[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [xmca] Re: microgenesis?
On 15 October 2012 23:36, Greg Thompson <greg.a.thompson@gmail.com> wrote:
> Certainly no harm in free associating, but perhaps better not to freely
> interpret. It would indeed be difficult to interpret lytical as meaning
> "loosening" in the text you provided. But it does leave me still wondering
> why the word was translated as "lytical". And as to how this might contrast
> with "critical" - I'm at a loss. (but the do set up a nice rhyme scheme).
>
>
"turning point in a disease" according to this etymology dictionary:
http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?allowed_in_frame=0&search=crisis&searchmode=none
Huw
As for the rest, the molecular accumulation model of "lytic"(?) and
> "gradual" development does suggest that there is a place for the kind of
> concern with micro-interactional contexts that are of most interest to me -
> even if those contexts don't show abrupt and critical developments. So the
> gist of this passage remains appealing even if I can't make sense of the
> "long-term cryptic molecular process" that V is describing. Anyone else
> have insight here?
>
> -greg
>
> p.s. The mole spirit may be a bit too much reification of development for
> me.
>
>
> On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 12:39 AM, Andy Blunden <ablunden@mira.net> wrote:
>
> > I see no harm in a bit of free association here, Greg. Here is Vygotsky's
> > own words on the topic.
> > (I have bolded what Vygotsky associates with lytcal and underlined what
> he
> > is contrasting with lytical):
> >
> > By purely empirical studies, psychology established that age-level
> > changes may, in the words of Blonsky, occur _abruptly and
> > critically_, or may occur *gradually and lytically*. Blonsky terms
> > as /periods and stages /the times of the child’s life that are
> > separated from one another by more (periods) or less (stages)
> > _abrupt crises_; phases are times of the child’s life separated from
> > each other *lytically*.
> >
> > Actually, at certain age levels, development is marked by *slow,
> > evolutionary, or lytic flow*. These are age levels of predominantly
> > *smooth and frequently unremarkable internal change* in the child’s
> > personality, change that is accomplished by *insignificant
> > “molecular” attainments*. Here, over a *more or less long time* that
> > usually takes several years, no _fundamental, abrupt shifts and
> > alterations_ occur that _reconstruct_ _the child’s whole
> > personality_. More or less remarkable changes in the child’s
> > personality occur here only as a result of a *long-term cryptic
> > “molecular” process*. They appear outside and are accessible to
> > direct observation *only as a conclusion of long-term processes of
> > latent development*.
> >
> > During r*elatively firm or stable* ages, development occurs mainly
> > through *microscopic change*s in the child’s personality *that
> > accumulate* to a _certain limit_ and _then appear spasmodically in
> > the form of some kind of neoformation_ of the age level.
> >
> > "Well burrowed, Old Mole!"
> > http://www.marxists.org/**glossary/terms/o/l.htm#old-**mole<
> http://www.marxists.org/glossary/terms/o/l.htm#old-mole>
> >
> > Andy
> >
> > Greg Thompson wrote:
> >
> >> and one last pitch for my (blind!) interpretation of "lytic":
> >>
> >> Lytic as loosening or breaking down before re-incorporation feels to me
> a
> >> lot like Hegel's "aufheben" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/**Aufheben<
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aufheben>)
> >> or "sublation" of the two elements in the dialectic. Lysing as taking
> apart
> >> the pieces and assembling them into something new that couldn't
> otherwise
> >> have been. That is Hegelian genesis, no? The source of creativity?
> >> At bottom, all "development" (regardless of timescale) involves the
> >> problem of change and creativity. How does something new come into being
> >> that wasn't already there?
> >>
> >> And as I said, my interpretation of "lytic" is severely blind and Andy's
> >> reading of the text suggests to me that I am connecting a few too many
> >> dots. But it is fun business to try to make (new?) sense of these
> things.
> >>
> >> I'm currently looking into aktualgenese in the Leipsig tradition, but I
> >> don't know the extent of Hegel's influence there. I assume that Vygotsky
> >> would have been influenced by folks there, but the names I'm coming
> across
> >> there don't seem to come up in Vygotsky's writings much - Wilhelm Wundt,
> >> Friederich Sander, Kleine-Hurst, and Erich Wohlfart. Certainly Vygotsky
> >> would have known of Wundt, but are there meaningful links here from
> >> aktualgenese to Vygotsky's notion of genesis and development?
