Verbal community: The Verbal Community and the Societal Construction of Consciousness

The Verbal Community and the Societal Construction of Consciousness

The Verbal Community and the Societal Construction of Consciousness

Download PDF

Download PDF

• Published: 01 October 1994

• Mark Burton^1,3 &
• Carolyn Kagan² 

Behavior and Social Issues
volume 4, pages 87–96 (1994)Cite this article

• 182 Accesses

• 4 Citations

• 1 Altmetric

• Metrics details

Abstract

Skinner’s concept of the “verbal community” is developed as a link between the private experiences of individuals, on the one hand, and societal structures, practices and conventions, on the other. The verbal community enables the individual to have a discriminated consciousness of private experience, but since the verbal community is itself a historically constructed entity, then our most personal inner experience is also socio-historically defined. The nature of these relationships between society, the verbal community and the individual are explored from the standpoint of a transformational model of individual-society relationships, using Gramsci’s concept of ideological hegemony to articulate the ways that consent to domination is created and reproduced in the lived experience of society’s members.

Download to read the full article text

References

• Barratt, M. (1980). Women’s oppression today: Problems in Marxist feminist analysis. London: Verso.

  Google Scholar 

• Beck, A.T. (1967). Depression: Clinical, experimental and theoretical aspects. New York: Harper.

  Google Scholar 

• Bhaskar, R. (1979). On the possibility of social scientific knowledge and the limits of naturalism. In J. Mepham & D-H. Ruben (Eds.), Issues in Marxist philosophy: Epistemology, science, ideology (Vol. 3) (pp. 107–139). Brighton: Harvester.

  Google Scholar 

• Bhaskar, R. (1989). The Possibility of naturalism: A philosophical critique of the contemporary human sciences. (2nd Ed.) Hemel Hempstead: Harvester.

  Google Scholar 

• Brown, G. W., & Harris, T. (1978). Social origins of depression: A study of psychiatric disorder in women. London: Tavistock.

  Google Scholar 

• Burton, M. (1983). Understanding mental health services; Theory and practice. Critical Social Policy, 7, 54–74. https://doi.org/10. 1177/026101838300300706

  Article 

  Google Scholar 

• Chomsky, N. (1959). A review of Verbal Behavior by B. F. Skinner. Language, 35, 26–58.https://doi.org/10.2307/411334

  Article 

  Google Scholar 

• Coleman, S. R. (1981). Historical context and systematic functions of the concept of the operant. Behaviorism, 9, 207–226.

  Google Scholar 

• Freire, P. (1972). Cultural action for freedom. Harmondsworth: Penguin.

  Google Scholar 

• Giddens, A. (1979). Central problems in social theory: Action, structure and contradiction in social analysis. London: Macmillan.

  Book 

  Google Scholar 

• Gramsci, A. (1948–1951/1971). Selections from the prison notebooks (Q. Hoare & G.N. Smith, Trans.). London: Lawrence and Wishart. (Originally published in Italian, 1948–1951).

  Google Scholar 

• Habermas, J. (1987/1991). The theory of communicative action (Vols. 1–2). Cambridge: Polity.

  Google Scholar 

• Hales, M. (1980). Living thinkwork: Where do labour processes come from? London: CSE Books.

  Google Scholar 

• Kagan, C.M., Evans, J., & Kay, B. (1986). A manual of interpersonal skill for nurses: An experiential approach. London: Harper and Row.

  Google Scholar 

• Leonard, P. (1984). Personality and ideology: Towards a materialist understanding of the individual. London: Macmillan.

  Book 

  Google Scholar 

• Levidow, L. (1978). A Marxist critique of the IQ debate. Radical Science Journal, 6/7, 13–72.

  Google Scholar 

• Llewelyn, S., & Kelly, J. (1980). Individualism in psychology: A case for a new paradigm? Bulletin of the British Psychological Society, 33, 407–411.

  Google Scholar 

• Luria, A.R. (1976). Cognitive development: Its cultural and social foundations (M. Lopez-Morillas and L. Solotaroff, Trans.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University, Press.

  Google Scholar 

• MacCorquodale, K. (1970). On Chomsky’s review of Skinner’s Verbal Behavior. Journal of The Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 13, 83–99 https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.1970.13-83

  Article 

  Google Scholar 

• Reich, W. (1942/1975). The mass psychology of fascism. Harmondsworth: Penguin.

  Google Scholar 

• Ryle, G. (1949). The concept of mind. London: Hutchinson.

  Google Scholar 

• Sassoon, A. S. (1980) Gramsci’s politics. London: Croom Helm.

