I'm completing some research on psychiatric patients and found that a lot
of their constructs were in the form of verbs, rather than nouns or
adjectives. For example,
"cares for me" vs. "beats me". Interpretations anyone?
----------
> From: Bob Parks <bobp@lightlink.com>
> To: pcp@mailbase.ac.uk
> Subject: Re: Person as scientist
> Date: Saturday, March 21, 1998 11:45 PM
>
> Lindsay,
> I'm glad you asked, but I think your question won't get a simple answer.
If
> a person is "like" a scientist (analogy), then we assume an
interpretation
> of "scientist" is accepted, and "person" is understood by comparison. But
> if a person "IS" a scientist (metaphor), then the directions of
> interpretation seem two way: we may learn something about what it is to
be
> a scientist when we study construct formation, and we may learn something
> about what it is to be a person to study the form of self-conscious
> construct formation practiced by the scientist.
>
> By the way, I'd also like to ask if there are any linguists out there.
I'm
> an amateur linguist, and would like to use PCP to study both what a
person
> means by the words used in their constructs, and what constructs are
> labeled by those words. Let me start with a question about whether PCP
only
> works with nouns and adjectives. Must we have an "object" for a
construct?
> What about processes? Can we study a person's concept of "running"
without
> nominalizing it?
>
> Bob Parks
>
> >Hi all,
> >could someone shed some light on Kelly's view of the person as a (an
> >incipient)
> >scientist.
> >
> >Is this an "analogy" or a "metaphor"? Are there any linguists out there?
> >
> >Regards
> >Lindsay Oades
> >Wollongong
>
>
>
>
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%