[Xmca-l] Re: language and music

[James Ma]

 Semiotically speaking, gesture is not a slippery concept; non-gesture
manifests itself as a kind of gesture. Human beings are biologically social
and socially biological, and their relationships can't be not semiotic. I'm
watching you watching me watching you - the way you look at me affects the
way I look at you. We can't stop sending, getting signals to and from each
other, verbally or non-verbally, voluntarily or involuntarily - this is
semiotically *and* linguistically splendid!  My point is that any
non-verbal gesture as a non-linguistic sign has the word-forming potential,
capable of being transcended into language as a system of signification. As
Barthes put it, "to perceive what a substance signifies is inevitably to
fall back in the individuation of language: there is no meaning which is
not designated, and the world of signifieds is none other than that of
language".

James

On Thu, 29 Nov 2018 at 18:58, HENRY SHONERD <hshonerd@gmail.com> wrote:

> James,
> This conversation has been so satisfying I don’t want to let go of it, so
> I hope I am not tiring you or others with all the connections I find. But,
> in the spirit of Alfredo’s post, I’ll just keep on talking and remark on
> how the duck tail hair cut is a rich gesture, an important concept in this
> subject line. Gesture is an aspect of communication present in many
> species. Hence, the importance of gesture as a rudimentary form of language
> with evolutionary results in human language. Maybe this is a reach, but I
> see the business of quotes in the subject line now taking place (Anna
> Stetsenko and Anne-Nelly Perret-Clermont, contributing right now) on the
> last chapter of Vygotsky’s Speech and Language as an issue of gesture.
> Language, written language in this case, is limited in its ability to
> provide nuance. Writing without quotes “gestured”, pointed to to author
> sources familar in the day that Vygotsky wrote, such that quotes were not
> necessary. Dan Slobin, psycholinguist at Univ of Calf, wrote that two
> charges of language where in “tension”: 1) make yourself clear and 2) get
> it said before losing the thread of thinking and talking. Gesture, I would
> like to argue, is an aspect of discourse that helps to address this
> tension. A turn (in discourse) is a gesture, with temporal constraints that
> belie the idea that a single turn can ever be totally clear in and of
> itself. Writing, as we are doing now, is always dialogic, even a whole
> book, is a turn in discourse. And we keep on posting our turns.
> Henry
>
>
> On Nov 29, 2018, at 8:56 AM, James Ma <jamesma320@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> Henry, Elvis Presley is spot on for this subject line!
>
> The ducktail hairstyle is fabulous. Funnily enough, it is what my brother
> would always like his 9-year-old son to have because he has much thicker
> hair than most boys. Unfortunately last year the boy had a one-day show off
> in the classroom and was ticked off by the school authority (in
> China). However, my brother has managed to restore the ducktail twice a
> year during the boy's long school holiday in winter and summer!
>
> I suppose the outlines of conversation are predictable due to
> participants' intersubjective awareness of the subject. Yet, the nuances of
> conversation (just like each individual's ducktail unique to himself) are
> unpredictable because of the waywardness of our mind. What's more,
> such nuances create the fluidity of conversation which makes it difficult
> (or even unnecessary) to predict what comes next - this is perhaps the
> whole point that keeps us talking, as Alfredo pointed out earlier.
>
> James
>
>
> On Wed, 28 Nov 2018 at 22:19, HENRY SHONERD <hshonerd@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Back at you, James. The images of the mandarin drake reminded me of a
>> hair style popularin the late 50s when I was in high school (grades 9-12): ducktail
>> haircuts images
>> <https://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en&q=ducktail+haircuts+images&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8>.
>> One of the photos in the link is of Elvis Presley, an alpha male high
>> school boys sought to emulate. Note that some of the photos are of women,
>> interesting in light of issues of gender fluidity these days. I don’t
>> remember when women started taking on the hair style. Since I mentioned
>> Elvis Presley, this post counts as relevant to the subject line! Ha!
>> Henry
>>
>>
>>
>> On Nov 28, 2018, at 7:39 AM, James Ma <jamesma320@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Thank you Henry.
