >> which invokes the ZPD for some trivial incident of learning, I'm > > > getting a > > > >> tattoo that says: "Look here, mate, just because it didn't kill ya > > > doesn't > > > >> mean it made ya any stronger". > > > >> > > > >> David Kellogg > > > >> Macquarie University > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From a.j.gil@iped.uio.no Fri Mar 31 12:05:22 2017 From: a.j.gil@iped.uio.no (Alfredo Jornet Gil) Date: Fri, 31 Mar 2017 19:05:22 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: ZPD and DST! In-Reply-To: <3cad925a-75c7-a749-53fd-3bf49519a07e@mira.net> References: <1490937703564.50878@iped.uio.no> , <3cad925a-75c7-a749-53fd-3bf49519a07e@mira.net> Message-ID: <1490987133497.81106@iped.uio.no> Thanks Andy. Concerning 1, I am afraid that 'failing to enquire into mediation' is what you find in most instances of the use of the term mediate and its different forms in the current empirical literature. But I'd be very interested in reading some empirical work that does indeed use the term or that approaches inquiry in the methodological sense that you refer to. Concerning 2, Huw does write a bit about that in the text he just shared. Alfredo ________________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of Andy Blunden Sent: 31 March 2017 12:52 To: xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: ZPD and DST! My 2 cents ... 1. Both Hegel and C. S. Peirce promoted mediation not only as essentially ubiquitous, but as *generative*, in the sense that since every relation is mediated, every new relation generates a new (mediating) relation. It is a method of enquiry which is forever uncovering new relations. I would call this the methodological aspect of mediation. To fail to enquire into mediation is effectively to close off enquiry and settle for some kind of dichotomy or taxonomy. 2. Vygotsky's *artefact mediation*, is a distinctive type of mediation, to which other approaches to mind are largely blind. Artefact mediation is not the answer to every problem of psychology. And it wasn't for Vygotsky either. Andy ------------------------------------------------------------ Andy Blunden http://home.mira.net/~andy http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making On 31/03/2017 8:44 PM, Huw Lloyd wrote: > The title has a somewhat oxymoronic flavour to it, Alfredo. Theorising > gets more interesting when it consists of a minimum of a 3-term system, and > in such a system one term can always be indexed as a mediating one in > relation to the other two. All the problems arise when these terms are > reduced to 2-term systems (formal logic, statistical associations, > descriptions based upon typed categories) in which the mediators are > elements of a non-unitary analysis. > > The issues of misuse of 'mediators' as elements rather than as part of a > unit is structurally similar to applying formal logic categories such as > "every" and "there exists" to thinking in terms of complexes, in which > these phrases merely limit the (1 term) bonding rather than applying to the > (2 term) hierarchical constructs that they are about. In LSV Vol. 1 we > have a 3+ term analysis (dialectic) of the development of 1-term thinking > (complexes) towards 2-term thinking (formal logic). > > Best, > Huw > > On 31 March 2017 at 06:21, Alfredo Jornet Gil wrote: > >> Thanks a lot for sharing the article, Michael. And yes, considering those >> copy-distribution issues is important in a forum like this. Is nice to be >> able to check with you/us authors on how to best share our work. >> >> On the issue of Theorizing with/out mediators, Huw, in the article we do >> recognize the viability of the option you suggest: not dismissing but >> pursuing an 'adequate' (or 'more developed' that may mean) understanding >> of the concept. Still, we recommend the other route, and this is part of my >> view. >> >> I think the problem concerns a confusion between treating mediation as a >> sort of universal premise that 'applies' to everything or as an analytical >> concept that 'explains' everything. For example, David K. in his post >> treats the phrase that 'if mediation explains everything then it explains >> nothing' as being analog to the sentence 'if perception applies to all >> visible phenomena then it applies to none of them.' 'Applies' and >> 'Explain', however, seem two very different words to me. You may want to >> say that mediation applies to all and every human action/relation. But then >> this is not to say that you are explaining any of them. As I view it, >> mediation should not be thought of as an analytical unit in the same sense >> that perezhivanie is, for it is not a concrete unit. In fact, following on >> David's example, *perception* can indeed be accounted for if you develop >> and further understand the category perezhivanie. And still, you will not >> want to use perezhivanie to account for every and any aspect of human >> existence. Nor every instance of 'human(ing)' will be perezhivanie (unless >> you reserve the term 'human' to a very specific set of all the things we >> human-looking animals do.). >> >> Alfredo >> >> >> ________________________________________ >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> on behalf of mike cole >> Sent: 31 March 2017 02:38 >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: ZPD and DST! >> >> Thanks Michael. >> Establishing fair use in the xmca community seems an important task. >> >> Your solution works given current uncertainties. >> >> mike >> >> On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 5:29 PM, Wolff-Michael Roth < >> wolffmichael.roth@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> Hi Mike, all, >>> Because I don't know what big companies can do to us if we violate signed >>> copyright release, I am more than hesitant to send the type-set version >>> they published. However, I am appending the final version of the >> manuscript >>> that prior to acceptance. >>> Cheers, >>> Michael >>> >>> >>> ------------------------------------------------------------ >>> -------------------- >>> Wolff-Michael Roth, Lansdowne Professor >>> Applied Cognitive Science >>> MacLaurin Building A567 >>> University of Victoria >>> Victoria, BC, V8P 5C2 >>> http://web.uvic.ca/~mroth >>> >>> New book: *The Mathematics of Mathematics >>> >> directions-in-mathematics-and-science-education/the- >>> mathematics-of-mathematics/>* >>> >>> On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 5:09 PM, mike cole wrote: >>> >>>> Michael -- >>>> >>>> XMCA has been operating as an educational collective among whom >> relevant >>>> written materials are circulated as they are needed for the the >> members' >>>> education. >>>> >>>> Would it incur Springer's wrath to make the paper directly available? >>>> >>>> mike >>>> >>>> On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 3:26 PM, Wolff-Michael Roth < >>>> wolffmichael.roth@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hi all, I did not realize that my reference wasn't updated. The paper >>> is >>>>> here: >>>>> https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12124-016-9376-0 >>>>> >>>>> and by personal request Alfredo or I will mail a copy to those not >>>>> operating at a uni with access to Springer Link. >>>>> >>>>> Michael >>>>> >>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------ >>>>> -------------------- >>>>> Wolff-Michael Roth, Lansdowne Professor >>>>> Applied Cognitive Science >>>>> MacLaurin Building A567 >>>>> University of Victoria >>>>> Victoria, BC, V8P 5C2 >>>>> http://web.uvic.ca/~mroth >>>>> >>>>> New book: *The Mathematics of Mathematics >>>>> >>>> directions-in-mathematics-and-science-education/the- >>>>> mathematics-of-mathematics/>* >>>>> >>>>> On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 2:33 PM, Wolff-Michael Roth < >>>>> wolffmichael.roth@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Hi David, you will disagree even more with this one: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Roth, W.-M., & Jornet, A. (in press). Theorizing with/out >>> "mediators." >>>>>> Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science. >>>>>> >>>>>> But people like Feliks Mikhailov, and also Ekaterina Zavershneva >>>> indicate >>>>>> that toward the end of his life, Vygotsy was moving away from >>>> mediation. >>>>> We >>>>>> give an extended argument for theorizing without mediators in the >>>>> article. >>>>>> But I hope you understand that I am not out to interpret and find >> out >>>>> what >>>>>> Vygotsky really said even if he did not say it. I think you are >> well >>>>>> positioned to do THAT kind of research. I want to move on. And, >>>> frankly, >>>>> I >>>>>> have no clue what people are saying when they write that something >> is >>>>>> mediated. It seems to me that they are hiding or refraining from >>> going >>>>>> after what I am interested in. I am not interested in knowing that >> a >>>> tool >>>>>> mediates something. I am interested in what the tool actually does, >>>> what >>>>>> are the events in which tools participate, shape people and get >>> shaped >>>> by >>>>>> them. >>>>>> >>>>>> In the end, all this is about finding suitable discourses, and >>>>>> descriptions, for doing the kinds of things we want to do. >>>>>> >>>>>> m >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------ >>>>>> -------------------- >>>>>> Wolff-Michael Roth, Lansdowne Professor >>>>>> Applied Cognitive Science >>>>>> MacLaurin Building A567 >>>>>> University of Victoria >>>>>> Victoria, BC, V8P 5C2 >>>>>> http://web.uvic.ca/~mroth > faculty/mroth/> >>>>>> New book: *The Mathematics of Mathematics >>>>>> >>>> directions-in-mathematics-and-science-education/the- >>>>> mathematics-of-mathematics/>* >>>>>> On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 2:22 PM, David Kellogg < >> dkellogg60@gmail.com >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> I think the Roth article I would recommend isn't the editorial, >> but >>>>> rather >>>>>>> this one: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Roth, W-M. 2007. On Mediation: Towards a Cultural Historical >>>>>>> Understanding. >>>>>>> Theory and Psychology 17 (5): 655-680. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> There's a lot I disagree with in this paper (e.g. I disagree with >>> the >>>>> idea >>>>>>> that if mediation "explains" everything then it explains >> nothing--it >>>> is >>>>>>> like saying that if perception applies to all visible phenomena >> then >>>> it >>>>>>> applies to none of them). But here's why I prefer it to Saeed's >>> paper: >>>>>>> a) Roth gets to concrete examples from direct experience almost >>>>>>> immediately >>>>>>> (fish feeding, on p. 656). This gives me something to go back to >>> when >>>> I >>>>>>> get >>>>>>> lost in abstraction, and I need it. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> b) Instead of using Theory A to illuminate Theory B, Roth goes >> back >>>> into >>>>>>> the historical origins of Theory A and discovers, immanently, >> Theory >>>> B, >>>>> C, >>>>>>> etc.. This has two advantages: it avoids chalk-and-cheese >>> eclecticism, >>>>> and >>>>>>> it helps me understand how Theory A was formed in the first place. >>>> With >>>>>>> Saeed's paper, I find myself missing: 1) an account of the >> CRITICAL >>>>>>> DISTINCTIONS between the two theories, 2) an explanation of how >> each >>>>> MAKES >>>>>>> UP for what the other lacks, and 3) some argument for long term >>>>>>> COMPATABILITY, some explication of why the emulsion will not >>>>> re-separate, >>>>>>> like vinegar and oil. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> c) For Vygotsky--no, for mediation more generally--the key problem >>> is >>>>>>> volition, free will, choice. Vygotsky once said that the most >>>>> interesting >>>>>>> problem in the whole of psychology, bar none, is what a human >> being >>>>> would >>>>>>> really do in the situation of Buridan's donkey (that is a >> situation >>> of >>>>>>> volition, of free will, of choice where the outcomes were either >>>>>>> apparently >>>>>>> equal or equally unknown). This isn't true of DST, which has, as >>> Saeed >>>>>>> admits, an "emergentist" account of volition (to put it >>> uncharitably, >>>>>>> handwaving and magic). At the very least, choice is late emerging >>> in a >>>>> DST >>>>>>> account, and that makes, for example, the child's early and >>>>>>> successful acquisition of speech very hard to explain. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> That said, Saeed--I DID appreciate the part on p. 86 where you >>> remind >>>> us >>>>>>> that learning and development are distinct but linked. As >>>> Wolff-Michael >>>>>>> says, the point has been made before, but I think that we've got >> to >>>> keep >>>>>>> saying this, until people really see that mixing up "microgenesis" >>> and >>>>>>> ontogenesis is, in our own time, the same kind of error that >> mixing >>> up >>>>>>> ontogenesis and phylogenesis was in Vygotsky's. If I read one more >>>>> article >>>>>>> which invokes the ZPD for some trivial incident of learning, I'm >>>>> getting a >>>>>>> tattoo that says: "Look here, mate, just because it didn't kill ya >>>>> doesn't >>>>>>> mean it made ya any stronger". >>>>>>> >>>>>>> David Kellogg >>>>>>> Macquarie University >>>>>>> >>>>>> > From a.j.gil@iped.uio.no Fri Mar 31 12:06:09 2017 From: a.j.gil@iped.uio.no (Alfredo Jornet Gil) Date: Fri, 31 Mar 2017 19:06:09 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: ZPD and DST! In-Reply-To: <58de59a8.03c1620a.ff3a8.7c7c@mx.google.com> References: <1490937703564.50878@iped.uio.no> , <58de59a8.03c1620a.ff3a8.7c7c@mx.google.com> Message-ID: <1490987181653.39024@iped.uio.no> Hi Larry, probably Michael already sent it to you, but here it is in case. Cheers, Alfredo ________________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of lpscholar2@gmail.com Sent: 31 March 2017 15:30 To: Huw Lloyd; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: ZPD and DST! I would also like a copy [private or public] of the article Last month we explored various assumptions [approaches] engaging perezhivanie. This thread today approaching mediation through conversare [the middle voice] focusing on understanding mediation being equally active and passive. WM Roth indicating; This thread is on the threshold of exploring concept/word through the prism of consciousness refracted as asymmetrical moments within symmetrical units. Transforming the relation of asymmetrical and symmetrical ? moments and units. These multiple articles read through each other [opening a place] which we collectively and individually may [visit] and possibly inhabit? Will require slow reading through complex medium. Will begin with Wolff Michael and Luis Radford 9 page editorial ?re/thinking? Zpd ? a symmetrical reading Sent from Mail for Windows 10moments From: Huw Lloyd Sent: March 31, 2017 2:47 AM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: ZPD and DST! -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Roth & Jornet 2017 Theorizing without mediators.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 1032137 bytes Desc: Roth & Jornet 2017 Theorizing without mediators.pdf Url : https://mailman.ucsd.edu/mailman/private/xmca-l/attachments/20170331/f223ca27/attachment-0001.pdf From a.j.gil@iped.uio.no Fri Mar 31 12:13:02 2017 From: a.j.gil@iped.uio.no (Alfredo Jornet Gil) Date: Fri, 31 Mar 2017 19:13:02 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: ZPD and DST! In-Reply-To: <1490987181653.39024@iped.uio.no> References: <1490937703564.50878@iped.uio.no> , <58de59a8.03c1620a.ff3a8.7c7c@mx.google.com>, <1490987181653.39024@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: <1490987594252.92200@iped.uio.no> Ops, i see I just accidentally did break the law. The message was intended to Larry alone. Apologies. Alfredo ________________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil Sent: 31 March 2017 21:06 To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: ZPD and DST! Hi Larry, probably Michael already sent it to you, but here it is in case. Cheers, Alfredo ________________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of lpscholar2@gmail.com Sent: 31 March 2017 15:30 To: Huw Lloyd; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: ZPD and DST! I would also like a copy [private or public] of the article Last month we explored various assumptions [approaches] engaging perezhivanie. This thread today approaching mediation through conversare [the middle voice] focusing on understanding mediation being equally active and passive. WM Roth indicating; This thread is on the threshold of exploring concept/word through the prism of consciousness refracted as asymmetrical moments within symmetrical units. Transforming the relation of asymmetrical and symmetrical ? moments and units. These multiple articles read through each other [opening a place] which we collectively and individually may [visit] and possibly inhabit? Will require slow reading through complex medium. Will begin with Wolff Michael and Luis Radford 9 page editorial ?re/thinking? Zpd ? a symmetrical reading Sent from Mail for Windows 10moments From: Huw Lloyd Sent: March 31, 2017 2:47 AM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: ZPD and DST! From a.j.gil@iped.uio.no Fri Mar 31 12:16:23 2017 From: a.j.gil@iped.uio.no (Alfredo Jornet Gil) Date: Fri, 31 Mar 2017 19:16:23 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: ZPD and DST! In-Reply-To: References: <1490937703564.50878@iped.uio.no> <3cad925a-75c7-a749-53fd-3bf49519a07e@mira.net> , Message-ID: <1490987794208.5331@iped.uio.no> Michael, thanks for sharing Nancy's reflections. I'd like to complement them with those by B. Latour. These are notes from the online version of his 2013 book, An Inquiry into Modes of Existence, which in its digital version is enhanced with notations by Latour and other readers. The following are part of Latour's annotations concerning the term 'mediation'. - 1 - The term mediation has been prevalent in actor-network theory, where it was a useful contrast to intermediary: in a course of action grasped in the habit mode or, more accurately, in Double Click, all sequences are aligned, precisely, as if they didn't have agency; there are only intermediaries. But as soon as things get complicated (and [hab], habit, is one of those complications), each intermediary becomes a mediation: a possible branch, and a hiatus in any case. In aime, since the term has no opposite, it does not play a major role, except to be synonymous with a hiatus, pass or stage on a trajectory always to be taken up again. - 2 - Like the term "construction", the term "mediation" is difficult to stabilize while it does the opposite of what we want to make it do (which is an interesting proposition in itself!): inevitably, as soon as we trace its etymology it means what bridge a gap, it becomes an intermediary between two banks that are, themselves, well established. Whereas, mediation is of interest, ontologically, only when instead of meaning a bridge, it means a gap, or a least the movement that goes from one mediation to the next. It is because of this ambiguity that the term is difficult to define and use. - 3 - >From the ontological point of view, the notion of mediation takes from the notion of substance the concept of "causa sui" (relative), but not the persistent substrate used in the philosophy of the being-as-being. In the fullest sense - if we are able to maintain it - mediation is what is divided by classical philosophy into three functions: freedom, determination, grace. Bad luck! It is all three at once! Relatively autonomous, it overflows with grace. The concept of mediation gets the most out of this confusion, this metaxu, this excluded middle, whose existence is an abomination in the philosophy of being but which is the norm in the philosophy of aime. Mediation is precisely that which is, at once, and in the same respect, a thing and its opposite. A feature that can be added to its classical definitions: that which is neither an end nor a mere means, that which is not quite a cause and not quite a consequence either ... - 4 - Mediation is synonymous with ?actual occasions?, in the Whiteheadian sense, and no more; it changes the typical expression of the philosophy of being "omnis determinatio est negatio" to "omnis determinatio est affirmatio". It recognizes antecedents and consequences for each event but these are neither causes nor effects, neither are they potentialities nor actualizations. Rather, they are permissions and promises; entities are promised to and permitted by; they are, in time. - 6 - The problem is that if mediation means "that which passes to something else from something", it becomes a medium, an intermediary and, thus, loses the ability to be its own end - and therefore to become synonymous with entelechy - but entelechy has the opposite problem: if, from the fact that it is its own end, one concludes that it is identical to itself (the conclusion drawn by being-as-being), thus the other beings necessary for its existence are lost. - 7 - The image war that has never ceased to define the dynamism and weaknesses of the West depends entirely on the initial choice: for if being is defined as b-a-b, mediations are indeed superfluous, they are merely attributes of substance (which alone exists, in this case), or worse, they become parasites or veils that hide substance. If the being