> >>
> >> Hopefully tomorrow I'll be able to return to micro-genesis - right now,
> >> too busy trying to rock my little micro-genetic to sleep. Hard to type
> >> while swaying back and forth...
> >>
> >> -greg
> >>
> >> On Sun, Oct 14, 2012 at 11:26 AM, mike cole <lchcmike@gmail.com<mailto:
> >> lchcmike@gmail.com>> wrote:
> >>
> >> Thanks very much Andy and all who jumped in to indicate their
> >> interest.
> >> I will replace the file online at lchc website with Andy's
> >> improved version.
> >>
> >> The re-admiration of "lytic" that Greg introduced is really thought
> >> provoking to me. It also puts me in mind of the meaning of culture
> >> that
> >> goes with biological research which urges us to think about the
> >> relation
> >> between culture and "medium." All useful.
> >>
> >> With respect to the polysemy of "development" and "learning." In
> >> *The Construction Zone, *Denis Newman, Peg Griffen, and I struggled
> >> enough so that we often gave up and used "change" which of course
> >> elides the difficulties but does not solve them.
> >>
> >> With respect to this learning/development discussion I think we
> >> are still
> >> struggling to get ourselves clear about whether the notion of
> "genetic
> >> domain" or "time scales" matters. In this discussion, at least, I
> have
> >> been struggling to get us to focus on short time intervals. Very
> >> often,
> >> as in Andy's earlier notes and in Helen's recent note with the
> helpful
> >> reminders about Marianne H's writing, the time scale is
> >> *ontogenetic -*
> >> years.
> >>
> >> I am all for discussion of these time scales!! But the issue that
> >> Greg put
> >> on the table was about micro time scales (or I thought that was
> >> what the
> >> topic was). From our discussion so far (I have not had a chance to
> >> read
> >> Huw's note carefully and have certainly forgotten other relevant
> >> contribution, so I may be overgeneralizing) I got the strong
> >> impression that
> >> it was being argued that at short time scales, the term
> >> development in any
> >> meaningful sense, does not apply.
> >>
> >> So, being interested in notions like a zone of proximal
> >> development, which
> >> presumably applies to interactions on a time scale closer to
> >> minutes than
> >> lifetimes, I have tried to get a focus there.
> >>
> >> I am arguing that if the term, development, is inappropriate at this
> >> briefer time scale, then there should be some very serious
> >> reconsideration
> >> of Vygotsky's use of the zone of proximal development, since
> >> development
> >> would be ruled out in all the examples he gives by virtue of the
> >> short time
> >> scale. So people who confuse a zone of proximal learning for a zone
> of
> >> proximal development have been right all along, just using
> misleading
> >> terminology.
> >>
> >> mike
> >> PS-- And while we are at it, a reconsideration of LSV's idea that
> in a
> >> zoped "one step in learning" should produce "two steps in
> >> development" also
> >> seems in order. My intuition is that Davydov was trying to point
> >> us right
> >> at that problem, and that his germ cell approach to development
> >> was his way
> >> of trying to deal with the issue, but others could probably speak
> >> to that
> >> better than I.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> *
> >> *
> >>
> >> On Sun, Oct 14, 2012 at 2:47 AM, Andy Blunden <ablunden@mira.net
> >> <mailto:ablunden@mira.net>> wrote:
> >>
> >> > Mike, I have attached a modified version of the document about
> >> "Question
> >> > Asking Reading." Two pages which were out of order have been
> >> replaced in
> >> > order and I have embedded OCR so it should be searchable.
> >> Perhaps you could
> >> > replace NEWTECHN.pdf
> >> <http://lchc.ucsd.edu/People/****NEWTECHN.pdf<
> http://lchc.ucsd.edu/People/**NEWTECHN.pdf>
> >> <http://lchc.**ucsd.edu/People/NEWTECHN.pdf<
> http://lchc.ucsd.edu/People/NEWTECHN.pdf>
> >> >>
> >> > on the server with this one?
