Вы не знаете, что это "семический анализ"?

[achilles-brazil.livejournal.com]

"Мы говорили уже, что первой и основной формой
нашего исследования является анализ высших
форм поведения; но положение в современной
психологии таково, что, прежде чем подойти к
анализу проблем, перед нами встает проблема
самого анализа" (Л.С. Выготский, 1931*)

* = История развития высших психических функций - Глава третья. 


Пожалуйста,

In some inner meetings of Vygotsky's group, around 1932-33-34, there was an interesting claim from him about methodological problem of the analysis: "Семический анализ есть единственный адекватный метод изучения системного и смыслового строения сознания" = something like: "[Semicheskii] analysis is the only adequate method for the study of the systemic and [smyslovoe] structure [or construction (?) = stroenie]" of consciousness" ("The Problem of Consciousness" - Collected Works - Volume I - this text was published before as: Л.С.ВЫГОТСКИЙ. Проблема сознания. Запись основных положений доклада 5.12.32 - Психология грамматики. Под редакцией А. А. Леонтьева и Т. В. Рябовой. 1968. - we here had a copy provide by Nikolai Veresov).

Well, in my Portuguese version I have a great problem not exactly because "stroenie" translation as "structure" - spite the word is not "struktura" - but mainly with "semicheskii" that was translated as "semiotic" and Vygotsky's word was not "semioticheskii" - French version translate the same "semitcheskii" has "sémantique" - but this is not so comfortable too, because "smyslovoe" in Portuguese was transformed in "semantic" too. But there is "semantika" and "semanticheskii" in Russian too, at least in present time. I don't know about actual familiarity of Vygotsky with terms such as "semiotics", "semantics", and so on, at that time...

How can we better translate "semicheskii analiz" today? Or, even better: by what methodological means did somebody actually proceed that kind of so important analysis, at that times? To what methodology Vygotsky concretely refereed with the term "semicheskii analiz" ("the only adequate method for the study of the systemic and "semantic" [smyslovoe] "construction" [stroenie] of consciousness")? -- The only title in Russian around this matter that in find in Google search was: Аснин, В. И. & Запорожец, А. В. (1935). Семический анализ языковых значений, усвоенных в школе. Сборник исследований харьковской группы; не был опубликован - something like Asnin, V.I & Zaporozhets, A.V. (1935) Semicheskii analysis of linguistic (?) meanings, adopted in school. Collection of investigations of Kharkov's group. ---> but this was not published...

Can I suppose that not only Vygotsky believed that "semicheskii analysis" was important, but even some people apply it in empirical research? Ow, sure... I can found many entries to "semic analysis" in contemporary semiotic studies, but seems to be no much in a "genetic" approach like is useful to Vygotsky's studies... A "sema" (сема) is "a unity of  the linguistic meaning", but current "semic analysis" seems to give no much importance to the developing character o meaning (and sense). Therefore I am very limited in choice an adequate translation, and even more limited in understand the actual concept... "semiotic analysis"(?), "analyse sémantique"(?), "semic analysis"(?) - this was not any kind of "concept formation" study, was it?

In addition I can say to you that I feel this is a methodological subject matter related to the very important question of the "textual analysis" – that is a necessary resource to study the own Vygotsky's and other Soviet/Russian relevant works in history of psychology... Can we find some kind of vygotskian methodology to study the meaning of the own vygotskian texts, for instance? I can remember that “semitcheskii analysis” perhaps could be nowadays related with studies in “Translation theory”, like Sirovatkin*, for instance… around the concept of “semicheskii akt”, quoted by A.A. Khudiakov:

