Complexity, Emergence, and Causality

in Applied Linguistics: A Social Realist

Viewpoint Jérémie Bouchard
Visit to download the full and correct content document:
https://ebookmass.com/product/complexity-emergence-and-causality-in-applied-lingui
stics-a-social-realist-viewpoint-jeremie-bouchard/
More products digital (pdf, epub, mobi) instant
download maybe you interests ...

When Things Grow Many: Complexity, Universality and

Emergence in Nature 1st Edition Lawrence S. Schulman

https://ebookmass.com/product/when-things-grow-many-complexity-
universality-and-emergence-in-nature-1st-edition-lawrence-s-
schulman/

Teaching and Researching: Motivation (2nd Edition)

(Applied Linguistics in Action) Zoltán Dörnyei

https://ebookmass.com/product/teaching-and-researching-
motivation-2nd-edition-applied-linguistics-in-action-zoltan-
dornyei/

Social Linguistics and Literacies: Ideology in

Discourses 5th Edition, (Ebook PDF)

https://ebookmass.com/product/social-linguistics-and-literacies-
ideology-in-discourses-5th-edition-ebook-pdf/

Applied Linguistics and Language Teaching in the Neo-

Nationalist Era 1st Edition Kyle Mcintosh

https://ebookmass.com/product/applied-linguistics-and-language-
teaching-in-the-neo-nationalist-era-1st-edition-kyle-mcintosh/
Causality and Causal Explanation in Aristotle Nathanael
Stein

https://ebookmass.com/product/causality-and-causal-explanation-
in-aristotle-nathanael-stein/

The Ritual Animal: Imitation and Cohesion in the

Evolution of Social Complexity Harvey Whitehouse

https://ebookmass.com/product/the-ritual-animal-imitation-and-
cohesion-in-the-evolution-of-social-complexity-harvey-whitehouse/

The Unstoppable Human Species, The Emergence of Homo

Sapiens in Prehistory John J. Shea

https://ebookmass.com/product/the-unstoppable-human-species-the-
emergence-of-homo-sapiens-in-prehistory-john-j-shea-2/

The Unstoppable Human Species: The Emergence of Homo

Sapiens in Prehistory John J. Shea

https://ebookmass.com/product/the-unstoppable-human-species-the-
emergence-of-homo-sapiens-in-prehistory-john-j-shea/

The Palgrave Handbook of Applied Linguistics Research

Methodology 1st ed. Edition Aek Phakiti

https://ebookmass.com/product/the-palgrave-handbook-of-applied-
linguistics-research-methodology-1st-ed-edition-aek-phakiti/
Complexity, Emergence,
and Causality in
Applied Linguistics

Jérémie Bouchard
Complexity, Emergence, and Causality in Applied
Linguistics
 Jérémie Bouchard

Complexity,
Emergence,
and Causality
in Applied Linguistics
Jérémie Bouchard
Faculty of Humanities
Hokkai Gakuen University
Sapporo, Japan

ISBN 978-3-030-88031-6 ISBN 978-3-030-88032-3 (eBook)

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-88032-3

© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature
Switzerland AG 2021
This work is subject to copyright. All rights are solely and exclusively licensed by the Publisher,
whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation,
reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other
physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer
software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed.
The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this
publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt
from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use.
The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this
book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the
authors or the editors give a warranty, expressed or implied, with respect to the material contained
herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with
regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Cover image: Apple on table, by Jérémie Bouchard 2020 ©

This Palgrave Macmillan imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature Switzerland
AG
The registered company address is: Gewerbestrasse 11, 6330 Cham, Switzerland
 Foreword by Dr. Derek Layder

In this book Jérémie Bouchard makes a very sophisticated, not to say

masterly, critique of what he considers to be certain weaknesses of applied
linguistics scholarship—and particularly what he refers to as “succes-
sionism” and “interpretivism.” He does this from the point of view of
a particular strand of social theory summarized by the term “realism”
or “realist social theory.” In this respect I am not by any means an
expert in applied linguistics, but I do applaud the author’s approach
from a social analytical point of view, as well as from a concern with
the idea that theory should, in some crucial way, be tied to empirical
evidence and a commitment to practical research. While my own work
has recently been preoccupied with these latter issues, this is of course
my own preference. However, it seems to me that what Bouchard has
done in this book is exceptionally important in its own right. He concen-
trates on drawing attention to some of the advantages to be gained
by recognizing the relevance of this area of philosophically informed
social analysis to applied linguistics as a discipline in its own right.
But not only this, he also points out its relevance to the many other
disciplines (such as psychology, anthropology, ethnography, sociology)

v
vi Foreword by Dr. Derek Layder

and approaches (for instance, modernism, postmodernism, subjectivism,

objectivism, realism) to which it relates, both as a “contributor” and also
from which it may draw as potential sources of influence and infor-
mation. Bouchard certainly brings to bear a very intimate and expert
knowledge of the importance of issues deriving from various strands
of social analysis such as the problematic relation between agency and
structure (Chapter 3) “realist social theory” (Chapters 4 and 5), as well
as what he calls “complex dynamic system theory” (Chapters 6 and 7),
while throughout, he tackles the parallel, but often neglected and thorny,
issues of “emergence” and causality in social science. In an impressively
detailed manner, he spells out the relevance of all these things to applied
linguistics and while his treatment is always fair and even handed, he
does not hesitate to engage in forceful critique where it is required (see
for example, his remarks on so-called ‘posthumanism’, p. 51).
Apart from the aforementioned achievements, what struck me forcibly
about the book was its underlying emphasis on a creative and open-
minded approach to wider issues and problems in the human and social
sciences concerning the advancement and accumulation of valid, empir-
ically anchored, conceptual knowledge. Bouchard offers a much-needed
emphasis on an approach which I admire because it opens up creative
possibilities for the types of knowledge available to us as practitioners,
as well as for the research methods and strategies that we may use in
unearthing the empirical data that underpins this knowledge. I think
that such an approach certainly throws light on some general issues and
problems in social science which threaten to inhibit advance in these
disciplines, and also points to some practical solutions which would open
up forms of constructive cooperation between them. Thus, Bouchard
rightly underscores the significance of “inter” or “trans” disciplinarity. He
begins from the premise that each discipline (or ‘school’, or ‘approach’)
has something to offer all the others to which it is related, by pointing
out that this would indeed be more obvious and manifest if only such
disciplines could or would communicate more willingly with each other.
Of course, this would only be possible by casting-off some inherent
“defensiveness” from within disciplines—which I have often observed, or
come up against, in my own experience of attempting something similar.
I think this stems from the feeling that a transdisciplinary perspective
 Foreword by Dr. Derek Layder vii

