Re: [xmca] More Problems With Chapter Two

Dear Anton:
 
Thanks for your patient, painstaking and very professional textological exegesis.
 
a) I agree that "the former" is a possible translation for "prima" and it makes sense here. The problem then becomes how FAR BACK the word "prima/former" refers. If it refers to the beginning of the quote (as I think it must) it makes sense: directed thought is mentioned before undirected (autistic) thought. I also agree that Minick's translation (changing "the former" into "rational/directed thought") is clearer.
 
b) I'm checking everything against the original of Piaget's book "Language and Thought of the Child". The strange thing is that the Kozulin/Hanfmann and Vakar translation, so inadequate in others ways (e.g. see point d] below) has got "Hans Larsson" on p. 17.
 
c.1) Agreed; I'm ordering the original 1928 Piaget to check it. But it makes PERFECT sense in context: the passage is refers to "fabulation" which is about lies and not about lives or even "mysl".

c.2) Yes, the source of the problem is probably the Russian translation of Piaget's book. All the more reason for professionalism in translation, something that is not always in evidence even with professional translators. Still we will do what we can!
 
c.3) Yes, but Minick doesn't try to re-translate into English the translation of the French into the Russian. He just uses 1959 Marjorie and Ruth Gabain translation.
 
d) I very much LIKE to be able to read the passage on p. 62 the way that you do (and I wonder if it really DOES read that way in Russian). But I can't! The English sentence is "It is of particular interestthat biologically oriented thoeries, in particular that of Bleuler who developed the theory of autistic thinking, have reached THIS SAME CONCLUSION" (capitals mine of course). And THIS SAME CONCLUSION can't refer back to the topic sentence of the paragraph; it has to refer back to the immediately preceding sentence which clearly says that the pleasure principle precedes the reality principle.
 
But that's exactly what Bleuler DOESN'T say in the rest of the section: on the contrary, he says (p. 63) that "the autistic function is not as primitive as the more simple forms of the reality function" (emphasis his). Now in fact Bleuler's analysis is quite complex: there are four early forms of the reality function (shared with animals) and autistic thinking emerges only at the fourth stage, after which it develops in parallel with realistic thinking (a point which Vygotsky has to dispute, because for example in role play we find both autistic and realistic thinking, and role play is intimately connected to rule based play).
 
I think that Vygotsky's point is that when Bleuler abandons the psychoanalytic concept of "autism" (pleasure principle based, including schizophrenia and egoism) and adopts a more general definition of "irrealism" (of which pathological autism is only one variety) he makes it possible to say BOTH that realism comes first (because the most primitive forms of realistic thinking DO come before irrealistic thinkign) AND that irrealism comes first (because autistic thinking is "more primitive in several respects than the higher forms of the reality function as developed in man [p. 63]").
 
That's what he means when he says "this change in the designation of autistic thinking, though perhaps necessary, masks an important change in the content of the concept itself (p. 62)." But it's VERY badly expressed here, at least in English. It looks for all the world like Vygotsky's saying that Bleuler has a position which is "the same conclusion" as Freud and Piaget.
 
Interestingly (and rather scandalously) Kozulin/Hanfmann and Vakar simply cut the knot instead of trying to untangle it. They have this, at the BEGINNING of the next paragraph (rather than the END of the previous one):
 
"It is quite remarkable that it was a biologically oriented psychologist, Eugen Bleuler, who developed a critique of the aforementioned concept of child autism."
 
It is obviously the same sentence, and it does indeed say what Vygotsky then has Bleuler saying. But it doesn't say what VYGOTSKY says!
 
David Kellogg
Seoul National University of Education

--- On Mon, 9/22/08, Anton Yasnitsky <the_yasya@yahoo.com> wrote:

From: Anton Yasnitsky <the_yasya@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: [xmca] More Problems With Chapter Two
To: xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
Date: Monday, September 22, 2008, 8:09 AM

  
> a) On p. 57, just after the first long Piaget quote,
> Minick's got "Rational or directed thinking is
> social." But Mecacci's got "La prima forma du
> pensiero e sociale". I interpret this to mean "The
> first form of thought is social", very different.

