I am in the process of digesting a paper about cognition and object-orientation. The author brings up the name of Vygotskij, or should we say Vygotsky, and something of a conceptual triangle:

The Russian philosopher, Lev Vygotskij [16] focuses on the significance of language. His notion of knowledge is based on the dialectic relationship between formal expression and subjective content of a concept. The constructivist reflection on experiences concerning a certain object (phenomenon) creates the subjective content for each individual (fig 1).

The formal expression is the term or symbolic representation of the subjective content. The relation between the formal expression and the object depends on the individual interpretation to give it meaning.

A term or symbolic representation that we intuitively connect to the corresponding subjective content is said to be part of our first order language [16].

When we are introduced to a new formal expression, we will at first have to translate this via a first order expression for it to make sense. This then becomes a part of our second order language. In time, the new term may become more familiar and turn into a first order expression.

In four small paragraphs he defines what formal expression, subjective content, object (phenomenon), first-order language, second-order language are and the relationship amongst them. Quite an achievement. If we need clarification we need just to refer to Vygotsky’s Thought and Language book (344pgs).

With a little help from Javi, I have come to my own subjective content of Vygotsky mediation theory: let’s say we have a physical object, something we can all see. Now somebody tell us that that is called “computer”, aka the formal expression. I have a great load of subjective content related to the term “computer”, so basically it does not matter what kind of computer it actually is. In my mind is a conglomerate the computers I have been using in the last years. As I “know” what a “computer” is, it forms part of my first order language.

The same person takes the computer, a laptop as it is easier to carry, to a school in the middle of Africa. They have never seen a computer before, so when they are told the fact they are in front of one and what it is for, they will link the term “computer” with “notebook”, “book”, or even “TV”. In this case, “computer” will be part of their second order language.

I don’t really know how close my interpretation from your own interpretation but I will like to know it. So if you have form some ideas, or some good references about this mess, I’ll be happy to discuss it with you!

This is just a post to clarify my own definitions, or should I say subjective content through second order language?, for all these terms, at some other point we should discuss the implications in educational technology…