Feb 20th Response; Swales and Gee

Swales Summary

In his article The Concept of Discourse Community, John Swales focusses on specifically defining discourse communities.  He uses 6 key concepts as a structure to define discourse communities.  He discusses the structure as well as members of discourse communities. 

QD

1.      The first characteristic of discourse communities is that they all have common public goals; meaning they all have an agreed upon agenda throughout the group.  Next is that they have a way of communicating with one another within the community.  The third stresses the mechanics for which the discourse community uses to give feedback for ideas, and sharing inputs.  The Fourth talks about the genres within the group, these genres explain the operations.  Next refers to the lingo the group uses, which allows the community to communicate more efficiently, while separating nonmembers from members.  Finally the sixth characteristic says that a discourse community needs a reasonable ratio of novice and expert members.

3.      It would depend on the classroom because not every class presents information or allows for feedback that is required fir discourse communities.

5.      I am currently rushing a fraternity and it is very much a discourse community, we all have goals of brotherhood, specific terms and lingo, and ways of communicating and giving feedback to ideas.  We even have certain texts and mottos we follow that would be considered our genres.

MM

Understanding discourse communities is a very useful skill when considering research and navigating through useful (credible) citations.  This article will help in future things I write. 

Personal Response

I think it was a good idea to give discourse communities specific characteristics (criteria).  I feel that this article helped me especially with my 4^th paper which is going to discuss discourse communities, and this definition helped clarify things. 

Gee Summary

Within Literacy, Discourse, and Linguistics James Gee focuses on the idea that literacy should not be about language or literacy but about social practices.  He explains discourses as “saying-doing-being-valuing-believing combinations” then, later going on into more specifics with discourses with a capital (D) and a lower case (d).  Gee also writes about dominant and nondominant discourses.

QD  

3.      Gee defines discourse with a capital (D) as “saying-doing-being-valuing-believing combinations”. He is saying that it is more a sense of identity than it is language or grammar for example; being American, Russian, Man, or Woman, etc. (484).  Gee also considers discourse with a lower case (d) as connecting stretches of language that make sense. It makes sense because these two connect how we interact with each other in everyday life.

4.      Primary Discourse is the one we first use to make sense of the world and interact with others, it represents our original sense of identity.  Secondary Discourse  is the one following the primary discourse, it includes, churches, schools, community groups, state and national businesses etc.  Dominant Discourses are secondary discourses, and they bring, social good. Nondominant Discourses are also secondary discourses but they bring solidarity with a particular social network. 

5.      “Discourses are connected with displays of identity” is explaining that identity is the main idea behind Discourses.  He uses this to help his definition of Discourses.

6.      He connects these two ideas with Discourse and identity saying you can’t be taught Discourse because it is you identity, and you aren’t taught your identity. 

7.      He is explaining the literacy tests that help distinguish between members and non-members, he says this test shows who was taught at the right time by the right people. This test focuses on specifics such as; the use of terminology as well as other things instead of main ideas.

8.      Dominant Discourses use these tests because it helps other members to see who is a credible person for the community.  It shows who isn’t faking it.  This is good for the Discourse because it keeps the respect level up within the group as well as keeping it efficient.

11.   Metaknowledge is the combination of what is learned and the subconscious, allowing to enhance your skill set.  Learning something understood to help understand what is learned. 

13.  I am trying to join a fraternity and in this Discourse it is difficult to break into because first you must learn the way things our and ideas the group holds closely.  There are many values to learn which can be overwhelming, sometimes I do feel like a pretender but in the pledging process you have to fake it till you make it.

A&EI

1.      The primary discourse I was born into, uses different lingo such as “pop” instead of “soda” or “channel-changer” instead of “remote”.   I was also born into a community that helped frame who I am.  My character and how I approach conflict comes from my primary Discourse.  Thus far in my academic career I have only been in private catholic schools, which wasn’t that much different from my primary Discourse because both my parents are Catholic.

3.       I am in several sometimes conflicting Discourses, that try to stunt the growth of each other because they have conflicting views, but staying open minded and understanding my primary Discourse helps me to not get caught up in it.

Personal Response

This reading was much easier to understand after discussing it in class, even though I still found it a little difficult to grasp fully.  It was still a good article that I took a lot away from and that I am going to use in my final paper.