Chapter10

第十章

Adult-child interaction, joint problem solving and the structure of cooperation*

长幼互动，共同解决问题以及合作的结构【注】

Mariette Hoogsteder, Robert Maier and Ed Elbers

马瑞迪·胡戈斯特德，罗伯特·迈尔与艾德·艾尔博斯

Introduction

前言

A mother helps her 4-year-old daughter to do a task. They are building a tower with Duplo blocks according to a model that we had provided (cf., Elbers, Maier, Hoekstra and Hoogsteder, 1992). Although the child is fairly competent, the mother intervenes regularly in order to correct errors and to make suggestions. Halfway through the task, the mother goes to the kitchen for a moment. During this interval, about one and a half minutes, the child goes on building the tower. She succeeds in completing part of the tower all by herself, by comparing the tower with the model and selecting and placing the pieces correctly. As soon as the mother comes back, the child stops working and asks "What next?"

一位母亲帮助他的四岁女儿完成任务。他们按照我们提供的设计图利用乐高得宝积木搭建一座塔（参见Elbers, Maier, Hoekstra and Hoogsteder, 1992）。虽然孩子完全有能力，但是母亲还是不断干预，只是为了纠正错误提出建议。中途母亲去了厨房片刻。这段时间大约有一分半钟，孩子自己搭建塔。通过比较塔和图示，正确选择并安放积木块，他成功地独立完成了一部分塔。当母亲回来的时候，孩子停止工作问道：“接下来是什么？”

This observation illustrates the issues we will be concerned with in this chapter. The dyad organized its cooperation according to two distinct patterns of interaction: a pattern in which the mother regulates the building of the tower, and a pattern in which the child controls the building on her own with the mother only present in the background. Moreover, in addition to building the tower, the parent and the child have to build their interaction. With her question "What next?", the child invites her mother to renegotiate the division of roles between them. The child does not only acquire competence in the construction of a tower according to a model, the task is also an "exercise in collectivity" for her (Bruner, 1986, p. 132): it involves negotiating and disagreeing, exchanging and sharing information, knowing when to follow the adult's instructions and when not to.

这次观察展示了我们在本章关心的问题。母子俩组织他俩的合作，其基础是两种明显不同的互动模式：一种是母亲调整塔的搭建过程，另一种是孩子控制搭建过程而母亲则隐在背后。此外，除了搭建塔，家长和儿童也在搭建他们的互动。他问道“接下来是什么”，儿童在邀请母亲重新协商他俩之间的任务分工。在按照设计图搭建塔的过程中，儿童获得的不仅仅是能力，对他而言这项任务也是一项“集体训练”（Bruner, 1986, p. 132）：涉及到协商与争执、交换并分享信息，知道何时遵循成年人的指示何时不遵循。

Many studies on problem solving by adult-child dyads have concentrated on the process of teaching and learning. They rarely focused on interaction patterns, on the way in which adult and child negotiate and reach an agreement about how to cooperate. Researchers assumed that the conditions of cooperation could be taken for granted.

许多研究长幼结对解决问题的研究都集中于教学和学习的过程。他们很少关注与成年人与儿童就如何合作协商并达成一致的互动模式。研究者认为合作的条件是理所当然的。

* This is an edited version of an article that appeared in Learning and Instruction 6(4), 1996.

【注】本文是《学习与教学》第六卷第四册1996期里一篇文章的修订版本。

Adult-child interaction 179

长幼互动，第一七九页

The assumption was that adult and child would engage in an instructive interaction, with the former in a teaching and the latter in a learning role. However, these conditions do not occur as a matter of course: they are constructed, they are the subject of negotiation and change. Each interaction is a construction, to which the participants bring their experiences, repertoires and the previous history of their relationship (cf., Minuchin, 1985). The outcome can certainly be didactic interaction, but a diversity of other interaction patterns is also available to the dyad.

这种观点假设从事教育性互动的成年人和儿童，前者教后者学。然而，这些条件不是生来就有的：它们是需要构建的，他们是协商和改变的对象。每次互动都是一次构建活动，参与者使用他们的体验、技能以及他们以前经历的关系参与构建（参见Minuchin, 1985）。其成果肯定是教学互动，但也包括可用于长幼结对的各种其他互动模式。

In the first part of this chapter, we will discuss the modes of interaction (cf., Elbers et al., 1992) that dyads use to mould their cooperation. What are the characteristics of these modes and how can they be recognized by an observer? In the second part, we will discuss a case-study of an interaction within a didactic mode of interaction. We will concentrate on the negotiations during the interaction and show how actively the child is involved in the construction and maintenance of the cooperation.

在本章的第一部分，我们将讨论长幼结对用以形成合作的互动模式（参见Elbers 等, 1992）。这些模式有哪些特点？如何通过观察进行识别？在第二部分，我们将讨论一个互动的教学模式的案例研究。我们将关注互动期间的协商，并展示儿童如何积极构建并维持合作。

Some assumptions about adult-child interaction

某些关于长幼互动的猜测

A major problem in the field is that many studies have implicitly adopted a unidirectional approach. The focus is on how adults direct and control the interaction, while there is a conspicuous lack of interest in children's contribution. A transfer view on learning is at the basis of this account on adult-child interaction. The adult's regulation and management of the problem solving are thought to be transmitted to the child. In the course of time, the child learns to do the task independently, using the regulative strategies that the adult has taught in the past. The adult is the architect of the collaboration; the child only carries out the adult's instructions.

该领域一个主要的问题是，许多研究都隐含的采用一种单向方法。关注成年人如何引导和控制互动，反过来对于儿童的作用明显缺乏兴趣。这份长幼互动的报告的基础是一种对学习的迁移观点。成年人对问题解决的规定与管理，被认为是传输给儿童的。日积月累，儿童学会使用成年人过去教的调整策略独立完成任务。成年人是合作的构建者，儿童仅是贯彻执行成年人的教导。

Instead of focusing the attention solely on the adult, we prefer to study the way in which the participants influence one another (cf., Stafford and Bayer, 1993) and the way in which they shape their cooperation. We regard children as actively involved in task situations in which they need assistance from an adult. They do not necessarily have a subordinate position, and they negotiate with the adult about how to proceed. The process of doing a task is not dominated by an adult, but jointly regulated by adult and child.

与完全关注于成年人相比，我们更愿意研究参与者彼此影响的方式（参见Stafford and Bayer, 1993），以及他们影响合作的途径。我们认为，儿童积极参与需要成年人辅助的任务状况。他们并非必需一个从属地位，他们可以和成年人协商如何着手。完成任务的过程并不由成年人操控，而是由成年人和儿童共同调整。

A related problem is that researchers of adult-child interaction tend to connect the child's learning in an interaction rigidly to the instructive behaviour of the adult. The origin of this view is, we think, their educational interest in how educators can most effectively stimulate a child's development. Research was designed in order to explore which kind of instruction is the most useful for children, what levels of abstraction adults may employ, and how effective communication can be brought about (for example, Wood, Bruner and Ross, 1976; Wood, Wood and Middleton, 1978).

一个相关问题是，长幼互动的研究者倾向于将儿童的学习与成年人的教育行为紧密关联起来。我们认为，这一观点的起源是，他们的教育兴趣在于教育者如何最有效的刺激儿童的发展。研究旨在探索哪种教学方式对儿童最有效，成年人可以使用哪一级别的抽象，以及可以带来什么程度的沟通（比如，Wood, Bruner & Ross, 1976; Wood, Wood and Middleton, 1978）。

However, there is more to children's learning than following the adult's lead. From the view on learning we adopt, a child's persistence in following his or her own way is not necessarily unconstructive.

然而，儿童的学习，有很多东西不止是跟着成年人跑。根据我们采用的学习观点，儿童坚持走自己的路并不一定没有建设性。

180 Relationships and learning

关系与学习，第一八零页

Rather, those kinds of actions can often be considered as genuine attempts to contribute to a solution of a task, even if they are clearly wrong or in disagreement with the adult's suggestions. Therefore, we argue for studying adult-child interaction from the assumption that the child's learning does not necessarily depend on the adult's correct and proper way of intervening.

说的更恰当一点，这类动作常被认为是真正试图解决一个任务状况，即使明显是错误的或者与成年人的建议不同。因此，我们主张，研究长幼互动的前提是，儿童的学习并不必然依赖于成年人的纠正和适当的介入。

A third problem is connected to comparative research of adult-child interaction. This research has convincingly shown that there is no universal format for instruction (e.g., Greenfield and Lave, 1982; Wertsch, Minick and Arns, 1984). Rogoff (1990) distinguishes between two cultural patterns for learning through adult-child interaction. In Western middle-class communities, situations are adapted to children. In many non-western cultures, however, children are adapted to situations; they are involved by adults in the life of the community, first as close observers and gradually as participants.

第三个问题与长幼互动的比较研究有关联。该研究有力地表明，不存在普适教学模式（比如，Greenfield and Lave, 1982; Wertsch, Minick and Arns, 1984）。罗格夫（1990）通过长幼互动区分学习的两种文化模式。在西方中产阶级社区，环境适应儿童。然而，在许多非西方文化中，是儿童适应环境。他们通过成年人参与到社区生活，现实密切观察，然后逐步参与。

The danger here is that culture is taken as an independent variable for explaining the observed interactions that are taken as dependent variables. We would rather take a more constructivist stance: there is a variety of cultural options open to an adult-child dyad. Every culture provides adults and children with a repertoire of interaction formats or patterns. Although these patterns certainly borrow their meaning from the wider sociocultural context, there is no one-to-one relationship between culture and adult-child interaction.

这里有一处危险，即在解释观察到的互动时，文化是作为自变量，而互动是作为因变量。我们宁愿采取更加建构主义的立场：对于长幼结对，有各式文化选择。每种文化都为成年人和儿童提供了全套的互动样式或模式。虽然这些模式肯定从其更广泛的社会文化背景中借用了他们的意义，但在文化与长幼互动之间也没有一一对应关系。

To summarize, we wish to contribute to the field by emphasizing the construction of adult-child interaction. In particular, we want to study how adult and child shape their cooperation and how the child learns, not only about the task at hand, but also about problem solving as a joint enterprise. With Jerome Bruner, we believe that

总之，我们希望，通过强调长幼互动的构建，对此领域有所贡献。特别是，我们希望研究成年人和儿童是如何形成他们的合作，以及儿童是如何学习的，不仅仅关乎手头任务，也包括作为合作团队去解决问题。用罗杰姆·布鲁纳的话说，我们相信

we shall be able to interpret meanings and meaning-making in a principled manner only in the degree to which we are able to specify the structure and coherence of the larger contexts in which specific meanings are created and transmitted.

只有在我们能够指明具有特定的创建和传输含义的更大背景下的结构和连贯性的基础上，我们将能够有原则的解释含义以及赋予含义。

(Bruner, 1991, pp. 64-65)

In order to write this chapter, we have drawn from our observations in two adult-child interaction studies, involving various problem-solving tasks - construction tasks - and including children from 3 to 5 years old (Elbers et al.,1992; Maier, Elbers and Hoekstra, 1992; Hoogsteder and Elbers, 1994; Hoogsteder, 1995). The adults were the children's parents (or other caregivers) and all interactions were videotaped at their homes. Parents were told that our interest was in investigating how children can solve a practical task with possible assistance by the parent. They were asked to assist the child in their own way and whenever they thought it necessary.

为了写这一章，我们从我们的观察中整理出两项长幼互动研究，设计各种不同的问题解决任务——建构任务——包含三至五岁儿童（Elbers 等,1992; Maier, Elbers and Hoekstra, 1992; Hoogsteder and Elbers, 1994; Hoogsteder, 1995）。成年人都是儿童的家长（或者其他监护人），并且所有互动都在家中被录影。家长被告知，我们的兴趣在于研究儿童在得到家长的帮助下，如何解决具体问题。要求他们用自己的方式，在他们认为需要的任何时刻，帮助他们的孩子。

The variety of interactions we observed is partly dependent on the arrangements made with the parents. They participated on a voluntary basis, and appointments were made to come to their homes. It was up to them to prepare their child.

我们观察到的各式互动，部分的依赖于家长所做的安排。他们自愿参与，并约定到家里进行试验。他们忙于为其子女做准备。

Adult-child interaction 181

长幼互动，第一八一页

Once we arrived, the parent set the scene by indicating a working-space (table, couch or floor) and by getting the attention of the child in question. Other children present were occupied with something else, and the participation of the adult meant that usual household tasks were ignored and that adults dedicated their time to joint problem solving with the child. This whole scene probably also meant that adults (re)presented themselves as "good" parents, discarding, for example, fights or arguments.

一旦我们到达，家长布置环境，以标明工作区域（桌子、沙发或地板），也是为了抓取儿童对问题的注意力。否则儿童会注意其他东西，并且成年人的参与意味着通常的家庭任务被忽略了，并且成年人专注于他们与孩子共同解决问题的时光。整个场景可能也意味着成年人（重新）展现为“好”家长，抛弃掉比如打架或争吵等问题。

Modes of adult-child interaction: status and types

长幼互动的模式：状态与类型

A mode of interaction is a certain type of interaction, a genre, with a typical dynamic. It is the framework giving meaning to the overall activity of the participants, comparable to Leont'ev's activity (1981) as, for example, investigated by Wertsch et al. (1984). On the basis of an analysis of 25 parent-child dyads, we distinguished three modes of interaction. We will first give a brief provisional description, and discuss them more systematically later.

一种互动模式是一种特定的互动类型，一种流派，具有特有的动态特征。是为参与者的整体活动赋予了含义的框架，比如，沃茨奇等人的调查（1984）与里昂涅夫的活动（1981）相比较。在此基础上分析了二十五对亲子结对，我们重点突出其中三中互动模式。我们首先将要暂时简要描述，随后将更加系统化的讨论。

A playful mode of interaction. Adult and child played together. The aim of constructing a tower was not altogether ignored, but was rather secondary to the aim of maintaining a pleasurable relationship between the participants. In one case, for example, the quality of "togetherness", a kind of playful, almost sensuous, interaction between a father and daughter, governed the entire interaction. The daughter followed eagerly and in delight any hint given by her father, and was rewarded with kisses and other emotional back-channels.

玩乐互动模式。成年人和儿童彼此嬉戏。构建一个塔这个目的并没有被忽视，但相对于维持参与者之间的和谐关系，它变得次要了。例如，在一个案例中，“团结”的素养，就是一类玩乐模式，父亲与女儿之间的互动非常愉快，充满了整个互动。女儿急切的遵照并乐于得到她父亲所给提示，并得到亲吻和其他暗示情绪作为奖励。

An economic and efficient mode. Some dyads were mainly concerned with the correct and rapid execution of the task, avoiding conflicts or troubles between them or with the task as much as possible. If the child was not competent enough for an efficient completion of the task, the adult gave a minimum of instructions or commands to enable the task to be carried out, or she took over the entire responsibility for the task.

经济高效模式。某些结对只关心正确而快速的执行任务，尽可能避免参与者之间或与任务之间的冲突或问题。如果孩子没有足够能力高效完成任务，成年人给予最低限度的指示或命令，以使任务能完成，或者家长接管了任务全部责任。

A didactic mode of interaction. Quite a few parents left a lot of space and time for explorations by the child, which could lead to errors and (self-)corrections. Those errors were seized as opportunity, for example, for explaining the rules of the task by the adult. Adults intervened when asked by the child or in order to clarify errors, or in order to evaluate the procedure followed.

教学互动模式。不少家长给孩子的探究留下大量时间和空间，这可能导致错误和（自我）纠正。这些错误被成年人当作教育的好机会，比如，成年人在解释任务规则的时候。当儿童要求成年人介入的时候，或者为了澄清错误，或者为了评估接下来的行为。

Characteristics

特征

What kind of criteria can be used for distinguishing and classifying the various types of interactions as belonging to one mode or another? How can modes be recognized by an observer? Although the modes of interaction are typified globally, they need to be justified and can be recognized by a combination of significant local elements. A mode of interaction can be specified by the following characteristics:

应当采用什么标准，才能将各种类型的互动加以区别并分类到各种模式？如何才能为观察者所识别？虽然互动模式全球通行，但是他们需要经过调整，且能够被一系列本地重要元素所识别。互动模式可以有以下特征：

182 Relationships and learning

关系与学习，第一八二页

the role distribution between adult and child;

分配给成年人和儿童的任务；

the instruments at their disposal, and in particular the forms of communication between adult and child;

他们所掌握的工具，特别是成年人与儿童之间沟通的形式；

the aim(s) pursued.