somehow threatens the “internal” integrity or independence of certain

disciplines. In particular cases these may very well be salient problems
or issues which must be addressed. Bouchard does this sometimes, and
necessarily without reserve, but always with constructive enthusiasm.
Although overall the book is intellectually demanding, it more than
adequately repays the diligent reader, by being written in a fascinating,
perceptive and insightful manner. A very impressive and important read.

July 2021 Derek Layder

Emeritus Professor of Sociology
University of Leicester
Leicester, UK
 Foreword by Dr. Albert Weideman

The enduring neglect of many fundamental questions has been a disser-

vice to applied linguistics. Applied linguists have been unwilling to ask:
where is the discipline heading? Is the fate of those who enter the field
likely to be that of victim, or will it enable their development as informed
practitioners? Will ideology prevail, or will good sense triumph in the
solutions we design?
Even where we do consider such issues, there is the one that Bouchard
raises here: are we asking the right questions? If we change our perspec-
tive, will that not facilitate a richer, wider range of more appropriate
questions? Perhaps that might become possible, if we recognize not only
perceived things and objects as states of affairs, but also further dimen-
sions of reality: subjective relations, intentions, events, processes, beliefs,
styles, strategies, commitments, all of which need explanation, perhaps as
interacting “layers” or strata of our experience. And that last, experience,
surely goes beyond what is conventionally—but erroneously—thought
of as sensorily perceptible phenomena? How to “observe” such realities
is, as this book points out, determined by methodological stance, which
in turn is dependent on theory.

ix
x Foreword by Dr. Albert Weideman

No doubt, theories can be more useful or less so; more credible or less
so; more aligned with reality and experience or less so and we should not
be afraid to say so. Nor should we be prevented from considering what
we understand to be useful, credible or aligned with experience because
we are unwilling to doff those conventional blinkers, the paradigms that
we embrace, often uncritically.
The position set out in this book has extensions in and affinities
with a multiplicity of current perspectives in the field of applied linguis-
tics. In my own subfield, language assessment, there have been calls, for
example, for a “pragmatic realism” that promises to lead us out of the
philosophical and theoretical quagmire of the debate on what “valid-
ity” means for a language test. Sadly, that debate is still conducted on
the fringes, while the conventional interpretivist dogma prevails (“Mean-
ingful interpretation is validity”). This book provides a strong antidote
to such unexamined theoretical beliefs.
The difficulty of course is: how to begin? The response here seems to
be: through patient analysis. By exposing reductionism. By introducing
a novel view of the system, yielding a richer perspective, more in tune
with reality. By acknowledging that similar issues and observations in
our field can be critically unpacked from divergent philosophical frames,
and perhaps productively so. In a word: we have only begun to consider
the philosophical and theoretical biases that have inhibited rather than
promoted understanding what applied linguistics is, and what it should
be tackling.
 Foreword by Dr. Albert Weideman xi

Any discussion that promotes this is timely and necessary.

June 2021 Albert Weideman

Extraordinary Professor
in Language Education
University of the Western Cape
Cape Town
Republic of South Africa
Professor of Applied Language
Studies and Research Fellow
University of the Free State
Bloemfontein
Republic of South Africa
 Contents

1 Introduction 1
2 The Need for a Renewed Applied Linguistics 27
3 The Structure–Agency Debate and Its Relevance to AL 95
4 Social Realism and Social/Cultural Morphogenesis 177
5 Social Realism and Applied Linguistics 253
6 Complex Systems and Social/Cultural Morphogenesis 297
7 Complex Dynamic System Theory and Applied
Linguistics 373
8 Conclusion 429

Index 449

xiii
 List of Tables

Table 4.1 Bhaskar’s ontological domains (Bhaskar, 2008: 46) 189

Table 5.1 A realist approach to studying extensive reading 264

xv
 1
Introduction

Defining AL
This book aims to elucidate some of the theoretical bases upon which
research in applied linguistics (AL) is grounded, identify some of the
persistent problems at the level of theory, and offer possible solutions,
an endeavour guided by the hope of a renewed AL scholarship for the
future. Specifically, it looks at the contribution by and growing popu-
larity of CDST in AL scholarship, and attempts to situate this emerging
strand within a realist ontology.
Necessarily, this type of work calls for a definition of AL at the onset;
although given the full scope of issues studied by applied linguists to
date, it is understandable that a single comprehensive definition of AL
has yet to be produced. Nevertheless, some interesting and useful defi-
nitions have been suggested: as a collective effort “of language teachers
wanting to distance themselves from their colleagues teaching literature”
(Kaplan, 2010: vi); as “the academic field which connects knowledge
about language to decision-making in the real world” (Simpson, 2011:
1); as research into language-related problems, with consideration for
social and cognitive aspects of language (Hall et al., 2011); as a “mode of
© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature 1
Switzerland AG 2021
J. Bouchard, Complexity, Emergence, and Causality in Applied Linguistics,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-88032-3_1
2 J. Bouchard

inquiry that engages with the people and issues connected to real-world
problems” (Chapelle, 2013: 2); and as the “theoretical and empirical
investigation of real-world problems in which language is a central issue”
(Brumfit, 1997: 93). Davies and Elder (2004: 1) hint at the broad
epistemological scope of AL when defining the field as,

concerned with solving or at least ameliorating social problems involving

language. The problems applied linguistics concerns itself with are likely
to be: How can we teach languages better? How can we improve the
training of translators and interpreters? How can we write a valid language
examination? How can we evaluate a school bilingual program? How can
we determine the literacy levels of a whole population? How can we help-
fully discuss the language of a text? What advice can we offer a Ministry of
Education on a proposal to introduce a new medium of instruction? How
can we compare the acquisition of a European and an Asian language?
What advice should we give a defense lawyer on the authenticity of a
police transcript of an interview with a suspect?

Clearly, this list of questions goes on. Indeed, a quick look at the
different special interest groups in most AL associations around the world
reveals the true interdisciplinary scope of the field. Rampton (1997)
notes that, by its very nature, AL requires a thorough yet creative reinter-
pretation of concepts and theories from other fields. This is entirely justi-
fiable, for as the above definitions suggest, AL is inherently concerned
with issues situated at the interface of language and society, and there-
fore requires insight from anthropology, cognitive science, education,
sociology, psychology, social geography and political science, for example
(Coupland et al., 2001; Douglas Fir Group, 2016; García et al., 2017).
Specific areas of AL scholarship with strong involvement in transdisci-
plinarity include contrastive linguistics, education and literacy, language
pedagogy and language teacher education, second language acquisition,
pragmatics, translation, language policy and planning, conversation,
discourse and critical discourse analyses and interactional sociolinguis-
tics. In large part because of its transdisciplinary nature, AL research
has undergone impressive developments in research outputs, concep-
tual models and theories and practical insight and techniques aimed at
helping practitioners on the ground. This increasingly stronger and more
 1 Introduction 3

discerning body of scholarly works, in return, also bears relevance to

other social sciences concerned with language including anthropology,
sociology, philosophy, psychology and health services to name a few.
Transdisciplinarity can lead to further sophistication of conceptual and
methodological practices across the social sciences. Rampton (2001: 264,
emphasis mine) lists three types of linkages between sociolinguistics and
other disciplines made possible through transdisciplinary engagement:

First and most obviously, research outside sociolinguistics can be useful

as a form of wider contextualisation for any given project on language
in social life, helping to specify the larger environment within which
any particular group, institution or practice is located. Second, [trans-
disciplinary] can have a deep influence on the underlying assumptions
about social reality that shape research in sociolinguistics. Third, it can
provide concepts which can be integrated into the analysis and interpre-
tation of specific data, and which may then also serve as a very practical
‘bridge’ back and forwards between sociolinguistics and the fields where
the concepts originate.

Although both necessary and beneficial to AL and social research,

transdisciplinarity can be challenging precisely because of how descrip-
tions of specific phenomena in different fields often diverge, with
sociological concepts such as agency and power providing good exam-
ples of how phenomena are understood differently across the social
sciences. Huckle (2004: 35) explains that transdisciplinarity “challenges
academics to reconcile ideas about the nature of reality, how that reality
can be known, and what procedures should guide enquiry (ontology,
epistemology, and methodology).” Understandably, transdisciplinarity
can be threatening to researchers, not only because of the sheer concep-
tual, analytical and logistical complexities involved, but also because it
questions the perhaps comforting notion of rigid boundaries dividing
research disciplines. Layder (2004: ix) argues that,

perhaps one reason why attempts at establishing creative connections are

not common is that they inevitably attract negative critical responses.
This is often because interdisciplinary explorations are regarded with
suspicion by those concerned to ‘protect’ their home discipline from
4 J. Bouchard

uninvited incursions from ‘outside’ – presumably for fear of dilution or

destabilization.

Beyond conservative forces constraining transdisciplinary endeavours,

there are very real conceptual and methodological challenges to be faced
(Hult, 2011). In subsequent chapters, I will identify some of these chal-
lenges in the context of complex dynamic system theory (CDST), and
suggest possible avenues for improvement. Part of this work includes
an emphasis on the point that transdisciplinarity in AL should not
reinforce empiricist viewpoints or approaches; rather, it should involve—
and encourage—greater engagement by AL scholars with theory (Cook,
2005).
The transdisciplinary nature of AL has also been identified quite early
on in its history. Hymes (1974) provided one of the earliest transdis-
ciplinary visions of AL in his calls for a socially constituted linguistics
as based on two core notions: (1) we encounter linguistic features
as outcomes of broader social functions, which implies that (2) our
analysis must provide descriptions and explanations of the relationship
between social functions and linguistic features. This understanding of
AL has only strengthened over time, leading Block et al. (2012: 2–3)
to argue that “the starting point for applied linguistics should be the
study of culture and social structures, followed by an examination of
how language plays a part in the enactment of different forms of social
action as well as the constitution of second order understandings of these
actions.” As these authors elucidate, the study of language-related issues,
problems and challenges (a) is deeply transdisciplinary, and (b) must
come to term with the stratified, or layered, nature of society and social
phenomena (an issue developed in Chapter 4 on realism). This need is
also identified by Hiver and Al-Hoorie (2020: 24) thus:

applied linguistics phenomena operate at different levels and are broad

enough to warrant multiple ways into any topic area. Several examples
that come to mind include a focus on the structure of interdependent
relations, a focus on relational dynamics, a focus on trajectories of change
and self-organized processes or a focus on emergent outcomes.
 1 Introduction 5

Despite some recognition of the importance of theory to AL projects,

however, and perhaps because of AL’s transdisciplinary nature, most
scholars agree that, being an applied field of inquiry, AL should be
devoted to the solution of language-related issues in the world. The
Douglas Fir Group (2016: 20), for example, see transdisciplinary AL
scholarship as inherently problem-oriented,

rising above disciplines and particular strands within them with their
oftentimes strong theoretical allegiances. It treats disciplinary perspec-
tives as valid and distinct but in dialogue with one another in order
to address real-world issues. Specifically, it seeks to integrate the many
layers of existing knowledge about the processes and outcomes of addi-
tional language learning by deriving coherent patterns and configurations
of findings across domains.

