Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Book Review: Melbourne Studies in Education 1974

Book Review: Melbourne Studies in Education 1974 BOOK REVIEWS to the other. Instead by definition and by the co-occurrence of two phenomena, Nist concludes that a cause-effect relationship exists. Logically this is a *cult position to sustain. Secondly, he attempts to justify his argument by rather tenuous means. In one instance he refers to two characters from novels (Babbitt and Grapes of Wrath) as proof that inferiority and use of basilect are causally related. He also quotes liberally from other authorities to support his work (especially Bernstein), but never questions the validity of their work. If a heavy-weight in the field has research evidence which opposes his thesis (e.g. Labov), he puts an alternate interpretation on the data. As well, he constantly uses a kind of ‘‘ linguistic-hide-and-seek ” to persuade the reader that “ Different =Inferior ” by couching assertions that “ different DOES equal inferior ” in the passive voice, e.g., “ Third, there is the basilect. As the generally recognized substandard form of any speech variety . . .” (p. 80). Recognized by whom ? On what criteria ? His failure to prove this point does not mean the hypothesis is not worth considering, or that it is not valid. Perhaps it merely http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Australian Journal of Education SAGE

Book Review: Melbourne Studies in Education 1974

Australian Journal of Education , Volume 19 (2): 2 – Jun 1, 1975

Loading next page...
 
/lp/sage/book-review-melbourne-studies-in-education-1974-7mLMFY0I62

References (0)

References for this paper are not available at this time. We will be adding them shortly, thank you for your patience.

Publisher
SAGE
Copyright
© 1975 Australian Council for Educational Research
ISSN
0004-9441
eISSN
2050-5884
DOI
10.1177/000494417501900212
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

BOOK REVIEWS to the other. Instead by definition and by the co-occurrence of two phenomena, Nist concludes that a cause-effect relationship exists. Logically this is a *cult position to sustain. Secondly, he attempts to justify his argument by rather tenuous means. In one instance he refers to two characters from novels (Babbitt and Grapes of Wrath) as proof that inferiority and use of basilect are causally related. He also quotes liberally from other authorities to support his work (especially Bernstein), but never questions the validity of their work. If a heavy-weight in the field has research evidence which opposes his thesis (e.g. Labov), he puts an alternate interpretation on the data. As well, he constantly uses a kind of ‘‘ linguistic-hide-and-seek ” to persuade the reader that “ Different =Inferior ” by couching assertions that “ different DOES equal inferior ” in the passive voice, e.g., “ Third, there is the basilect. As the generally recognized substandard form of any speech variety . . .” (p. 80). Recognized by whom ? On what criteria ? His failure to prove this point does not mean the hypothesis is not worth considering, or that it is not valid. Perhaps it merely

Journal

Australian Journal of EducationSAGE

Published: Jun 1, 1975

There are no references for this article.