Introduction

The argument that discourse analysis should become the central component in a reworked social psychology represents one facet of a recent growth of interest in more fine-grained studies of language in the classroom. Despite my critical comments (mainly in Chapter 2) about the value of micro-level enquiry, there is little doubt that the new emphases here have allied themselves with a rejection of 'deficit' principles and the disembodied and artificial speech analyses associated with them (see Atkinson, 1985; Edwards & Mercer, 1986; Mercer & Edwards, 1981; Robinson, 1985). In one interesting analysis, Mehan (1984) suggested that classroom language may be of sufficient specificity to constitute a 'cultural code' in itself, one that must be mastered for school success. On the basis of what I have already discussed here, we could add a corollary: disadvantage may be understood as arising in part from differential mastery of this subtle and unarticulated style that combines both knowledge and its appropriate display.

One important advantage of this perspective is that it involves teachers as well as pupils. Mehan describes a study in which differences in language styles between lower-status children and their teachers were assessed and, following this, the latter were assisted in making some adaptations to the children's language patterns. With teachers phrasing their questions in the children's maternal style, their passivity and 'non-verbality' decreased; and, with the establishment of an enhanced participation, children could be gradually introduced to more standard usage. This type of educational adaptability is a long way removed from programmed intervention based upon assumptions of linguistic deprivation. While making a general argument similar to Mehan's, Young (1983) noted that such alterations in teacher practice do not always come easy. They typically have to combat longstanding traditions based more upon the maintenance of classroom dominance and control than upon the optimization of learning.

Setting aside conceptions and assessments of intelligence, debates about whether or not some language varieties are inferior to others have provided the most interesting sub-plot within the larger story of disadvantage.