A similar principle is captured by Kramsch (2012: 484) when defining

AL as a “‘real-world’ project.” On this point, however, I disagree with
Kramsch’s use of inverted commas framing the term real world , which
oddly suggests that, unlike practice, theory is somehow not about the
real world. In subsequent chapters, I will discuss the realist view of the
real and of the centrality of theory in uncovering the real. Coming back
to AL, Weideman (2006) defines the field as a discipline of design—
i.e., as essentially geared towards the formulation and implementation of
solutions to language problems. Accordingly, AL,

typically presents the solution in the form of a design or plan, which in its
turn is informed by some kind of theoretical analysis or justification. Like
any other entity or artefact, the plan presented has two terminal func-
tions: a qualifying or leading function [the technical aspect of design],
and a foundational or basis function [the theoretically-grounded analysis
of experience]. (p. 72)

This understanding of AL is rather prominent in our field, and posits

AL researchers as responsible for producing scholarly insight, models
and theories specifically aimed at improving language-related social prac-
tices on the ground. In partial agreement with this view, I will make
the point in this book that, to achieve these broad aims, AL needs
6 J. Bouchard

conceptually strong and productive models of complexity, emergence

and causality—three closely linked concepts—and that the production
and consumption of these by scholars and practitioners alike necessarily
involves greater engagement on their part with theory. In short, I will
argue that, if AL’s central aim is to help practice on the ground, it must
be equipped with a more solid conceptual basis. Much of the analysis
and argumentation in this volume is anchored by this central line of
reasoning.

Principles and Motivations for This Book

With its marked emphasis on ontological issues grounding inquiry in
AL but also in various fields of social research and human practice, this
book mirrors recent developments in various branches of social studies
concerned with language issues, including sociology (Archer, 2012;
Carter, 2000; Elder-Vass, 2010, 2012; Layder, 1997, 2006; Maccarini
et al., 2011), education (Maton & Moore, 2010; Murphy, 2013; Whee-
lahan, 2010; Willmott, 2002), language and discourse studies (Fair-
clough, 1992, 2010; Joseph, 2002; Parker, 1998; Wodak et al., 2009)
and AL research (e.g., Block, 2007; Bloome et al., 2005; Bouchard,
2017, 2018, 2020; Bouchard & Glasgow, 2019; Canagarajah, 2005;
Cook, 2010; Coupland et al., 2001; Filipović, 2015; Kramsch, 1998;
Larsen-Freeman, 2015, 2017, 2019, 2020; Larsen-Freeman & Cameron,
2008; Mercer & Williams, 2014; Pennycook, 2019, Rampton, 2006;
Sealey & Carter, 2004). In this sense, I prefer to think of the argumen-
tation developed in this book as “old wine in a new bottle”. Previously
published works in AL, sociology and social theory, in my view, have
already formulated most of the points found in the following chapters
more succinctly and sophisticatedly, and when possible I invite readers
to consult these valuable and timely contributions to AL scholarship and
human understanding.
My goals in this volume are to build upon existing and developing
AL knowledge, locate some of its problematic conceptual bases, clarify
some of the epistemological and ontological grounds upon which the
field stands, and refer to realist social theory and CDST to suggest new
 1 Introduction 7

perspectives and possibilities. The stratified (or layered , or again lami-

nated ) viewpoint developed in this book has developed from awareness
that issues studied in AL are part of, or at least are intricately related to,
education in a broader sense, and as such are fundamentally social and
ethical concerns. As will be discussed later, the viewpoint offered here is
thus stratified both in an ontological sense—i.e., as pertaining to entities
within the social realm composed of, and unfolding within and across,
multiple layers or strata of that realm—and in a critical sense—i.e., in
reference to particular distributions of social “facts” and entities based
on differentiated status and access to resources and privilege. Ontolog-
ical questions, however, will be most prominent. This book also aims
to respond to Weideman’s (2007, 2009, 2015) convincing calls for a
“philosophy” of AL scholarship. The author’s particular use of the term
“philosophy” can, in my view, be interpreted broadly and from multiple
epistemological perspectives. Although in agreement with his view, my
understanding is limited to the question of how we come to know
things within AL worlds (e.g., how do we come to these particular claims
about language and language learning and not others?). I also consider
Rajagopalan’s (2004) understanding of a “philosophy” as an examination
of the philosophical underpinnings of a particular academic discipline,
with the intention of resolving pending conceptual and methodolog-
ical issues and challenges. These combined understandings of the term
achieve two purposes in relation to the work in this book: unpacking
AL scholarship as a distinct area of the social sciences while situating it
within the social sciences, and as such, as an inherently transdisciplinary
scholarly practice of importance to the study of a wide range of social
issues.
Because this book reveals insight into the complex and necessary rela-
tionship between theory and practice, it is also intended as a resource
for both beginner and experienced applied linguists and sociolinguists.
Throughout the book readers will notice a rather free movement
between talks of AL and sociolinguistics. This movement, however,
should not alarm readers: both areas are concerned with explaining
multiple complex phenomena including language(s), language users,
language pedagogy and learning, language policy and planning and other
8 J. Bouchard

