Material Culture, Semiotics and Early Childhood Development

Chapter
Part of the International perspectives on early childhood education and development book series (CHILD, volume 3)

Abstract

In his latest works, Vygotsky argues for a cultural-historical conception of development where culture through semiotic systems plays a key role. Language is considered by Vygotsky as the semiotic system par excellence through which a cultural-historical development and consciousness emerge. If I agree with Vygotsky’s general theoretical assumption that development is the result of semiotic constructions, I nevertheless consider that it is necessary to investigate the variety and complexity of cultural semiotic systems susceptible to intervening in cultural-historical psychological development from the onset. In this chapter, I will focus on material culture and, more specifically, on material objects and their social (canonical and symbolic) uses which can be considered as one of the most important semiotic systems that children have to appropriate during the pre-verbal period. I shall thus emphasize the semiotic dimension of cognitive processes in early development through material objects. With the appropriation of object uses by the child in child–object–adult triadic interaction, I will attempt to show that material culture needs to be reconsidered as semiotic and engages before language the young child in a cultural-historical development which is based on a rather complex construction of meaning that is elaborated on a material basis through objects, and can thus be submitted to semiotic analysis.

Keywords

Material Culture Material Object Semiotic System Triadic Interaction Psychological Tool 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Notes

Acknowledgments

I am grateful to Michalis Kontopodis and Denise Shelley Newnham for their close reading of this text. I am indebted to Sarah Stauffer for her translation and Sophie Tapparel for her final reading and help in editing this paper.

References

  1. Barthes, R. (1985). L’aventure sémiologique. Paris: Seuil.Google Scholar
  2. Cole, M. (1996). Cultural psychology: A once and future discipline. Cambridge, MA; London: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Eco, U. (1998). Sémiotique et philosophie du langage. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.Google Scholar
  4. Eco, U. (2003). De la littérature. Paris: Grasset.Google Scholar
  5. Everaert-Desmedt, N. (1990). Le processus interprétatif. Introduction à la sémiotique de Ch.S. Peirce. Liège, Belgique: Mardaga.Google Scholar
  6. Gibson, J. J. (1979). The theory of affordances. In R. Shaw & J. Bransford (Eds.). An ecological approach to visual perception (pp. 127–143). Boston: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar
  7. James, W. (1912/1904). Does consciousness exist? Electronic document, Accessed July 20, http://psychclassics.yorku.ca/James/consciousness.htm
  8. Lee, B. (1985). Intellectual origins of Vygotsky’s semiotic analysis. In J. V. Wertsch (Ed.), Culture, communication and cognition (pp. 66–93). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  9. Mecacci, L. (1983). Vygotskij. Antologia di Scritti. Bologne: Il Mulino.Google Scholar
  10. Moro, C. (2000). Vers une approche sémiotique intégrée du développement humain. Habilitation à Diriger des Recherches en Psychologie. Université Bordeaux 2: UFR des sciences sociales et psychologiques Université Bordeaux 2.Google Scholar
  11. Moro, C. (2002). Médiation et développement. Enjeux et perspectives de la théorie de L.S. Vygotski. In M. Wirthner & M. Zulauf (Ed.). A la recherche du temps musical (pp. 137–159). Paris: L’Harmattan.Google Scholar
  12. Moro, C. (2003). L’action éducative et la médiation des significations des objets en crèche. In M. Saada-Robert et V. Solioz (Ed.), « L’intervention éducative en crèche et son rapport à l’observation. Confrontation de trois types d’analyse : sémiotique, didactique, micro-génétique », Actes du colloque du Service de la Recherche en Education (SRED): Constructivisme et Education. Scolariser la petite enfance, Genève, Septembre 2003, 143–152.Google Scholar
  13. Moro, C., & Rodríguez, C. (1998). Towards a pragmatical conception of the object: The construction of the uses of the objects by the baby in the pre-linguistic period. In M. C. D. P. Lyra & J. Valsiner (Eds.). Child development within culturally structured environments. Construction of psychological processes in interpersonal communication (Vol. 4, pp. 53–72). Stamford, Connecticut and London, England: Ablex Publishing Corporation.Google Scholar
  14. Moro, C., & Rodríguez, C. (2004a). Formes sociales et (re)construction des significations dans la situation éducative. In C. Moro & R. Rickenmann (Ed.). Situation éducative et significations (pp. 221–245). Raisons Educatives No 8. Bruxelles: De Boeck.Google Scholar
  15. Moro, C., & Rodríguez, C. (2004b). L’éducation et le signe comme conditions de possibilité du développement psychologique. Un questionnement qui transcende les frontières disciplinaires. In G. Chatelanat, C. Moro, & M. Saada-Robert (Ed.), Unité et pluralité des sciences de l’éducation. Sondages au cœur de la recherche (pp. 61–87). Berne: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
  16. Moro, C., & Rodríguez, C. (2005). L’objet et la construction de son usage chez le bébé. Une approche sémiotique du développement préverbal. Berne: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
  17. Moro, C., & Schneuwly, B. (1997). L’outil et le signe dans le développement psychologique. In C. Moro, B. Schneuwly, & M. Brossard (Ed.). Outils et signes. Perspectives actuelles de la théorie de Vygotski (pp. 1–17). Bern: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
  18. Peirce, C. S. (1931-1958). Collected papers. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  19. Piaget, J. (1936/1977). La naissance de l’intelligence chez l’enfant. Neuchâtel-Paris: Delachaux & Niestlé.Google Scholar
  20. Roche, D. (1997). Histoire des choses banales. Naissance de la consommation XVIIème – XIXème siècle. Paris: Fayard.Google Scholar
  21. Rodríguez, C., & Moro, C. (2002). Objeto, communicación y símbolo.Una mirada a los primeros usos simbólicos de los objetos. Estudios de psicología, 23/3, 323–338.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Vygotsky, L. S. (1930). The instrumental method in psychology. Accessed July 24, 2009, Published online at: http://www.marxists.org/archive/vygotsky/works/1930/instrumental.htm
  23. Vygotsky, L. S. (1933/1968). Problema soznanjia [Le problème de la conscience]. In A. A. Léontiev et T. B. Riabovoï (Ed.), Psychologija grammatiki (pp. 182–196). Moscou: Isdatjelstvo Moskobskovo Universitjeta.Google Scholar
  24. Vygotsky, L. S. (1934/1997a). Pensée et langage. Paris: La Dispute.Google Scholar
  25. Vygotsky, L. S. (1931/1997b). The history of the development of higher mental functions. In R. W. Rieber (Ed.), The collected works of L.S. Vygotsky (Vol. 4). New York and London: Plenum Press.Google Scholar
  26. Vygotsky, L. S. (1925/1997c). Mind, consciousness, the unconscious. In R. W. Rieber (Ed.), Problems of the theory and history of psychology: Vol. 3. The collected works of L.S. Vygotsky (pp. 62–90). New York and London: Plenum Press.Google Scholar
  27. Vygotsky, L. S. (1930/1994). Tool and symbol in child development. In R. Van der Veer & J. Valsiner (Eds.), The Vygosky reader (pp. 99–174). Cambridge: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
  28. Wertsch, J. V. (1979). The regulation of human action and the given new structure of private speech. In G. Zivin (Ed.) The development of self-regulation through private speech (pp. 79–98). New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  29. Wittgenstein, L. (1953/1961). Investigations philosophiques. Paris: Gallimard.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Université de LausanneLausanneSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations