Kanyu asked Kenneth D. Chastain:

Dear Prof. Chastain, Some questions about "cognitive-code learning theory". 1) I noticed that in Carroll (1965) and Chastain (1969) the theory was written as "Cognitive Code-Learning Theory", while in Carroll (1971), it was written as "Cognitive-Code Learning Theory". Does the different poition of the hyphen mean any difference? 2) Does the "code" here mean "symbol" or "rule"? Many thanks!

Kenneth D. Chastain Dear Kanyu,
First, let me express my hope that you receive my reply after such a long period of time. I apologize for the delay. Only today did I find your question, and I am pleased to be able to respond to such an insightful and thought-provoking question. (I do not know very well how to use Goodreads.)
I am not sure why Professor Carroll spelled the phrase two different ways on two different occasions. However, I do think that there is a difference of meaning with the hyphen in the two different positions.
Let me begin with Professor Carroll's second spelling. In my opinion, the meaning is that there is a "learning theory", and it is a "cognitive-code" learning theory.
The meaning of the first spelling "cognitive code-learning theory" is that there is a "code-learning" theory, which is based on "cognitive" mental processes.
When spoken, the emphasis and rhythm would be different for the two phrases. In "cognitive-code learning theory", the phrase would be pronounced "cognitive-code (pause) learning theory". In "cognitive code-learning theory", the phrase would be pronounced "cognitive (pause) code-learning theory".
I prefer the latter because I think that the theory is about code-learning, which is cognitive in nature.
I think that "code" refers to language rules that enable us to produce and receive meaning-based messages.
I hope that makes my meaning clear. Your opinion may be different. You obviously are a serious student of the subject.
Best wishes.
Kenneth Chastain

flag