Re: [xmca] Re: xmca Digest, Vol 45, Issue 56

[ulvi icil <ulvi.icil@gmail.com>]

Kiitos Kolya ( This does not mean that I know Finnish and Russian. None of
them ! )

Only I lived one year in Helsinki and I admire Russian literature ,
especially 19th century (in fact, who does  not I suggest)


On 19/02/2009, Nikolai Veresov <nikolai.veressov@oulu.fi> wrote:
>
> Sure, Ulvi
> You can find it here
> http://nveresov.narod.ru/links.html
> Nikolai
>
>> Hello,
>>>
>>> Is it possible to reach this article "Marxist and non-Marxist
>>> aspects of the
>>> cultural historical psychology of L.S. Vygotsky" via email please?
>>>
>>> Thank you.
>>>
>>> Ulvi
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 18/02/2009, Andy Blunden <ablunden@mira.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Perhaps I could risk throwing in my thoughts Mike, because David
>>>> and I have
>>>> discussed this in the past too.
>>>>
>>>> My understanding has been that LSV brought forward the concept of
>>>> word
>>>> meaning as a foundation for solving the problem of intelligent
>>>> speech. I am
>>>> not sure how wide that territory was for Vygotsky; self-evidently I
>>>> think it
>>>> is wider that simply "intelligent speech", but there are two
>>>> reasons I would
>>>> not go so far as to say that it was meant as a "unit of analysis of
>>>> human
>>>> consciousness".
>>>>
>>>> (1) Words are probably the most important of artefacts, but they
>>>> are just
>>>> one kind of artefact. My work with "teaching spaces" when I first
>>>> started to
>>>> use Vygotsky was to do with how building forms succeeded in
>>>> transmitting
>>>> theories of learning to future generations, despite books and papers
>>>> claiming the opposite of what was set in concrete.
>>>>
>>>> (2) Apart from artefacts, is also activity. Doubtbless activity is
>>>> implicit
>>>> in meaning in some way, but it is unclear to me. I think it is a
>>>> mistake to
>>>> make the foundation of consciousness just words, rather than
>>>> practice.
>>>>
>>>> Andy
>>>>
>>>> Mike Cole wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Without the time (or skill to switch to cyrrilic!) I have been
>>>>> thinking
>>>>> about Kolya's questions, ,David.
>>>>>
>>>>> For those who forget in the stream of xcma chatting, Nikolai asks:
>>>>> where Vygotsky posits word meaning as
>>>>> unit of analysis of human consciousness?
>>>>> In which text and on what page? From what Vygotsky's work it is
>>>>> taken?
>>>>> Could
>>>>>
>>>>> I ask you to make a quotation from Vygotsky?
>>>>> Thank you in advance
>>>>> Nikolai
>>>>>
>>>>> I was thinking how nice it would be to know how to search the
>>>>> vygotsky
>>>>> corpus online in Russian, which I do not know how to do.
>>>>>
>>>>> And remembering fragments of why I thought David's comments
>>>>> resonated
>>>>> strongly
>>>>> with my own intuitions, formed in part, by LSV.
>>>>>
>>>>> such as (no quotations or page numbers, just failing memory here):
>>>>>
>>>>> meaning is the most stable form of sense-- every totally stable?
>>>>> really?
>>>>> word meaning changes in development
>>>>> the closing of *Speech and Thought *that David points to, the drop
>>>>> of
>>>>> water,
>>>>> perhaps,
>>>>> being in my eye.
>>>>> The citation of the fragment from Doestoevsky where a bunch of
>>>>> guys are
>>>>> standing
>>>>> around saying, it seems, the word "product of defecation" (oh
>>>>> poo!) and
>>>>> every one
>>>>> is using the same word and every one is both saying the same thing
>>>>> and
>>>>> saying something different.
>>>>>
>>>>> Don't all of these and many other examples (Paula, are the
>>>>> Sakharov -LSV
>>>>> blocks of any help here?) point to the general conclusion that
>>>>> David was
>>>>> asserting?
>>>>>
>>>>> Might our Russian friends join Nikolai and help us to understand
>>>>> the core
>>>>> of
>>>>> the issue
>>>>> David raised? Is he incorrect? Can you search the corpus and help
>>>>> us to
>>>>> understand
>>>>> if we are misleading each other?
>>>>> mike
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 5:26 PM, David Kellogg <
>>>>> vaughndogblack@yahoo.com
>>>>>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Dear Professor Veresov:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Let me begin by saying how much we enjoy your work here in Korea.
>>>>>> Our
>>>>>> group
>>>>>> has been discussing your 2005 "Outlines" article "Marxist and non-
>>>>>> Marxist
>>>>>> aspects of the cultural historical psychology of L.S. Vygotsky"
>>>>>> since we
>>>>>> read it last year, and I found your 2006 article "Leading
>>>>>> activity in
>>>>>> developmental psychology" very useful in figuring out why I don't
>>>>>> accept
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> whole construct of "leading activity".
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I think that BOTH works are really quite central to the
>>>>>> periodization
>>>>>> problem under discussion, but I also think that BOTH works refer
>>>>>> mainly
>>>>>> and
>>>>>> centrally (and thus for me somewhat misleadingly) to a period of
>>>>>> Vygotsky's
>>>>>> oeuvre that is quite different from the one I have in mind.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The 2005 article places a good deal of stress on early Vygotsky, a
>>>>>> Vygotsky
>>>>>> who is almost non-Vygotskyan, or at least non-psychological,
>>>>>> Vygotsky in
>>>>>> his
>>>>>> early twenties, a student of the humanities with a very strong
>>>>>> sense that
>>>>>> nothing human is alien to them.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The 2006 article in contrast seems to me to place a great deal of
>>>>>> stress
>>>>>> on
>>>>>> the post-Vygotsky period, and I was very surprised and pleased to
>>>>>> read
>>>>>> that
>>>>>> the work on "leading activity" is really not as far as I had
>>>>>> thought from
>>>>>> the fragments LSV left behind in his unfinished "Child
>>>>>> Development".
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Elkonin, at any rate, seems to have been fully aware that the
>>>>>> "leading
>>>>>> activity" is in no way typical or characteristic of a particular
>>>>>> period
>>>>>> (though Leontiev and lately Karpov have said exactly the
>>>>>> opposite). The
>>>>>> problem remains that I do not see any place for the crisis in
>>>>>> this work,
>>>>>> and
>>>>>> there is no question but that MY Vygotsky, LATE Vygotsky, the
>>>>>> Vygotsky of
>>>>>> Thinking and Speech gives the crisis an absolutely central (one
>>>>>> might
>>>>>> even
>>>>>> say a critical) role.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Of course, when I said that word meaning is a unit of analysis
>>>>>> for human
>>>>>> consciousness I am not simply repeating what others have said (e.g.
>>>>>> Werstch
>>>>>> 1985). On the contrary, I mean what for me is the most mature and
>>>>>> therefore
>>>>>> in some ways least characteristic moment of Vygotsky's own work;
>>>>>> I might
>>>>>> even call it the "leading activity" of his thinking.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I meant, especially, the very last three paragraphs of Thinking and
>>>>>> Speech.
>>>>>> I have always found this to be a little like the last page of
>>>>>> "Origin of
>>>>>> Species", rather more than a conclusion, but a whole revolutionary
>>>>>> program,
>>>>>> complete with a clarion call in the very last six words:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> п·я│п╪я▀я│п╩п╣п╫п╫п╬п╣ я│п╩п╬п╡п╬ п╣я│я┌я▄ п╪п╦п╨я─п╬п╨п╬я│п╪
>>>>>> я┤п╣п╩п╬п╡п╣я┤п╣я│п╨п╬пЁп╬ я│п╬п╥п╫п╟п╫п╦я▐.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> David Kellogg
>>>>>> Seoul National University of Education.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> xmca mailing list
>>>>>> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
>>>>>> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>
>>>>> xmca mailing list
>>>>> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
>>>>> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>> ---
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> Andy Blunden http://home.mira.net/~andy/ +61 3 9380 9435 Skype
>>>> andy.blunden
>>>> Hegel's Logic with a Foreword by Andy Blunden:
>>>> http://www.marxists.org/admin/books/index.htm
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> xmca mailing list
>>>> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
>>>> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>> xmca mailing list
>>> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
>>> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
>>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 2
>> Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2009 13:15:20 -0800
>> From: "Monica Hansen" <monica.hansen@vandals.uidaho.edu>
>> Subject: RE: [xmca] Re: xmca Digest, Vol 45, Issue 47
>> To: "'eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity'" <xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
>> Message-ID: <BLU0-SMTP874EA415B1EF023A4ACD32C5B50@phx.gbl>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="KOI8-R"
>>
>> Is anything in Vygotsky counter to discourse and pragmatics? My take is
>> that
>> Vygotsky suggested word meaning as the unit of analysis in the concrete
>> sense(a specific example) of a more general concept for approaching the
>> study of development. I'm still studying...
>>
>> Monica R. Hansen
>> Graduate Teaching Assistant
>> Curriculum and Instruction
>> College of Education
>> University of Idaho
>> 1000 W. Hubbard
>> Suite 242
>> Coeur d'Alene, ID 83814
>> Phone: 208-667-2588, ext. 123
>> Email:  monica.hansen@vandals.uidaho.edu
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu] On
>> Behalf Of Joe
>> Sent: Wednesday, February 18, 2009 1:02 PM
>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
>> Cc: mcole@weber.ucsd.edu; eXtended Mind, Culture,Activity
>> Subject: Re: [xmca] Re: xmca Digest, Vol 45, Issue 47
>>
>> I've always been bothered by word meaning as the basic unit. It is
>> more "cognitive" than I think was intended. Broadening the concept to
>> discourse a la wertsch/bakhtin opens the ideas to inter to intra and
>> to dialogic space, adressivity, audience, external/internal speech and
>> seems to link to many more Vygotskian concepts than does word meaning
>> alone.
>>
>> On Feb 18, 2009, at 2:47 AM, ulvi icil <ulvi.icil@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hello,
>>>
>>> Is it possible to reach this article "Marxist and non-Marxist
>>> aspects of the
>>> cultural historical psychology of L.S. Vygotsky" via email please?
>>>
>>> Thank you.
>>>
>>> Ulvi
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 18/02/2009, Andy Blunden <ablunden@mira.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Perhaps I could risk throwing in my thoughts Mike, because David
>>>> and I have
>>>> discussed this in the past too.
>>>>
>>>> My understanding has been that LSV brought forward the concept of
>>>> word
>>>> meaning as a foundation for solving the problem of intelligent
>>>> speech. I am
>>>> not sure how wide that territory was for Vygotsky; self-evidently I
>>>> think it
>>>> is wider that simply "intelligent speech", but there are two
>>>> reasons I would
>>>> not go so far as to say that it was meant as a "unit of analysis of
>>>> human
>>>> consciousness".
>>>>
>>>> (1) Words are probably the most important of artefacts, but they
>>>> are just
>>>> one kind of artefact. My work with "teaching spaces" when I first
>>>> started to
>>>> use Vygotsky was to do with how building forms succeeded in
>>>> transmitting
>>>> theories of learning to future generations, despite books and papers
>>>> claiming the opposite of what was set in concrete.
>>>>
>>>> (2) Apart from artefacts, is also activity. Doubtbless activity is
>>>> implicit
>>>> in meaning in some way, but it is unclear to me. I think it is a
>>>> mistake to
>>>> make the foundation of consciousness just words, rather than
>>>> practice.
>>>>
>>>> Andy
>>>>
>>>> Mike Cole wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Without the time (or skill to switch to cyrrilic!) I have been
>>>>> thinking
>>>>> about Kolya's questions, ,David.
>>>>>
>>>>> For those who forget in the stream of xcma chatting, Nikolai asks:
>>>>> where Vygotsky posits word meaning as
>>>>> unit of analysis of human consciousness?
