These files are maintained strictly for historical reference, research, and recordkeeping purposes,
and the content has not been altered or updated since archiving.
Content on this site may not meet current digital accessibility standards.
If you require an alternative, accessible format of any information found on this site,
please contact Bruce Jones, bjones@ucsd.edu to request an accommodation.
These files are maintained strictly for historical reference, research, and recordkeeping purposes,
and the content has not been altered or updated since archiving.
Content on this site may not meet current digital accessibility standards.
If you require an alternative, accessible format of any information found on this site,
please contact Bruce Jones, bjones@ucsd.edu to request an accommodation.
On Sat, 19 Mar 2011, mike cole wrote:
From the many ideas here, one stands out for me, David. You write:It seems to me that what we need to study is not simply "context" but the relationship between context and emergent text. As hard as it is to keep in mind, I think in principle that text and con-text have to be seen as co-constituitive. We run in to (at least) notions of context that are there, waiting for a text/behavior/event to occur, and the emergent system that enables us to make a distinction between text and context. Very inconvenient to us linear thinkers. Beautifully illustrated in McDermott article in Chaiklin Lave book on activity theory in practice from a prior decade or two. mike
__________________________________________ _____ xmca mailing list xmca@weber.ucsd.edu http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca