Vygotsky s Speaking Thinking System. Holbrook

8/17/2019 Vygotsky s Speaking Thinking System. Holbrook

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/vygotsky-s-speaking-thinking-system-holbrook 1/40

Vygotsky’s “Speaking/Thinking System of Meaning”:

An Essential but Overlooked Concept

Holbrook Mahn

University of e! Me"ico

h#ahn$un#%edu

&'&())*(+,)* phone

&'&(-++()./- fa"

Ackno!ledge#ents0 1hanks to Vera 2ohn(3teiner4 as al!ays4 for her ongoing inspiration and

thoughtful collaboration% 3eth Chaiklin’s4 2i# 5antolf’s4 and Aaro 1oo#ela’s insightful

co##ents on the paper helped shape its final for#% A special thanks to the #any graduate

students4 colleagues4 and friends !ho have co##ented on this paper and to 3usan Metheny !ho

helped !ith translations fro# 6ussian%

mailto:[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]



7n Thinking and Speech, Vygotsky #akes clear that the central focus of his research is the

e"a#ination of the relationship bet!een thinking processes and the processes involved in the

reception and production of language% 8ey to this e"a#ination is his analysis of the entity

created by the unification of these processes% 7n spite of its centrality4 this analysis has not

received as #uch attention in interpretations of his !ork as his analysis of other concepts 9 and

!hen it has4 understandings that diverge fro# his intent have e#erged% 1here are t!o #ain

factors for this divergence0 first4 the entity that is created by the unification he describes is not

analy:ed as a dyna#ic syste# interconnected !ith other syste#s; and second4 the unit Vygotsky

derives to analy:e this unification has been interpreted in !ays that vary fro# his intent% 1he

purpose of this article is to clarify this central concept of Vygotsky’s 9 the syste# created

through the unification of speaking and thinking processes !ith #eaning at its center 9 through a

precise and e"plicit e"a#ination of his !ritings4 not interpretations of his !ork% <3 peaking in this

article includes all processes involved in the reception and production of oral and !ritten

language=%

1he 6ussian phrase Vygotsky uses to refer to the pheno#enon created by the unification

of speaking and thinking processes appears in English versions as verbal thinking % 1he English

editors of Thinking and Speech note4 ho!ever4 a #ore accurate rendition of the 6ussian !ould be

“speech thinking> <6ieber ? Carton4 *,)+4 p% .)+=% Additionally4 verbal, in an ad@ectival

position4 di#inishes the eual participation that Vygotsky ascribes to speaking processes and

thinking processes in their unification% 7n this article 7 refer to the pheno#enon created by this

unification as a speaking/thinking system of meaning % 1he key is not the phrase used4 but rather

achieving clarity about the pheno#enon to !hich it refers% Vygotsky vie!s the pheno#enon of

2



the speakingBthinking syste# of #eaning as a “unified psychological for#ation> <*,)+4 p% =4 as

a “co#ple" #ental !hole> <p% &=4 and sees the relationships bet!een thinking and speaking as

“internal4 dyna#ic4 and relationships bet!een processes> <p% -).=% 1hese relationships represent

a “uniue and changing set of relations4> and Vygotsky indicates that “the develop#ent of such

ne! fle"ible relationships bet!een functions> should be vie!ed as “a psychological system>

<*,,+a4 p% ,-=% Vygotsky concentrates his research on unification as a process4 starting at its

inception !hen the thinking processes include perception4 #e#ory4 attention4 and generali:ation;

and the speaking processes include babbling4 attending to sound4 using the pointing gesture as a

sy#bol representing intent4 and generali:ation% Denerali:ation4 !hich is central to both speaking

and thinking4 plays a key role in their unification% Vygotsky argues that the ability to generali:e is

the ground fro# !hich arises the capacity to co##unicate meaning through language in social

interaction% or this reason he puts #eaning at the center of the speakingBthinking syste#%

Unlike other psychologists of his ti#e4 !ho e"a#ined #ental functions in isolation4

Vygotsky analy:es the hu#an psyche and consciousness as interconnected syste#s and

e"a#ined #ental functions as processes interrelated in syste#s% 7nternal syste#s of the hu#an

psyche are based on the unity of the brain and #ind and are activated and shaped through

sensuous activity and co##unicative interactions in specific social situations of develop#ent%

Vygotsky ackno!ledges the centrality of syste#s for his !ork !hen anticipating the research

that is described in Thinking and Speech, “Systems and their fate 9 it see#s to #e that for us the

alpha and o#ega of our ne"t !ork #ust reside in these four !ords4> <*,,+a4 p% *'+4 e#phasis

added=% He reiterates this centrality in Chapter / of that volu#e4 “Fe no! turn to the central

proble# of our research4 the proble# of syste# <*,)+4 p% --=% *

1o study the hu#an psyche and its syste#s4 Vygotsky relies heavily on Mar" and Engels

3



and develops a #ethodological approach that analy:es pheno#ena as processes4 as dyna#ic

syste#s in !hich unification !ith other processes and syste#s is central to develop#ent% 1his

approach investigates a pheno#enon’s origins4 e"a#ines the forces behind its develop#ent4 and

reveals interconnections and interactions !ith its environ#ent% Using a dialectical approach to

analy:e the essence of a unified entity4 Vygotsky derives a unit !hich is irreducible4 is pri#ary4

and yet #aintains the essence of the unified !hole% “1he unit contains4 in a si#ple4 pri#itive

for#4 the characteristics of the !hole that is the ob@ect of analysis> <*,)+4 p% -=% 1his unit is

then analy:ed by looking at its genesis4 its function4 and its structureBfor# to reveal the nature of

the develop#ent of the syste# created through unification%

1he unit Vygotsky derives for analysis of the speakingBthinking syste# is znachenie

slova – the 6ussian znachenie translates as “#eaning> and slova as “!ord> 9 used by Vygotsky

to indicate “language in general%> As described in #ore depth belo!4 English translations of

znachenie slova have led to #isinterpretations of Vygotsky’s !ork% Again4 the key is not @ust

translation4 but rather ho! Vygotsky uses analysis of this unit to focus on a “single basic

proble#> 9 “to develop a general theory of the genetic roots of thinking and speech> <*,)+4 p%

.,=% Gecause the unit Vygotsky derives to develop this theory #ust reflect the essence of the

!hole 9 the speakingBthinking syste# 9 znachenie slova takes on a !ide variety of #eanings not

connected !ith Vygotsky’s specific use in Thinking and Speech if it is analy:ed isolated fro# the

syste# of !hich it is an essential unit%

7n describing the !ay that this unit reveals the nature of the interrelationships of speaking

and thinking4 7 use Vygotsky’s !ritings as a !hole4 but focus on Thinking and Speech, to develop

the logic of his argu#ent% 1hough the cited passages #ay be fa#iliar to readers of this @ournal4

they are being offered to reveal the logic of Vygotsky’s argu#ent in e"plaining the origins and

4



develop#ent of the speaking/thinking system of meaning % Gecause the description of Vygotsky’s

central argu#ent offered here differs in funda#ental !ays fro# other interpretations4 the logic of

his argu#ent !ill be obscured if it is vie!ed through the lenses of other understandings4 as the

dissonance !ith those understandings !ill beco#e the focus and not Vygotsky’s argu#ent% 7t

#ay see# presu#ptuous to ask readers to put aside those lenses in reading this article4 but in

order to appreciate the logic of Vygotsky’s argu#ent described here4 7 a# asking that readers rely

on Vygotsky’s !ritings uoted here and not on previous interpretations of his !ork%

Vygotsky’s Methodological Approach

Early in his career4 Vygotsky argues4 in The Historical Meaning of the risis in

!sychology <*,,+a=4 that developing a #ethodological approach appropriate to the investigation

of the hu#an psyche is the #ain challenge facing psychology% He articulates a goal of

developing a #ethodological approach to the study of consciousness that addresses the proble#s

inherent in the t!o do#inant approaches to psychology of his ti#e0 behaviorist approaches that

atte#pt to legiti#ati:e psychology by adopting #ethodological approaches !holesale fro# the

hard sciences4 and #etaphysical approaches that deal e"clusively !ith sub@ective reactions and

therefore do not even atte#pt to e"plain the origins and develop#ent of hu#an consciousness%

Vygotsky describes three key aspects that constitute the foundation of his approach0 *= his use of

Mar" and Engels’ dialectical approach; -= his analysis of co#ple" syste#s through e"a#ining

interconnections !ith other syste#s; and .= his analytic approach using units% Vygotsky develops

an approach that e"a#ines #ental functions as processes in syste#s and analy:es their origins4

develop#ent4 and interfunctional relationships% His interest is e"ploring “the unified and integral

nature of the process being studied> <*,)+4 p% /=% or this e"ploration4 he turns to the !orks of

Mar" and Engels4 particularly "erman #deology and Theses on $e%erbach, !hich describe their

5



#ethodological approach%-

Vygotskys reliance on Mar" and Engels’ #ethodological approach is evident throughout

his !ork4 but it is #ost clearly described in0 The Historical Meaning of the risis in !sychology

&'(()a*, in the 6esearch Method chapter in The History of the +evelopment of Higher Mental

$%nctions &'(()b*, and in Thinking and Speech !here he outlines the theoretical foundation for

his research% 7n the preface to Thinking and Speech4 Vygotsky alludes to the foundation provided

by Mar" and Engels’ #ethodological approach4 !hen he notes that !hile there have been so#e

shifts and dead ends in his !ork4 “nevertheless4 the overall direction of our research developed

steadily4 on a foundation that !as basic to our !ork fro# the outset> <*,)+4 p% '=%