>> More on mandarin duck, just thought you might like to see:
>> https://www.livingwithbirds.com/tweetapedia/21-facts-on-mandarin-duck
>>
>> HENRY SHONERD <hshonerd@gmail.com> 于 2018年11月27日周二 19:30写道：
>>
>>> What a beautiful photo, James, and providing it is a move on this
>>> subject line that instantiates nicely Gee’s conception of discourse. Thanks
>>> for your thoughtful and helpful response.
>>> Henry
>>>
>>>
>>> On Nov 27, 2018, at 11:11 AM, James Ma <jamesma320@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Henry, thanks for the info on Derek Bickerton. One of the interesting
>>> things is his conception of displacement as the hallmark of language,
>>> whether iconic, indexical or symbolic. In the case of Chinese language,
>>> the sounds are decontextualised or sublimated over time to become
>>> something more integrated into the words themselves as ideographs. Some of
>>> Bickerton's ideas are suggestive of the study of protolanguage as an *a
>>> priori *process, involving scrupulous deduction. This reminds me of
>>> methods used in diachronic linguistics, which I felt are relevant to CHAT
>>> just as much as those used in synchronic linguistics.
>>>
>>> Regarding "intermental" and "intramental", I can see your point. In fact
>>> I don't take Vygotsky's "interpsychological" and "intrapsychological"
>>> categories to be dichotomies or binary opposites. Whenever it comes to
>>> their relationship, I tend to have a post-structuralism imagery present in
>>> my mind, particularly related to a Derridean stance for the conception of
>>> ideas (i.e. any idea is not entirely distinct from other ideas in terms of
>>> the "thing itself"; rather, it entails a supplement of the other idea which
>>> is already embedded in the self). Vygotsky's two categories are relational
>>> (dialectical); they are somehow like a pair of mandarin ducks (see attached
>>> image). I also like to think that each of these categories is both
>>> "discourse-in-context" and "context-for-discourse" (here discourse is in
>>> tune with James Gee's conception of discourse as a patchwork of actions,
>>> interactions, thoughts, feelings etc). I recall Barbara Rogoff talking
>>> about there being no boundary between the external and the internal or the
>>> boundary being blurred (during her seminar in the Graduate School of
>>> Education at Bristol in 2001 while I was doing my PhD).
>>>
>>> James
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, 21 Nov 2018 at 23:14, HENRY SHONERD <hshonerd@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> James,
>>>> I think it was Derek Bickerton (
>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Derek_Bickerton) who argued that “formal
>>>> syntax” developed from stringing together turns in verbal interaction. The
>>>> wiki on Bickerton I have linked is short and raises issues discussed in
>>>> this subject line and in the subject line on Corballis. Bickerton brings me
>>>> back to the circularity of discourse and the development of discourse
>>>> competence. Usage-based grammar. Bickerton’s idea that complex grammar
>>>> developed out of the pidgins of our ancestors is interesting. Do I see a
>>>> chicken/egg problem that for Vygotsky, “…the intramental forms of semiotic
>>>> mediation is better understood by examining the types of intermental
>>>> processes”? I don’t know. Could one say that inner speech is the vehicle
>>>> for turning discourse into grammar? Bickerton claimed a strong biological
>>>> component to human language, though I don’t remember if he was a Chomskian.
>>>> I hope this is coherent thinking in the context of our conversation. All
>>>> that jazz.
>>>> Henry
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Nov 21, 2018, at 3:22 PM, James Ma <jamesma320@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Alfredo, I'd agree with Greg - intersubjectivity is relevant and
>>>> pertinent here.
>>>>
>>>> As I see it, intersubjectivity transcends "outlines" or perhaps
>>>> sublimates the "muddledness" and "unpredictability" of a conversation (as
>>>> in Bateson's metalogue) into what Rommetveit termed the "draft of a
>>>> contract". This is because shared understanding makes explicit and external
>>>> what would otherwise remain implicit and internal. Rommetveit argues
>>>> that private worlds can only be transcended up to a certain level and
>>>> interlocutors need to agree upon the draft of a contract with which the
>>>> communication can be initiated. In the spirit of Vygotsky, he uses a
>>>> "pluralistic" and "social-cognitive" approach to human communication - and
>>>> especially to the problem of linguistic mediation and regulation in
>>>> interpsychological functioning, with reference to semantics, syntactics and
>>>> pragmatics. For him, the intramental forms of semiotic mediation is better
>>>> understood by examining the types of intermental processes.