is defined as B-A-O, however, mediations are all that we have to lead us to objects of value. But since being-as-being leads only to nihilism, representations are bound to proliferate in any case, and even more so if we deny their necessity. We are faced, thus, with the Iconoclash: a proliferation of images and continual doubts as to their virtue. ________________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of Wolff-Michael Roth Sent: 31 March 2017 15:54 To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: ZPD and DST! Sorry, my last message crossed that of Andy, but is a response to it as well. For those who do not know Jean-Luc Nancy, he is probably one of the leading philosophers in Europe, who also has a lot to say of the body (not in the least in his *Corpus*). Michael -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Wolff-Michael Roth, Lansdowne Professor Applied Cognitive Science MacLaurin Building A567 University of Victoria Victoria, BC, V8P 5C2 http://web.uvic.ca/~mroth New book: *The Mathematics of Mathematics * On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 6:37 AM, Robert Lake wrote: > That 2 cents goes a long, long generative way Andy. Thanks! > > Robert > > On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 6:52 AM, Andy Blunden wrote: > > > My 2 cents ... > > > > 1. Both Hegel and C. S. Peirce promoted mediation not only as essentially > > ubiquitous, but as *generative*, in the sense that since every relation > is > > mediated, every new relation generates a new (mediating) relation. It is > a > > method of enquiry which is forever uncovering new relations. I would call > > this the methodological aspect of mediation. To fail to enquire into > > mediation is effectively to close off enquiry and settle for some kind of > > dichotomy or taxonomy. > > > > 2. Vygotsky's *artefact mediation*, is a distinctive type of mediation, > to > > which other approaches to mind are largely blind. Artefact mediation is > not > > the answer to every problem of psychology. And it wasn't for Vygotsky > > either. > > > > Andy > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > Andy Blunden > > http://home.mira.net/~andy > > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making > > On 31/03/2017 8:44 PM, Huw Lloyd wrote: > > > >> The title has a somewhat oxymoronic flavour to it, Alfredo. Theorising > >> gets more interesting when it consists of a minimum of a 3-term system, > >> and > >> in such a system one term can always be indexed as a mediating one in > >> relation to the other two. All the problems arise when these terms are > >> reduced to 2-term systems (formal logic, statistical associations, > >> descriptions based upon typed categories) in which the mediators are > >> elements of a non-unitary analysis. > >> > >> The issues of misuse of 'mediators' as elements rather than as part of a > >> unit is structurally similar to applying formal logic categories such as > >> "every" and "there exists" to thinking in terms of complexes, in which > >> these phrases merely limit the (1 term) bonding rather than applying to > >> the > >> (2 term) hierarchical constructs that they are about. In LSV Vol. 1 we > >> have a 3+ term analysis (dialectic) of the development of 1-term > thinking > >> (complexes) towards 2-term thinking (formal logic). > >> > >> Best, > >> Huw > >> > >> On 31 March 2017 at 06:21, Alfredo Jornet Gil > >> wrote: > >> > >> Thanks a lot for sharing the article, Michael. And yes, considering > those > >>> copy-distribution issues is important in a forum like this. Is nice to > be > >>> able to check with you/us authors on how to best share our work. > >>> > >>> On the issue of Theorizing with/out mediators, Huw, in the article we > do > >>> recognize the viability of the option you suggest: not dismissing but > >>> pursuing an 'adequate' (or 'more developed' that may mean) > understanding > >>> of the concept. Still, we recommend the other route, and this is part > of > >>> my > >>> view. > >>> > >>> I think the problem concerns a confusion between treating mediation as > a > >>> sort of universal premise that 'applies' to everything or as an > >>> analytical > >>> concept that 'explains' everything. For example, David K. in his post > >>> treats the phrase that 'if mediation explains everything then it > explains > >>> nothing' as being analog to the sentence 'if perception applies to all > >>> visible phenomena then it applies to none of them.' 'Applies' and > >>> 'Explain', however, seem two very different words to me. You may want > to > >>> say that mediation applies to all and every human action/relation. But > >>> then > >>> this is not to say that you are explaining any of them. As I view it, > >>> mediation should not be thought of as an analytical unit in the same > >>> sense > >>> that perezhivanie is, for it is not a concrete unit. In fact, following > >>> on > >>> David's example, *perception* can indeed be accounted for if you > develop > >>> and further understand the category perezhivanie. And still, you will > not > >>> want to use perezhivanie to account for every and any aspect of human > >>> existence. Nor every instance of 'human(ing)' will be perezhivanie > >>> (unless > >>> you reserve the term 'human' to a very specific set of all the things > we > >>> human-looking animals do.). > >>> > >>> Alfredo > >>> > >>> > >>> ________________________________________ > >>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > >>> on behalf of mike cole > >>> Sent: 31 March 2017 02:38 > >>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > >>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: ZPD and DST! > >>> > >>> Thanks Michael. > >>> Establishing fair use in the xmca community seems an important task. > >>> > >>> Your solution works given current uncertainties. > >>> > >>> mike > >>> > >>> On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 5:29 PM, Wolff-Michael Roth < > >>> wolffmichael.roth@gmail.com> wrote: > >>> > >>> Hi Mike, all, > >>>> Because I don't know what big companies can do to us if we violate > >>>> signed > >>>> copyright release, I am more than hesitant to send the type-set > version > >>>> they published. However, I am appending the final version of the > >>>> > >>> manuscript > >>> > >>>> that prior to acceptance. > >>>> Cheers, > >>>> Michael > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> ------------------------------------------------------------ > >>>> -------------------- > >>>> Wolff-Michael Roth, Lansdowne Professor > >>>> Applied Cognitive Science > >>>> MacLaurin Building A567 > >>>> University of Victoria > >>>> Victoria, BC, V8P 5C2 > >>>> http://web.uvic.ca/~mroth > >>>> > >>>> New book: *The Mathematics of Mathematics > >>>> >>>> directions-in-mathematics-and-science-education/the- > >>>> mathematics-of-mathematics/>* > >>>> > >>>> On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 5:09 PM, mike cole wrote: > >>>> > >>>> Michael -- > >>>>> > >>>>> XMCA has been operating as an educational collective among whom > >>>>> > >>>> relevant > >>> > >>>> written materials are circulated as they are needed for the the > >>>>> > >>>> members' > >>> > >>>> education. > >>>>> > >>>>> Would it incur Springer's wrath to make the paper directly available? > >>>>> > >>>>> mike > >>>>> > >>>>> On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 3:26 PM, Wolff-Michael Roth < > >>>>> wolffmichael.roth@gmail.com> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>> Hi all, I did not realize that my reference wasn't updated. The paper > >>>>>> > >>>>> is > >>>> > >>>>> here: > >>>>>> https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12124-016-9376-0 > >>>>>> > >>>>>> and by personal request Alfredo or I will mail a copy to those not > >>>>>> operating at a uni with access to Springer Link. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Michael > >>>>>> > >>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------ > >>>>>> -------------------- > >>>>>> Wolff-Michael Roth, Lansdowne Professor > >>>>>> Applied Cognitive Science > >>>>>> MacLaurin Building A567 > >>>>>> University of Victoria > >>>>>> Victoria, BC, V8P 5C2 > >>>>>> http://web.uvic.ca/~mroth > > >>>>>> > >>>>>> New book: *The Mathematics of Mathematics > >>>>>> >>>>>> directions-in-mathematics-and-science-education/the- > >>>>>> mathematics-of-mathematics/>* > >>>>>> > >>>>>> On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 2:33 PM, Wolff-Michael Roth < > >>>>>> wolffmichael.roth@gmail.com> wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Hi David, you will disagree even more with this one: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Roth, W.-M., & Jornet, A. (in press). Theorizing with/out > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> "mediators." > >>>> > >>>>> Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> But people like Feliks Mikhailov, and also Ekaterina Zavershneva > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> indicate > >>>>> > >>>>>> that toward the end of his life, Vygotsy was moving away from > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> mediation. > >>>>> > >>>>>> We > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> give an extended argument for theorizing without mediators in the > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> article. > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> But I hope you understand that I am not out to interpret and find > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> out > >>> > >>>> what > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> Vygotsky really said even if he did not say it. I think you are > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> well > >>> > >>>> positioned to do THAT kind of research. I want to move on. And, > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> frankly, > >>>>> > >>>>>> I > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> have no clue what people are saying when they write that something > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> is > >>> > >>>> mediated. It seems to me that they are hiding or refraining from > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> going > >>>> > >>>>> after what I am interested in. I am not interested in knowing that > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> a > >>> > >>>> tool > >>>>> > >>>>>> mediates something. I am interested in what the tool actually does, > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> what > >>>>> > >>>>>> are the events in which tools participate, shape people and get > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> shaped > >>>> > >>>>> by > >>>>> > >>>>>> them. