40 Leegan Fancett – Literacy, Discourse, and Language
Leegan Fancett is a Sophomore from Goodyear, AZ, majoring in Psychology. Leegan wrote this during the second semester as a freshman in college online at IU East. This work was prepared for Sara Baxter’s ENGW131, who states, “I was impressed by the depth and detail of Leegan’s rhetorical analysis of Gee’s article.”
Literacy, Discourse, and Language
Every day, we communicate and learn through speech, writing, and literature. Whether it is consciously or unconsciously, the type of language or Discourse that we use varies in depending on different situations. In the article “Literacy, Discourse, and Linguistics” by James Paul Gee, Gee highlights the importance of knowing what type of language is appropriate for specific situations, as well as the different types of language and Discourses that we use. Gee also explains the significance of where and why we learn our language and Discourses. The purpose of conducting and sharing his research is to give people an in-depth insight into literacy and linguistics.
In the article, Gee starts by discussing a common misinterpretation about what “language” means. This misconception of “language” is what motivated Gee to write this article of his findings. Gee states that, “It is a truism that a person can know perfectly the grammar of a language and know how to use that language” (Gee, 2020, p. 508). Seeing language as just grammar is something a lot of students agree with, especially when it comes to writing and revising their papers. However, there is so much more to language than grammar. Gee goes into explaining how we use different “languages”, such as formal and informal, based on the environment we are in and who we are speaking to. “It is not just what you say, but how you say it.”(Gee, 2020, p. 509). Gee appeared to have wanted to reach a wide range of audiences. He wanted to share the backing and content to why we respond the way we do in different situations. Throughout the article, Gee emphasizes the importance of knowing when it is appropriate to use formal language, but also when it is important to use informal language. This is something that can be easily seen when people talk to their friends versus when someone is talking to their boss. Gee is seen as a credible source when it comes to explaining the differences between the Discourses that we have and the importance of these Discourses. He studied and obtained a doctorate in linguistics, which is the study of language. Gee is also a Regents’ Professor and Mary Lou Fulton Presidential Chair in Literacy Studies at Arizona State University (Gee, 2020, p. 507).
The main topic in Gee’s article is Discourse. Gee talks about the significance and difference of the small “d” and capitalized “D” in discourse/Discourse. He believes the small “d” in discourse refers to the characteristics of our language, whereas the capitalized “D” in Discourse refers to a combination of features, such as our values, interactions and behaviors. Discourse to Gee is another form of expressing oneself. “Discourses are ways of being in the world; they are forms of life which integrate words, acts, values, beliefs, attitudes, and social identities as well as gestures, glances, body positions, and clothes” (Gee, 2020, p. 510). People can have many Discourses throughout their life. Each individual’s primary Discourse is going to be different from another’s. How one person speaks to their family varies from how another person does, but that can also be easily seen. Each “language” has a formal and informal way of speaking, writing, and reading. When we learn a language in school, it is a different experience from what we are used to hearing or seeing in the “real world.” People often use slang, abbreviations, or shortened words so it is easier to write or talk to another person. Our “at home,” or primary Discourse, is the first place where we use language to establish an identity. However, our primary Discourse is not always appropriate to use and therefore we use our second Discourse.
Our second Discourse is the Discourse learned in various social environments we encounter apart from our family, school, club, sport, or a professional job. Gee takes this a step further and dissects our secondary Discourse into two separate categories, dominant and non-dominant. Dominant Discourse refers to Discourses that have the ability to bring “social goods,” such as wealth and status. Dominant secondary Discourse is often looked upon as a symbol of power. A non-dominant Discourse can bring unity between members of a social group, but not necessarily status or wealth. Depending on one’s fluency of a particular Discourse can lead to them being excluded in a social group. This is a way that “natives” establish themselves in a social setting. However, this is also a way for people to tell/see the difference between “natives” and “non-natives.” These specific Discourses can signify social groups that people belong to that group. “It is not just what you say, but how you say it. If I enter my neighborhood bar and say to my tattooed drinking buddy as I sit down, “May I have a match please?” my grammar is perfect, but what I have said is wrong nonetheless. It is not just how you say it, but what you are and do when you say it.” (Gee, 2020, p. 509).
Something that is important to note is that Gee states that “not all Discourse involve writing or reading though many do” (Gee, 2020, p. 514). The article mentions that reading and writing is often incorporated into Discourse, typically because reading and writing cannot be taught without a type of Discourse. Another important aspect of Discourse, according to Gee, is that Discourse is essentially unteachable, even though many schools want teachers to teach some sort of Discourse. “Discourses are not mastered by overt instruction” (Gee, 2020, p. 510). Gee instead states that Discourse is something learned through a “master-apprentice relationship.” This means someone can guide another to master a specific Discourse. There are many different ways of learning Discourse, but this specific method of learning is practiced through social interactions. While grammatical correctness is not something that should be necessarily looked for, it often is used to showcase that one was guided correctly. What many people do not understand about the “master-apprentice relationship” is that it varies from each relationship because of the different cultures and Discourses.
Gee goes on to explain two concepts relating to how metaknowledge and resistance can be used to help aid in Discourse development. The first is true acquisition, which is to have full mastery of a Discourse. However, achieving true acquisition does not seem possible because Discourses change depending on the environment and situation people are actively in. This further agrees with Gee’s statement that Discourses cannot be taught. The second concept is “mushfake” Discourse. This is essentially making do with what you have. Rather than acquiring mastery of a Discourse, a person is obtaining what is available. This idea is often used to describe the Discourse of prison inmates, as they do not have all the necessary materials for Discourse development. Therefore, these individuals make do with what they have and already know. Due to true acquisition not being possible to achieve, Gee believes mushfake is the best way for students to gain an understanding of Discourse. Gee further solidifies his argument of learning Discourse through metaknowledge and resistance by saying “All successful teaching, that is, teaching that inculcates Discourse and not just content, is political. That too is truism” (Gee, 2020, p. 517).
Throughout the article, Gee expresses the different ways “language” is used. While “language” is grammar, it can also be an extension of one’s culture. People use different Discourses in the various situations and environments that they live in. Each environment and situation, therefore, has its own Discourse. The two main types of Discourse Gee talks about are primary and secondary Discourse. Primary Discourse refers to what we learn from our families, while secondary Discourse refers to what is learned in other social environments separate from family. Secondary Discourse can be further broken down into two categories, dominant and non-dominant. Dominant Discourses can bring “goods,” such as wealth and status. Non-dominant Discourses bring unity among people in a social group, but do not bring in “goods.” People use different Discourses in order to show their power in a group, as well as identify those who have not yet mastered a Discourse in order to exclude them from that group. While many want Discourse to be something taught in a classroom, it is considered to be unteachable. Though one strategy to teach students is mushfake, giving them what is available, it is by no means a method of mastery when it comes to learning a Discourse. There are many variables that intertwine and connect parts of language, and many variables that influence the Discourses that people know and use.
Works Cited
Gee, J. (2020). Literacy, Discourse, and Linguistics. In E. Wardle & D. Downs (Eds.), Writing about writing (4th ed., pp. 507-521). Bedford/St. Martin’s.