Justin J. Bain
PhD Student in Composition and Cultural Rhetoric
Syracuse University
315-443-1412
jjbain@syr.edu
Projects: Basil Bernstein and Writing Well
Basil Bernstein and Writing Well
Basil Bernstein’s work grew partially out if his interest in exploring how symbolic systems are both realizations and regulators of the structures of social relationships. In particular, he was interested in the "processes underlying the social structuring of experience," an area of inquiry that was not well defined in his field (159). Bernstein’s work, though limited by many factors, is still important to the field of Composition, but in order to discuss that, it is necessary to spend some time exploring what Bernstein actually had to say.
It should be said up front that Bernstein is interested in issues of social class, and hence the paradigm he is operating in allows him to speculate in particular on the ways social class structures experience. In "Social Class, Language and Socialization," Bernstein first distinguishes between orders of meanings, what he calls universalistic and particularistic. Universalistic meanings are those in which principles are made linguistically explicit; particularistic meanings are those in which principals are linguistically implicit. This means that in a given society, universalistic meanings would (in principle) be available to all because they are not context dependent. Particularistic meanings, in that same society, would only be understood by a select few, those who shared the same context with the speaker. In terms of social class, this means that there are those who have access to universalistic meanings and so can theoretically hold sway in more public settings by communicating more effectively to more people. Those with particularistic meanings would be more limited to communicate in a public setting because their speech would only be understood by those with shared contexts. This is similar to the use of academic discourse in Composition in that, within the field, academic discourse functions as the universalistic meaning, and if one writes in that discourse, everyone within the field will understand. Hence basic writing is associated with Composition and with academic discourse: a class that will in theory prepare all students to speak the language that will enable them to be heard. E.D. Hirsch would be proud.
Bernstein establishes these categories of meaning in order to be able to say something about how they are established, or how we, as individuals, find ourselves involved with them. To work towards this, Bernstein makes the argument that the universalistic meaning is based on difference and that the particularistic meaning is based on consensus. Difference is important to universalistic meaning because it is an understanding of what is different from one individual to another, of what is not shared, that allows speech to bridge the gap. The reason, then, that universalistic meanings are useful in public settings is that they function by filling in the gaps of difference, of context, in order to make meaning widely available. Conversely, the shared context, the lack of difference, is exactly what makes particularistic meaning limited in a public setting. If an individual functions with a theory of consensus rather than difference, than that individual will be less likely to recognize and fill in gaps because he/she is assuming a shared context to enable understanding. Looking again at academic discourse, it is necessary to recognize that this discourse serves the universalistic function only within certain academic settings. That is, while I can safely assume to be able to read and understand most undergraduate papers written at Syracuse University, I am not able to read and understand a dissertation in bio-physics because that genre (or group) functions on the basis of a shared context. Academic discourse might also be said to be particularistic in relation to a universalistic meaning outside the academy, but for now it is useful to continue with a universalistic understanding of academic discourse.
Consensus and difference, in Bernstein’s mind, run parallel to community and individuality, and this is where he begins to account for the processes underlying social structure. To put it simply, those who come from more communal societies will be more likely to operate on the principle of consensus and those who come from more individual societies will be more likely to operate on principles of difference. In one sense, this might account for a universalistic understanding of academic discourse based on the American ideal of the individual. This same line of reasoning might go on to explain why non-traditional students, those from what might be considered more communal settings, have a harder time adopting academic discourse.
The communal and individual understandings are, for Bernstein, a derivative of social class and the familial relations class creates. In articulating this relationship Bernstein creates the categories of positional families and person-centered families. In positional families, "the boundaries between the statuses are strong and the social identities of the members very much a function of their age, sex, and age-relation status" (174). In person-centered families, in contrast, "relationships becomes more egocentric and the unique attributes of family members more and more are made substantive in the communication structure" (174). The division of communication strategies within these families corresponds to the division of meanings in speech. Positional families function on the consensus that each member knows his/her role and position, and communication is particularistic and limited by the shared context. Person-centered families function by recognizing the differences between individual members and adjusting speech according to context (universalistic).
These family structures are also related to the division of labor within a society. Positional families are more likely to be from the working class where managers are not to be questioned and hold sway because they are in fact managers. Person-centered families are more likely to be from the middle-class where managers ask for help and decisions from individual workers based on strengths and skills. It is Bernstein’s contention that these work relations are brought into the homes by parents and taught to the children, who then bring these relations and their associated communication systems to the work and academic worlds as they grow up. Bernstein’s theories are based heavily on evidence gathered in interviews with young children, and so some question their relevance. His works are also rather difficult to read because he switches the terms with which he is working and, frankly, writes fairly densely. His focus on social class also has little to say about issues of race and other factors in communication, but I do not think this means these other issues are incompatible with his theories. These limitations aside, his theories are of use to Composition.
As I have been writing throughout this piece, Bernstein’s work speaks to our understanding of academic discourse and a student’s ability to either bring it with them to the academy or have to learn it. Knowing that middle class students will more likely be ready to use academic discourse than working class students should mean changes to curriculums to affect this disadvantage. It should also mean that teachers within curriculums should be more sensitive to starting where students are at and offering explanations for one student’s ability in relation to another’s in terms other than "deficiency." But aside from day to day activities, Bernstein’s theories should also be applied to Composition and its status as a discipline, one that has demarcated social and political boundaries in order to achieve disciplinarity, and so one that has created an inside and an outside, universalistic and particularistic ways of being and doing if you will. Bernstein’s theories could provide a powerful lens for examining who within the field is constructing boundaries, who is breaking them down, who is denying their existence altogether, and who has the ability to speak and be heard on any of these issues.