[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: [xmca] concepts for LSV and us
Larry,
Also, I'd like to add here the notice of the use of metaphor as generative
or creative as a discernible increase in generalization, or conceptual
change. Does the recognition of a double-meaning or a deeper meaning occur
in the word choice before the utterance or after? Does what might be
considered a spontaneous activity then become a mediating influence?
Monica
-----Original Message-----
From: xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu] On
Behalf Of Martin Packer
Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2011 5:46 PM
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: Re: [xmca] concepts for LSV and us
Larry,
It's interesting, isn't it, that Leopold confirmed my suspicion that
metaphor should be thought of as part of the inner form of the word. And
metaphor has both its established, one might say conventionalized, versions
such as the "love is a journey" metaphor and others that Lakoff has
articulated, and its creative and spontaneous versions, the fresh metaphors
we invent on the spot and in the moment.
I think you're correct, Anna's word play is designed to evoke an
understanding in the recipient that more conventional word choices would not
permit.
Martin
On Apr 27, 2011, at 9:14 AM, Larry Purss wrote:
> Martin & Jay & Anna and others
>
> Commognition as a term Anna has coined to capture a relation between
> communication and cognition has an historical context that is a particular
> example of what I think Anton Marty is referring to as *inner form* . The
> article Martin posted by W. Leopold in 1929, exploring Anton Marty's
notion
> of inner form, [that challenged Wundt's principle of parallelism of mind
and
> language as a DIRECT outgrowth of mind] was helpful to try to grasp
Marty's
> notion of inner form and Martin's further elaboration.
>
> For Leopold and Marty the SOURCE of language is NOT self-expression but
> rather the DESIRE for communication. Creation therefore is purposeful,
> teleological and USES an inner form by CHOOSING EXPRESSIONS which are
> generally associated with the meaning the speaker is attempting TO EVOKE
> intersubjectively in order to communicate. The speaker chooses a
particular
> form that will LEAD [mark] the hearer to the correct *understanding*.
> However Leopold suggests if a universally associated form is not available
> [in the discourse community],
>
> "he selects another form, the habitual meaning of which is closely enough
> related to the actually desired one, by either contiguity or analogy, to
be
> likely TO LEAD the hearer to the correct understanding with the help of
the
> context. Such an AUXILIARY concept Marty called (with Steinhal) the
> *etymon*, or, more frequently, the inner speech form." (p. 257)
>
> This auxiliary meaning LEADS or EVOKES in the hearer "primarily a
conception
> which was NOT the desired meaning, but which helped to grasp it. Leopold
> suggests EVERY metaphor falls under this category of *inner form* as
> auxiliary concept. A speaker can boldly choose to create a new form as
> auxiliary meaning to EVOKE a specific meaning better than the conventional
> terms. Anna's term *commognition* can be seen as an example of evoking a
> specific meaning that relates communication and cognition.
>
> Jay, you qualified your post with the comment,
>
> I just want to say that IF LSV meant that conceptual thinking happens ONLY
> through verbal signs, then I would disagree insofar as I believe it
happens
> through more complex multi-modal sign resources, including not only
> language, but also visual signs, motor actions functioning as signs,
> emotional feelings functioning as signs, and pretty much anything
> functioning as a sign insofar as it can be "imagined", i.e. function in
> inner-directed meaning-making. (For outer-directed meaning-making actual
> physical objects / artifacts can also play a part in the total mix.)
>
> I hope as this conversation moves forward that *images* as they relate to
> commognition and concepts are elaborated. I agree with you that
emotional
> feelings function as signs. In conclusion, when talking about the place
of
> *desires* in development the centrality of the desire to communicate
> [intersubjectivity, not self-expression] as foundational to
> cultural-historical/subjective development seems a good place to start
>
> Larry
>
>
>
__________________________________________
_____
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