Gee, Swales, and Johns

By now, we have read both pieces by John Swales and James Paul Gee regarding their respective ideas about discourse communities and their function. Writing About Writing suggests that a dialogue or conversation is occurring between the two writers as we read. On the one side we have Swales and his systematic breakdown of what he views as “the six important features of any public discourse community”. Among his key points are that a discourse community has to be centered on the idea of operating in an inclusive manner (as opposed to an exclusive manner).

In Gee’s view, a discourse community functions in a manner opposite to that of Swales’ community. In other words, Gee’s communities operate in an exclusive manner where those included are part of the “dominant group”. To me, it seemed implied that this idea is generally tied in with power and socioeconomic standing. Gee talks about the dominant group using “tests” to feel out the literacy of outsiders as a means to exclude them, as well as to “get the right person” when seeking someone for a position or job.

Then along comes Ann Johns. She backs up Swales points regarding his six key traits of a discourse community, even directly referencing them early on in her own article. She then goes on to relate the various aspects of Swales’ points to instances where they occur in her life; her mother’s AARP membership, her husband’s international bicycling group, to name a couple. Johns also brings more to the table for discussion. She makes mention of the topic of convention vs. anti-conventionalism, where she compares the tendency for established writers to part ways with what is considered conventional while students are required to learn and write in a rigidly conventional manner, ‘lest they be “torn apart” by their instructors. Johns also discusses the issue of authority in communities: asserting that those who are considered the “authority” in their community could (either consciously or otherwise) impose their values and beliefs on the rest of the community. 

Gee and Discourse

    In Literacy, Discourse, and Linguistics, James Paul Gee discusses, among other things, the key differences between language, grammar, discourse, and Discourse. Gee also makes mention of "tests" imposed upon users of a certain language or literacy. These tests are based on their knowledge and usage of what is considered to be the "dominant Discourse" in a community or society. The primary outcome of these tests is that one can see whether this person is "native" to this Discourse or not.
    In other words, you can see whether a person has learned the proper usage of a language that is considered the primary language of an area. An example that Gee gives is the focus on superficial features of a language that only one who is "native" to it would grasp. His example is "middle-class mainstream" Discourse, which presupposes that is in opposition with those of lower socioeconomic standing. These "non-native users" don't have as firm of a grasp on the proper use of the language and can thus be pointed out and denied access to greater opportunities (such as a better job). I think this is an example we can all relate to as, for better or for worse, we are taught from a young age to articulate our thoughts in such a way as to imply that we are well educated and intelligent.

Six Discourse Communities

1) “A discourse community has a broadly agreed upon set of common public goals.”

In other words, all discourse communities have a framework of what they’d like to change or accomplish. For example, a student group centered on “going green” has the ultimate goal of inspiring significantly more people on campus to recycle and reduce their carbon footprint than were previously doing so before the group existed.

2) “A discourse community has mechanisms of intercommunication among its members.”

There exists a means to communicate and keep in touch in all discourse communities. In my above example, this could mean an emailing list that all the members of the group are apart of. It would also mean the meetings this group holds to discuss new topics and ways to further their goal.  

3) “A discourse community uses its participatory mechanisms primarily to provide information and feedback”

A discourse community discusses new information and ideas in its meetings or other instances where the community is able to participate. In my example, the “green group” would utilize meetings to discuss new ideas relevant to “going green” as well as different ideas as per how to spread them throughout their campus and student body.

4) “A discourse community utilizes and hence possesses one or more genres in the communicative furtherance of its aims.”

Discourse communities make use of certain genres, or types of writing, to help communicate its message and, by extension, accomplish its ultimate goal. My “green group” would, in this instance, probably utilize print (posters, flyers, ads) to keep ideas about recycling and using less energy at the forefront of the student bodies’ mind. 

5) “In addition to owning genres, a discourse community has acquired some specific lexis.”

A discourse community will make use of certain words and phrases specific to its cause and operation. In my “green group”, this could mean the use of the words and phrases like green, environmentally friendly, and others that pertain to recycling and such.

6) “A discourse community has a threshold level of members with a suitable degree of relevant content and discoursal expertise.”

Within the discourse community is at least a certain number of people who are credible in the knowledge and direction they provide. In my example, this could be a group of knowledgeable students studying fields relevant to “going green” (i.e., environmental health, environmental sustainability, green energy, etc).

