Advertisement

Studies in the Mentality of Literates: Searching for the Cultural Great Divide at the Individual Level of Analysis

  • 59 Accesses

  • 1 Citations

Abstract

Today it is usually agreed that cultures are different but no culture is more developed than some other. It follows that culture did not develop hierarchically. Otherwise some cultures must be more developed than the others. This position, however, contradicts ample evidence that individual mental development is hierarchical. As culture can develop only on the basis of individual development, cultural development has to be hierarchical too. In this paper a research program to study cultural and individual development in one framework is outlined. Particularly it is discussed whether it is possible to define a Great Divide, a characteristic that would distinguish more developed cultures from less developed cultures today. Both literacy and formal education are rejected as candidates for a Great Divide. Then, following and extending Vygotsky’s theory, it is demonstrated that a Great Divide can be defined in terms of the development of word meaning structure (WMS). A novel theory of the development of WMS over five hierarchical stages is shortly described and it is suggested that both individuals and cultures develop over the same stages in invariant order. Particularly differences between everyday and logical (or “scientific” in Vygotsky’s terms) concepts are discussed. It is theoretically explained how study of adult individuals can be used to support the presented theory of developmental similarities between cultures and individuals. Specific hypotheses for the study are put forward.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant unlimited access to the full article PDF.

US$ 39.95

Price includes VAT for USA

Subscribe to journal

Immediate online access to all issues from 2019. Subscription will auto renew annually.

US$ 99

This is the net price. Taxes to be calculated in checkout.

Notes

  1. 1.

    Culture is defined in too many ways (e.g., Kroeber and Kluckhohn 1952) and it would require a separate paper to discuss which of the definitions should be used and why. In this paper culture is understood as defined by Leslie Alvin White: “Culture, then, is a class of things and events, dependent upon symboling, considered in an extrasomatic context” (White 1959, p. 234). Why this definition (or a similar one I have proposed following Vygotsky’s theory) should be preferable in psychology has been discussed in details elsewhere (Toomela 2016a, see also Toomela 1996a, 1996b). Here it is important that culture thus defined refers to specifically organized (human) environment and, at the same time, connects cultural environment to individual psychic processes. This is because linguistic signs or symbols can be only intrapsychic: “we should not fail to note that the word-image stands apart from the sound itself and that it is just as psychological as the concept which is associated with it” (Saussure 1959, p. 12, see for the same idea p. 66).

  2. 2.

    It is important that there are different forms of activity in which environments can be experienced. One is direct participation in the corresponding environment. The other is mediated by language. But the latter is not out of the world or “decontextualized” but rather experiencing in the environment of language. It would be also wrong to think that language environment is one and the same. On the contrary, language environments must also be different, different stories are told about different linguistic and extralinguistic environments.

  3. 3.

    This is also a separate issue, how psychic development is constrained by biological age. There is sufficient evidence to suggest that new stages of development become possible at certain ages because, first, brain maturation proceeds over waves of relatively fast maturation (when a new stage becomes possible) and subsequent slow maturation and second, each next period of fast maturation concerns different regions of the brain. There are regions that are relatively mature already at birth (these support early development) and other regions (which are necessary for the emergence of more complex psychic operations), such as prefrontal areas, which become fully mature in the third decade of life (see for details, Toomela 2017, Ch. 5).

  4. 4.

    Usually those scholars did not suggest that literacy is the sole causal agent in such changes but rather that emergence of writing was a significant change.

  5. 5.

    I am going to rely on several Vygotsky’s ideas in this paper. Recently evidence has been found to suggest that several publications attributed to Vygotsky have been edited and in some places substantially changed by later scholars (e.g., Van der Veer and Zavershneva 2018; Yasnitsky 2017; Yasnitsky and Van der Veer 2016). In the context of the present article, it is not important, who was the author of the ideas discussed. Only the content of the ideas and coherence of the overall theory is, what matters. Furthermore, I have also relied, among others, on 5 out of 10 publications that, according to Yasnitsky and Van der Veer (2016, pp. 92-93) are more important Vygotsky’s works that also are less likely to have been substantially edited (Pedagogical Psychology,1926; Studies on the history of behavior, 1930, together with Luria; Pedology of the adolescent, 1929–1930; Thinking and speech, 1934; Mental development of children in the process of learning and instruction, 1935). Furthermore, the ideas I am attributing to Vygotsky are, as a rule, those, which appear in different contexts in several of his works, including the nonedited versions.