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> In the end, all this is about finding suitable discourses, and > >>>>>>> descriptions, for doing the kinds of things we want to do. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> m > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------ > >>>>>>> -------------------- > >>>>>>> Wolff-Michael Roth, Lansdowne Professor > >>>>>>> Applied Cognitive Science > >>>>>>> MacLaurin Building A567 > >>>>>>> University of Victoria > >>>>>>> Victoria, BC, V8P 5C2 > >>>>>>> http://web.uvic.ca/~mroth >>>>>>> > >>>>>> faculty/mroth/> > >>> > >>>> New book: *The Mathematics of Mathematics > >>>>>>> >>>>>>> > >>>>>> directions-in-mathematics-and-science-education/the- > >>>>>> mathematics-of-mathematics/>* > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 2:22 PM, David Kellogg < > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> dkellogg60@gmail.com > >>> > >>>> wrote: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> I think the Roth article I would recommend isn't the editorial, > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> but > >>> > >>>> rather > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> this one: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Roth, W-M. 2007. On Mediation: Towards a Cultural Historical > >>>>>>>> Understanding. > >>>>>>>> Theory and Psychology 17 (5): 655-680. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> There's a lot I disagree with in this paper (e.g. I disagree with > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> the > >>>> > >>>>> idea > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> that if mediation "explains" everything then it explains > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> nothing--it > >>> > >>>> is > >>>>> > >>>>>> like saying that if perception applies to all visible phenomena > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> then > >>> > >>>> it > >>>>> > >>>>>> applies to none of them). But here's why I prefer it to Saeed's > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> paper: > >>>> > >>>>> a) Roth gets to concrete examples from direct experience almost > >>>>>>>> immediately > >>>>>>>> (fish feeding, on p. 656). This gives me something to go back to > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> when > >>>> > >>>>> I > >>>>> > >>>>>> get > >>>>>>>> lost in abstraction, and I need it. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> b) Instead of using Theory A to illuminate Theory B, Roth goes > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> back > >>> > >>>> into > >>>>> > >>>>>> the historical origins of Theory A and discovers, immanently, > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Theory > >>> > >>>> B, > >>>>> > >>>>>> C, > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> etc.. This has two advantages: it avoids chalk-and-cheese > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> eclecticism, > >>>> > >>>>> and > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> it helps me understand how Theory A was formed in the first place. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> With > >>>>> > >>>>>> Saeed's paper, I find myself missing: 1) an account of the > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> CRITICAL > >>> > >>>> DISTINCTIONS between the two theories, 2) an explanation of how > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> each > >>> > >>>> MAKES > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> UP for what the other lacks, and 3) some argument for long term > >>>>>>>> COMPATABILITY, some explication of why the emulsion will not > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> re-separate, > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> like vinegar and oil. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> c) For Vygotsky--no, for mediation more generally--the key problem > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> is > >>>> > >>>>> volition, free will, choice. Vygotsky once said that the most > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> interesting > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> problem in the whole of psychology, bar none, is what a human > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> being > >>> > >>>> would > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> really do in the situation of Buridan's donkey (that is a > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> situation > >>> > >>>> of > >>>> > >>>>> volition, of free will, of choice where the outcomes were either > >>>>>>>> apparently > >>>>>>>> equal or equally unknown). This isn't true of DST, which has, as > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Saeed > >>>> > >>>>> admits, an "emergentist" account of volition (to put it > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> uncharitably, > >>>> > >>>>> handwaving and magic). At the very least, choice is late emerging > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> in a > >>>> > >>>>> DST > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> account, and that makes, for example, the child's early and > >>>>>>>> successful acquisition of speech very hard to explain. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> That said, Saeed--I DID appreciate the part on p. 86 where you > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> remind > >>>> > >>>>> us > >>>>> > >>>>>> that learning and development are distinct but linked. As > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Wolff-Michael > >>>>> > >>>>>> says, the point has been made before, but I think that we've got > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> to > >>> > >>>> keep > >>>>> > >>>>>> saying this, until people really see that mixing up "microgenesis" > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> and > >>>> > >>>>> ontogenesis is, in our own time, the same kind of error that > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> mixing > >>> > >>>> up > >>>> > >>>>> ontogenesis and phylogenesis was in Vygotsky's. If I read one more > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> article > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> which invokes the ZPD for some trivial incident of learning, I'm > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> getting a > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> tattoo that says: "Look here, mate, just because it didn't kill ya > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> doesn't > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> mean it made ya any stronger". > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> David Kellogg > >>>>>>>> Macquarie University > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >> > > > > > -- > Robert Lake Ed.D. > Associate Professor > Social Foundations of Education > Dept. of Curriculum, Foundations, and Reading > Georgia Southern University > P. O. Box 8144, Statesboro, GA 30460 > Secretary/Treasurer-AERA- Paulo Freire Special Interest Group > Webpage: https://georgiasouthern.academia.edu/RobertLake*Democracy must be > born anew in every generation, and education is its midwife.* John > Dewey-*Democracy > and Education*,1916, p. 139 > From huw.softdesigns@gmail.com Fri Mar 31 12:36:23 2017 From: huw.softdesigns@gmail.com (Huw Lloyd) Date: Fri, 31 Mar 2017 20:36:23 +0100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: ZPD and DST! In-Reply-To: <1490986263115.53446@iped.uio.no> References: <1490986263115.53446@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: Thanks for you graciousness, Alfredo. Some people like, some don't. ;) On 31 March 2017 at 19:50, Alfredo Jornet Gil wrote: > Huw, I also wanted to thank you and acknowledge your interesting work, > which is very useful to overview a wide range of CHAT scholars and their > use of notions scubas as mediation. I hope many others in this list also > look at it. Thanks for sharing it! > Alfredo > ________________________________________ > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > on behalf of Huw Lloyd > Sent: 31 March 2017 02:25 > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: ZPD and DST! > > Thank you for the paper, Michael. I have skim-read this and am largely in > agreement with the content. However, I think I disagree about some implied > premises. My sense is that these issues are largely a symptom of > undeveloped systems and theoretical skills in this area, which I would say > is essential for real progress. On that basis I would not suggest that > people omit the use of certain terms, but rather that they keep tripping > over them until they study them more carefully. > > A few pointers, perhaps: > 1. Field is synonymous with medium (a cognate of media in the > non-fashionable sense). > 2. The 'mis-use' of tool/sign mediation as in non-unitary forms in CHAT is, > I believe, largely a result of construing the object of activity socially > rather than psychologically, i.e. in which orientation is the field/medium. > (Some elaboration here: > https://www.academia.edu/24660665/A_Comparison_of_ > Seven_Historical_Research_Orientations_within_CHAT_up_to_2001_ > ) > 3. In "thesis-antithesis" dialectics there is a medium implicated. > > Best, > Huw > > > On 31 March 2017 at 00:42, ??? wrote: > > > Hi, Roth. > > I want a copy. > > > > 2017-03-31 7:26 GMT+09:00 Wolff-Michael Roth < > wolffmichael.roth@gmail.com > > >: > > > > > Hi all, I did not realize that my reference wasn't updated. The paper > is > > > here: > > > https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12124-016-9376-0 > > > > > > and by personal request Alfredo or I will mail a copy to those not > > > operating at a uni with access to Springer Link. > > > > > > Michael > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > -------------------- > > > Wolff-Michael Roth, Lansdowne Professor > > > Applied Cognitive Science > > > MacLaurin Building A567 > > > University of Victoria > > > Victoria, BC, V8P 5C2 > > > http://web.uvic.ca/~mroth > > > > > > New book: *The Mathematics of Mathematics > > > > > directions-in-mathematics-and-science-education/the- > > > mathematics-of-mathematics/>* > > > > > > On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 2:33 PM, Wolff-Michael Roth < > > > wolffmichael.roth@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > Hi David, you will disagree even more with this one: > > > > > > > > > > > > Roth, W.