> >> >
> >> > Now, my hat off to the authors of this paper. I am sure others
> >> on this
> >> > list knew about *Question Asking Reading*, but I was not one of
> >> them. You
> >> > define reading as "/expanding/ the ability to mediate one's
> >> interactions
> >> > with the environment by interpreting text." You recognise that a
> >> child
> >> > already has an ability to "read the world" and is probably already
> >> > proficient in mediating their reading of the world by
> >> interacting with
> >> > adults, so learning to read is constructed upon this base. This
> >> is clearly
> >> > drawing on Vygotsky (credit to Piaget as well), and taking
> >> reading as a
> >> > specific kind of collaborative process rather than just a
> >> technical process
> >> > of decoding. You call on Luria's idea of "combined motor method"
> to
> >> > introduce an approach to combining diagnostic tasks with
> >> teaching tasks.
> >> > And you call on A N Leontyev to solve the crucial problem of the
> >> child's
> >> > motivation for learning to read.
> >> >
> >> > (As an aside I much enjoyed the observation of how prominent it
> >> was for
> >> > the children to engage in discussion about the relation between
> >> "growing
> >> > up" and learning to read. My one and only experience of teaching
> >> a child to
> >> > read hinged around this discussion. We were living in a very
> remote
> >> > location in the UK and her older brother was old enough to
> >> attend the
> >> > mixed-age primary school, but Sam was too young. This
> >> hyperactive, very
> >> > physical child suddenly focused on reading with startling
> >> intensity and
> >> > learnt to read fluently inside of a week. ... despite our
> >> explanations
> >> > about the legal age of public school attendance. But very soon
> >> the school
> >> > willingly bent a rule or two and admitted her. :) )
> >> >
> >> > Now I grant that my contributions to this thread have not gone
> >> within a
> >> > mile of the issues raised in this paper. But my interests and
> >> experience
> >> > are in social transformation, not teaching and learning in
> >> elementary
> >> > schools. But I am willing to listen and learn.
> >> >
> >> > A point of clarification on my side.
> >> >
> >> > ZPD. I have heard it said that ZPD is relevant only to the
> >> critical phases
> >> > of development. I have also heard that ZPD was not a discovery
> >> of Vygotsky.
> >> > For my part, I don't see any reason why this simple idea is not
> >> applicable
> >> > to any learning situation. And likwise if you want to introduce
> >> the concept
> >> > of "development" into qualitative achievements in the lytical
> >> phase of
> >> > development under the heading of "microgenesis" to distinguish
> >> it from the
> >> > whole process of growing into an adult citizen through a series
> >> of distinct
> >> > social roles, I see no problem with this. ... Only provided we
> >> understand
> >> > that if a child soldier who learns one day how to torture a
> >> prisoner, which
> >> > they were formerly reluctant to do, this is "development" in a
> >> different
> >> > sense, because it creates only a barrier to becoming a citizen of
> a
> >> > community governed by democratic norms. But it would remain
> >> "microgenesis"
> >> > if considered in cultural isolation. What makes every step along
> >> the road
> >> > of learning to read in countries like ours /development/ is that
> >> (as you
> >> > discussed with the kids) being able to read is a /sine qua non/
> >> of being a
> >> > grown up in our world. Torturing your peers is not.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > In your message of almost 24 hours ago you said:
> >> >
> >> > "If what you write is correct, what does the word DEVELOPMENT mean
> >> > in the concept of a zone of proximal DEVELOPMENT? ... classroom
> >> >
> >> > lessons are clusters of events that take place in microgenetic
> time
> >> > WITHIN ontogenetic lythic periods.Where does that leave us?"
> >> >
> >> > I am perfectly prepared to live with a lot of polysemy with a
> >> word like
> >> > "development" when one moves from context to context. Provided
> >> only we
> >> > don't claim that there is /no qualitative distinction/ between
> >> the little
> >> > developments that add up to development during a lytic phase,
> >> and the
> >> > change in social position of a child which is constituted by
> >> successful
> >> > completion of both lytic and critical phases of development. In
> >> that sense
> >> > there is development and development. If that is how you are
> >> deploying the
> >> > word "microgenesis," then fine. I just don't see any real
> >> disagreement.
> >> >
> >> > Andy
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > mike cole wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> Hi Andy--
> >> >>
> >> >> I made it home through a ton of LA traffic alive, which,
> >> microgenetically
> >> >> feels good whatever the larger significance.
