Re: [xmca] Redundancy in "Tool and Sign" (translations EUREKA!)

[Bella Kotik-Friedgut <bella.kotik@gmail.com>]

Why not to  ask Elkchonon Goldberg <eg@elkhonongoldberg.com>, and Peeter
Tulviste <peeter.tulviste@riigikogu.ee>?

2011/7/10 mike cole <lchcmike@gmail.com>

> I am sure of nothing, Anton... except what I wrote.
> I realize that they are not entirely texts yet, but you might try asking
> asking Tulviste and Goldberg about it! I almost certainly have a foggy
> memory for such things after so many years.
>
> I agree with David's comments about translation-- we have gotten to the
> point where serious, aiming at definitive-- translations of what Vygotsky
> wrote are certainly appropriate. Your efforts to get things straight are
> much appreciated. As to the usefulness of mind in society, I prefer to
> leave
> such judgments to others. As Robert suggested, it may yet provide a useful
> entry point for some. (I personally find Bodrova and Leong's little book
> aimed at pre-school helpful for students).
>
> I agree with you about casual citations. Didn't we see a reference here to
> "drive by citations" of Bakhtin, lately?
> And how about such "deeply read" authors as Heidegger, Foucault,
> Latour........?
>
> Think of it as an academic rumor mill. It goes with the academic territory.
> Like ISI indices.
> mike
>
> On Sat, Jul 9, 2011 at 2:42 PM, Anton Yasnitsky <the_yasya@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
> > ...Mike, this is truly a huge eureka, quite spontaneous question
> following
> > my current excavations:
> >
> > Could you please remember as best as one can what exactly *they* told you
> > about Tulviste and Goldberg's participation in the translation of Tool
> and
> > Sign/Symbol? Are you 100 % sure this was meant to be a translation from
> > Russian into English, and not, as paradoxically as it may sound, vice
> versa?
> >
> > Were the latter true, it would explain a lot!
> >
> > AY
> >
> > ------------------------------
> > *From:* mike cole <lchcmike@gmail.com>
> > *To:* "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
> > *Sent:* Saturday, July 9, 2011 2:31:38 PM
> > *Subject:* Re: [xmca] Redundancy in "Tool and Sign"
> >
> > You guys should have seen the typography shop at Moscow State in the
> early
> > 1960's -- like Singer sewing machines from the 1920's. Paper? You have
> got
> > to
> > be joking!
> >
> > Anton-- The story I heard, from those who should know, is that Peter
> > Tulviste and
> > Nick Goldberg were involved in the production of that English version I
> > got.
> > What they were given I do not know. That THEY did a lot of messing with
> the
> > text is doubtful, although mistranslations could, of course, abound.
> > SomeoneS else must have.... people who kept track of it during the
> > evacuation in 1941, others who got it into the hands of those who gave it
> > to
> > me.
> >
> > If the authorities at the airport had found those papers in my luggage I
> > would have been one very unhappy camper, and so would those who broke
> > Soviet
> > law to "get it out." I had no idea in the world that "it" would get very
> > far
> > out and like a lighted match on a pool of gasoline, cause a boom. I
> thought
> > no one would bother to read it.
> > I would like to think that the boom did not kill anyone.
> >
> > It will be more fascinating lifetimes of work to figure out what "it" is.
> > Good luck hunting!
> > mike
> >
> > On Sat, Jul 9, 2011 at 1:11 AM, David Kellogg <vaughndogblack@yahoo.com
> > >wrote:
> >
> > > The version of "Tool and Sign" that is printed in the Vygotsky Reader
> > (van
> > > der Veer and Valsiner, 1994; can be downloaded for free from Andy's
> > Vygotsky
> > > site on MIA) has eliminated many MANY pages of redundancy in the
> interest
> > of
> > > readability.
> > >
> > > At first I thought this was a good idea. But the other day it occurred
> to
> > > me that this was exactly the reason given by Hanfmann and Vakar for
> > > eliminating nearly HALF of Thinking and Speech when it was translated
> > into
> > > English.
> > >
> > > Anton has pointed out that compilations like "Mind in Society"
> performed
> > an
> > > extremely important function: without "Mind in Society", I would not be
> > > reading "Tool and Sign" today.
> > >
> > > But Anton ALSO pointed out that this function really lies in our past
> > now.
> > > Vygotsky is here, and he's not going to disappear, at least not as a
> > name.
> > > The real danger now is that the Vygotsky everybody is reading will bear
> > no
> > > resemblance to the Vygotsky that Vygotsky wrote.
> > >
> > > Anton even pointed out what we need to do about it: produce an edition
> of
> > > Vygotsky's work that is authoritative and annotated, like the sort of
> > thing
> > > done by the Freud Society and the Jean Piaget society.
> > >
> > > That means going back to see if the redundancies are really
> redundancies.
> > > And the answer is YES and NO.
> > >
> > > Here's an example:
> > >
> > >
> > > Chapter Two: Такие функции, как произвольное внимание, логическая
> память,
> > > высшие формы всприятия и движения, которые до сих пор изучались в
> > изоляции,
> > > как отдельные психологические факты, теперь в свете наших экспериментов
> > > выступают по существу как явления одного порядка .
> > >
> > > Chapter Three: Такие функции, как произвольное внимание, логическая
> > память,
> > > высшие формы восприятия и движения, которые до сих пор рассматривались
> > > изолированно, как частные психологические факты, выступают в свете
> наших
