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

Re: [xmca] Sign & Symbol



Vygotsky says that a symbol is a tool used for changing someone's (or one's own) mind; a tool is used for changing nature. He insists on a qualitative difference based on the object acted upon. But he also says that the introduction of a tool into a child's system of activity radically re-organises that system of activity (and thus the thinking of the child) and genetically the tool is a precondition to the symbol. Personally, I have never been convinced that this works as a dichotomy, but the functional distinction and its implications stand clearly enough.

Andy

mike cole wrote:
In a side discussion of related matters, Huw got me thinking back about the
diagrams he was making
and I was led to remember my thoughts upon trying to interpret them.

*What, from a Vygotskian perspective, is the relation between sign and
symbol? How does this relationship
related to what one might be imagining when they write about the inner and
outer sides of words (& The Word)?
Are signs and symbols assignable to separate "genetic domains" in the
Vygotskian sense?*

I do not feel on solid ground when thinking about these matters. But they
seem important. It seems like an awful
lot to think about all at once.

mike
__________________________________________
_____
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca



--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Andy Blunden*
Joint Editor MCA: http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/title~db=all~content=g932564744
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@weber.ucsd.edu
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca