Re: CH 3 (translation etc)

From: Victor Kaptelinin (vklinin@informatik.umu.se)
Date: Wed Oct 18 2000 - 04:56:25 PDT


Armando,

Thank you for your message!

Unfortunately, I do not speak Spanish but the translation of "predmet" and
"objekt" as, respectively, "objeto mediatizado" and "objeto real" (i.e.,
"mediating object" and "object existing in reality", am I wrong?) seems to
be an interesting way to define the differences between these two
concepts... I have to think more about it...

Concerning Leontiev's use of "interiorization", he definitely used this
term, and, at least as far as I know, never tried to distance himself from
Vygotsky's understanding of internalization.

Please, find included below an excerpt from my 1997 posting to xmca, in
which differences between "interiorizatsija" and "vraschivanie" had been
discussed. Hope you will find it helpful.

Best wishes,
Victor

======
The actual terminology used by Vygotsky himself is a bit confusing. Jim
Wertsch is absolutely right that while Vygotsky used "interiorizatsija" on
occasion (e.g., Collected Works, v. 3, p. 146, v.6, p. 34), he often
preferred "vraschivanie". There are several places in Vygotsky's works,
especially those written in 1930-31, where he explicitly defines
internalization of functions as "vraschivanie". One of them, mentioned by
Jim, is "The genesis of higher mental functions" (written in 1931,
Collected Works, v. 3, pp. 160-163). Another one is "Tool and symbol in
child development" (written in 1930, Collected Works, v.6, pp. 15-17).

In his later works, however, Vygotsky apparently abandoned "vraschivanie".
Most notably, in "Thinking and speech" (mostly written after 1931) he goes
into long discussions of problems related to internalization without using
either "vraschivanie" or "interiorizatsija" (or, for that matter, any other
fixed term for internalization, cf. "evaporation" of speech into thought,
v.2, p. 316) . My impression is that Vygotsky got dissatisfied with
"vraschivanie", probably because it did not fit his developing
understanding of the relationship between inner speech and egocentric
speech (cf. chapter 7 of "Thinking and speech"). As far as I know,
"vraschivanie" had disappeared from Russian psychological vocabulary for
good, and terminological vacuum created by this disappearance in Russian
cultural-historical tradition was eventually filled with
"interiorizatsija".
=========

>Thnaks Victor:
>I donĄt know if Leotiev use de term interiorization
>(as something that it is pun inside from the outside,
>but I agree tha Vygotsky use internalization ( an that
>means another think because of always in Vyg it is the
>idea of intersubjectivity. (The analysis of the
>concept Social Situation of Development and the real
>meaning of Proximal Zone of Development in which you
>construct with the child, taking into account his
>subjectivity is very clear for me) In Cuba always we
>speak about interiorization in relation with Leontiev.
>Of course, traqnslation from russian to spoanish is
>very difficult. We need in spanish traslate pritmet
>and objetc differently as "objeto mediatizado" y
>objeto real". And in this sense I undestand that
>pritmet is always "objeto mediatizado". And mediation
>means a lot of mediation including the mediation for
>the subject. Anyway, Thanks a lot
>Armando
>



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Nov 01 2000 - 01:01:26 PST