As for disruption, I'm obviously all for it, uncomfortable though
it may be. I'm somewhat provoked by these messages to wonder about
the power of language for significant social change. Without
an explicit critique, we can't do much to intervene. But should
the critique be directed at language use itself? Obviously, not
only, but as a window into meaning-making practices, language use
ain't all that bad.
I was trying to think aloud (or rather with my fingers) when I expressed
suspicion of the expert linguist. I think that I am closer to Judy's
perspective.
I can understand the uncomfortable nature of disruption, and by that I mean
that it _is_ uncomfortable and most people are not willing to engage in an
activity that causes discomfort without pressure from many sources
encouraging, frightening, deceiving, or otherwise creating the myth of
necessity.
I only recently encountered theories that rest on the foundation of The
Construction of Knowledge with Language as a Mediational Tool(late bloomer, I
guess) and felt enlightened and empowered (but not without some feelings of
discomfort and loss)so I was trying to express how I had felt before
beginning to except that language is not a transparent, pure representation
of reality. And that outside of academia, most people still believe in the
purity of language, so perhaps there is some need that this belief fulfills.
Katherine
****************************************************************
****************************************************************""Baby, we
can choose, you know, We ain't no amoeba." ---Bonnie Raitt & John Hiatt
Katherine E. Goff
District Elementary Technology Coordinator
Cotton Creek Elementary Computer Specialist
Katherine_Goff who-is-at together.cudenver.edu