  6. 6.

    Every time I compare the substantially shortened first English translation of Vygotsky’s Thinking and Speech with the original, I have a stronger and stronger feeling that in the process of editing, first the most interesting and important parts of the book were selected. And then the rest was translated into English.

  7. 7.

    There are two different words in Russian, opyt and perezhivaniye, which both are often translated as “experience”. However, these two terms in Russian have a very different meaning. The first (opyt), refers to rational aspect of experiences, to knowledge and skills that have emerged in the process of activities, whereas the second (perezhivaniye) refers to the experiences that result in the involvement of all psyche, feelings or emotional states in the first place.

  8. 8.

    The term “true concept” was occasionally also used by Vygotsky as a synonym for the “scientific concept.”

  9. 9.

    There are different ways to define (scientific) understanding. I have discussed three main epistemologies in psychology elsewhere (Toomela 2007, 2009, 2010a, 2012, 2014, 2015a, b, 2016b). Continental European psychology before the Second World War, including Vygotsky’s cultural-historical psychology, relied on what I call structural-systemic theory of causality. Explanation and understanding of what is studied is in this approach achieved when three questions have been answered: What are the elements of the studied thing or phenomenon?; In which specific relationships these elements are?; and What novel qualities, different from the parts, characterize the whole that emerged in the synthesis of the parts? Description of appearances (as it is done in modern qualitative research) and discovery of cause ➔ effect relationships between events (which is the aim of mainstream quantitative psychology today) heve less explanatory power.

  10. 10.

    I define a sign as follows: a sign is a wholistic unit containing an image composed of sensory attributes as one of its parts, and an aspect of the external world as another part, or another image that is associated with that first image (Toomela 2016a, pp. 182–183).

  11. 11.

    In fact I cannot be certain that there is no cultural group today which has not developed everyday conceptual thought yet. Too little seems to be known about Sentinelese culture, for example, to be absolutely certain in that. Yet I am quite certain that this group, and very likely many others in the world have not achieved logical conceptual stage.

References

  1. Anokhin, P. K. (1975). Ocherki po fiziologii funktsional'nykh sistem. Moscow: Medicina.

  2. Ardila, A., Rosselli, M., & Rosas, P. (1989). Neuropsychological assessment in illiterates: Visuospatial and memory abilities. Brain and Cognition, 11, 147–166.

  3. Ardila, A., Bertolucci, P. H., Braga, L. W., Castro-Caldas, A., Judd, T., Kosmidis, M. H., et al. (2010). Illiteracy: The neuropsychology of cognition without reading. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 25, 689–712.

  4. Bernardo, A. B. I. (1998). Literacy and the mind. The contexts and cognitive consequences of literacy practice. Hamburg: UNESCO Institute for Education.

  5. Berry, J. W., Poortinga, Y. H., Segall, M. H., & Dasen, P. R. (2002). Cross-cultural psychology: Research and application. (second ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

  6. Boas, F. (1887). Museums of ethnology and their classification. Science, 9(229), 614.

  7. Boas, F. (1920). The methods of ethnology. American Anthropologist, 22(4), 311–321.

  8. Bruner, J. S. (1966). On culture and cognitive growth II. In J. S. Bruner, R. Olver, &. P. M. Greenfield (Eds.), Studies in cognitive growth. New York: Wiley.

  9. Castro-Caldas, A. (2004). Targeting regions of interest for the study of the illiterate brain. International Journal of Psychology, 39(1), 5–17.

