Bernstein's "Codes" and the Linguistics of "Deficit"

Autor/in	Jones, Peter E.
Titel	Bernstein's "Codes" and the Linguistics of "Deficit"
Quelle	In: Language and Education, 27 (2013) 2, S.161-179 (19 Seiten)Infoseite zur Zeitschrift PDF als Volltext Verfügbarkeit
Sprache	englisch
Dokumenttyp	gedruckt; online; Zeitschriftenaufsatz
ISSN	0950-0782
DOI	10.1080/09500782.2012.760587
Schlagwörter	Linguistic Theory; Cognitive Processes; Models; Literacy; Language Research; Research Methodology; Oral Language; Written Language; Semantics; Criticism; Correlation; Socioeconomic Background; Language Aptitude; Academic Achievement; Disadvantaged + Suchen Sie Ihr Suchwort? Linguistische Theorie; Cognitive process; Kognitiver Prozess; Analogiemodell; Alphabetisierung; Schreib- und Lesefähigkeit; Sprachforschung; Research method; Forschungsmethode; Oral interpretation; Mündlicher Sprachgebrauch; Geschriebene Sprache; Semantik; Kritik; Korrelation; Sozioökonomische Lage; Sprachbegabung; Spracheignung; Schulleistung
Abstract	This paper examines the key linguistic arguments underpinning Basil Bernstein's theory of "elaborated" and "restricted" "codes". Building on a review of selected highlights from the collective critical response to Bernstein, the paper attempts to clarify the relationship of the theory to "deficit" views and to explore the conceptual roots of Bernstein's position as well as of the linguistics which informs it. The paper finds that Bernstein's theory qualifies as a "deficit" position on a number of counts, most particularly due to the alleged cognitive implications of the "codes". However, the paper argues that no convincing evidence or rationale for the existence of such "codes" has ever been provided. The paper gives support to the argument that Bernstein's "code" theory has its roots in a particular model of literacy and, as such, is best understood as a variant of the more traditional ethno- (and socio-) centric "great divide" perspective. The paper further argues that the relatively recent re-working of Bernstein's position in the work of Ruqaiya Hasan does not succeed in overcoming its principal theoretical and methodological failings. (Contains 22 notes.) (As Provided).
Anmerkungen	Routledge. Available from: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. 325 Chestnut Street Suite 800, Philadelphia, PA 19106. Tel: 800-354-1420; Fax: 215-625-2940; Web site: http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals
Erfasst von	ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC
Update	2017/4/10