>>>>> In which text and on what page? From what Vygotsky's work it is
>>>>> taken?
>>>>> Could
>>>>>
>>>>> I ask you to make a quotation from Vygotsky?
>>>>> Thank you in advance
>>>>> Nikolai
>>>>>
>>>>> I was thinking how nice it would be to know how to search the
>>>>> vygotsky
>>>>> corpus online in Russian, which I do not know how to do.
>>>>>
>>>>> And remembering fragments of why I thought David's comments
>>>>> resonated
>>>>> strongly
>>>>> with my own intuitions, formed in part, by LSV.
>>>>>
>>>>> such as (no quotations or page numbers, just failing memory here):
>>>>>
>>>>> meaning is the most stable form of sense-- every totally stable?
>>>>> really?
>>>>> word meaning changes in development
>>>>> the closing of *Speech and Thought *that David points to, the drop
>>>>> of
>>>>> water,
>>>>> perhaps,
>>>>> being in my eye.
>>>>> The citation of the fragment from Doestoevsky where a bunch of
>>>>> guys are
>>>>> standing
>>>>> around saying, it seems, the word "product of defecation" (oh
>>>>> poo!) and
>>>>> every one
>>>>> is using the same word and every one is both saying the same thing
>>>>> and
>>>>> saying something different.
>>>>>
>>>>> Don't all of these and many other examples (Paula, are the
>>>>> Sakharov -LSV
>>>>> blocks of any help here?) point to the general conclusion that
>>>>> David was
>>>>> asserting?
>>>>>
>>>>> Might our Russian friends join Nikolai and help us to understand
>>>>> the core
>>>>> of
>>>>> the issue
>>>>> David raised? Is he incorrect? Can you search the corpus and help
>>>>> us to
>>>>> understand
>>>>> if we are misleading each other?
>>>>> mike
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 5:26 PM, David Kellogg <
>>>>> vaughndogblack@yahoo.com
>>>>>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Dear Professor Veresov:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Let me begin by saying how much we enjoy your work here in Korea.
>>>>>> Our
>>>>>> group
>>>>>> has been discussing your 2005 "Outlines" article "Marxist and non-
>>>>>> Marxist
>>>>>> aspects of the cultural historical psychology of L.S. Vygotsky"
>>>>>> since we
>>>>>> read it last year, and I found your 2006 article "Leading
>>>>>> activity in
>>>>>> developmental psychology" very useful in figuring out why I don't
>>>>>> accept
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> whole construct of "leading activity".
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I think that BOTH works are really quite central to the
>>>>>> periodization
>>>>>> problem under discussion, but I also think that BOTH works refer
>>>>>> mainly
>>>>>> and
>>>>>> centrally (and thus for me somewhat misleadingly) to a period of
>>>>>> Vygotsky's
>>>>>> oeuvre that is quite different from the one I have in mind.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The 2005 article places a good deal of stress on early Vygotsky, a
>>>>>> Vygotsky
>>>>>> who is almost non-Vygotskyan, or at least non-psychological,
>>>>>> Vygotsky in
>>>>>> his
>>>>>> early twenties, a student of the humanities with a very strong
>>>>>> sense that
>>>>>> nothing human is alien to them.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The 2006 article in contrast seems to me to place a great deal of
>>>>>> stress
>>>>>> on
>>>>>> the post-Vygotsky period, and I was very surprised and pleased to
>>>>>> read
>>>>>> that
>>>>>> the work on "leading activity" is really not as far as I had
>>>>>> thought from
>>>>>> the fragments LSV left behind in his unfinished "Child
>>>>>> Development".
