Communities of practice in sociolinguistics
Communities of practice in sociolinguistics
复制标题
社会语言学实践社区
DOI：
10.1111/j.1360-6441.2005.00307.x
复制
发表时间：
2005
影响因子：
1.9
通讯作者：
E. Wenger
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
P. Eckert;E. Wenger
戴维斯的文章（本期第 557 页）有一个重要的基本前提^，即我们需要总体上理解权力在语言实践中的作用，特别是在变化和变化的传播中的作用。我们同意这个前提，并同意实践社区是研究权力如何在日常语言实践中组织和行使的良好场所。然而，我们担心她的方法可能会产生误导。戴维斯认为，层次结构和接受度是框架中缺失的一对概念。如果她所说的等级制度意味着任何形式的权力结构，那么它就已经存在于理论中了。根据定义，实践社区就是这样一种权力结构，我们将很快阐明。将其称为等级制度可能会引起人们对权力问题中心性的关注，但它并没有在概念上增加任何内容。如果正如我们怀疑的那样，她的意思是更具体的东西，即根据职位赋予权力的分层结构，那么我们认为这是对实践共同体中权力问题的过度简单化，并且不应该将其纳入理论中。我们认为，人们必须非常小心地构建理论。将层级和接受等两个很大程度上线性和单向的概念配对，有几个我们认为有问题的相关含义：• 存在一种根据位置授予权力的结构• 期望人们可以通过阐明结构本身的性质来解释（并实际上预测）该结构向谁授予权力• 具有明确定义的顶部和底部的线性分层假设• 合法性对于底层人员来说是一个问题的建议 上层人士可以自由选择接受或不接受下层人士。
The Davies article (page 557 of this issue) has an important underlying premise^ that we need to understand the role of power generally in linguistic practice, and specifically in variation and the spread of change. We agree with this premise, and concur that communities of practice are a good locus for studying how power is organized and exercised in day-to-day linguistic practice. However, we are concerned that her approach might be misleading. Davies argues that hierarchy and acceptance are a pair of concepts that are missing from the framework. If by hierarchy she means any power structure whatever form it takes, then it is already in the theory. A community of practice by definition is such a power structure in a way that we will articulate shortly. Calling it a hierarchy may draw attention to the centrality of power issues, but it does not add anything conceptually. If as we suspect she means something much more specific, a stratified structure that confers power according to positions, then we believe that it is an oversimplification of the question of power in communities of practice and that it should not be built into the theory. We will argue that one has to be very careful about what one builds into a theory. Pairing two largely linear and uni-directional concepts such as hierarchy and acceptance has several related connotations that we find problematic:• the existence of a structure that confers power according to position• the expectation that one can explain (and indeed predict) to whom the structure confers power by articulating the nature of the structure itself• an assumption of linear stratification with a well-defined top and bottom• a suggestion that legitimacy is an issue for those at the bottom and that those on top have free choice to accept or not those at the bottom.