-M., & Jornet, A. (in press). Theorizing with/out > "mediators." > > > > Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science. > > > > > > > > But people like Feliks Mikhailov, and also Ekaterina Zavershneva > > indicate > > > > that toward the end of his life, Vygotsy was moving away from > > mediation. > > > We > > > > give an extended argument for theorizing without mediators in the > > > article. > > > > > > > > But I hope you understand that I am not out to interpret and find out > > > what > > > > Vygotsky really said even if he did not say it. I think you are well > > > > positioned to do THAT kind of research. I want to move on. And, > > frankly, > > > I > > > > have no clue what people are saying when they write that something is > > > > mediated. It seems to me that they are hiding or refraining from > going > > > > after what I am interested in. I am not interested in knowing that a > > tool > > > > mediates something. I am interested in what the tool actually does, > > what > > > > are the events in which tools participate, shape people and get > shaped > > by > > > > them. > > > > > > > > In the end, all this is about finding suitable discourses, and > > > > descriptions, for doing the kinds of things we want to do. > > > > > > > > m > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > -------------------- > > > > Wolff-Michael Roth, Lansdowne Professor > > > > Applied Cognitive Science > > > > MacLaurin Building A567 > > > > University of Victoria > > > > Victoria, BC, V8P 5C2 > > > > http://web.uvic.ca/~mroth > > > > > > > > New book: *The Mathematics of Mathematics > > > > > > directions-in-mathematics-and-science-education/the- > > > mathematics-of-mathematics/>* > > > > > > > > On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 2:22 PM, David Kellogg > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > >> I think the Roth article I would recommend isn't the editorial, but > > > rather > > > >> this one: > > > >> > > > >> Roth, W-M. 2007. On Mediation: Towards a Cultural Historical > > > >> Understanding. > > > >> Theory and Psychology 17 (5): 655-680. > > > >> > > > >> There's a lot I disagree with in this paper (e.g. I disagree with > the > > > idea > > > >> that if mediation "explains" everything then it explains nothing--it > > is > > > >> like saying that if perception applies to all visible phenomena then > > it > > > >> applies to none of them). But here's why I prefer it to Saeed's > paper: > > > >> > > > >> a) Roth gets to concrete examples from direct experience almost > > > >> immediately > > > >> (fish feeding, on p. 656). This gives me something to go back to > when > > I > > > >> get > > > >> lost in abstraction, and I need it. > > > >> > > > >> b) Instead of using Theory A to illuminate Theory B, Roth goes back > > into > > > >> the historical origins of Theory A and discovers, immanently, Theory > > B, > > > C, > > > >> etc.. This has two advantages: it avoids chalk-and-cheese > eclecticism, > > > and > > > >> it helps me understand how Theory A was formed in the first place. > > With > > > >> Saeed's paper, I find myself missing: 1) an account of the CRITICAL > > > >> DISTINCTIONS between the two theories, 2) an explanation of how each > > > MAKES > > > >> UP for what the other lacks, and 3) some argument for long term > > > >> COMPATABILITY, some explication of why the emulsion will not > > > re-separate, > > > >> like vinegar and oil. > > > >> > > > >> c) For Vygotsky--no, for mediation more generally--the key problem > is > > > >> volition, free will, choice. Vygotsky once said that the most > > > interesting > > > >> problem in the whole of psychology, bar none, is what a human being > > > would > > > >> really do in the situation of Buridan's donkey (that is a situation > of > > > >> volition, of free will, of choice where the outcomes were either > > > >> apparently > > > >> equal or equally unknown). This isn't true of DST, which has, as > Saeed > > > >> admits, an "emergentist" account of volition (to put it > uncharitably, > > > >> handwaving and magic). At the very least, choice is late emerging > in a > > > DST > > > >> account, and that makes, for example, the child's early and > > > >> successful acquisition of speech very hard to explain. > > > >> > > > >> That said, Saeed--I DID appreciate the part on p. 86 where you > remind > > us > > > >> that learning and development are distinct but linked. As > > Wolff-Michael > > > >> says, the point has been made before, but I think that we've got to > > keep > > > >> saying this, until people really see that mixing up "microgenesis" > and > > > >> ontogenesis is, in our own time, the same kind of error that mixing > up > > > >> ontogenesis and phylogenesis was in Vygotsky's. If I read one more > > > article > > > >> which invokes the ZPD for some trivial incident of learning, I'm > > > getting a > > > >> tattoo that says: "Look here, mate, just because it didn't kill ya > > > doesn't > > > >> mean it made ya any stronger". > > > >> > > > >> David Kellogg > > > >> Macquarie University > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From huw.softdesigns@gmail.com Fri Mar 31 13:03:50 2017 From: huw.softdesigns@gmail.com (Huw Lloyd) Date: Fri, 31 Mar 2017 21:03:50 +0100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: ZPD and DST! In-Reply-To: References: <1490986263115.53446@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: On 31 March 2017 at 20:00, Wolff-Michael Roth wrote: > Huw, for some reason I didn't get your message. I am not accessing the > paper right now. But I don't think I made the point #3. To me this is the > problem of the thesis-antithesis approach, because it requires mediation. > Philosophers have pointed this out. Michael > > Hi Michael, I think it is only a problem when it is treated as something only within the province of a philosophical discourse. I had to tackle this problem when I was getting to grips with Davydov's formulations (which reference dialectics extensively). In fact, I wrote a masters thesis contrasting genetic functional systems (Bateson, Baldwin, Beer, Waddington, Luria etc) with Davydov's dialectics as part of this understanding. The paper did not go down favourably, and it wasn't clear to me whether this was down to a failure in the administrative supervisors to comprehend the work (I am certain they did not understand it) or whether, indeed, something more sinister was at play (as I had made it clear that I was looking to transfer my research funding somewhere more suitable). Anyway, I don't view this issue as overtly philosophical. The point is that it is the fusion of the two things, realised through some carrier, that expresses their commensurability. So with thought and speech we can look to the carrier/medium of activity or action. I have been looking a little at parallel work undertaken within the history of inventive work within 20th C. Russia (TRIZ), in which the search for the appropriate medium is a fundamental principle, and in which dialectics and contradictions are part and parcel of the work. Best, Huw > ------------------------------------------------------------ > -------------------- > Wolff-Michael Roth, Lansdowne Professor > Applied Cognitive Science > MacLaurin Building A567 > University of Victoria > Victoria, BC, V8P 5C2 > http://web.uvic.ca/~mroth > > New book: *The Mathematics of Mathematics > directions-in-mathematics-and-science-education/the- > mathematics-of-mathematics/>* > > On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 11:50 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil > wrote: > > > Huw, I also wanted to thank you and acknowledge your interesting work, > > which is very useful to overview a wide range of CHAT scholars and their > > use of notions scubas as mediation. I hope many others in this list also > > look at it. Thanks for sharing it! > > Alfredo > > ________________________________________ > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > on behalf of Huw Lloyd > > Sent: 31 March 2017 02:25 > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: ZPD and DST! > > > > Thank you for the paper, Michael. I have skim-read this and am largely in > > agreement with the content. However, I think I disagree about some > implied > > premises. My sense is that these issues are largely a symptom of > > undeveloped systems and theoretical skills in this area, which I would > say > > is essential for real progress. On that basis I would not suggest that > > people omit the use of certain terms, but rather that they keep tripping > > over them until they study them more carefully. > > > > A few pointers, perhaps: > > 1. Field is synonymous with medium (a cognate of media in the > > non-fashionable sense). > > 2. The 'mis-use' of tool/sign mediation as in non-unitary forms in CHAT > is, > > I believe, largely a result of construing the object of activity socially > > rather than psychologically, i.e. in which orientation is the > field/medium. > > (Some elaboration here: > > https://www.academia.edu/24660665/A_Comparison_of_ > > Seven_Historical_Research_Orientations_within_CHAT_up_to_2001_ > > ) > > 3. In "thesis-antithesis" dialectics there is a medium implicated. > > > > Best, > > Huw > > > > > > On 31 March 2017 at 00:42, ??? wrote: > > > > > Hi, Roth. > > > I want a copy. > > > > > > 2017-03-31 7:26 GMT+09:00 Wolff-Michael Roth < > > wolffmichael.roth@gmail.com > > > >: > > > > > > > Hi all, I did not realize that my reference wasn't updated. The paper > > is > > > > here: > > > > https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12124-016-9376-0 > > > > > > > > and by personal request Alfredo or I will mail a copy to those not > > > > operating at a uni with access to Springer Link. > > > > > > > > Michael > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > -------------------- > > > > Wolff-Michael Roth, Lansdowne Professor > > > > Applied Cognitive Science > > > > MacLaurin Building A567 > > > > University of Victoria > > > > Victoria, BC, V8P 5C2 > > > > http://web.uvic.ca/~mroth > > > > > > > > New book: *The Mathematics of Mathematics > > > > > > > directions-in-mathematics-and-science-education/the- > > > > mathematics-of-mathematics/>* > > > > > > > > On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 2:33 PM, Wolff-Michael Roth < > > > > wolffmichael.roth@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Hi David, you will disagree even more with this one: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Roth, W.