language-related issues and problems emerging from the complex inter-

action between structure, culture and human agency. Both AL and
sociolinguistics have inherent social foci, even if the emphasis on social
realities is more explicit in sociolinguistics. In addition, being a trained
TESOL teacher, applied linguist and sociolinguist, I feel confident in
moving from AL to sociolinguistics and back when argumentation calls
for it. This is not to minimize the important differences between AL and
sociolinguistics: it is simply acknowledgement that the content of the
present volume bears equal relevance to both.
Three broad perspectives ground the overall argumentation in this
book. The first one is a justified opinion: AL researchers and soci-
olinguists should not be oblivious to sociological issues and debates
regarding language and society. In our current neoliberal world in which
language education is increasingly being commodified (Block et al.,
2012), the English language teaching (ELT) industry has paradoxically
become more narrow and granular in scope, while gaining greater influ-
ence over the directions of specific strands of AL scholarship, dictating
what phenomena to research, how to design and implement language-in-
education policies that can serve the economic needs of the nation, how
to transform research insight and language policies into one-size-fits-all
pedagogical activities, how to produce learning materials of relevance to
increasingly larger populations of language-learners-as-consumers, and
how to design and administer reliable and profitable language proficiency
tests.
In my view, these developments are alarming and counterproductive
to further sophistication of knowledge in our field, and I would therefore
call for widespread critical engagement by all AL researchers alike. Given
the hegemonic presence of neoliberal forces gradually but surely limiting
the scope and depth of AL scholarship, applied linguists (as social scien-
tists, let’s not forget) must collectively assert the profoundly humanistic
nature of AL as a branch of the social science. This mode of thinking
in part requires AL scholars to come to terms with the shortcomings
of successionism and interpretivism (see next chapter for discussion),
and contextualize AL problems within a robust social ontology, prob-
lems which in my view must be seen as complex and contingent
outcomes of the relationship between structure, culture and agency. They
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
Gallo.—Preguntaselo a Grilo,
noble varon griego, el qual
boluiendo de la guerra de Troya
passando por la ysla de Candia le
conuertio la maga Cyrçes en
puerco, y despues por ruego de
Ulixes le quisiera boluer honbre, y
tanta ventaja halló Grilo en la
naturaleza de puerco, y tanta
mejora y bondad que escogio
quedarse ansi, y menospreçió
boluerse a su natural patria.
Miçilo.—Por cierto cosas me
cuentas que avn a los hombres
de mucha esperiençia cansassen
admiraçion, quanto más a vn
pobre çapatero como yo.
Gallo.—Pues porque no me
tengas por mentiroso, y que
quiero ganar opinion contigo
contandote fabulas, sabras que
esta historia auctorizó Plutarco el
historiador griego de más
auctoridad.
Miçilo.—Pues, valame dios, que
bondad halló ese Grilo en la
naturaleza de puerco, por la qual
a nuestra naturaleza de hombre la
prefirio?
Gallo.—La que yo hallé.
Miçilo.—Eso deseo mucho saber
de ti.
Gallo.—A lo menos vna cosa
trabajaré mostrarte como aquel
que de ambas naturalezas por
esperiençia sabra dezir. Que
comparada la vida y inclinacion
de muchos hombres al comun
viuir de vn puerco, es mas perfeto
con gran ventaja en su natural.
Prinçipalmente quando de viçios
tiene el hombre ocupada la razon.
Y agora pues es venido el dia
abre la tienda y yo me passearé
con mis gallinas por la casa y
corral en el entretanto que nos
aparejas, el manjar que emos de
comer. Y en el canto que se sigue
verás claramente la prueba de mi
intinçion.
Miçilo.—Sea ansi.

Fin del primer canto del gallo.

 NOTAS:
[298] En el códice de Gayangos aguadero.
[299] En el códice de La Romana se añade, á modo de apostilla,
pero de la misma letra: «y agora que son lutheranos no diffieren
de la gentilidad».
[300] La indicación del año que parece un paréntesis está en el
códice de Gayangos, pero falta en el de La Romana.
[301] Falta la palabra tálamo en el códice de La Romana.
[302] En el códice de La Romana ataviados.
[303] En el mismo códice agraciaban.
[304] En el códice de Gayangos dice sólo que «colgaban de los
ramos».
[305] En la Romana «y de allí la truxieron los de esta ciudad por
cosa admirable, y la daban agora al que fuese triunfoso en esta
fiesta y desafío».
[306] Así en La Romana. En Gayangos «vive Dios».
 ARGUMENTO
DEL SEGUNDO
CANTO DEL
GALLO

En el segundo canto que se

sigue, el auctor imita a
Plutarco en vn dialogo que
hizo entre Ulixes y vn griego
llamado Grilo; el qual auia
Cyrçes conuertido en puerco.
En esto el auctor quiere dar a
entender, que quando los
hombres estan encenagados
en los viçios y prinçipalmente
de la carne son muy peores
que brutos, y avn ay muchas
fieras que sin comparaçion los
exceden en el vso de la virtud.

Gallo.—Ya parece, Miçilo, que

es hora conueniente para
començar a vibir, dando gracias a
dios que ha tenido por bien de
passar la noche sin nuestro
peligro, y traernos al dia para que
con nuestra buena industria nos
podamos todos mantener.
Miçilo.—Bendito sea dios que
ansi lo ha permitido. Pero dime,
gallo, es esta tu primera cancion?
Porque holgaria de dormir vn
poco más hasta que cantes
segunda vez.
Gallo.—No te engañes, Miçilo,
que ya canté a la media noche
como acostumbramos, y como
estauas sepultado en la
profundidad y dulçura del primer
sueño, no te bastaron despertar
mis bozes, puesto caso que
trabajé por cantar lo mas
templado y bien comedido que
pude por no te desordenar en tu
suave dormir. Por la fortaleza
deste primer sueño creo yo que
llamaron los antiguos al dormir
ymagen de la muerte, y por su
dulçura le dixeron los poetas,
apazible holganza de los dioses.
Agora ya será casi el dia, que no
ay dos horas de la noche por
passar, despierta que yo quiero
prosseguir en mi obligaçion.
Miçilo.—Pues dizes ser essa
hora yo me quiero leuantar al
trabajo, porque proueyendo a
nuestro remedio y hambre, oyrte
me sera solaz. Agora di tu.
Gallo.—En el canto passado
quedé de te mostrar la bondad y
sosiego de la vida de las fieras, y
avn la ventaja que en su natural
hazen a los hombres. Esto
mostraré ser verdad en tanta
manera que podria ser, que si
alguna dellas diessen libertad de
quedar en su ser, o venir a ser
hombre como vos, escogeria
quedar fiera, puerco, lobo o leon
antes que venir a ser hombre, por
ser entre todos los animales la
especie mas trabajada y infeliz.
Mostrarte he el órden y conçierto
de su vibir, tanto que te
conuenças afirmar ser en ellas
verdadero vso de razon, por lo
qual las fieras sean dignas de ser
en mas tenidas, elegidas y
estimadas que los hombres.
Miçilo.—Parece, gallo, que con
tu eloquençia y manera de dezir
me quieres encantar, pues te
profieres a me mostrar vna cosa
tan lexos de verdadera y natural
razon. Temo me que en eso te
atreues a mi presumiendo que
facilmente como a pobre çapatero
qualquiera cosa me podras
persuadir. Agora pues
desengañate de oy mas que
confiado de mi naturaleza yo me
profiero a te lo defender. Di, que
me plazerá mucho oyr tus
sophisticos argumentos.
Gallo.—Por çierto yo espero que
no te parezcan sophisticos, sino
muy en demostraçion.
Prinçipalmente que no me podras
negar que yo mejor que quantos
ay en el mundo lo sabré mostrar,
pues de ambas naturalezas de
fiera y hombre tengo hecha
esperiencia. Pues agora
pareceme a mi que el prinçipio de
mi prueba se deue tomar de las
virtudes, justiçia, fortaleza,
prudençia, continençia y castidad,
de las quales vista la perfeçion
con que las vsan y tratan las
fieras conoçeras claramente no
ser manera de dezir lo que he
propuesto, mas que es muy
aueriguada verdad. Y quanto a lo
primero quiero que me digas; si
huviesse dos tierras, la vna de las
quales sin ser arada, cabada ni
sembrada, ni labrada, por sola su
bondad y generosidad de buena
naturaleza lleuasse todas las
frutas, flores y miesses muy en
abundancia? Dime, no loarias
más a esta tal tierra, y la
estimarias y antepornias a otra, la
qual por ser montuosa y para solo
pasto de cabras avn siendo
arada, muy rompida, cabada y
labrada con dificultad diesse fruto
poco y miserable?
Miçilo.—Por çierto avnque toda
tierra que da fruto avnque
trabajadamente es de estimar, de
mucho mas valor es aquella que
sin ser cultivada, o aquella que
con menos trabajo nos comunica
su fruto.
Gallo.—Pues de aqui se puede
sacar y colegir como de sentençia
de prudente y cuerdo, que ay
cosas que se han de loar y
aprobar por ser buenas, y otras
por muy mejores se han de
abraçar, amar y elegir. Pues ansi
de esta manera verdaderamente
y con necesidad me conçederas
que avnque el ánima del hombre
sea de gran valor, el ánima de la
fiera es mucho más; pues sin ser
rompida, labrada, arada ni
cabada; quiero dezir, sin ser
enseñada en otras escuelas ni
maestros que de su mesma
naturaleza es mas abil, presta y
aparejada a produçir en
abundançia el fruto de la virtud.
Miçilo.—Pues dime agora tú,
gallo, de qual virtud se pudo
nunca adornar el alma del bruto,
porque pareze que contradize a la
naturaleza de la misma virtud?
Gallo.—Y eso me preguntas?
Pues yo te probaré que la vsan
mejor que el más sabio varon.
Porque lo veas vengamos primero
a la virtud de fortaleza de la qual
vosotros, y principalmente los
españoles entre todas las
naciones, os gloriais y honrrais.
Quan vfanos y por quan gloriosos
os teneis quando os oys nombrar
atreuidos saqueadores de
çiudades, violadores de templos,
destruidores de hermosos y
sumptuosos edifiçios, disipadores
y abrasadores de fertiles campos
y miesses? Con los quales
exerçiçios de engaños y cautelas
aueis adquirido falso titulo y
renombre entre los de vuestro
tiempo de animosos y esforçados,
y con semejantes obras os aueis
usurpado el nombre de virtud.
Pero no son ansi las contiendas
de las fieras, porque si han de
pelear entre si o con vosotros,
muy sin engaños y cautelas lo
hazen, abierta y claramente las
verás pelear con sola confiança
de su esfuerço. Prinçipalmente
porque sus batallas no estan
subjetas a leyes que obliguen a
pena al que desamparare el
campo en la pelea. Pero como
por sola su naturaleza temen ser
vencidos trabajan quanto pueden
hasta vencer a su enemigo avn
que no obligan el cuerpo ni sus
animos a subjeçion ni vasallaje
siendo vencidas. Y ansi la
vençida siendo herida cayda en el
suelo es tan grande su esfuerço
que recoxe el animo en vna
pequeña parte de su cuerpo y
hasta que es del todo muerta
resiste a su matador. No hay
entre ellas los ruegos que le
otorgue la vida; no suplicaciones
lagrimas ni petiçiones de
misericordia; ni el rendirse al
vençedor confesandole la vitoria,
como vosotros hazeis quando os
tiene el enemigo a sus pies
amenaçandoos degollar. Nunca tú
viste que vn leon vençido sirua a
otro leon vençedor, ni vn cauallo a
otro, ni entre ellos ay temor de
quedar con renombre de
