LIBRARY OF THE CHEREPOVETSK PEDAGOGICAL INSTITUTE

A. A. Leontiev

Language, speech, speech activity. M., Education ", 1969. 214 pages.

A.A. Leont'ev acquaints readers with the theory of speech activity, with the principles of the study of speech activity, psycholinguistics as the science of speech activity, shows how the analysis of speech activity and the problem of language learning are related.

FROM THE AUTHOR

The general trend observed in modern linguistics is the development of complex, borderline problems, in the development of "adjacent" areas, where linguistics works side by side with other sciences, such as sociolinguistics, ethnolinguistics, psycholinguistics; it is a general tendency in penetrating "beyond" the language, in revealing the essential characteristics of human activity as a whole, including speech activity; in a word, in learning not so much the language as the speaking person.

This tendency largely determined the appearance of this book. Its main idea is the need for the present stage the development of the human sciences is not limited to the study of speech and language within the framework of one science (for example, linguistics), but to widely operate primarily with such concepts and categories that arise in the course of interdisciplinary research. The ideas reflected in the book were expressed by the author earlier, but here these thoughts, so to speak, are collected together and presented as an integral system. On the pages of this work, the author did not at all strive only to express his own opinion on the issues raised by him. On the contrary, its task is to introduce the reader into the circle of some of the problems that concern the linguistic science of today, and to give a more or less general idea of ​​the state of these problems. At the same time, the author tried to make his presentation clear and accessible to the general reader, in particular, not to overload the presentation with references to the literature (our brochure Psycholinguistics (L., 1967) is specially devoted to the history of the issue, which should be addressed to the interested reader). In preparing the book, the author used materials from articles and reports, partially published earlier in various publications.

Introduction

Alexey Nikolaevich Leontiev (1903-1979) - one of the founders and leader of Russian psychological science in the most difficult times for science, is by no means one of the "forgotten" authors: despite the ambiguous attitude to his theoretical legacy, which is largely due to his acceptance of Marxism as the methodological foundation of psychological science, his name and ideas live and actively work not only in the works of his direct students and students of his students, but also in the entire scientific community. Moreover, he is one of the few creators scientific schools, whose students did not confine themselves to chanting and concretizing the teacher's ideas, but in very many respects have moved far ahead, to new theoretical frontiers.

A. N. Leontiev - an outstanding domestic psychologist of the modern era, who once worked at the Saburova dacha - a former Saburyan who at one time created a well-known Kharkov group of psychologists and is the author of a general psychological theory of activity. Alexei Nikolaevich is widely known as the recognized leader of Soviet psychology in the 40-70s of the XX century. He initiated the creation of the Society of Psychologists of the USSR. His services to national science are great and versatile.

A. N. Leont'ev developed in the 20s of the last century, together with L. S. Vygotsky and A. R. Luria, a cultural-historical theory, conducted a series of experimental studies revealing the mechanism of the formation of higher mental functions (voluntary attention, memory) as a process "Rotation", interiorization of external forms of tool-mediated actions into internal mental processes. Experimental and theoretical works are devoted to the problems of the development of the psyche (its genesis, biological evolution and socio-historical development, the development of the child's psyche), the problems of engineering psychology, as well as the psychology of perception, thinking and other issues.

The purpose of this work is to reflect the main aspects in the work of AN, Leontiev "Language and Speech".

1. The concept of learning language and speech by A. N. Leontiev

Based on the ideas of cultural-historical theory, A. N. Leont'ev put forward and developed in detail a general psychological theory of object-related activity, which is one of the most influential and new theoretical directions in Russian and world psychology.

The content of this concept is closely related to the analysis of the emergence and development of the psyche in phylogenesis, the emergence of consciousness in anthropogenesis, mental development in ontogenesis, the structure of activity and consciousness, the motivational and semantic sphere of personality, the methodology and history of psychology, which reveals the mechanisms of the origin of consciousness and its role. in the regulation of human activity.

On the basis of the scheme of activity structure (activity - action - operation - psychophysiological functions) proposed by A.N. Leont'ev, correlated with the structure of the motivational sphere (motive - goal - condition), a wide range of mental phenomena (perception, thinking, memory, attention and others ), among which special attention was paid to the analysis of consciousness (highlighting meaning, meaning and "sensory fabric" as its main components) and personality (interpretation of its basic structure as a hierarchy of motivational and semantic formations)

The concept of Aleksey Nikolaevich's activity was developed in various branches of psychology (general, child, pedagogical, medical and social), which in turn enriched it with new data. The proposition formulated by A. N. Leontiev on the leading activity and its determining influence on the development of the child's psyche served as the basis for the concept of periodization of the mental development of children, put forward by D. B. Elkonin.

Psychology was considered by A. N. Leontiev as the science of "the generation, functioning and structure of the mental reflection of reality in the processes of activity."

2. The concept of speech activity

Speech activity is determined by the leading Russian specialist in psycholinguistics A.N. Leont'ev as the process of using language for communication during any other human activity.

According to A.N. Leontiev (shared by far from all domestic psycholinguists), speech activity is some kind of abstraction that cannot be directly correlated with "classical" types of activity (cognitive, play, educational), and cannot be compared with work or play. It - in the form of individual speech actions - serves all types of activity, being part of acts of labor, play, cognitive activity. Speech activity as such takes place only when speech is valuable in itself, when the underlying motive that motivates it cannot be satisfied in any other way than speech. Speech actions and even individual speech operations can also be included in other types of activity, primarily in cognitive activity. Thus, speech (RD) is defined as one of the means of non-speech activity, speech (linguistic) process, the process of generation (production) and perception (understanding) of speech, which provides all other types of human activity. This applies to all forms of speech:

1. oral (sound);
2. written (reading and writing);
3. kinetic (i.e., mimic-gesticulatory) speech.

3. Distinctive features of speech activity

Distinctive features of speech activity (RD), according to A. N. Leontiev, are as follows.

• Substantiveness of the activity. It is determined by the fact that RD, according to the figurative expression of AN. Leont'ev, proceeds "face to face with the world around us." In other words, "in activity there is, as it were, the opening of the circle of internal mental processes towards the objective objective world, which powerfully bursts into this circle, which does not close at all."
• Purposefulness, which means that any act of activity is characterized by a final goal, and any action by an intermediate goal, the achievement of which, as a rule, is planned by the subject in advance.
• Motivation RD. It is determined by the fact that in reality the act of any activity is stimulated simultaneously by several motives fused into one whole.
• Hierarchical ("vertical") organization of speech activity, including the hierarchical organization of its units.

“Speech activity,” A. N. Leont'ev believes, “is a specialized use of speech for communication, and in this sense is a particular case of communication activity”.

However, it should be borne in mind that speech activity is not limited to the framework of communication, communication in human society... She plays a huge role in human life; the formation and development of RD is closely connected with the formation and development of the entire personality of a person as a whole. A.A. Leontiev emphasizes that "speech actions and even individual speech operations can be included in other types of activity, primarily in cognitive activity."

4. The main provisions of the psycholinguistic theory of speech activity

The main provisions of the psycholinguistic theory can be expressed in the form of the following postulates [A.N. Leontiev, 1997, 2003, etc.].

Like any other human activity, speech activity includes:

• need, motive, goal, design, attitude, knowledge (cultural, linguistic, and appeal to them);
• multilateral analysis of the situation in which the activity should take place and is taking place;
• making a decision to carry out or not to carry out activities and the choice of the means of carrying out activities that are optimal for a given situation (forms of speech, their variants and the actual linguistic means: phonetic, syntactic, lexical and others);
• planning activities (at different levels of awareness of planning results) and predicting its possible result (acceptor of the result of an action according to P.K.Anokhin;
• production (execution) of certain actions and operations;
• current control over the activities being performed and its correction (if necessary);
• the final comparison of the result of an activity with its purpose (concept).

The units of psycholinguistic analysis are elementary speech action and speech operation (in the "extreme" version - an integral act of speech activity).

These units should carry all the basic features of speech activity.

These include:

1. objectivity of activity (focus on a particular subject);
2. purposefulness, since any act of activity is characterized by a final, and any action - by an intermediate goal, the achievement of which, as a rule, is predicted by the subject;
3. motivation (in this case, the act of human activity, according to A. N. Leont'ev, is, as a rule, polymotivated, that is, it is motivated by several motives merged into a single whole);
4. the hierarchical organization of activities, including the hierarchical organization of its units, and
5. phase organization of activities.

Thus, in the concept of the Moscow psycholinguistic school, units of psycholinguistic analysis are distinguished and characterized in the “activity paradigm”.

The organization of speech activity is based on the "heuristic principle" (that is, it provides for the choice of a "strategy" of speech behavior). According to A.N. Leontyev, the psycholinguistic theory of speech activity should

• provide for a link in which the choice of the strategy of speech behavior would be carried out;
• allow different ways of operating with the utterance at separate stages of the generation (perception) of speech;
• finally, do not contradict the experimental results obtained earlier on the material of various psycholinguistic models built on a different theoretical basis. "

The activity of the subject in relation to the surrounding reality is mediated by the reflection of this reality.

According to AN Leontiev, any psychological theory of speech activity should first of all investigate the relationship between the image of the human world mediated by the language and speech activity as a communicative activity. Based on this, the psycholinguistic theory combines an activity approach and an approach in terms of display. In the structure of human activity, reflection appears primarily in the form of an indicative link.

Accordingly, in the structure of speech activity, the subject of research in psycholinguistics should be the stage (phase) of orientation, the result of which is the choice of an appropriate strategy for the generation or perception of speech, as well as the planning stage, which involves the use of memory images.

The choice of one way or another for the implementation of activities is already a "modeling of the future"

The psychological mechanism of "anticipatory analysis and synthesis" (speech prediction) became the subject of active study in Russian psycholinguistics only in the 70s of the XX century. However, until now, the mechanism for predicting speech activity remains insufficiently studied.

According to A.N. Leontyev, the action of this mechanism can be characterized as a "heuristic principle" of the organization of speech activity. In accordance with this, speech activity should provide for a link in which the choice of the strategy of speech behavior would be carried out, as well as allow various ways of operating with the utterance at separate stages of the generation (perception) of speech. In this regard, it seems important to use the created by N.A. Bernstein within the framework of the theory of psychophysiological organization of movements "model of the future".

Subject (psychological) content of speech activity

Along with the structural content, any activity, including speech, is also characterized by objective or psychological content.

The subject content of activity includes the conditions of activity, which are determined by such elements as the object, means, tools, product, result.

The subject of activity is considered as the main element of its subject content, since it largely determines the very nature of the activity (in particular, its purpose, type, form of implementation, etc.). It is in the object that the need - the motive of activity - is realized, "finds" itself. As A.N. Leont'ev, "any activity of the organism is directed to one or another object, non-objective activity is impossible."

The subject of activity can be either "material", materialized, or ideal. When analyzing the main types of speech activity, it is necessary to emphasize the ideality of its subject.

