there has been a lot of work in linguistics from CHAT
perspective--reviewed in some 1984 papers, but which are in German,
unfortunately for many here on the list.
On 2-Jun-05, at 6:17 AM, Phil Chappell wrote:
> On 02/06/2005, at 5:35 AM, Ana Marjanovic-Shane wrote:
>> What I am interested in is developing a CHAT theory of language --
>> so all these different ways to look at it as an activity are very
> Dear Ana, Mike, and All,
> I'm a little hesitant to go too far here, as my own previous attempts
> here to sow the seeds of a group object/motive of discussing AT and a
> theory of language haven't really resulted in much - I often wonder
> whether any mention of systemics and Michael Halliday results in an
> impulsive "hit hit the delete" response ;-) And whither Bernstein...
> But Ana's interest is an interest that many here have, I feel, and it
> has often been said that the xmca community lacks a fully articulated
> theory of language, just as the SFL community is often derided for
> lacking a fully articulate theory of human learning. I'm struggling
> right now with a study from the SFL "Sydney school" in an attempt to
> make explicit a pedagogical approach that foregrounds the linguistic
> features that afford students access to future human activity that
> they may otherwise be denied. But that is a red herring here.
> Should anyone here wish to pursue the discussion of a theory of
> language "for chat", I'd like to offer up the suggestion that we read
> Gordon Well's paper: The complementary contributions of Halliday and
> Vygotsky to a 'language-based theory of learning', and I also think
> that the various ecological views of language may be worthwhile to
> So, any takers to assemble a couple of papers? I have an electronic
> version of Gordon's paper that we will need to get approval to use
> I'll leave it there and hope there may be a couple here interested in
> making a motive.......
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jul 01 2005 - 01:00:06 PDT