> >> >>
> >> >> When you write "I personally regard it as a matter or "mere
> words"
> >> >> whether "child X at last managing to recognize the difference
> >> between d
> >> >> and b today," for example, is described as a development" it is
> >> clear that
> >> >> you and I are not close enough to the same topic for me to know
> >> how to make
> >> >> progress.
> >> >> It also appears that no more than four of the some 700 people
> >> on xmca
> >> >> give a damn about this topic, so lets go offline about it,
> >> cc'ing Greg,
> >> >> and David,
> >> >> if he has patience to hang with us.
> >> >>
> >> >> mike
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 8:44 AM, Andy Blunden
> >> <ablunden@mira.net <mailto:ablunden@mira.net> <mailto:
> >> >> ablunden@mira.net <mailto:ablunden@mira.net>>> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> Yeah, whoever translated Vygotsky's "Problem of Age" is
> >> >> responsible. It just means /gradual/. So in a process of
> >> >>
> >> >> development, you have alternating critical and lytical phases, as
> >> >> in stepwise processes.
> >> >>
> >> >> Andy
> >> >>
> >> >> Greg Thompson wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >>> Apologies for the intrusion, but I had a quick point of
> >> >>> clarification, for the uninitiated, what is meant by "lytic"?
> >> >>> (all I could come up with pertained to "lysis" or the breaking
> >> >>> down of cells - which would seem to suggest a different sense of
> >> >>> "development" - a breaking down so that things can be
> >> >>> reintegrated. Is that the idea?).
> >> >>> -greg
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 9:15 AM, Andy Blunden
> >> <ablunden@mira.net <mailto:ablunden@mira.net>
> >> >>> <mailto:ablunden@mira.net <mailto:ablunden@mira.net>>> wrote:
> >> >>>
> >> >>> I don't know where Americans being dolts comes into it, Mike.
> >> >>> Some of my best friends are Americans. :) But let's move on
> >> >>> from that.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> The point, as I see it, is trying to extract from what we can
> >> >>> reaonsably understand Vygotsky to be saying, something which
> >> >>> we believe could be correct and significant. To do this I
> >> >>> think we have to understand the concept of "development"
> >> >>> always in a particular context. A truism for anyone here I
> >> >>> think. What it means to me is that I cannot just ask: what
> >> >>> transformations in psychological functioning constitutes
> >> >>> "development"? The necessary, relevant context is what role
> >> >>> in what cultural and historical community is the person to
> >> >>> play, in the short term and in the longer term. So the
> >> >>> question of what constitutes development is age-specific,
> >> >>> culturally specific and future-oriented.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> (Of course, the world changes, and what was development
> >> >>> yesterday may become oppressive and detestable tomorrow and
> >> >>> vice versa, but let's abstract from cultural and historical
> >> >>> change for the moment.)
> >> >>>
> >> >>> >From the standpoint of natural science what I have posed is
> >> >>> an absurdity and incompatible with basic tenets of science
> >> >>> ... because I have made development dependent on events and
> >> >>> relations in the future. In my opinion, that is just as it
> >> >>> should be: kids go to school "for a purpose" - although what
> >> >>> we mean by "purpose" in this context (the child's? the
> >> >>> parents'? the state's? in retrospect? under advice?
> >> >>> sponatneous?). But again, let's just put the problems arising
> >> >>> from the idea of human actions being part of object-oriented
> >> >>> activities to the side for the moment.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> So you ask: "what does the word DEVELOPMENT mean in the
> >> >>> concept of a zone of proximal DEVELOPMENT?"