If the subject of RD is thought, the formation and expression of which is directed by speaking, then the means of existence, formation and expression of this thought is language or linguistic system. Speech communication is carried out according to the laws of this language(Russian, German, English, etc.), which is a system of phonetic (graphic), lexical, grammatical and stylistic means and the corresponding rules for their use in the process of communication (speech communication). The features of speech activity, which distinguish it from other types of human activity, also lie in the special nature of its tools, which are the signs of the language.

Conclusion

Language is a system of signs that function as a means of communication and an instrument of thought.

However, the thought of the speaker or writer can be formed and formulated in different ways using the same linguistic means, that is, the same vocabulary and grammar. Based on this, we can say that speech (as a psychophysiological process of generation and perception of speech utterances) "is not a process of communication, speech is not speaking either, speech is a way of forming and formulating thoughts in the very process of speech activity."

Proceeding from this, speech (as a psychophysiological process), serving as a way of forming and formulating thoughts through language, is an internal tool, an instrument for performing all types of speech activity.

Bibliography

1. Leontiev A.N. The emergence and initial development of the language. M., 1963.
2. Leontiev A.N. Psycholinguistics. L., 1967.
3. Leontiev A.N. Psycholinguistic units and the generation of speech utterance. M., 1969.
4. Leontiev A.N. Word in speech activity. M., 1965.
5. Leontiev A.N. Language, speech, speech activity. M., 1969.
6. Leontiev A.N. On the mechanism of sensory reflection. "Questions of Psychology", 1959, no. 2.
7. Leontiev A.N. Problems of the development of the psyche. Ed. 2.M., 1965.

(unpublished lecture 1935)

Leontiev A.N. Psychology of speech // World of psychology. - 2003. - No. 2 (34). - S. 31-39

Comrades, in our last lesson I tried to show that the development of human consciousness begins with the development of labor, together with the emergence of human society. That radical change in the attitude of man to nature, which is associated with the emergence of social and labor activity of man, leads to the fact that this attitude now appears not as direct, but as mediated, that this attitude is now expressed in the system of means that connects man and the environment. his reality, man and nature.

Thus, it is in the process of labor and the development of social labor relations that the word first appears, the material basis of human consciousness; at the same time, and thus, meaning also arises - an object that can be designated, that is, can thereby receive its material carrier. The development of speech, the development of the word, as I have already said, is a necessary condition for the development of human consciousness.

It is obvious that the history of the development of human consciousness proper, the history of the development of human mental activity (in particular, the history of the development of thinking) can and should be understood together with the development of human speech activity, together with the development of speech, together with the development of words.

We are faced with the task of tracing the history of the development of thinking, this peculiar and also specifically human psychological function, for it is thinking that turns out to be the most intimate, most closely associated with the word, with speech. The development of thinking and the development of speech turn out to be processes that cannot be considered in isolation from one another, for every step in the development of thinking at the same time turns out to be a step in the development of speech activity, just as every step in the development of speech activity is at the same time a step in the development of thinking. ...

Before attempting to present the history of the development of human speech and, at the same time, the history of the development of human thinking, it seems natural to pose the question of what speech itself is, how can we approach the study of this peculiar formation of the form of activity, what is a word, as we are we can investigate, study this word, the subject of which science is the word, speech, as a known activity that presupposes the word.

This is the necessary preliminary question with which we will have to begin our presentation and to which we have devoted today's lecture.

The first thing that we can discover in a word, that we can discover in speech, is its external material side. In fact, every spoken word presupposes a certain movement of muscles, the speech apparatus, presupposes, therefore, a certain activity of those organs, the function of which is to pronounce the sounds of human speech.

Thus, in speech, we can discover, first of all, the phasic side of it, that is, we can consider speech as a system of muscle movements, as a system of known physiological processes. But if we imagine speech only as a system of neuromuscular movements, then the question arises - will we consider speech psychologically. Of course not, to consider speech in this way is to consider it physiologically.

It is clear, however, that speech is not limited only to this side of it, speech is not only a system of movements, and when we try to imagine what a word is, we first of all discover that the word refers to something, the word has meaning, has meaning ... If we try to imagine from this side the history of the development of the word, the history of the development of speech, then, on the basis of the factual material of the history of the development of human language, we will be convinced that in the process of historical development this aspect of speech also changes, the meaning of the word changes.

The history of language provides a number of examples of such changes in the meaning of a word. For example, it is known that the word “day” in the history of the Russian language used to mean a combination of two pieces of fabric woven together, hence the word “day” itself, derived from the verb “to weave”, “to weave”. What then happened to this word? The history of the language says that this word "day" began to denote the connection of logs in the log cabin of the hut, forming a corner in the hut, and this word, thus, acquired a new meaning. Further, we know that the word "day" began to be used to designate the moment of sunrise and sunset, that is, to designate the combination of day and night. As you can see, the word "day" has acquired another new, third meaning.

Finally, as you know, the word "day" now does not mean dawn, but a full daily turnover. This is the history of the word.

You see, therefore, that in the process of development of speech, the meaning of the word turns out to be changing. First, the word denotes one thing, then another, a third, etc.

In a word, it turns out that in the process of historical development, speech changes not only towards the increasingly complicated movement of the speaker's speech apparatus, but also from the side, as it were, internal, from the side of the meaning that this word has.

What, one wonders, in this kind of change in the meaning of the word, in this historical process, can we discover a certain psychological content, that is, in other words, does the study of this process of psychology or does it belong to another science? Undoubtedly, such a process of changing the meaning of a word should appear and in fact is the subject of consideration of one of the historical sciences, namely linguistics, the history of language, or, as they sometimes say, paleontology of speech.

