Stephen BartonSeptember 22, 2015Lev Vygotsky: Thought and
Word
In Chapter 7 of the book Thinking and Speech, the author, Lev
Vygotsky, speaks at length about the relationship between thought
and speech. Initially, Vygotsky states that there is no
relationship that exists because of a genetic or evolutionary
predisposition to relating words and thought. He goes on to say
that there is a relationship between words and thought, but that it
develops over our early stages of development. Vygotsky then goes
on to make a distinction between inner speech and external speech,
stating that external speech is meant for others while internal
speech is meant for the individual, so they will obviously differ
in syntax.[footnoteRef:1] Vygotsky goes on to say that this inner
speech develops from the egocentric speech that one speaks with
when they are much younger. Throughout the whole of the argument,
he continues to argue that merely vocalising silent
speech[footnoteRef:2] will not result in the same understanding of
the idea presented in the speech. Vygotsky views inner speech as a
function in and of itself, not simply a representation of external
speech. Ultimately, Vygotsky argues that thought and language are
the key to understanding human thought and consciousness and that
each word holds a whole host of meaning and ability to trigger
inner speech mechanisms within us. [1: Vygostky, 13] [2: Ibid.
20]
Personally, I mostly agree with Vygotskys argument as it is
reasonably logical and he proposes new ideas about thinking about
thoughts and language, which refute the old psychological theories
and build on some of the previous theories that were beginning to
think about language in the way that he does. Vygotskys argument
also cannot be disproven or proven scientifically, which does cause
me to criticize the plausibility of the argument. Much like Freuds
ego, id, and superego the mechanism of inner speech cannot be
observed and cannot be proven; however, this doesnt mean that
Vygotsky is incorrect about his ideas; he simply seems to prefer
considering ideas in a larger context and speaks more generally.
The scientific evidence he did present in the argument was mostly
in the form of experiments that he had carried out on children
regarding their use of egocentric speech, which did not relate as
directly to the overall argument as Vygotsky perhaps thought.
Ultimately, Vygotskys argument is intriguing and I find myself
agreeing with many of his ideas, but I feel that it is not as
strong of an argument because of a lack of citation and a general
inability to experiment/expand on the ideas he proposes here.
