26.398, Review: Applied Ling; Socioling: Block (2013)

[The LINGUIST List via LINGUIST]

LINGUIST List: Vol-26-398. Wed Jan 21 2015. ISSN: 1069 - 4875.

Subject: 26.398, Review: Applied Ling; Socioling: Block (2013)

Moderators: linguist at linguistlist.org (Damir Cavar, Malgorzata E. Cavar)
Reviews: reviews at linguistlist.org (Anthony Aristar, Helen Aristar-Dry, Sara Couture)
Homepage: http://linguistlist.org

Editor for this issue: Sara  Couture <sara at linguistlist.org>
================================================================


Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2015 14:35:12
From: Chiara Meluzzi [chiara.meluzzi at yahoo.it]
Subject: Social Class in Applied Linguistics

E-mail this message to a friend:
http://linguistlist.org/issues/emailmessage/verification.cfm?iss=26-398.html&submissionid=35948757&topicid=9&msgnumber=1
 
Discuss this message: 
http://linguistlist.org/pubs/reviews/get-review.cfm?subid=35948757


Book announced at http://linguistlist.org/issues/24/24-4764.html

AUTHOR: David  Block
TITLE: Social Class in Applied Linguistics
PUBLISHER: Routledge (Taylor and Francis)
YEAR: 2013

REVIEWER: Chiara Meluzzi, Free University of Bozen-Bolzano

Review's Editor: Helen Aristar-Dry

SUMMARY

David Block analyses a key concept in applied linguistic research, i.e. social
class, by emphasizing how this category has almost never been completely
addressed in this field of research. Thus, the book offers a rigorous
examination of this topic, based on the literature and on the personal
experience of the author, both fully testified to in the long list of
references. The book consists of a prologue, five chapters, an epilogue, and
three appendixes.

The prologue provides a preliminary notation on the terminology adopted in the
book, that is the two key terms ‘social class’ and ‘applied linguistics’.
Block explains that he chooses ‘social class’ over the almost synonymic
‘class’, because the latter could present some ambiguities, whereas the first
has a long tradition of use dating back to Labov’s variationist works. As for
applied linguistics, Block follows the definitions provided by Grabe (2002)
and Simpson (2011), thus highlighting the multidisciplinary nature of this
field of research, and also considering as applied linguistics subfields
sociolinguistics, bi/multilingualism research, and second language acquisition
and learning (henceforth, SLA/L). The three aforementioned subfields are the
focus of chapters three, four, and five respectively.

The first chapter is titled “setting the scene”, and this is the final aim of
these first pages of the book. The author introduces the notion of social
class through the recall of personal experiences, which testify how this
notion is not always directly addressed, but how it could be perceived in
everyday life. In this chapter the focus is mainly on social class in the US,
since it follows the biography of the writer, with some observations also
concerning the UK. Then, the author surveys some theories in sociology in
order to define what is society, and how economic phenomena influence social
class, mainly addressing the problem of globalization and its effect on
societies. In discussing these issues, Block stresses that socioeconomic
phenomena influence social class organization and perception, and must be
addressed in the theoretical reflection in applied linguistics. 