«Одним из центральных в теории Сыроваткина является понятие семического акта, т.е., по существу, акта конструирования сентенционального знака. Последний обладает - и в этом мы склонны согласиться с автором – двумя модусами бытия: семиотическим и актуальным. С семиотической точки зрения знак рассматривается как элемент семиотической системы языка, а с актуальной – как всякий раз неповторимый и не воспроизводимый семический акт, происходящий в необратимом промежутке времени, и уже потому обладающий свойством уникальности: “о повторении семического акта в принципе не может быть речи, повторённый семический акт – это уже другой семический акт” [там же, 42]. Знак как часть семиотической системы (устойчивой, стабильной, в известной мере статичной, застывшей) – это не совсем то, что знак, как семический акт (высказывание). В последнем случае он, сохраняя системные свойства, приобретает некоторые новые, окказиональные, обусловленные спецификой конкретного речевого акта. В данном случае, по-видимому, имеет место дискурсивное приращение окказиональных смыслов к узуальным языковым значениям знаков и даже их трансформация, модификация и т.п. Эта двойная трактовка статуса знака позволяет Сыроваткину различать соответственно две лингвосемиотические дисциплины – лингвосемиотику языка и лингвосемиотику речи [там же, 25].»**

* = Сыроваткин С.Н. Теория перевода в аспекте функциональной лингвосемиотики. – Калинин: Изд-во Калининского гос. ун-та, 1978.

** = А. А. Худяков Сентенциональный уровень языка в свете теории семиозиса. Образование и культура Северо-Запада России. Вып.6. 2001.

What do you think?

Excuse me about naiveness of questions. Thank you very much.

Большое спасибо.

Achilles.

Comments

Re: Извините за беспокойство

[achilles-brazil.livejournal.com]

Ха, ха...
Конечно! Давайте играть "жизнь"! Not so easy game, nowadays... I return to the problem of social drama, and social actors, playing the game, trying to understand the rules, dreaming about create new and more just collective rules. So serious game, of course, sometimes for life or death. Semantic problems can be only the beginning. :-)

Re: Извините за беспокойство

[ipain.livejournal.com]

actually, i think we know rules by now pretty well.
the games are serious and fun, and we have respawns for deaths. =)

Re: Извините за беспокойство

[achilles-brazil.livejournal.com]

«Нет ничего абсолютно мертвого:
у каждого смысла будет свой
праздник возрождения»
(Бахтин, 1974)

Re: Извините за беспокойство

[ipain.livejournal.com]

Единственно адекватной формой словесного выражения подлинной человеческой жизни является незавершимый диалог.

ibid.

Re: Извините за беспокойство

[achilles-brazil.livejournal.com]

:)

Бахтин = «Единственно адекватной формой словесного выражения подлинной человеческой жизни является незавершимый диалог»

Выготский = «(...) едниственный адекватный метод (...)».

Re: Извините за беспокойство

[ipain.livejournal.com]

and they called him - eclectic! funny ppl

Re: Извините за беспокойство

[achilles-brazil.livejournal.com]

Perhaps "ecletic minds" tends to construct eclectic reading for anything else... Of course western Bakhtin's reception was even more confused/chaotic than Vygotsky's reception, in my opinion... But I read more Vygotsky than Bakhtin, until now - because I am psychologist, and is not so easy transfer things from literary aesthetics to concrete human psychology, spite a living human being looks much more as a work of art than like a Skinner's mouse... Even so, is not so easy... General epistemological problems about human sciences in Bakhtin's contribution seems to be more directly related with our methodological tasks nowadays, but from Dostoevsky's and Rabelais' artistic literary forms to the "stroenie" of a simple Achilles' consciousness, for instance, there is a large way to going through. :-) Speech genders seems to be an interesting key... because if Vygotsky talk about "word meaning" (semantic problem?) as unity of analysis, Bakhtin talk about "Высказывание как единица речевого общения." - and to stay in relation with a social gender is a characteristic that defines of the "viskazyvanie", beyond others... Seems to be a more common theoretical field for both literature and concrete human consciousness social genesis. Just guessing...

