These files are maintained strictly for historical reference, research, and recordkeeping purposes,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These files are maintained strictly for historical reference, research, and recordkeeping purposes,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.
Me like
Nate
5/12/01 1:26:55 PM, Judith Diamondstone
<diamonju@rci.rutgers.edu> wrote:
>
>I've thought of "community" in AT as "community of
reference" -- i.e., the
>backdrop against which 'relevance' emerges.
>
>The answer to Don's q:
>
>My confusion of community with the activity system is
perhaps
>understandable since in this example (and in others, I
imagine) XMCAites are
>a part of the community of those inspired by CHAT. The
subject could, in
>another analysis, be what is here represented as the
community. What would
>BE the community in that analysis, I wonder?
>
>would of course depend on Don's project more generally ('it
depends') but
>could for instance be social theorists around the world.
>
>'community of reference' indexes for me the semiotic nature
of processes of
>consumption -- the colletctive subject of xmca participants
orient to one
>another as well as to a wider community/ies, whereas in
'production,'
>semiosis is instrumental: the subject orients to the obj.
>
>Judy
>
>
Due to the energy crisis the light at the end of the tunnel
has been shut off.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jun 01 2001 - 01:01:25 PDT