Interdisciplinarity Jan Blommaert

Disciplines and perspectives President of LSA, AAA, AAAL, American Folklore Association, dean of Education at Pennsylvania President of LSA, AAA, AAAL, American Folklore Association, dean of Education at Pennsylvania Disciplines: anthropology, linguistics, folklore, education, narrative studies, history of science Disciplines: anthropology, linguistics, folklore, education, narrative studies, history of science At the cradle of: modern ethnography, sociolinguistics, new language pedagogy (communicative method), new folklore At the cradle of: modern ethnography, sociolinguistics, new language pedagogy (communicative method), new folklore Ethnopoetics: structuralism, ethnography, philology Ethnopoetics: structuralism, ethnography, philology

Hymes introduces a new way of ‘doing’ science Hymes introduces a new way of ‘doing’ science Characterised by intrinsic interdisciplinarity Characterised by intrinsic interdisciplinarity Held together by a perspective Held together by a perspective Topics: Topics: –Ethnography as a theory and perspective –Theoretical and practical problems converge –Comparison: Bourdieu and Wallerstein

1. Ethnography as theory and perspective Distinction between: –The way we do things: disciplines –The way we think things: perspectives Hymes crosses disciplines because of a unified functional perspective that has anthropological roots

Anthropological roots: Anthropological roots: –Anthropology = study of Man –Every anthropological issue needs to tell us something about Man –The study of language needs to tell us something about the function of language for Man (social, cultural) –Hence, the study of language needs a general component: human society –We study language-in-society as a functional issue –This is an ontology for ethnography

Ethnography Ethnography –Makes this study an empirical science –By looking at concrete cases comprehensively –In such a way that general conclusions can be drawn from concrete cases (= typical empiricist position) –Ethnography =  ‘descriptive theory’  ‘A theory which is valid for the case’  An empirical linguistics that answers the non- empirical stance of Chomsky

Empirical, comprehensive, generalisable approach Empirical, comprehensive, generalisable approach Aimed at functional answers about language-in-society Aimed at functional answers about language-in-society What does language do for actual people in their actual lives? What does language do for actual people in their actual lives? This perspective allowed multiple disciplinary approaches (‘pragmatics’) This perspective allowed multiple disciplinary approaches (‘pragmatics’)

But: But: “linguistics and anthropology [should] revise their conventional scope and methodology, so that matters now let fall between them are seen as indispensable to both.” (1971: 32) “linguistics and anthropology [should] revise their conventional scope and methodology, so that matters now let fall between them are seen as indispensable to both.” (1971: 32) “No amount of combination of disciplines as presently constituted (…) asking just the questions each normally asks, will serve.” (1971: 50) “No amount of combination of disciplines as presently constituted (…) asking just the questions each normally asks, will serve.” (1971: 50)

The unified perspective will force all disciplines to revise their ‘ways of doing things’, because the ‘ways of thinking things’ have changed. The unified perspective will force all disciplines to revise their ‘ways of doing things’, because the ‘ways of thinking things’ have changed. > intrinstic interdisciplinarity > intrinstic interdisciplinarity The reason: point 2 The reason: point 2

2. Theoretical and practical problems converge Point of departure for ethnography = practical problems Point of departure for ethnography = practical problems –Language in education (minorities) –Multilingualism in society –Linguistic/narrative inequality –Disappearing/misrecognized traditions Problems are not ‘invented’, they are ‘out there’ and need to be addressed fully (ethnographic stance) Problems are not ‘invented’, they are ‘out there’ and need to be addressed fully (ethnographic stance)

Any social problem requires Any social problem requires –A clear perspective on the problem (what is the problem) – an ontology –An eclectic interdisciplinary attitude towards solving it - methodologies The reason: the comprehensiveness of analysis The reason: the comprehensiveness of analysis –Complexity is a rule and cannot be reduced –Micro, meso, macro dimensions always there –Different adapted modes of work required

E.g.: describing any speech event requires E.g.: describing any speech event requires –A description of the participants, sequence, immediate context (micro) –Against the background of the repertoires involved (meso) –Set in the wider sociocultural (and political, historical) context (macro) Ethnography studies big things through a comprehensive analysis of small things

The practical bias also makes ethnography a critical science The practical bias also makes ethnography a critical science Engaging with social structure Engaging with social structure From the angle of social structure as a problem for real people in real lives From the angle of social structure as a problem for real people in real lives –Centrality of ‘voice’ –School ethnography –ethnopoetics

Comparison Recap: Hymes advocates ethnography as a functional, problem-oriented perspective which triggers intrinsic interdisciplinarity Recap: Hymes advocates ethnography as a functional, problem-oriented perspective which triggers intrinsic interdisciplinarity In the 1970s, several other scholars advocated similar programmatic forms of interdisciplinarity In the 1970s, several other scholars advocated similar programmatic forms of interdisciplinarity –Bourdieu –Wallerstein

Background: Background: –Increasing codification and institutionalization of ‘disciplines’ in universities and funding –In social sciences: narrowing of scope due to specialization –Effect: many salient topics did not ‘fit’ in specific disciplines –Social sciences reduced the complexity of social process

Bourdieu Starts from the multi-leyered nature of society Starts from the multi-leyered nature of society –‘big’ structures, e.g. social class – historicity, slow processes of transformation –‘small’ structures of everyday life – contingent on context and immediate experience Sees the subject as the nexus of big and small: ‘habitus’ Sees the subject as the nexus of big and small: ‘habitus’ Develops a science that can ‘objectify’ this nexus by attending to its different aspects Develops a science that can ‘objectify’ this nexus by attending to its different aspects

Bourdieu’s background Bourdieu’s background –Marxism –Structuralist anthropology (Lévi-Strauss) Problems: Problems: –Marxism pre-defines human (class) experience: non- empirical –Structuralism avoids & elides human contingent experience Solution: Solution: –An ethnography-based ‘reflexive sociology’ –That encapsulates micro, meso and macro –And is methodologically eclectic

Wallerstein Unthinking Social Science Unthinking Social Science ‘Historical social science’ (World-Systems Analysis) is a unified social science ‘Historical social science’ (World-Systems Analysis) is a unified social science That attends to the micro, meso and macro aspects of historical process That attends to the micro, meso and macro aspects of historical process As a matter of theoretical adequacy As a matter of theoretical adequacy And as a reaction against Modernist ‘carving up’ of social sciences And as a reaction against Modernist ‘carving up’ of social sciences

Central problem: how did modern capitalism develop? Central problem: how did modern capitalism develop? This problem is complex This problem is complex –Historical –Political –Economic –Geographical –Anthropological

Addressing this problem requires a perspective on the coherence of all these aspects Addressing this problem requires a perspective on the coherence of all these aspects And a flexible framework that allows insights from all these angles And a flexible framework that allows insights from all these angles

All three of them Accept complexity as the challenge for social science Accept complexity as the challenge for social science Start from concrete problems, which they define as complex Start from concrete problems, which they define as complex Develop a unified perspective on this problem Develop a unified perspective on this problem And allow eclecticism in solving it And allow eclecticism in solving it A model of doing social science A model of doing social science