69249454-chandler-semiotics

CODES 153
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8222
9
10
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
20
1222
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
30
1
2
3
4
5
6
7222
SOCIAL CODES
Constructionist theorists argue that linguistic codes play a key role
in the construction and maintenance of social realities. We learn not
the world but the codes into which it has been structured. The
Whorfian hypothesis, or Sapir–Whorf theory, is named after the
American linguists Edward Sapir and Benjamin Lee Whorf. In its
most extreme version the Sapir–Whorf hypothesis can be described
as relating two associated principles: linguistic determinism and
linguistic relativism. Applying these two principles, the Whorfian
thesis is that people who speak languages with very different phonological,
grammatical and semantic distinctions perceive and think
about the world quite differently, their worldviews being shaped or
determined by their language (Sapir 1958, 69; Whorf 1956, 213–14).
The extreme determinist form of the Sapir–Whorf hypothesis is
rejected by most contemporary linguists. Critics note that we cannot
make inferences about differences in worldview solely on the basis
of differences in linguistic structure. While few linguists would
accept the Whorfian hypothesis in its ‘strong’, extreme or deterministic
form, many now accept a ‘weak’, more moderate, or limited
Whorfianism, namely that the ways in which we see the world may
be influenced by the kind of language we use.
Within a culture, social differentiation is overdetermined by a
multitude of social codes. We communicate our social identities
through the work we do, the way we talk, the clothes we wear, our
hairstyles, our eating habits, our domestic environments and possessions,
our use of leisure time, our modes of travelling and so on.
Language use acts as a key marker of social identity. A controversial
distinction regarding British linguistic usage was introduced in
the 1960s by the sociologist Basil Bernstein between so-called
‘restricted code’ and ‘elaborated code’ (Bernstein 1971). Restricted
code was used in informal situations and was characterized by a
reliance on situational context, a lack of stylistic variety, an emphasis
on the speaker’s membership of the group, simple syntax and the
frequent use of gestures and tag questions (such as ‘Isn’t it’).
Elaborated code was used in formal situations and was characterized
by less dependence on context, wide stylistic range (including