> > > экспериментов в качестве явлений одного психологического порядка,
> > >
> > > In other words (roughly):
> > >
> > > Chapter Two: Functions such as arbitrary attention, logical memory,
> > highest
> > > forms of sensation and motion which until now were studied in isolation
> > as
> > > separate psychological facts, now in light of our experiments emerge as
> > > actually phenomena of one and the same order.
> > >
> > > Chapter Three: Functions such as arbitrary attention, logical memory,
> > > higher forms of perception and movement are still considered in
> > isolation,
> > > as isolated psychological facts appear in the light of our experiments,
> > as
> > > the phenomena of one psychological order,
> > >
> > >
> > > This is just an example! Actually, there are several pages of this,
> where
> > > Vygotsky and Luria simply uptake what they said at the end of the
> > previous
> > > chapter. You can see that the idea is repeated--but not word for word.
> > >
> > > It's not just "Tool and Sign" either. There is a moment in the middle
> of
> > > Chapter Six in Thinking and Speech when Vygotsky appears to begin the
> > whole
> > > book all over again from the very beginning (6-2-28).
> > >
> > > So what's going on? I think what is happening is that Vygotsky has a
> > > PHENOMENAL but memory for words. He carries around GREAT chunks of
> almost
> > > completed text in his head, and uses them in lectures, internal
> seminars,
> > > discussions, and also on paper. When he sits down to write, the
> argument
> > > comes out almost, but not quite, word for word. And then he forgets
> what
> > he
> > > said and says it again, SLIGHTLY differently.
> > >
> > > What is to be done? I guess what we are going to do (in the Korean
> > version
> > > of this book) is to go ahead and print the redundancies, but set them
> off
> > in
> > > a different font so that the reader can skip them if he or she so
> > chooses,
> > > following the principle that in an authoritative addition all of the
> > changes
> > > to a historical text have to be reversible by the reader so that the
> > > original authorial text is recoverable by the reader.
> > >
> > > And then annotate it! That's really the fun part. Here's what I really
> > > think Vygotsky's getting at in this passage. Imagine looking at an
> actual
> > > scene (say, a night-time view from your balcony).The ability to
> > distinguish
> > > the distant background from the proximal foreground is a natural
> > function. A
> > > small child or even an animal could probably do the same thing in much
> > the
> > > same way.
> > >
> > > Now imagine looking at van Gogh's "Starry Night". The ability to
> > > distinguish the distant background from the proximal foreground is no
> > longer
> > > given; it must be learned. We know, for example (from experiments that
> I
> > > have done here in Korea) that small children can find it difficult to
> > > distinguish the reflection of the lights in the water from the lights
> on
> > the
> > > horizon, and the lights on the horizon from the stars in the Big
> Dipper.
> > An
> > > animal would certainly not treat this as a real scene or even a picture
> > of a
> > > scene.
> > >
> > > Finally, imagine reading a text (e.g. F. Scott Fitzgerald's Great
> Gatsby,
> > > where the hero has to pick out a light on his one-time lover's dock
> > amidst
> > > the night-time stars). When we read a text we are easily able to
> discern
> > the
> > > main characters from the minor ones (we can pick out Gatsby and Daisy
> > from a
> > > host of lesser characters, such as Wolfsheim, Dan Cody and even Nick
> > > Carraway, the narrator, who is not actually a central character). But a
> > > child could never do this, even if the child could read (nor could an
> > animal
> > > if we showed the animal a movie). The child would assume that the
> > narrator
> > > is a main character, because being able to tell the figure from the
> > ground
> > > is a skill that is fundamentally transformed when it is structured in
> > words.
> > >
> > > Vygotsky thinks that these are NOT co-existing and qualitatively
> > different
> > > functions (which is what Thorndike thinks). Nor are they one and the
> SAME
> > > skill (which is what the Gestaltists think). Instead, the thinks that
> > they
> > > are different moments in the cultural formation (note: formation, and
> not
> > > evolution) of the child's personality out of words.
> > >
> > > We can see that this has DIRECT relevance for the argument that
> Vygotsky
> > is
> > > going to make years later in defense of GENERAL, LIBERAL education
> > > (Herbart), where one GENERAL skill such as grammar, mathematics, and
> > foreign
> > > language learning can have a radical effect on many others .  (See
> > Thinking
> > > and Speech, 6-3-23~27). No wonder Vygotsky likes to repeat
> himself--there
> > is
> > > an AWFUL lot there to assimlate, and none of us are going to get it the
> > > first time.
> > >
> > > Vygotsky liked to say, "In the beginning was the deed. But that was
> just
> > > the beginning, you know!" For me, in the beginning, there was "Mind in
> > > Society" (where you can actually still find this bit of text if you
> look
> > > hard enough). But that was just the beginning.
> > >
> > > David Kellogg
> > > Seoul National Univesity of Educaiton
> > > __________________________________________
> > > _____
> > > 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
>



-- 
Sincerely yours Bella Kotik-Friedgut
__________________________________________
_____
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca