Search

This article examines the extent to which dream narratives have a special function in the formation of ego identity. The answer to this question is based on a connection of culturalhistorical psycholinguistic and psychoanalytical perspectives. To begin with, the importance of narratives for the formation of ego identity is discussed by pointing out that narratives form an interface between external, communicative and internal, self-directed speech processes as well as in the transition fromunconscious to conscious processes. Dreamnarration and their unique access to the unconscious are examined. The special nature of dream narration in relation to narratives of real experiences and narratives of thoughts result in a continuum of different narrative qualities. Dream narratives, due to their more direct access to the unconscious, have their own significance for the formation of ego identity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In The Crisis of Psychology (1927), Bühler aims at clarifying the notion of psychology. The three indispensable aspects for that clarification encompass the life context of at least twopartners. Therewith, Bühler opens a space of pragmatic questioningwhich he further pursues in his Theory of Language (1934) where he confers language a pivotal role in his investigation of these aspects. An essential element here is the two-field theory with its deictic and symbolic field. Whereas the deictic field is anchored in the sensorial, the symbolic field leads into abstract, invisible spheres; a qualitative shift from one field to the other. It is remarkable that Bühler distinguishes sharply the two fields, but is not tearing them apart so that a dynamic at play between the sensorial and the symbolic becomes visible. The contribution follows the idea of the sensorial-symbolic moment in the work of two contemporaries of Bühler: the linguist Jakubinskij and the psychologist Vygotsky. The encompassing connections between language, body, and other is shown as basis for the functioning of language symbols. The power of language symbols is realized without attributing them to bodyless, individual thinking and without separating them from societal activity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Sociogenesis addresses a pervasive problem in psychology given by Cartesian dualism that assigns the mental an inner locus apart from material activity. Aligning ourselves to the ongoing critical discussions of interiorization in psychology, we explore the crucial notion of space by highlighting language as sociocultural and dialogical activity performed by other-oriented individuals. We discuss space in terms of the “language spacetime”, a symbolic, embodied formation of mutually positioned speaking and listening selves. This leads beyond the “inside-outside” container metaphor and allows for a reformulation of interiorization. Interiorization is conceptualized as a continuous series of different, though mutually related movements between self and other and self and self that lead to and are supported by specific formations in language activity: reversion, transposition, and decoupling. Along a short passage of a video-based interview, we trace the reversion of dialogical positions within the addressivity constellation of the two interlocutors, their interactive creation of a heterotopic spacetime, and the decoupling of one speaker's psychological activity from the concrete here-and-now and the present other by moving and acting into this new sphere. Interiorization appears as a movement at the border of past, present, and possible future(s). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Currently, the ancient dilemma linguistique/language seems to be solved and studied. An issue disappears; another arises as the world is changing continuously [...]. As a linguist, researcher and practitioner at the same time, leaning to the good functioning of the discourse(s), I realize that that the discourse should be considered mainly as a language activity, because the utensils of the linguistic introspection become unsatisfactory and because of the fact that the limits and the standard constraints elaborated by the Discourse Analysis are crossed successfully by the realities which raise often from the language creativity, as well as, from art or from the Arts, if one think visually or gesturally [...]. Discoursing transforms the speaker in an artist of word. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this article we discuss the research of the communication in the real space sociability of the work world. The actuality of the central concept of the work today is more complex because the communication is present. The research has been conducted with the triangulation of quantitative and qualitative methods, as explained in Denzin and Lincoln (2006), to explore competing visions of research contexts. The results show the contradictions between official organizational communication and the communication in the work world. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

My starting point is a dialogical notion of language that puts forth language activity as a dynamic process performed by subjects conceived as dialogical selves. Obviously, the language performance taking place at a specific moment is not pure momentaneity, not only unique but also well-known, it can be identified and recognized. What, then, grants the performance order and makes it non-arbitrary? To preserve the priority of the performance of language activity one has to conceive of a structuring moment other than some supra-individual system that is upstream to performance. This leads to the “in-between”: the principal assumption is that relata are constituted by an in-between, understood as a medium-generating relatedness, and thus the relata as such. Seeing language as that medium, I look at the way it functions, how it supplies forms as possibilities of generating a communicable and understandable subjectivity. Time is a key notion to this questioning. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Scientific research in a dialogical paradigm highlights processes and insists on human beings’ relatedness. The basic move is thus a shift from the self-contained “I” to the related self, where the other is seen as the self’s pre-condition. This must be accompanied by a similar shift with regard to language: language has to be viewed as a genuinely dialogical and plural phenomenon. Through five target articles and four commentaries addressing themes across the articles, this special issue takes a close look at the relationship between language and the self and explores some of the topics surfacing within the dialogical perspective: the “in-between” of the related subjects; movements, such as in speaking, listening, thinking, and writing, as an inherent part of the dynamics of the selves’ relatedness. As a result, language gets a rhetorical, phenomenal volume, and the subject is conceived as a self by virtue of its language performances. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]