[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [xmca] concepts for LSV and us
Hi Martin & Monica
Monica,
you wrote,
Also, I'd like to add here the notice of the use of metaphor as generative
or creative as a discernible increase in generalization, or conceptual
change. Does the recognition of a double-meaning or a deeper meaning occur
in the word choice before the utterance or after? Does what might be
considered a spontaneous activity then become a mediating influence?
Monica
In my understanding of metaphor as Lakoff and Johnson use the term, metaphor
[especially PRIMARY metaphor] is PRIOR to word choice. They suggest that
there are foundational metaphors which are similar to Jung's notions of
"archeypes" as basic structurings [conceptual structurings???] that are the
inner form that are manifested in *communication* [more general than
discourse] I'm not sure if my reading of their text is how they were
meaning the term *primary* metaphor but it is how I read their meaning.
The primary metaphor of "container* as a foundational concept I find
intriguing as it points to the centrality of *structure* when understanding
human development. Bradd Shore also points to the centrality of
*containment* when he writes,
We need not choose between structuralist and praxis-oriented accounts of
meaning construction. Formalist accounts of knowledge structures employ
constructs like schemata, mental models, and prototype effects.
Praxis-oriented perspectives treat meaning construction as a creative and
ongoing process that accompanies practical activities and problem solving
and involves analysis of *discourses* IN EXPERIENCE rather than structures
OF EXPERIENCE.
The very objectified knowledge structures that have come under such
insistent attack by post-structuralists as reifications are likely an
essential and an *essentialist* MOMENT in all cultural cognition. The
attack on structuralist strategies of cultural knowledge has tended to
assume that reification is practised as outsiders interested in
appropriating authentic cultural experience of others as a form of
domination....
Yet cultural processes include reification as a necessary MOMENT in both
individual understanding and social coordination of experience. It is
important to distinguish the sort of subversive reifications against which
the new ethnographic sensibility is directed from other reifications that
are INTRINSIC to cultural cognition. Otherwise, culture itself becomes
inextricably identified with structures of domination, a position that is
deeply problematical.
Since reification occurs only AS PART OF a larger dialectic by which these
structures are re-created in experience, neither reification nor praxis
alone can CONSTITUTE THE ESSENCE of cultural analysis. A GENERAL theory of
culturally mediated meaning construction should make clear the RELATIONS
BETWEEN the objectifying and the creative dimensions of meaning making."
{American Anthropologist, Vol. 83 Issue 1 pages 9-27 March 1991].
Bradd Shore's article read in conjunction with Anna Stetsenko's article's on
*transformative activist stance* and Lakoff & Johnson's notions of primary
metaphors leaves me pondering how essential is a motivating *sense* of
*containment* in folk psychology discourse [in tension with emancipatory
narratives of transformation.] Hermeneutics speaks to images of containment
and therefore is sometimes labelled *traditional* & conservative [in its
focus on historical consciousness as GIVEN] However, Martin's exploration
of "inner FORM" may be another discourse which is exploring themes which
lakoff and Johnson are labelling primary metaphor and hermeneutics frames as
foundational.
Just curious
Larry
On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 7:53 PM, Monica Hansen <
monica.hansen@vandals.uidaho.edu> wrote:
> Larry,
> Also, I'd like to add here the notice of the use of metaphor as generative
> or creative as a discernible increase in generalization, or conceptual
> change. Does the recognition of a double-meaning or a deeper meaning occur
> in the word choice before the utterance or after? Does what might be
> considered a spontaneous activity then become a mediating influence?
> Monica
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu] On
> Behalf Of Martin Packer
> Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2011 5:46 PM
> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
> Subject: Re: [xmca] concepts for LSV and us
>
> Larry,
>
> It's interesting, isn't it, that Leopold confirmed my suspicion that
> metaphor should be thought of as part of the inner form of the word. And
> metaphor has both its established, one might say conventionalized, versions
> such as the "love is a journey" metaphor and others that Lakoff has
> articulated, and its creative and spontaneous versions, the fresh metaphors
> we invent on the spot and in the moment.
>
> I think you're correct, Anna's word play is designed to evoke an
> understanding in the recipient that more conventional word choices would
> not
> permit.
>
> Martin
> On Apr 27, 2011, at 9:14 AM, Larry Purss wrote:
>
> > Martin & Jay & Anna and others
> >
> > Commognition as a term Anna has coined to capture a relation between
> > communication and cognition has an historical context that is a
> particular
> > example of what I think Anton Marty is referring to as *inner form* .
> The
> > article Martin posted by W. Leopold in 1929, exploring Anton Marty's
> notion
> > of inner form, [that challenged Wundt's principle of parallelism of mind
> and
> > language as a DIRECT outgrowth of mind] was helpful to try to grasp
> Marty's
> > notion of inner form and Martin's further elaboration.
> >
> > For Leopold and Marty the SOURCE of language is NOT self-expression but
> > rather the DESIRE for communication. Creation therefore is purposeful,
> > teleological and USES an inner form by CHOOSING EXPRESSIONS which are
> > generally associated with the meaning the speaker is attempting TO EVOKE
> > intersubjectively in order to communicate. The speaker chooses a
> particular
> > form that will LEAD [mark] the hearer to the correct *understanding*.
> > However Leopold suggests if a universally associated form is not
> available
> > [in the discourse community],
> >
> > "he selects another form, the habitual meaning of which is closely enough
> > related to the actually desired one, by either contiguity or analogy, to
> be
> > likely TO LEAD the hearer to the correct understanding with the help of
> the
> > context. Such an AUXILIARY concept Marty called (with Steinhal) the
> > *etymon*, or, more frequently, the inner speech form." (p. 257)
> >
> > This auxiliary meaning LEADS or EVOKES in the hearer "primarily a
> conception
> > which was NOT the desired meaning, but which helped to grasp it. Leopold
> > suggests EVERY metaphor falls under this category of *inner form* as
> > auxiliary concept. A speaker can boldly choose to create a new form as
> > auxiliary meaning to EVOKE a specific meaning better than the
> conventional
> > terms. Anna's term *commognition* can be seen as an example of evoking a
> > specific meaning that relates communication and cognition.
> >
> > Jay, you qualified your post with the comment,
> >
> > I just want to say that IF LSV meant that conceptual thinking happens
> ONLY
> > through verbal signs, then I would disagree insofar as I believe it
> happens
> > through more complex multi-modal sign resources, including not only
> > language, but also visual signs, motor actions functioning as signs,
> > emotional feelings functioning as signs, and pretty much anything
> > functioning as a sign insofar as it can be "imagined", i.e. function in
> > inner-directed meaning-making. (For outer-directed meaning-making actual
> > physical objects / artifacts can also play a part in the total mix.)
> >
> > I hope as this conversation moves forward that *images* as they relate to
> > commognition and concepts are elaborated. I agree with you that
> emotional
> > feelings function as signs. In conclusion, when talking about the place
> of
> > *desires* in development the centrality of the desire to communicate
> > [intersubjectivity, not self-expression] as foundational to
> > cultural-historical/subjective development seems a good place to start
> >
> > Larry
> >
> >
> >
>
> __________________________________________
> _____
> 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