The legitimacy of considering this side in the development of speech, and, consequently, this side of the word itself in historical science, and not in psychology, is primarily due to the fact that this very process of changing the meaning of a word is an ideological process in the proper sense of the word. Say, if we have such a change in meaning, such as, for example, a change in the meaning of the word "labor", which used to mean suffering and only later acquire the meaning that it has today in the Russian language, is this fact an ideological one? Obviously yes.

In this process of changing the meaning of the word, some kind of ideological process, some kind of movement, which acts as the actual moment of historical social development, finds its expression and implementation.

Let me give you another example: the German word for state is known to coincide with the word for wealth. Undoubtedly, this fact is also an expression of a certain moment in socio-historical development, is an ideological fact.

That is why it seems to me correct the requirement of modern linguistics, which is presented to any linguistic research, to any study of the history of language and which can be expressed as follows: any historical research in the field of linguistics should be deepened to the study of the ideological.

Thus, from this side, the development of speech turns out not to belong to psychology, but is the subject of the history of language.

However, considering the development of speech, we discover another content of this process, which is already the subject of psychological research itself.

In order to understand this side of the development of speech, let us also turn to the consideration of a specific example.

Let's imagine that a child says the word "cooperative" in his speech. This word is also used by me and, perhaps, even in the same conversation in which this word was used by the child. What is the difference between the word I used and the word used by the child? Does this word differ primarily as a well-known system of movements of the vocal apparatus? If it differs, then in an insignificant respect, from a psychologically insignificant point of view. Does his word differ in what subject it refers to? No, since if this were so, if I had in mind, when I say the word "cooperative", something other than what the child is talking about, then the very communication could not be realized, it also could not be, as in the case if the child spoke one language, and I spoke another, it means that the difference that separates my word and the same word in the child's speech is not a difference either from the physiology of the word, nor from the side of that, what does this word refer to, because when we say the word "cooperative", both I and the child refer this word to the same thing. However, there is a difference between the two. Where does this difference lie? This difference, it turns out, lies in the generalization that lies behind this word. After all, behind every word lies some generalization, we have already spoken about this in sufficient detail. Every word in this sense is a generalization; behind every word lies not a single thing, but a certain mental group of things. It is this generalization that lies behind the word "cooperative" in a child and in an adult, it turns out to be different.

How is the meaning of the word "cooperative" formed in a child? The child goes out with me on the street, I invite the child to come with me to the cooperative, I carry out this intention. The child connects the word "cooperative" that he heard from me with the store where we entered, and now the word "cooperative" the child will mean not only the store in which he was with me, but he will continue to use this word to refer to others single things, that is, use this word to designate any store that is similar or in other respects similar to the first.

If we ask ourselves what lies behind the word "cooperative" in a child, we could characterize this, and we could not only indicate what exactly can lie behind this word, what specific things can be designated by the child by this word, but we could also indicate the principle by which a child designates different things with the same word.

In other words, we could indicate what kind of connections connect separate individual things that are generalized, which lie behind this word.

For example, our research could show us that the word "cooperative" is used by a child to refer to any store that sells food products. The question is, does the generalization that lies behind this word coincide with the generalization that lies behind this word in the child? For me, the concept of "cooperative" is not limited to the concept of "store", that is, the concept of a trading organization, it is much broader in this sense, but it is narrower, because not every store that sells products is in fact a cooperative.

You see, therefore, that from the side of the structure of the generalization that lies behind the word in the speech of an adult and the word in the speech of a child, they are essentially different from one another. This is the difference that we are discovering here, and shows us what changes in the process of psychological development of the child. Changes, as you can see, are primarily the structure of the generalization that lies behind the word. This indirectly indicates what we see as the subject of psychological research, the subject of psychological consideration in speech. This subject, however, will become clearer still when we take a few more steps in our preliminary analysis of the word.

Approaching our question from the other side, we can ask ourselves: what role, what function does this peculiar activity perform, namely speech activity, or, speaking quite simply, what is the purpose of speech, a word when it is used by a person, what is the function of a word.

Here analysis allows us to arrive at one very important point, which is absolutely necessary in order for us to move on.

The word first appears before us as a means of communication. The child begins to speak under the influence of the need to convey something, to somehow influence others. You address a speech to another, obviously, in that case and when you need to convey something, to communicate something to another person. Thus, the first thing that we discover from this side in speech, the first function that we must highlight - the function of communication, the function of communication - is usually denoted by the foreign word communication, that is, transmission, communication.

Well, does the word act only as a means of communication, or does it act in some other role? It seems to me that it is not difficult to discover this second role of the word. When we think, then the process of our thinking is associated with the word. We usually say that: I think in words.

Behind this statement lies the important idea that the activity of our thinking proceeds along with the word, that the word appears in the activity of our thinking, and that the word that is revealed in the mental process, in the processes of thinking - that this word performs a special function, namely, the word performs the function of thinking here. The function of the word appears here as an intellectual function.

Thus, we have discovered two main functions of the word, two main functions of speech. Speech can act as a means of communication, and speech can act as an internal thought process. Is this combination of two functions just a combination of two different functions, or are these functions of the word - the communication function and the intellectual function - related to one another? It should be understood from the very beginning that these two functions are not externally and not accidentally connected, but that they are in the necessary internal connection with each other, and this is easy to understand if we take into account the following.

Imagine that you feel the need to convey something to your interlocutor. The very process of speaking our speech turns out to be a communicating, transmitting, communicating process, but this process is only possible when your words have meaning, when your great words for your interlocutor lie behind known meanings, that is, only in that case , if the words really turn out to be carriers of some generalizations.

Thus, if you have a certain possibility of communication, then this possibility always presupposes a certain possibility of generalization.

In the process of speech development, in the process of word development, both of these functions are extremely closely, extremely intimately connected with each other. It should be noted, however, that this relationship does not remain constant, but that it changes. If initially the word always appears in the form of an external sign, in the form of an external means and always performs the functions of a message, then at the end of the development process, at the highest stage of the development of the word, we see that the main function of speech changes, speech appears in a new activity not only in communicative functions, but also as a moment of the internal intellectual process.

From everything that I have said, it seems to me that we can draw the following conclusions.

In speech, we can first of all single out that side of it, which we could call the external side, the formal side. This side is commonly referred to as the phasic side.

So, the word first of all has a phasic side, an external side. The word "table" differs from the word "lectern" first of all phasically, that is, in its real sound content. A word of the primitive, say children's language, which often merges two words in itself, differs phasically from a word in the speech of an adult or an older child, that is, the phasic, external side develops first, the word becomes, as it were, more articulate, and this difference is also a phasic difference.

What is this semic side of speech? Obviously, the semantic side of speech is what lies behind the word, what is transmitted or can be conveyed in the word. Moreover, if we are aware of the difference between the two main functions - communicative and intellectual - that we discover in speech, then we can somehow dismember this side of speech, and this side of the word, open, first of all, in each word the moment of attribution of this word to the object signified by this word, that is, we open the object relatedness of the word.

This is what makes it possible, as I said, the process of communication (communication). This is the most essential condition for speech to arise as a means of communication.

But behind the word lies a well-known generalization. When we name, that is, we mean something, then by the same token we generalize - the object we mean is included in a whole group of objects. For example, I say, "This is a watch." What does it mean? This means that I include this subject in a certain mental group, in the group of "hours", that is, I generalize, which means that the word is not only related to the subject, but also generalizes the subject.

They are not the same thing. For example, in a conversation with a child, I use the word "cooperative", meaning a certain store. The child understands me, he refers this word to the same thing as me, things, and in this conversation he uses it quite correctly, which means that my word and the child's word coincide in their object-related relevance. Do they coincide, however, in the generalization of which the given word is? Obviously not. For a child, this word summarizes a number of stores, for example grocery stores, while for me the word "cooperative" is a carrier of a much more complex generalization, a much more complex concept.

The difference between my word and the child's word here is not a difference in their subject matter, but in their meaning, that is, in the generalization of which the word is.

So, the word has, firstly, an object relatedness, and, secondly, it has a meaning.

After we have analyzed the word, we can proceed to consider the question of how the development of the child's speech is expressed specifically. First of all, we must ask ourselves, does the object relatedness of a word change in the process of the development of a child's speech? No, the object relatedness of the word remains almost unchanged. A change in the object-relatedness of a word is not the main fact of development. A child who once mastered the word "brother" continues to refer this word to the same person at the age of 5, and at 10, and at 20. On this side, we do not find a significant change in the word. Significant change reveals the meaning of the word.

The writer Veresaev says: once he asked a child: "Who is this, Akulina's son?" "No," the child answered, "he is no longer her son." - "Why?" - "What kind of son is this - with a beard, with a mustache."

This example shows how the meaning of the word "son" for a child appears in a peculiar way. Behind this word in the child lies a certain generalization, but this generalization is still sensible and concrete as a whole. For a child, a "son" is, first of all, a child, a boy.

For our adult consciousness, age is not a sign at all, our generalization underlying this word is not built as a complex of specific signs, but it is based on a certain relationship, namely, the relationship of kinship.

The same can be seen with respect to the meanings of other words. For a child, a “grandmother” is an old woman, gray-haired, kind or unkind, evil, etc. For us, this is a mother's mother.

Thus, in the process of the development of the child's speech, the meanings of the words change. The development of the meaning of a word is the most important central process in the development of speech.

So, the word develops from the side of its meaning. Does it develop from the phasic side or not? At first glance, it seems that the word does not develop phasically. True, the child's vocabulary increases, that is, the child first knows a dozen words, and then knows several hundred of them, but this is a simple accumulation of words, there is still no real development of the word. It turns out that, as if from its phasic side, the word does not develop. Let us, however, clarify this view of ours.

The word is a sign, that is, it means something, the word has a meaning. Well, only the meaning of the word develops, or does the word appear in its phasic side precisely as a sign? First of all, it is clear that initially a word for a child always exists only as an external word, and not as an internal spoken word to himself. It is very easy to show experimentally that a word in a child of early childhood is always a loud, sounding word, and in our psychological activity we discover a word in a different form, in the form of an inner word, and from the very beginning we must say firmly that this inner word is essential. different and in its form than the word of loud speech. When you think and thus words appear in this thought process, then these words arise not in their expanded form, but in some very special form. When a thought flashes verbally in a speech form, this does not mean that you are saying this thought to yourself, fully developing each word.

It turns out that this verbal thinking only turns into speech, into a word of loud speech, but does not coincide with it. At the beginning of the development of a child's speech, there is only a loud word, but then, along with this loud word, an internal word arises, different in its form. This means that there is a development not only of the meaning of the word, but also of the word as a sign, and the word as a meaning and the word as a sign, it turns out, do not develop independently of one another, but develop together with each other.

The development of meaning and the development of a word as a sign are moments that are internally interconnected. This formal and this substantive aspect of speech, it turns out, are not only inseparable from one another, but, it turns out, seem to follow one another in development and constitute a single line of speech development, a single line of development of the word.

This unity of the development of the word is at the same time the unity of the development of speech and semantic activity, the unity of the development of sign and meaning. The development of the word as a sign and the development of the meaning of the word form a unity, we say, but precisely unity, not identity.