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Elkonin, at any rate, seems to have been fully aware that the
>>>>>> "leading
>>>>>> activity" is in no way typical or characteristic of a particular
>>>>>> period
>>>>>> (though Leontiev and lately Karpov have said exactly the
>>>>>> opposite). The
>>>>>> problem remains that I do not see any place for the crisis in
>>>>>> this work,
>>>>>> and
>>>>>> there is no question but that MY Vygotsky, LATE Vygotsky, the
>>>>>> Vygotsky of
>>>>>> Thinking and Speech gives the crisis an absolutely central (one
>>>>>> might
>>>>>> even
>>>>>> say a critical) role.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Of course, when I said that word meaning is a unit of analysis
>>>>>> for human
>>>>>> consciousness I am not simply repeating what others have said (e.g.
>>>>>> Werstch
>>>>>> 1985). On the contrary, I mean what for me is the most mature and
>>>>>> therefore
>>>>>> in some ways least characteristic moment of Vygotsky's own work;
>>>>>> I might
>>>>>> even call it the "leading activity" of his thinking.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I meant, especially, the very last three paragraphs of Thinking and
>>>>>> Speech.
>>>>>> I have always found this to be a little like the last page of
>>>>>> "Origin of
>>>>>> Species", rather more than a conclusion, but a whole revolutionary
>>>>>> program,
>>>>>> complete with a clarion call in the very last six words:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Осмысленное слово есть микрокосм
>>>>>> человеческого сознания.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> David Kellogg
>>>>>> Seoul National University of Education.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> xmca mailing list
>>>>>> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
>>>>>> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>
>>>>> xmca mailing list
>>>>> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
>>>>> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>> ---
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> Andy Blunden http://home.mira.net/~andy/ +61 3 9380 9435 Skype
>>>> andy.blunden
>>>> Hegel's Logic with a Foreword by Andy Blunden:
>>>> http://www.marxists.org/admin/books/index.htm
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> xmca mailing list
>>>> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
>>>> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>> xmca mailing list
>>> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
>>> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> xmca mailing list
>> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
>> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 3
>> Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2009 16:28:14 -0500
>> From: Martin Packer <packer@duq.edu>
>> Subject: Re: [xmca] Re: xmca Digest, Vol 45, Issue 47
>> To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
>> Message-ID: <C5C1E79E.1E73B%packer@duq.edu<C5C1E79E.1E73B%25packer@duq.edu>
>> >
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1251
>>
>> But Andy, if we're following Ilyenkov's lead, don't words have an ideal
>> character that activity lacks?
>>
>> Martin
>>
>>
>> On 2/17/09 9:11 PM, "Andy Blunden" <ablunden@mira.net> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> (2) Apart from artefacts, is also activity. Doubtbless
>>> activity is implicit in meaning in some way, but it is
>>> unclear to me. I think it is a mistake to make the
>>> foundation of consciousness just words, rather than practice.
>>>
>>> Andy
>>>
>>> Mike Cole wrote:
>>>
>>>> Without the time (or skill to switch to cyrrilic!) I have been thinking
>>>> about Kolya's questions, ,David.
>>>>
>>>> For those who forget in the stream of xcma chatting, Nikolai asks:
>>>> where Vygotsky posits word meaning as
>>>> unit of analysis of human consciousness?
>>>> In which text and on what page? From what Vygotsky's work it is taken?
>>>> Could
>>>>
>>>> I ask you to make a quotation from Vygotsky?
>>>> Thank you in advance
>>>> Nikolai
>>>>
>>>> I was thinking how nice it would be to know how to search the vygotsky
>>>> corpus online in Russian, which I do not know how to do.
>>>>
>>>> And remembering fragments of why I thought David's comments resonated
>>>> strongly
>>>> with my own intuitions, formed in part, by LSV.
>>>>
>>>> such as (no quotations or page numbers, just failing memory here):
>>>>
>>>> meaning is the most stable form of sense-- every totally stable? really?
>>>> word meaning changes in development
>>>> the closing of *Speech and Thought *that David points to, the drop of
>>>> water,
>>>> perhaps,
>>>> being in my eye.
>>>> The citation of the fragment from Doestoevsky where a bunch of guys are
>>>> standing
>>>> around saying, it seems, the word "product of defecation" (oh poo!) and
>>>> every one
>>>> is using the same word and every one is both saying the same thing and
>>>> saying something different.