cobardes. Qualesquiera fieras
que por engaños o cautelas
fueron alguna vez presas en lazos
por los caçadores, si de edad
razonable son, antes se dexarán
de hambre y de sed morir que ser
otra vez presas y captiuas si en
algun tiempo pudieran gozar de la
libertad. Aunque algunas vezes
aconteçe que siendo algunas
presas siendo pequeñas se
vienen a amansar con regalos y
apazibles tratamientos, y ansi
aconteçe darseles por largos
tiempos en seruidumbre a los
hombres. Pero si son presas en
su vejez o edad razonable antes
moriran que subjetarseles. De lo
qual todo claramente se muestra
ser las fieras naturalmente
naçidas para ser fuertes y vsar de
fortaleza, y que los hombres vsan
contra verdad de titulo de fuertes
que ellos tienen usurpado
diziendo que les venga de su
naturaleza, y avn esto façilmente
se verá si consideramos vn
prinçipio de philosophia que es
vniuersalmente verdadero; y es,
que lo que conuiene por
naturaleza a vna especie
conuiene a todos los indiuiduos y
particulares igual y
indiferentemente. Como acontece
que conuiene a los hombres por
su naturaleza la risa, por la qual a
qualquiera honbre en particular
conuiene reyrse. Dime agora,
Miçilo, antes que passe adelante,
si ay aqui alguna cosa que me
puedas negar?
Miçilo.—No porque veo por
esperiençia que no ay honbre en
el mundo que no se rya y pueda
reyr; y solo el honbre propiamente
se rye. Pero yo no sé a que
proposito lo dizes.
Gallo.—Digolo porque pues esto
es verdad y vemos que
igualmente en las fieras en
fortaleça y esfuerço no diffieren
machos y hembras, pues
igualmente son fuertes para se
defender de sus enemigos, y para
sufrir los trabajos neçesarios por
defender sus hijos, o por vuscar
su mantenimiento, que
claramente pareçe conuenirles de
su naturaleza. Porque ansi
hallarás de la hembra tigre, que si
a caso fue a vuscar de comer
para sus hijos que los tenia
pequeños y en el entretanto que
se ausentó de la cueua vinieron
los cazadores y se los lleuaron;
diez y doze leguas sigue a su
robador y hallado haze con él tan
cruda guerra que veynte honbres
no se le igualaran en esfuerço. Ni
tampoco para esto aguardan
favorecerse de sus maridos, ni
con lagrimas se les quexan
contándoles su cuyta como hazen
vuestras hembras. Ya creo que
habrás oydo de la puerca de
Calidonia quantos trabajos y
fatigas dio al fuerte Theseo con
sus fuertes peleas. Que dire de
aquel sphinge de Pheniçia y de la
raposa telmesia? Que de aquella
famosa serpiente que con tanto
esfuerço peleó con Apolo?
Tambien creo que tú abrás visto
muchas leonas y osas mucho
mas fuertes que los machos en su
naturaleza. Y no se han como
vuestras mugeres las quales
quando vosotros estais en lo mas
peligroso de la guerra estan ellas
muy descuidadas de vuestro
peligro sentadas al fuego, o en el
regalo de sus camas y deleytes.
Como aquella Reyna Clithenestra,
que mientra su marido Agamenon
estaua en la guerra de troya
gozaua ella de los bessos y
abraços de su adultero Egisto. De
manera que de lo que tengo dicho
pareçeme no ser verdad, no ser
natural la fortaleza a los hombres,
porque si ansi fuesse igualmente
conuernia el esfuerço a las
henbras de vuestra espeçie, y se
hallaria como en los machos
como aconteçe en las fieras. Ansi
que podemos dezir, que los
honbres no de su voluntad, mas
forjados de vuestras leyes y de
vuestros principes y mayores
venis a exercitaros en esfuerço,
porque no osais yr contra su
mandado temiendo grandes
penas. Y estando los honbres en
el peligro más fragoso del mar, el
que primero en la tenpestad se
mueue no es para tomar el mas
pesado remo y trabajar doblado;
pero cada qual procura yr primero
por escoger el mas ligero y dexar
para los de la postre la mayor
carga, y avn del todo la reusarian
sino fuesse por miedo del castigo,
o peligro en que se ven. Y ansi
este tal no se puede dezir
esforzado, ni este se puede
gloriar ser doctado desta virtud,
porque aquel que se defiende de
su enemigo con miedo de reçebir
la muerte este tal no se deue
dezir magnanimo ni esforçado
pero cobarde y temeroso. Desta
manera aconteçe en vosotros
llamar fortaleza lo que bien
mirado con prudencia es
verdadera cobardia. Y si vosotros
os hallais ser mas esforçados que
las fieras, por qué vuestros
poetas y historiadores quando
escriuen y decantan vuestras
hazañas y hechos en la guerra os
comparan con los leones, tigres y
onzas, y por gran cosa dizen que
igualastes en esfuerço con ellos?
Y por el contrario nunca en las
batallas de las fieras fueran en su
ánimo comparadas con algun
hombre. Pero ansi como aconteçe
que comparamos los ligeros con
los vientos, y a los hermosos con
los angeles, queriendo hazer
semejantes los nuestros con las
cosas que exceden sin alguna
medida ni tasa: ansi parece que
desta manera comparais los
honbres en vuestras historias en
fortaleza con las fieras como a
cosas que exceden sin
comparaçion. Y la causa desto es,
porque como la fortaleza sea vna
virtud que consiste en el buen
gouierno de las passiones y
impetus del animo, el qual más
sincero y perfecto se halla en las
peleas que entre si tienen las
fieras. Porque los hombres
turbada la razon con la yra y la
soberuia los ciega y desbarata
tanto la colera que ninguna cosa
hazen con libertad que merezca
nombre de virtud. Avn con todo
esto quiero dezir que no teneis
porqué os quexar de naturaleza
porque no os diese vñas,
colmillos, conchas y otras armas
naturales que dio a las fieras para
su defensa, pues que vn
entendimiento de que os armó
para defenderos de vuestros
enemigos le enbotais y
entorpeçeis por vuestra culpa y
negligençia.
Miçilo.—O gallo, quan admirable
maestro me has sido oy de
Retorica, pues con tanta
abundançia de palabras has
persuadido tu proposito avn en
cosa tan seca y esteril. Forçado
me has a creer que hayas sido en
algun tiempo vno de los famosos
philosophos que obo en las
escuelas de athenas.
Gallo.—Pues mira, Micilo, que
por pensar yo que querias
redarguirme lo que tengo dicho
con algunos argumentos, o con
algun genero de contradiçion no
