In a message dated 7/10/2002 1:03:44 PM Central Daylight Time,
krocap@csulb.edu writes:
> I read LSV as saying that the ability for a rich
> engagement with reality (connoting a use of "concepts" that guide that
> engagement) precedes an ability to consciously and articulately express
> the concepts employed.
>
Kevin I certainly would agree with this but perhaps you misunderstood what I
meant about moving from narrow definitions to robust definitions. I was
particularly speaking to the child's ability to verbalize that which they
know. Initially a child can only speak to a narrow definition but as they
gain experience with a word or concept they are much better prepared to speak
about that word or concept meaning. AS the child is able to articulate they
are in a much better position to produce novel definitions not previously
thought of and perhaps this may become a part of the cultural tool kit [thank
you for refereshing me on that term Mike!]
At one time I did respite care for an autistic teen age boy who had limited
communication (did not speak nor use american sign language but rather used
hand gestures and grunts or moans). One hot summer day he was at my home and
we were outside with a hose that did not have a metal end but was just the
soft rubber. I squirted him and then to squirt me back he pinched the end,
very effective and something I never would have thought to do because I was
always accustomed to put my thumb over the end. Through his novel behavior
he was able to mediate my actions because from that time forward with that
hose I always pinched the end.
Would this be a good example of novel behavior being different then mediated
culture?
eric
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Aug 01 2002 - 01:00:11 PDT