Amber Hypothesis
The Bernstein hypothesis , also known as deficit hypothesis , is a linguistic assumption developed by Basil Bernstein in 1958 . Bernstein builds on the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis , but shifts its focus to intra-linguistic considerations, i.e. on differences between members of the same language community .
classification
Important areas of investigation in sociolinguistics are the specific language use of social classes and the occurrence of language barriers . In his deficit hypothesis, Basil Bernstein differentiates between restricted and elaborate language codes .
Bernstein's basic statement: The members of the social middle and upper class of a society or language community use a variant of the common standard language that is very different from the variant of the social lower class (working class). The middle and upper classes use an elaborate (formal language) , the lower class a restricted code (public language) . Since the two codes are viewed as having different levels of performance, a difference between the two social classes in terms of their perception and thinking is assumed.
For his thesis, Bernstein explicitly adopts not only Edward Sapir's and Benjamin Whorf's thesis of linguistic relativity, but also the more problematic second part, linguistic or linguistic determinism : The elaborate code of the middle and upper classes brings about better developed cognitive skills than those in the lower classes . This leads to better school success for children from the upper classes and thus to better professional, social and economic opportunities.
Aside from structuralism , Bernstein is not interested in describing the structure of a language system, but in researching the role of language in the socialization processes of children from different social classes.
The more recent sociolinguistics is based on the Bernstein hypothesis - either building on its approach or as a form of the diverse criticism of it, which has never completely fallen silent since its emergence, especially in Germany and the USA. One allegation is that the Bernstein hypothesis could be used without reflection for social Darwinist arguments.
Bernstein's hypothesis received criticism from US sociolinguistics of the 1970s, above all from William Labov . In Germany, Bernstein's views are more likely to be accepted by the traditional left, which wants to enable the lower classes to move up through education. The New Left, on the other hand, rejects Bernstein as being too norm-oriented: The language of the lower classes (the restricted code) is in reality not deficient, but very expressive - just not in the way the elaborated code is. This criticism is justified insofar as the term “deficit hypothesis” alone suggests a deficit language in relation to the standard language. Furthermore, “restricted” means “restricted” or “limited”. Bernstein corrects his observations, which contradict each other terminologically: “A restricted code contains a huge potential of meanings. It is a form of speech that symbolizes a community-based culture. It has its own aesthetic. It should not be devalued. ”This new definition arose due to criticism by William Labov and his hypothesis of difference , which assumes that the language of the less educated class is not backward (deficit), but above all different and just as rich in lexemes. This can be observed, for example, in the vocabulary of the subject of the "street" (property crime, drugs, etc.). In doing so, Labov paves the way for modern sociolinguistics that descriptively examines sociolects without proceeding centristically.
Restricted code
characterization
The restricted code is assigned to the linguistic usage of less educated classes . With this categorization, Basil Bernstein argues that the use of a code is closely related to the social structure of a particular culture. The restricted code is useful where there is a large amount of shared knowledge among speakers, as it enables them to express a lot in a few words.
The characteristics of the restricted code are short, grammatically simple and often incomplete sentences as well as a limited number of adjectives and adverbs . Proverbs and stereotypes are also often used. The restricted code is often found in tabloids such as B. picture .
features
- short, grammatically simple, often incomplete sentences
- limited number of adjectives and adverbs
- Use of proverbs
- rarely impersonal way of speaking
- Reinforcements at the end of the sentence (e.g. "You know!", "Can you imagine anyway, right?", "Do you know that?")
- lower vocabulary compared to the elaborated code
- one assumes that the listener knows what one also knows.
Example of a narration for a picture story in the restricted code:
“So that one goes in there and they play with that ball. And then that one kicks the ball in there. And here they go, and this one comes and that one comes out of here now. And then he sees him and thinks, 'It was him' and sticks to the one. It wasn't there at all, but he doesn't know that, but the ball must still be in there, but it could have defended itself. It's all pretty mean. "
Elaborate code
characterization
The elaborated code is assigned to the linguistic usage of formed layers. With this categorization, Basil Bernstein argues that the use of a code is closely related to the social structure of a particular society . The elaborate code is important where there is no shared knowledge.