>>>>
>>>> Don't all of these and many other examples (Paula, are the Sakharov -LSV
>>>> blocks of any help here?) point to the general conclusion that David was
>>>> asserting?
>>>>
>>>> Might our Russian friends join Nikolai and help us to understand the
>>>> core of
>>>> the issue
>>>> David raised? Is he incorrect? Can you search the corpus and help us to
>>>> understand
>>>> if we are misleading each other?
>>>> mike
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 5:26 PM, David Kellogg
>>>> <vaughndogblack@yahoo.com>wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Dear Professor Veresov:
>>>>>
>>>>> Let me begin by saying how much we enjoy your work here in Korea. Our
>>>>> group
>>>>> has been discussing your 2005 "Outlines" article "Marxist and
>>>>> non-Marxist
>>>>> aspects of the cultural historical psychology of L.S. Vygotsky" since
>>>>> we
>>>>> read it last year, and I found your 2006 article "Leading activity in
>>>>> developmental psychology" very useful in figuring out why I don't
>>>>> accept the
>>>>> whole construct of "leading activity".
>>>>>
>>>>> I think that BOTH works are really quite central to the periodization
>>>>> problem under discussion, but I also think that BOTH works refer mainly
>>>>> and
>>>>> centrally (and thus for me somewhat misleadingly) to a period of
>>>>> Vygotsky's
>>>>> oeuvre that is quite different from the one I have in mind.
>>>>>
>>>>> The 2005 article places a good deal of stress on early Vygotsky, a
>>>>> Vygotsky
>>>>> who is almost non-Vygotskyan, or at least non-psychological, Vygotsky
>>>>> in his
>>>>> early twenties, a student of the humanities with a very strong sense
>>>>> that
>>>>> nothing human is alien to them.
>>>>>
>>>>> The 2006 article in contrast seems to me to place a great deal of
>>>>> stress on
>>>>> the post-Vygotsky period, and I was very surprised and pleased to read
>>>>> that
>>>>> the work on "leading activity" is really not as far as I had thought
>>>>> from
>>>>> the fragments LSV left behind in his unfinished "Child Development".
>>>>>
>>>>> Elkonin, at any rate, seems to have been fully aware that the "leading
>>>>> activity" is in no way typical or characteristic of a particular period
>>>>> (though Leontiev and lately Karpov have said exactly the opposite). The
>>>>> problem remains that I do not see any place for the crisis in this
>>>>> work, and
>>>>> there is no question but that MY Vygotsky, LATE Vygotsky, the Vygotsky
>>>>> of
>>>>> Thinking and Speech gives the crisis an absolutely central (one might
>>>>> even
>>>>> say a critical) role.
>>>>>
>>>>> Of course, when I said that word meaning is a unit of analysis for
>>>>> human
>>>>> consciousness I am not simply repeating what others have said (e.g.
>>>>> Werstch
>>>>> 1985). On the contrary, I mean what for me is the most mature and
>>>>> therefore
>>>>> in some ways least characteristic moment of Vygotsky's own work; I
>>>>> might
>>>>> even call it the "leading activity" of his thinking.
>>>>>
>>>>> I meant, especially, the very last three paragraphs of Thinking and
>>>>> Speech.
>>>>> I have always found this to be a little like the last page of "Origin
>>>>> of
>>>>> Species", rather more than a conclusion, but a whole revolutionary
>>>>> program,
>>>>> complete with a clarion call in the very last six words:
>>>>>
>>>>> нЯЛШЯКЕММНЕ ЯКНБН ЕЯРЭ ЛХЙПНЙНЯЛ ВЕКНБЕВЕЯЙНЦН ЯНГМЮМХЪ.
>>>>>
>>>>> David Kellogg
>>>>> Seoul National University of Education.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> xmca mailing list
>>>>> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
>>>>> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> xmca mailing list
>>>> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
>>>> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> xmca mailing list
>> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
>> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
>>
>>
>> End of xmca Digest, Vol 45, Issue 56
>> ************************************
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> xmca mailing list
> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
>
_______________________________________________
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca