Lang. Soc. 17, 263-304.

Printed in the United States of America

REVIEWS

DIMENSIONS OF SOCIOLINGUISTICS

PAUL ATKINSON, Language, structure, and reproduction: An introduction to the

sociology of Basil Bernstein. London: Methuen, 1985. Pp. 216.
With what appears to be a rare case of academic generosity, Atkinson makes
clear in the introduction that the governing impulse of his book is to portray Basil
Bernstein as a "creative author struggling to find a voice for complex and often
elusive ideas" (16). On the surface, this might appear a rather straightforward
task, were it not for the fact that, in Atkinson's view, there really exist two
distinct Bernsteins: the historical author of pathfinding, iconoclastic, and unified
works in the discourse of linguistics, sociology, and education; and the ill-fated
straw man who stalks the pages of numerous texts, journals, and bibliographies
as part of secondary interpretations of the scholar himself, most of which are the
creation of "misleadingly crude and mistaken views on Bernstein" (16). Such
mistaken views, considered by Atkinson to be irredeemably heretical, hold Bern-
stein's work to be fragmentary, idiosyncratic, and theoretically misguided.
Playing the dual role of academic avenger and apologist, Atkinson could not
be more unambiguously inspired: to rescue Bernstein's work from the mytholog-
ical offspring of "taken-for-granted stereotypical views" of Bernstein in the
hope that the authenticity and integrity of the "real" Bernstein will be salvaged
"from the accretions of repeated readings and misreadings" (18).
At times appearing overly distressed and discomfited by longstanding distor-
tions and misunderstandings surrounding Bernstein's work, Atkinson undertakes
the task of attempting to reverse any serious damage that critics might have
managed to effect in their often savage assaults on the work of this unarguably
brilliant, yet oftentimes puzzling and inconsistent theorist.
While engaging such a challenge, Atkinson leaves few dimensions of Bern-
stein's innovative corpus unanalyzed. For instance, he deftly examines how
Bernstein's early work in linguistics came to constitute the foundations of a
sociological project startling in its magnitude, scope, and implications for educa-
tional reform. From his initial articulations of "public" and "formal" language
and his subsequent reformulation of these categories in terms of codes, we follow
closely Bernstein's examination of social relations and rituals in schools, his
exploration of pedagogic discourse, his coding of power, and his analysis of the
production, distribution, and consumption of pedagogic texts. Atkinson treats
this conceptual journey not so much as a litany of theoretical accomplishments,

© 1988 Cambridge University Press 0047-4045/88 $5.00 + .00

263
 REVIEWS

but as an extended commentary on the development of Bernstein's sociological

imagination.
While acknowledging Bernstein's indebtedness to such theoretical progenitors
as Whorf, Mead, Malinowski, Vygotsky, and more importantly Durkheim,
Atkinson presents Bernstein as a theoretical luminary who has been able to forge
connections between language and social stratification which previously had
been vitiatingly inadequate within the provenance of sociological theory.
Overall, Atkinson does an exemplary job of explicating how the major strands
of Bernstein's work actually knit together into a coherent pattern, with the
Gallostructuralist school of Durkheimian sociology providing the intellectual
loom. Atkinson clearly wants to downplay any theoretical attachment on Bern-
stein's part to the more politically conservative Anglo-American exponents of
Durkheimian sociology who work within the structural-functionalist tradition.
Such an emphasis helps Atkinson to present Bernstein's work in the best possible
light in two ways: First, by noting Bernstein's allegiance to Gallostructuralism,
Atkinson is able to compare Bernstein's work on classification and framing
favorably to Foucault's work on discursive formations. Second, Atkinson is able
to dismantle the myth that Bernstein is a closet deficit theorist by highlighting his
unyielding critical concern with the question of who owns and manages the
means of material production and who owns and manipulates the means of
symbolic and cultural production.
It comes as little surprise that, in the course of his painstaking defense of
Bernstein's work on language codes, Atkinson discredits antagonistic readings of
Bernstein - such as those by Rosen and Labov - by claiming such critics have
abstracted Bernstein's work from the Gallostructuralist context within which it
must be judged. Further criticisms of Bernstein are accordingly dismissed on the
grounds that they constitute problems of intertextuality, or an incommen-
surability of theoretical frameworks. Atkinson goes so far as to suggest that
many misconceptions of Bernstein are the product of an intellectual tradition that
privileges the "speaking subject." While I believe Atkinson is justified in argu-
ing that Bernstein's work must be understood in its post-Durkheimian context as
distinct from a backcloth of empirical sociolinguistics, I feel that Atkinson often
overstates his case by dismissing important areas in which linguistic theory and
Bernstein's sociological formulations do, in fact, overlap.
While a portrait emerges of Bernstein as a precocious scholar who appears at
times immune to criticism, Atkinson allows his own penitential inflexibility to
occasionally lapse, providing us with some scattered instances of underdevelop-
ment in Bernstein's work. This does not in any way prevent Language, struc-
ture, and reproduction from constituting an overwhelmingly favorable reading
of Bernstein's sociology, as filtered through Bernstein's own critical categories.
It is, in essence, a Bernsteinian reading of Bernstein.
That Atkinson chooses to elaborate mainly on the strong points of Bernstein's
work is not without its problems. For instance, while Atkinson's book is quite
telling in its discussion of power, one wishes that the author would speak more
264
 REVIEWS

insistently about the emancipatory political project inherent in much of Bern-

stein's sociology. And one certainly wishes that Atkinson could have written
with more deliberation and fervor regarding Bernstein's considerable influence
on the development of critical pedagogy both in Britain and in North America.
While Atkinson admirably refuses the role of Bernstein's intellectual curator,
preferring instead to serve as a well-informed interpreter and apologist, it is
regrettable that more is not made of Bernstein's theoretical commensurability
with the work of Lacan, Foucault, Bourdieu, Levi-Strauss, Derrida, and post-
Althusserian discourse theorists. A sharper delineation (as distinct from Atkin-
son's vague adumbration) is needed regarding the congruences, parallels, and
compatibilities of Bernsteinian concepts and new poststructuralist or "post-
modern" theoretical formulations.
Atkinson's discussion of Bernstein's contribution to understanding how sub-
jectivities are constructed through the classification of culture by means of the
relatively autonomous status of codes (which are, in turn, mediated by social
structure and the division of labor) needs to be more fully elaborated. For
instance, a more deliberate attempt could have been made to link Bernstein's
structuralist advances to poststructuralist articulations of ideology as signifying
practices. There is, in addition, a potentially problematic reading of Bernstein's
totalizing view of domination which is left inadequately addressed. For instance,
if cultural codes unremittingly position individuals within an ideological matrix
of total domination, how can Bernstein's account for the plurality of subject
positions capable of contesting received texts?
All in all, these criticisms should not diminish the merits of this important and
timely book. Survey and synthesis are not easily and effectively accomplished,
yet Atkinson's ability to do both is commendable and instructive. Bernstein's
vast contributions to sociology in many of its variants are far too important to be
left essentially misunderstood either by those who would carelessly recontex-
tualize them for assimilation into other disciplines or by those who would under-
mine their importance in the field of sociology itself. It is to Atkinson's credit
that his book serves as such a convincing corrective to many of the conceptual
distortions surrounding interpretations of Bernstein's work.
In sum, Language, structure, and reproduction constitutes an illuminating
commentary on the work of a landmark social theorist. In his faithful rendering
and exposition of Bernstein's work, Atkinson has provided sociologists and
linguists alike with a valuable service. Admirers of Bernstein's work will wel-
come this short but wonderfully intelligent book. Moreover, those interested in
contemporary social theory will find this book a worthwhile and sometimes
fascinating summary of major sociological trends.

Reviewed by PETER MCLAREN

Department of Educational Leadership
Miami University
(Received 23 February 1987) Oxford, OH 45056
265