Thank you, Alfred for accepting some minor rewriting, mostly for my self, in formation. Your english is far better than my german! (This has been my stumbling-block) I purposely sent the compilation of your postings back to the list, because in the rewriting, I came upon several important phrases in which I was not sure I understood, and I rewrote them with my interpretation. A good example, I suppose, of my completing the semiotic function circle, personally, and expanding the circle of interactions between you and I, and among others.
What I understand is that the function circle processes and structures do not imply an immediate transfer of information, but involve interpretation in the transfer of causation. Underlying this, and also underlying what you wrote concerning affinities, I understand to be the necessity of thinking of the historical embeddedness of formations in contexts, what I rephrase as: "the developmental path through contexts" with "development" carrying the sense of re-formations through a history (path) of interactions, and referring both to the development of people and things. Structures are made and re-made through such history, that are essential elements of interpretation.
On "transaction", I would like to offer what Fuhrer wrote. His use of 'inputs' could mistakenly be construed to index the untransformed transfer of information, especially as he describes Barker's *sensory mechanism* that "receives and transmits information". Alfred, I think your posting yesterday of the interpreting functions of sensory apparatus, that enact transformations of impinging energy, dispells the idea of direct transfer. Fuhrer's aim was to describe further transformations through subsequent processes that situate interpretation and action, and constitute, in part, the co-evolution of individual and behavior setting. Phrases within asterisks represent the original emphasis, in italics, of the author:
"The single individual and the behavior setting are in a *transactional relationship* with each other. The term *transactional* (e.g. Stokols & Shumaker, 1981; Altman & Rogoff, 1987), for my purposes, emphasizes the idea that the extraindividual elements of the behavior setting and both the cognitive elements in people's minds and those people's behavior are aspects of a single process, not separate components. Inputs coming from the behavior setting or from the single inhabitant are so intertwined that each contributes to the other and initiates changes in the other (c.f. Barker, 1987)"
Furher, U., (1993) Behavior Setting Analysis of situated learning: The case of newcomers, in "Understanding practice: Perspectives on activity and context. Eds. Seth Chaiklin and Jean Lave, Cambridge University Press.
Bill Barowy, Associate Professor
Lesley University (Effective September 5, 2000)
29 Everett Street, Cambridge, MA 02138-2790
Phone: 617-349-8168 / Fax: 617-349-8169
http://www.lesley.edu/faculty/wbarowy/Barowy.html
_______________________
"One of life's quiet excitements is to stand somewhat apart from yourself
and watch yourself softly become the author of something beautiful."
[Norman Maclean in "A river runs through it."]
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Sep 01 2000 - 01:00:55 PDT