预期目标。

Role distribution concerns the symmetrical or asymmetrical constellation of responsibilities for the participants. Symmetry is an essential characteristic of play, so in a playful mode the participants have, in principle, equal opportunities. In efficient and economic interactions, the most competent participant (the adult) controls and dominates the other (the child) at all times in order to reach the goal either rapidly, or with a minimum of effort and fuss. The role distribution is asymmetrical. In didactic interactions, the expert will monitor the contributions of the child, and the child will have numerous opportunities to explore and to make mistakes. Therefore, with regard to responsibilities, a didactic mode has a layered structure. This means that the adult will not control each specific action of the child, but will keep an eye on the various actions of the child with regard to her understanding of the task and with regard to a satisfying solution. On the one hand, the participants have asymmetrical roles the adult monitoring the actions of the child but on the other hand, there is a specific form of symmetry, because adult and child attempt to reach a common understanding.

任务分配考虑的是参与者责任关系上的均衡与否。均衡，是游戏的基本特征，因此在一个玩乐型当中，原则上，参与者机会均等。在经济高效型互动中，最有能力的参与者（成人）自始至终控制并支配其他人（儿童），以求或快速或最小代价达成目标。在这里任务分配是不均衡的。在教学型互动中，专家将会监控儿童的努力，儿童也将会有大把的机会去探究和产生错误。因此，关于责任，教学模式具有分层结构。这意味着成年人不会控制儿童的每一步具体动作，但是会密切关注儿童的各种动作，以掌握他对任务的理解，以得到满意的解决办法。一方面，参与者扮演不对称的角色，成年人监控儿童的活动，但是另一方面，这里有一种特殊的均衡形式，因为成年人和儿童都力求达到共同理解。

A role distribution also involves a particular kind of identity for the participants. In a playful mode, the participants adopt fictional identities belonging to the kind of play agreed on. In an efficient mode, the adult or expert will strictly control the procedure for reaching the goal in a minimum of time or effort, which reduces the child to a role of sole executor of those parts of the task that she can do correctly. The adult has an identity as manager and performer of all other aspects of the task. In a didactic mode of interaction, the identities of the participants are more subtle: the adult will monitor the activities of the child, and in this sense adopts an identity as manager, but the child has, at the same time, an identity of competent participant and one who can work on specific aspects of non-competence through participation.

任务分配还涉及对参与者身份的具体识别。在玩乐模式中，参与者使用游戏约定的某一类虚拟身份。在高效模式，成年人或专家将会严格控制在最小时间或代价内达成目标的进度，这将减少儿童在能够正确执行任务时独立执行任务的机会。除此之外，在任务的各个方面，成年人具有管理者和执行者的身份。在教学模式互动中，参与者的身份更加微妙：成年人将见识儿童的活动，在此意义上，成年人的身份是管理者，但是与此同时儿童具有胜任的参与者身份，以及能够在不擅长的方面继续工作。

The instruments at the disposal of the participants are mainly communicative instruments, such as demands, requests, orders, but also postures, gestures and other body-language conveying agreement or doubt. In play, we encounter role-playing and the associated forms of communication that are all of the register of adopted identities. In efficient interactions, communication is governed by a means-end rationality that is characteristic for this mode of interaction and often has the form of (indirect) commands, either with words or with gestures. In the didactic mode of interaction, one can encounter a great variety of communicative means, for example advice or encouragement, illustrations, explanations, suggestions, evaluative remarks, but also proposals by both parties to review what has been achieved up to now at a meta-level.

参与者可以使用的手段主要是交流手段，比如要求、请求、命令，但也包括姿态、手势和承载同意或疑虑的其他身体语言。在玩乐型，我们遭遇角色扮演和相关形式的交流，而这些交流都是通过所用身份进行的。在高效模式中，交流受到方法—目的理性的支配，这是这种互动所特有的，常常具有直接或间接命令的形式，无论是语言还是手势。在教学模式互动中，可以使用大量各式交流手段，比如，劝告或鼓励、图例、解说、建议、评价，而且还建议双方回顾到目前为止在元级上已取得的成就。

Adult-child interaction 183

长幼互动，第一八三页

The aims pursued are of two kinds. Firstly, there are practical aims concerning the manner of proceeding with the task. For example, in the efficient and economic mode, the result-oriented production of the task is the aim, and therefore errors are prevented as much as possible. Secondly, there are aims concerning the participants. In play, an aim can be to seek pleasure and delight. In a didactic interaction, the aim is to transform the non-competent participant (the child) - as far as his or her knowledge on a specific point is concerned - into a competent one, and thus to transform the relationship between the participants. Errors are not prevented but seized as learning or teaching opportunities. A mode of interaction not observed in our studies, but present in many experimental studies in which an adult experimenter interacts with a child, is a test mode (e.g., Elbers and Kelderman, 1994; for an overview see Schubauer-Leoni and Grossen, 1993). Here the aim is that one participant evaluates the capability of the other in performing a task without any assistance.

追求的目标有两类。其一，就是与处理任务的方式有关的实际目标。比如，在高效经济模式，以结果为导向的任务处理活动是其目的，因此尽可能防止错误。其二，有针对参与者的目标。在玩乐模式中，目标可以是寻求快乐。在教学模式中，目标是改变缺乏能力的参与者（儿童）——就我们所关注的他的某一方面的知识而言——使其变得胜任，并因此改变参与者之间的关系。并不阻止错误，但是使之成为学习或教学的机会。有一种互动模式在我们的研究中没有被发现，但存在于许多实验研究当中，即成年实验者与儿童的互动，谓之实验模式（比如，Elbers & Kelderman, 1994；其概述可见Schubauer-Leoni and Grossen, 1993）。这里的目标是，一方参与者评估另一方在没有任何帮助下执行任务的能力。

In addition to the three characteristics of modes, observations about the order in and closure of a certain mode may help to recognize a mode.

除了这三种特征的模式之外，观察某确切模式的发生与结束，有助于识别此模式。

First, participants systematically distinguish between what is usual and what is exceptional within an ongoing interaction. Parents and their children seem to be quite competent - when interacting in a specific mode - to discriminate between the ordinary and the unconventional. What is usual and belongs to the interaction is more or less self-evident, whereas the exceptional is easily identified as not acceptable within that particular mode. Let us illustrate with some examples.

首先，参与者系统的区分进行中的互动哪部分常见哪部分例外。家长及其子女似乎完全有能力——在特定模式互动时——辨别常见和例外。什么常见并属于互动，多少是不言自明的，然而，例外很容易被认定为具体模式不可接受的事物。让我们看几个例子。

In a playful interaction between a father and his daughter, the play was that the daughter followed any suggestion of her father without any autonomous initiative, for which she was rewarded every time. At some moments, she did something that was in some sense outside the agreed play - an autonomous selection of a block for the tower but she spontaneously stopped with these initiatives, being apparently aware of the fact that these actions belonged to another game, in which she would have a different role.

父女之间的一次玩乐互动，游戏是女儿毫无自主性的跟随父亲的提示做出反应，女儿每次都能得到奖励。在某些时刻，女儿会做一些在某种意义上超出游戏许可的东西——为建塔自主选择了一块积木，但是他自发放弃了这种主动性，显然正意识到这些动作不属于另一个游戏，在那里他会有不同的角色。

An efficient or economic mode has a result-oriented agenda, and any disruption of this procedure, for example by making a mistake or by playing with the blocks without a task-relevant result, is immediately identified.

经济高效模式以结果为导向，任何对这一过程的破坏，比如犯错误或者将积木用在与任务无关的结果上，都会立即得到确认。

Didactic interactions are a rather particular case. Within this mode of interaction, a great variety of actions may occur, because of the combination of symmetrical and asymmetrical role distributions. However, all these actions will be coordinated at some phase of the interaction. This coordination establishes a shared understanding of the task and will finally lead to a correct execution of the task, although probably preceded by many errors. So a block that is selected correctly by the child but not put exactly on the right place may be left there for a while. This typically happens when the child is busy with part of the task and focusing her efforts on some aspect while neglecting others. In this sense, an error is perfectly normal and usual for a didactic interaction.

