Re: Authentic dialogue in inauthentic context

From: Phil Chappell (phil_chappell@access.inet.co.th)
Date: Mon Nov 18 2002 - 01:43:22 PST


Eric,
At 15:01 17/11/02 -0500, you wrote:
>My point is that as the year went I started to notice the development and
>genesis of these verbal interactions to represent something beyond the
>immediate environement but represented more of the overall culture of the
>school. About this time [1995] is when I began my search for a more
>robust explanation then the operant and behavioral strategies I had been using

Your point about seeking a more valid interpretation of learning than
operant conditioning and behavioural strategies strikes very close to my
bigger study, which is looking at language learning as more of a socially
embedded practice. I have been considering some very recent theorising by
Atkinson (2002) Modern Language Journal 86 pp. 525-545, in which he posits
a sociocognitive approach to second language acquisition. In this, he
introduces a connectionist approach to language acquisition, which on
initial accounts didn't fit with the 'socio' in his model, however he goes
on to posit two concepts - joint cognition, and propositions across
individuals, which both sit nicely within the intersubjective domain of
sociocultural theory. I quote, "...joint cognition - a form of
intersubjectivity created and maintained on the basis of both shared (and
highly articulated) cognitive knowledge of the activity being engaged in,
and a world that gives such activity a social purpose, a conventional shape
(e.g. a participation structure), and an approximately agreed-upon means of
linguistic expression" (530).

This then set my mind off racing through genre theory, schema theory, and
scripts, and I realised I was back into the debate over Piaget's
assimilation and accomodation versus Vygotsky's sociocultural situatedness,
and the danger of travelling down a route that foregrounds universals,
which takes second language pedagogy back to more behaviourist modes. It
aint easy! But Atkinson doesn't posit universal structures, rather that
"meaning/knowledge" (strange bedfellows to use a / with) exists in
"potential form" in the "human cognitive apparatus" - neural associations.
You mention the genesis of verbal interactions (I don't want to put words
in your mouth), I read potential forms of meaning/knowledge, I always have
Bakhtin's notions of speech genres in mind, and I still miss the point
within sociocultural theory of some telos of internalised, individual
mental functioning without coming back to a focus on the individual.

Not a particularly eloquent response to your initial reply, but this is
where my angst lies at the moment.

Back to the classroom...

Phil



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Dec 01 2002 - 01:00:08 PST