Trying to sort out matters is really tough in this tangled set of discussions.
Charles invokes Shutz, who reminds us that meaning is RETROSPECTIVELY constructed
and the quotations coming at us from various sources are heterochronous to a
crazifying degree. Some invoke the sense-meaning distinction, some, instead,
speak of PERSONAL meaning, etc.
I, too, lean toward thinking of various views as either complementary, or alternative
formulations of each other. But I am uncertain, so I continue to seek what appear to
be "real disagreements" rather than "misunderstandings" by which I mean people are
talking past each other in vocabularies that overlap in unassessed ways.
The appropriation/transformation example fits here. I cannot imagine what appropriation
without transformation is supposed to mean in a CHAT framework. Appropriation is
somehow equated with "Selective copying" if I understand correctly.
Finally, I constantly worry about what conceptual distinctions make a difference, any
difference, in practices other than email and journal debates. If I enter our
5th Dimension activity center thinking, Gee, the kids are appropriating the technology
and associated practices (I routinely do) does this contradict the equally frequent
experience of entering the activity and thinking, gee, aren't the kids transforming
the practices here in an interesting way.
Is a focus on the contradictions inherent in commodities incompatible with a focus
on continuity and discontinuity? Why?
Like that.
And I am really bothered by what easter eggs have to do with easter bunnies.
mike