教学式互动是另一种特殊情况。在这种互动模式中，因为对称性和非对称性角色分配的组合，可能会发生大量各种动作。然而，所有这些动作都将在互动的某阶段融合。这种融合建立了对任务的共同理解，使得最终正确执行任务，尽管可能会遇到很多错误。因此，儿童正确选择了一块积木，但并没有放在正确的位置上，也许应该就让它在那儿放一会。这一般发生在儿童忙于任务的局部的时候，他关注任务的某些方面而忽略了其他方面。从这个意义上讲，对于教学式互动，错误是完全常见且正常的。

184 Relationships and learning

关系与学习，第一八四页

However, in the long run, this incorrect placement will be taken up at some moment, for example when the child recognizes a similar error with another block. The child herself may go back to the former block and correct the error, or the adult may guide the child in doing this. We may state that in a didactic interaction, errors are exceptional only in the long run, because all actions will be linked and coordinated with each other and with the aim of the task in order to increase participation of the child.

然而，从长远看，积木放错位置这种情况，会在某一时刻得到处理，比如当儿童纠正其他积木的类似错误时。儿童自己会拿起以前的积木，纠正错误，或者成年人也可以指导儿童纠正。我们可以说，在教学式互动中，从长远来看，错误都是特殊的，因为所有动作最后都将彼此关联协调，以任务为目标，促进儿童参与。

This brings us to a second feature, the particular sequential order of actions. In a didactic mode, various sequences of corrections, evaluations and explanations are possible, but most steps will be reconsidered in a later phase of the interaction. This means that all particular actions will be integrated in a meaningful whole at some moment. In an efficient mode, however, the management of the procedure for completing the task is taken over completely by the adult. The chosen procedure will then fully determine the order of the actions. Actions will not be reconsidered; for example, the correct placement of a block has its own value, and will not be related to the placement of an earlier block with the same principle. In play, once the "rules of the game" have been established, just about anything can happen as long as it fits into the play agreed on.

这便引出了第二个特征，动作的特别连续的顺序。在教学模式中，纠正、评估以及解释的顺序存在各种可能性，但多数步骤都将在互动的后继阶段得以重新考虑。这意味着，所有特定动作都将在某一时刻被集成为有意义的整体。然而，在高效模式，为完成任务而实施的过程管理完全有成年人掌控。此外，选定程序将完全决定动作的顺序。行动不会予以重新考虑，比如，积木的正确放置都有其自身价值，且不会涉及到以同样方式放置的早期积木。在游戏中，一旦“游戏规则”确定，它在游戏允许的范围之内，任何可能性都会发生。

To a certain extent, we suppose that modes of interaction are structured totalities, and this view is supported by the function of conflicts. During some interactions, one of the participants (usually the child) stops acting and functioning according to the characteristics of the agreed mode. A conflict arises, a clash between one mode and another. This can be settled only if the participants renegotiate (explicitly or implicitly) and agree on how to proceed further. Sometimes they will adopt another mode of interaction, adjusting their actions accordingly; sometimes they will proceed in the old mode. In the example at the beginning of this chapter, the girl was eager to go back to a didactic mode in which her mother made suggestions for the task, after she had been building part of the tower independently.

在一定程度上，我们假设所有互动模式都是有序的，这一观点得到冲突功能的支持。在某些互动中，一方参与者（通常是儿童）停止基于商定模式特征的工作。冲突产生，一种模式与另一种的碰撞。只有参与者重新协商（明确或隐含的）并就如何开展进一步工作达成协议，才能解决。有时候，他们会采用另一种互动模式，相应的调整他们的动作；有时候他们将回到旧的模式。在本章开始的例子中，在小女孩独立搭建一部分塔之后，他希望回到教学模式，这是他妈妈为任务建议的。

We argue that modes of interaction are more or less closed structures, but open to change and applicable to a wide range of practical situations. Trespassing or disrupting a mode may result in a conflict for example when a child is making mistakes on purpose, or when she asks her mother "what next?" while she has shown to be quite competent on her own but by conflict one might pass from one mode to another. This pattern of changing modes was found in several dyads. Conflicts are therefore not exclusively disruptive, but also constructive; it is by conflict that switches from one mode to another can be realized.

我们认为，互动模式或多或少结构封闭，但是便于改变，适用于各种具体情况。妨碍或分解互动模式有可能导致冲突，比如儿童故意犯错误时，或在他问妈妈“接下来干什么？”的时候，虽然他看上去胜任工作，但是从一种互动模式转到另一种的时候会发生冲突。在许多长幼结对中都发现了这种模式改变。冲突，不完全都是破坏性的，也有建设性，冲突会实现从一种模式到另一种模式的切换。

As a preliminary conclusion, modes of interaction classified globally and characterized locally can be powerful frameworks for participants, although they may not be aware in which mode they interact and how this affects their (inter)actions. We will now have a closer look at how participants in a concrete interaction realize their cooperation.

作为初步结论，互动模式的全局分类和局部特征化可以作为参与者的强大工作框架，虽然他们可能并不他们的具体互动模式，以及如何用来影响他们的（相互）动作。现在我们有了一次机会，密切观察参与者在一次具体互动中如何实现他们的合作。

Adult-child interaction 185

长幼互动，第一八五页

The structure of cooperation in a didactic mode of interaction: a case-study

教学互动模式中的合作结构：案例研究

In order to illustrate the way in which a parent and a child cooperate, a case-study of one dyad interacting in a didactic mode will be presented. The choice of a case-study as a methodological procedure for presenting data and making argumentative claims may need clarification. Analogous to the claims made by studies on conversation and discourse analysis, case-studies on adult-child interaction serve to support certain types of claim (see Jackson, 1986; Jacobs, 1986). None of these claims is of a quantitative nature - about what frequently or usually happens because such claims need evidence different from the evidence in a case-study. Case-studies serve other functions. First, a case-study may be evidence for something that had, until then, been unnoticed. A single case suffices to show the contrary, provided that readers regard the case as recognizable. Second, a case-study may serve as support for analysing the organization or structure of an interaction. Structures, simple or complex, cannot be explained with discrete, quantifiable data. Third, a case-study has an heuristic function. A well-done analysis has a demonstrative power that may generate new relevant questions and hypotheses concerning adult-child interaction.

为了说明家长与儿童的合作方式，我们来看一个研究案例，教学模式下的长幼结对互动。将选择研究案例作为呈现数据、形成辩论观点的方法论过程，这种观点需要澄清。类似于研究会话分析谈话形成观点，案例研究和长幼互动支持某几种主张（参见Jackson, 1986; Jacobs, 1986）。这些主张都不具备定量研究的特征——有关发生的频率，因为这些主张需要的证据不同于案例研究发现的证据。案例研究具有其他功能。其一，案例研究可能是某种观点不为人知的证据。单独一个例子足够说明问题，足以使读者注意到这个案例。其二，案例研究可为分析互动的组织结构提供支援。结构，不论简单复杂，都无法用离散的量化的数据进行解释。其三，案例研究具有启发式教学的功用。出色的分析具有示范作用，可以产生与长幼互动有关的，新的问题和假说。

The aim of the following case-study is to show how parent and child, interacting in a didactic mode, structure their cooperation with regard to a task. In line with this structure, their responsibility for acting, and hence the child's participation and learning, is distributed accordingly.

以下研究案例的目的，在于展示家长子女是如何在教学模式中互动，并根据任务构建合作关系的。根据这种关系，他们开展行动，由此，儿童形成相应的参与和学习。

The dyad consists of a girl aged 3 years 7 months and her mother. The girl will be called Claire (C) and her mother Amy (A). Their case is drawn from a study with 15 caregivers and their 3-year-old children (Hoogsteder, 1995). The task was to build a tower of 13 wooden blocks (see Figure 10.1).

