Re: [xmca] Translations: just quit using and referring to Vygotsky (1962, 1978, 1986)!!

[Robert Lake <boblake@georgiasouthern.edu>]

LSV would agree I am sure, since to him, meaning is dialectical process
involving continual collaboration, including translation from one language
to another..

2011/7/3 mike cole <lchcmike@gmail.com>

> PS-- It strikes me that whether I agree or disagree in individual cases,
> David Ke's constant thinking about the translation/theory issue in relation
> to varieties of relevant data is a useful place to look for somone
> seriously
> trying to figure out where translation differences make a difference.
>
> mike
>
> 2011/7/3 mike cole <lchcmike@gmail.com>
>
> > A coupla remarks.
> >
> > I have been a huge beneficiary of the continued translations,
> discussions,
> > interpretations of Vygotsky's work that got started in earnest in the
> late
> > 1970's.
> >
> > Calling the labor prior scholars "unusuable" assumes an attitude toward
> the
> > certainty of translation across intellectual/cultural/language traditions
> > about "the one right translation" that I believe unfortunate.
> >
> > The word research, in English, carries within in it the spirit of inquiry
> > that seems to
> > fit this threat pretty well:  to research, re-search, is to search again.
> > To search for meaning in those of someone's ideas that made it into
> print,
> > giving it the illusion of "the original."
> >
> > The pressing question that this discussion seems to bring up is the
> > following:
> >
> > What difference(s) does a difference in translation make? What old,
> > unsolvable problems have been solved? What new apparently disparate sets
> of
> > ideas brought
> > together in a way to create deeper insight, for example, into the
> relation
> > between thought and language? Or the developmental signicance of written
> > language? Or?
> >
> > If our language is getting ever more precise and closer to THE TRUTH
> > shouldn't we be able to think/act more effectively?
> >
> > I think examples CAN be found of where translation/interpretation
> > differences make a difference. I would choose the scaffolding/zoped
> > discussion as one arena for such an inquiry.
> >
> > The mis-translations of "obuchenie" I was involved in were bi-directional
> > nationally and in each case traceable to implicit ideas about the domain
> of
> > phenomena under consideration. When we first discovered this mistake, we
> put
> > it into the LCHC newletter and teaching/learning became not only the term
> we
> > used in our discussions, it guided the way we organized children's
> > activities and how we thought about a lot of what we were doing.
> >
> > Hopefully July 3, 2011 is not the end of history.
> >
> > mike
> >
> > On Sun, Jul 3, 2011 at 9:19 AM, Anton Yasnitsky <the_yasya@yahoo.com
> >wrote:
> >
> >> A coupla remarks.
> >>
> >>
> >> FIRST.
> >>
> >>
> >> RE David Kellogg wrote:
> >> ....You yourself have said you did not want
> >> to use the MIT press version anymore. In their latest article on what
> >> needs to be done in English, van der Veer and Yasnitsky have called the
> >> Minick translation is "unusable". Meccaci is the best translation we
> have
> >> (according to van
> >> der Veer). It's the ONLY translation of the original 1934 edition, you
> >> know; ALL the others to date go back to 1956
> >>
> >> If only I were to speak on behalf of  van der Veer and Yasnitsky (just
> in
> >> case, the ref is van der Veer, R. & Yasnitsky, A. (2011). Vygotsky in
> >> English: What still needs to be done [html && pdf]. Integrative
> >> Psychological and Behavioral Science; DOI: 10.1007/s12124-011-9172-9
> >>  ; the full text free of charge as pdf or html is here:
> >> http://www.springerlink.com/content/278j5025767m2263/ ), I would simply
> >> say:
> >>
> >> Hey, guys! Please, could you quit referring to the outdated and
> >> essentially false editions of:
> >> (a) Vygotsky (1962). Thought and Language and its derivative
> >> (b) Vygotsky (1986). Thought and Language,
> >> and, finally,
> >> (c) Vygotsky (1978). Mind in Society
> >>
> >> Vygotsky *never* wrote *none* of these books! All of these were quite
> good
> >> back then and very much instrumental to where we are now (and many
> thanks to
> >> Mike Cole, Vera John-Steiner and their teams, and many others who made
> these
> >> editions possible back then), and are totally useless now. So, again,
> just
> >> *don't use them*!
> >>
> >> INSTEAD, for instance, for Thinking and Speech (also notoriously known
> as
> >> Thought and Language, 1939, 1962, 1986), just use another translation,
> quite
> >> imperfect, but not quite unusable and definitely the best we have in
> >> English:
> >>
> >> ** Vygotsky, L. S. (1987). Thinking and Speech. In R.W. Rieber & A.S.