Pencils to Pixels

In his piece, Denis Baron talks extensively of the leaps and bounds technology has made in regards to communication. From the advent of writing and cuneiform, to our modern age of computers and telephones, Baron discusses the implications and responses to these technologies. In the process of covering all this, Dennis Baron seemingly to “shrug” at the idea of technology changing the fundamental shape and nature of writing. His overall thought seems to be that new technologies have come and innovated our means of writing and communication time and time again, and yet writing is still writing. Honestly, I have to agree. Whether it comes from a pencil, typewriter, or computer word processor, writing is still fundamentally the same as it was years ago. The advents of “backspace” and “spell-check”, for example, have helped to aid in the creation and revision of writing, but they have not fundamentally changed how it is done. Baron does point out that technologies, as they become outdated, also become “automatic and invisible”. He points out that we incorporate older and established ideas and methods as we take on the new and “cutting edge” of technology. One could potentially make a case that this could be the aforementioned fundamental change, but I feel that it is actually just the process of absorbing established tools and methods into our everyday use.

The Future of Literacy

While each case was in essence unique, all of them generally had similar backgrounds: white, middle to upper-middle class family with access to one or more computers in their home. This I can relate to, as it essentially details my own home life. The story that I connected to most was that of Charles Jackson. Charles, much like myself, was exposed to computers at a young age. As a result, the growth of his literacy went hand in hand with the growth of his computer skills. Charles also mentions how video games, specifically online games, helped further his reading and writing abilities. This is also true of my own past. While I did read as a child, I did also spend time playing games. And, as Charles bluntly puts it,  “You are going to have to read to learn to play the games.” In this way, the use of technology helped to better my own reading, writing, and general skills of communication; not to mention typing skills.

Some of the things that really got me going on reading were early book series available to me at that age (the Redwall series, Harry Potter, etc.). I remember being especially fond of these books, as they were part of a larger series. For this reason, I was much more motivated to learn the details about the characters and places, as well as to keep on reading more of the books!                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     

Malcom X and Sherman Alexie

           

Both Malcom X and Sherman Alexie overcame a great deal of adversity and strife to acquire the literacy that they did. I found the prominent difference to be in their motivations to learn to read, as well as why they read. Malcolm X viewed literacy as a means of gaining knowledge, and by extension, power. He implies that because of his race and social standing that he would not have been able to acquire this power; though he was able to while in prison via a prison library. Sherman Alexie aspired for literacy because of his own father’s obsession with books and reading. From there, he developed a great thirst for what we would call literacy. This was largely because the Indian reservation school system didn’t seem to work. Children didn’t learn to write and, as a result, often times didn’t amount to much. Sherman says of his intense drive to read and reading abilities, “If I hadn’t been an Indian boy on a reservation, I may have been called a prodigy. Instead I was an oddity.” He was using his literacy to help him get out of the reservation and out into the world.

Malcolm and Sherman both struggled with their race when becoming literate. Their race and socioeconomic statuses made it incredibly difficult for them to learn to read, and thereby improve their situation. For Malcom X it took a stint in prison to gain the access to literacy and literature, while Sherman had to go outside of the school system and ultimately his own culture to do the same.

Literacy and You

At the ripe old age of twenty, I have been exposed to many a “sponsor of literacy”. If I were to consider my primary sponsors, I would have to say that mine would be various levels of schools (of course), Church, and my family.

Obviously, high school strives to expose us to a certain variety of literacy. This includes poetry, plays, and certain novels that they want us to read and comprehend. The literacy they provide to us is tightly restricted, as per what they feel is ok for teenagers to read about. As you get into college there is obviously a much wider exposure to virtually any and all literacy. This time around, the instructors typically choose texts that will expose you to different and new ways of thinking.

Church is in a similar vein to school in how it handles literacy, though with a much narrower range of exposure. In my own experience with Catechism classes when I was young, the literacy you are exposed to is (obviously) only the Bible. They don’t really strive to expose you to anything else, but are intent that you have your facts straight on what they do teach to you.

My family has been by far the most dynamic of my literacy sponsors. Naturally, when I was very young they were careful about what I was exposed to and had access to. As I grew and matured my parents were increasingly less restrictive about what I was allowed to read, watch, etc. In this way, they exposed me to arguably the largest amount of literacy by sheer virtue of progressively allowing me more freedom as I grew up.

Any of these sponsors on their own would probably be far from adequate access, but together they contribute to a great deal of my own acquired literacy and knowledge.