[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: RE: [xmca] moral life of babies

Rod and Larry -- Finally arriving home after two weeks of hithering and

Yes, Alan Fogel is very relevant.
Yes, all of this is central to understanding human communication.
Question: The pattern Martin describes with Sarah and Jenny (hmmm, i once
had a little one named Jenny) appears very wide spread among
American middle class mothers. It appears virtually absent in a lot of
cultures (Kaluli, Yucatec Maya........). Seems doubtful that the Kaluli or
the Maya lack imagination or communication. What might be the functional

On Wed, May 12, 2010 at 1:02 AM, Rod Parker-Rees <
R.Parker-Rees@plymouth.ac.uk> wrote:

> Hi Larry,
> I think Reddy's 2nd person model of interaction highlights the fact that we
> have been distracted by a focus on the thinking aspects of communication so
> that the feeling aspects have been downplayed or even overlooked altogether.
> For me 'imagination' has primarily 'thinky' associations but I suspect that
> it would be a more valuable concept if it was expanded to include the full
> scope of intuitive, pre-conscious 'gut-feelings' as well as the 'mental
> imagery' to which it is often reduced (I suspect that you, too, would want a
> richer meaning for imagination).
> Another person whose ideas I have found really powerful is Alan Fogel,
> whose 1993 book 'Developing through relationships: origins of communication,
> self and culture' introduced the term 'co-regulation' to describe the
> continuous reciprocity which informs nearly all forms of communication. In
> adult-baby interactions the adult clearly takes a bigger role in
> co-regulation but in later forms of communication (e.g. writing a letter or
> sending a message to a discussion group) the co-regulating partner/s may be
> imagined or internalised models of how other people might be imagined to
> react/respond. You are never alone with a culture.
> All the best,
> Rod
> -----Original Message-----
> From: xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu] On
> Behalf Of Larry Purss
> Sent: 11 May 2010 17:56
> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
> Subject: Re: RE: [xmca] moral life of babies
> Hi  Rod, and Martin.
> Martin, can you give us more details on when your new book will be
> published.?
> Mike Cole mentioned he has a lot of sympathy about the notions of
> "reciprocity" and Martin's 2 articles definitely put reciprocity at the
> center of development.
> Martin asked us "What do you think? and my answer is that this topic is
> foundational for understanding "communication" and our notions of what that
> term "means"
> I want to respond to a specific point in Martin's masters thesis [1983]  On
> page 28 he describes an interaction between Jenny and Sarah [mother] and
> their interaction of smiling and sticking out their tongues. Martin says
> several aspects of this interaction stand out as striking.
> 1)Sarah TAKES Jenny's actions AS IF they are manifesting "intentions"
> though this clearly goes BEYOND Jenny's actual capabilities to form
> intentions.[interpretive]
> 2) Sarah talks AS THOUGH Jenny is issuing an invitation to "play"
> [interpretive] though this is a CONCEPT Jenny cannot yet possess.
> 3)Sarah TAKES subsequent tonguings AS THOUGH they are part of A DIALOGUE
> [interpretive]
> 4) Two of Sarah's comments to Jenny make SENSE IF ONE IMAGINES an
> intervening reply by Jenny [To me the term "imagine" is central to Martin's
> notion of communication.
> At the heart of what Martin is trying to explicate is the centrality of
> IMAGINATION to the process of interpretation within a RECIPROCAL INTER
> actional pattern of activity [could it also be called "motivation"]  It
> depends on how you differentiate motivation from activity.
> The other central notion being pointed out by Martin is that this
> communicational pattern is ALWAYS OPEN-ENDED and that "motivation/intention"
> is ALWAYS being reciprocally NEGOTIATED in patterns of ENGAGEMENT [response
> and withdrawal]
> Rod I believe Reddy's dialogical 2nd person account of reciprocal
> communication is narrating an account of communication that has many
> parallels with Martin's reciprocal account of the foundations of
> communication.
> Martin, that's what I think at the moment
> Larry
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Rod Parker-Rees <R.Parker-Rees@plymouth.ac.uk>
> Date: Tuesday, May 11, 2010 1:09 am
> Subject: RE: [xmca] moral life of babies
> To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
> > Thanks for this Martin,
> >
> > The image that came to mind reading your last sentence was of
> > surfing - the child is caught by the wave of an existing culture
> > and swept along with the cultural practices going on around her
> > but it doesn't take long before she is kneeling on her board and
> > then standing up and then carving the wave (I have no personal
> > experience of surfing on actual water!). What may be missing
> > from this analogy, however, is the active concern by certain,
> > local, familiar parts of the wave to keep her afloat.
> >
> > All the best,
> >
> > Rod
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-
> > bounces@weber.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Martin Packer
> > Sent: 08 May 2010 21:16
> > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
> > Subject: Re: [xmca] moral life of babies
> >
> > Mike has added several names to the list of infancy researchers
> > whose work we need to consider, and I haven't even finished yet
> > with Jean Mandler! Then there are my messages to David about T&L
> > that still need to be completed. So I need to play for time, and
> > to do so I'm attaching yet another 'young' publication, the
> > longitudinal case-study of infant-mother interaction that was
> > accepted as a masters thesis by UCBerkeley, on the condition
> > that I considered it to be officially a failure.
> >
> > It's written with youthful arrogance (especially the title!),
> > and with too phenomenological a turn of phrase at times. But
> > perhaps people on the list can get their teeth into it and tear
> > off the bits that have little value, and we'll see what's left.
> > Without having read a word of Vygotsky at the time I proposed
> > that "It is possible, perhaps even likely, that it is by
> > observing the effects on others of our utterances that we
> > discover our own intentions, make them conscious, and hence are
> > able to act more deliberately in the future." And I suggested that:
> >
> > "There is a level of shared meanings that is constantly referred
> > to, and constantly developed; and so the infant's schemes will
> > inevitably take a form that depends not only on her bodily
> > structure (the basis of knowledge for Piaget) but which also
> > reflects the norms, values, expectations, and roles - in short,
> > the practices - of the society she is born into. These social
> > meanings are at first not represented, but simply lived; the
> > infant's bodily dispositions will reflect and express them in an
> > unreflective, preconscious fashion. The 'task', so to speak, for
> > the adults who interact with the infant is to make available to
> > her the shared meanings of their society by making them relevant
> > to her own interests and needs, at the same time redirecting
> > those interests into more mature forms. The child is involved in
> > communication from birth. Her task is not to learn how to begin
> > to communicate, but to learn how to gain mastery of what she is
> > doing already."
> >
> > What do you think?
> >
> > Martin
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
> _______________________________________________
> xmca mailing list
> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
xmca mailing list