The Language of Law School This page intentionally left blank

Rites of Passage
, 11.
49. P. Garrett and Baquedano-Lopez, “Language Socialization”; see also Brenneis
and Macaulay, “Learning Language.” In addition to issues of morality and personhood,
P. Garrett and Baquedano-Lopez point to both narrative and linguistic ideology as im-
portant foci for ongoing research on linguistic socialization. As we will see, new forms
of narrative and mediating linguistic ideology are indeed important parts of the linguistic
socialization process in law schools.
50. Bourdieu and Passeron, 
Reproduction
.
51. See, e.g., Anyon, “Social Class and School Knowledge”; Collins, “Socialization to
Text” and “Differential Treatment and Reading Instruction”; J. Gee, “Narrativization of
Experience”; Heath, 
Ways with Words
 and “Toward an Ethnohistory of Writing”; Mehan,
Learning Lessons
; Michaels, “Narrative Presentations”; Philips, “Participant Structures and
Communicative Competence”; Wortham and Rymes, 
Linguistic Anthropology of Education
.
Wortham points to several basic tenets that have anchored the linguistic anthropology of
education: connection of micro- and macrolevel processes, examining linguistic patterns
in use, and a focus on the speaker’s point of view. Wortham, “Introduction.” In addition,
he would add four more central foci that he sees as promising avenues for moving the field
forward: creativity, indexicality, regimentation, and poetic structure. These concepts ob-
viously fit within the Silversteinian framework outlined earlier.
52. See, e.g., Goody and Watt, “Consequences of Literacy”; Olson, “Utterance to Text.”
53. See, e.g., Gough, “Implications of Literacy”; Scinto, “Text, Schooling, and the
Growth of Mind”; Scribner and Cole, “Literacy without Schooling”; Street,
 Literacy in
Theory and Practice
.
54. Scribner and Cole, “Literacy without Schooling.”
55. Street, 
Literacy in Theory and Practice
; see also Baton, “Literacy in Everyday
Contexts.”
56. Collins, “Literacy and Literacies,” 75–76 (emphasis added).
57. In a similar vein, work following in the tradition of L. S. Vygotsky focusing on
linguistic mediation in children’s development has demonstrated that the same task, using
the same combination of writing and speech, may be absorbed differently depending on
the culturally constructed perceptions and approaches people bring to it. See Saxe et al.,
“The Social Organization of Early Number Development;” Wertsch,
 Vygotsky and the So-
cial Foundation of Mind
 and 
Culture, Communication, and Cognition
.
58. Collins and Blot, 
Literacy and Literacies
, xviii; Heath, 
Ways with Words
.
59. See, e.g., Cazden, 
Classroom Discourse
; Cook-Gumperz, “Schooling and Literacy”;
J. Gee, “The Narrativization of Experience in the Oral Style”; Mehan, 
Learning Lessons
;
Notes to Pages 22–24
233

---

Michaels, “Narrative Presentations”; Philips, “Participant Structures and Communicative
Competence.” Philips’s early study underlined the crucial role of language in education;
she demonstrated the serious misunderstandings that followed when Anglo teachers failed
to understand Native American children’s norms for talk. Philips, 
The Invisible Culture
.
60. See Anyon, “Social Class and School Knowledge”; J. Gee, “The Narrativization
of Experience in the Oral Style”; Michaels, “Sharing Time”; and sources cited in notes 55
and 61–63.
61. James Gee concludes that the student’s narrative makes sense of her world:
She works out the problems in a quite sophisticated way, in terms of a conflict of
natures (the Greeks, an oral society that ultimately gave birth to Western literacy,
would have understood this perfectly). She carries it out with a full utilization of
prosody, time and sequence markers, an intricate aspect system (actional, habitual,
iterative), and parallelism and repetition, and as suspenseful thematic development.
(J. Gee, “The Narrativization of Experience in the Oral Style,” 24)
62. See Collins, “Language and Class in Minority Education”; Collins and Michaels,
“Speaking and Writing”; Heath,