features
- frequent use of technical terms
- frequent use of the passive voice
- Explicitness
- grammatical correctness
- logical or argumentative structuring
- more extensive vocabulary compared to the restricted code
- frequent use of the impersonal pronouns "es" and "man"
Example of a narration for a picture story in elaborate code:
“A man, wearing a hat and coat, parks his car in front of a cafe, which he goes into. Meanwhile, two boys are playing soccer near the car. One of the two has very short hair and the other slightly longer hair. Then the boy with the slightly longer haircut shoots the ball into the left pane of the car, so that the pane breaks apart. Then the two quickly run away. Then the man in the hat comes out of the café and out into the street. Another boy happened to be strolling by who also had a ball with him. The man takes this and gives him a slap. That is the end of the story. "
Restricted and elaborate code in comparison
- Mother to child: "Would you please do me a favor and be a little quieter?" (Elaborated); "Be quiet!" (Restricted)
- On the street: “Why are you looking at me so strangely?” (Elaborated), “You fixed me! (elaborated in the sociolect of student associations ) “; "Is what?" Or "What are you looking at?" (Restricted)
Depending on the situation, even more highly educated people can use the restricted code (and do it often, e.g. with friends or family - it would be a very strange family that would only use the elaborate code), while conversely members of lower classes in usually cannot actively use the elaborated code themselves. Even the passive understanding of this is difficult or even impossible with a low level of education. In this context, one speaks of a language barrier in society.
Layer differences in the meaning of words
It was also shown that a word can have different meanings for people from different backgrounds. Rolf Oerter examined PH students and found that - depending on which class their parents belonged to - they understood very different things under one word. There was a big difference here between two groups:
- 1st group: children of craftsmen and self-employed people without high school diploma
- 2nd group: children of civil servants and employees.
Students from these two groups of origin imagine very different things under one word. The differences were greatest when it came to the word “efficient”. When they used the word competent, artisan children usually thought of qualities related to sophistication and dominance. The children of employees and civil servants, on the other hand, thought of qualities that had to do with physical performance and strength of character. The following answers were most frequently given to the question of what good means:
| Students were asked, "What does 'capable' mean?" | |
|---|---|
| Children of craftsmen * said | Children of employees and officials said |
|
|
|
* Craftsman's children = children of craftsmen and self-employed people without a high school diploma |
|
literature
- Basil Bernstein: Contributions to a theory of the educational process . Suhrkamp, Frankfurt am Main 1982, ISBN 3-518-10850-6 .
- Basil Bernstein, Gustav Grauer, Christine Holzkamp: Family education, social class and school success . Beltz, Weinheim 1979, ISBN 3-407-13107-0 .
- Basil Bernstein, Walter Brandis, Dorothy Henderson: Social Class, Language and Communication (Primary Socialization, Language and Education) . Schwann, Düsseldorf 1973, ISBN 3-7895-0143-3 .
- Basil Bernstein: Social structure, socialization and language behavior. Articles 1958–1970 . Contact-Press, Amsterdam 1971, DNB 750402024 .
- Basil Bernstein (Ed.): Linguistic Codes and Social Control . Schwann, Düsseldorf 1975, ISBN 3-590-14605-2 .
- Basil Bernstein: Studies on Linguistic Socialization . Ullstein, Berlin 1981, ISBN 3-548-35103-4 .
- Peter Ernst: German Linguistics . UTB 2541. WUV, Vienna 2004, ISBN 3-8252-2541-0 .
- Heidrun Pelz: Linguistics for Beginners . 13th edition. Critical Science Series. Hoffmann and Campe, Hamburg 1994, ISBN 3-455-09171-7 .
Web links
- Analysis of the advantages and disadvantages of elaborate and restrictive language in comparison by Josef Huber
Individual evidence
- ^ Basil Bernstein: A socio-linguistic approach to socialization: With some contributions on educability. In: Educational Psychology. Volume 1: Development and Socialization. Fischer Taschenbuch, Frankfurt 1973, p. 268.
- ^ A b Joseph Huber: The traditional language norm and the norm of communicative adequacy. In: Discussion German , Issue 16, 1974 pp. 144–145 ( PDF; 37 kB )
- ↑ Language Codes .
- ↑ Rolf Oerter: Modern developmental psychology. Verlag Ludwig Auer, Donauwörth 1970, pp. 487, 488.
- ↑ Rolf Oerter: Modern developmental psychology. Verlag Ludwig Auer, Donauwörth 1970, p. 488.