> >> >>>
> >> >>> I have to ask /which/ zone of proximal development, which
> >> >>> crisis or lytic period are we talking about. Now I guess we
> >> >>> can manage to give a general answer to the question: general
> >> >>> questions require general answers. What "development" means
> >> >>> is relative to which ZPD you are talking about. On the other
> >> >>> hand, the presence of the ZPD itself depends on the
> >> >>> development being posed. Achievment of a specific new mode of
> >> >>> action with those around you, transforming your relations and
> >> >>> your identity and your actions in the social situation
> >> >>> depends on the expectations of those around you, according to
> >> >>> broader cultural expectations and possibilities.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> A teacher or other "helper" interested in fostering
> >> >>> development (if they can be presumed to reflect general,
> >> >>> broader cultural expectations) has in mind what new
> >> >>> functioning will be a necessary step towards the child
> >> >>> becoming an autonomous citizen of the community.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> As Vygotsky insists, this poses for the child and her
> >> >>> "helper" two different kinds of situation: either /lytical/
> >> >>> development or /critical/ development. Lytical development is
> >> >>> gradual and prepares the basis for developmental leap. To
> >> >>> argue whether the gradual progress made in strengthening the
> >> >>> relevant psychologhical functions in this phase is or is not
> >> >>> development is in my opinion /just words/. Gradual
> >> >>> accumulation of strength in those activities which the child
> >> >>> is basically able to do, but maybe not very confidentally and
> >> >>> well is a necessary preparation for transcending their
> >> >>> age-role and entering into a phase of critical development in
> >> >>> which they have a chance of successfully coming out the other
> >> >>> side. It is by completion of the critical phase of
> >> >>> development - the leap - which transforms the child's
> >> >>> identity and role, that "/the development" is realised/. All
> >> >>> the preparation in the world proves to be not development if
> >> >>> it is not realised in facilitating the critical transformation.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> So, excuse me please for however imperfectly rehearsing
> >> >>> egg-sucking for grandma's erudition.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> I personally regard it as a matter or "mere words" whether
> >> >>> "child X at last managing to recognise the difference
> >> >>> between d and b today," for example, is described as a
> >> >>> development. In the context of course it is; it is a step.
> >> >>> You want to call that a "microgenetic development"?
> >> >>> Personally I don't have a problem with that. David may, but
> >> >>> paraphrasing Oscar Wilde: "Microgenesis is not one of my
> >> >>> words." But if the child at last managed to repeat the
> >> >>> Gospel According to St Luke by rote, and you wanted to
> >> >>> describe this as a microgenetic development, I would want to
> >> >>> hear the developmental plan that made that claim coherent.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Where if anywhere does this leave us?
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Andy
> >> >>> My apologies for using so many words to say so little.
> >> >>> Just trying to be clear and careful.
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> mike cole wrote:
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Hi Andy--
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Well to begin with, thanks for keeping the discussion
> >> >>> alive. I am away from home without books or control of my
> >> >>> time, so I want to ask a question that may highlight what
> >> >>> is central to my queries here.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> If what you write is correct, what does the word
> >> >>> DEVELOPMENT mean in the concept of a zone of proximal
> >> >>> DEVELOPMENT? Its all fine and dandy to point out what
> >> >>> dolts Americans are for not understanding that learning
> >> >>> leads DEVELOPMENT in classroom instruction, that but
> >> >>> classroom lessons are clusters of events that take place
> >> >>> in microgenetic time WITHIN ontogenetic lythic periods.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Where does that leave us?
> >> >>>
> >> >>> mike
> >> >>>
> >> >>> PS- the url below lays out in some detail where the idea
> >> >>> of acquisition of reading as a cultural-historical
> >> >>> developmental process. Old and never published. But at
> >> >>> least we might refine what is indexed by the phrase
> >> >>> "learning to read."
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> http://lchc.ucsd.edu/People/****NEWTECHN.pdf<
> http://lchc.ucsd.edu/People/**NEWTECHN.pdf>
> >> <http://lchc.ucsd.**edu/People/NEWTECHN.pdf<
> http://lchc.ucsd.edu/People/NEWTECHN.pdf>
> >> >
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 7:32 PM, Andy Blunden
> >> >>> <ablunden@mira.net <mailto:ablunden@mira.net>
> >> <mailto:ablunden@mira.net <mailto:ablunden@mira.net>>
> >> >>> <mailto:ablunden@mira.net <mailto:ablunden@mira.net>
> >> <mailto:ablunden@mira.net <mailto:ablunden@mira.net>>>>
> >> >>> wrote:
> >> >>>
> >> >>> So this thread does not die ...
> >> >>> You said, Mike, "So I am seeing the same solution to
> >> >>> thinking
> >> >>> about the ontogeny/microgenesis relationships by
> >> >>> analogy with the
> >> >>> phylogeny/cultural-history relation."
> >> >>>
> >> >>> I don't see the analogy there. Phylogeny and
> >> >>> ethnogeny are two
> >> >>> (overlapping and mutually determining) processes with
> >> >>> two very
> >> >>> distinct material bases, viz., genes and artefacts.
> >> >>> But learning
> >> >>> to read/write and development of abstract thinking
> >> >>> (and other
> >> >>> leading activities in a developmental ZPD) is not
> >> >>> such a relation,
> >> >>> it is a relation between critical phases and lytic
> >> >>> (gradual)
> >> >>> phases of development. This is quite a different
> >> >>> relationship.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> The analogy I would see for something which couold be
> >> >>> called
> >> >>> microgenesis would be the /situation/: a concept develops
> >> >>> momentrily in a person and their actions in a
> >> >>> situation. The
> >> >>> situation is not a factor in phylo- or ethnogensis,
> >> >>> it essentially
> >> >>> belongs to the very short time scale, and its
> >> >>> material basis is
> >> >>> activity. I grant that no-one might use
> >> >>> "microgenesis" in that way
> >> >>> and no-one may be doing research into that process
> >> >>> these days. I
> >> >>> don't know. But the situation is a distinct material
> >> >>> basis for
> >> >>> development and one on which Vygotsky did a great
> >> >>> deal of work. On
> >> >>> the other hand, I think /all/ processes of
> >> >>> development have both
> >> >>> critical and lytical phases (c.f. Gould's punctuated
> >> >>> evolution).
> >> >>>
> >> >>> What do you think?
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Andy
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> ______________________________****____________
> >> >>> _____
> >> >>> xmca mailing list
> >> >>> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
> >> <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>>
> >>
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/****listinfo/xmca<
> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/**listinfo/xmca>
> >> <http://dss.ucsd.**edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca<
> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca>
> >> >
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> -- Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D.
> >> >>> 883 Spencer W. Kimball Tower
> >> >>> Department of Anthropology
> >> >>> Brigham Young University
> >> >>> Provo, UT 84602
> >> >>>
> >> http://byu.academia.edu/****GregoryThompson<
> http://byu.academia.edu/**GregoryThompson>
> >> <http://byu.**academia.edu/GregoryThompson<
> http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson>
> >> >
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >> --
> ------------------------------****----------------------------*
> >> *--
> >> >> **------------
> >> >>
> >> >> *Andy Blunden*
> >> >> Home Page: http://home.mira.net/~andy/
> >> <http://home.mira.net/%7Eandy/**>
> >> >> <http://home.mira.net/%7Eandy/****<
> http://home.mira.net/%7Eandy/**>
> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >> Book: http://www.brill.nl/concepts
> >> >>
> >> >> ______________________________****____________
> >> >> _____
> >> >> xmca mailing list
> >> >> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
> >> <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>>
> >>
> >> >>
> >> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/****listinfo/xmca<
> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/**listinfo/xmca>
> >> <http://dss.ucsd.**edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca<
> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca>
> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> > --
> >> > ------------------------------****----------------------------**
> >> --**
> >> > ------------
> >> >
> >> > *Andy Blunden*
> >> > Home Page: http://home.mira.net/~andy/
> >> <http://home.mira.net/%7Eandy/**>
> >>
> >> > Book: http://www.brill.nl/concepts
> >> >
> >> > ______________________________**____________
> >> > _____
> >> > xmca mailing list
> >> > xmca@weber.ucsd.edu <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
> >>
> >> > http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/**listinfo/xmca<
> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca>
> >> >
> >> >
> >> ______________________________**____________
> >> _____
> >> xmca mailing list
> >> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
> >>
> >> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/**listinfo/xmca<
> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D.
> >> 883 Spencer W. Kimball Tower
> >> Department of Anthropology
> >> Brigham Young University
> >> Provo, UT 84602
> >> http://byu.academia.edu/**GregoryThompson<
> http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson>
> >>
> >>
> > --
> > ------------------------------**------------------------------**
> > ------------
> >
> > *Andy Blunden*
> > Home Page: http://home.mira.net/~andy/
> > Book: http://www.brill.nl/concepts
> >
> > ______________________________**____________
> > _____
> > xmca mailing list
> > xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> > http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/**listinfo/xmca<
> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca>
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D.
> 883 Spencer W. Kimball Tower
> Department of Anthropology
> Brigham Young University
> Provo, UT 84602
> http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson
> __________________________________________
> _____
> 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