That these are not the same process can be shown by the following example of the development of a child's speech. Where does the development of a child's speech begin? With the naming of individual isolated words. What happens next? Then the child moves from speech in separate words to speech in phrases, sentences, that is, to connected speech. So, the development of speech shows that speech goes from word to phrase. From what point of view do we now consider the process of development of speech, from the semic side or from the phasic side?

So, from the phasic side, the development speech goes from word to phrase.

And how is the development of speech proceeding from the semantic side? It goes in the opposite direction. What is the first word of a child, what does this word mean? It turns out that this is not a semantic unit, but a whole sentence. When a child, who is able to speak only in separate words, pronounces the word "mother", then this word always has a complex semantic meaning, has semantic content. This word can mean in the mouth of a child: “Mom, give me something to eat,” “Take me in your arms,” etc., that is, in this phasic unit, in the word, there is a whole semantic sentence.

And what happens to this semantic side of the word at the end of the development process? It turns out that the word now appears as a semantic unit, that is, that the word now acquires a strictly limited meaning.

This means that if, from the phasic side, the process of speech development moves from unity, from an individual word to complex sentence, then from the semic side in the development of the word itself there is a reverse movement. First, a whole sentence lies behind the word, and then a differentiated meaning is highlighted, that is, the word acts as a certain semantic unit.

Let me now turn to an even more important relationship, which also, if you want to understand the speech and mental activity of a child and an adult, we absolutely need to carefully consider.

You and I have come to the conclusion that in the process of the development of the word we discover the development of the word as a sign and the development of the meaning of this sign.

What is the development of the sign? A sign, as I have already said, is a means of communication and, in general, a means of some kind of activity. I would like to draw your attention to the fact that every means of activity determines by itself this very activity.

Thus, a person who cultivates the land cultivates it in different ways. What determines this development? What determines the difference between the cultivation of the land by primitive man and modern man? It is primarily determined by what is in the hands primitive man there is a hoe, a stick, and in the hands modern man sophisticated agricultural implements, a modern plow, and maybe a tractor. In other words, you see that the change in this activity and the means of this activity are internally interconnected and, in essence, the history of the development of activity is, in a certain sense, the history of the development of the means of this activity.

We say: a word as a word changes. Does this mean at the same time that speech activity itself is changing? Oh sure. Is internal semantic activity conceivable if the word as a sign in the process of its development would not turn into this kind of internal word? “Obviously not. If this were an intellectual process of thinking with loud words, then it would still be different, and the activity would be different, namely external, loud, and not that internal, extremely economical, intellectual activity, which we usually call the term "thinking "And which is scientifically, psychologically called discursive activity, that is, internal mental activity, by the activity of reasoning.

You see that along with the development of the sign, activity develops, and this gives us the right to say that in the process of the development of a word as a sign, we also have the development of its meaning, that is, that generalization, that reflection of reality that lies behind the word, and together with this, we always have the development of the corresponding activity, by the way, the activity in which this generalization is formed, which forms the very meaning of the word.

Domestic psycholinguistics from the very beginning of its inception took shape and developed as theory of speech activity. Since the mid-1930s. within the psychological school of L.S. Vygotsky intensively developed an activity-based approach to the interpretation of the human mental sphere, presented in the most complete and complete form in the works of the Academy of Sciences. Leontiev (1974; 1977, etc.). The very concept of activity, philosophically ascending to the ideas of G. Hegel, in the history of Russian psychology is associated with the names of I.M. Sechenov, P.P. Blonsky, S.L. Rubinstein. Common in Russian science psychological concept A.N. Leontiev and his students (137, 8, 50, 98) directly relies on the approach outlined in the works of L.S. Vygotsky and S.L. Rubinstein. According to the concept of NA. Leont'ev, “any objective activity meets a need, but always objectified in a motive; its main generators are the goals and, accordingly, the actions corresponding to them, the means and methods of their implementation, and, finally, those psychophysiological functions that implement the activity, which often constitute its natural prerequisites and impose certain restrictions on its course, are often rearranged in it and even by it are generated ”(135, p. 9).

The structure of activity (according to AN. Leontiev) includes motive, purpose, actions, operations(as ways of doing things). In addition, it includes personal installations and results(products) activities.

Different kinds activities can be classified according to different criteria. The main one is the qualitative originality of the activity - on this basis, one can divide labor, play, cognitive activities as independent views activities. Another criterion is external(material), or interior, the mental nature of the activity. They are different shape activities. External and internal forms of activity are interconnected and pass each other in processes interiorization and exteriorization(8, 50, 98, etc.). In this case, an action of one type can be included as a formative element in an activity of another type: a theoretical action can be part of a practical, for example, labor activity, a labor action - a part play activities etc.

V general psychology speech is defined as a form of communication that has historically developed in the process of material transforming activities of people, mediated by language. Speech includes processes generation and perception(reception and analysis) messages for communication purposes or (in a particular case) for the purposes of regulation and control of their own activities (51, 135, 148). Modern psychology considers speech as a universal means of communication, that is, as a complex and specifically organized form of conscious activity, in which two subjects participate - the one who forms the speech utterance and who perceives it (133, 243).

The majority of Russian psychologists and linguists consider speech as speech activity, acting either in the form whole act of activity(if it has a specific motivation that is not realized by other types of activity), or in the form speech actions, included in any non-speech activity (L.S. Rubinstein (185); A.N. Leontiev (135); A.A. Leontiev (120, 133, etc.); N.I. Zhinkin (81); A. Winter (92, 94) and others.