母女结对中，女孩三岁零七个月。我们称女孩为克莱尔（女），他母亲称作艾米（母）。此案例来自于对十五个保姆和他们三岁孩子的研究（Hoogsteder, 1995）。任务是用十三块积木组建一座塔（参见图10.1）。

Episodes

情节

In order to manage the problem of building a tower, the dyad has to divide the task into manageable steps. We called these steps episodes, a series of meaningful actions that form the interaction. An episode can be seen as a structural equivalent of a textual paragraph. The structure of both text and adult-child interaction can be marked by an author or by the interacting participants respectively by means of various instruments. For example, texts can be structured by punctuation marks, blank lines, choice of adverbs or topic shifts (Brown and Yule, 1983). Interactions can be structured by actions, pauses, regulations or goal-setting. We took goal-directed acting as a criterion for identifying episodes. An episode in an interaction is defined as a series of meaningful actions in which a goal is set by the dyad, implicitly or explicitly agreed on, performed and (sometimes) evaluated (See also Elbers et al., 1992). Pauses, gestures and other acts or utterances can support the marcation of one episode from another.

为了组建好塔，这一对将任务分成几步简单步骤。我们称这些步骤为情节，构成互动的一系列有意义动作。一段情节，结构上相当于一段文字。文字和长幼互动的结构，都可以由作者或者相互作用的参与者，根据各种方法的意思，做出标记。比如，文章可以通过标点、空行、选择副词或主题轮换，进行结构化（Brown and Yule, 1983）。互动可以通过动作、暂停、规程或目标设置，进行结构化。我们把以目标为导向的动作当作区分情节的标准。在互动中，情节被定义为一系列有意义的动作，长幼结对设置其目标，并就其执行与（有时）评估，或明或暗地达成协议（参见Elbers et al., 1992）。暂停、手势和其他言行可以作为一段情节与另一段的界限。

186 Relationships and learning

关系与学习，第一八六页

Figure 10.1 Construction task used with mothers

图10.1 与母亲一起用来组建任务

How episodes structure an interaction

情节是如何构成互动的

The transcription in Figure 10.2 presents the first 2 minutes and 45 seconds and starts after the introduction of the task by the researcher.

图10.2是头两分四十五秒的活动记录，之前是研究者介绍任务。

In each episode, the verbal formulation of the goal that is central for that specific part of the interaction is in italics. In the first episode (from line 1 to line 5), the dyad is concerned with the seriation aspect of the task; their searching for the biggest block. Claire selects the big yellow block (line 2), her mother explicitly states their goal of searching for the biggest one (lines 4-5). Claire again selects the yellow block as the biggest one (line 8), her mother disagrees with her choice and suggests looking for another big block (lines 10-12). Claire takes another block, checks her choice by comparing the blue block with the black base of the tower, and then places the blue one on the spindle (lines 12-13). Her mother evaluates with "right" (line 14). These series of actions form the first episode.

在每一段情节中，口头简述目标，该目标对于这部分互动很重要，标记为斜体。在第一段（从一到五行），这对母女操心任务的顺序问题，他们找最大的积木。克莱尔选择黄色的大积木（第二行），他母亲明确指出他们是要找最大的（第四、五行）。克莱尔再次选择黄色积木，说是最大的（第八行），他母亲否定了他的选择，建议他找其他的大积木（第十至十二行）。克莱尔找到另外一块，拿蓝色的和塔底黑色的比较，然后将蓝色的放在柱子上（第十二、十三行）。他母亲评价说“正确”（第十四行）。这一系列动作形成了第一段情节。

Then a new problem arises, it is not the selection of the blue block that is questioned, but its placement on the spindle. This problem is explained by Amy (lines 16-20) and verified by Claire. Amy then suggests a new goal; the blue block does "need another one" (line 22). She formulates the goal in terms of belonging.

然后出现了一个新问题，怀疑不是选择蓝色积木，但是它就放在柱子上。艾米解释了这个问题（第十六至二十行），克莱尔也确认了。接下来艾米提出新目标，蓝色积木“还差另外一边”（第二十二行）。他用归类的方式强调目标。

Adult-child interaction 187

长幼互动，第一八七页

A: Now, we'll have a try then (.) is quite a

very difficult high tower, isn't it?

What do you think(.) the biggest one is

5 always down under, uh(.) You should first

look for the biggest one

C: [whispering] This one

A: 10 That one(.) you could take another one

that's very big (.) and have a look which

one is the biggest

right

Hey (.) There is something strange, isn't

there (.) do you see(.) What do you see

here(.) That wasn't quite like this when

Mariette had the tower (.) Then it fitted

20 nicely (.) How is that possible?

Would it need another one?

25 You should first (.) yes (.) wait a moment

Do you know what you should do first(.)

We have this one (.) that's the biggest one,

but there is another one, that is as big

Is that one as big?

Ill That one is as big, isn't it(.)

So suppose you place that one on top of it

No (.) No it doesn't yet (.) And when

you turn it

40 Look (.) No, it isn't yet one block (.) How

will it become one block?

C takes a big yellow block

and

puts it on the stick

C points to the yellow one on the stick

C takes off the yellow one from the stick, takes big blue one, compares it to the black base, puts it on the stick upside down

A points to 'hole' under the blue

C watches

C nods, puts yellow one down and takes little blue one

A takes off big blue one, C lays down little blue one

C points to yellow one, looks at other blocks on the table, takes big red one

C places red block upside down on blue block, on table

C turns around red one, places it with thick side on thick side of blue block

continued

母：现在，我们来试着……

这是一个与众不同的高塔，对不对？

看懂了么……最大的积木应该放在最下面，

嗯……你应该先找最大的那块。

女：【低声细语】这块

母：那块啊……你应该找块更大的……

比比看那块更大。

对了。

【一】

哟……他们都长得好奇怪，不是那里……

你看……看这里有个什么……

这跟马阿姨拿来的塔有点不大一样……

他们组装得很好……这是怎么做到的？

这里还需要一块么？

你首先应该……对了……等一下

【二】

你知道先放哪块么……

我们有这块……

这是最大的，这里还有一块，他俩一样大

这块一样大么？

【三】

那块最大，对不对……

来，想像一下你把那块放在他上面

不……现在还不要……

先把它转过来

瞧……不，他们还没有变成一整块……

要怎么做才能变成一整块？

女：拿起一块黄色大块积木

然后

把它放在柱子上

女：指着柱子上的黄色积木

女：从柱子上拿走黄色积木，拿起一块蓝色的，在黑底子上比较大小，将蓝色的放上柱子。

母：指着蓝色积木底下的洞

女：观察

女：点头，放下黄色的，拿起一块小的蓝色积木

母：拿走蓝色大块，

女：放上蓝色小块。

女：指着黄色的，看着桌子上其他积木，拿起红色大块

女：直接在桌子上，把红色积木放在蓝色积木上

女：把红色积木掉个个儿，把它厚的一边和蓝色厚的一边放在一起

未完待续

188 Relationships and learning

关系与学习，第一八八页

No. (.) Look carefully (.) If you turn it like

this

Hey (.) do you see this(.) you should have

a look at this side (.) Now it has become

IV one big block, hasn't it(.)

Now it can be put on the tower

50 Yes

C: It is going to break down

A: Yes, it slips apart a little bit (.) Could you

do them both together(.) Just hold them

55 real tight

C: It won't work

A: It works very well (.) really good

C: [whispering] Now this one

A: Hey no, again you should look for two that

belong together (.) Which ones are equally

65 big?

Yes, I think so too

C: I don't know that tower

A: 70 Just try (.) watch the piece carefully (.)

turning, very good

Really good sweetheart (.) Beautiful, isn't

it, with all those colours together (.)

wonderful

C brings red one to the stick

A constructs red and blue block together,

red on top of blue one

A turns the block and points to the side

C laughs and takes the big pair of blocks together as pair

C brings pair to the stick and tries to put it on the stick

C stands up to have more strength and places the pair of blocks on the stick

C takes the big yellow one and wants to place it on the stick

C takes the big green one

C tries to fit yellow and green one, constructs a pair and places them on the stick

C turns the blocks on the stick a little, places them neatly and looks at the tower

不对……看仔细了……

你要把它转成这样子

嗨……看这个……你应该看看这边……

现在变成一整块了，对不对……

【四】

现在你可以把它放在塔上了

对了

女：它要散了

母：对，他有点点斜……

你可以让他们挨紧一点儿么……

把它们堆紧

女：做不好

母：已经做得非常好了……真的很好

【五】

女：【低声细语】现在是这块

母：嗨，还不是，你应该找两块一起的……

哪两块一样大？

对，你找对了。

女：看不出这是个高塔

母：试一下……仔细看这块……

转过来，非常好

宝贝真了不起……

漂亮么，这么多颜色……

真漂亮

【六】

女：拿起红色的放上柱子

母：把红色蓝色的放在一起，

红色放在蓝色上面

母：转动积木，指着一边

女：笑，把两个大的放在一起组成一对

女：把这一对拿往柱子上，努力放上去

女：站起来用力将这一对积木放上柱子

女：拿起黄色的，想把它放在柱子上

女：拿起绿色大块积木

女：尝试组合黄色和绿色的，

组成一对，

放上柱子

女：转了一下柱子上的积木，

放整齐，

然后看着塔

Figure 10.2 Transcribed excerpt of interaction between Amy and Claire

图10.2 艾米和克莱尔之间的互动记录摘录

Notes: A = Adult (Amy); C = Child (Claire, 3.7 years); (.) = small pause; blank line = longer pause; = end marcation of episode.

说明：母=成年人（艾米）；女=儿童（克莱尔，3.7岁）；……=短暂停；空行=长暂停；【】=一段情节。

The formulation of a new goal is marked by italics.

形成新目标处用粗体标记。

Adult-child interaction 189

长幼互动，第一八九页

Claire nods and searches for a corresponding block; she selects a small blue one, implicitly defining the question of belonging in terms of colour. This is the second episode, concerning the selection of a block related to the big blue one, in order to make it fit.

克莱尔点头认可，寻找相应的积木；他选择了蓝色小块，认为这属于颜色问题。进入第二情节，找一块与蓝色大块相应的积木，两者要匹配。

Her mother then formulates a new goal, because the block needed should not be selected in terms of colour, but in terms of size. She formulates the goal explicitly, "another one, that is as big" (line 29). This is the goal for the third episode. Claire searches for a block as big as the blue one, selects a red block (lines 30-31) and now holds the two biggest blocks, so this goal has been performed, which is acknowledged by Amy (line 33).

接下来他母亲提出一个新目标，因为所需积木不是依据颜色选择，而是尺寸。他明确提出目标：“另一块，一样大小”（第二十九行）。这是第三情节的目标。克莱尔寻找和蓝色一样大小的积木，选择了一块红色的（第三十至三十一行），现在拿起这两块最大的，目标达成，得到艾米的赞扬（第三十三行）。

The fourth episode concerns yet another aspect of the task, the construction of a pair out of the two biggest blocks. This is formulated by Amy in lines 34 and in 40-41. Claire tries a few times, but eventually it is Amy who performs the goal, by placing the two blocks on top of each other, so they become "one big block" (lines 43-47).

第四情节关注的是任务的另外方面，用这两块最大的组合出一对。这由艾米在第三十四行和四十到四十一行提出。克莱尔尝试片刻，最终由艾米达成目标，将这两块彼此嵌合，这样他们就变成“一大块”（第四十三至四十七行）。

The fifth episode involves placing the pair on the stick. Claire marks her recognition of the new goal by a smile and she supports her understanding of this and the previous goal (line 51); the two blocks form one pair, but by holding them in her small hands, the pair nearly breaks apart. She eventually places the pair of blocks on the stick.

第五情节需要将这一对放上柱子。克莱尔咯咯笑，因为他认出这一新目标，他的表现表明他明白这一目标和前一目标（第五十一行）；这两块组成一对，他的手太小，拿的时候快要散了。他最后将这一对放上柱子了。

Altogether, this part of the interaction is divided into five episodes, each one with a distinct goal. The dyad needs these five episodes before the two biggest blocks are put together on the stick as a pair. The fact that the goals of episodes IV and V - the construction and placement of a pair of blocks respectively - involve a pair of blocks and not two separated blocks, is illustrative of the rest of the building process. During the part of the interaction in the sixth episode, the goal involves the selection and placement of one pair of blocks. This goal is formulated again by Amy (lines 63-64), but the separate goals of construction and placement are no longer explicitly formulated, because these are performed automatically together (lines 68-70). After that (not shown in the excerpt), the dyad finishes the whole tower within two more episodes: one episode for the third pair of blocks, and another episode for the smallest three pairs and the final block-on-top, which are placed successively without any new goals being explicitly set.

总之，这部分互动分成了五段情节，每段都有不同的目标。这对母女需要这五段情节，才能将这两块最大的积木作为一个整体放上柱子。事实上，情节四、五的目标——分别组装和放置成对的积木——涉及到的积木是成对而非两块独立的，足以说明组建过程的余下部分。在第六段交互过程中，目标涉及选择及放置一对积木。该目标由艾米提出（第六十三至六十四行），但是不再明确区别搭建和放置这两个不同的目标，因为会自然而然的一起执行（第六十八至七十行）。之后（未显示在摘录中），这对母女通过两个后继情节完成了整座塔：一段情节完成第三对积木，另一情节完成最小的三对，以及最后的塔顶，最后这一部分在没有明确提出任何新目标就顺利完成了。

During the entire interaction, the number of blocks placed in one episode increases. The first pair of blocks is placed during episodes I-V, the second pair of blocks is placed in episode VI, the third pair of blocks is placed in episode VII, and the fourth to sixth pairs and the block-on-top are placed in episode VIII. This means that the terms in which Claire and Amy set goals change. The excerpt in Figure 10.2 indicates that in episode I the goal concerns the size of one block, while in episode VI the goal is to select, construct and place one pair of blocks. In episode VIII (not in Figure 10.2) the goal is to finish the tower, the rules governing its construction now having become self-evident. Claire's participation in episode VI is built on the dyad's way of setting goals.

在整个互动当中，每情节防治的积木数量递增。放置第一对积木经历情节一至五，放置第二对积木经历情节六，第三对积木放置于情节七，第四到六对积木和塔顶积木是在情节八中放置的。这意味着克莱尔和艾米设置目标的周期在变化。图10.2中引用表明在情节一的目标关注一块积木的尺寸，而在情节四，目标是选择、组建、放置一对积木。在情节八（不在图10.2中）的目标是完成整座塔，其组建规则现在已经不言自明了。克莱尔在情节六中的表现建立在这对母女设置目标的方式基础上的。

190 Relationships and learning

关系与学习，第一九零页

She now understands and performs a goal that is formulated not in terms of separate blocks (as was the case in episodes I, II and III), but in terms of pairs of blocks. So, one way of learning during the course of this interaction is exemplified in the kinds of goal the dyad sets and performs in the successive episodes. Claire's understanding improves in terms of the goals she can handle. She has learned through participating in the earlier episodes (although her responsibility was low), as appears from her ability to deal with goal formulations in terms of pairs of blocks in the later episodes. This is an improvement compared to the start of the interaction, where the goals were formulated and performed in terms of the selection or placement of one block.

他现在理解并能够执行不仅是单个积木的目标（如在情节一二三中的例子），也包括成对积木的目标。因此，母女在情节中连续不断设定和实现的目标的种类，证明了他在互动中的学习方式。克莱尔明白他在这些目标方面所取得的进步。在早期情节，他通过与他人合作进行学习（虽然他参与的比较少），正如他在后期情节处理成对积木相关目标时所表现得那样。与互动初期相比是一大进步，虽然目标都只是要求且执行选择或放置一块积木。

In the case of Claire and Amy, it is clearly shown how a kind of symmetry can be found in their interaction. This symmetry was not found in dyads interacting in an efficient mode, because the parents set the goals for an efficient construction of the tower, which meant that the child participated under the conditions of the parent.

在卡莱尔和艾米这个案例中，明确的展示了如何在其互动中发现平衡性。在效率模式的结对互动中并没有发现平衡性，因为家长设置目标是为了高效组建高塔，这意味着儿童在家长的约束之下参与其中。

It is important to realize that any adult and child have to construct their goals for acting on the spot. The goals emerge out of the dyad's interaction itself, specifically for the purpose of this problem-solving situation, and there is no predefined way of doing this. In the case of Amy and Claire, it might seem that Amy is responsible for the construction of goals. But although Claire's participation in the construction of goals is peripheral, especially in the first half of the interaction, it is the dyad who should be held responsible for the construction of goals. Amy and Claire have to negotiate the construction of a goal that can be agreed upon by both of them. For example, the goal in episode III, the selection of the two biggest blocks, can be seen as the outcome of such negotiations. This goal was first formulated as a selection of two blocks that belong together (in episode II), but Claire looked for a combination in the same colour. This made her mother formulate a new goal that explicitly mentions an important rule of the tower: the fact that the blocks should be selected by size and not by colour. Claire's participation, and hence her negotiations, are primarily in the sphere of operations with the blocks and not in the sphere of speech. Still, it is important that the goal is agreed on by both of them. The fact that it has become a joint goal is confirmed in episode VI, where the goal is set in lines 63-64, and Claire selects and constructs a new pair of blocks without much help from her mother. Amy does not intervene after the goal has been formulated, neither does she make suggestions. No further negotiations are necessary, because the goal has become intersubjective and silently agreed upon.