The second chapter attempts to answer the main question of “what is social
class”. In this respect, the author remarks how in recent years applied
linguists are moved to political economy as a “source discipline [...] in the
face of an increasingly difficult and complex socioeconomic situation” (p.
25). Thus, in defining social class Block considers not only society, but also
the socioeconomic situation characterizing and defining each society. The
starting point is basically the hard core of sociology, i.e. the works of
Marx, Engels, Durkheim and Weber. As for Marx, in his works there is not an
explicit definition of social class, even if the author points out that this
meaning “emerges from the ways that the term is used” (p. 27). A central point
in Marx’s theory is that social relations and class conflicts are deeply bound
to material conditions and interests. On the other hand, Engels provides a
list of variables denoting class, such as amount and quality of clothing,
food, type of dwelling, and neighborhood. It is worth noting that these same
variables were used in the first chapter by Block to define his perception of
social class differences during his life and experiences. Durkheim, then,
introduces in sociology the crucial notion of “occupational groups”, which is
more a cultural  than a material definition: specialized occupations lead to
specialized cultures, meaning that each group shares different values and
behaviors. The author points out that Durkheim’s definition may be closely
associated to the applied linguistic key term of “community of practice” (see,
for instance, Meyerhoff 2002). Finally, Max Weber’s theory more generally
deals with the organization of societies. As for social class, Weber
elaborates a list of class position, nowadays a common practice in class
theorizing. He also introduces the notion of status, in opposition to class:
indeed, while class is basically an economic concept, status also involves a
more general cultural sphere (i.e. social activities, relationships,
behaviors). The stratification of both class and status groups also follows
different dynamics: if classes are stratified according to the economic power
of the individual, so to speak, status groups are identified according the
different “styles of life”, another key concept introduced in Weber’s theory.
The remaining part of the chapter is dedicated to other theories related to
class (and social class), with a particular emphasis on Bourdieu’s works.
Indeed, Bourdieu introduces the notion of cultural capital as opposed to
social capital, the latter being related to networking, recognition from
others and the feeling of belonging to a certain group. Moreover, Bourdieu
introduces the key notion of “habitus”, which is “structured by past
experience and it structures activity in the present and future” (p. 55), thus
being embodied in each person. Habitus is a central concept in sociology, and
it’s frequently used by Block in his book. After this extensive review of the
state of the art concerning social class, the author comes to the conclusion
that this is basically an economic notion (p. 56), and points out how the
economic aspects must inform applied linguistic research dealing with social
class.

The third chapter examines how the notion of social class has been used in
sociolinguistics. Firstly, Block points out that with the term
sociolinguistics he intends socially informed analysis in general, thus more
nearly adopting   Dell Hymes’ (1974) perspective of multidisciplinary and
interdisciplinary research than Trudgill’s more narrow view of
sociolinguistics (p. 74). The chapter then considers how the notion of social
class has been applied by different sociolinguists, starting with Labov
(1962). As Block points out, Labov was particularly interested in how language
is used and also evaluated by people: in particular, Labov stresses the
importance of “social evaluation”, which is how different linguistic features
are attached to different social differences and values. However, as has been
emphasized in Rickford (1986), Labov defines individual class position with a
set of parameters, thus ignoring the macro level of class categorization.
Bernstein (1975) views class as a “theory of socialization” (p. 81), which
means that different ways of communication are developed according to our
social relations (e.g. family, group of peer, etc.). In his theory, social
class position is linked to particular ways of using language to create
meaning, with a basic contrast between an “elaborate code”, associated with
the middle class, and a “restricted code”, which is more typical of the
working class. Milroy and Milroy (1992) moves from considering social class a
variable affecting language use, to “a more fluid notion of class as a social
marker constituted through the day-to-day practices, including linguistic
practices, of individuals who purportedly occupy a particular class position
in society” (p. 91). Among the other works there is also Heath’s (1983)
ethnographic analysis, and Rampton’s (2010) work on the educational system and
school, in which he puts social class at the center of his analysis. Block
also discusses some key concepts in sociolinguistic theory such as repertoire,
style, and stance, and considers works integrating these concepts with social
class analysis (e.g. Snell 2013, Bloommaert and Makoe 2011). In the conclusion
of the chapter, Block claims that the notion of social class was at the core
of sociolinguistic analysis but has somewhat faded away: even though
sociolinguistic research has developed a very technical and detailed
terminology, the author emphasizes how social issues must always be taken into
account in sociolinguistic research.

The fourth chapter is dedicated to social class in bi/multilingualism
research. Block uses the term “bi/multilingualism research” to cover the whole
range of studies dealing with people speaking more than one language, thus
including works on bilingualism in the narrow sense of the term, works on
trilingualism, and works on multilingualism in general. The chapter focuses on
how social class emerges in language contact situations when two or more
languages are at play. In general, the author points out how in this field of
research social class is rarely mentioned, and this is seen as a lack
especially in very recent textbooks and collections such as Baker (2011). Even
if the term “social class” appears in some texts, it is “never taken on
directly in the sense that it is never defined or problematized” (p. 118). It
emerges that the question of “how social class intersects with
bi/multilingualism” (p. 122) has not been answered yet in this field of
research. A partial exception in this respect is represented by Castles and
Kosack’s (1973) work on immigrant workers in western Europe, in which they
consider the interrelation among different variables, such as language, race,
and social class. The remaining part of the chapter is dedicated to what
Heller (2002) called “commodification of language”, which is the observed
shift from valuing a language for its communicative functions to valuing it as
a commodity, in a Marxist interpretation, that is for its value in a
globalized market. The author exemplifies this last statement by reporting in
detail two cases in South Korea (see Park 2011) and in India (see Ramanathan
2005). 

The fifth chapter closely follows the last one, by taking into account how
social class is considered in studies dealing with SLA/L. Again, social class
is barely considered in this field of research, and no effective discussion is
provided, at least in the vast literature reviewed by Block. The author claims
that social class has to be considered as part of a more general identity
issue, in order to trace the profile of the learners as a whole without
limiting the research to the cognitive-linguistic perspective.

Finally, in the epilogue, Block resumes the main content of his book and
emphasizes how social class  always has to be considered as a key construct in
applied linguistic research. In the author’s words, “there is social class in
itself and it is inextricably linked with relations of power in society and
the life chances of individuals and collectives whose lives are shaped by
these relations” (p. 165). 

EVALUATION

The main virtue of this book is to have provided an in-deep reflection on
social class. As the author points out, this category is used by many scholars
in applied linguistics without any discussion of what this label means for
them. Block offers not only an historical reconstruction of the theory
concerning class and social class, two labels that he precisely explains in
the prologue, but he discusses how each works also in an applied way, that is
by considering how it could be useful or how it could be applied generally in
research dealing with language use. The author stresses the importance of
reflection on the concepts and the labels that are used in research, by
emphasizing how in many fields there is very poor discussion of such a key
topic as social class. This lack is particularly evident in the SLA/L field,
but even sociolinguistic studies have barely offered a full discussion of this
category, which, on the other hand, has been widely used since the very
beginning of the discipline (cfr. Labov 1963).

For these reasons, Block’s book is a real milestone, and the reflections
presented here will hopefully prompt further detailed discussion of social
class in applied linguistics. According to the author, the main wish is that
from now on “social class [will] figure as a key construct in research being
carried out” (p. 171). In this sense, this book will be extremely useful for
scholars at every level of expertise, even if a general knowledge of applied
linguistic themes and issues will be needed to fully appreciate the
discussion.

There are, however, some potential weaknesses in this work. First of all,
there is a bibliographical problem: through the book, and in particular in
Chapter Two, Block quotes works from various scholars belonging to different
historical periods; the quotes provided in the books were all referenced to
modern editions of those texts. This creates strange entries, as for example
when Emile Durkheim’s work “The division of Labour in Society”, which was
originally published in 1893, is referred to as Durkheim (1984) at p. 35 and
elsewhere. Although it is correct for the author to quote passages from the
texts actually at his disposal, it would have been more advisable to give the
reader a clear indication of the first edition of the works between square
brackets, as is common in other subfields (historical linguistics, philology,
and so on), thus printing Durkheim [1895] (1984), as has been done in this
review. This would have provided a clear timeline and historical perspective,
and it might avoid misunderstandings in readers with poor knowledge of the
history of sociology or of applied linguistics.

A more general critique regards the contents of the book, or better what the
book doesn’t take into account. The title of the work is “Social class in
Applied Linguistics”, and as a non-Anglophone scholar myself I was thus
expecting a chapter, or even a sub-section, dedicated to the use of ‘social
class’ as a category in different applied linguistic traditions. There
traditions are indeed very well represented all over the world, for instance
with annual conferences and specific national associations (e.g. AItLA for
Italy, LiTaKA for Lithuanian, to cite only two European ones). In these
traditions, social class, as well as other labels, is sometimes discussed to
understand how it may affect variation in language use. For instance, the
Italian applied linguistic tradition has provided important discussions on how
linguistic repertoires and language use are affected by many variables,
including social class (see for instance Berruto 1980 among others). Moreover,
for the Italian context social class seems to be determined more by level of
education than by job or goods, thus differing from the Anglophone situation
as discussed by Block. In the book there are, indeed, some random references
to international works at p. 8; and at pp. 124-125 the author reports Castles
and Kosack’s (1973) studies situated in Western Europe, which is the only
cited work based on non-Anglophone communities and in which English is not the
language under investigation. Even given the limits of human knowledge, more
international work could’ve been included, or the lack of it could have been
somehow addressed in the preface. 

Even with these limits, the book remains an important contribution to the
theoretical development of applied linguistics, and it will hopefully inspire
more critical reflection on constructs and categories used in linguistic
research.

REFERENCES

Baker, Colin. 2011. Foundations of bilingual education and bilingualism. 5th
edition. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.

Bernstein, Basil. 1975. Class, codes, and control, volume 3: towards a theory
of educational transmissions, London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.

Berruto, Gaetano. 1980. La variabilità sociale della lingua. Torino: Loescher.

Blommaert, Jan. and Makoe, Pinky. 2011. Class in class: ideological processes
of class in desegregated classrooms in South Africa. Working papers in Urban
Language and Literacies 80. King’s College London/Tilbrug University.

Castles, Stephen. and Kosack, Godula. 1973. Immigrant workers and class
structure in Western Europe. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Durkheim, Émile. [1893]1984. The division of labor in society. New York: Free
Press.

Grabe, William. 2002. Applied linguistics: An emerging discipline of the
twenty-first century. in R. Kaplan (ed.). Oxford Handbook of Applied
Linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 3-12.

Heath, Shirley B. 1983. Ways with Words. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.

Heller, Monica. 2002. Globalization and the commodification of bilingualism in
Canada. D. Block and D. Cameron (eds.) Globalization and Language Teachin.
London: Routledge. 47-63.

Hymes, Dell. 1974. Foundations of Sociolinguistics. London: Tavistock.

Labov. William. 1963. The social motivation of a sound change. Word 19.
273-309.

Meyerhoff, Miriam. 2002. Communities of Practice. in J.K. Chambers, P.
Trudgill and N. Schilling-Estes (eds.). The Handbook of Language Variation and
Change, London: Blackwell. 526-548.

Milroy, Leslie and Milroy, James. 1992. Social network and social class:
towards an integrated sociolinguistic model. Language in Society 21. 1-26.

Park. Joseph. S-Y. 2011. The promise of English: linguistic capital and the
neoliberal worker in the South Korean job market. International Journal of
Bilingual Education and Bilingualism 14(4). 443-55.

Ramathan, Vaidehi. 2005. The English-vernacular divide: postcolonial language
politics and practice. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.

Rampton, Ben. 2010. Social class and sociolinguistics. Applied Linguistics
Review 1. 1-21.

Rickford, J. 1986. The need for new approaches to social class in
sociolinguistics. Language and Communication 6(3). 215-21.

Simpson, James. 2011. The Routledge Handbook of Applied Linguistics. London:
Routledge.
Snell, J. 2013. Dialect, interaction and class positioning at school: from
deficit to difference to repertoire. Language and Education 27(2). 110-28.


ABOUT THE REVIEWER

Chiara Meluzzi has successfully completed her PhD in Linguistics at University
of Pavia and Free University of Bozen in January 2014. Her dissertation
presented a sociophonetic analysis of dental affricates /ts dz/ realized by
Italian speakers in Bozen (South Tyrol, Italy). She is now working on a
research project at the Free University of Bozen aiming to create a corpus of
spoken Italian. Her main research interests are sociolinguistics,
sociophonetics, applied linguistics, pragmatics, and also historical
linguistics.








----------------------------------------------------------
LINGUIST List: Vol-26-398	
----------------------------------------------------------