Re: [Critical-Realism] Neologisms in Critical Realism

[Karl Maton <matonianuk@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

It's pretty early on, Ruth ... I'll have to dig it out.  In a couple of 
weeks, when I'm back to the office. 

Bourdieu was often attacked for his style of writing.  One gets used to 
it pretty quickly.  Worse than it being a problem for understanding is 
the way it seems to sometimes infect others who read him - they write 
this fluent Bourdieuese style prose, but with far less insight.  They 
got the style but not the content. 

Bernstein was attacked for his style too.  He wrote as if paying for the 
paper and ink himself - highly condensed and suggestive. 

All the B's then.  At one point when working on my thesis, having read 
Boudon, I thought I was becoming a Bee collector. 

Cheers
Karl

Ruth Groff wrote:

>Hi Karl,
>
>Can you give me a page reference for that?  Or even chapter?  I'd love to see it.  The Bourdieu reference I mean.
>
>Thanks!
>Ruth
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: critical-realism-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx on behalf of Karl Maton
>Sent: Sun 02-Dec-07 6:30 AM
>To: Continuation of the Spoon Bhaskar List
>Subject: Re: [Critical-Realism] Neologisms in Critical Realism
> 
>Hiya,
>
>I'd suggest the system has relatively strong internal grammar, but 
>relatively weaker external grammar at times.  It tends to be 
>characterised by weaker semantic gravity, though the use of conceptual 
>frameworks in practical social theorising that are compatible with its 
>tenets enables it to reach down again to various contexts.  Of course, 
>we're talking here about a long, much developed and elaborated system of 
>ideas that have then been used by others in a variety of contexts, so it 
>does vary across the whole corpus. 
>
>But I wonder whether it's this weaker semantic gravity that causes some 
>to experience a certain light-headedness, a certain feeling of being far 
>from the ground of what they would normally study (I'm thinking here of 
>non-philosophers). 
>
>On Bourdieu - as an aside - there's a magnificent sentence in Homo 
>Academicus, comprising numerous subclauses, of over 70 words in length 
>that effectively says: 'If you want academic status, write in obscure, 
>convoluted ways'.  I imagine he had his tongue firmly in cheek with that 
>one. 
>
>Karl
>
>
>Mervyn Hartwig wrote:
>
>  
>
>>Hi Karl
>>
>>Interesting.
>>
>>For what it's worth, I'd say the Bhaskarian system has strong internal and
>>external grammars and balanced semantic gravity - applicability to a wide
>>range of contexts but in the last resort historically relative...
>>
>>Primal squeezes to all,
>>
>>Mervyn 
>>
>>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: critical-realism-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>[mailto:critical-realism-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Karl
>>Maton
>>Sent: 01 December 2007 02:53
>>To: Continuation of the Spoon Bhaskar List
>>Subject: Re: [Critical-Realism] Neologisms in Critical Realism
>>
>>Hi all,
>>
>>Just a quick one, as at conference, but surely the question isn't 
>>whether concepts are neologisms but their structure.  For anyone 
>>interested in the form taken by concepts, and the work they do in 
>>theories, there's some work in systemic functional linguistics that 
>>looks at the role of what they call 'grammatical metaphor' in the 
>>technicalisation of a discourse, such as in science.  And there's work 
>>in the sociology of knowledge developing Bernstein that explores 
>>concepts in terms of what he termed their 'internal grammar' (degree of 
>>interrelatedness) and 'external grammar' (relation to correlates beyond 
>>the theory), as well as what's known as their 'semantic gravity' (or 
>>degree of context-dependency).  Many theories in sociology, for example, 
>>have a strong internal grammar but weak external grammar, making it 
>>problematic when one tries to use them in practical social research.  
>>They can often either exhibit overly strong semantic gravity, locking 
>>them into a context such as a particular object of study, or overly weak 
>>gravity, making them unrelated to anything beyond the theory.  
>>
>>Whether something is a neologism or not is, I'd suggest, not the central 
>>issue, though it may be initially daunting to a reader.  .... of course, 
>>another issue that I think is jumbled up in this debate is the question 
>>of the style of writing deployed. 
>>
>> 
>>
>>    
>>
>
>  
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>_______________________________________________
>Critical-Realism mailing list
>Critical-Realism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/critical-realism
>  
>

-- 
With best wishes,

Karl

----

Dr Karl Maton
Department of Sociology & Social Policy
Faculty of Arts, University of Sydney

http://www.KarlMaton.com

Editorial Board, Journal of Critical Realism
General Secretary, Australasian Association for Critical Realism

'This is your life, and it's ending one minute at a time'

_______________________________________________
Critical-Realism mailing list
Critical-Realism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/critical-realism