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

Re: [xmca] Was Tool and Sign Retranslated From English?

My source:

I had a copy (in English) with the notion -" translation approved by AL".
It was a copy that Sylvia Scribner had in her files. I have since send that
copy to Mike Cole - who is more knowledgable than I about the provenance. I
believe that was the copy that found its way in to Mind in Society (though
not sure about that). When Mike received the MS he offered a an opinion
about the MS.. Tool and Sign was, I believe, intended for the first volume
of the Manual of Child Psychology (in English). In the MS it was "authored"
by Vygotsky and Alexander Romanovitch Luria. I also believe that Elkohonon
Goldberg was the translator. I believe it was translated *to* the English
in order to be published in English.

Joe Glick

On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 7:52 AM, David Kellogg <vaughndogblack@yahoo.com>wrote:

> In the prologue to Volume Four of the English language Collected Works of
> L.S. Vygotsky (Plenum 1997, p. vi), Joseph Glick says that Tool and Sign in
> Child Devleopment was translated from the English manuscript. This claim is
> also made in van der Veer and Valsiner's Understanding Vygotsy (Blackwell,
> 1991, p. 188).
> But on p. 174 of the Vygotsky Reader, footnote 60 refers to a handwritten
> note on the English manuscript that refers the reader to a
> "Russian original". This MIGHT suggest that the Russian original was lost
> and the the Russian version printed in the Russian Collected Works
> (and also translated into English in the volume introduced by Professor
> Glick) really was translated from the English.
> But that version is clearly in a less heaviliy edited state (with far more
> repetitions and redundancies). This has been explained by "editorial
> manipulations". But the problem is that the repetitions and redundancies
> are not word for word; it's not the sort of thing a manipulating editor
> would do.
> But it is the sort of thing that an author who had large amounts of text
> virtually memorized (for the purpose of classes) might do in the days
> before cutting and pasting on a computer. That is, Vygotsky and/or Luria
> would have a huge amount of argument almost word for word in several places
> in the manuscript and then cut one or the other before translation for
> publication (when they noticed the redundancy).
> Does anyone know Professor Glick?  I would like to know about the claim
> that the Russian manuscript was retranslated from English.
> David Kellogg
> Hankuk University of Foreign Studies
> mbol
> __________________________________________
> _____
> xmca mailing list
> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
xmca mailing list