  Google Scholar 

• Seve, L. (1968/1975). Marxism and the theory of human personality (D. Paveti, Trans.). London: Lawrence and Wishart.

  Google Scholar 

• Simon, R. (1982) Gramsci’s political thought: An introduction. London: Lawrence and Wishart.

  Google Scholar 

• Skinner, B. F. (1938). The behavior of organisms. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.

  Google Scholar 

• Skinner, B. F. (1945). The operational analysis of psychological terms. Psychological Review, 52, 270–277, 291 https://doi.org/10.1037/h0062535

  Article 

  Google Scholar 

• Skinner, B. F. (1950) Are theories of learning necessary? Psychological Review, 57, 193–216.https://doi.org/10.1037/h0054367

  Article 

  Google Scholar 

• Skinner, B. F. (1953). Science and human behavior. New York: Free Press.

  Google Scholar 

• Skinner, B. F. (1956). A case history in scientific method. American Psychologist, 11, 221–223.https://doi.org/10.1037/h0047662

  Article 

  Google Scholar 

• Skinner, B. F. (1957). Verbal behavior. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.

  Book 

  Google Scholar 

• Skinner, B. F. (1963). Behaviorism at fifty. Science, 140, 951–958. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.140.3570.951

  Article 

  Google Scholar 

• Skinner, B. F. (1972). Beyond freedom and dignity. London: Cape.

  Google Scholar 

• Skinner, B. F. (1981). Selection by consequences. Science, 213, 501–504. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.7244649

  Article 

  Google Scholar 

• Skinner, B. F. (1985). Cognitive science and behaviourism. British Journal of Psychology, 76, 291–301. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044–8295.1985.tbo1953.x

  Article 

  Google Scholar 

• Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

  Google Scholar 

• Waller, B. (1977). Chomsky, Wittgenstein, and the behaviorist perspective on language. Behaviorism, 5, 43–59.

  Google Scholar 

• Williams, R. (1961). The long revolution (Penguin ed. ). London: Chatto and Windus.

  Book 

  Google Scholar 

• Williams, R. (1973/1980). Base and superstructure in Marxist cultural theory. In R. Williams (Ed.), Problems in materialism and culture. London: Verso.

  Google Scholar 

• Wittgenstein, L. (1953). Philosophical investigations. Oxford: Blackwell.

  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

1. Mancunian Community Health (NHS) Trust, UK

   Mark Burton

2. Manchester Metropolitan University, UK

   Carolyn Kagan

3. Learning Disability Service, Mauldeth House, Mauldeth Road West, Manchester, M21 2RL, England

   Mark Burton

Authors

1. Mark Burton

   View author publications

   You can also search for this author in
   PubMed Google Scholar

2. Carolyn Kagan

   View author publications

   You can also search for this author in
   PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to
Mark Burton.

Additional information

We are grateful to Jerry Ulman for his enthusiastic encouragement to submit this article.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

ABA Therapy: Understanding Verbal Behavior (VB)

There is a huge focus on verbal behavior in Applied Behavior Analysis (ABA) and for a reason. When you hear the words “verbal behavior” you may think vocal speech. But verbal behavior is so much more than that!

The formal definition of verbal behavior is

a response that is reinforced through the mediation of others. In layman’s terms, verbal behavior accounts for anything a person does that communicates something to another person. For example, even though gestures are not vocal, if I point across the room at a water bottle and you immediately grab it and hand it to me, that response of pointing is now considered verbal behavior! You’ve essentially confirmed (or reinforced) that me pointing at an object, i. e., tangible, was sufficient enough to communicate my wants and needs (read more about tangibles and reinforcement here).

Sign language, picture communication, writing, and even the arts, such as music and paintings, all fall under the umbrella that is verbal behavior. Why is this important to note?

Some children with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) may express themselves through ways that are harmful to themselves or others. They may also exhibit disruptive behavior, like wandering or throwing objects during class time. Following direct observation (read more on our initial assessment process here), these responses can be identified as verbal behavior. Meaning, they are signaling a want or need for a material, food, a trip to the bathroom, or help. Direct observation can pin down what they are communicating, therefore allowing us to teach a more effective communicative response (e.g., saying, “help”, signaling bathroom, showing us a picture of food).

This leads to another important finding.

Is calling someone “non-verbal” appropriate? Behavior analysts say no. Non-verbal means they do not listen to others’ communication or participate at all, whether it’s showing signs of distress or crying. A more appropriate term would be non-vocal. I challenge you to replace non-verbal permanently when referring to a human being. Not only is it more appropriate, but it also leads to the discussion of “how does this person communicate?”.

As we mentioned previously, behavior analysts (BCBAs) use direct observation to identify an individual’s wants and needs to teach the right communicative response depending on the environmental context. This indicates that behavior analysts view language through a functional perspective rather than structural. Both matter, but a structural account provides rules based on form (how it sounds or looks) rather than

why it is occurring.

To get a better understanding on our functional approach to language, check out our next blog as we will dive into the very important

verbal operants. Can’t wait? Browse our blog for more topics surrounding ABA and Autism.

ABA, Autism, EducationJeanne LuisOctober 15, 2021ABA, autism, Verbal Behavior, Functions of Behavior, Verbal Operants, Language, CommunicationComment

Trademark search of all departments xUSSR

nine0016

nine0016

Review of the practice of resolving disputes related to the protection of the rights to the trademark \ ConsultantPlus

Appendix

to the letter of the highest

Arbitration Court

of July 29, 1997 N 19

1. Legal protection of commodity goods The mark is provided on the basis of state registration. nine0009

The distillery filed a lawsuit against the joint-stock company with an arbitration court to prohibit the production of vodka using a designation identical to its trademark on the label. In support of its claims, the plaintiff presented a license for the production of vodka and a patent for an invention.

Consultant Plus: note.

Law of the Russian Federation No. 3520-1 of 23.09.1992 became invalid as of 1 January 2008 due to the adoption of Federal Law No. 231-FZ of 18.12.2006. For trademarks, service marks and appellations of origin, see paragraphs 2-3 of Chapter 76 of Part Four of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation. nine0009

The arbitration court dismissed the claim, not recognizing the said documents as evidence of rights to the disputed trademark, since, in accordance with Article 2 of the Law of the Russian Federation “On Trademarks, Service Marks and Appellations of Origin”, the right to a trademark arises on the basis of state registration of the latter in the Patent Office of the Russian Federation.

There were also no grounds for the protection of this designation by virtue of international treaties of the Russian Federation. nine0009

2. The exclusive right of the owner to a trademark is determined in relation to the goods and services indicated in the trademark certificate.

The joint-stock company applied to the arbitration court with a claim to terminate the infringement of the rights to a trademark registered in its name for goods of the 16th class of the International Classification of Goods and Services.

The plaintiff referred to the fact that the designation, similar to its trademark to the degree of displacement, is used by the defendant in the manufacture of paint brushes and rollers. nine0009

In dismissing the claim, the arbitration court indicated that, in accordance with Articles 3 and 4 of the Law of the Russian Federation “On Trademarks, Service Marks and Appellations of Origin”, legal protection of the exclusive right to a trademark is ensured in respect of the goods specified in the certificate for trademark.

In accordance with the Nice Agreement of 06/15/57, revised in Stockholm on 07/14/67 and in Geneva on 05/13/77, the International Classification of Goods and Services was adopted for the registration of marks. Each of the 42 classes is divided into headings that list the names of the type of goods and services included in the class. nine0009

A trademark certificate may be issued for a part of goods of one class, as was the case in the present case.

In the list of class 16 goods in the plaintiff’s certificate, brushes and paint rollers were not indicated, therefore the court found that the plaintiff did not have the right to a trademark to designate these goods.

3. The scope of legal protection of a trademark and service mark is determined on the basis of its state registration.

The bank filed a lawsuit against the joint-stock company to protect the rights to the service mark registered by it for all types of services of the 36th class “Insurance and financing”, pointing to the use by the defendant of a designation confusingly similar to the plaintiff’s service mark, for similar services. nine0009

Article 5 of the Law of the Russian Federation “On Banks and Banking Activities in the Russian Federation” prohibits banks from carrying out all types of insurance, except for insurance of currency and credit risks.

The Arbitration Court found that the defendant used a designation similar to the plaintiff’s trademark in the provision of public insurance services and dismissed the claim.

Reversing the above decision, the appellate instance referred to the fact that, in accordance with Article 2 of the Law of the Russian Federation “On Trademarks, Service Marks and Appellations of Origin”, legal protection of a trademark and service mark in the Russian Federation is provided on the basis of its state registration . nine0009

Current legislation does not limit the possibility of registering trademarks and service marks by the type of activity carried out, the license or special legal personality.

4. The offer to sell products with a trademark used without the permission of its owner is a violation of trademark rights.

The watch factory applied to the arbitration court with a claim for suppression of trademark infringement against a consignment store that put up for sale watches bearing the image of its trademark, the manufacturer of which is not the factory. nine0009

Objecting to the stated requirements, the defendant referred to the fact that he is not a manufacturer of watches, but only sells them.

In accordance with Part 2 of Article 4 of the Law of the Russian Federation “On Trademarks, Service Marks and Appellations of Origin of Goods”, an offer for sale is an element of the introduction of goods into economic circulation, therefore it is an independent violation of the rights of the trademark owner.

Proceeding from this, the arbitration court satisfied the claim against the defendant, obliging him to remove the watch with the plaintiff’s trademark from sale. nine0009

5. Storage of products with a trademark used without the permission of its owner is recognized as a violation of trademark rights if the storage is carried out for the purpose of introducing such products into economic circulation.

A sugar substitute manufacturer filed a trademark infringement claim against a limited liability partnership in arbitration because the defendant stocks a similar product marked with a trademark registered in the name of the plaintiff for goods of this class. nine0009

The defendant referred to the fact that he is not a manufacturer of goods, but only provided warehouses for its storage.

During the resolution of the dispute, it was established that the defendant sent draft contracts for the purchase and sale of this sugar substitute to several retail stores.

Satisfying the claim, the arbitration court indicated the purpose of storing the goods: its subsequent sale, in connection with which it saw in the defendant’s actions signs of an offense under part 2 of article 4 of the Law of the Russian Federation “On Trademarks, Service Marks and Appellations of Origin of Goods”. nine0009

6. Unauthorized use of a protected element of a trademark without an element not subject to legal protection is a violation of trademark rights.

A limited liability partnership filed a lawsuit against a publishing house with a claim against a publisher to protect the rights to a trademark by removing it from printed materials. A two-word designation is registered as a trademark, one of which is a protected element.

The Arbitration Court dismissed the claim, because a two-word designation, one of which is a protected element, was registered as a trademark. The defendant uses only the protected part of the trademark. nine0009

Reversing the decision, the appellate instance pointed out that the infringement of trademark rights is both the use of the trademark as a whole and only one protected element.

7. If goods marked with a trademark are put into economic circulation by other persons with the consent of its owner, then he has no right to prohibit them from using this trademark.

A limited liability partnership applied to an arbitration court with a claim against a joint-stock company to stop the infringement of trademark rights. The defendant, according to the plaintiff, releases goods of the same class into economic circulation using an identical trademark. nine0009

The joint-stock company did not deny this circumstance, but referred to the legitimacy of its actions, since it produces goods with the indicated designation within the quantity established by the agreement concluded with the plaintiff before registering this designation as a trademark.

The Arbitration Court dismissed the claim on the following grounds.

In accordance with Article 23 of the Law of the Russian Federation “On Trademarks, Service Marks and Appellations of Origin”, registration of a trademark does not entitle its owner to prohibit the use of this trademark by other persons in relation to goods that were put into economic circulation directly by the owner trademark or with his consent. Therefore, the manufacture of goods using a designation subsequently registered as a trademark is not a violation of trademark rights if it is carried out under a previously concluded agreement with the owner of the trademark. nine0009

8. Manufacture of products of inadequate quality by the new owner of the trademark is not grounds for invalidating the transaction on the assignment of the trademark concluded with the original owner.

A limited liability partnership filed a lawsuit with an arbitration court to prohibit a joint-stock company from producing goods with a trademark owned by the plaintiff on the basis of an agreement on the assignment of a trademark to him by a third party.

The joint-stock company did not recognize the claim, believing that the trade mark assignment transaction is void, as it creates a distorted view of the product and its manufacturer. As evidence, the joint-stock company provided an order of the Department of Pharmacy prohibiting the partnership from selling goods due to their inadequate quality.

The Arbitration Court dismissed the claim.

The said decision in the case is annulled, because in accordance with Article 25 of the Law of the Russian Federation “On Trademarks, Service Marks and Appellations of Origin of Goods”, the assignment of a trademark is not allowed if it may cause misleading of the consumer regarding the product or its manufacturer . nine0009

Manufacture of products of inadequate quality by the new owner of the trademark cannot serve as grounds for recognizing the transaction for the assignment of the trademark as invalid, since the condition on the quality of the goods is not the content of such a transaction, unlike a license agreement.

9. When resolving a dispute on the suppression of violations of the rights to a trademark, an arbitration court cannot invalidate the registration of a trademark.

The manufacturer of mineral water filed a claim against a limited liability partnership in arbitration court for trademark infringement, since he owns a trademark in the form of a graphic image of a forest landscape with the name of water. nine0009

Objecting to the claim, the defendant referred to the fact that a trademark was registered in his name, which is a combined designation, which, along with the name of water, includes a figurative element that does not resemble that used in the plaintiff’s trademark. The name of the water is included in both trademarks as an unprotected element.

The court of first instance, satisfying the claim, declared the registration of the defendant’s trademark invalid, since the word element of the defendant’s trademark was the name of the aquifer complex, which indicates the properties of mineral water, therefore, by virtue of paragraph 1 of Article 6 of the Law of the Russian Federation “On Commodity marks, service marks and appellations of origin” could be included in a trademark as an unprotected element only if it does not occupy a dominant position in it. nine0009

In the defendant’s trademark, the verbal designation occupies 2/3 of the trademark field; by location and color scheme, it is perceived as its main part.

The court of cassation, overturning the decision of the court of first instance, pointed out that the arbitration court could not invalidate the registration of the trademark, since the plaintiff filed a claim for the suppression of violations of his rights to the trademark by applying another form of protection.

In addition, in accordance with Article 28 of the Law of the Russian Federation “On Trademarks, Service Marks and Appellations of Origin of Goods”, an objection to the registration of a trademark is filed with the Appellate Chamber, so the arbitration court cannot accept the case for its proceedings until the dispute is considered in administrative order. nine0009

10. The requirement to protect trademark rights by publishing a court decision in a particular publication must be justified.

The owner of the trademark applied to the arbitration court with a claim for the protection of the rights to the trademark by removing it from the products put into economic circulation and publishing the decision in three newspapers.

In accordance with Article 46 of the Law of the Russian Federation “On Trademarks, Service Marks and Appellations of Origin”, rights are protected by publishing a court decision in order to restore the victim’s business reputation. nine0009

The Court of Arbitration granted the claim because the defendant manufactured and sold garments illegally using the plaintiff’s trademark.

In the decision, the court named a specific printed publication in which the court decision should be published within the prescribed period, since it was this publication that placed the defendant’s advertisement about the sale of goods and was distributed at the place where the goods were sold.

11. If the removal of a trademark is impossible without causing significant damage to the product itself, the court cannot make a decision on the destruction of the product. nine0009

A foreign company filed a lawsuit with an arbitration court to stop the violation of trademark rights and destroy the stationery on which it is applied, since the destruction of a trademark is impossible without the loss of consumer properties of this product.

The Arbitration Court, having considered the materials of the case, recognized that the defendant violated the plaintiff’s rights to the trademark, and by its decision ordered the defendant to stop its illegal use.

The Arbitration Court rejected the plaintiff’s claim for the destruction of the goods themselves, since such a measure of responsibility is not established by Article 46 of the Law of the Russian Federation “On Trademarks, Service Marks and Appellations of Origin of Goods”. nine0009

12. Violation of the procedure for filing an objection or the procedure for its consideration is not a basis for invalidating the decision of the Appeals Chamber.

The owner of the trademark filed a claim with the arbitration court to invalidate the decision of the Appeals Chamber, which canceled the registration of his trademark in accordance with Article 28 of the Law of the Russian Federation “On Trademarks, Service Marks and Appellations of Origin”, referring to the fact that the objection to the Appeals Chamber was signed by an official by proxy, drawn up in violation of Articles 181, 185 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, and the notice of the meeting was sent to him later than the one-month period established by clause 5.2.2 of the Procedure for filing and considering complaints and objections in the Patent Examination Board of Appeal, approved by Order of the State Patent of the USSR dated 26.08.91 N 68.

When resolving the dispute, the arbitration court dismissed the claim, as it established that there were grounds for invalidating the claimant’s trademark registration. The decision of the Appeals Chamber cannot be declared invalid if it is made in accordance with Article 28 of the Law of the Russian Federation “On Trademarks, Service Marks and Appellations of Origin”.

Violation of the procedure for considering an administrative objection cannot serve as a motive for setting aside the decision of the Appeals Chamber. nine0009

13. Infringement of trademark rights is the introduction into economic circulation of a designation confusingly similar to a registered trademark in relation to similar goods or services.

The joint-stock company applied to the arbitration court with a request to terminate the defendant’s actions to introduce into economic circulation in relation to homogeneous goods a designation confusingly similar to a trademark registered in his name.

Claims were satisfied. nine0009

The decision was canceled as unfounded, the case was sent for a new trial.

According to paragraph 2 of Article 4 of the Law of the Russian Federation “On Trademarks, Service Marks and Appellations of Origin of Goods”, unauthorized manufacture, use, importation, offer for sale, sale, other introduction into economic circulation or storage with this purpose of a trademark or a product marked by this sign, or a designation confusingly similar to it, in relation to homogeneous goods.