> >> Carton (Eds.) The collected works of L. S. Vygotsky, Vol. 1, Problems of
> >> general psychology (N. Minick, Trans.), pp. 39-285
> >>
> >> SECOND.
> >> As to David's remark that the Italian version of the text is the only
> one
> >> done from the 1934 original, -- I would not be so sure about that. Thus,
> >> e.g., long ago van der Veer mentioned "excellent translations" into
> German
> >> (1964) and Danish (1982); see p. 177 here:
> >>
> http://www.docstoc.com/docs/23054700/Thought-and-Language-Lev-S-Vygotsky-(newly-revised-translated.
> None of the languages are really among my strengths, but anybody
> >> interested is welcome to verify the van der Veer's claim.
> >>
> >> THIRD.
> >>
> >>
> >> RE Andy Blunden wrote:
> >> ...
> >> "category" sometimes means "kategoria" ...
> >>
> >>
> >> No, Andy. "Category" *always* means "kategoriia". And vice versa. But
> >> certainly not "collision" :). Feel free to verify this in any
> >> English-Russian-English (or any other)
> >> dictionary
> >>  available on the surface of the Earth.
> >>
> >>
> >> Cheers,
> >> Anton
> >>
> >>
> >> ________________________________
> >> From: Andy Blunden <ablunden@mira.net>
> >> To: David Kellogg <vaughndogblack@yahoo.com>
> >> Cc: Culture ActivityeXtended Mind <xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
> >> Sent: Sunday, July 3, 2011 12:23:40 AM
> >> Subject: [xmca] Translations
> >>
> >>
> >>  David, your project of tracking the various translations is valuable in
> >> itself. The work of a great and subtle writer like Vygotsky, takes a
> >> long time to make itself entirely clear though the fog of translations.
> >> And your work in that respect is important. But the problem of thoughts
> >> being lost in translation should also, in my view, not be exaggerated.
> >> For example, when a friend first brought a photocopy of the 1962
> >> translation of T&S back to Melbourne from the States, I immediately
> >> recognised the work of a Marxist and a genius in what I read. And yet,
> >> it is said that all the Marxism and all the genius had been translated
> >> out of that work. I am now very conscious of how inadequate that
> >> edition (not to say "translation") was. There is the same issue with
> >> Hegel. Hegel is very difficult to render in any language other than
> >> German. Sometimes, there is no alternative, in decoding a particularly
> >> obtuse piece, than to use my electronic copy of his CW in German. But
> >> generally, I have to say that contrary to what some claim, it is
> >> possible to understand Hegel in English translation, even 19th century
> >> translations. And one learns, over time, the special problems, the
> >> special German words and common translation errors, etc.
> >>
> >> So my point is: discussion of Vygotsky is a collective, shared
> >> project. If no-one is deemed to have access to Vygotsky's ideas
> >> (clear or otherwise) except if they use the original Russian, then we
> >> are all barred from discussion (unless you provide a selected
> >> retranslation for us). Therefore, for the sake of dialogue and joint
> >> discussion, we must use published English translations that we can all
> >> gain access to, read and understand, and if there is a particular
> >> problem with a particular passage (eg "remove" means "aufheben",
> >> "category" sometimes means "kategoria", "experience" is perezhivanie",
> >> "activity" is not necessarily Taetigkeit, or this or that line was
> >> omitted, etc., etc.) then someone should say so in the particular
> >> instance, and we all learn more and more as we go on, and still we all
> >> discuss the same shared text. Eventually, your work will
> >> contribute to achieving that I am sure, David.
> >>
> >> Martin Luther and King James of England, figured it out 500 or so years
> >> ago. And who knew what God really said anyway?
> >>
> >> OK?
> >>
> >> comradely,
> >> Andy
> >> :)
> >>
> >> David Kellogg wrote:
> >> Well, if the Vygotsky quote does not say what I claimed it
> >> said, it is probably that I expressed my own views rather clumsily. I
> >> often do.
> >> >
> >> >But I'm puzzled. You yourself have said you did not want
> >> to use the MIT press version anymore. In their latest article on what
> >> needs to be done in English, van der Veer and Yasnitsky have called the
> >> Minick translation is "unusable".
> >> >
> >> >Meccaci is the best translation we have (according to van
> >> der Veer). It's the ONLY translation of the original 1934 edition, you
> >> know; ALL the others to date go back to 1956, which has not a few
> >> political revisions.
> >> >
> >> >Do you want the original Italian? Do you want the Russian?
> >> Do you want MY translation? I am--as ever--more than happy to oblige:
> >> just tell me what you are looking for.