According to AA. Leontyev, speech activity is a specific type of activity that is not directly correlated with "classical" types of activity, for example, with work or play. Speech activity “in the form of separate speech actions serves all types of activity, being part of acts of labor, play, cognitive activity. Speech activity as such takes place only when speech is valuable in itself, when the underlying motive that motivates it cannot be satisfied in any other way than speech ”(133, p. 63).

According to the concept of the Moscow Psycholinguistic School, speech memory a person is not a passive repository of information about the language. It is a dynamic (movable) functional system. In addition, there is a constant interaction between the process of acquiring speech experience and its product. In other words, receiving new information of the speech plan, a person not only processes it, but also rebuilds the entire system of his speech experience. This allows us to consider speech activity as a rather complex self-organizing system. The focus of psycholinguistics is precisely the organization and mechanisms of speech activity and human behavior, as well as the peculiarities of their formation and functioning.

"Psycholinguistics. Theory of speech activity"

This interpretation of human speech was first given in the science of L.S. Vygotsky (1934). In his attempt to create a new approach to defining the human psyche, L.S. Vygotsky proceeded simultaneously from two basic propositions. First, from the position that the psyche is a function, a property of a person as a material being; secondly, from the fact that the human psyche is social, that is, its features must be sought in the history of human society. The unity of these two provisions of L.S. Vygotsky expressed in the doctrine of the nature of human activity mediated by social means. The human psyche is formed as a kind of unity of biological (physiological) premises and social means. Only by assimilating these means, "appropriating them", making them a part of his personality in his activity, a person becomes himself. Only as a part of human activity, as a tool of a mental subject - a person, these means, and above all language, manifest their essence (43, 44).

At the same time, the "word" (speech) appears, according to L.S. Vygotsky, in the process of social practice, which means that it is a fact of objective reality, independent of the individual consciousness of a person (43, 46).

Speech activity is defined by the leading Russian specialist in psycholinguistics A.A. Leontyev as the process of using language to communicate during any other human activity(120, p. 27-28; 133, etc.). According to A.A. Leont'ev (not shared by all Russian psycholinguists), speech activity is some kind of abstraction that cannot be directly correlated with "classical" types of activity (cognitive, play, educational), which cannot be compared with work or play. It - in the form of individual speech actions - serves all types of activity, being part of acts of labor, play, cognitive activity. Speech activity as such takes place only when speech is valuable in itself, when the underlying motive that motivates it cannot be satisfied in any other way than speech (133, p. 63). Speech actions and even individual speech operations can also be included in other types of activity, primarily in cognitive activity. Thus, speech(RD) is defined as one of the means of non-speech activity, speech (linguistic) process, the process of generation (production) and perception (understanding) of speech, providing all other types of human activity. This applies to all forms of speech: (1) oral (sound), (2) written (reading and writing), and (3) kinetic (i.e. mimic-gesticulatory) speech.

Distinctive features of speech activity (RD), according to A.A. Leontiev are as follows.

Substantiveness of the activity. It is determined by the fact that RD, according to the figurative expression of AN. Leont'ev, flows "face to face with the world around" (135, p. 8). In other words, “in activity there is, as it were, the opening of the circle of internal mental processes towards the objective objective world, which powerfully bursts into this circle, which does not close at all” (ibid., P. 10).

"Psycholinguistics. Theory of speech activity"

Purposefulness, which means that any act of activity is characterized by a final, and any action - by an intermediate goal, the achievement of which, as a rule, is planned by the subject in advance.

Motivation RD. It is determined by the fact that in reality the act of any activity is stimulated simultaneously by several motives fused into one whole.

Hierarchical ("vertical") organization of speech activity, including the hierarchical organization of its units. In the works of psychologists of the school L.S. Vygotsky's concept of the hierarchical organization of the RD is interpreted in different ways. So, V.P. Zinchenko introduced the concept of a functional block into it (98); A.A. Leontiev distinguished between the concepts of macro-operations and micro-operations and introduced the concept of three types of systematic activities (120, 122); A.S. Asmolov introduced the concept of the levels of attitudes in activities and, together with V.A. Petrovsky developed the idea of ​​a “dynamic paradigm of activity” (8).

Phase("Horizontal") organization of activities (119, 133).

The most complete and methodically successful definition of speech activity was proposed by the famous Russian psycholinguist, prof. I.A. Winter. “Speech activity is a process of active, purposeful, mediated by language and conditioned by the communication situation, the interaction of people with each other (with each other). Speech activity can be part of another, broader activity, for example, social-production (labor), cognitive. However, it can also be an independent activity; ... each type of RD has its own "professional embodiment", for example, the RD of speaking determines the professional activity of a lecturer, a letter - a writer ... "(92, pp. 28-29).

Characterizing speech activity, I.A. Winter indicates that the taxiway is an active, purposeful, motivated, objective (meaningful) process of issuing or receiving a thought formed and formulated through the language, aimed at satisfying the communicative and cognitive needs of a person in the process of communication (95).

It is clear that in these cases RD is considered both as communicative proper and as professional activity of people. It acts as an independent, socially "fixed" human activity. Based on this provision, I.A. Winter makes a very important methodological conclusion, which is most directly related to the methodology of speech development (and, accordingly, to the theory and practice of speech therapy work): teaching speech activity should be carried out from the position of its formation as an independent one, possessing the full completeness of its characteristics of activity.

Any kind of activity is aimed at achieving a certain goals, which determines the choice of action, the way of taking into account the conditions in which these actions are carried out. Any activity (as a rule) goes through the stage of orientation and development of an action plan, in the process of implementation of which mechanisms of control and correction are used, which allow comparing the obtained result with the planned plan and, if necessary, introduce some changes.