Vygotsky offers the sa#e caveat that Mar" and Engels #ade in developing their theory0

the overarching dialectical approach as a universal4 general philosophical approach can be

applied in a nu#ber of different areas4 but its abstract principles have to be #ade concrete

through an analysis of the #aterial being studied% Ira!ing on Engels’ +ialectics of at%re4

Vygotsky asserts that there cannot be an i##ediate application of the basic tenets of this

dialectical approach4 because the task !as “not to foist the dialectical principles on nature4 but to

find the# in it> <*,,+a4 p% ..'=%

7n describing his use of a dialectical approach4 Vygotsky e#phasi:es that his use of

“dialectical #aterialis#> differs significantly fro# that of the ruling 3oviet bureaucracy in the

#id(*,-'s <*,,+a=% Mar" and Engels never used the ter# “dialectical #aterialis#> that has been

ascribed to their #ethodology and !ould have recoiled in horror at ho! 3talin’s 3oviet

bureaucracy used it as a shibboleth against any !ho !ould dare to disagree4 an approach that

found its echo in all 3oviet scientific endeavors4 including psychology% 1he 3oviet bureaucrats

#ined Mar"’s !orks for uotes to bolster their shifting political positions0 “a pile of #ore or less

6



accidental citations and their 1al#udic interpretation4> <*,,+a4 p% .*.=% 3uch citations4 Vygotsky

argues4 “even !hen they have all been !ell ordered4 never yield syste#s> <p% .*.=% 7n order to

understand consciousness as a syste# Vygotsky relies on “Mar"’s !hole #ethod of ho! to build

a science4 ho! to approach the investigation of the #ind JpsycheK> <p% ..*=%

Mar" and Engels in "erman #deology describe ho! they apply a dialectical and

#aterialist approach to study the origins4 develop#ent4 structure4 and functions of hu#an social

for#ations by developing an inter#ediary theory 9 historical #aterialis# 9 to guide that study%

Fhile Vygotsky uses Mar" and Engels’ analysis in his study of the role social interactions play in

the for#ation and develop#ent of the hu#an psyche4 he asserts that the econo#ic categories

Mar" and Engels developed to study hu#an social for#ations 9 class struggle4 value4

co##odity4 #odes and #eans of production4 labor theory of value4 etc% 9 are not adeuate to

study consciousness and the develop#ent of an individual’s syste# of #eaning% Hu#an labor

changed nature and led to the develop#ent of social syste#s through !hich hu#anity developed

as a species% Vygotsky’s goal is to build upon that understanding and analy:e hu#an

consciousness using phylogenetic and ontogenetic approaches% 1o develop an inter#ediary

theory for psychology 9 psychological #aterialis# <or !hat he also called “general psychology>=

9 Vygotsky uses a dialectical #ethodological approach4 focusing on the origins4 develop#ent4

structure4 function4 and syste#ic interdependence and interconnections of psychological

processes and syste#s%

5ike history4 sociology is in need of the inter#ediate special theory of historical

#aterialis# !hich e"plains the concrete #eaning4 for the given group of

pheno#ena4 of the abstract la!s of dialectical #aterialis#% 7n e"actly the sa#e

!ay !e are in need of an as yet undeveloped but inevitable theory of biological

7



#aterialis# and psychological #aterialis# as an inter#ediate science !hich

e"plains the concrete application of the abstract theses of dialectical #aterialis#

to the given field of pheno#enaL% 7n order to create such inter#ediate theories 9

#ethodologies4 general sciences 9 !e #ust reveal the essence of the given area of

pheno#ena4 the la!s of their change4 their ualitative and uantitative

characteristics4 their causality4 !e #ust create categories and concepts appropriate

to it% <risis4 *,,+a4 p% ..'=

1he “given area of pheno#ena> for Vygotsky is hu#an consciousness and the role that the

unification of thinking and speaking processes in a syste# of #eaning plays in the develop#ent

of hu#an consciousness% Vygotsky’s challenge !as to ground his approach in the #aterial !orld%

Engels !rites that a starting point in a dialectical approach is !ith the #aterial !orld4 things in

reality; ho!ever4 he cautions0

1he !orld is not to be co#prehended as a co#ple" of ready(#ade things4 but as a

co#ple" of processes, in !hich the things apparently stable no less than their

#ind(i#ages in our heads4 the concepts4 go through an uninterrupted change of

co#ing into being and passing a!ay% <*,..4 p% &.=

Vygotsky’s #ethodological approach incorporates the key tenet of dialectical logic that

there is nothing constant but change% “1o study so#ething historically #eans to study it in

#otion% recisely this is the basic reuire#ent of the dialectical #ethod> <*,,+b4 p% .=% 7n

studying the relationship bet!een think and speaking4 Vygotsky first e"a#ines the origins of

each and deter#ines that initially they have independent paths of develop#ent%

1he internal relationships bet!een thought and !ord !ith !hich !e are

concerned are not pri#al% 1hey are not so#ething given fro# the outset as a

8



precondition for further develop#ent% On the contrary4 these relationships e#erge

and are for#ed only !ith the historical develop#ent of hu#an consciousness%

1hey are not the precondition of #an’s for#ation but its product% <*,)+4 p% -.=

Understanding the develop#ent of the thinking and speaking processes is key to understanding

the nature of their unification%

Vygotsky starts !ith a critical analysis of the !ay in !hich prevailing psychological

theories address the relationship of thinking and language processes% “Atte#pts to resolve the

proble# of thinking and speech have al!ays oscillated bet!een t!o e"tre#e poles4 bet!een an

identification or co#plete f%sion of tho%ght and -ord and an eually #etaphysical4 absolute4 and

co#plete separation of the t!o4 a severing of their relationship> <*,)+4 p% =% 7n the first

approach4 because thinking and speaking coincide4 there can be no e"a#ination of the

relationship bet!een the t!o% “One cannot study the relationship of a thing to itself> <p% =% 7n

the second approach thinking and speaking are analy:ed as separate entities that only have an

e"ternal relationship4 and then “an atte#pt is #ade to reconstruct a connection bet!een the t!o4

to reconstruct an e"ternal4 #echanical interaction bet!een t!o different processes> <p% =%

7n contrast to the above t!o approaches4 Vygotsky traces the psychological processes

instru#ental for the develop#ent and unification of speaking and thinking and starts !ith the

postulate that “consciousness is pri#ordially so#ething unitary> <*,,+b4 p% *.'= and focuses on

the interrelated syste#s that constitute it% “1he first issue that #ust be faced in the analysis of

thinking and speech concerns the relationship a#ong the various #ental functions4 the

relationship a#ong the various for#s of the activity of consciousness> <*,)+4 p% .=% Using the

#ethod of abstraction that Mar" and Engels developed in their dialectical approach4 and !hich

he had earlier used to study the psychology of the aesthetic reaction in order “to analy:e the

9



processes in their essence> <*,,+a4 p% .*,=4 Vygotsky analy:es dialectical the relationship of

thinking and speaking processes in a “pure4 independent4 uncovered for#> <*,,+b4 p% &.=%

Analysis of the unification of distinct processes4 Hegel’s unity of opposites4 is a

funda#ental aspect of Vygotskys #ethodological approach4 as it !as for Mar" and Engels% 7norder to understand change4 especially transfor#ational change4 the concept of the unification of

distinct entities and processes into so#ething ualitatively different is funda#ental% 1here is an

opportunity at these points of ualitative change to study the forces behind the transfor#ation4illu#inating both the old for#ation and the one that is in the process of beco#ing% or this

reason4 Vygotsky e"a#ines ti#es of .%alitative transformation in the relationships bet!een

#ental processes4 that lead to the creation of the ne! #ental for#ations4 ne! syste#s%

Vygotsky and sychological 3yste#s

As alluded to in the introduction4 Vygotsky’s analysis of the nature of the hu#an consciousness

and the role of #eaning in its creation and develop#ent relies on studying pheno#enon as

syste#s !ithin syste#s% “1he structure of #eaning is deter#ined by the syste#ic structure ofconsciousness> <*,,+a4 p% *.+=% His e"a#ination of the origins and develop#ent of the

speakingBthinking syste# of #eaning rests on the concept of the hu#an psyche as a syste# ofsyste#s% He analy:es “the syste#ic relationships and connections bet!een the child’s separate

#ental functions in develop#ent> <*,)+4 p% .-.= and conceives of the relationships bet!een

functions as “a psychological system” <*,,+a4 p% ,-=% 7n developing the concept of the unity ofspeaking and thinking as a syste# !ith #eaning at its center4 Vygotsky relied on e"peri#ents

that he and his colleagues4 and other psychologists conducted4 !hich revealed the co#ple"ity of

analy:ing the origins and course of develop#ent of #eaning for both the hu#ans species and the

individual% 1he essential co#ponent in the psychological syste# created through the unificationof thinking and speaking processes is the internal syste# of #eaning that is at its center% As

described above Vygotsky derives an irreducible4 funda#ental4 essential unit 9 znachenie slova 9

that he !ill analy:e to reveal the nature of the entity created through the unification of thethinking and speaking processes% Vygotsky’s analysis of this unit #akes up a substantial part of

Thinking and Speech% 1he co#ple"ity and abstract nature of an internal psychical

speaking/thinking system and its essential unit znachenie slova #ake a description of Vygotsky’sanalysis of their origins and develop#ent difficult4 !hich is !hy 7 rely heavily on his !ords to

do so and create a visual representation of the speakingBthinking syste# of #eaning to sho!