>>>>
>>>> I think these intermental processes (just like intramental ones) can be
>>>> boiled down or distilled to signs and symbols with which interlocutors are
>>>> in harmony during a conversation or any other joint activities.
>>>>
>>>> James
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *________________________________________________*
>>>>
>>>> *James Ma  Independent Scholar **https://oxford.academia.edu/JamesMa
>>>> <https://oxford.academia.edu/JamesMa>   *
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, 21 Nov 2018 at 08:09, Alfredo Jornet Gil <a.j.gil@ils.uio.no>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Henry's remarks about no directors and symphonic potential of
>>>>> conversation reminded me of G. Bateson's metalogue "why do things have
>>>>> outlines" (attached). Implicitly, it raises the question of units and
>>>>> elements, of how a song, a dance, a poem, a conversation, to make sense,
>>>>> they must have a recognizable outline, even in improvisation; they must be
>>>>> wholes, or suggest wholes. That makes them "predictable". And yet, when you
>>>>> are immersed in a conversation, the fact that you can never exactly predict
>>>>> what comes next is the whole point that keep us talking, dancing, drawing,
>>>>> etc!
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Alfredo
>>>>>
>>>>> ------------------------------
>>>>> *From:* xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu <
>>>>> xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu> on behalf of HENRY SHONERD <
>>>>> hshonerd@gmail.com>
>>>>> *Sent:* 21 November 2018 06:22
>>>>> *To:* eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
>>>>> *Subject:* [Xmca-l] Re: language and music
>>>>>
>>>>> I’d like to add to the call and response conversation that discourse,
>>>>> this conversation itself, is staged. There are performers and and an
>>>>> audience made up partly of performers themselves. How many are lurkers, as
>>>>> I am usually? This conversation has no director, but there are leaders.
>>>>> There is symphonic potential. And even gestural potential, making the chat
>>>>> a dance. All on line.:)
>>>>> Henry
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Nov 20, 2018, at 9:05 PM, mike cole <mcole@ucsd.edu> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> For many years I used the work of Ellen Dissenyake to teach comm
>>>>> classes about language/music/development. She is quite unusual in ways that
>>>>> might find interest here.
>>>>>
>>>>> https://ellendissanayake.com/
>>>>>
>>>>> mike
>>>>>
>>>>> On Sat, Nov 17, 2018 at 2:16 PM James Ma <jamesma320@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hello Simangele,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> In semiotic terms, whatever each of the participants has constructed
>>>>>> internally is the signified, i.e. his or her understanding and
>>>>>> interpretation. When it is vocalised (spoken out), it becomes the signifier
>>>>>> to the listener. What's more, when the participants work together to
>>>>>> compose a story impromptu, each of their signifiers turns into a new
>>>>>> signified – a shared, newly-established understanding, woven into the
>>>>>> fabric of meaning making.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> By the way, in Chinese language, words for singing and dancing have
>>>>>> long been used inseparably. As I see it, they are semiotically indexed to,
>>>>>> or adjusted to allow for, the feelings, emotions, actions and interactions
>>>>>> of a consciousness who is experiencing the singing and dancing. Here are
>>>>>> some idioms:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 酣歌醉舞 - singing and dancing rapturously
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 村歌社舞 - dancing village and singing club
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 燕歌赵舞 - citizens of ancient Yan and Zhao good at singing and dancing,
>>>>>> hence referring to wonderful songs and dances
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 舞榭歌楼 - a church or building set up for singing and dancing
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> James
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *________________________________________________*
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *James Ma  Independent Scholar **https://oxford.academia.edu/JamesMa
>>>>>> <https://oxford.academia.edu/JamesMa>   *
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Sat, 17 Nov 2018 at 19:08, Simangele Mayisela <
>>>>>> simangele.mayisela@wits.ac.za> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Colleagues,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> This conversation is getting even more interesting, not that I have
>>>>>>> an informed answer for you Rob, I can only think of the National Anthems
>>>>>>> where people stand still when singing, even then this is observed only in
>>>>>>> international events.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Other occasions when people are likely not to move when singing when
>>>>>>> there is death and the mood is sombre. Otherwise singing and rhythmic body
>>>>>>> movement, called dance are a norm.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> This then makes me  wonder what this means in terms of cognitive