Vygotsky discusses the distinction between rational or directed thought AND
undirected or autistic (sensu Bleuler, the teacher of Piaget), quotes from
Piaget, and then he says:

Pervaya forma myshleniya sotsial'na. -- Literally: The first form of
thinking is social.

I interpret this to mean:

The former form of thinking [i.e. rational or directed thinking] is social ---

which is not -- "The first form of thought is social", or "La
prima forma du pensiero e sociale" (unless 'la prima' in this
contexst can mean 'the former'--I guess it might:
http://dictionary.reverso.net/english-italian/former ), very different indeed.

Then, in the following sentences Vygotsky discusses, in turn, autistic thought
(see Minick's translation, p. 57).

So, Minick is absolutely right, is he not?

 
> b) On p. 58,  bottom of the page, Minick's got
> "Following K.D. Larson". But the ref in Piaget is
> clearly to Hans Larsson, a Swedish poet, who Piaget calls
> "M. Larsson", author of "La logique de la
> poesie". The Kozulin version of Hanfmann and Vakar has
> Hans Larsson. Who is K.D.Larson?
>  

This question should be addressed to the editors of the volume of the Russian
edition, 1982 and even the one of 1956. At least one thing is cliear: none of
them either had the book by Piaget or cared to check out the reference. In the
edition of 1934 Vygotsky says "Following Larson, Piaget, etc."

> c) On p. 59, second Piaget quote. Minick's got
> "All the writers who have concerned themselves with the
> play, the testimony and the lives of children have realized
> this." Mecacci says that the Russian ed has
> mistranslated "mensonges" as "mysl". And
> Minick's got "lives" for "lies"!

Three points:
1. Indeed, Minick seems to have inserted the V into lies in the quotation from
the 1928 translation of Piaget's Le jugement la raisonnement chez
l'enfant:
http://books.google.com/books?id=W6q3qAVVP5oC&pg=PA202&dq=%22Lustprinzip+is+prior
. However, I personally would suspend judgement until I see the French original
(which does not mean that I do not trust Mecacci, still...).

2. Note, Vygotsky referred to the Russian translation of Piaget's book of
1932, therefore, I would attribute the mistakes in rendering Piaget's
'mensonges' to the errors in this translation rather than to a
"Russian ed" who "has mistranslated 'mensonges' as
'mysl'". Interestingly, in the 1994 version of the Russian
translation of the Piaget's book that I have this paragraph remains exactly
as it is in Vygotsky's quote. Yet another reason to check out Piaget's
original.

3. Anyway, Vygotsky's quote is quite far from Piaget's phrasing, so I
would not be surprised to find many more discrepencies between Piaget's text
and Vygotsky's quotations. However, one should keep it in mind that Vygotsky
himself knew the work of Piaget very well and had the first-hand knowledge of
his works, reading the stuff obviously in the original.

 
> d) On p. 62, end of the second para,  Minick's got
> this: "It is of particular interest that biologically
> oriented theories in particular that of Bleuler who
> developed the theory of autistic thinking, have reached the
> same conclusion," i.e. that autistic thinking precedes
> the reality principle.

Exactly the opposite. I believe it is not Minick but L.S. Vygotsky who fairly
clearly points out that (emphasis added):

Autistic thinking is NOT, however, the first stage in the mental development of
either the human species or the child. It is NOT a primitive function, not the
point of departure for the whole of development. Is is NOT the basic or initial
form from which all others take their beginning. NOT EVEN for biological
evolution or the biological analysis of infant behaviour does autisitc thinking
warrant the status suggested by Freud and accepted by Piaget. [...]
It is of particular interest that biologically oriented theories, in particular
that of Bleuler who developed the theory of autistic thinking, have reached this
same conclusion.
http://books.google.com/books?id=u8UTfKFWb5UC&pg=PA62&dq=Autistic+thinking+is+NOT,+however,+the+first+stage+in+the+mental+development+of+either+the+human+species+or+the+child

      __________________________________________________________________
Yahoo! Canada Toolbar: Search from anywhere on the web, and bookmark your
favourite sites. Download it now at
http://ca.toolbar.yahoo.com.
_______________________________________________
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
Received on Mon Sep 22 23:03 PDT 2008