so#e its interrelationships%

Analysis of Units7n Thinking and Speech4 Vygotsky reports on e"peri#ental studies he and his colleagues

conducted to discover the nature of the %nification of the thinking and speaking processes and of

“the unified psychological for#ation> <*,)+4 p% = that results 9 the speakingBthinking syste# of #eaning% After e#phasi:ing the i#portance of #aintaining the integrity of the !hole syste#

!hen analy:ing the unification of thinking and speaking processes4 Vygotsky poses the uestion0

“Fhat then is a unit that possesses the characteristics inherent to the integral pheno#enon ofverbal thinking Jthe speakingBthinking syste#K and that cannot be further deco#posedN 7n our

vie!4 such a unit can be found in znachenie slova4 the inner aspect of the !ord4 its #eaning> <p%

+=% 1his approach is in contrast to psychologies that deco#pose the speakingBthinking syste#

“into its ele#ents in an atte#pt to e"plain its characteristics and search in vain for the unity that

10



is characteristic of the !hole> <p% &=% 7n partitioning the !hole into a unit4 “the ter# unit’

designates a product of analysis that possesses all the basic characteristics of the -hole% 1he unit

is a vital and irreducible part of the !hole> <p% /= that is derived through an analysis thate"a#ines the “concrete aspects and characteristics> <p% -= of the !hole% 1his resonates !ith

Mar" and Engels stressing the need to discover the “ualitative and uantitative characteristics>

and “categories and concepts> <*,,+a4 p% ..'= of the pheno#ena being analy:ed% Vygotskycautions4 though4 that the unit he has derived can not e"plain the !hole of the speakingBthinking

syste# but rather its pri#ary4 “initial aspects> <*,)+4 p% =4 adding that he has not had ti#e to

analy:e the !hole process of the develop#ent of the speakingBthinking syste# of #eaning%Gefore describing Vygotsky’s analysis of znachenie slova, 7 clarify so#e issues that have clouded

that analysis in previous interpretations% A central one being4 !hat did Vygotsky #ean by

meaning and ho! did it relate to his use of znachenie slova

Iuring a conference !ith his closest collaborators in *,.. near the end of his life4

Vygotsky clarified ho! he !as using znachenie slova: “Meaning is not the su# of all of the

psychological operations !hich stand behind the !ord% Meaning is so#ething #ore specific 9 it

is the internal structure of the sign operation> <*,,+a4 p%*..=% Ho!ever4 Vygotsky’s analysis of

znachenie slova as a unit of the speakingBthinking syste# of #eaning is lost !hen it is translated

into English as “!ord #eaning%> 1he 6ussian znachenie translates to “#eaning> and slova

< slovo in its un#arked4 no#inative for#= to “!ord4> but slovo represents language as a !hole4 as

reflected in the sentence4 “7n the beginning !as the !ord%> More accurate4 e"panded renditions

of znachenie slova are “#eaning through language use> or “#eaning through the use of the sign

operation%> . 1he key is that Vygotsky analy:es znachenie slova as it reflects the essence of the

internal psychical syste# created by the unification of speakingBthinking processes% Meaning

co##unicated through language is a central aspect of znachenie slova, but focusing on the

e"ternal #eanings of !ords and processes of se#iotic #ediations !ithout analy:ing the origins

and develop#ent of their interrelationship !ith thinking processes overlooks !hat Vygotsky

feels is essential 9 that znachenie slova #aintain the essence of the internal psychical syste# of

!hich it is a unit%

7t is also i#portant to #ake a distinction bet!een the use of slova in connection !ith

11



znachenie referring to language as a !hole and slova used on its o!n to #ean -ord to refer to a

particular ob@ect0 Vygotsky dra!s on both uses throughout his !ork so having conte"t illu#inate

his usage is key% Co#pounding the potential for confusion is that fact that znachenie appearing

by itself in the 6ussian is translated in the English editions as “!ord #eaning> #aking it difficult

to kno! !hether the original 6ussian te"t is znachenie slova or znachenie !hen “!ord #eaning>

appears in the English te"t%

At the above(#entioned *,.. conference4 Vygotsky ackno!ledges proble#s in the !ay

that he and his closest collaborators conceived of the unit znachenie slova4 because in their focus

on the sign and the sign operation4 they “ignored that the sign has #eaning> <*,,+a4 p% *.'= and4

conseuently4 did not study the internal develop#ent of #eaning% “Fe proceeded fro# the

principle of the constancy of #eaning4 !e discounted #eaning> <*,,+a4 p% *..=% He also notes a

prevalent error in the linguistic and psychological theories of his ti#e in their approaches to

#eaning 9 taking the develop#ent of #eaning for granted4 vie!ing #eaning as stable and

unchanging% 7n these theories the constancy of #eaning is “given as the starting point !hich

ter#inates the process> <p% *.-=% 1hey do not investigate !hat is central to Vygotsky’s theory 9

the origins and course of develop#ent of #eaning as an internal syste# that develops through

co##unicative social interaction%

Overlooking the fact that Vygotsky derives the unit znachenie slova through a process of

analysis can lead researchers to deviate fro# Vygotsky’s #ethod of analysis of units and si#ply

select a unit of analysis !ithout the analysis involved in the unit’s derivation% 1here is a tendency

to ascribe Vygotsky’s use of “analysis into units> to the !ide(ranging use of “units of analysis>

by psychologists and others in different disciplines% Ioing so can obscure Vygotsky’s #ain

ob@ective0 to analy:e znachenie slova 9 to study the co#ple"ity of all of the factors4 processes4

12



and syste#s that bring the speakingBthinking syste# of #eaning into being and play central roles

in its develop#ent% Even though Vygotsky #akes it clear throughout his !ritings that the unity

he is analy:ing is the speakingBthinking syste# , there is a co##on #isinterpretation that he is

using znachenie slova as a unit to analy:e consciousness as a !hole% Fhile it is true that analysis

of consciousness is Vygotsky’s #ain ob@ective4 he uses znachenie slova specifically to analy:e

the speakingBthinking syste#4 not consciousness as a !hole%

1he confusion over !hether Vygotsky proposes znachenie slova to analy:e the

speakingBthinking syste# or to study consciousness as a !hole4 often flo!s fro# a

#isinterpretation of Vygotskys conclusion to Thinking and Speech in !hich he su##ari:es !hat

has been acco#plished and !hat lies ahead% ear the end of his life Vygotsky !rites that4 in spite

of the e"tensive research he and his colleagues have conducted on the speakingBthinking syste#

of #eaning , their investigation had only really begun as they had revealed the co#ple"ity of this

syste# but had not provided an e"tensive analysis of it% He clai#s that their analysis of the

speakingBthinking syste# “has brought us to the threshold of the proble# of consciousness>

<*,)+4 p% -)&=% Vygotsky uses the #etaphor “consciousness is reflected in the !ord like the sun is

reflected in a droplet of !ater> <*,)+4 p% -)&= to describe !hat future study !ill entail4 not to

describe the results of his analysis of the unit znachenie slova to reveal the essence of the

speakingBthinking syste# of #eaning0

Analysis of 1nachenie Slova

Vygotsky presents the results of this analysis in Thinking and Speech4 !here he describeshis analysis of znachenie slova, !hich reveals the relationship bet!een thinking and speaking

and discloses “the internal essence that lies behind the e"ternal appearance of the process4 its

nature4 its genesis> <*,,+b4 p% +'=% He analy:es znachenie slova fro# three perspectives0 genetic4looking at its origins; str%ct%ral 4 e"a#ining the develop#ent of psychological functions and

processes and their interconnections; and f%nctional 4 investigating psychological activity and

#otivating factors in the syste# of #eaning% Vygotsky looks at the develop#ent of #eaning as a

process4 one that is shaped by its syste#ic relationship !ith other psychical functions4 processes4

13



structures4 and syste#s% As a preli#inary step to the study of the unification of thinking and

speaking processes and the discovery of its ualitative and uantitative characteristics and

categories and concepts4 Vygotsky argues that a first step for research on the genesis of therelationship bet!een thinking and speaking needs to be “an analysis of available infor#ation on

its phylogenesis and ontogenesis> <*,)+4 p% '=% He does this in chapters - and . in Thinking and

Speech critically analy:ing theories of iaget and 3tern on the relationship bet!een thinking andspeaking% 1hen in chapter he e"a#ines the “theoretical issues concerning the genetic roots of

thinking and speech> <p% '= 9 looking at the origins of sy#bolic representation in early hu#ans

and co#paring and contrasting hu#an thinking processes and language use to higher pri#ates’thinking and co##unicative abilities% 1hese chapters provide the foundation for Vygotsky’s

analysis of the unit znachenie slova%

7n su##ari:ing his !ork at the end of Thinking and Speech4 Vygotsky states0 “1he

discovery that znachenie slova changes and develops is our ne! and funda#ental contribution to

the theory of thinking and speech% 7t is our #a@or discovery> <*,)+4 p% -&=% 1he develop#ent of

#eaning is a process that has its foundation in the infant’s physical brain and in those ele#entary

thinking processes !ith !hich hu#ans are born and !hich develop in infancy 9 #echanical