Re: Извините за беспокойство

[ipain.livejournal.com]

try reading bakthin (starting with "voloshinov" book, if u haven't read it yet) chronologically, western tradition reads him backwards.

Re: Извините за беспокойство

[achilles-brazil.livejournal.com]

I Read Bakhtin's/Voloshinov's - Marxism and philosophy of language... It was great, spite at the finish I have that problems for transpose discussion about "косвенная речь" in literary forms, to the same process in everyday life. But this was around ten years ago, I must to read again, perhaps trying to compare with Russian in the most complicated parts. Thank you. I read the "Freudizm" too - everything in Portuguese of course. But the one that I like more is "Problems of Dostoevsky poetics" - recently I perceive that there was two titles:

Проблемы творчества Достоевского 1929; Киев, 1994.
and
Проблемы поэтики Достоевского. М.,1963; 1974; 1979 (4-е изд.).

But I really do not know the actual difference, I try to compare and the titles of the chapters seems to be very close.

In Portuguese I do not know from what version it was translated...

Then there is a lot of work to do...

Thank you very much.

Re: Извините за беспокойство

[ipain.livejournal.com]

К философии поступка (http://www.philosophy.ru/library/bahtin/post.html)

Re: Извините за беспокойство

[achilles-brazil.livejournal.com]

Oh, sure. I read it too. What a wonderful book... I read in Spanish... But seemed to be more elliptic than the others. I liked so much Bakhtin's crictics about Nietzsche vitalism, his position about Jesus is very brave too, for that time, and there a critic to marxists too, if remember well... This is another book too read many times - certainly - a monumental aproach to human existence and "co-existence". There so many important Russian terms very difficult to translate - that have caused much confusion in the west... Subtle "semantic" distinctions like "postupk" and "akt" - sometimes borrowed, erased in translations by "action", and so on... I began to make a list of all te Russian terms, but I turn to other tasks - this is around 2005-2006, I guess... The Spanish edition has the virtue to put in commas several original Russian terms... And this is very useful... For instance, we have "SOznanie" in Vygotsky, and in Bakhtin we have "SObytie"!!! Could be not only a happy coincidence... Rubinshtei wrote "Bytie i Soznanie", I have a Portuguese version... Why not somebody write "Soznanie i Sobytie"???

Re: Извините за беспокойство

[ipain.livejournal.com]

there are many texts (http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&safe=off&q=%22%D1%81%D0%BE-%D0%B1%D1%8B%D1%82%D0%B8%D0%B5%22+%2B%D0%BF%D1%81%D0%B8%D1%85%D0%BE%D0%BB%D0%BE%D0%B3%D0%B8%D1%8F&btnG=Search&aq=f&aqi=&oq=) using со-бытие, check this (http://www.psyperm.narod.ru/K3_11.htm) for example.

Re: Извините за беспокойство

[achilles-brazil.livejournal.com]

Hmmmm...

And what do you think about this "trend"? (I don't know if is a trend... but...) There is some relations with Vygotsky's and historical-cultural contributions about sign mediation, and so forth? I will see the text and the links with more attention. And cross some terms.

Thank you. Don't you sleep? You must no be at Moscow, for instance... There must be 6h19min AM, right now... But you here since several hours before.
:-)

Re: Извините за беспокойство

[ipain.livejournal.com]

it is not a trend, it is common understanding somewhat. it is closely connected with lsv school, check out mamardashvili and there is a LOT of other people around.

i am in boston. and i do sleep sometimes. cheers.