"Psycholinguistics. Theory of speech activity"

It should be emphasized that any activity includes a stage (or phase) at which there is an awareness of the goal and the development of a plan for its achievement. "The entire course of activity must be subordinated to the achievement of the intended result ... and therefore requires planning and control of execution" (S. L. Rubinstein, 185, p. 572).

A special problem of human psychology and psycholinguistics is the relationship between speech activity and communication activity (AA Leontiev, 132, 133). Communication defined in psychology as an activity to solve problems of social communication. Communication activity acts as general type specifically human activity, private manifestations which are all types of human interaction with other people and objects of the surrounding reality.

The main and universal type of interaction between people in human society is speech, speech activity. Thus, the activity of communication and speech activity are considered in general psychology as general and particular, as a whole and a part. In this case, speech can be considered as a form and at the same time a way of communication. “Speech activity,” says AA. Leont'ev, - there is a specialized use of speech for communication and in this sense - a special case of communication activity ”(133, p. 64).

However, it should be borne in mind that speech activity is not limited to the framework of communication, communication in human society. She plays a huge role in human life; the formation and development of RD is closely connected with the formation and development of the entire personality of a person as a whole. A.A. Leont'ev emphasizes that “speech actions and even individual speech operations can be included in other types of activity, first of all, in cognitive activity” (ibid., P. 64). As I.A. Winter (95), speech, speech activity is integral part of personality a person, it is intimately connected with his consciousness. Thus, the RD is one of the essential conditions implementation of intellectual activity (cognition, awareness, analytical and synthetic activity, creativity).

It is important to note that language, acting as the main means of speech activity and being its integral part, according to L.S. Vygotsky, there is a unity of communication and generalizations(as a product of intellectual activity) - this is its essence. The relationship and interconnection between RD and communication activities can be reflected in the following rather simple scheme:

It clearly follows from what has been said that speech activity has two main options for its implementation (otherwise, implementation, implementation). The first is the process of verbal communication (verbal communication), which accounts for about two-thirds of the entire “layer” of speech activity; the second - individual speech-thinking activity, realized through internal speech.

"Psycholinguistics. Theory of speech activity"

Superlinguist is an electronic scientific library dedicated to theoretical and applied issues of linguistics, as well as the study of various languages.

How the site works

The site consists of sections, each of which includes more subsections.

Home. This section presents general information About the site. Here you can also contact the site administration through the "Contacts" item.

Books. This is the largest section of the site. Here are books (textbooks, monographs, dictionaries, encyclopedias, reference books) in various linguistic areas and languages, a complete list of which is presented in the "Books" section.

For the student. This section contains many useful materials for students: essays, term papers, diploma theses, lecture notes, answers to exams.

Our library is designed for any circle of readers dealing with linguistics and languages, from a schoolboy who is just approaching this area to a leading linguistic scientist working on his next work.

What is the main purpose of the site

The main goal of the project is to improve the scientific and educational level of persons interested in linguistics and learning various languages.

What resources are contained on the site

The site contains textbooks, monographs, dictionaries, reference books, encyclopedias, periodicals, abstracts and dissertations in various fields and languages. Materials are presented in .doc (MS Word), .pdf (Acrobat Reader), .djvu (WinDjvu) and txt formats. Each file is archived (WinRAR).

(0 Votes)

A. A. Leontiev

Language, speech, speech activity

A. A. Leontiev Language, speech, speech activity.- M .: Education, 1969 .-- 214 p. EBook. Psycholinguistics. Neuro linguistics

Abstract (description)

In this book, the author, an outstanding Russian linguist A.A. Leontiev (1936-2004), acquaints readers with the theory of speech activity. The first chapter examines the most important theoretical problems of a general nature - the object and subject of linguistic science, the concept of speech activity, the function of language. In the second chapter, the author tries to apply the above theoretical propositions to the solution of some specific scientific questions; considers the problems of linguistic evolution and some questions of the genesis of speech communication in the light of the theory of activity. Chapter three is devoted to psycholinguistics as the science of speech activity; the fourth chapter analyzes various issues related to teaching language and grammar. The appendix contains two historical studies about great scientists - the linguist I.A. Baudouin de Courtenay and the psychologist L. S. Vygotsky.
The book will be of interest to research scientists - linguists and psychologists, students and graduate students of the relevant specialties.

Contents (table of contents)

Preface to the second edition

From the author
Chapter I. Theory of speech activity
§ 1. Object and subject of linguistic science
§ 2. Language and speech
§ 3. The concept of speech activity
§ 4. Social functions and functional equivalents of language as a problem of the theory of speech activity
§ 5. Language sign and theory of speech activity
Chapter II. Research of speech activity and some problems of linguistics
§ 1. Diachrony, history, development of language
§ 2. Some problems of language evolution and speech culture
§ 3. To the theory of speech culture
§ 4. Some questions of the genesis of speech communication in the light of the theory of activity
Chapter III. Psycholinguistics as a science of speech activity
§ 1. From the history of the emergence and development of psycholinguistics
§ 2. On the subject of psycholinguistics
§ 3. Psycholinguistic problems of phrase generation
§ 4. Psycholinguistic problems of semantics
Chapter IV. Speech activity and learning problems
§ 1. Speech activity and language teaching
§ 2. On the speech situation and the principle of speech actions
§ 3. The essence and tasks of "school grammar"
§ 4. To the question of the place of psycholinguistic analysis in the problems of "school grammar" (parts of speech as a psycholinguistic problem)
Application. From the history of the study of speech activity in our country
I.A. Baudouin de Courtenay
L.S.Vygotsky