The issue of translation is quite interesting. My first reading of
Vygotsky was a translation of Mike´s English version to Spanish. What I
was reading, then? Vygotsky? Mike and the other editors? The
translators? A mixture of both? If a mixture, what is its nature?
Concerning cultural biases, it is interesting how influential has been
Vygotsky in the Spanish speaking world, in comparison to "mainstream"
American psychology. Why do we Latin Americans have that
sociocultural "bias"?
Following up on the issue of translation, I would love to hear opinions
concerning the collected works recently published.
Quoting Mike Cole <mcole@weber.ucsd.edu>:
>
> While I have a momement, I will comment on Phil's reflections reading
> Kozulin
> et al (which I have not yet seen, so cannot comment on directly).
>
> First, its great that (mostly) Russians have put together a book on
> this
> topic. I do not particularly like the term "bias" because of its
> negative
> overtones, but if we are talking in terms of, say, "bias filters" or
> just
> "filters" the notion that ideas change when they change
> cultural-historical
> contexts ought to be taken for granted. For a long time, owing to
> obvious
> political factors of a bi-directional sort, examination of Vygotsky
> in
> context was not doable.
>
> Second, there is a pretty large literature out there now on the very
> questions
> you ask, Phil. I note that none of my recent writings on the subject
> are on
> my web page, which needs updating in any event. But you can start
> pretty
> far back.
>
> Alex Kozulin wrote a fine book called "Psychology in Utopia" which I
> strongly
> recommend. It contains a lot of information relevant to your
> concerns. Valsiner's
> Developmental Psychology in the USSR, also 15-20 years old is worth
> re-
> reading any time you have the time.
>
> Jim Wertsch has written about Vyogtsky in context in several of his
> publications.
>
> Concerns about the trivialization of the notion of a zoped have been
> expressed
> from a number of sources including Bonnie Litowitz in the collection
> on
> activity theory (obtainable free in the lchc newsletter archives),
> Valisner's
> attempts to deal with the metaphor of zones, Chaiklin's (post on
> xmca)
> fine critical discussion from last year, discussed here, Griffin and
> Cole's
> critical discussion in Rogoff and Wertsch (1984) little edited book
> on the zone of proximal development (where Ann Brown and a student
> report
> on efforts to make the zoped measurable), critical writings in work
> by
> Harry Daniels.........
>
> The attempts to distance Vygotsky from marxism strike me as
> unfortunate, but
> so do efforts to romanticize him and Soviet communism, which he
> supported
> for a good deal of his short life.
>
> I could not agree more that "we need to move beyond good linguistic
>
> translations" of LSV" to better cultural implications of his ideas.
> Do
> we have good translations? Of various kinds, yes. After more labor by
> more
> people than I care to try to remember.
>
> And as to discovering the cultural implications, isn't that one
> formulation
> of the goals of xmca?
>
> How well is it being done? Well, I am not satisfied. But I have long
> been
> enjoying the collective labor such work entails.
>
> Great, important, questions to move us toward the new year.
> mike
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jan 01 2004 - 01:00:09 PST