mike,
while I don't know Russian, doesn't it make sense that the adjectival of
object is simply objective? Isn't it likely that Leont'ev himself is
translating a concept from the european philosophical language into Russian?
Etymologically, object derives from ojbectum, the past participle of the
latin objicere which means "to throw before or over against." When seen in
this light, the phrase "objective activity" makes perfect sense in the
marxist framework as "activity that stands over against the subject of the
activity as something other than the subject". In other words, alienated
labor, which has the characteristic of being outside or other than the
subject and also the quality of ideality since it is the product of
motivated activity.
What d'ya think?
Paul H. Dillon
----- Original Message -----
From: Mike Cole <mcole@weber.ucsd.edu>
To: <xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
Sent: Monday, October 16, 2000 10:18 AM
Subject: translation issues
>
> Dear All-- I am having translation problems reading ch3 that are ghosts
> of my long struggle to understand ANL. I would ask for help from more
> knowledgeable others on how to deal with two terms.
>
> Objective activity and "turning"
>
> I have confirmed that objective activity is the translation for
> predmetnaya deyaletlnost'. Its the predmetnaya that has always
> give me trouble.
>
> premet=object. But what the adjectival form of object is in Englis
> is not so clear to me.
>
> I go not recall the term used where "turning" appears. I recall it
> as a term I would translate as turning on oneself, but I believe
> it is related to the term for in-growing.
>
> All help appreciated.
> mike
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Nov 01 2000 - 01:01:22 PST