-M., & Jornet, A. (in press). Theorizing with/out > > "mediators." > > > > > Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science. > > > > > > > > > > But people like Feliks Mikhailov, and also Ekaterina Zavershneva > > > indicate > > > > > that toward the end of his life, Vygotsy was moving away from > > > mediation. > > > > We > > > > > give an extended argument for theorizing without mediators in the > > > > article. > > > > > > > > > > But I hope you understand that I am not out to interpret and find > out > > > > what > > > > > Vygotsky really said even if he did not say it. I think you are > well > > > > > positioned to do THAT kind of research. I want to move on. And, > > > frankly, > > > > I > > > > > have no clue what people are saying when they write that something > is > > > > > mediated. It seems to me that they are hiding or refraining from > > going > > > > > after what I am interested in. I am not interested in knowing that > a > > > tool > > > > > mediates something. I am interested in what the tool actually does, > > > what > > > > > are the events in which tools participate, shape people and get > > shaped > > > by > > > > > them. > > > > > > > > > > In the end, all this is about finding suitable discourses, and > > > > > descriptions, for doing the kinds of things we want to do. > > > > > > > > > > m > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > -------------------- > > > > > Wolff-Michael Roth, Lansdowne Professor > > > > > Applied Cognitive Science > > > > > MacLaurin Building A567 > > > > > University of Victoria > > > > > Victoria, BC, V8P 5C2 > > > > > http://web.uvic.ca/~mroth faculty/mroth/> > > > > > > > > > > New book: *The Mathematics of Mathematics > > > > > > > > directions-in-mathematics-and-science-education/the- > > > > mathematics-of-mathematics/>* > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 2:22 PM, David Kellogg < > dkellogg60@gmail.com > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > >> I think the Roth article I would recommend isn't the editorial, > but > > > > rather > > > > >> this one: > > > > >> > > > > >> Roth, W-M. 2007. On Mediation: Towards a Cultural Historical > > > > >> Understanding. > > > > >> Theory and Psychology 17 (5): 655-680. > > > > >> > > > > >> There's a lot I disagree with in this paper (e.g. I disagree with > > the > > > > idea > > > > >> that if mediation "explains" everything then it explains > nothing--it > > > is > > > > >> like saying that if perception applies to all visible phenomena > then > > > it > > > > >> applies to none of them). But here's why I prefer it to Saeed's > > paper: > > > > >> > > > > >> a) Roth gets to concrete examples from direct experience almost > > > > >> immediately > > > > >> (fish feeding, on p. 656). This gives me something to go back to > > when > > > I > > > > >> get > > > > >> lost in abstraction, and I need it. > > > > >> > > > > >> b) Instead of using Theory A to illuminate Theory B, Roth goes > back > > > into > > > > >> the historical origins of Theory A and discovers, immanently, > Theory > > > B, > > > > C, > > > > >> etc.. This has two advantages: it avoids chalk-and-cheese > > eclecticism, > > > > and > > > > >> it helps me understand how Theory A was formed in the first place. > > > With > > > > >> Saeed's paper, I find myself missing: 1) an account of the > CRITICAL > > > > >> DISTINCTIONS between the two theories, 2) an explanation of how > each > > > > MAKES > > > > >> UP for what the other lacks, and 3) some argument for long term > > > > >> COMPATABILITY, some explication of why the emulsion will not > > > > re-separate, > > > > >> like vinegar and oil. > > > > >> > > > > >> c) For Vygotsky--no, for mediation more generally--the key problem > > is > > > > >> volition, free will, choice. Vygotsky once said that the most > > > > interesting > > > > >> problem in the whole of psychology, bar none, is what a human > being > > > > would > > > > >> really do in the situation of Buridan's donkey (that is a > situation > > of > > > > >> volition, of free will, of choice where the outcomes were either > > > > >> apparently > > > > >> equal or equally unknown). This isn't true of DST, which has, as > > Saeed > > > > >> admits, an "emergentist" account of volition (to put it > > uncharitably, > > > > >> handwaving and magic). At the very least, choice is late emerging > > in a > > > > DST > > > > >> account, and that makes, for example, the child's early and > > > > >> successful acquisition of speech very hard to explain. > > > > >> > > > > >> That said, Saeed--I DID appreciate the part on p. 86 where you > > remind > > > us > > > > >> that learning and development are distinct but linked. As > > > Wolff-Michael > > > > >> says, the point has been made before, but I think that we've got > to > > > keep > > > > >> saying this, until people really see that mixing up "microgenesis" > > and > > > > >> ontogenesis is, in our own time, the same kind of error that > mixing > > up > > > > >> ontogenesis and phylogenesis was in Vygotsky's. If I read one more > > > > article > > > > >> which invokes the ZPD for some trivial incident of learning, I'm > > > > getting a > > > > >> tattoo that says: "Look here, mate, just because it didn't kill ya > > > > doesn't > > > > >> mean it made ya any stronger". > > > > >> > > > > >> David Kellogg > > > > >> Macquarie University > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From lpscholar2@gmail.com Fri Mar 31 14:07:01 2017 From: lpscholar2@gmail.com (lpscholar2@gmail.com) Date: Fri, 31 Mar 2017 14:07:01 -0700 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: ZPD and DST! In-Reply-To: <1490987794208.5331@iped.uio.no> References: <1490937703564.50878@iped.uio.no> <3cad925a-75c7-a749-53fd-3bf49519a07e@mira.net> , <1490987794208.5331@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: <58dec4fd.8107630a.e8998.c5a3@mx.google.com> Alfredo, Thanks. Yes the article was already sent. Your notes from Latour exploring or approaching or orienting to mediation are so provocative, even counter intuitive. #1 a possible branch and a ?hiatus?. Aime being synonymous with a hiatus pass or stage on a trajectory always to be taken up again. #2 mediation, instead of meaning a bridge, means a ?gap?. This ambiguity means mediation is difficult to define. #3 mediation in classical philosophy divided into three functions: freedom, determination, grace. Mediation is all 3 at once. Relatively autonomous it overflows with grace. #4 mediations are actual occassions ? and no more. They are permissions and promises. Entities are permitted to and promised by ?. In time. Alfredo, moving through the prism of mediation in the way Latour engages this topic feels like falling down the rabbit hole. Fascinating Sent from my Windows 10 phone From: Alfredo Jornet Gil Sent: March 31, 2017 12:19 PM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: ZPD and DST! Michael, thanks for sharing Nancy's reflections. I'd like to complement them with those by B. Latour. These are notes from the online version of his 2013 book, An Inquiry into Modes of Existence, which in its digital version is enhanced with notations by Latour and other readers. The following are part of Latour's annotations concerning the term 'mediation'. This ?excluded? MIDDLE which is the norm in the philosophy of aime. - 1 - The term mediation has been prevalent in actor-network theory, where it was a useful contrast to intermediary: in a course of action grasped in the habit mode or, more accurately, in Double Click, all sequences are aligned, precisely, as if they didn't have agency; there are only intermediaries. But as soon as things get complicated (and [hab], habit, is one of those complications), each intermediary becomes a mediation: a possible branch, and a hiatus in any case. In aime, since the term has no opposite, it does not play a major role, except to be synonymous with a hiatus, pass or stage on a trajectory always to be taken up again. - 2 - Like the term "construction", the term "mediation" is difficult to stabilize while it does the opposite of what we want to make it do (which is an interesting proposition in itself!): inevitably, as soon as we trace its etymology it means what bridge a gap, it becomes an intermediary between two banks that are, themselves, well established. Whereas, mediation is of interest, ontologically, only when instead of meaning a bridge, it means a gap, or a least the movement that goes from one mediation to the next. It is because of this ambiguity that the term is difficult to define and use. - 3 - >From the ontological point of view, the notion of mediation takes from the notion of substance the concept of "causa sui" (relative), but not the persistent substrate used in the philosophy of the being-as-being. In the fullest sense - if we are able to maintain it - mediation is what is divided by classical philosophy into three functions: freedom, determination, grace. Bad luck! It is all three at once! Relatively autonomous, it overflows with grace. The concept of mediation gets the most out of this confusion, this metaxu, this excluded middle, whose existence is an abomination in the philosophy of being but which is the norm in the philosophy of aime. Mediation is precisely that which is, at once, and in the same respect, a thing and its opposite. A feature that can be added to its classical definitions: that which is neither an end nor a mere means, that which is not quite a cause and not quite a consequence either ... - 4 - Mediation is synonymous with ?actual occasions?, in the Whiteheadian sense, and no more; it changes the typical expression of the philosophy of being "omnis determinatio est negatio" to "omnis determinatio est affirmatio". It recognizes antecedents and consequences for each event but these are neither causes nor effects, neither are they potentialities nor actualizations. Rather, they are permissions and promises; entities are promised to and permitted by; they are, in time. - 6 - The problem is that if mediation means "that which passes to something else from something", it becomes a medium, an intermediary and, thus, loses the ability to be its own end - and therefore to become synonymous with entelechy - but entelechy has the opposite problem: if, from the fact that it is its own end, one concludes that it is identical to itself (the conclusion drawn by being-as-being), thus the other beings necessary for its existence are lost. - 7 - The image war that has never ceased to define the dynamism and weaknesses of the West depends entirely on the initial choice: for if being is defined as b-a-b, mediations are indeed superfluous, they are merely attributes of substance (which alone exists, in this case), or worse, they become parasites or veils that hide substance. If the being is defined as B-A-O, however, mediations are all that we have to lead us to objects of value. But since being-as-being leads only to nihilism, representations are bound to proliferate in any case, and even more so if we deny their necessity. We are faced, thus, with the Iconoclash: a proliferation of images and continual doubts as to their virtue. ________________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of Wolff-Michael Roth Sent: 31 March 2017 15:54 To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: ZPD and DST! Sorry, my last message crossed that of Andy, but is a response to it as well. For those who do not know Jean-Luc Nancy, he is probably one of the leading philosophers in Europe, who also has a lot to say of the body (not in the least in his *Corpus*). Michael -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Wolff-Michael Roth, Lansdowne Professor Applied Cognitive Science MacLaurin Building A567 University of Victoria Victoria, BC, V8P 5C2 http://web.uvic.ca/~mroth New book: *The Mathematics of Mathematics * On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 6:37 AM, Robert Lake wrote: > That 2 cents goes a long, long generative way Andy. Thanks! > > Robert > > On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 6:52 AM, Andy Blunden wrote: > > > My 2 cents ... > > > > 1. Both Hegel and C. S. Peirce promoted mediation not only as essentially > > ubiquitous, but as *generative*, in the sense that since every relation > is > > mediated, every new relation generates a new (mediating) relation. It is > a > > method of enquiry which is forever uncovering new relations. I would call > > this the methodological aspect of mediation. To fail to enquire into > > mediation is effectively to close off enquiry and settle for some kind of > > dichotomy or taxonomy. > > > > 2. Vygotsky's *artefact mediation*, is a distinctive type of mediation, > to > > which other approaches to mind are largely blind. Artefact mediation is > not > > the answer to every problem of psychology. And it wasn't for Vygotsky > > either. > > > > Andy > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > Andy Blunden > > http://home.mira.net/~andy > > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making > > On 31/03/2017 8:44 PM, Huw Lloyd wrote: > > > >> The title has a somewhat oxymoronic flavour to it, Alfredo. Theorising > >> gets more interesting when it consists of a minimum of a 3-term system, > >> and > >> in such a system one term can always be indexed as a mediating one in > >> relation to the other two. All the problems arise when these terms are > >> reduced to 2-term systems (formal logic, statistical associations, > >> descriptions based upon typed categories) in which the mediators are > >> elements of a non-unitary analysis. > >> > >> The issues of misuse of 'mediators' as elements rather than as part of a > >> unit is structurally similar to applying formal logic categories such as > >> "every" and "there exists" to thinking in terms of complexes, in which > >> these phrases merely limit the (1 term) bonding rather than applying to > >> the > >> (2 term) hierarchical constructs that they are about. In LSV Vol. 1 we > >> have a 3+ term analysis (dialectic) of the development of 1-term > thinking > >> (complexes) towards 2-term thinking (formal logic). > >> > >> Best, > >> Huw > >> > >> On 31 March 2017 at 06:21, Alfredo Jornet Gil > >> wrote: > >> > >> Thanks a lot for sharing the article, Michael. And yes, considering > those > >>> copy-distribution issues is important in a forum like this. Is nice to > be > >>> able to check with you/us authors on how to best share our work. > >>> > >>> On the issue of Theorizing with/out mediators, Huw, in the article we > do > >>> recognize the viability of the option you suggest: not dismissing but > >>> pursuing an 'adequate' (or 'more developed' that may mean) > understanding > >>> of the concept. Still, we recommend the other route, and this is part > of > >>> my > >>> view. > >>> > >>> I think the problem concerns a confusion between treating mediation as > a > >>> sort of universal premise that 'applies' to everything or as an > >>> analytical > >>> concept that 'explains' everything. For example, David K. in his post > >>> treats the phrase that 'if mediation explains everything then it > explains > >>> nothing' as being analog to the sentence 'if perception applies to all > >>> visible phenomena then it applies to none of them.' 'Applies' and > >>> 'Explain', however, seem two very different words to me. You may want > to > >>> say that mediation applies to all and every human action/relation. But > >>> then > >>> this is not to say that you are explaining any of them. As I view it, > >>> mediation should not be thought of as an analytical unit in the same > >>> sense > >>> that perezhivanie is, for it is not a concrete unit. In fact, following > >>> on > >>> David's example, *perception* can indeed be accounted for if you > develop > >>> and further understand the category perezhivanie. And still, you will > not > >>> want to use perezhivanie to account for every and any aspect of human > >>> existence. Nor every instance of 'human(ing)' will be perezhivanie > >>> (unless > >>> you reserve the term 'human' to a very specific set of all the things > we > >>> human-looking animals do.). > >>> > >>> Alfredo > >>> > >>> > >>> ________________________________________ > >>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > >>> on behalf of mike cole > >>> Sent: 31 March 2017 02:38 > >>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > >>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: ZPD and DST! > >>> > >>> Thanks Michael. > >>> Establishing fair use in the xmca community seems an important task. > >>> > >>> Your solution works given current uncertainties. > >>> > >>> mike > >>> > >>> On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 5:29 PM, Wolff-Michael Roth < > >>> wolffmichael.roth@gmail.com> wrote: > >>> > >>> Hi Mike, all, > >>>> Because I don't know what big companies can do to us if we violate > >>>> signed > >>>> copyright release, I am more than hesitant to send the type-set > version > >>>> they published. However, I am appending the final version of the > >>>> > >>> manuscript > >>> > >>>> that prior to acceptance. > >>>> Cheers, > >>>> Michael > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> ------------------------------------------------------------ > >>>> -------------------- > >>>> Wolff-Michael Roth, Lansdowne Professor > >>>> Applied Cognitive Science > >>>> MacLaurin Building A567 > >>>> University of Victoria > >>>> Victoria, BC, V8P 5C2 > >>>> http://web.uvic.ca/~mroth > >>>> > >>>> New book: *The Mathematics of Mathematics > >>>> >>>> directions-in-mathematics-and-science-education/the- > >>>> mathematics-of-mathematics/>* > >>>> > >>>> On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 5:09 PM, mike cole wrote: > >>>> > >>>> Michael -- > >>>>> > >>>>> XMCA has been operating as an educational collective among whom > >>>>> > >>>> relevant > >>> > >>>> written materials are circulated as they are needed for the the > >>>>> > >>>> members' > >>> > >>>> education. > >>>>> > >>>>> Would it incur Springer's wrath to make the paper directly available? > >>>>> > >>>>> mike > >>>>> > >>>>> On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 3:26 PM, Wolff-Michael Roth < > >>>>> wolffmichael.roth@gmail.com> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>> Hi all, I did not realize that my reference wasn't updated. The paper > >>>>>> > >>>>> is > >>>> > >>>>> here: > >>>>>> https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12124-016-9376-0 > >>>>>> > >>>>>> and by personal request Alfredo or I will mail a copy to those not > >>>>>> operating at a uni with access to Springer Link. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Michael > >>>>>> > >>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------ > >>>>>> -------------------- > >>>>>> Wolff-Michael Roth, Lansdowne Professor > >>>>>> Applied Cognitive Science > >>>>>> MacLaurin Building A567 > >>>>>> University of Victoria > >>>>>> Victoria, BC, V8P 5C2 > >>>>>> http://web.uvic.ca/~mroth > > >>>>>> > >>>>>> New book: *The Mathematics of Mathematics > >>>>>> >>>>>> directions-in-mathematics-and-science-education/the- > >>>>>> mathematics-of-mathematics/>* > >>>>>> > >>>>>> On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 2:33 PM, Wolff-Michael Roth < > >>>>>> wolffmichael.roth@gmail.com> wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Hi David, you will disagree even more with this one: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Roth, W.-M., & Jornet, A. (in press). Theorizing with/out > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> "mediators." > >>>> > >>>>> Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> But people like Feliks Mikhailov, and also Ekaterina Zavershneva > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> indicate > >>>>> > >>>>>> that toward the end of his life, Vygotsy was moving away from > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> mediation. > >>>>> > >>>>>> We > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> give an extended argument for theorizing without mediators in the > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> article. > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> But I hope you understand that I am not out to interpret and find > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> out > >>> > >>>> what > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> Vygotsky really said even if he did not say it. I think you are > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> well > >>> > >>>> positioned to do THAT kind of research. I want to move on. And, > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> frankly, > >>>>> > >>>>>> I > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> have no clue what people are saying when they write that something > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> is > >>> > >>>> mediated. It seems to me that they are hiding or refraining from > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> going > >>>> > >>>>> after what I am interested in. I am not interested in knowing that > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> a > >>> > >>>> tool > >>>>> > >>>>>> mediates something. I am interested in what the tool actually does, > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> what > >>>>> > >>>>>> are the events in which tools participate, shape people and get > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> shaped > >>>> > >>>>> by > >>>>> > >>>>>> them. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> In the end, all this is about finding suitable discourses, and > >>>>>>> descriptions, for doing the kinds of things we want to do. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> m > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------ > >>>>>>> -------------------- > >>>>>>> Wolff-Michael Roth, Lansdowne Professor > >>>>>>> Applied Cognitive Science > >>>>>>> MacLaurin Building A567 > >>>>>>> University of Victoria > >>>>>>> Victoria, BC, V8P 5C2 > >>>>>>> http://web.uvic.ca/~mroth >>>>>>> > >>>>>> faculty/mroth/> > >>> > >>>> New book: *The Mathematics of Mathematics > >>>>>>> >>>>>>> > >>>>>> directions-in-mathematics-and-science-education/the- > >>>>>> mathematics-of-mathematics/>* > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 2:22 PM, David Kellogg < > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> dkellogg60@gmail.com > >>> > >>>> wrote: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> I think the Roth article I would recommend isn't the editorial, > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> but > >>> > >>>> rather > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> this one: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Roth, W-M. 2007. On Mediation: Towards a Cultural Historical > >>>>>>>> Understanding. > >>>>>>>> Theory and Psychology 17 (5): 655-680. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> There's a lot I disagree with in this paper (e.g. I disagree with > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> the > >>>> > >>>>> idea > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> that if mediation "explains" everything then it explains > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> nothing--it > >>> > >>>> is > >>>>> > >>>>>> like saying that if perception applies to all visible phenomena > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> then > >>> > >>>> it > >>>>> > >>>>>> applies to none of them). But here's why I prefer it to Saeed's > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> paper: > >>>> > >>>>> a) Roth gets to concrete examples from direct experience almost > >>>>>>>> immediately > >>>>>>>> (fish feeding, on p. 656). This gives me something to go back to > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> when > >>>> > >>>>> I > >>>>> > >>>>>> get > >>>>>>>> lost in abstraction, and I need it. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> b) Instead of using Theory A to illuminate Theory B, Roth goes > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> back > >>> > >>>> into > >>>>> > >>>>>> the historical origins of Theory A and discovers, immanently, > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Theory > >>> > >>>> B, > >>>>> > >>>>>> C, > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> etc.. This has two advantages: it avoids chalk-and-cheese > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> eclecticism, > >>>> > >>>>> and > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> it helps me understand how Theory A was formed in the first place. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> With > >>>>> > >>>>>> Saeed's paper, I find myself missing: 1) an account of the > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> CRITICAL > >>> > >>>> DISTINCTIONS between the two theories, 2) an explanation of how > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> each > >>> > >>>> MAKES > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> UP for what the other lacks, and 3) some argument for long term > >>>>>>>> COMPATABILITY, some explication of why the emulsion will not > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> re-separate, > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> like vinegar and oil. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> c) For Vygotsky--no, for mediation more generally--the key problem > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> is > >>>> > >>>>> volition, free will, choice. Vygotsky once said that the most > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> interesting > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> problem in the whole of psychology, bar none, is what a human > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> being > >>> > >>>> would > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> really do in the situation of Buridan's donkey (that is a > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> situation > >>> > >>>> of > >>>> > >>>>> volition, of free will, of choice where the outcomes were either > >>>>>>>> apparently > >>>>>>>> equal or equally unknown). This isn't true of DST, which has, as > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Saeed > >>>> > >>>>> admits, an "emergentist" account of volition (to put it > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> uncharitably, > >>>> > >>>>> handwaving and magic). At the very least, choice is late emerging > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> in a > >>>> > >>>>> DST > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> account, and that makes, for example, the child's early and > >>>>>>>> successful acquisition of speech very hard to explain. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> That said, Saeed--I DID appreciate the part on p. 86 where you > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> remind > >>>> > >>>>> us > >>>>> > >>>>>> that learning and development are distinct but linked. As > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Wolff-Michael > >>>>> > >>>>>> says, the point has been made before, but I think that we've got > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> to > >>> > >>>> keep > >>>>> > >>>>>> saying this, until people really see that mixing up "microgenesis" > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> and > >>>> > >>>>> ontogenesis is, in our own time, the same kind of error that > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> mixing > >>> > >>>> up > >>>> > >>>>> ontogenesis and phylogenesis was in Vygotsky's. If I read one more > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> article > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> which invokes the ZPD for some trivial incident of learning, I'm > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> getting a > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> tattoo that says: "Look here, mate, just because it didn't kill ya > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> doesn't > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> mean it made ya any stronger". > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> David Kellogg > >>>>>>>> Macquarie University > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >> > > > > > -- > Robert Lake Ed.D. > Associate Professor > Social Foundations of Education > Dept. of Curriculum, Foundations, and Reading > Georgia Southern University > P. O. Box 8144, Statesboro, GA 30460 > Secretary/Treasurer-AERA- Paulo Freire Special Interest Group > Webpage: https://georgiasouthern.academia.edu/RobertLake*Democracy must be > born anew in every generation, and education is its midwife.* John > Dewey-*Democracy > and Education*,1916, p. 139 > From lpscholar2@gmail.com Fri Mar 31 21:07:45 2017 From: lpscholar2@gmail.com (lpscholar2@gmail.com) Date: Fri, 31 Mar 2017 21:07:45 -0700 Subject: [Xmca-l] Ma (negative space) - Wikipedia Message-ID: <58df2799.4ea7630a.f28d4.fa1d@mx.google.com> Alfredo, I am sending this wiki on an orientation or approach that I believe shares a close family resemblance with the way Latour orients to the prism of ?mediation? in the four ways outlined in your post. The terms (hiatus) (gap) not a ?bridge? which emphasizes (intermediary) between two substantialist poles. I may be offering two cryptic a response that lacks resonance? ?Ma? as presence/place pervades Japanese sensibility. Mediation (as presented by Latour) seems to explore similar phenomena that opens us to new horizons within the Western sensibility re/thinking consciousness. The forward (/ ) indicating the phenomena of (ma). The (interval). I hear in Latour a way of approaching ?mediation? through ?ma? as the open local middle voice in Latin ? conversare ? (both active and passive). I may be way off base, but probing around the periphery in liminal places, transitional places, on the edges of consciousness (both singular and plural) The soul knows no mediators (Mikhailov 2006) referenced in (Theorizing with/out mediators) Ma (negative space) - Wikipedia https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ma_(negative_space) Sent from my Windows 10 phone From vwilk@inf.shizuoka.ac.jp Fri Mar 31 21:46:14 2017 From: vwilk@inf.shizuoka.ac.jp (vwilk@inf.shizuoka.ac.jp) Date: Sat, 01 Apr 2017 13:46:14 +0900 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Ma (negative space) - Wikipedia In-Reply-To: <58df2799.4ea7630a.f28d4.fa1d@mx.google.com> References: <58df2799.4ea7630a.f28d4.fa1d@mx.google.com> Message-ID: <20170401044614.000048B5.0940@inf.shizuoka.ac.jp> In the space of time it takes to write a reply without seeing the Wikipedia article OR Keat's Negative Capability, I'll just mention that a common expression in Japan is "'ah' to iu ma ni" which translates as " In the space of time it takes to say, 'Ah'" because I want to stick a feather into the fascinating topic, before it moves on irrevocably without me. Vandy@GST ----- Original Message ----- > Alfredo, > > I am sending this wiki on an orientation or approach that I believe shares a close family resemblance with the way Latour orients to the prism of ?mediation? in the four ways outlined in your post. > The terms (hiatus) (gap) not a ?bridge? which emphasizes (intermediary) between two substantialist poles. > > I may be offering two cryptic a response that lacks resonance? > ?Ma? as presence/place pervades Japanese sensibility. > Mediation (as presented by Latour) seems to explore similar phenomena that opens us to new horizons within the Western sensibility re/thinking consciousness. > > The forward (/ ) indicating the phenomena of (ma). > The (interval). > I hear in Latour a way of approaching ?mediation? through ?ma? as the open local middle voice in Latin ? conversare ? (both active and passive) . > I may be way off base, but probing around the periphery in liminal places, transitional places, on the edges of consciousness (both singular and plural) > > The soul knows no mediators (Mikhailov 2006) referenced in (Theorizing with/out mediators) > > > Ma (negative space) - Wikipedia > > > https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ma_(negative_space) > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > > > From smago@uga.edu Wed Mar 29 06:09:18 2017 From: smago@uga.edu (Peter Smagorinsky) Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2017 13:09:18 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] FW: New Smore for your social media accounts! In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: [https://s.smore.com/ss/58daecd4218cc401b5e60c1c-screenshot-fb_wide.jpg?_v=1490743967] JoLLE March Newsletter www.smore.com JoLLE March Newsletter If we had no winter, the spring would not be so pleasant. --Anne Bradstreet