xmca@weber.ucsd.edu writes:
So, does appropriation encompass internalization? For me, appropriations
usefulness is in describing aspects of the social that are not
internalyzed
perse. But it seems possible to have one and not the other. For example, a
child with downs syndrom appropriating the activity of reading (looking
through dictionary) yet not internalyzing skills / practices necessary to
"read".
this example is really tricky, Nate -
yes, picking up a book and looking through it is one part of the activity
of reading - and when any child (regardless of developmental readiness)
picks up a book and looks through it, that initial action is mimicing the
activity of those around her. but, what's the history of the child and
books and the activity of reading? i've known some children with downs
syndrom who over time were able to learn to read - others never seemed to
catch on.
it seems to me that it is certainly possible for a child to have
internalized the activity of pickiing up a book and looking through it for
her own goals/object - and such behavior is certainly an indicator of
reading readiness.
so, the observer of the child with down's syndrom would need to have a
fairly rich understanding of that child's history in order to determine is
that child were mimicing, appropriating or practicing an internalized
activity.
phillip
* * * * * * * *
* *
The English noun "identity" comes, ultimately, from the
Latin adverb "identidem", which means "repeatedly."
The Latin has exactly the same rhythm as the English,
buh-BUM-buh-BUM - a simple iamb, repeated; and
"identidem" is, in fact, nothing more than a
reduplication of the word "idem", "the same":
"idem(et)idem". "Same(and) same". The same,
repeated. It is a word that does exactly what
it means.
from "The Elusive Embrace" by Daniel
Mendelsohn.
phillip white
university of colorado at denver
denver, colorado
phillip_white@ceo.cudenver.edu
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jun 27 2002 - 08:02:50 PDT