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

RE: [xmca] concepts

Thanks for this quote, Andy. 
I think this highlights function, or use in a socially shared, meaningful context as a method of acquisition, from conscious and deliberate learning. It is easier to see this distinction in young children because they do not recognize sign in the generalized way as those with more experience do. Once the use of sign is "discovered and consolidated" as this passage says, does the other system of learning cease developmentally or does it continue throughout development only harder to discern? Is this ability to learn/way of learning a facet of culture or development?


-----Original Message-----
From: xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Andy Blunden
Sent: Thursday, April 14, 2011 6:51 AM
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: Re: [xmca] concepts

Martin, looking more closely at the internal/external structure in T&S IV:

    "We believe that this view comes closest to the truth. The data on
    children’s language (supported by anthropological data) strongly
    suggest that for a long time the word is to the child a property,
    rather than the symbol, of the object; that the child grasps the
    external structure word-object earlier than the inner symbolic
    structure. We choose this “middle” hypothesis among the several
    offered’ because we find it hard to believe, on the basis of
    available data, that a child of eighteen months to two years is able
    to “discover” the symbolic function of speech. This occurs later,
    and not suddenly but gradually, through a series of “molecular”
    changes. The hypothesis we prefer fits in with the general pattern
    of development in mastering signs which we outlined in the preceding
    section. Even in a child of school age, the functional use of a new
    sign is preceded by a period of mastering the external structure of
    the sign. Correspondingly, only in the process of operating with
    words first conceived as properties of objects does the child
    discover and consolidate their function as signs."**

It seems clear to me that "external structure" of the word is the set of 
objects that it refers to, more or less the reference in Frege's 
categorisation, and the "internal structure" is the word's symbolic 
functioning, which of course has nothing to do with specific objects, 
more or less the sense in Frege's categorisation. This is consistent 
with the child forming pseudoconcepts.

Thank you for these stimuli

Martin Packer wrote:
> In five of the eight chapters (counting the preface) of T&S, LSV introduces a distinction that he insists is important if we are to correctly understand how speech has psychological consequences. In each case the distinction seems different, and his terminology varies accordingly: we have word meaning, inner aspect, external and internal structure, sense and reference, sense and signification. I've summarized these below, ordered by chapter, and cited the Russian where it is available to me. I have also suggested some possible sources for these distinctions. Any help figuring this out further would be greatly appreciated!
> Martin
> =============
> Preface (1934?): the meanings of words 
> “word meanings [значения слов] develop in children”
> Chapter 1 (1933-34): Inner aspect of the word [внутренней стороне слова]
> “what is such unit, which cannot be further resolved and in which the properties are inherently contained in verbal thinking as whole? To us it seems that this unit can be found in the internal aspect of the word [внутренней стороне слова], in its meaning [значении.].”
> 	von Humboldt?
> 	Shpet?
> Chapter 2 (1932): none
> Chapter 3 (1932?): none
> Chapter 4 (1929):  external structure [внешней структурой] and internal structure [внутренней внутренней]
> “the child, as we saw, grasps the external structure earlier than the internal one; the child seizes the external structure: word-thing, which only later becomes a symbolic structure.” [ребенок, как мы видели, раньше овладевает внешней структурой, чем внутренней. Он овладевает внешней структурой: слово — вещь, которая уже после становится структурой символической.]
> Chapter 5 (1931): sense and reference 
> “The first thing that we can learn from contemporary linguistics is that, according to Peterson, it is essential to distinguish between the meaning of a word or expression and its objective reference, i.e. the objects which this word or expression indicates.” [Первое, что мы узнаем из современного языкознания, это то, что необходимо отличать, по выражению Петерсона, значение слова или выражения от предметного отнесения, т.е. от тех предметов, на которые данное слово или выражение указывает.]
> “So contemporary linguistics does make a distinction between the meaning and the objective reference of words.” [Таким образом, современное языкознание различает значение и предметную отнесенность слова]
> 	Gottleib Frege?
> 	Edmund Husserl?
> Chapter 6 (1934): none 
> Chapter 7: (1933-34):  sense [смыслом ] and signification [значением]
> “The first of these is the predominant sense of the word over its meaning in speech inner. Paulhan rendered a great service to the psychological analysis of speech by introducing the distinction between the meaning of the word and its meaning.” [Мы могли в наших исследованиях установить три такие основные особенности, внутренне связанные между собой и образующие своеобразие смысловой стороны внутренней речи. Полан оказал большую услугу психологическому анализу речи тем, что ввел различие между смыслом слова и его значением.]
> 	Paulhan?
> __________________________________________
> _____
> xmca mailing list
> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca

*Andy Blunden*
Joint Editor MCA: 
Home Page: http://home.mira.net/~andy/
Book: http://www.brill.nl/default.aspx?partid=227&pid=34857
MIA: http://www.marxists.org

xmca mailing list
xmca mailing list