социология языка, sociology of language, системно-функциональная лингвистика, systemic functional linguistics, социология управления, sociology of management, дискурс-анализ, CDA, теория кодов легитимации, LCT, Vygotsky, социально-культурная теория Выготского, социальная теория управляемости, social theory of manageability

The Translaton of “Legitimation Code”: What meaning of Code (I, II or III) is the main? updated by Karl Maton’s answer

**Karl Maton responded to this question 03.03.2016 (see below)

Let’s see “Knowledge & Knowers”. LCT and Knowledge & Knowers. before Table 1.1, Underline is my

Multidimensional

“LCT includes a multidimensional conceptual toolkit for analysing actors’
dispositions, practices and contexts, within a variegated range of fields. For LCT, society comprises an array of relatively autonomous social universes that are neither wholly separate from nor reducible to others. Each field has its own distinctive ways of working, resources and forms of status that are specific in terms of their realizations yet similar in terms of their underlying generative principles. Within each field, actors cooperate and struggle to maximize their relational positions in its hierarchies by striving both to attain more of that which defines achievement and to shape what is defined as achievement to match their own practices. LCT highlights that actors’ practices thereby represent competing claims to legitimacy, whether explicit or tacit (such as routinized ways of working) – they are languages of legitimation (Chapter 2).”

Then there are some relevant sentences:

“(1) These strategies to shape the ‘rules of the game’ are themselves shaped by relations between actors’ dispositions (which are in turn shaped by previous and ongoing experiences in fields) and the current structure of the field.

(2)The organizing principles of dispositions, practices and fields are conceptualized by LCT in terms of legitimation codes, each ‘code’ representing in effect a currency proposed by actors as the ruler of the field.

(3)Underlying the structuring of fields, and acting as a kind of exchange rate mechanism among currencies, is the Legitimation Device (Chapter 3).

(4)Whoever controls this ‘device’ establishes specific legitimation codes as dominant and so defines what is legitimate, shaping the social field of practice as a dynamic field of possibilities.

(5)To analyse legitimation codes is thus to explore what is possible for whom, when, where and how, and who is able to define these possibilities, when, where and how.”

The questions:

I. Do Codes legitimize something?   Maybe, yes – sentences (2),  it has value as a currency. However, this is not Durkheim, again we see the‘rules of the game’ (1) and codes do not predominate over situation and actors as independent social facts

II. Is something legitimizing through codes?  Maybe, yes, e.g. power – sentences (4),  but  the codes here are passive, something is happening through them

III. Do Codes indicate there is a legitimation?  Maybe, yes, e.g. (3), (4), (5)

What meaning of Code (I, II or III) is the main?

PS It is not a question of theory. Theory can have three meanings together, but it is a question of translation, because I need to prefer only one word.

PS1. Karl Maton responded to this question 03.03.2016:

The questions:
I. Do Codes legitimize something? Maybe, yes – sentences (2), it has
value as a currency. However, this is not Durkheim, again we see the‘rules
of the game’ (1) and codes do not predominate over situation and actors as
independent social facts

 Legitimation codes do legitimate things and people and behaviour etc
etc, yes.

II. Is something legitimizing through codes? Maybe, yes, e.g. power –
sentences (4), but the codes here are passive, something is happening
through them

 I use ‘legitimate’ and ‘legitimating’ rather than ‘legitimize’. Yes,
something is legitimated through legitimation codes.

III. Do Codes indicate there is a legitimation? Maybe, yes, e.g. (3),
(4), (5)
What meaning of Code (I, II or III) is the main?
PS It is not a question of theory. Theory can have three meanings
together, but it is a question of translation, because I need to prefer
only one word.

 Yes, ‘legitimation codes’ indicate there is a process of legitimating
happening.

So, yes, the term ‘legitimation codes’ includes within itself all three
notions you have asked: something is being legitimated, something is doing
that legitimating, and there is a process of legitimation. But those are
the resonances of the name rather than a definition per se. Another
reason I chose ‘legitimation’ as a word (see chapter 2 of K&K) is because
it suggests the possibility that what is being legitimated may in fact be
legitimate, that there might possibly be a real basis for that
legitimation, that yes it might be arbitrary but also it might not be
arbitrary, there may be an ontological reason for something being seen as
legitimate. It hints at issues of ontology and epistemology.

Thanks to Karl Maton

3 comments:

  1. Also, from Maton (2010, p36):

    “When actors make knowledge claims or engage in practices they are at the same time making a claim of legitimacy for those practices. Knowledge claims and practices can thus be understood as languages of legitimation: claims made by actors for carving out and maintaining intellectual and institutional spaces within education. … By analysing the structuring principles underlying its language of legitimation, I outline a generative conceptualization of legitimation codes.”

    (emphasis in original.)

    Maton, K. (2010) “Analysing Knowledge Claims and Practices: Languages of Legitimation” in Maton & Moore, K (eds) “Social Realism, Knowledge and the Sociology of Education”.

    Is there a standard Russian translation of Basil Bernstein’s “language code”? The “code” in legitimation code is a “code” in the same sense.

    Note that elsewhere (e.g. the LCT website) the phrase “code of legitimation” is also used.

    I think code is used here in the sense of “code of conduct” or “code of practice”: a set of norms (which may be implicit) which govern the language and other professional behaviour of participants in the field.

    From my Big Russian-English dictionary, I think Норм fits the bill best, but Кодекс would probably please the LCT people more. What are your candidate Russian terms?

    Ivan

    1. Dear Ivan!
      I think that your comment may help.

      If we translate “Legitimation Code”, there are three variants:

      Легитимирующий код – the meaning I
      Легитимационный код – the meaning II
      Код легитимации – the meaning III

      However, if we translate “Code of Legitimation”, we have only one meaning
      Код легитимации – the meaning III

      Then it is necessary to translate the name of the theory – Теория кодов легитимации (literally – Theory of Codes of Legitimation)

Leave a Reply

Войти с помощью: 
Персональный мультилингвальный блог, посвященный междисциплинарному взаимодействию социологии, лингвистики и менеджмента. Блог содержит информацию о научных мероприятиях и междисциплинарных дискуссиях. При цитировании активная гиперссылка обязательна. ©Mariia Rubtcova, 2009-2016