#e#ory4 involuntary attention4 perception4 etc% 1hese ele#entary #ental functions are shaped by

the sociocultural situation into !hich children are born4 as !ell as through their interactions !ith

others and their environ#ent% 1he develop#ent of perception4 attention4 and #e#ory leads to

co##unication bet!een the child and caretakers4 !ith the latter ascribing co##unicative intent

to the infant’s gestures and sounds% 1his early social interaction provides a foundation for the

develop#ent of children’s co##unicative intentionality and sy#bolic representation 9 key

ele#ents in the acuisition of language% As children develop4 a ualitative transfor#ation in

social interaction takes place as co##unication of #eaning is enhanced once they develop the

ability to generali:e% 1his is acco#plished through “the creation and the use of signs> <*,,+b4 p%

&&=%

7t turns out that @ust as social interaction is i#possible !ithout signs4 it is also

i#possible !ithout #eaning% 1o co##unicate an e"perience of so#e other

content of consciousness to another person4 it #ust be related to a class or group

14



of pheno#ena% As !e have pointed out4 this reuires generalization0 Social

interaction pres%pposes generalization and the development of verbal meaning2

generali:ation beco#es possible only !ith the develop#ent of social interaction%

<*,)+4 p% )=

1!o basic functions of speech 9 revealing reality in a generali:ed !ay and co##unicating

#eaning in social interaction 9 are i#portant co#ponents of the speakingBthinking syste# of

#eaning% “7t #ay be appropriate to vie! znachenie slova not only as a %nity of thinking and

speech, but as a %nity of generalization and social interaction, a %nity of thinking and

comm%nication> <*,)+4 p% ,4 italics in original=% Vygotsky uses generalization to refer to the

#ental act of abstracting fro# a concrete ob@ect to develop a concept of the ob@ect in its #anifold

#anifestations as opposed to using generalization to refer to general #eaning versus local

#eaning%

Understanding the potential for confusion about the significance of “#eaning”, and

having established “the changeable nature of #eaning>4 Vygotsky says4 “!e #ust begin by

defining it correctly% 1he nature of #eaning is revealed in generali:ation% 1he basic and central

feature of any !ord is generali:ation% All !ords generali:e> <*,)+4 p% -,=% 1he structure of

generali:ation that is produced through ongoing develop#ent of the ability to generali:e

provides the foundation for the internal speakingBthinking syste# of #eaning and is revealed in

Vygotsky’s analysis of znachenie slova%

Meaning is a necessary4 constituting feature of the !ord itself% 7t is the !ord vie!ed fro#

the inside% 1his @ustifies the vie! that znachenie slova is a pheno#ena of speech% 7n

psychological ter#s4 ho!ever4 znachenie slova is nothing other than a generali:ation4 that

is a concept% 7n essence generali:ation and znachenie slova are synony#s% Any

15



generali:ation 9 any for#ation of a concept 9 is unuestionably a specific and true act of

thought% 1hus4 znachenie slova is also a pheno#enon of thinking% <*,)+4 p% -=

Ho!ever4 if znachenie slova is translated as “!ord #eaning4> the focus tends to shift to a

linguistic analysis of changes in the e"ternal #eaning of a !ord and a!ay fro# an analysis of the

internal psychical syste# created through the unification of thinking and speaking% Vygotsky

critici:es this approach in e"plaining !hat he #eant !ith the clai# that znachenie slova

develops%

1he notion that the se#antic structure of znachenie slova #ight change through

the historical develop#ent of language is co#pletely foreign to linguistics%

5inguistics cannot perceive the possibility that the psychological nature of

#eaning changes4 that linguistic thought #oves fro# pri#itive for#s of

generali:ation to higher and #ore co#ple" for#s4 that the very nature of the

reflection and generali:ation of reality in the !ord changes !ith the e#ergence of

abstract concepts in the process of the historical develop#ent of language% <*,)+4

p% -&=

As children acuire the ability to generali:e and use sy#bolic representation4 the “psychological

nature of #eaning changes%> 1he thinking processes involved in generali:ation take different

for#s in their connections !ith speaking processes in the develop#ent of the speakingBthinking

syste# of #eaning4 leading eventually to thinking in concepts as adolescents begin to use

abstract4 conceptual thinking% <1his syste# of #eaning continues to develop throughout one’s

life; ho!ever4 Vygotsky only analy:es it through adolescence%=

At the conclusion of Thinking and Speech Vygotsky !rites that he has not fully analy:ed

the speakingBthinking syste# of #eaning but has only revealed its co#ple"ity% 7 atte#pt to

16



capture this co#ple"ity in the diagra# belo!4 but because the speakingBthinking syste# of

#eaning develops in a continuous process that includes #ultiple4 dyna#ic interrelationships4 and

ualitative transfor#ations in its develop#ent4 it is difficult to convey in t!o di#ensions% 7n the

discussion follo!ing the diagra#4 7 use Vygotsky’s !ritings to describe the significance of the

nu#bered ite#s !ithin the diagra# as !ell as their relationships !ith other aspects in the

diagra#% 1he concept being described in each section belo! is !ritten in all capitals for

clarification% <7 suggest referring back to this diagra# at the beginning of each nu#bered section

to see the interrelationships bet!een !hat is being described and the rest of the syste#%=

Vygotsky’s Speaking/Thinking System of Meaning

17



<*=% 1he 7I7V7IUA5 3PCHE is de#arked by the vertical line near the #iddle of the figure

and includes the psychological functions4 processes4 structures4 and syste#s that deter#ine its

course of develop#ent% 1he psyche as the unification of the brain and #ind4 involves

interrelationships of nu#erous syste#s 9 historical4 social4 cultural4 biological4 natural4

e#otional4 che#ical4 electrical4 physical4 activity4 and #ental4 a#ong others% Vygotsky

recogni:es the i#portance of the interrelationships of all of these syste#s4 but his focus is on

ho! these interrelationships lead to and enhance the develop#ent of the hu#an psyche% 7n

critiuing approaches that isolate functions for analysis4 Vygotsky !rites4 “Gecause Jthat

approachK causes the researcher to ignore the unified and integral nature of the process being

studied4 this for# of analysis leads to profound delusion% 1he internal relationships of the unified

18



!hole are replaced !ith e"ternal #echanical relationships bet!een t!o heterogeneous

processes> <*,)+4 p% /=%

Vygotsky contrasts his approach to ones that analy:e the e"ternal and ignore the internal%

“1he result has been that the relationships bet!een thought and !ord have been understood as

constant4 eternal relationships bet!een things4 not as internal4 dyna#ic4 and #obile relationships

bet!een processes> <*,)+4 p% -).=% 1hese processes are essential in the develop#ent of the

syste#s that constitute consciousness4 including the speakingBthinking syste# of #eaning% 7n his

analysis of the origins and develop#ent of this syste#4 for both the species and the individual4

Vygotsky incorporates an e"a#ination of the roles played by social4 cultural4 historical4 and

natural forces% His central focus is on the interconnections a#ong all of these processes and ho!

they influence the develop#ent of hu#anity’s and of the individual’s ability to construct and

co##unicate #eaning through language%

<-=% 1he individual psyche develops through interaction !ith 3OC7A5 CU51U6A5

A1U6A5 H731O67CA5 3OU6CEs% Each of these sources is i#portant to Vygotsky’s

theoretical fra#e!ork4 and because they have been analy:ed fro# #ultiple perspectives4 it is

i#portant to briefly describe Vygotsky’s focus for each of these concepts% 1he 3OC7A5 aspect

relies heavily on Mar" and Engels’ analysis of the role of labor in the develop#ent of hu#an

social for#ations and of ho! hu#ans changed nature through labor and in the process changed

hu#anity% Vygotsky focuses on “hu#an sensuous activity> <Mar"4 *,..4 p% +*= and in particular

the !ay in !hich hu#ans develop higher psychical processes% 1o do so he takes a H731O67CA5

approach looking at the genesis of those processes for the species and for the individual% 1he

historical develop#ent of hu#anity and its social for#s of organi:ation are key forces in the

develop#ent of the hu#an psyche%

19



Vygotsky’s genetic analysis of the species looks at the ti#e !hen “hu#anityLcrossed the

boundaries of ani#al e"istence> <*,,+b4 p% = and e"a#ines t!o different processes in that

crossing0

On the one hand4 it is the process of biological evolution of ani#al species

leading to the appearance of the species Homo sapiens; on the other4 it is the

process of historical develop#ent by #eans of !hich the pri#ordial4 pri#itive

#an beca#e cultured% <*,,+b4 p% *&=

7n his analysis of cultural sources of develop#ent for the species4 Vygotsky concludes0

Vygotsky argues that the role A1U6A5 and CU51U6A5 forces create “autono#ous

and independent lines of develop#ent> <p% *&= for the species and for the individual% or

hu#anity4 “Culture creates special for#s of behavior4 it #odifies the activity of #ental functions4

it constructs ne! superstructures in the developing syste# of hu#an behavior> <p% *)=; ho!ever4

for the child “both these lines are #erged in ontogenesis and actually for# a single4 although

co#ple" process> <p% *&=4 !hich has its origins at birth% Unlike for the hu#an species4 !hich had

reached an al#ost co#plete biological for# by the ti#e higher psychical processes developed4

gro!th and cultural develop#ent occur at the sa#e ti#e for the child%

Cultural develop#ent of the child is still characteri:ed pri#arily by the fact that it

occurs under conditions of dyna#ic change in organic type% 7t is superi#posed on

processes of gro!th4 #aturation4 and organic develop#ent of the child and for#s

a single !hole !ith these% Only by abstraction can !e separate so#e processes

fro# others% <p% *,=

1he latter describes the #ethod that Vygotsky uses to e"a#ine t!o interrelated but distinct

processes that play a central role in the develop#ent of the hu#an psyche0

20



irst4 the processes of #astering e"ternal #aterials of cultural develop#ent and

thinking0 language4 !riting4 arith#etic4 dra!ing; second4 the processes of

develop#ent of special higher #ental functions not deli#ited and not deter#ined

!ith any degree of precision and in traditional psychology ter#ed voluntary

attention4 logical #e#ory4 for#ation of concepts4 etc% <p% *=

1hese processes are intert!ined fro# the beginning4 but it is only by abstracting one fro# the

other that !e can begin to understand their essence%

7n his analysis of the cultural develop#ent of the child4 Vygotsky focuses pri#arily on the

role that language plays in the develop#ent the speakingBthinking syste#s of #eaning for both

the hu#an species and the individual% 1he natural and cultural forces are central in the

develop#ent of the hu#an psyche% Vygotsky appreciates the tre#endous force that culture has

on an individual4 but his focus is not pri#arily on cultural practices% 7nstead4 it is on the c%lt%ral

development of the individual4 especially the acuisition of the ability to co##unicate through

language% 1o study the relationships bet!een individuals and their social4 cultural4 natural4 and

historical sources of develop#ent Vygotsky uses the concept of perezhivanie%

<.=% !3431H#56#3 describes individuals’ interactions !ith and e"periences in the

environ#ent 9 their sociocultural !orlds% Vygotsky conceives of the environ#ent broadly to

include the !hole “ense#ble of social relations4> !hich is the phrase Mar" uses to describe the

essence of hu#anity in his Theses on $e%erbach <*,..4 p% +.=% “1he essential factors4 !hich

e"plain the influence of environ#ent on the psychological develop#ent of children and on the

develop#ent of their conscious personalities4 are #ade up of their perezhivanie> <Vygotsky4

*,,4 p% ..,=% 1his ter# refers to the !ay people perceive4 e#otionally e"perience4 appropriate4

internali:e4 and understand interactions in their social situations of develop#ent% “ !erezhivanie

21



is a unity !here4 on the one hand4 in an indivisible state4 the environ#ent is represented4 i%e% that

!hich is being e"periencedLand on the other hand4 !hat is represented is ho! 74 #yself4 a#

e"periencing this4 i%e%4 all the personal characteristics and all the environ#ental characteristics

are represented in perezhivanie> <Vygotsky4 *,,4 p% .-=% 1here is no adeuate translation in

English of the 6ussian ter# perezhivanie, and single or t!o(!ord translations do not do @ustice

to the concept% 1he translators of Vygotsky’s article <*,,=4 “1he roble# of the Environ#ent4>

in !hich he e"plains perezhivanie, !rite “the 6ussian ter# J perezhivanieK serves to e"press the

idea that one and the sa#e ob@ective situation #ay be interpreted4 perceived4 e"perienced or lived

through by different children in different !ays> <p% .&=% Vygotsky points out that the !ay in

!hich an e"perience is given #eaning actually affects the environ#ent as !ell% !erezhivanie

describes the !ay that individuals participate in and #ake #eaning of “hu#an sensuous

activity%> 1hroughout the discussion of the develop#ent of the speakingBthinking syste# of

#eaning4 it is i#portant to keep perezhivanie in #ind4 as one of the criticis#s of Vygotsky is that

he focuses too narro!ly on the internal processes% Ho!ever4 in his analysis of the develop#ent

of the syste# of #eaning4 he continually e#phasi:es the role that social interaction plays in its

construction%

<=% 3OC7A5 371UA17O O IEVE5OME1 describes the relationships of

individuals to their environ#ents and is key to the “unity of the social and the personal> <*,,)4

p% *,'=% 1his unity e"presses “a co#pletely original4 e"clusive4 single4 and uniue relation4

specific to the given age4 bet!een the child and reality4 #ainly the social reality that surrounds

hi#% Fe call this relation the social sit%ation of development at the given age> <p% *,)=% 7t is

i#portant to note that Vygotsky conceives of the social situation of develop#ent as a relation4

not a conte"t%

22



1he child is a part of the social situation4 and the relation of the child to the

environ#ent and the environ#ent to the child occurs through the e"perience and

activity of the child hi#self; the forces of the environ#ent acuire a controlling

significance because the child e"periences the#% <p% -,=

1he stage that children have achieved in their develop#ent is a key factor in deter#ining the

nature of interactions in their social situations of develop#ent% 1he concept of perezhivanie,

e"perience in a social situation of develop#ent4 is key to understanding the role social processes

play in the develop#ent of an individual’s speakingBthinking syste#%

<&=% 1he 3EA87DB1H787D 3P31EM O MEA7D is represented by the largest

oval4 reflecting a #ore developed syste#% Gecause this syste# develops4 it !ould occupy far less

space graphically in its initial stages% 7t is i#portant to recogni:e that Vygotsky is looking at the

unity of thinking and speaking processes by e"a#ining znachenie slova as the center of the

internal speakingBthinking syste# of #eaning <*,,+a4 p% *..=% Fith the foundation described in

the previous four sections4 Vygotsky starts his analysis by e"a#ining the structure that is created

in the develop#ent of one’s ability to generali:e%

</=% 1he 316UC1U6E O DEE6A57QA17O provides the fra#e!ork for the

speakingBthinking syste# and co(develops !ith it fro# the beginning% 1he ability to generali:e

develops as children acuire language and begin to develop preconcepts% 1he syste# of #eaning

and the structure of generali:ation change through the develop#ent of a syste# of concepts%

1he basic finding of our research is that relationships of generality bet!een

concepts are closely associated !ith the structure of generali:ation <i%e%4 they are

closely associated !ith the stages of concept develop#ent that !e studied in our

e"peri#ental research=% 3ach str%ct%re of generalization &i0e0, syncretic,

23



comple7es, preconcepts, and concepts* corresponds -ith a specific system of

generality and specific types of relationships of generality bet-een general and

specific concepts <p% --&4 italics in original=% L1hus4 in concept develop#ent4 the

#ove#ent fro# the general to the specific or fro# the specific to the general is

different for each stage in the develop#ent of #eaning depending on the structure

of generali:ation do#inant at that stage% <p% --/=

7n chapter & of Thinking and Speech Vygotsky e"a#ines the origins of this structure 9 the initial

unification of the thinking and speaking processes 9 through his analysis of znachenie slova0 1he

foundation for the structure of generali:ation includes the generali:ation involved in using a

pointing gesture% 1he use of a gesture as sy#bolic representation lays the foundation for the

unification of thinking and speaking in a syste# of #eaning% 1he creation this syste# starts

!hen children4 in interaction !ith adults4 apply language to a#alga#ated visual i#ages% 7n this

act of generali:ation4 children bring together “a series of ele#ents that are e"ternally connected

in the i#pression they have had on a child but not unified internally a#ong the#selves> <*,)+4

p% *.= into !hat Vygotsky calls a syncretic heap or group% An e"a#ple is children associating

the !ord “doggie> !ith their sensual and e#otional e"periences !ith their pet and then grouping

other ob@ects or events that evoke the sa#e sub@ective i#pressions under the !ord “doggie%>

1he ne"t step in the develop#ent of the structure of generali:ation occurs !hen the

“representatives of these JsyncreticK groups are isolated and once again syncretically united> <p%

*.&=% 1his represents a generali:ation of a generali:ation% 1o trace the develop#ent of the

structure of generali:ation4 Vygotsky e"plains ho! the different #odes of thinking create “the

for#ation of connections4 the establish#ent of relationships a#ong different concrete

i#pressions4 the unification and generali:ation of separate ob@ects4 and the ordering and the

24



syste#ati:ation of the !hole of the child’s e"perience> <p% *.&=% He illustrates the unification of

speaking and thinking processes by sho!ing ho! the use of a !ord facilitates the develop#ent

of voluntary attention4 partitioning4 co#parison4 analysis4 abstraction4 and synthesis% 1he !ord

tail !ill help the child focus attention4 isolate4 abstract4 generali:e and synthesi:e features% 1his

kind of unification of speaking and thinking processes is critical to the entire process of the

develop#ent of #eaning%

As the syncretic for# of thinking the “connection(less4 connectedness> <p% *.= of visual

i#ages develops4 a ualitative transfor#ation takes place and the ne"t for# of thinking 9

thinking in comple7es 9 develops4 and brings about funda#ental changes in the structure of

generali:ation% “1he co#ple"(collection is a generali:ation of things based on their co(

participation in a single practical operation4 a generali:ation of things based on their functional

collaboration> <p% *.,=% 1he child includes ob@ects in a co#ple" based on e#pirical connections%

Vygotsky <*,)+= gives an e"a#ple of a chained(co#ple" as a child uses a !ord for a duck in a

pond and then uses the sa#e !ord for any kind of liuid4 for a coin !ith an eagle on it4 and for

anything round% 7n their thinking in co#ple"es4 children’s forms of thinking #ove through five

different phases4 al!ays in a dialectical relationship !ith the changing content of thinking 9 this

dialectical relationship is key to understanding Vygotskys clai# that znachenie slova develops%

Ievelop#ent in the form of thinking facilitates the develop#ent of the content of

thinking 9 #eaning created through the unification of thinking and speaking processes% 1he

content of thinking reflects increased capacity !ith language4 facilitating the ability of children

to “use !ords or other signs as #eans of actively directing attention4 partitioning and isolating

attributes abstracting these attributes and synthesi:ing the#> <*,)+4 p% *.'=% 1his ability to use

abstract thinking leads to “the isolation of the #eaning fro# sound4 the isolation of !ord fro#

25



thing4 and the isolation of thought fro# !ord J!hichK are all necessary stages in the history of

the develop#ent of concepts> <*,)+4 p% -)=% At ti#es in this process there are ualitative

transfor#ations such as those bet!een syncretic thinking and thinking in co#ple"es and those

bet!een thinking in co#ple"es and thinking in concepts%

1he pse%doconcept is key to the transfor#ation fro# thinking in co#ple"es to thinking in

concepts% 1he child and the adult both focus on an ob@ect designated by a !ord4 and in that

shared contact they are able to co##unicate; ho!ever4 they use different for#s of thinking to

arrive at the point !here they are using the sa#e !ord for an ob@ect% 1he “child thinks the sa#e

content differently4 in another #ode4 and through different intellectual operations> <*,)+4 p%

*&-=% 1he child and the adult have different #odes of thought as the basis for their syste#s of

#eaning%

1he child and adult understand each other !ith the pronunciation of the !ord

“dog> because they relate the !ord to the sa#e ob@ect4 because they have the

sa#e concrete content in #ind% Ho!ever4 one thinks of the concrete co#ple"

“dog> Jthe pseudoconceptK and the other of the abstract concept “dog>% <p% *&&=

Adults also use pseudoconcepts as they go through the process of transfor#ing everyday

concepts into scientific concepts 9 ones !ithin syste#s% Ira!ing on #athe#atics4 Vygotsky

gives an e"a#ple of the transition fro# the #ode of thinking in co#ple"es to the #ode of

thinking in concepts%

1he transition fro# preconcepts <e%g%4 the school child’s arith#etic concept= to

true concepts <e%g%4 the adolescent’s algebraic concept= occurs through the

generali:ation of previously generali:ed ob@ects% 1he preconcept is an abstraction

of the nu#ber fro# the ob@ect and4 based on this4 a generali:ation of the ob@ect’s

26



nu#erical characteristics% 1he concept is an abstraction fro# the nu#ber and4

based on this a generali:ation of the relationships bet!een nu#bers% <*,)+4 p%

-.'=

Critical of the theories of his day4 Vygotsky !rites4 “all have overlooked the

generali:ation that is inherent in the !ord4 this uniue #ode of reflecting reality in

consciousness> <*,)+4 p% -,=% 7n so doing4 these theories #iss the unification of the thinking and

speaking processes4 creating syste#s of #eaning through the develop#ent of the structure of

generali:ation% Conseuently4 they #iss that “Each structure of generali:ation has a characteristic

degree of unity4 a characteristic degree of abstractness or concreteness4 and characteristic thought

operations associated !ith a given level of develop#ent of znachenie slova> <*,)+4 p% --&=%

Gefore describing the final #ode of thinking in the structure of generali:ation 9 thinking

in concepts 9 7 look at the different !ays in !hich Vygotsky uses meaning and then relate the#

to his use of the concept of sense < smysl*0

<+=% As has been e#phasi:ed through this article4 the concept of meaning is central to

Vygotsky’s theory4 but because he uses meaning !ith a nu#ber of different connotations in

Thinking and Speech, there is often confusion about !hat he #eans if the reader is not a!are of

ho! he is using the !ord4 especially in the phrase znachenie slova0 7t is helpful to conceive of a

3OC7OCU51U6A5 3P31EM O MEA7D4 !hich incorporates so#e of the different !ays in

!hich Vygotsky uses meaning % He starts by e"a#ining ho! #eaning develops in a historical4

natural4 sociocultural conte"t fro# hu#ans’ first use of language to the fully developed syste#s

of kno!ledge in #odern ti#es% At ti#es4 Vygotsky uses meaning to refer to individual !ords 9

#eanings captured in dictionaries 9 5e"ical Meaning <+a=% At other ti#es he uses #eaning to

refer to Meaning in a 3ocial Conte"t <+b= 9 the !ay in !hich kno!ledge and concepts are

27



conveyed in an individual’s particular sociocultural conte"t% A nu#ber of factors contribute to

#eaning in a sociocultural conte"t including !hat language is being spoken; !here is it being

spoken 9 in !hat nation4 in !hat co##unity; the ethnic4 gender4 class4 and po!er relationships

of the speakers; fa#ily situations; and affective factors4 a#ong others% 1here is a level of fluidity

in sociocultural #eaning ranging fro# the #ost fi"ed4 #eanings that are codified in the

dictionary4 to the #ost fluid4 Meaning in 5anguage Use <+c= 9 language in specific utterances4

!ritten and spoken sign operations in particular social situations of develop#ent%

Meaning <+d= that is internally appropriated through the sign operation and incorporated

into an individual’s speakingBthinking syste# is influenced by the social situation of

develop#ent 9 !ho is interacting !ith the individual and !hat is the #eaning being conveyed%

1here is a constant interplay bet!een the sociocultural #eaning and the individual’s syste# of

#eaning4 !hich has been and is continually being shaped by sociocultural #eanings

co##unicated through the sign operation% 7n analy:ing e"ternal sociocultural #eaning4 the focus

should go beyond @ust the #eaning and use of a particular !ord and also focus on the processes

through !hich #eaning is conveyed in phrases4 sentences4 idio#s4 #etaphors4 and larger te"ts4

and then ho! it is internali:ed into the individual’s syste# of #eaning% Vygotsky uses the

concept of sense <s#ysl= to help e"plain the internali:ation process 9 a dialectical process

through !hich sense develops the syste# of #eaning and is developed by it%

<)=% Gecause Vygotsky’s specifically uses 3E3E to describe inner speech4 it is i#portant

to re#e#ber that in Thinking and Speech, he is focusing pri#arily on the “uniue se#antic

structure> of inner speech4 “indeed4 the entire internal aspect of speech that is oriented to!ard the

personality> <*,)+4 p% -).= !hen he e"a#ines the “three basic characteristics of the se#antics of

inner speech> <p% -+&=% 1o illustrate the nature of sense4 he dra!s analogies to e"ternal speech

28



pri#arily related to “literary speech> but #akes clear that these analogies do not i#ply an

euivalency in the use of sense as related to e"ternal speech and as related to inner speech%

Atte#pts to describe Vygotsky’s use of sense !ithout #aking this distinction #iss a central

point% 7t is true that the internal “uniue se#antic structure> has its origins in sociocultural

#eanings4 but there are al!ays going to be degrees of divergence bet!een sociocultural

#eanings and the 3E3E of !ords or concepts incorporated into an individual’s syste# of

#eaning% Children’s first !ords are do#inated by the sense of visual perception and their

e#otional e"perience of the social situation of develop#ent in !hich a !ord is being used% 1heir

sense do#inates until their e"posure to and interaction !ith adult or sociocultural #eanings of

!ords cause these #eanings to play a #ore significant role in their syste#s of #eaning% 7n this

process4 Vygotsky cautions though that the “child’s !ord #ay correspond !ith the adult’s in

ob@ect relatedness4 but not in #eaning> <*,)+4 p% *&.=% 3ense < smysl* is an i#portant co#ponent

in the speakingBthinking syste# of #eaning !ith sociocultural #eaning as an essential but

subordinate part of sense% 1his subordination is an i#portant aspect of inner speech% “7n inner

speech4 !e find a predo#inance of the !ord’s sense over its #eaning> <*,)+4 p% -+=% A !ord

and its #eaning change in the internali:ation process through !hich sociocultural #eaning is

incorporated into an individual’s sense% “1he #eaning of the !ord in inner speech is an

individual #eaning4 a #eaning understandable only in the plane of inner speech> <p% -+,=% “1o

so#e e"tent4 JsenseK is uniue for each consciousness and for a single consciousness in varied

circu#stances> <p% -+/=% 1herefore4 the sense of a !ord is never co#plete% 3ense is “the

aggregate of all the psychological facts that arise in our consciousness as the result of the !ord>

<pp% -+&(-+/= and is a transfor#ative co#ponent in the develop#ent of the speakingBthinking

syste# of #eaning% “Ulti#ately4 the !ord’s real sense is deter#ined by everything in

29



consciousness !hich is related to !hat the !ord e"pressesLJandK ulti#ately sense depends on

one’s understanding of the !orld as a !hole and on the internal structure of personality> <p% -+/=%

Essential to the syste# of #eaning is the lifelong 4 dyna#ic4 dialectic interplay bet!een

sociocultural #eaning and the sense that develops as a part of the syste# of #eaning% 3ense and

the syste# of #eaning both develop through the internali:ation of sociocultural #eanings%

Sense8s course of develop#ent starts early !ith the trial and error period of the syncretic i#ages

and continues as the child begins to think in co#ple"es and continues !ith the develop#ent of

everyday and scientific concepts and adolescents develop#ent of conscious a!areness of their

o!n thinking processes 9thinking in concepts% 7n this process there is an ongoing dialectical

interaction bet!een4 on the one hand4 the speakingBthinking syste# of #eaning and the plane of

sense !ithin it and4 on the other4 the e"isting4 relatively stable4 e"ternal sociocultural #eanings%

1he !ay in !hich sociocultural #eaning is transfor#ed as it is internali:ed can be seen at

the level of single !ords in the difference bet!een the individual’s sense of the !ord and

co##on usage based on dictionary #eanings% 1he !ord mother 4 for e"a#ple4 invokes for every

individual a very personal sense of the !ord% At the sa#e ti#e there is a co##on understanding

of the sociocultural #eaning of the !ord denoting both a biological and cultural relationship%

1his divergence e"ists in both the internali:ation and e"ternali:ation processes% 5anguage can

never fully e"press an individual’s sense of a concept or sense of a thought%

<,=% 2ust as there is an individual’s syste# of #eaning and a sociocultural syste# of

#eaning4 there is a sociocultural 3P31EM O COCE13 <,= and an individual’s 3yste# of

Concepts <,a=% 1he interaction !ith adults through the use of the pseudoconcept described above

in </= lays the ground!ork for the ne"t transfor#ation in conceptual develop#ent as the child

#oves fro# concrete to abstract thinking4 and fro# thinking in co#ple"es to thinking in

30



concepts% A syste# of concepts is built in the speakingBthinking syste# on the structure of

generali:ation4 in a dialectical relationship4 being influenced by and influencing it% “1he

develop#ent of concepts or znachenie slova presupposes the develop#ent of a !hole series of

J#entalK functionsLvoluntary attention4 logical #e#ory4 abstraction4 co#parison4 and

differentiation> <*,)+4 p% *+'=% Although the foundation for concepts is laid !hen children begin

to acuire language4 they do not use concepts e"isting in syste#s until they reach adolescence%

As the child begins to isolate and abstract separate ele#ents4 and “to vie! these isolated4

abstracted ele#ents independently of the concrete and e#pirical connections in !hich they are

given> <*,)+4 p% *&/=4 the syste# of #eaning undergoes a ualitative transfor#ation as the child

begins to think in concepts% “1he concept arises !hen several abstracted features are re(

synthesi:ed and !hen this abstract synthesis beco#es the basic for# of thinking through !hich

the child perceives and interprets reality> <p% *&,=%

1he #ost i#portant psychological process for adolescents in acuiring the ability to think

in concepts is the develop#ent of an “internal #eaningful perception of their o!n #ental

processes> <p% *,'=4 through !hich they gain conscious a!areness of their thinking processes%

1his introspection “represents the initial generali:ation or abstraction of internal #ental for#s of

activity> <p% *,'=% Vygotsky argues that this generali:ation and abstraction can only be

acco#plished through the process of developing a syste# of concepts4 the source of !hich is the

syste# that e"ists e"ternally and includes scientific concepts4 !hich are generally4 but not

e"clusively4 introduced at school% As it is internali:ed4 this syste# of concepts beco#es part of

the process that is developing the syste# of #eaning% “sychologically4 the develop#ent of

concepts and the develop#ent of znachenie slova are one and the sa#e process> <*,)+4 p% *)'=%

<7 do not include an oval for the syste# of concepts4 because depicting the develop#ent of the

31



syste# of concepts that includes the relationship bet!een everyday and scientific concepts !ould

be difficult !ithout #aking the diagra# inco#prehensible%=

Vygotsky argues that scientificBacade#ic concepts “can arise in the child’s head only on

the foundation provided by the lo!er and #ore ele#entary for#s of generali:ation !hich

previously e"isted> <p% *++=% 1he syste#atic use of concepts transfor#s the structure of

generali:ation as the syste# of scientific concepts “is transferred structurally to the do#ain of

the everyday concepts4 restructuring the everyday concept and changing its internal nature fro#

above> <p% *,-=% A dialectical relationship is established !ith the everyday concepts in !hich the

“scientific concept gro!s do!n!ard through the everyday concept and the everyday concept

#oves up!ard through the scientificL% 7n this process4 Jeveryday conceptsK%%%are restructured in

accordance !ith the structures prepared by the scientific concept> <p% --'=% 1he link bet!een the

everyday and scientific concepts as they #ove in opposite directions is that “of the zone of

pro7imal development > <p% --'=%

1his syste#ati:ation of concepts brings about a ualitative transfor#ation in the

speakingBthinking syste#4 generating changes in adolescents’ volition and creating a conscious

a!areness of their o!n thinking processes%

Only !ithin a syste# can the concept acuire conscious a!areness and a

voluntary nature% Conscious a!areness and the presence of a syste# are

synony#s !hen !e are speaking of concepts4 @ust as spontaneity4 lack of

conscious a!areness4 and the absence of a syste# are three different J!ays ofK

designating the nature of the child’s concept0 <pp% *,*(*,-=

1he syste# of #eaning that incorporates conscious a!areness and syste#ati:ation of concepts

yields a ualitatively different vie! of reality4 because it has different relationships of generality

32



than that of a syste# based on everyday concepts% <1he follo!ing uote fro# Vygotsky4 !hich

describes this different vie!4 ends the description of the ite#s in the diagra# above%=

According to a !ell(kno!n definition of Mar"4 if the for# of a #anifestation and

the essence of things coincided directly4 then all science !ould be superfluous%

or this reason4 thinking in concepts is the #ost adeuate #ethod of kno!ing

reality because it penetrates into the internal essence of things4 for the nature of

things is disclosed not in direct conte#plation of one single ob@ect or another4 but

in the connections and relations that are #anifested in #ove#ent and in the

develop#ent of the ob@ect4 and these connect it to all of the rest of reality% 1he

internal connection of things is disclosed !ith the help of thinking in concepts4 for

to develop a concept of so#e ob@ect #eans to disclose a series of connections and

relations of that ob@ect !ith all the rest of reality4 to include it in the co#ple"

syste# of pheno#ena% <*,,)4 p% &=

7nner 3peech and the 3yste# of Meaning

After analy:ing the construction of the structure of generali:ation and the creation of a

syste# of concepts4 Vygotsky uses functional analysis to e"a#ine the internali:ation of speech

and its #ediation of thought 9 a central co#ponent of the speakingBthinking syste# of #eaning%

1he unit znachenie slova reveals “the co#ple" structure of the actual process of thinking4 the

co#ple" #ove#ent fro# the first vague e#ergence of thought to a co#pletion in a verbal

for#ulation> and sho!s ho! “#eanings function in the living process> of the speakingBthinking

syste# <*,)+4 p% -,=% 7n each stage in develop#ent “there e"ists not only a specific structure of

verbal #eaning4 but a special relationship bet!een thinking and speech that defines this

structure> <p% -,=% Vygotsky e"a#ines this relationship by describing the different planes

33



through !hich “thought passes as it beco#es e#bodied in the !ord> <p% -&'=%

Vygotsky begins his analysis !ith the e"ternal plane and then proceeds to the different

internal planes4 focusing #ainly on inner speech% “Fithout a correct understanding of the

psychological nature of inner speech4 !e cannot clarify the actual co#ple" relationships bet!een

thought and !ord> <p% -&&=% As opposed to iaget4 !ho proposed that egocentric speech 9

articulated speech directed to oneself 9 disappears4 Vygotsky argues that it beco#es internali:ed

in the for# of inner speech as part of the process of inter#entalBe"ternal functioning beco#ing

intra#entalBinternal functioning% 7n this internali:ation process the function and structure of

language changes4 !hich in turn changes the syste# of #eaning% 1he transfor#ations in the

internali:ation of speech include frag#entation4 abbreviation4 and agglutination4 along !ith

predicativity% “1he si#plification of synta"4 the #ini#i:ation of syntactic differentiation4 the

e"pression of thought in condensed for# and the reduction in the uantity of !ords all

characteri:e this tendency to!ard predicativity that e"ternal speech #anifests under certain

conditions> <p% -/,=% E"peri#ental research on inner speech reveals that0

1he structural and functional characteristics of egocentric speech develop along

!ith the develop#ent of the child% At three years of age4 there is little difference

bet!een egocentric and co##unicative speech% Gy seven years of age4 nearly all

of the functional and structural characteristics of egocentric speech differ fro#

those of social speech% <p% -/*=

Vygotsky’s analysis of znachenie slova reveals the internal planes in the

speakingBthinking syste# of #eaning fro# e"ternal speech to inner speech4 fro# inner speech to

pure thought4 and4 ulti#ately4 to the “#otivating sphere of consciousness4 a sphere that includes

our inclinations and needs4 our interests and i#pulses4 and our affect and e#otion% 1he affective

34



and volitional tendency stands behind thought> <p% -)-=% 1hought #otivated in the

affectiveBvolition plane co#bines !ith language in the syste# of #eaning leading to production

of !ritten or oral language% 7n this process “thought is not only #ediated e"ternally by signs% 7t is

#ediated internally by #eanings> <p% -)-=% “Fhere e"ternal speech involves the e#bodi#ent of

thought in the !ord4 in inner speech the !ord dies a!ay and gives birth to thought% 1o a

significant e"tent4 inner speech is thinking in pure #eanings4 though as the poet says !e uickly

tire of it’> <p% -)'=% 1here is a ualitative difference bet!een the e"ternal #eanings of !ords and

their transfor#ation through internali:ation into a syste# of #eaning%

1his outline of the characteristics of inner speech leaves no doubt concerning the

validity of our basic thesis4 the thesis that inner speech is an entirely %ni.%e,

independent, and distinctive speech f%nction, that it is co#pletely different fro#

e"ternal speech% 1his @ustifies the vie! that inner speech is an internal plane of

Jthe speakingBthinking syste#K !hich #ediates the dyna#ic relationship bet!een

thought and !ord% <*,)+4 p% -+,4 italics in original=

Rualitative 1ransfor#ations in the 3peakingB1hinking 3yste#

7n Vygotsky’s analytic approach4 psychological syste#s do not proceed on a linear path;

rather their courses are deter#ined by ualitative transfor#ations in the relationships bet!een

#ental functions and other psychological processes% 1hese ualitative transfor#ations take place

in the speakingBthinking syste# and affect the develop#ent of the structure of generali:ation%

Analy:ing these ualitative changes leads Vygotsky to the central discovery of his research 9 that

znachenie slova develops% 1he analysis of znachenie slova reveals that the develop#ent of the

speakingBthinking syste# described in Thinking and Speech takes place through transfor#ations

in interpsychological relationships4 including the0

35



<a= develop#ent of higher psychological processes through a reconstruction of

ele#entary processes;

<b= develop#ent of the structure of generali:ation through stages #arked by

different #odes of thinking 9 syncretic4 co#ple"ive4 and conceptual;

<c= develop#ent of scientificBacade#ic concepts in relationship to

spontaneousBeveryday concepts;

<d= internali:ation of speech and the develop#ent of inner speech; and

<e= transfor#ations in the relationships of #ental functions that bring about

periods of “crisis> in children’s develop#ent at appro"i#ately ages one4 three4

seven4 and thirteen%

1he unification of speaking and thinking processes brings about transfor#ations ”from

direct, innate, nat%ral forms and methods of behavior to mediated, artificial mental f%nctions

that develop in the process of c%lt%ral development” <*,,)4 p% */)4 italics in original=% 1he

higher psychological processes depend on ne! #echanis#s that result not fro# the gradual4

linear develop#ent of the ele#entary processes4 but fro# “a ualitatively ne! #ental for#ation

JthatK develops according to co#pletely special la!s sub@ect to co#pletely different patterns>

<*,,)4 p% .=% 1he develop#ent of this ne! for#ation4 the conceptual #eaning syste#4 leads to a

transfor#ation !hen ele#entary “processes that are #ore pri#itive4 earlier4 si#pler4 and

independent of concepts in genetic4 functional4 and structural relations4 are reconstructed on a

ne! basis !hen influenced by thinking in concepts> <*,,)4 p% )*=%

Conclusion

Vygotsky reveals the co#ple"ity of the speakingBthinking syste# of #eaning through

genetic4 structural4 and functional analysis of znachenie slova4 but he says this “investigation has

36



brought us to the threshold of a proble# that is broader4 #ore profound4 and still #ore

e"traordinary than the proble# of thinking% 7t has brought us to the threshold of the proble# of

consciousness> <*,)+4 p% -)&=% He su##ari:es the !ork that he and his collaborators have

co#pleted and the path that lies ahead4 !hen he !rites4 “7 !ill si#ply restate the clai# that the

#ethod that !e are applying in this !ork not only per#its us to see the internal unity of thinking

and speech4 but allo!s us to do #ore effective research on the relationship of verbal thinking Jthe

speakingBthinking syste# of #eaningK to the !hole life of consciousness> <*,)+4 p% &*=%

Understanding hu#an consciousness is Vygotsky’s overarching ob@ective4 but he begins this

study !ith an in(depth e"a#ination of the speaking/thinking system of meaning 9 an essential

aspect of consciousness%

Vygotsky states that his study had only @ust begun and that he had #erely been able to

sho! the co#ple"ity of the syste# that is created through the unification of thinking and

speaking% He !as not able to conduct #ore research on it as he died shortly after co#pleting

Thinking and Speech0 His !ork4 banned by 3talin’s bureaucracy in *,./4 re#ained virtually

unavailable until *,&/% Fhen it began to see the light of day once again4 it !as through

interpretations4 #ainly 5eontiev’s <*,+,4 *,)*=4 !hich clai#ed that Vygotsky’s unit znachenie

slova !as used to analy:e consciousness as a !hole and that it !as not adeuate for that task%

Vygotsky clearly uses znachenie slova to e"a#ine the speakingBthinking syste# of #eaning and

not consciousness as a !hole4 but nevertheless4 5eontiev uses this erroneous interpretation to

re@ect Vygotsky’s unit and substitute an evolving series of units tied to hu#an activity to analy:e

consciousness% 5eaving aside the uestion of !hether or not this substitution has #erit4 it has

contributed to obscuring Vygotsky’s analysis of the speakingBthinking syste# through the unit

znachenie slova4 resulting in the pheno#enon that Vygotsky put at the center of his analysis

37



being overlooked%

Fhile it is i#possible in a short article to do @ustice to Vygotsky’s analysis of znachenie

slova to reveal the co#ple"ity of the speakingBthinking syste# of #eaning4 7 hope that this

e"ploration has sho!n the value of reading Vygotskys !ork4 both broadly and deeply4 !ithout

forcing it into a fra#e!ork constructed by interpretations of that !ork% 7n doing so4 scholars can

gain a better understanding of his notion of consciousness as a syste# of syste#s and also can

see the overall coherence in his !ork as it evolved during his lifeti#e% 1his understanding can

also sti#ulate further analysis of the develop#ent of Vygotsky’s speakingBthinking syste# of

#eaning%

ootnotes

*% Fith a couple of e"ceptions to Mar" and Engels’ !ork4 all of the references in this paper are to

Vygotskys !ork4 and4 therefore4 for the sake of si#plicity4 7 usually do not include his na#e in

the in(te"t citations% 5ike!ise4 if there is a series of uotes fro# the sa#e !ork4 7 include only

the page nu#bers after first citing the year of the !ork%

-% or a #ore in depth analysis of Vygotsky’s reliance on Mar" and Engels’ #ethodological

approach see Mahn4 -'*'%

.% Although Vygotsky ackno!ledges that there are a variety of non(linguistic sign operations 9

those related to #ath4 #usic4 #aps4 etc% 9 his #ain focus is the study of the role of the sign

operation using language in the creation and develop#ent of the speakingBthinking syste# of

#eaning%

% 1hese periods are not @ust biologically deter#ined4 but also reflect the social4 historical

conditions in !hich children live% or e"a#ple4 a key aspect of the crisis at around the age of

seven is the change in social relations that is precipitated !hen children begin school% 7n the

38



3oviet Union at Vygotskys ti#e4 children began school at seven% <3ee Mahn4 -''.; Vygotsky4

*,,)=%

6eferences

Engels4 % <*,.. date of reface=% 5ud!ig euerbach and the outco#e of classical Der#an

philosophy% 7n V% Adoratsky <Ed%= 9arl Mar7: Selected -orks0 5ol0 ', pp% *(+'% e!

Pork0 7nternational ublishers0

5eontiev4 A%% <*,+,=% 1he proble# of activity in psychology <pp% .+(+*=% 7n 2%V% Fertsch <Ed%=%

The concept of activity in Soviet psychology% Ar#onk4 P0 3harpe.

5eontiev4 A%%4 <*,)*=% The development of mind % e! Pork4 P0 rogress ublishers% Also

available at0 http0BB#ar"ists%orgBarchiveBleontevB!orksBdevelop#ent(#ind%pdf

Mahn4 H% <-'*'=% Vygotsky’s #ethodological approach0 A blueprint for the future of psychology%

7n A% 1oo#ela ? 2% Valsiner <Eds%=% Methodological Thinking in !sychology: ; <ears

"one 6stray <pp% -,+9.-.=% Charlotte0 C0 7nfor#ation Age ublishing%

Mahn4 H% <-''.=% eriods in child develop#ent0 Vygotsky’s perspective% 7n V% Ageev4 G% Dindis4

A% 8o:ulin4 ? 3% Miller4 <Eds%=4 5ygotsky=s 3d%cational Theory in %lt%ral onte7t, <pp%

**,(*.+=% Ca#bridge4 MA0 Ca#bridge University ress%

Mar"4 8% <*,+'=% 6 contrib%tion to the criti.%e of political economy0 e! Pork0 7nternational

ublishers%

6ieber4 6%F ? Carton4 A% 3% <Eds%=% <*,)+=% English otes to Thinking and Speech in !roblems

of general psychology% The collected -orks of >0 S0 5ygotsky: 5ol0 '0 e! Pork4 P0

lenu#

Vygotsky4 5% 3% <*,)+=% roble#s of general psychology% 1he collected !orks of 5% 3% Vygotsky0

Vol% *% 7ncluding the volu#e 1hinking and 3peech% e! Pork4 P0 lenu#%

39

http://marxists.org/archive/leontev/works/development-mind.pdf

http://marxists.org/archive/leontev/works/development-mind.pdf



Vygotsky4 5% 3% <*,,.=% The f%ndamentals of defectology &6bnormal psychology and learning

disabilities% The collected -orks of >0 S0 5ygotsky: 5ol0 ?0 e! Pork0 lenu#%

Vygotsky4 5% 3% <*,,=% The 5ygotsky reader0 6% van der Veer ? 2% Valsiner <Eds%=%Ca#bridge4

MA0 Glack!ell%

Vygotsky4 5% 3% <*,,+a=% !roblems of the theory and history of psychology% The collected -orks

of >0 S0 5ygotsky: 5ol0 @0 7ncluding The Historical Meaning of the risis in !sychology

e! Pork0 lenu#%

Vygotsky4 5%3% <*,,+b *0 The history of the development of higher mental f%nctions% The collected

-orks of >0 S0 5ygotsky: 5ol0 A0 !roblems of the theory and history of psychology% e!

Pork0 lenu#%

Vygotsky4 5%3% <*,,) *0 hild psychology% The collected -orks of >0 S0 5ygotsky: 5ol0 B0 !roblems

of the theory and history of psychology% e! Pork0 lenu#%

Vygotsky4 5%3% <*,,,=% Scientific legacy0 The collected -orks of >0 S0 5ygotsky: 5ol0 0 !roblems

of the theory and history of psychology% e! Pork0 lenu#%

40

Vygotsky s Speaking Thinking System. Holbrook

Documents