>>>>>>> functioning, in the light of Vygotsky’s developmental stages – of language
>>>>>>> and thought. Would the body movement constitute the externalisation of the
>>>>>>> thoughts contained in the music?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Helena – the video you are relating about reminds of the language
>>>>>>> teaching or group therapy technique- where a group of learners (or
>>>>>>> participants in OD settings) are instructed to tell a single coherent and
>>>>>>> logical story as a group. They all take turns to say a sentence, a sentence
>>>>>>> of not more than 6 words (depending on the instructor ), each time linking
>>>>>>> your sentence to the sentence of previous articulator, with the next person
>>>>>>> also doing the same, until the story sounds complete with conclusion. More
>>>>>>> important is that they compose this story impromptu, It with such stories
>>>>>>> that group dynamics are analysed, and in group therapy cases, collective
>>>>>>> experiences of trauma are shared.  I suppose this is an example of
>>>>>>> cooperative activity, although previously I would have thought of it as
>>>>>>> just an “activity”
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Simangele
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> *From:* xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:
>>>>>>> xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] *On Behalf Of *
>>>>>>> robsub@ariadne.org.uk
>>>>>>> *Sent:* Friday, 16 November 2018 21:01
>>>>>>> *To:* eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity <xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu>;
>>>>>>> Helena Worthen <helenaworthen@gmail.com>
>>>>>>> *Subject:* [Xmca-l] Re: Michael C. Corballis
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I remember being told once that many languages do not have separate
>>>>>>> words for singing and dancing, because if you sing you want to move - until
>>>>>>> western civilisation beats it out of you.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Does anybody know if this is actually true, or is it complete cod?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If it is true, does it have something to say about the relationship
>>>>>>> between the physical body and the development of speech?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Rob
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 16/11/2018 17:29, Helena Worthen wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I am very interested in where this conversation is going. I remember
>>>>>>> being in a Theories of Literacy class in which Glynda Hull, the instructor,
>>>>>>> showed a video of a singing circle somewhere in the Amazon, where an
>>>>>>> incredibly complicated pattern of musical phrases wove in and out among the
>>>>>>> singers underlaid by drumming that included turn-taking, call and response,
>>>>>>> you name it. Maybe 20 people were involved, all pushing full steam ahead to
>>>>>>> create something together that they all seemed to know about but wouldn’t
>>>>>>> happen until they did it.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Certainly someone has studied the relationship of musical
>>>>>>> communication (improvised or otherwise), speech and gesture? I have asked
>>>>>>> musicians about this and get blank looks. Yet clearly you can tell when you
>>>>>>> listen to different kinds of music, not just Amazon drum and chant circles,
>>>>>>> that there is some kind of speech - like potential embedded there. The
>>>>>>> Sonata form is clearly involves exposition (they even use that word).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> For example: the soundtrack to the Coen Brothers’ film Fargo opens
>>>>>>> with a musical theme that says, as clearly as if we were reading aloud from
>>>>>>> some children’s book, “I am now going to tell you a very strange story that
>>>>>>> sounds impossible but I promise you every word of it is
>>>>>>> true…da-de-da-de-da.’ Only it doesn’t take that many words.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> (18) Fargo (1996) - 'Fargo, North Dakota' (Opening) scene [1080] -
>>>>>>> YouTube
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Helena Worthen
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> helenaworthen@gmail.com
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Berkeley, CA 94707 510-828-2745
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Blog US/ Viet Nam:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> helenaworthen.wordpress.com
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> skype: helena.worthen1
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Nov 16, 2018, at 8:56 AM, HENRY SHONERD <hshonerd@gmail.com>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Andy and Peter,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I like the turn taking principle a lot. It links language and music
>>>>>>> very nicely: call and response. By voice and ear. While gesture is linked
>>>>>>> to visual art. In face-to-face conversation there is this rhythmically
>>>>>>> entrained interaction. It’s not just cooperative, it’s verbal/gestural art.
>>>>>>> Any human work is potentially a work of art. Vera John-Steiner and Holbrook
>>>>>>> Mahn have talked about how conversation can be a co-construction “at the
>>>>>>> speed of thought”.  Heady stuff taking part, or just listening to, this
>>>>>>> call and response between smart people.  And disheartening and destructive
>>>>>>> when we give up on dialog.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> As I write this, I realize that the prosodic aspects of spoken
>>>>>>> language (intonation) are gestural as well. It’s simplistic to restrict
>>>>>>> gesture to visual signals. But I would say gesture is prototypically
>>>>>>> visual, an accompaniment to the voice. In surfing the web, one can find
>>>>>>> some interesting things on paralanguage which complicate the distinction
>>>>>>> between language and gesture. I think it speaks to the embodiment of
>>>>>>> language in the senses.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Henry
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Nov 16, 2018, at 7:00 AM, Peter Feigenbaum [Staff] <
>>>>>>> pfeigenbaum@fordham.edu> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Andy,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I couldn't agree more. And thanks for introducing me to the notion
>>>>>>> of delayed gratification as a precondition for sharing and turn-taking.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> That's a feature I hadn't considered before in connection with
>>>>>>> speech communication. It makes sense that each participant would need
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> to exercise patience in order to wait out someone else's turn.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Much obliged.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Peter
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Fri, Nov 16, 2018 at 8:50 AM Andy Blunden <andyb@marxists.org>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Interesting, Peter.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Corballis, oddly in my view, places a lot of weight in so-called
>>>>>>> mirror neurons to explain perception of the intentionality of others. It
>>>>>>> seems blindingly obvious to me that cooperative activity, specifically
>>>>>>> participating in projects in which individuals share a common not-present
>>>>>>> object, is a form of behaviour which begets the necessary perceptive
>>>>>>> abilities. I have also long been of the view that delayed gratification, as
>>>>>>> a precondition for sharing and turn-taking, as a matter of fact, is an
>>>>>>> important aspect of sociality fostering the development of speech, and the
>>>>>>> upright gait which frees the hands for carrying food back to camp where it
>>>>>>> can be shared is important. None of which presupposes tools, only
>>>>>>> cooperation.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Andy
>>>>>>> ------------------------------
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Andy Blunden
>>>>>>> http://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/index.htm
>>>>>>> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.ethicalpolitics.org_ablunden_index.htm&d=DwMFaQ&c=aqMfXOEvEJQh2iQMCb7Wy8l0sPnURkcqADc2guUW8IM&r=mXj3yhpYNklTxyN3KioIJ0ECmPHilpf4N2p9PBMATWs&m=itd0qPWlE7uAuyEX0ii8ohEoZegfdMAOOLf-YoaEqqs&s=-uwTjZDhHtJM2EFdBS-rXLTptADQdSGAcibaav-mhJw&e=>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 17/11/2018 12:36 am, Peter Feigenbaum [Staff] wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If I might chime in to this discussion:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I submit that the key cooperative activity underlying speech
>>>>>>> communication is *turn-taking*. I don't know how that activity or rule came
>>>>>>> into being,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> but once it did, the activity of *exchanging* utterances became
>>>>>>> possible. And with exchange came the complementarity of speaking and
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> listening roles, and the activity of alternating conversational
>>>>>>> roles and mental perspectives. Turn-taking is a key process in human
>>>>>>> development.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Peter
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Thu, Nov 15, 2018 at 9:21 PM Andy Blunden <andyb@marxists.org>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Oddly, Amazon delivered the book to me yesterday and I am currently
>>>>>>> on p.5. Fortunately, Corballis provides a synopsis of his book at the end,
>>>>>>> which I sneak-previewed last night.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The interesting thing to me is his claim, similar to that of Merlin
>>>>>>> Donald, which goes like this.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It would be absurd to suggest that proto-humans discovered that they
>>>>>>> had this unique and wonderful vocal apparatus and decided to use it for
>>>>>>> speech. Clearly* there was rudimentary language before speech was
>>>>>>> humanly possible*. In development, a behaviour is always present
>>>>>>> before the physiological adaptations which facilitate it come into being.
>>>>>>> I.e, proto-humans found themselves in circumstances where it made sense to
>>>>>>> develop interpersonal, voluntary communication, and to begin with they used
>>>>>>> what they had - the ability to mime and gesture, make facial expressions
>>>>>>> and vocalisations (all of which BTW can reference non-present entities and
>>>>>>> situations) This is an activity which further produces the conditions for
>>>>>>> its own development. Eventually, over millions of years, the vocal
>>>>>>> apparatus evolved under strong selection pressure due to the practice of
>>>>>>> non-speech communication as an integral part of their evolutionary niche.
>>>>>>> In other words, rudimentary wordless speech gradually became modern
>>>>>>> speech, along with all the accompanying facial expressions and hand
>>>>>>> movements.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It just seems to me that, as you suggest, collective activity must
>>>>>>> have been a part of those conditions fostering communication (something
>>>>>>> found in our nearest evolutionary cousins who also have the elements of
>>>>>>> rudimentary speech)  - as was increasing tool-using, tool-making,
>>>>>>> tool-giving and tool-instructing.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Andy
>>>>>>> ------------------------------
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Andy Blunden
>>>>>>> http://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/index.htm
>>>>>>> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.ethicalpolitics.org_ablunden_index.htm&d=DwMFaQ&c=aqMfXOEvEJQh2iQMCb7Wy8l0sPnURkcqADc2guUW8IM&r=mXj3yhpYNklTxyN3KioIJ0ECmPHilpf4N2p9PBMATWs&m=VlOXr8x02-mghKHGod2LwGx8_X-LHNRmDI_elI-7rKI&s=A3k5oeQ13zGCPUbWibdOb2KNZT4q__fLyCwugyULUDw&e=>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 16/11/2018 12:58 pm, Arturo Escandon wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Dear Andy,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Michael Tomasello has made similar claims, grounding the surge of
>>>>>>> articulated language on innate co-operativism and collective activity.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/cambridge-handbook-of-child-language/90B84B8F3BB2D32E9FA9E2DFAF4D2BEB
>>>>>>> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.cambridge.org_core_books_cambridge-2Dhandbook-2Dof-2Dchild-2Dlanguage_90B84B8F3BB2D32E9FA9E2DFAF4D2BEB&d=DwMFaQ&c=aqMfXOEvEJQh2iQMCb7Wy8l0sPnURkcqADc2guUW8IM&r=mXj3yhpYNklTxyN3KioIJ0ECmPHilpf4N2p9PBMATWs&m=VlOXr8x02-mghKHGod2LwGx8_X-LHNRmDI_elI-7rKI&s=vxJZooXRDYwTRrM4dzWBbLfUhF9HhmUvU3ouq6sbwPI&e=>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Best
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Arturo
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Sent from Gmail Mobile
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Peter Feigenbaum, Ph.D.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Director,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Office of Institutional Research
>>>>>>> <https://www.fordham.edu/info/24303/institutional_research>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Fordham University
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thebaud Hall-202
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Bronx, NY 10458
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Phone: (718) 817-2243
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Fax: (718) 817-3817
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> email: pfeigenbaum@fordham.edu
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Peter Feigenbaum, Ph.D.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Director,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Office of Institutional Research
>>>>>>> <https://www.fordham.edu/info/24303/institutional_research>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Fordham University
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thebaud Hall-202
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Bronx, NY 10458
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Phone: (718) 817-2243
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Fax: (718) 817-3817
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> email: pfeigenbaum@fordham.edu
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> This communication is intended for the addressee only. It is
>>>>>>> confidential. If you have received this communication in error, please
>>>>>>> notify us immediately and destroy the original message. You may not copy or
>>>>>>> disseminate this communication without the permission of the University.
>>>>>>> Only authorised signatories are competent to enter into agreements on
>>>>>>> behalf of the University and recipients are thus advised that the content
>>>>>>> of this message may not be legally binding on the University and may
>>>>>>> contain the personal views and opinions of the author, which are not
>>>>>>> necessarily the views and opinions of The University of the Witwatersrand,
>>>>>>> Johannesburg. All agreements between the University and outsiders are
>>>>>>> subject to South African Law unless the University agrees in writing to the
>>>>>>> contrary.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> <Mandarin Ducks.jpg>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20181130/83136892/attachment-0001.html