Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
Theory
Harry Daniels
University of Bath
This paper will discuss some of the shortcomings of the social theory of L.S.
Vygotsky and suggest that Basil Bernstein’s work on social positioning and
his approach to the development of multi-level languages of description may
be of value to those concerned with theoretical and empirical work on the
social formation of mind.
In what is arguably his most influential text, Thinking and Speech,
Vygotsky (1987) discusses the process of development in terms of changes
in the functional relationship between speaking and thinking. He asserts that
‘change in the functional structure of consciousness is the main and central
content of the entire process of mental development’ (p. 188). He illustrates
the movement from a social plane of functioning to an individual plane of
functioning. From his point of view the ‘internalization of socially rooted
and historically developed activities is the distinguishing feature of human
psychology’ (Vygotsky, 1978, p. 57). In this way interpersonal processes are
transformed into intrapersonal processes as development progresses.
Vygotsky provided a rich and tantalizing set of suggestions that have been
taken up and transformed by social theorists as they attempt to construct
accounts of the formation of mind which to varying degrees acknowledge
social, cultural and historical influences. His is not a legacy of determinism
Theory & Psychology Copyright © 2006 Sage Publications. Vol. 16(1): 37–49
DOI: 10.1177/0959354306060107 www.sagepublications.com
38 THEORY & PSYCHOLOGY 16(1)
dynamic, critical, unitary social theory. Lemke suggests that whilst linguis-
tics furnishes theories of description and psychology provides theories of
mind, both tend to ignore the social functions of language and the social
origins of human behaviour.
He laments the lack of progress in advancing this agenda:
Unfortunately, most theories of discourse are not social theories. Indeed
most theories of discourse are mainly linguistic and psychological, paying
relatively little attention to the question of who says what when, why, and
with what effects. The social context of discourse, and issues of discourse
as social action are largely ignored. Instead discourse is mostly seen as the
product of autonomous mental processes, or it is simply described as
having particular linguistic features. (Lemke, 1995, p. 28)
The concepts of both ‘habitus’ and ‘genre’ have been proposed as theoretical
devices for ‘bridging’ the gap. As I noted above, however, Bernstein is
critical of habitus for its weaknesses when it comes to operational descrip-
tion and thus comparative analysis.
Both Hasan (1992a, 1992b, 1995) and Wertsch (1985a, 1985b, 1991) note
the irony that whilst Vygotsky developed a theory of semiotic mediation in
which the mediational means of language was privileged, he provides very
little if anything by way of a theory of language use. Wertsch has turned to
Bakhtin’s theory of speech genres for such a theory. However, Hasan (in
press) has argued that whilst Bakhtin’s views concerning speech genres are
. . . rhetorically attractive and impressive, the approach lacks . . . both a
developed conceptual syntax and an adequate language of description.
Terms and units at both these levels in Bakhtin’s writings require clarifica-
tion; further, the principles that underlie the calibration of the elements of
context with the generic shape of the text are underdeveloped, as is the
general schema for the description of contexts for interaction.
Hasan is also concerned with the bias within activity theory towards the
experiential function of language. She equates this with the ‘field of
discourse’ within systemic functional linguistics. Her concern is with the
absence of analysis of what she refers to as the ‘tenor of discourse’, by
which she means the social relations and the positioning of the interactants,
and the ‘mode of discourse’, that is, the nature of the semiotic and material
contact between the discursive participants.
Within Vygotskian theory, speech is supposedly the primary means of
semiotic mediation, and yet the social functioning of language is under-
theorized. In an account of the social formation of mind, surely there is a
requirement for theory which relates meanings to interpersonal relations.
This emphasis on representational/experiential meaning and the absence of
an account of the ways in which language serves to regulate interpersonal
relations and in which its specificity is in turn produced through specific
patterns of interpersonal relations and thus social regulation constitute a
serious weakness (Hasan, 2005).
constituted and recontextualised’ (p. 45). As Ratner notes, Vygotsky did not
consider the ways in which concrete social systems bear on psychological
functions. He discussed the general importance of language and schooling
for psychological functioning; however, he failed to examine the real social
systems in which these activities occur. The social analysis is thus reduced
to a semiotic analysis which overlooks the real world of social praxis
(Ratner, 1997).
The feature that can be viewed as the proximal cause of the maturation of
concepts, is a specific way of using the word, specifically the functional
application of the sign as a means of forming concepts. (Vygotsky, 1987,
p. 131)
Whilst it is quite possible to interpret ‘a specific way of using the word’ to
be an exhortation to analyse the activities in which the word is used and
meaning negotiated, this was not elaborated by Vygotsky himself. The
analysis of the structure and function of semiotic psychological tools in
specific activity contexts is not explored.
In Engeström’s (1987) work within activity theory the production of the
outcome is discussed but not the production and structure of the tool itself.
The rules, community and division of labour are analysed in terms of the
contradictions and dilemmas which arise within the activity system specifi-
cally with respect to the production of the object. The production of the
cultural artefact—the discourse—is not analysed in terms of the context of
its production, that is, the rules, community and division of labour which
regulate the activity in which subjects are positioned.
Mediating artefacts:
Tools and signs
Object
Sense
Subject
Outcome
Meaning
Bernstein (1990, pp. 16ff.) argues that socially positioned subjects, through
their experience of and participation in code-regulated dominant and domi-
nated communication, develop rules for recognizing what social activity as
context is the context for, and how the requisite activity should be carried
out. Participation in social practices, including participation in discourse, is
the biggest bootstrapping enterprise that human beings engage in: speaking
is necessary for learning to speak; engaging with contexts is necessary for
recognizing and dealing with contexts. This means, of course, that the
contexts that one learns about are the contexts that one lives, which in turn
means that the contexts one lives are those which are specialized to one’s
social position.
My argument follows that of Hasan that the Vygotskian account of the
‘social’ is insufficient for the task Vygotsky set himself in his attempt to
formulate a general social theory of the formation of mind. It lacks a central
requirement of any theory of semiotic mediation that attempts to account for
the way we as humans behave: how language is used to serve a social
interpersonal function. Bernstein’s account of social positioning within the
discursive practice that arises in activity systems, taken together with his
analysis of the ways in which principles of power and control translate into
References
Bernstein, B. (1971). Class, codes and control: Vol. 1. Theoretical studies towards a
sociology of language. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
Bernstein, B. (1977). Class codes and control: Vol. 3. Towards A theory of
educational transmissions (2nd rev. ed.). London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
Bernstein, B. (1981). Codes, modalities and the process of cultural reproduction: A
model. Language in Society, 10, 327–363.
Bernstein, B. (1990). Class, codes and control: Vol. 4: The structuring of pedagogic
discourse. London: Routledge.
Bernstein, B. (1993). Foreword. In H. Daniels (Ed.), Charting the agenda:
Educational activity after Vygotsky (pp. xiii–xxiii). London: Routledge.
Bernstein, B. (1996). Pedagogy, symbolic control and identity: Theory, research and
critique. London: Taylor & Francis.
Bernstein, B. (2000). Pedagogy, symbolic control and identity: Theory research and
critique (Rev. ed.). Oxford: Rowman & Littlefield.
Bruner, J. (1997). Celebrating divergence: Piaget and Vygotsky. Human Develop-
ment, 40, 63–73.
Diaz, M. (2001). The importance of Basil Bernstein. In S. Power, P. Aggleton,
J. Brannen, A. Brown, L. Chisholm, & J. Mace (Eds.), A tribute to Basil Bernstein
1924–2000 (pp. 106–108). Institute of Education, University of London.
Engeström, Y. (1987). Learning by expanding. Helsinki: Orienta-Konsultit Oy.
Engeström, Y. (1993). Developmental studies on work as a test bench of activity
theory. In S.Chaikin & J. Lave (Eds.), Understanding practice: Perspectives on
activity and context (pp. 64–103). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Engeström, Y., & Miettinen, R. (1999). Introduction. In Y. Engeström, R. Miettinen,
& R.L. Punamaki (Eds.), Perspectives on activity theory (pp. 1–16). Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Halliday, M.A.K. (1978). Language as social semiotic: The social interpretation of
language and meaning. London: Arnold.
Hasan, R. (1992a). Speech genre, semiotic mediation and the development of higher
mental functions. Language Science, 14, 489–528.
Hasan, R. (1992b). Meaning in sociolinguistic theory. In K. Bolton & H. Kwok
(Eds.), Sociolinguistics today: International perspectives (pp. 126–140). London:
Routledge.
Hasan, R. (1995). On social conditions for semiotic mediation: The genesis of mind
in society. In A.R. Sadovnik (Ed.), Knowledge and pedagogy: The sociology of
Basil Bernstein (pp. 33–67). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Hasan, R. (2005). Language, society and consciousness (J. Webster, Ed.). Sydney:
Equinox.
Lemke, J.L. (1995). Textual politics: Discourse and social dynamics. London/
Bristol, PA: Taylor & Francis.
Ratner, C. (1997). Cultural psychology and qualitative methodology: Theoretical
and empirical considerations. London: Plenum.
Vygotsky, L.S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological