The same could be said of a human child at least up to
the point when they grasp the "moral" of a fairy-tale. At that point
(and beyond) we are no longer dealing solely with *expansion* via social
cooperation but with the lower end of distinctly human *societal
appropriation* (something all "primitive" folk-lore, oral cultural
traditions, and "modern" textbook histories have in common). Forget the
fruitless debate about grammar--the real difference between
communication and *language* is that the latter is an exchange of
culturally embedded ideology. Get it?
I do hope to elaborate this system further in both articles and
*empirical action research.* I just thought someone out there might want
to look at what I've been doing.
Cheers,
Paul F. Ballantyne
Dept. of Psychology
York University
4700 Keele Street
North York, Ontario
CANADA M3J 1P3
e-mail: pballan who-is-at yorku.ca
On Sun, 12 Oct 1997, Mike Cole wrote:
> Paul-- I find it difficult to interpret your schema without accompanying
> text that makes clear your notion of a zoped. In *Cult Psych* I suggest
> that the evidence concerning the cognitive and linguistic development of
> chimpanzees raised in the wild versus raised in human environments based
> on predictable routines (formmats in Bruner's terms) suggests the operation
> of an inter-species zoped. Does that fit with your views?
>
> mike
>