It's reflection time! 50 % of this weeks independent studying comes from the visitation lecture kept by Marjorie Harness Goodwin from the University of Pennsylvania. This lecture was not part of any specific course I'm doing right now but it was interesting since it crosses with conversation analysis. Mrs. Goodwin talked about Haptic Sociality, a field of study where she's actually a trailblazer. Mrs. Goodwin and her group had been recording children's and their parents' acting when it's time to go to bed or when they see each other after a day at work or school.
Her field of study was intercorporeality (this word is so going to be part of my idiosyncratic dictionary!) inside families, in other words she studies physical contact and the meaning of touching in families. (Especially in families with kids.) It was a great honor to follow her lecture since this was the first time her work is presented in Finland. She started the presentation by telling about the meaning of touch as a sense in the animal world and among humans. Touch is something that has been underestimated in science (she calls this occularcentrism so I'll have, again a new word to my dictionary) even though all five senses can be reduced to one: touch. Through touch an individual locates himself in space and is interlocated with things. Despite of the occularcentrism - the importance of visuality in the field of science - psychological research finally paid attention to touch. They admitted that it's through touch that social development begins and the importance of this sense stays during the whole life of an individual.
She talked about experimental studies on monkies: monkie babies without touch (or without any contact with their mommies) became autistic. It was the same effect that created mental problems to Romanian children who were separated from their parents in the 19th century. She told us that all kind of intersubjectivity (contact, care, love, sexuality and empathy) starts with touch and usually conversation as such is not the primary and final aim. Touch can be seen as a ritual. A touch virtually demands response. Touch can be used as a source of control and compliance. She gave us some examples of how touch can be used when parents control their children. These examples were: piggyback ride (a new word again!) when going to bed, high five evaluation, gestures and shepherding. All the examples were in the video tapes she showed us from her project. All put together, she wanted to show us Descartes' error: the abyssal separation between body and mind.
What has this lesson got to do with language? Why am I interested in touching instead of different forms of using spoken language? Well, since I would like to study 'real' language, real talking situations, I have to admit that a big part of communication is actually not verbal. It's also touching, gestures etc. And that's interesting!
Ei kommentteja:
Lähetä kommentti