Re: Извините за беспокойство

[achilles-brazil.livejournal.com]

Ok. I note Mamardashvili's name at the chapter, this is a name that I have listen recently. But I confess that I never read something from him yet. I liked this title here, for instance: Клименко Ю.Г. Театр как практическая психология. Катарсис. Альманах. - М., 1994, с.84-116. I found because "so-bytie", but I am interested in questions about "drama" and "personality" - as I tell you before... perhaps from "semicheskii analiz" to "dramaticheskii analiz"(?) of human personality development, structure and functioning...
.
This is a fragment from Klimenko about so-bytie, and other "so-" categories:

"При анализе положений психологической теории эмоций, экстраполированной на театр, невозможно не учитывать такие "единицы" эмоционального процесса как со-чувствие и со-переживание. К сожалению, специализированные словари по психологии редко идут по пути исследования этимологии слов и в попытках описать явления общего порядка не отражают существа театрального процесса как области применения практической психологии. Например, слова "со-бытие", "со-гласие", "сознание", со-стояние" и пр., в которых приставка "со-" обозначает единение в некоем акте как минимум двух сторон, заключают смысл-призыв к совместным действиям, состояниям и чувствам. Отсюда рождается иное определение со-чувствия и со-переживания в связи с особенностями театрального процесса: со-чувствие - это совместный творческий душевный труд, возникающий в состоянии эквивалентности чувств посредством воли и способности к пере-воплощению в объект приложения милосердия, дающий возможность оценить, понять и оправдать поступки объекта как свои собственные."

... seem to be interesting... I have to look with dictionaries to understand better, I will see better later... :-) I am interested in Stanislasky's contributions about "perejivanie" and "voploshchenie"... both are related to the playing role...

He had and impressionning diagram:
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_mCNX4vGC2uc/SkUV4novtSI/AAAAAAAAAGk/8IaUj11az_o/s1600-h/Perejivanie_voploshtchenie.jpg

I liked it...

:-)

Re: Извините за беспокойство

[ipain.livejournal.com]

[Error: unknown template video]
i am watching this (http://link.brightcove.com/services/player/bcpid1815813330?bctid=64729174001), and thinking that it represents really well the process lsv was going to investigate with семический анализ.

there are a lot of theater connections too, check this out:

Шпет Г.Г. Психология социального бытия. Предисловие Т.Д. Марцинковской. Серия Психологи отечества. Избранные психологические труды в 70-ти томах. Тираж 10.000 экз. М.-Воронеж Институт практической психологии - МОДЭК 1996г. 496 с. твердый переплет, обычный формат.
Один путь психологии и куда он ведет. Внутренняя форма слова. Введение в этническую психологию. Проблемы современной эстетики. Театр как искусство.
(he was one of influences on vygotsky thinking about art)

Смирницка Ю. Эмоциональное развитие средствами любительского театра Смирницка Ю. Эмоциональное развитие средствами любительского театра (http://www.vygotsky.mgppu.ru/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=154:theatre&catid=85:lit&Itemid=67)

and there is also a theater studio in moscow run by student of lsv, but i cant remember the name right now, i'll try to find it.

Re: Извините за беспокойство

[achilles-brazil.livejournal.com]

Hmmm.

Wonderful references. Includind the lighting "semicheskii akt". Nikolai Veresov as wrote about Shpet influences in Vygotsky though. I liked very much. And even, de question of the "Silver age" influences too, with some "scenic metaphor" incidences in Vygotsky's discourse. But this title "Psikhologia sotsial'nogo bytiia" is very impressioning too... I saw that Zinchenko wrote about Shpet and Vygotsky. But high now I could see that he wrote about Shpet and Bakhtin too... This all is very interesting and sense-making... I did'n know about Shpet and theater even... There are many things too read and think about... И у меня уже болит голова!

I saw that Shpet's books are in 70 Volumes, it is this? Or this is for a series with many other authors?... Do you think and can order for a single volume, only "Психология социального бытия", for instance? I guess that this is not available in e-books...

Thank you, Ipain.
Best wishes.

Re: Извините за беспокойство

[ipain.livejournal.com]

this is just one volume (i just have it on a shelf, but shpet should be availabe in e-formats), othe volumes from different authors.

check this diploma (http://www.rosdiplom.ru/readyi2a1a2new.asp?id=120767) and its bibliography. sorry about ur head. =)

Re: Извините за беспокойство

[achilles-brazil.livejournal.com]

И ещё болит. Но это не проблема. As they say: "No pain, no gain", dear Ipain!
Эта диплома - очень интересно!

I will organize a kind of "study plan". Maybe, could functions.
I'm wonder to read soon:

1)STANISLAVSKY
Работа актера над собой [1938]
Часть 1. Работа над собой в творческом процессе переживания
Часть II. Работа над собой в творческом процессе воплощения
http://az.lib.ru/s/stanislawskij_k_s/
(but in English - Translation by Jean Benedetti - Routledge.)

2)IVANOV
"Очерки по истории семиотики в СССР"
(We have it in Portuguese now - there is no English translation yet!)
http://philologos.narod.ru/semiotics/ivanov_semio.htm

And

3) EISENSHTEIN
"Psychology of composition".
Do you now this title? There are two texts about "Psychology of art" demanded by A.R. Luria.
http://www.4shared.com/file/109329298/bc778d1/Eisenstein_-_The_psychology_of.html?
(I did'n find in Russian Yet. Of course because did not knew how to search correctly yet, perhaps)...

Not necessarily in this order...

But there many things to see... almost "Impossible Mission" again, maybe.

What do you think?

Re: Извините за беспокойство

[ipain.livejournal.com]

pain is just a weakness leaving ur body - another saying =)

anyway, these are good books to read. since this intersects somewhat with my interests, i could prob suggest few more when u are done. if you reading stanislavsky, u should also look at mikhael chekhov. ivanov is a good choice. and check out this (http://ipain.livejournal.com/486642.html?mode=reply) post of mine about luria and eisenstein.

Re: Извините за беспокойство

[achilles-brazil.livejournal.com]

{By mistake, I wrote there in your post about "Psychology is no science"... And now I will repeat here, sorry:}

Лурия очень любил мозги, не так ли? Но я могу читать ещё раз, с словарём - потому что я ещё не понимаю хорошо.
It's interesting this book from Elena... I do not have it yet, there is only in Russian? I order Khomskaya's book recently, and there she tells something about Luria and Eisenshtein... and artistic Luria's interests, in general... They have correspondence too, but I don´t know about availability... I was more interested about something that Cole said in "Making Mind" about some studies from Luria and Vygotsky about people reception of Eisenstein movies. It seems that they create pools that people had to answer... But I ask for Cole about this and seems that there is no surviving documentation from this experiences... Andrei Puzirei said in a paper that in Eisenstein library was found an exemplar of "Psychology of Art" and several places in where appeared the problem "contradiction between form and contend" are underlined by the owner... I guess Ivanov will talk something about the problem of "inner monologue" in Eisenstein system... I confess that I'm really not exactly searching for contributions from psychology to arts... But the inverse way... supposing that more broader semiotic systems than verbal language are demanded to make a movie and/or a theater play... Of course I'm thinking about personality as a drama of social roles... - as said Vygotsky in 1929 - but I don´t know why this was not so developed after... Spite this we have the problem of Stanislavsky's "subtext" as in the text "Problem of consciousness" (the same in we find the emphasis in "semicheskii analiz") as in Chapter 7 of "Mishlenie i Rech"... - The scene of Chatskii and Sophia... - The theater inspiration was not totally leaved away...

подтекст

[achilles-brazil.livejournal.com]

*) This is in 1932-1933...
"(Станиславский: за текстом лежит подтекст). Всякая речь имеет заднюю мысль. Всякая речь есть иносказание. [В чем эта задняя мысль? Крестьянский ходок у Успенского говорит:"языка нет у нашего брата"]."

*) This is in 1934...
"Станиславского мы находим такую попытку воссоздать подтекст каждой реплики в драме, т.е. раскрыть стоящие за каждым высказыванием мысль и хотение."

"Живая фраза, сказанная живым человеком, всегда имеет свой подтекст, скрывающуюся за ней мысль."

"В нашей речи всегда есть задняя мысль, скрытый подтекст."

"Поэтому параллельно тексту пьесы Станиславский намечал соответствующее каждой реплике хотение, приводящее в движение мысль и речь героя драмы. Приведем для примра текст и подтекст для нескольких реплик из роли Чацкого в интерпретации Станиславского."

etc. This seems to be a problem to "Semicheskii analiz" too - there are the flash and the thunder (your picture) - but there is also something that we can't listen nor see... that originate/constitute both - the actual "friction of the clouds"? (Bakhtin talk about sign like an "arena"...) But how could any kind of analysis grasp something like this? There is not only the "semicheskii" problem (sema?), there is the "polisemicheskii" problem (semema?). And there is not only the "polisemic" constitution of sign, there is the "diverse", "contradictory", "opposite", meanings in the "same" utterance... a fight and/or struggle... In time: Vygotsky said that we must understand the "motive" to understand "thinking" and to understand "speech", the utterance... but without the same utterance is not so easy to access any motive too... I suppose... Even more motives are not only that traditional biological drives, motives are historical and cultural created too... And this seems to create some kind of circularity to my naive mind. How to understand a text? the subtext... the motives... What is a motive? A text too?

What do you think?

Re: подтекст

[ipain.livejournal.com]

art is what boils brains (re: lsv "вареная психика") (http://community.livejournal.com/psyhistorik/39082.html).

but u right, the issue is bigger. for example one of my interest is using courtroom as a microscope to study social actions of representations. it has all you are talking about: drama of social roles; sema and polisema and polimetasema; categories and personal senses; performance and written laws; poverty, state and money - etc etc. and of course it is much bigger then 'signs'.

we did move ahead since vygotsky. basically, now we can create spaces where utterances become вещи (both meanings =), so we could study the whole process while participating in it. this creates a lot of interesting questions, but makes many old ones - kinda irrelevant.

Re: подтекст

[achilles-brazil.livejournal.com]

Courtrooms are really very dramatic, even not tragic... The young Vygotsky himself liked to play roles in simulated courts... both defense and accusation roles - is what people say at the biographies... People here are dealing more with "classrooms" and the scenes there, but in microgenetic approach and/or analysis... At the other side, at same time, I have a colleague here in my town working with boys "in conflict with law" that are in "correctional units" (actually prisions for adolescents, in order words)... I was wondering to create some kinds of role-playing activities with these boys to use a "microscope" too... and to try to help in their (re)education, any way... But, the situation is not very easy too... Someday, perhaps they will stay in a court too... Or was before in front a judgment situation... Ow... This very complicated. But in extreme situations we have an opportunity to go ahead too, as in art... And I understand Vygotsky give us this legacy too... extreme situations... defectology, schizophrenia, dementia, etc... Well there is a lot of work, these boils brain and all the body... Of course my own brain will have not any privileged in anatomy museums here in Brazil after all. :) Well, in this respect, I'm very lucky.

Some researches about Language, Power relations and Law problems has been done here in Brazil, but more in dialog with Michel Foucault's theory. I don´t like very much his conception of Language - over all in "The words and the things" ("Les mots et les choses"), spite in "The order of discourse" (L'odre du discours" - seems to be very better. Many times, he seems to be truly the opposite of Bakhtin's conception... But, he deals with Law problems, and was a serious historicist - descriptively talking - spite we do not need only descriptions, more detailed that they could do...

Re: подтекст

[achilles-brazil.livejournal.com]

"basically, now we can create spaces where utterances become вещи (both meanings =), so we could study the whole process while participating in it."

This is very cool...

You makes me remember something that I read from Davidov, about "exteriorization"... But, depending what kind of "вещи" we could create, more than "exteriorization" will be involved, but beyond, the own creation of new "вещи" - something like the "творчество" of the human cultural-objective world...