1.3.2 A Sociocultural Perspective
Vygotsky’s (1978) sociocultural theory highlights the interdependence of the individual and social dimensions of consciousness in interaction, by arguing that we human beings’ psychological processes will emerge when we use language as ‘culturally-constructed symbolic and material artifacts’ (Lantolf & Yanez, 2003, p.98) for participating in daily activities (cf.Lantolf, 2000, 2006; Lantolf & Thorne, 2006; Lantolf & Yáñez, 2003).In Vygotsky’s (1978) sociocultural theory, there are three important themes which elucidate this interdependence, that is, the semiotic nature of human action in the individual and the social dimensions, the originality of individual development in social sources, and the genetic/development/historical analysis of the first two themes.Interpreting from these three themes, language is treated not only as a tool in the process of knowledge co-construction but also as the semiotic means or products in the development of language-using activity.
First, language is a semiotic tool to mediate knowledge co-construction and to internalise the language-using competence development.Mediation and internalisation are two key concepts in sociocultural theory.Mediation explains that materials or symbolic tools mediate through human beings’ mental systems in which biological factors provide necessary functions and enable individuals to intentionally regulate these functions (Lantolf, 2006; Vygotsky, 1987).Language helps individuals take part in various social activities, communicate with others culturally and mentally, or reflect and self-regulate.Internalisation then is ‘a bridge between external and internal activity’ (Lantolf & Yáñez, 2003, p.106).It is also a mediated psychological process through which members in a community gain necessary symbolic tools needed in communicative activities, which in turn transforms into psychological activity tools.To date, this concept has been widely used to explain the relationship between the continuity of personal experience and context.
Similar to the description of mediation and internalisation in sociocultural theory, Halliday (1985) distinguishes between human beings’ symbolic and nonsymbolic acts—‘the direct, non-symbolic action on the object itself, and the indirect, symbolic action “on” (i.e.directed towards) the object but “through” (mediated by the person) addressed’ (p.4).He explains this in an example that, when a person is hungry and wants to eat an apple, he or she can act a series of non-symbolic movements directly to grab the apple; while he or she also can act symbolically to say to people around ‘fetch me an apple’ (Halliday, 1985, p.4).A symbolic act is an act of meaning and its system is a social one, because a system of symbols is mediated by the person’s address and meanings in the real environment.However, it is important to notice that the functions of symbols depend on the values that they have already been acquired ‘in use’ (Halliday, 1985, p.3).
Second, individual development is rooted in both of the individual and society.In investigating a child’s development in a culture, Vygotsky (1978) argues there is the interdependence of social and individual development.He proposes that the process of individual development involves both the self and the social and argues that:
‘Any function of the child’s cultural development appears on the stage twice, or on two planes, first the social, then the psychological, first between people as an intermental category, then within the child as an intramental category.’ (pp.105-106)
To exemplify this trajectory of development, on the first intermental plane, individuals engage in and through the interaction between the participants with disparate knowledge levels, such as students and teachers.On the second intramental plane, if individual students in a learning community, for example, took part in co-constructed learning activities and internalised the effects of learning together, they then would acquire things such as knowledge of the context or the culture.Sociocultural theory researchers (Lantolf, 2000; Lantolf & Thorne, 2006; Lave & Wenger, 1991; Norton, 1997, 2000, 2001; Wenger, 1998) have elaborated, extended and refined Vygotsky’s emphasis of psychological development in social interaction and culturally organised activities, arguing that individuals’ mental functioning is affected by cultural, institutional and historical context.
Third, a genetic method underpins its basis into the historical study of behaviour and the process of change, in order to ‘discover its nature, its essence’ (Vygotsky, 1978, pp.64-65).Vygotsky proposes three genetic dimensions:namely, sociocultural, ontogenetic and microgenetic.The sociocultural dimension is concerned with how the history of human culture affects the development of different symbolic tools, and how this culture has impact upon different mediation values.The ontogenetic focuses on how human beings ‘appropriate and integrate meditational means, primarily language’ (Lantolf, 2000, p.3) during their lifespan.The microgenetic manifests how mediation continually reorganises and develops within a short period.