  10. Castro-Caldas, A., & Reis, A. (2000). Neurobiological substrates of illiteracy. Neuroscientist, 6(6), 475–482.

  11. Castro-Caldas, A., & Reis, A. (2003). The knowledge of orthography is a revolution in the brain. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 16, 81–97.

  12. Castro-Caldas, A., Reis, A., & Guerreiro, M. (1997). Neuropsychological aspects of illiteracy. Neuropsychological Rehabilitation, 7(4), 327–338.

  13. Castro-Caldas, A., Petersson, K. M., Reis, A., Stone-Elander, S., & Ingvar, M. (1998). The illiterate brain: Learning to read and write during childhood influences the functional organization of the adult brain. Brain, 121, 1053–1063.

  14. Castro-Caldas, A., Nunes, M. V., Maestu, F., Ortiz, T., Simoes, R., Fernandes, R., et al. (2009). Learning orthography in adulthood: A magnetoencephalographic study. Journal of Neuropsychology, 3, 17–30.

  15. Childe, V. G. (1936). Man makes himself. London: Watts & Co.

  16. Cole, M. (1996). Cultural psychology. A once and future discipline. Cambridge: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.

  17. Cole, M., & Cole, J. (2006). Rethinking the Goody myth. In D. R. Olson & M. Cole (Eds.), Technology, literacy, and the evolution of society (pp. 305–324). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum.

  18. Dewey, J. (1916). Democracy and education. An introduction to the philosophy of education. New York: Macmillan Company.

  19. Farre, I., Robertson, M. J., Walton, G. H., & Asseng, S. (2002). Simulating phenology and yield response of canola to sowing date in Western Australia using the APSIM model. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research, 53, 1155–1164. https://doi.org/10.1071/AR02031.

  20. Flavell, J. H. (1982). On cognitive development. Child Development, 53, 1–10.

  21. Flavell, J. H. (1992). Cognitive development: Past, present, and future. Developmental Psychology, 28, 998–1105.

  22. Forbes, F. E. (1850). Despatch communicating the discovery of a native written character at Bohmar, on the Western coast of Africa, near Liberia, accompanied by a vocabulary of the Vahie or Vei tongue. Journal of the Royal Geographical Society of London, 20, 89–101.

  23. Funk, C., & Alber, B. A. (2015). Religion and science. Washington: Pew Research Center.

  24. Goody, J. (1973). Evolution and communication: The domestication of the savage mind. British Journal of Sociology, 24(1), 1–12.

  25. Goody, J. (1977). The domestication of the savage mind. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

  26. Goody, J. (1986). The logic of writing and the organization of society. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

  27. Goody, J., & Watt, I. (1963). The consequences of literacy. Comparative Studies in Society and History, 5(3), 304–345.

  28. Halverson, J. (1992). Goody and the implosion of the literacy thesis. Man, 27(2), 301–317.

  29. Hildebrandt, W. (1965). Some of the roots of the ideal of universal literacy. Reading Teacher, 19(1), 4–8.

  30. Howard, S. R., Avargues-Weber, A., Garcia, J. E., Greentree, A. D., & Dyer, A. G. (2019a). Numerical cognition in honeybees enables addition and subtraction. Science Advances, 5(2), eaav0961. https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.aav0961.

  31. Howard, S. R., Avargues-Weber, A., Garcia, J. E., Greentree, A. D., & Dyer, A. G. (2019b). Symbolic representation of numerosity by honeybees (Apis mellifera): Matching characters to small quantities. Proceedings of the Royal Society B, 286, 20190238. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2019.0238.

  32. Klingenheben, A. (1933). The Vai script. Africa: Journal of the International African Institute, 6(2), 158–171.

  33. Konstantinov, F. K., Lomov, B. F., & Shvyrkov, B. V. (Eds.). (1978). P. K. Anokhin. Izbrannyje trudy. Filosofskije aspekty teorii funktsional'noi sistemy. Moscow: Nauka.

  34. Kroeber, A. L., & Kluckhohn, C. (1952). Culture: A critical review of concepts and definitions. New York: Vintage Books.

  35. Luria, A. R. (1974). Ob istoricheskom razvitii poznavatel'nykh processov. Eksperimental'no-psikhologicheskoje issledovanije. Moscow: Nauka.

  36. Luria, A. R. (1976). Cognitive development: Its cultural and social foundations. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

  37. Luria, A. R. (1979). Jazyk i soznanije. Moscow: Izdatel'stvo Moskovskogo Universiteta.

  38. Mazama, A. (1998). The Eurocentric discourse on writing. An exercise in self-glorification. Journal of Black Studies, 29(1), 3–16.

  39. Mignolo, W. D. (1995). The darker side of the renaissance. Literacy, territoriality, and colonization. Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press.

  40. Molenaar, P. C. M. (2004). A manifesto on psychology as idiographic science: Bringing the person back into scientific psychology, this time forever. Measurement, 2(4), 201–218.

  41. Molenaar, P. C. M. (2007). Psychological methodology will change profoundly due to the necessity to focus on intra-individual variation: Commentary on Toomela. Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science, 41(1), 35–40.

  42. Molenaar, P. C. M. (2008). Consequences of the ergodic theorems for classical test theory, factor analysis, and the analysis of developmental processes. In S. M. Hofer & D. F. Alwin (Eds.), Handbook of cognitive aging (pp. 90–104). Thousand Oaks: Sage.

  43. Morgan, L. H. (1877). Ancient society or researches in the lines of human progress from savagery through barbarism to civilization. Chicago: Charles Kerr & Company.

  44. Olesen, J. E., Borgesen, C. D., Elsgaard, L., Palosuo, T., Rotter, R. P., Skjelvag, A. O., et al. (2012). Changes in time of sowing, flowering and maturity of cereals in Europe under climate change. Food Additives and Contaminants: Part A, 29(10), 1527–1542. https://doi.org/10.1080/19440049.2012.712060.

  45. Olson, D. R. (1977). From utterance to text: The bias of language in speech and writing. Harvard Educational Review, 47(3), 257–281.

  46. Olson, D. R. (1986). The cognitive consequences of literacy. Canadian Psychology, 27(2), 109–121.

  47. Olson, D. R. (2006). The documentary tradition in mind and society. In D. R. Olson & M. Cole (Eds.), Technology, literacy, and the evolution of society. Implications of the work of Jack Goody (pp. 289–304). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum.

  48. Ostrosky-Solis, F., Ardila, A., Rosselli, M., Lopez-Arango, G., & Uriel-Mendoza, V. (1998). Neuropsychological test performance in illiterate subjects. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 13(7), 645–660.

  49. Petersson, K. M., Reis, A., Askelöf, S., Castro-Caldas, A., & Ingvar, M. (2000). Language processing modulated by literacy: A network analysis of verbal repetition in literate and illiterate subjects. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 12(3), 364–382.

  50. Petersson, K. M., Silva, C., Castro-Caldas, A., Ingvar, M., & Reis, A. (2007). Literacy: A cultural influence on functional left-right differences in the inferior parietal cortex. European Journal of Neuroscience, 26, 791–799.

  51. Plato. (1997a). Letters. In J. M. Cooper (Ed.), Plato. Complete works (pp. 1634–1676). Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing Company.

  52. Plato. (1997b). Phaedrus. In J. M. Cooper (Ed.), Plato. Complete works (pp. 506–556). Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing Company.

  53. Rosselli, M., & Ardila, A. (2003). The impact of culture and education on non-verbal neuropsychological measurements: A critical review. Brain and Cognition, 52, 326–333.

  54. Saussure, d. F. (1959). Course in general linguistics. New York: Philosophical Library.

  55. Schuman, S., Dokken, J.-V., Van Niekerk, D., & Loubser, R. A. (2018). Religious beliefs and climate change adaptation: A study of three rural south African communities. Jamba - Journal Of Disaster Risk Studies, 10(1), a509. https://doi.org/10.4102/jamba.v10i1.509.

  56. Scribner, S., & Cole, M. (1981). The psychology of literacy. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

  57. Sumner, W. G. (1906). Folkways. A study of the sociological importance of usages, manners, customs, mores, and morals. Boston: Ginn and Company.

  58. Tammik, V., & Toomela, A. (2013). Relationships between visual figure discrimination, verbal abilities, and gender. Perception, 42(9), 971–984. https://doi.org/10.1068/p7607.

  59. Tammik, V., & Toomela, A. (2017). Dominant structure of word meanings moderates aging related decline in visual figure discrimination. Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 29(3), 279–288.

  60. Toomela, A. (1996a). How culture transforms mind: A process of internalization. Culture and Psychology, 2(3), 285–305.

  61. Toomela, A. (1996b). What characterizes language that can be internalized: A reply to Tomasello. Culture and Psychology, 2(3), 319–322.

  62. Toomela, A. (2003a). Culture as a semiosphere: On the role of culture in the culture-individual relationship. In I. E. Josephs (Ed.), Dialogicality in development (pp. 129–163). Westport: Praeger.

  63. Toomela, A. (2003b). Development of symbol meaning and the emergence of the semiotically mediated mind. In A. Toomela (Ed.), Cultural guidance in the development of the human mind (pp. 163–209). Westport: Ablex Publishing.

  64. Toomela, A. (2003c). Relationships between personality structure, structure of word meaning, and cognitive ability: A study of cultural mechanisms of personality. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85(4), 723–735. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.85.4.723.

  65. Toomela, A. (2007). Culture of science: Strange history of the methodological thinking in psychology. Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science, 41(1), 6–20. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12124-007-9004-0.

  66. Toomela, A. (2008a). Noncognitive correlates of education. Learning and Individual Differences, 18(1), 19–28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2007.07.006.

  67. Toomela, A. (2008b). Variables in psychology: A critique of quantitative psychology. Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science, 42(3), 245–265. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12124-008-9059-6.

  68. Toomela, A. (2008c). Word meaning structure as a predictor of depression in Estonian defense forces. Military Psychology, 20(2), 103–114. https://doi.org/10.1080/08995600701869551.

  69. Toomela, A. (2009). How methodology became a toolbox - and how it escapes from that box. In J. Valsiner, P. Molenaar, M. Lyra, & N. Chaudhary (Eds.), Dynamic process methodology in the social and developmental sciences (pp. 45–66). New York: Springer.

  70. Toomela, A. (2010a). Methodology of idiographic science: Limits of single-case studies and the role of typology. In S. Salvatore, J. Valsiner, J. T. Simon, & A. Gennaro (Eds.), Yearbook of idiographic science, volume 2/2009 (pp. 13–33). Rome: Firera & Liuzzo Publishing.

  71. Toomela, A. (2010b). Quantitative methods in psychology: Inevitable and useless. Frontiers in Psychology, 1(29), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2010.00029.

  72. Toomela, A. (2010c). Systemic person-oriented approach to child development: Introduction to the study. In A. Toomela (Ed.), Systemic person-oriented study of child development in early primary school (pp. 1–24). Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.

  73. Toomela, A. (2010d). What is the psyche? The answer depends on the particular epistemology adopted by the scholar. In S. Salvatore, J. Valsiner, J. T. Simon, & A. Gennaro (Eds.), Yearbook of idiographic science, volume 2/2009 (pp. 81–104). Rome: Firera & Liuzzo Publishing.

  74. Toomela, A. (2011). Travel into a fairy land: A critique of modern qualitative and mixed methods psychologies. Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science, 45(1), 21–47. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12124-010-9152-5.

  75. Toomela, A. (2012). Guesses on the future of cultural psychology: Past, present, and past. In J. Valsiner (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of culture and psychology (pp. 998–1033). New York: Oxford University Press.

  76. Toomela, A. (2014). A structural systemic theory of causality and catalysis. In K. R. Cabell & J. Valsiner (Eds.), The catalyzing mind. Beyond models of causality (pp. 271–292). New York: Springer.

  77. Toomela, A. (2015a). Towards understanding biotic, psychic and semiotically-mediated mechanisms of anticipation. In M. Nadin (Ed.), Anticipation: Learning from the past (pp. 431–455). Cham: Springer.

  78. Toomela, A. (2015b). Vygotsky’s theory on the Procrustes’ bed of linear thinking: Looking for structural-systemic Theseus to save the idea of ‘social formation of mind’. Culture and Psychology, 21(3), 318–339.

  79. Toomela, A. (2016a). Kultuur, kõne ja Minu Ise. (Culture, speech, and My Self). Tallinn: Eesti Keele Sihtasutus.

  80. Toomela, A. (2016b). The ways of scientific anticipation: From guesses to probabilities and from there to certainty. In M. Nadin (Ed.), Anticipation across disciplines (pp. 255–273). Cham: Springer.

  81. Toomela, A. (2016c). What are higher psychological functions? Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science, 50(1), 91–121.

  82. Toomela, A. (2017). Minu Ise areng: Inimlapsest Inimeseks. (development of my self: From the human child to the human.). Tartu: Väike Vanker.

  83. Tulviste, P. (1988). Kul'turno-istoricheskoje razvitije verbal'nogo myshlenija. Tallinn: Valgus.

  84. Ungureanu, M. (2013). On Goody, his critics, and beyond: Social metaphysics for literacy studies. Avant, 4(2), 97–123. https://doi.org/10.12849/40202013.0709.0006.

  85. van der Veer, R. (1996). The concept of culture in Vygotsky’s thinking. Culture and Psychology, 2, 247–263.

  86. Van der Veer, R., & Zavershneva, E. (2018). The final chapter of Vygotsky's Thinking and Speech: A reader's guide. Journal of the History of the Behavioral Sciences, 54, 101–116. https://doi.org/10.1002/jhbs.21893.

  87. Vygotsky, L. S. (1926). Pedagogicheskaja psikhologija. Kratkii kurs. (educational psychology. A short course.). Moscow: Rabotnik Prosveschenija.

  88. Vygotsky, L. S. (1934). Myshlenije i rech. Psikhologicheskije issledovanija. (thinking and speech. Psychological investigations.). Moscow: Gosudarstvennoje Social'no-ekonomicheskoje Izdatel'stvo.

  89. Vygotsky, L. S. (1935a). Osnovy pedologii. Leningrad: Gosudarstvennyi Pedagogicheskii Institut imeni A. I. Gerzena.

  90. Vygotsky, L. S. (1935b). Razvitije zhiteiskikh i nauchnyks ponjatii v shkol'nom vozraste. (the development of everyday and scientific concepts in the school age. Originally presented as a lecture in 1933). In L. V. Zankov, Z. I. Shif, & D. B. El'konin (Eds.), L. S. Vygotsky. Umstvennoje razvitije detei v processe obuchenija. (cognitive development of children in the process of learning in the context of teaching) (pp. 96–115). Moscow: Gosudarstvennoje Uchebno-Pedagogicheskoje Izdatel'stvo.

  91. Vygotsky, L. S. (1962). Thought and language. In E. Hanfmann & G. Vakar (Eds.), Lev Semenovitch Vygotsky. Thought and language (pp. 1–153). Cambridge: MIT Press.

  92. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society. The development of higher psychological processes. In M. Cole, V. John-Steiner, S. Scribner, & E. Souberman (Eds.), Mind in society. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

  93. Vygotsky, L. S. (1982a). Myshleniye i rech. (Thinking and Speech). In A. V. Zaporozhec (Ed.), L. S. Vygotskii. Sobranije sochinenii. Tom 2. Problemy obschei psikhologii (pp. 5–361). Moscow: Pedagogika.

  94. Vygotsky, L. S. (1982b). O psikhologicheskih sistemah. (originally a lecture presented in 1930). In A. R. Luria & M. G. Jaroshevskii (Eds.), L. S. Vygotsky. Sobranije sochinenii. Tom 1. Voprosy teorii i istorii psikhologii (pp. 109–131). Moscow: Pedagogika.

  95. Vygotsky, L. S. (1983a). Istorija razvitija vyshikh psikhicheskih funkcii. (originally written in 1931). In A. M. Matjushkina (Ed.), L. S. Vygotsky. Sobranije sochinenii. Tom 3. Problemy razvitija psikhiki (pp. 5–328). Moscow: Pedagogika.

  96. Vygotsky, L. S. (1983b). Kollektiv kak faktor razvitija defektivnogo rebjonka. (collective as a factor in the development of the defective child. Originally published in 1931). In A. V. Zaporozhec (Ed.), L. S. Vygotsky. Sobranije sochinenii. Tom 5. Osnovy defektologii (pp. 196–218). Moscow: Pedagogika.

  97. Vygotsky, L. S. (1984a). Krizis semi let. (originally presented as a lecture in 1933/34). In D. B. El'konin (Ed.), L. S. Vygotsky. Sobranije sochinenii, Tom 4. Detskaja psikhologija (pp. 376–385). Moscow: Pedagogika.

  98. Vygotsky, L. S. (1984b). Pedologija podrostka. (originally published in 1930-1931). In D. B. El'konin (Ed.), L. S. Vygotsky. Sobranije sochinenii. Tom 4. Detskaja psikhologija (pp. 5–242). Moscow: Pedagogika.

  99. Vygotsky, L. S. (1984c). Problema vozrasta. (originally written in 1932-1934). In D. B. El'konin (Ed.), L. S. Vygotsky. Sobranije sochinenii. Tom 4. Detskaja psikhologija (pp. 244–268). Pedagogika: Moscow.

  100. Vygotsky, L. S. (1987). Thinking and speech. In R. W. Rieber & A. S. Carton (Eds.), The collected works of L. S. Vygotsky. Volume 1. Problems of general psychology (pp. 37–285). New York: Plenum Press.

  101. Vygotsky, L. S. (1994). The problem of the cultural development of the child. (originally published in 1929). In R. v. d. Veer & J. Valsiner (Eds.), The Vygotsky reader (pp. 57–72). Oxford: Blackwell.

  102. Vygotsky, L. S., & Luria, A. R. (1930). Etjudy po istorii povedenija. Obezjana. Primitiv. Rebjonok. Moscow-Leningrad: Gosudarstvennoje Izdatel'stvo.

  103. Vygotsky, L. S., & Luria, A. (1994). Tool and symbol in child development. (originally written in 1930). In R. v. d. Veer & J. Valsiner (Eds.), The Vygotsky reader (pp. 99–174). Oxford: Blackwell.

  104. Wertsch, J. V. (1991). Voices of the mind. A sociocultural approach to mediated action. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

  105. White, L. A. (1959). The concept of culture. American Anthropologist, 61, 227–251.

  106. Yasnitsky, A. (2017). Orudiye i znak v razvitii rebjonka: Samaya izvestnaya rabota L. S. Vygotskogo, kotoruyu on nikogda ne pisal. Psikhologiya: Zhurnal Vyshei Shkoly Ekonomiki, 14(4), 576–606. https://doi.org/10.17323/1813-8918-2017-4-576-606.

  107. Yasnitsky, A., & Van der Veer, R. (Eds.). (2016). Revisionist revolution in Vygotsky studies. London: Routledge.

Download references

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by the Tallinn University School of Natural Sciences and Health Grant Study of novel aspects of the state and development of speech function.

Author information

Correspondence to Aaro Toomela.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Toomela, A. Studies in the Mentality of Literates: Searching for the Cultural Great Divide at the Individual Level of Analysis. Integr. psych. behav. 54, 1–29 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12124-019-09503-5

Download citation

Keywords

  • Great divide
  • Literacy
  • Formal education
  • Recapitulation
  • Developmental hierarchy
  • Word meaning structure