> >> >
> >> >I thought you had invented some new-fangled emoticon for
> >> expressing grouchiness. But I see you are just doing it the old
> >> fashioned way. Korean emoticons are, like traditional Korean script,
> >> read vertically; you don't have to tilt your head to see their
> >> iconicity. We also don't smile with our mouths, but with our eyes.
> >> >
> >> >Like this: ^.^
> >> >
> >> >David Kellogg
> >> >Seoul National University of Education
> >> >
> >> >PS: Here's something I read in Chapter Two of "Tool and
> >> Sign" this morning.
> >> >
> >> >Как
> >> логическое следствие из признания решающей важности использования
> >> знаков для истории развития высших психических функций в систему
> >> психологических категорий вовлекаются и внешние символические формы
> >> деятельности, такие, как речевое общение, чтение, письмо, счет и
> >> рисование.
> >> >
> >> >It
> >> says, if you trust my translation anyway, "As a logical consequence of
> the
> >> acknowledgement of the
> >> decisive importance of the use of signs for the history of the
> >> development of the higher mental functions into a system of
> >> psychological categories, external symbolic forms of activity, such, as
> >> verbal contact, reading, writing, counting and drawing are also
> >> implicated."
> >> >
> >> >There are lots of interesting things here, but the one
> >> that struck me was the use of "category". It doesn't, actually, suggest
> >> a theatrical conflict. So at least as of 1930, Anton is right.
> >> >
> >> >d
> >> >
> >> >--- On Sat, 7/2/11, Andy Blunden <ablunden@mira.net> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >>From: Andy Blunden <ablunden@mira.net>
> >> >>Subject: Re: [xmca] Numbers - Natural or Real?
> >> >>To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
> >> >>Date: Saturday, July 2, 2011, 6:31 PM
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>David, you cast doubt on the ancient
> >> idea that mathematics is the science of quantity and said that Vygotsky
> >> was clear on this. If Vygotsky is so clear, then you wouldn't need to
> >> go to an English translation of an Italian translation to find Vygotsky
> >> refuting the idea that mathematics is the science of quantity. But your
> >> re-translation doesn't say this anyway. The colon was a typo.
> >> >>
> >> >>-----------------
> >> >>
> >> >>But let's take up the interesting point you raise anyway, even though
> >> it does not say what you claimed it said, it is nonetheless interesting
> >> and pertinent.
> >> >>
> >> >>Am I right here? A child learns to survey the perceptual field and
> >> point to things one after another reciting "one," "two,"three," ... and
> >> then remember the number they say as they complete the practice. This
> >> is called "counting." And I think it is a way children learn to
> >> abstract the units from a collection in their perceptual field -
> >> pointing to each ion turn and saying the next number. So I think they
> >> don't first abstract the actual objects and then abstract number from
> >> this. Learning the practice of counting is how they learn to abstract
> >> units from a whole.
> >> >>
> >> >>Now, and this is the wonderful thing I learnt from Anna. Just because
> >> the last number I said on completing counting wa "Five!" does not mean
> >> that I know that there are 5 things. In fact, "Five" is a property of
> >> my counting action; but I have to be taught to see "5" as a *property
> >> of the collection of actual things*. AND then I have to learn that "5"
> >> is a *quantity* (a cardinal as well as the last ordinal).
> >> >>
> >> >>So there are two big conceptual leaps involved *after *I learn to
> >> abstract things *by counting* them, before I get to the concept of
> >> quantity ... and the beginnings of a type of mathematics (since other
> >> types of mathematics will grow from other types of quantity).
> >> >>
> >> >>So Bill, I think the position may be this (and please, I am way out of
> >> my comfort zone here, but the July 4 holiday will be over soon and
> >> maybe the cavalry will come to our rescue.) Your kids can't see any 2s
> >> in the 5 of 54, because they see the 5 as an ordinal. They can see 2 2s
> >> in 4, because they have been told so countless times, But they haven't
> >> been able to generalise that knowledge because 5 does not "contain" 4,
> >> it is just the number "after" 4. OK? What do you think? Does that make
> >> sense?
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>Andy
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>David Kellogg wrote:
> >> >>> I don't understand this, Andy. The short answer is "Sure".
> >> >>>  What is YOUR short answer supposed to mean? In particular, what
> >> does the colon mean? I'm afraid the emoticons that we use in Korea are
> >> a little different.
> >> >>>  dk
> >> >>>
> >> >>> --- On *Sat, 7/2/11, Andy Blunden /<ablunden@mira.net>/* wrote:
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>>     From: Andy Blunden <ablunden@mira.net>
> >> >>>     Subject: Re: [xmca] Numbers - Natural or Real?
