Systemic Functional Linguistic theory.ppt
《Systemic Functional Linguistic theory.ppt》由会员分享,可在线阅读,更多相关《Systemic Functional Linguistic theory.ppt(74页珍藏版)》请在麦多课文档分享上搜索。
1、Language and legitimation: Disciplinary differences in constructing space for new knowledge.,Pearling seminar October 22, 2010,Dr Susan Hood Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences University of Technology, Sydney (UTS) sue.hooduts.edu.au Visiting Scholar Hong Kong Polytechnic University,How does discip
2、line impact on who gets to know what in the introduction to a research paper?,The problem,There has been much recent discussion in studies of academic literacy around the need to address disciplinary differences. An understanding of the ways in which disciplines use language differently, and hence m
3、ean differently, is fundamental to providing meaningful academic language support for students and researchers. It is also especially relevant in an evolving academic context in which inter-disciplinary or trans-disciplinary study and research are actively encouraged. Effective inter-disciplinary co
4、llaboration relies on a better understanding of disciplinary differences.To date studies of disciplinary differences in applied linguistics have been dominated by two orientations: - corpus-based quantitative studies of distributions of discrete linguistic features, and/or - ethnographic studies tha
5、t choose to largely ignore language in favour of observations of activity.Engaging with sociological theorisations of knowledge (Bernstein; Maton) has suggested a number of fruitful directions for the linguistic analysis and explanation of disciplinary difference.,From the field of the sociology of
6、knowledge . Disciplines as kinds of knowledge structures (Bernstein 1999),Bernstein draws our attention to differences in kinds of knowledge (what he calls discourses): Horizontal discourse or commonsense knowledge local, segmentally organised, context-specific and dependent The kind of knowledge we
7、 acquire and use in the home and local community.Vertical discourse or un-commonsense knowledge coherent, explicit and systematically principled structure. characteristic of formal schooling and of academic study where knowledge is abstracted from everyday and commonsense understandings. Then Bernst
8、ein differentiates vertical discourse into different kinds of knowledge structures: Hierarchical knowledge structuresHorizontal knowledge structures.,Disciplines as Hierarchical or Horizontal knowledge structures (Bernstein 1999),A hierarchical knowledge structure is one that builds on and integrate
9、s knowledge at lower levels in the attempt to create very general propositions and theories. There is an integration of existing knowledge in the process of constructing new knowledge - as in the natural sciences. This orientation towards integration at lower levels in the building of generalised pr
10、opositions is typically represented visually as a triangle:,A horizontal knowledge structure is a series of specialised languages, each with its own specialised modes of interrogation and specialised criteriaas in the humanities. A horizontal knowledge structure is represented diagrammatically as a
11、series of discrete strongly bounded and so segmented languages,Accumulating knowledge through integrationHierarchical knowledge structure the sciencesAccumulating knowledge segmentally Horizontal knowledge structurethe humanitiesSegmented languages some with with stronger verticality the social scie
12、nces,Knowledge structures (Bernstein 1996,1999, 2000),On the basis of this theorisation from sociology of disciplines as different kinds of knowledge structures we might expect to find differences in the ways in which research writers from different disciplines go about constructing a warrant for th
13、eir research in the introductions to their research papers. If they come from disciplinary homes that view knowledge differently and have different ways of accumulating knowledge then we might expect that they would engage differently with other sources of knowledge in the construction of their rese
14、arch warrants. We might expect to find evidence in their writing of differences in degrees of integration or of segmentation.,Disciplines as Hierarchical or Horizontal knowledge structures and Hierarchical or Horizontal knower structures (Maton 2007, 2009),Maton takes the conceptualisation of differ
15、ent kinds of knowledge structures a step further. claims to knowledge are not just of the world, they are also made by authors for every knowledge structure there is also a knower structure Just as we can speak of disciplines as representing hierarchical or horizontal knowledge structures, so we can
16、 also consider them as hierarchical or horizontal knower structures. Science can be characterized as a horizontal knower structure, in which knowers are segmented by specialized modes of acting, and where the social profile of the scientist is irrelevant for scientific insight, while the humanities
17、can be seen as a hierarchical knower structure where knowers are integrated hierarchically in the construction of an ideal knower.,Legitimation codes of specialisation (Maton 2007),LCT theory (Maton 2007),Legitimation Code Theory (LCT) (Maton 2000) two sets of relations: the epistemic relation and t
18、he social relation. The epistemic relation is that between educational knowledge and its proclaimed object of study (that part of the world of which knowledge is claimed). What can be known and how? The social relation is that between educational knowledge and its author or subject (who is making th
19、e claim to knowledge). Who can know? Each of these sets of relations can be relatively stronger or weaker. Stronger epistemic relations give emphasis to the possession of explicit principles, skills and procedures; Stronger social relations and give emphasis to the attitudes and dispositions of know
20、ers.Legitimation Code Theory (LCT) proposes that intellectual fields or disciplines can be differentiated in terms of the relative strength or weakness of their epistemic relations and their social relations,Legitimation codes of specialisation (Maton 2007),LCT theory (Maton 2007),LCT theory (Maton
21、2007),We might expect the disciplinary home of the researcher to be evident in the ways writers legitimate their research in their research paper introductions.,As functional linguists we can ask how differences in knowledge-knower structures are instantiated in key academic genres of those intellec
22、tual fields. One such genre is the research article, and in particular the introduction to the article or the research warranta site in which the writer constructs a legitimating platform from which they can proceed to report in detail on their study and its contribution to knowledgeLCT theory sugge
23、sts questions that we might usefully ask in a social semiotic analysis of this writing from different intellectual fields. But what do we look for amongst the multitude of variations in language from text to text that can generate patterns of difference that we can relate to differences in knowledge
24、-knower structuring of intellectual fields?,A set of published articles from different intellectual fields (natural sciences, social sciences, and humanities)A loose association with field of science from science journalsfrom applied linguistics journal on science educationfrom a cultural studies jo
25、urnal on science educationAim to explore some means by which research writers represent differently knowledge and knowers in the process of legitimating their own research.,Systemic Functional Linguistic theory,discourse semantics,lexico-grammar,phonology/graphology,Systemic Functional Linguistic th
- 1.请仔细阅读文档,确保文档完整性,对于不预览、不比对内容而直接下载带来的问题本站不予受理。
- 2.下载的文档,不会出现我们的网址水印。
- 3、该文档所得收入(下载+内容+预览)归上传者、原创作者;如果您是本文档原作者,请点此认领!既往收益都归您。
下载文档到电脑,查找使用更方便
2000 积分 0人已下载
下载 | 加入VIP,交流精品资源 |
- 配套讲稿:
如PPT文件的首页显示word图标,表示该PPT已包含配套word讲稿。双击word图标可打开word文档。
- 特殊限制:
部分文档作品中含有的国旗、国徽等图片,仅作为作品整体效果示例展示,禁止商用。设计者仅对作品中独创性部分享有著作权。
- 关 键 词:
- SYSTEMICFUNCTIONALLINGUISTICTHEORYPPT