pasaua adelante en mi dezir. Y ya
que veo que te vas conuenciendo
quiero que pasemos a otra virtud,
y luego quiero que tratemos de la
castidad. En la qual te mostraré
que las fieras exçeden a los
hombres sin alguna comparaçion.
Mucho se preçian vuestras
mugeres tener de su parte por
exemplo de castidad vna
Penelope, vna Lucreçia Porçia,
Doña Maria de Toledo, y doña
Ysabel Reyna de Castilla; porque
dezis que estas menospreçiauan
sus vidas por no violar la virtud de
su castidad. Pues yo te mostraré
muchas fieras castas mil vezes
mas que todas esas vuestras, y
no quiero que comencemos por la
castidad de la corneja, ni Croton,
admirables fieras en este caso,
que despues de sus maridos
muertos guardan la viudez no
qualquiera tiempo, pero nueue
hedades de hombres sin ofender
su castidad. Por lo qual
neçesariamente me deues
conçeder ser estas fieras nueue
vezes mas castas que las
vuestras mugeres que por
exemplo teneis. Pero porque
tienes entendido de mí, Miçilo,
que soy retorico, quiero que
procedamos en el discurso desta
virtud segun las leyes de
Retorica, porque por ellas espero
vençerte con mas façilidad, Y ansi
primero veamos la difiniçion desta
virtud continençia, y despues
deçenderemos a sus inferiores
espeçies. Suelen dezir los
philosophos, que la virtud de
continençia es vna buena y çierta
dispusiçion y regla de los
deleytes, por la qual se desechan
y huyen los malos, vedados y
superfluos y se faboreçen y
allegan los neçesarios y naturales
en sus conuenientes tiempos.
Quanto a lo primero vosotros los
hombres todos los sentidos
corporales corrompeis y
deprabais con vuestros malos
vsos y costumbres y
inclinaciones, endereçandolos
sienpre a vuestro viçioso deleyte
y luxuria. Con los ojos todas las
cosas que veis endereçais para
vuestra laçiuia y cobdiçia. lo qual
nosotras las fieras no hazemos
ansi. Porque quando yo era
hombre me holgaua y regoçijaua
con gran deleyte viendo el oro,
joyas y piedras preçiosas, a tanto
que me andaua bobo y
desbaneçido vn dia tras vn Rey o
principe si anduuiesse vestido y
adornado de jaezes y atauios de
seda, oro, purpura y hermosos
colores. Pero agora, como lo
hacen las otras fieras, no estimo
yo en más todo eso que al lodo y
a otras comunes piedras que ay
por las pedregosas y asperas
syerras y montañas. Y ansi
quando yo era puerco estimaua
mucho más sin comparaçion
hallar algun blando y humido
cieno, o piçina en que me
refrescasse rebolcandome. Pues
si venimos al sentido del oler, si
consideramos aquellos olores
suaues de gomas, espeçias y
pastillas de que andais siempre
oliendo, regalando y afeminando
vuestras personas. En tanta
manera que ningun varon de
vosotros viene a gozar de su
propia muger si primero no se
vnta con vnçiones delicadas y
odoriferas, con las quales
procurais inçitar y despertar en
vosotros a venus. Y esto todo avn
seria sufridero en vuestras
hembras por daros deleyte usar
de aquellos olores laboratorios,
afeytes y vnturas; pero lo que
peor es que lo vsais vosotros los
varones para incitaros a luxuria.
Pero nosotras las fieras no lo
vsamos ansi, sino el lobo con la
loba, y el leon con la leona, y ansi
todos los machos con sus
hembras en su genero y espeçie
gozan de sus abraços y açessos
solamente con los olores
naturales y proprios que a sus
cuerpos dio su naturaleza sin
admistion de otro alguno de fuera.
Quando mas ay, y con que ellas
mas se deleytan es al olor que
produçen de si los olorosos
prados quando en el tiempo de su
brama, que es quando vsan sus
bodas, estan verdes y floridos y
hermosos. Y ansi ninguna hembra
de las nuestras tiene necesidad
para sus ayuntamientos de
afeytes ni vnturas para engañar y
traer al macho de su especie. Ni
los machos tienen neçesidad de
las persuadir con palabras,
requiebros, cautelas ni
ofreçimientos. Pero todos ellos en
su propio tiempo sin engaños ni
intereses hazen sus
ayuntamientos atsaydos por
naturaleza con las dispusiçiones y
concurso del tiempo, como los
quales son inçitados y llamados a
aquello. Y ansi este tiempo siendo
passado, y hechas sus preñezes,
todos se aseguran y mortiguan en
su incentiuo deleyte, y hasta la
buelta de aquel mesmo tiempo
ninguna hembra cobdiçia ni
consiente al macho, ni el macho
la acomete. Ningun otro interese
se pretende en las fieras sino el
engendrar y todo lo guiamos y
ordenamos como nuestra
naturaleza lo dispone. Y añade á
esto que entre las fieras en
ningun tiempo se cobdiçia ni
soliçita ni acomete hembra a
hembra, ni macho con macho en
açesso carnal. Pero vosotros los
hombres no ansi, porque no os
perdonais vnos a otros; pero
muger con muger, y hombre con
hombre contra las leyes de
vuestra naturaleza, os juntais, y
en vuestros carnales açessos os
toman vuestros juezes cada dia.
Ni por esto temeis la pena, quanto
quiera que sea cruel, por
satisfazer y cumplir uuestro
deleyte y luxuria. En tanta manera
es esto aborreçido de las fieras,
que si vn gallo cometiese açesso
con otro gallo, avn que le faltasse
gallina, con los picos y vñas le
hariamos en breue pedaços.
Pareçe, micilo, que te bas
conuençiendo y haciendote de mi
sentencia, pues tanto callas sin
me contradezir.
Miçilo.—Es tan efficaz, gallo, tu
persuasion, que como vna
cadena me llevas tras ti sin poder
resistir.
Gallo.—Dexemos de contar
quantos varones han tenido sus
ayuntamientos con cabras, ouejas
y perras; y las mugeres que han
effectuado su lexuria con gimios,
asnos, cabrones y perros: de los
quales açessos se han
engendrado çentauros, sphinges,
minotauros y otros admimirables
monstruos de prodigioso aguero.
Pero las fieras nunca vsaron ansi,
como lo muestra por exemplo la
continencia de aquel famoso
mendesio, cabron egipcio, que
siendo encerrado por muchas
damas hermosas para que
holgase con ellas, ofreçiéndosele
desnudas delante, las
menospreçio, y quando se pudo
soltar se fué huyendo á la
montaña á tener sus plazeres con
las cabras sus semejantes. Pues
quanto ves que son mas
inferiores en la castidad los
hombres que las fieras, ansi lo