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

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

This seems likely, Mike:

G. Spet, Vvedenie v etniceskuju psixologiju [Introduction à la psychologie ethnique], in G.G. Ÿpet, Socinenija [Oeuvres], Moscou, 1989, p. 475-574.


On Jan 24, 2015, at 6:03 PM, mike cole <mcole@ucsd.edu> wrote:

> So a specific text from Shpet on ethnic psychology would be of special
> interest,
> Martin.
> Where might such a thing be hiding?
> mike
> On Sat, Jan 24, 2015 at 2:40 PM, Martin John Packer <mpacker@uniandes.edu.co
>> wrote:
>> There is a growing literature on Shpet, but very little of his own work is
>> available in English. His book 'Appearance & Sense' is translated (and I
>> have a copy in case anyone is interested), but this was early work,
>> introducing Husserl to Russian readers (and early Husserl at that: Shpet
>> studied with Husserl in 1912-13). Shpet's more explicitly hermeneutic work,
>> in particular his writing on the inner form of the word, has not been
>> translated, to my knowledge. Yet the connection with, and presumably the
>> influence on, LSV is evident. Around 1916 Vygotsky attended Shpet’s seminar
>> on "internal form of the word" at Shanyavsky University, and the two were
>> both teaching at the Pedology Department of Moscow University in the late
>> 1920s. In the early 1920s Shpet organized the 'ethnic psychology' section
>> at Moscow University.  Hence my interest in his work, and my suggestion
>> that getting more translated would be very interesting.
>> Martin
>> On Jan 24, 2015, at 5:21 PM, Martin John Packer <mpacker@uniandes.edu.co>
>> wrote:
>>> Got it!  :)
>>> On Jan 24, 2015, at 4:58 PM, Ed Wall <ewall@umich.edu> wrote:
>>>> You possibly might also be interested in
>>>> The Role of Hermeneutic Phenomenology in Grounding the Affirmative
>> Philosophy of Gustav Gustavovich Shpet
>>>> V. G. Kuznetsov
>>>> Russian Studies in Philosophy 37 (4):62-90 (1999)
>>>> Ed
>>>> On Jan 24, 2015, at  2:49 PM, Martin John Packer wrote:
>>>>> This is the information I have, Henry.
>>>>> Freiberger-Sheikholeslami, E. (1984). Gustav G. Shpet: Hermeneutical
>> logic and philosophical semiotics. In J. Deely (Ed.), Semiotics 1984 (pp.
>> 381-391). Bloomington: Semiotic Society of America.
>>>>> Martin
>>>>> On Jan 24, 2015, at 2:37 PM, HENRY SHONERD <hshonerd@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> Martin,
>>>>>> Thank you very muchfor the article on Sheet. I think the readings and
>> dialog generated will help me understand much better Vygotsky and his
>> context by getting a better grip on the long view, through the eyes of
>> hermeneutics. Do you know when the Freiberger-Sheeikholes article was
>> written?
>>>>>> Henry
>>>>>>> On Jan 24, 2015, at 10:26 AM, Martin John Packer <
>> mpacker@uniandes.edu.co> wrote:
>>>>>>> I am sure that there are differences between LSV and Shpet, as Larry
>> points out. But there are also striking similarities. Here is a little
>> background:
>>>>>>> Martin
>>>>>>> <Freiberger-Sheikholeslami 1985 Gustav G. Shpet He.pdf>
>>>>>>> On Jan 24, 2015, at 11:39 AM, Larry Purss <lpscholar2@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>>>>>>> Martin will be sending us an article on Shpet.
>>>>>>>> I therefore did some background exploration and discovered that
>> Shpet and
>>>>>>>> Vygotsky differed on the notion of "oscillation".
>>>>>>>> Vygotsky believed thought and language oscillated while Shpet
>> disagreed.
>>>>>>>> Zinchenko clarifies Vygotsky's understanding in this paragraph
>>>>>>>> that Zinchenko wrote in his chapter "Thought and Word, the
>> Approaches of L.
>>>>>>>> S. Vygotsky and G. G. Shpet": It uses the metaphor of rain [which I
>>>>>>>> associated with the other thread on rain]
>>>>>>>> "Thought and word are no less polyphonic than mind.  Yet, there is a
>>>>>>>> long way to go to arrive at this conclusion.  And it is hard to
>>>>>>>> overestimate the input of Shpet and Vygotsky, along with Aleksandr
>> Potebnya.
>>>>>>>> Out of all the polyphony of mind and thought, out of all the various
>>>>>>>> possibilities of origins, Shpet and Vygotsky   gave their
>> preference to the
>>>>>>>> word, although they understood it differently.  Let us start from
>>>>>>>> Vygotsky's metaphorical description: *What is simultaneous in
>> thought is
>>>>>>>> successive in language.*  It would be possible to compare a thought
>> with a
>>>>>>>> cloud that showers a rain of words.  This is why the transition from
>>>>>>>> thought to language is a very complicated process of
>> *dismemberment* of a
>>>>>>>> thought and its recreation in a word.  On the next page, Vygotsky
>> wrote,
>>>>>>>> 'continuing this picturesque comparison, we should liken the
>> motivation of
>>>>>>>> thought to the wind that sets the clouds in motion.'  If something
>> can *pour
>>>>>>>> itself, *it means that it already exists.  Therefore we can
>> understand the
>>>>>>>> given metaphor as saying that thought, already existing is
>> *expressed *in a
>>>>>>>> word"  [emphasis in the original]
>>>>>>>> This quote draws attention to Vygotsky perceiving *oscillation
>> *behind the
>>>>>>>> movement of thought and language. Shpet did not see thought and
>> language as
>>>>>>>> oscillating.  Zinchenko's goal in his article is not to place the
>>>>>>>> approaches of Shpet and Vygotsky in opposition but to present them
>> as
>>>>>>>> mutually complimentary approaches.
>>>>>>>> I hope to learn from others on the complexity of the notions of
>>>>>>>> oscillating movement of thought and language situated within words.
>>>>>>>> Polyphonic notions
> -- 
> It is the dilemma of psychology to deal with a natural science as an object
> that creates history. Ernst Boesch.