[Xmca-l] Re: Zukerman resumed

[Huw Lloyd]

By contrast Ilyenkov may be consulted regarding the traps of putting
language first (reducing Vygotsky to language), which is pertinent to the
school of notation etc.

https://www.marxists.org/archive/ilyenkov/works/activity/index.htm

Best,
Huw

On 15 December 2016 at 20:56, Larry Purss <lpscholar2@gmail.com> wrote:

> Here is the Gordon Wells article.
>
> On page 46 Wells says that Vygotsky takes external physical language use
> and in addition this language tool provides a medium in which those
> external activities are *symbolically represented*
>
> On page 48 Wells quotes Halliday to say : "it would be nearer the point to
> say that language *actively symbolizes* the social system representing
> *metaphorically
> *in its patterns of variation, the variation that characterizes human
> cultures .... It is this same twofold function of the linguistic system,
> its function both as *expression* of and *metaphor for* social processes,
> that lies behind thedynamics of the interrelation of language and social
> context..."
>
> The Zukerman article focuses on *intermental* dialogical processes.
> Hope to keep this tapestry weaving ongoing in the slow reading lane :- } to
> help with my apprenticeship
>
> On Thu, Dec 15, 2016 at 12:05 PM, mike cole <mcole@ucsd.edu> wrote:
>
> > Those are all relevant questions, Larry. I have forwarded your msg to
> > Galina in hopes that she will have time to respond for herself.
> >
> > It seems relevant, as you suggest, to send along Gordon's paper. The
> issue
> > of the complementarity/relationship of Vygotsky & Halliday is a clear
> > thread in this discourse and a preoccupation with some of us.
> > Fine tapestry to be sewn there. :-)
> > mike
> >
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Dec 15, 2016 at 11:28 AM, <lpscholar2@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > The notion of intermental processes as occurring between persons
> > > actualizes an ongoing focus on what occurs between persons, and seems
> to
> > > put in question the priority of internalized mastery of one’s own
> > > interiorized mental activity. Am i misreading this emphasis in the
> > article.
> > >
> > > Is this understanding of (intermental) that prioritizes dialogical
> > > activity with the other a different focus than the emphasis that Gordon
> > > Wells puts on the dual aspects of the language system as BOTH
> > > *a mediation of social activity by enabling participants to plan and
> > > coordinate and review their actions through EXTERNAL speech
> > >
> > > AND in addition language as
> > > *a medium in which those  above activities are SYMBOLICALLY
> REPRESENTED,
> > > providing the psychological sign/tool that mediates the associated
> ideal
> > > mental activities in the internal discourse of inner speech.
> > >
> > > This shift or crossing over from priority given to the actual physical
> > > discourse using language (the tool of tools -metatool) to priority
> given
> > to
> > > the SYMBOLICALLY represented realm seems to be a key or hinge moment
> > within
> > > the dual nature of language as both external and interior.
> > >
> > > Reading the Zukerman article and the focus on the (intermental) all the
> > > way down seems to put a different slant or incline to what Gordon Wells
> > is
> > > exploring.
> > > My turn is up, but i could reference examples from the Zukerman article
> > on
> > > the priority of the (intermental)
> > >
> > > For those interested i could send another article by Gordon Wells (The
> > > complimentary contributions of Halliday and Vygotsky to a Language
> Based
> > > Theory of Learning, 1994)
> > > Loose threads being picked up
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Sent from my Windows 10 phone
> > >
> > >
> >
>