重要的是要认识到，任何成年人和儿童都在实践中实现目标。这些目标从长幼结对中自动浮现出来，特别是在问题解决状况中，没有预先确定好的解决方式。在卡莱尔和艾米这个案例中，似乎由艾米负责提出目标。但虽然克莱尔也参与到构建目标的周边工作，尤其是在互动的前半段，母女俩都应该为构建目标承担责任。卡莱尔和艾米协商，一个目标的提出，应当得到大家所有人的同意。首先提出的目标是选择两块可以拼起来的积木（第二情节），但是克莱尔希望按照相同颜色组合。这令母亲提出一个新目标，明确谈及该塔的重要规则：事实是，选择积木应当按照尺寸而非颜色。克莱尔的参与，以及由此产生的交流，主要存在于操作积木这一领域，而非演讲与口才。不过，重要的是，目标是由他两人都同意了的。事实上，情节六证明了，目标已变成一个共同目标，目标在第六十三至六十四行设置，克莱尔在没有母亲多少帮助的前提下，选择并构建了新的一对积木。艾米在提出目标后并没有介入其中，也没有给出建议。没有进一步的交流很有必要，因为目标变得主体间性以及默认。

A layered structure

分层结构

As has been argued before, a typical characteristic of a didactic mode of interaction is its layered structure of symmetrical and asymmetrical responsibilities. We will illustrate a way in which this becomes manifest with an example from the same dyad.

如前所述，教学模式互动的典型特征就是他责任的均衡性与不均衡性的分层结构。我们将通过同一对母女的例子，说明分层结构变清晰的方式。

Adult-child interaction 191

长幼互动，第一九一页

After the completion of the task by the dyad, Claire spontaneously - without the researcher or her mother asking or encouraging her to do so - started to take the tower apart with the aim of building it again. Although she is now more familiar with the tower, the situation remains a tutoring interaction in a didactic mode. In the beginning of this second building process, it seems that the joint goal-directed procedure of selecting two blocks, making them into a pair and placing them on the stick, has become intersubjective and implicit. This goal is formulated either in a very abbreviated form or not at all.

这对母女完成该任务之后，克莱尔自发的——没有研究人员或者他母亲要求或鼓励他这样做——开始拆除塔，以便再次组建。虽然他现在更加熟悉这座塔，但现在的状况仍然是一个教学模式。在第二次组建过程一开始，选择两块积木、将其组合成一大块、放置到柱子上这三个目标的联合目标导向过程，似乎变得主体间性，变得更隐含。这一目标的制定过程，要么非常短暂，要么根本没有。

While placing the third pair of blocks, however, something strange happened. The two blocks came apart and fell down on the stick one after the other. Amy says: "You can do it like this as well, did you see that?", so that Claire realizes that their procedure of placing pairs could be replaced by a procedure of placing blocks one after the other. This incident has consequences for the interaction in the next episode, in which the dyad started renegotiating the procedure of constructing and placing pairs. Claire selects the correct blocks, constructs them into a pair on the table, and then tries to place the blocks on the stick one after the other. She needs five attempts before the blocks are placed correctly (see Figure10.3).

然而，在放置第三对积木时，出现了一些意外。这两块积木分解开，掉落在柱子上重叠着。艾米说：“你也可以像这样做，看到这个了么？”因此，克莱尔认识到，一次放置一对积木的过程，可以用逐个放置积木的过程取代。这次意外为互动带来的影响出现在下一情节，这对母女开始重新商量组建和放置积木的过程。克莱尔选择了纠正积木的方法，在桌子上将其组合成一对，然后尝试将这一对积木逐个放上柱子。在这些积木被成功放好之前，他一共尝试了五次（见图10.3）。

In the end, she decides to do it the old way because "it is not possible like this". In her fifth and last attempt, she constructs the pair on the table and places them on the stick as a pair.

最后，他决定用老办法去做，因为“不可能做像这样”。在他第五次也就是最后一次尝试中，他在桌子上组合好，然后一起放上柱子。

Figure 10.3 The child's incorrect and correct attempts within one episode

图10.3 儿童在同一情节中的错误和正确尝试

192 Relationships and learning

关系与学习，第一九二页

Apparently, it was very difficult for her to see that the position of the yellow block on top of the green one, as constructed on the table, is not the same as its position on the stick if placed as the bottom block of the pair. This is a problem she had not yet met, because in the old procedure, she placed both blocks on the stick as a pair instead of one by one. As a result of this problem, a break-down in the way the agreed goal is performed, the structure of the interaction becomes more complex. Four attempts result in incorrect placement of the blocks. It is not the goal itself that is brought up for discussion, but the (incorrect) result due to the way in which the goal is carried out. The performance of the goal becomes the focus of attention, resulting in a series of temporary subgoals. These subgoals within an episode lead to a layered structure of the interaction. The two layers in the structure of the interaction that can be discerned are (1) the agreed-on overall goal (placing a constructed pair of two blocks of the same size on the stick; this goal no longer needs negotiation) and (2) the temporary subgoals that are negotiated and performed, each with the intention of performing the overall goal, but four of them failing to do so.

显然，对他而言，要看明白绿色积木上面的黄色积木的位置，是非常困难的，因为在桌子上组装时，和放在柱子上的位置不同，它是放在这对积木的底部。这是一个他尚未遇到的问题，因为在老过程，是将两块积木作为一个整体放上柱子，而非逐个放置。由于此问题，中断了一项解决既定目标的方法，互动的结构变得横加复杂。四次尝试导致错误放置积木。要讨论的并不是目标本身，而是实现目标所用方法导致的（错误）结果。目标的效果变成关注的重点，导致一系列临时子目标。这些同一情节中的子目标导致互动的分层结构。互动结构中的这两层可以被识别为：（甲）既定总体目标（放置组合好的一对同尺寸积木；该目标不再需要商量），和（乙）需要商议和执行的临时子目标，每一个子目标都符合执行总目标的意图，但四个都失败了。

Conclusions

结论

The interaction between Claire and her mother is typical of a didactic mode. They take time to work on all the problems they come across (size, pair construction, placement on the stick), neither adult nor child wants to get a quick result, and mistakes are not immediately corrected but explored by the child, verbally mediated by the adult. In other words, a didactic mode is oriented towards the process of increasing the child's competence, not towards the product of the task (cf., Renshaw and Gardner, 1990). As will be clear, it is not just the adult having a didactic role, the child also participates in this didactic mode. She takes her time, listens to her mother, explores new ways of doing things. In other words, she knows to separate this kind of problem-solving from activities in another mode, such as play (which would have resulted in a fantasy construction with the blocks) or efficient productive activity. Amy and Claire combine symmetrical and asymmetrical role distribution, as shown while Claire explored her mistakes on her own, as long as she kept sharing the agreed overall goal.

克莱尔及其母亲之间的互动是典型的教学模式。他们投入的解决他们遇到的所有问题（大小、组合一对、放上柱子），无论成年人或小孩，都不希望立即得到结果，错误也不是立刻得到纠正，而是放由儿童去探究，成年人在一旁口头介入。换言之，教学模式面向的是增强儿童能力的过程，而非面向任务结果（参见 Renshaw & Gardner, 1990）。正如将要澄清的那样，不仅仅成年人具有教学任务，儿童也参与到教学模式中。克莱尔投入时间，倾听母亲的话语，探究做事的新方法。换而言之，他能够区分这类问题解决活动和其他模式中的活动，比如玩乐模式（这将得到一个梦幻式积木建筑）或高效生产活动。只要克莱尔能坚持商定的整体目标，艾米和克莱尔就兼备均衡式和不均衡式任务分配，正如克莱尔在独立探究错误时所展示的那样。

The problem-solving interactions we analysed can be seen as episodic (cf., Valsiner, 1987), an emergent structure of goal-directed acting. The dyad as a problem-solving entity is responsible for these episodes. This means that although a child cannot perform the task alone, she is able to conceive and participate in the interaction as a problem-solving situation that needs goal-directed acting.

我们所分析的解决问题互动可以看作是有情节的（参见 Valsiner, 1987），目标导向活动的突发结构。长幼结对作为解决问题的实体，他们造就了这些情节。这意味着，虽然儿童不能独立执行此任务，但他能够理解并参与互动，因为这是需要目标导向活动的问题解决状况。

A structural analysis of adult-child problem-solving in terms of modes and episodes calls for an idea of control that is different from the idea displayed in most studies. An adult does not control a child on a moment-by-moment basis, as is implied by the notion of contingency (Wood et al., 1976; Wood, 1989).

对成年人—儿童在模式和情节方面解决问题的结构化分析，得出要求控制的观点，这和多数研究得出的观点不同。成年人并不时时刻刻控制儿童，而是隐含在应急观念中的控制（Wood 等, 1976; Wood, 1989）。

Adult-child interaction 193

长幼互动，第一九三页

On the contrary, a dyad constructs their interaction in accordance with a mode, and their cooperation is realized by a negotiated procedure that becomes manifest in episodes.

相反，长幼结对按照一个模式构建互动，他们的合作是通过商定的过程在情节中得以实现。

The variety of types of interaction we encountered can be systematized into modes of interaction. We can conclude that, even within the limited setup of a problem-solving task, adults and children have diverse repertoires of interaction at their disposal. In some cases, adult and child initiated a certain mode of interaction, and this mode governed the whole session, as in the case of Claire and Amy. In other cases, there was quite some conflict, misunderstanding and (re)negotiation, because each participant tried to interact in a different mode to begin with.

我们遇到的各种类型的互动都可以归类到各互动模式当中。我们可以得出结论，即使在条件有限的问题解决任务中，成年人与儿童也有多种互动模式供其选择。如同艾米与克莱尔的例子一样，在某些情况下，成年人和儿童发起的某种模式的互动，支配了整个活动过程。在其他情况下，具有相当多的冲突、错误理解和重新商议，因为在一开始的时候，每一位参与者都试图按照不同的模式互动。

The case-study showed that the child's learning does not depend solely on the adult's correct way of intervening. By taking initiatives on how to proceed and by participating in the interaction, Claire contributed substantially to her own learning.

案例研究表明，儿童的学习并不完全取决于成年人的正确介入方式。通过积极参与互动，克莱尔实际上对其自身学习做出了贡献。

How can instruction and learning be defined within the framework of the modes of interaction we could distinguish? Are there specific modes where learning and instruction take place, or is learning an opportunity in all modes of interaction? There is no single or simple answer to these questions.

在互动模式框架中，教学与学习是如何定义，使得我们能够区分？一些特殊模式中是否发生教学与学习，或者说，学习是否存在于所有互动模式？这些问题没有惟一或简单答案。

To begin with, children have to learn to recognize the various modes of interaction and to function adequately within them. Therefore, the first answer is that learning and instruction always precede a given mode of interaction. Second, as each of the modes of interaction offers a rich field of experience, the second answer is that any mode of interaction offers ample opportunities for learning and instruction. Third, the didactic mode of interaction is a crystallization of a distinctive expert-novice relationship. This mode is a cultural invention, presupposing a social division of labour and considered as the ultimate educational activity in our culture. The third answer is that at least in our Western history a particular mode of interaction came into being as a very specific social organization of instruction and learning. However, learning and instruction as organized in a didactic mode can function only if embedded in other forms of learning and instruction; and, as shown by our case-study, learning should not be viewed only as the result of instruction.

首先，儿童必须学会识别各种互动模式，并能够充分运用他们。因此，第一个答案是，学习和教学始终先于某一特定互动模式。其次，由于每一互动模式都提供了广阔的体验领域，因此第二个答案是，任何互动模式都为学习和教学提供了充足的机会。其三，教学模式互动是特殊的专家—新人关系的具体化。此模式属文化创造，预设了社会分工，被视为我们文化中最终的教育活动。第三个答案是——至少在我们西方历史中，一种特殊的互动模式，会形成一种非常特殊的教育学习社会体制。然而，由于教学模式中安排有学习与教育，教学模式可以正常运作，只有当前如其他形式的学习与教学。并且，如我们案例研究所显示的，学习，不应该被视作教学的唯一结果。

We conclude that, on the one hand, learning and instruction are a specialized set of (inter)actions developed and constructed jointly by adult and child in a social history, but on the other hand, learning and instruction can never be reduced to these specialized (inter)actions. Learning and learning to learn are not the same.

我们认为，一方面，学习与教学是一套有成年人和儿童在社会历史中共同构建并发展的专门的（相互）动作，但是另一方面，学习与教学永远不能被这些专门的（相互）动作所限制。学习与学会学习也不尽相同。

References

参考文献

Brown, G. and Yule. G. (1983). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

194 Relationships and learning

Bruner, J. (1986). Actual minds, possible worlds. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Bruner, J. (1991). Acts of meaning. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Elbers, E., Maier. R., Hoekstra. T. and Hoogsteder, M. (1992). Internalization and

interaction. Learning & 2,

Elbers, E. and Kelderman, A. (1994). Ground rules for testing: Expectations and

misunderstandings in test situations. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 9, 111-120.

Greenfield, P. and Lave, J. (1982). Cognitive aspects of informal education. In D. A. Wagner and H. W. Stevenson (Eds), Cultural perspectives on child development (pp. 181?207). San-Francisco: Freeman.

Hoogsteder, M. (1995). Learning through participation. The communication between young children and their caregivers in informal tutoring situations. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Utrecht University, The Netherlands. Hoogsteder, M. and Elbers, E. (1994, July). Children's and adults' roles in tutoring

interactions. Paper presented at the Biennial Meeting of the Amsterdam.

Jackson, S. (1986). Building a case for claims about discourse structure. In D. G.

Ellis and W. A. Donohue (Eds), Contemporary issues in language and discourse processes

(pp. 129-148). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence

Jacobs, S. (1986). How to make an argument from example in discourse analysis. In

D. G. Ellis and W. A. Donohue (Eds), Contemporary issues in language and discourse

processes (pp. 149?168). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Leont'ev, A. N. (1981). The problem of activity in Soviet psychology. In J. V.

Wertsch The concept of activity in Soviet psychology (pp. 37?71). NY: Sharpe.

Maier, R., Elbers, E. and Hoekstra, T (1992). Wertsch's puzzle. A case study. Cultural Dynamics,

Minuchin, P. (1985). Families and individual development. Provocations from the field of family therapy. Child Development, 56, 289?302.

Renshaw, P. D. and Gardner, R. (1990). Process versus product task interpretation and parental teaching practices. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 13, 489-505.

Rogoff, B. (1990). Apprenticeship in thinking. Cognitive development in social context. New York: Oxford University Press.

Schubauer-Leoni, M. L. and Grossen, M. (1993). Negotiating the meaning of questions in didactic and experimental contracts. European Journal of Psychology of Education,

Stafford, L. and Bayer, C. L. (1993). between parents and children. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.

Valsiner, J. (1987). Culture and the development of children's action. Chichester: John Wiley.

Wertsch, J. V., Minick, N. and Arns, F. J. (1984). The creation of context in joint problem-solving. In B. Rogoff and J. Lave (Eds), Everyday cognition. Its development in social context (pp. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Wood, D. J. (1989). Social interaction as tutoring. In M. H. and J. S.

Bruner (Eds), in human development (pp. 59-80). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Adult-child interaction 195

Wood, D. J., Bruner, J. and Ross, G. (1976). The role of tutoring in problem-solving. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 17, 89-100.

Wood, D. J., Wood, H. A. and Middleton, D. (1978). An experimental evaluation of four face-to-face teaching straregies. International Journal of Behavioral Development,

Orca's Blog

2009年6月4日星期四

翻译《ED840_1_Reading_004》