> >> >>>     To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
> >> >>>     Date: Saturday, July 2, 2011, 5:33 AM
> >> >>>
> >> >>>     So the short answer is ":no."
> >> >>>     a
> >> >>>
> >> >>>     David Kellogg wrote:
> >> >>>     > Sure, Andy!
> >> >>>     >  This is from Luciano Meccaci's translation of "Thinking
> >> and
> >> >>>     Speech", Chapter Six:
> >> >>>     >     > "If we may say so, the assimilation of a foreign
> >> language raises
> >> >>>     the level of the maternal language (rech) for the child as
> >> much as
> >> >>>     the assimilation of algebra raises to a higher level the
> >> child's
> >> >>>     arithmetic thinking, because it permits the child to understand
> >> >>>     any arithmetical operation as a particular case of algebraic
> >> >>>     operations, furnishing the child a freer, more abstract, more
> >> >>>     generalized and at the same time more profound and rich view of
> >> >>>     operations on concrete quantitites. Just as algebra frees the
> >> >>>     thinking of the child from its dependence on concrete numbers
> >> and
> >> >>>     raises it to a higher level of more generalized thinking, in
> >> the
> >> >>>     same way the assimilation of a foreign language in completely
> >> >>>     diverse ways frees verbal thinking from the grip of concrete
> >> forms
> >> >>>     and concrete phenomena of language."
> >> >>>     >
> >> >>>     >     > David Kellogg
> >> >>>     >
> >> >>>     > Seoul National University of Education
> >> >>>     >
> >> >>>     >     > --- On *Fri, 7/1/11, Andy Blunden /<ablunden@mira.net
> >> >>>     <
> http://us.mc1103.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=ablunden@mira.net
> >> >>/*
> >> >>>     wrote:
> >> >>>     >
> >> >>>     >
> >> >>>     >     From: Andy Blunden <ablunden@mira.net
> >> >>>     <
> http://us.mc1103.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=ablunden@mira.net
> >> >>
> >> >>>     >     Subject: Re: [xmca] Numbers - Natural or Real?
> >> >>>     >     To: "Culture ActivityeXtended Mind" <xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> >> >>>     <
> >> http://us.mc1103.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>>
> >> >>>     >     Date: Friday, July 1, 2011, 10:53 PM
> >> >>>     >
> >> >>>     >     Can you give us your reference here David, in a
> >> pubished
> >> >>>     >     translation of Vygotsky?
> >> >>>     >     andy
> >> >>>     >
> >> >>>     >     David Kellogg wrote:
> >> >>>     >     > ... I don't think that quantity IS the basic
> >> concept in
> >> >>>     >     mathematics, though. Vygotsky is pretty clear about
> >> this: just a
> >> >>>     >     preschooler has to be able to abstract actual objects
> >> away from
> >> >>>     >     groups in order to form the idea of abstract
> >> quantity, the
> >> >>>     >     schoolchild has to be able to abstract quantities
> >> away from
> >> >>>     >     numbers in order to form the idea of RELATIONS between
> >> >>>     quantities,
> >> >>>     >     or OPERATORS.
> >> >>>     >     >
> >> >>>     >
> >> >>>     >
> >> >>>     >     __________________________________________
> >> >>>     >     _____
> >> >>>     >     xmca mailing list
> >> >>>     >     xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> >> >>>     <
> >> http://us.mc1103.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
> >> >>>     >        <
> >> http://us.mc1103.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=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
> >> >>>     <
> >> http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/title%7Edb=all%7Econtent=g932564744>
> >> >>>     Home Page: http://home.mira.net/~andy/ <
> >> http://home.mira.net/%7Eandy/>
> >> >>>     Book: http://www.brill.nl/default.aspx?partid=227&pid=34857
> >> >>>     <http://www.brill.nl/default.aspx?partid=227&pid=34857>
> >> >>>     MIA: http://www.marxists.org <http://www.marxists.org/>
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>>     __________________________________________
> >> >>>     _____
> >> >>>     xmca mailing list
> >> >>>     xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> >> >>>     <
> >> http://us.mc1103.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=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
> >> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> ________________________________
> >>  *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
> >> __________________________________________
> >> _____
> >> 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
>



-- 
*Robert Lake  Ed.D.
*Assistant Professor
Social Foundations of Education
Dept. of Curriculum, Foundations, and Reading
Georgia Southern University
P. O. Box 8144
Phone: (912) 478-5125
Fax: (912) 478-5382
Statesboro, GA  30460

 *Democracy must be born anew in every generation, and education is its
midwife.*
*-*John Dewey.
__________________________________________
_____
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca