This week we go back to the intro of Bernstein and see why he wrote The New Constellation. Or I guess I should say compiled it from many papers and articles of his own. I think this intro helps me to understand what I was reading in Chapter 1 better. As a “response” of sorts to post-modernism, Chapter 1 seems to make more sense. I guess I began reading it as a start to laying out a grand idea of sorts (like many textbooks do). But now the tone makes more sense. I understand a bit where Bernstien is discussing his “ethical-political” expression. I think I have to de-program my mind from a current American understanding of these words (a poluted definition, that is) in order to fully understand the angle that Bernstien is coming from. That will probably unravel as we read through the book.

Habermas…. it seems to me that he is just giving a very in-depth explanation of grade school communication and grammar lessons. Not that this is bad (just look at Facebook to see how people need to learn these lessons again) – it just seems to be a bit difficult for me to focus in on what he is saying. My mind keeps wandering to different (better) lessons I went through growing up to learn these concepts. I guess all of that schooling did stick to some degree.  He basically says that for successful communication, both the speaker and hearer must agree that their sentences are justified. What I am having trouble understanding is how he brings this all together into his model of linguistic communication. I understand many of the parts, but sometimes his reasoning for why he goes into such detail over each part is a bit elusive to me.

The articles that we read were much easier to understand. I am interested to know if the debate between Clark and Kozma is still continuing to this day. I know people that still take on a basic attitude that Clark proposed, so I am guessing that is does. The article by Driscoll is a good summary article that will be a handy reference for the future. I think to some degree I understand the difference between the various research paradigms, but of course will need to more experience with both of them in order to fully grasp the true differences between them. I probably have the most experience with meta-analysis as that is the main method used in many studies I have read up until now.