Summary and Synthesis Report #3
Throughout chapter 11 of, What Writing Does and How It Does It, the author, Charles Bazerman, emphasizes the significance of speech acts and its role in verbal formulations. He believes the three-leveled analysis of speech acts that philosopher John Austin explained in his book, How to Do Things with Words, are essential to understanding the status of claims. Bazerman stresses the “‘felicity’ conditions that must be right in order for the speech act to succeed” (Bazerman, 314). This means that Bazerman believes the locutionary act must occur first in a speech act, followed by an illocutionary act, and finished with a perlocutionary effect. The emphasis on each stage provides the reader with a sense of importance in analyzing and appropriately understanding the forms of speech acts.
Midway through the book, Feminist Research In Theory and Practice, by Gayle Letherby, the focus becomes the way speech has had an integral part in the progression of feminism. Letherby begins the section of I am What I am, or am I?, with the Maynard concept that the term “difference” has a close relation to western feminism. Letherby states that “With reference to ‘difference’ as diversity of experience, assumptions that gender unites women more powerfully than other ‘differences’ has been challenged” (Letherby, 49). Although the movement of feminism was to unite women based on their difference of gender, the result was that women compared their differences between each other. The comparisons between themselves formed an otherness unsurpassable for many women. The intention to unite women together is the illocutionary act, which is what was literally meant to occur. Unfortunately, the interpretation for many was the unintended perlocutionary effect, which caused women to feel as if they were unable to join the feminist movement. In the bigger picture, the term “difference” was (also) misinterpreted by second-wave feminists. The word was meant to “point to the inequalities and disadvantages that women experience when compared to men” (Letherby, 49). During the second-wave feminism movement, the intention from the use of “difference” was unity between women, while the consequence of that act was a different interpretation that sparked a separate movement in women.The way in which the word “difference” impacted the movement of feminism is an ideal example of the importance of the speech act conditions.
Barbara Tomlinson, the author of Feminism And Affect At The Scene Of Argument, aims to combat the arguments formulated to ignore feminism. In the latter half of chapter 1, Tomlinson creates a counterargument to Epstein’s notion that feminists are perpetually angry women that are lead by irrational emotions. Tomlinson rebuttals, asserting “Feminists and other women are constantly faced with claims that they must forgive and overlook such ‘humorous’ sexist commentary (‘It’s just a joke!’)” (Tomlinson, 14). This introduction to her argument, that women are barraged with sexist and disadvantageous attitudes, emphasizes the importance of understanding speech acts. Epstein’s argument of jokes being misinterpreted as sexism is a prime example of the mishap that can occur between the locutionary act and perlocutionary effect. Epstein believes that the statements that belittle women are spoken, and meant to be interpreted, as jokes. Tomlinson states that she, and the women on the receiving end, are the people listening to these statements and claim their judgement to be sexism. Feminist movement for equality is the consequence, or the perlocutionary effect, that is a response to sexism. Unfortunately, Epstein proves his ignorance to the three-leveled analysis of speech as he forces “Any objection by a feminist… is eagerly taken up to ‘turn’ the debate from whether the joke is puerile and insulting to why it’s funny… and what is wrong with her if she does not think so (Tomlinson, 14). The standpoint that Epstein takes shuts down any criticism or interpretation a sexist comment can make. This is a violation of the three-leveled analysis, and as a result is a failed argument. The approach that Tomlinson takes against Epstein helps solidify the concept that speech acts will fail when they do not follow the three-leveled analysis explained earlier.
In, A Teaching Subject, by Joseph Harris, the author analyzes the way in which English and college writing has adapted to the structure of college institutes. The growth theory identifies the progress teaching has had, for example, in assigning essay assignments. Harris hones in on the method in which a student reveals an experience in a story. He believes experience writing on something outside of school may cause humility for a student; this is the idea that connects to the three-leveled analysis. Although growth theorists believe teachers have began to properly assign writings on intellectual experiences, student’s out of school experiences have caused a perlocutionary effect. The examples students tell their teachers contain the locutionary act. This is the story a student literally tells his teacher. In Harris’s book, he refers to an important moment in a students life, that they would have preferred to keep hidden. The consequence of this improper storytelling is created by the growth theory. As a result of the out of school experience essay, this form of storytelling has been pushed out of school systems. Harris states “it could be argued that no real change or learning can take place without such conflicts” (Harris, 18). Harris is referring to the ongoing battle between students and teachers position on storytelling. Harris goes on to claim that “there would be some cruelty involved in asking a student to write about an important moment in her life” (Harris, 18). This is the standpoint that growth theorists and Harris take on why there has to be change. The perlocutionary effect, or consequence to the locutionary act, is the pushback on out of school storytelling. On top of this, the reader can clearly identify that the illocutionary act is answering the assignment question given. Harris reassures that students want to succeed, therefore the illocutionary act identified in these essay assignments would be the question being asked. A Teaching Subject successfully manages to incorporate the three-step analysis of speech acts inside the growth theory. Harris intertwines the two, inadvertently, as the growth theory and three-step process go nearly hand in hand.
Word Count: 1132
- With the rise of social media in today’s society, has the three-step analysis become less significant to the speaker? For example, the president may not consider consequences, or the interpretation his Tweets may have.
- Would you argue that the illocutionary act, or the perlocutionary effect, is more important in general? In other words, would the intentions outweigh the possible consequences?
- Has the three-step process become more dated as technology and society evolves? Do you believe there is a different, or replacement, step that contributes considerably more in the proper analysis of speech acts?
Paradigm Shift Project
Blog Post (04/30/18)
1. During the 2016 election people dismissed Hilary because she was a woman, so they voted for Trump because they wanted a male president. They were afraid of change and made impulsive decisions.
2. In an incident on twitter, Rapper T.I publicly dismissed Hilary as a presidential candidate as he categorized all women as too emotional. Oprah responded to these comments directly, telling him to essentially stay silent on this subject as he clearly can not contribute properly.
3) Just because one person from a minority group becomes a success in life, doesn’t mean that unfair struggles / advantages do not exist. You hear all the time “Well I succeeded and I had (insert hindrance here) but circumstances for everyone are different and the overall issue may still exist. Ex) business women CEO has more obstacles to have a position of power.
Throughout the chapters of Reading Chinese Fortune Cookie, by LuMing Mao, the author presents multiple arguments supporting the need for proper growth in Chinese American rhetoric. In chapter 1, Mao references the concept of a rhetorical borderland and states that if we accept and understand them, then we must also consider that they are examples of hybrid rhetoric. She clarifies her thoughts claiming “It is perhaps reasonable, and even logical, to view Chinese American rhetoric as a hybrid because it indeed invokes and involves two kinds of rhetorical practices and their underlying traditions (Mao 25).” Mao expands on the concept of hybrid rhetoric and is cautiously optimistic about the idea that through hybridity, multiracial harmony can be attempted and succeeded.
The author of Groove: Synchronizing African American Rhetoric and Multimedia Writing through the Digital Griot, by Adam Banks, makes multiple connections to hybrid rhetoric. Banks discusses the Oral Narrative Engagement method created by Ted Grace, and lists it as one of the ways African American students are able to connect their teachings to the storytelling traditions. Banks claims that “the importance of the story, of narrative in African American rhetorical traditions, to efforts at both participation in American society and resistance to oppression” and to “ensure that new realities do not erase those ‘ancient rivers’ ” (Groove 17). Banks pushes for methods that are more inclusive to African American students. Instead of an educational system that ignores the historical traditions of their students, its important to Banks’ argument that African American students have a proper mix of current and past knowledge in order to connect with technology in the modern era. The students are given access to Black culture through stories and other methods discussed in the chapter, while learning instruction from print literacies. Similar to the way Mao presses that hybrid cultures can be beneficial, Banks presses for old culture to be mixed with the new in order to have an inclusive educational system.
In the excerpt from Voices of the Self, by Keith Gilyard, the author analyzes his personal experiences with Black English in schools. Gilyard recognizes that the way English is taught in schools has not yet adjusted for extensions of the language, such as Black English. Unfortunately, the lack of inclusiveness leaves African American students at a disadvantage. In chapter 1 of his book, Gilyard states “I have worked with Black students who, for the most part, have been ill-prepared by the public schools to write the Standard English demanded of them” (Voices of the Self 11). The public school systems choose to ignore the necessary mix of languages in order to properly prepare their students. Later, Gilyard tells his story in the school system, and his battle with integrating Black English into his education. Gilyard explains “Included in my bag of communicative tricks were that prize stratagem, Black English, a productive biloquialism, and a broader receptive bidialectalism” (Voices of the Self 33). By successfully mixing the formal English curriculum taught in school, with the Black English he had developed himself, Gilyard feels he can properly use the two together. Although retaining the use of Black English throughout his life benefited him, Black English still struggles to make its way into the public school system. Mao’s belief in hybridity in regards to rhetorics draws parallels to Gilyard’s desire for a school system that teaches students the proper use of both Black English, and curriculum English.
In contrast to the previous examples of rhetoric and language mixing, chapter 5 of What Writing Does and How It Does It, finds a method in which an inner border zone is created for certain people. Marcia Buell, the author of chapter 5, Code-Switching and Second Language Writing: How Multiple Codes Are Combined in a Text, looks into the ways in which contrastive language affects the learner. The person learning a second language ends up with an inter-rhetoric, which is when “learners of new rhetorical codes may creatively produce novel, border zone forms, new combinations and transformations that mimic neither the code they are learning nor the code they already know” (Buell 102). This means that the person learning a new language is themself, a borderland. The person is not consistently being affected by others rhetoric, rather they are their own influence. As a result, the code, or speech, they create is neither the code they are learning or already know. This is one of Buell’s examples of code-switching, and it closely relates to Mao’s concept of hybrid rhetoric. In this case though, Buell and interlanguage analysis show that inter-rhetoric is an example of a border zone.
Word Count: 828
- How does technology hold an influence over the way we write in today’s world?
- How has the technology already changed the way our language works?
- Why have the public school systems embraced the new language of technology, but felt it was acceptable to leave behind Black Language?
Paradigm Story Board
Paradigm Shift Script
Fake News Report
3) The author uses Twitter to get his message across (the students are victim to these accusations)
4) “Fake”, “Crisis actor”
5) – The conspiracy theorists are incorrect, if the theories exist it means that his wish to spread the word is successful
6) Proper, professional, but gives the notion that he is against these theories. “As the false theory goes”, this opening to a sentence gives off the feeling that the author is belittling them and their ideas
7) The author acknowledges the claim that multiple people with the name “David Hogg” somehow connects the concept of this David Hogg being an actor
9)”It also shows just how strong the Parkland students are in fighting back”
10) Connects the article to other interviews that were had, as well as social media replies from Twitter
What Writing Does and How It Does It: Chapter 4 & Scrolling Forward: Chapter 3
Paradigm Shift Multimedia Project
For our Paradigm Shift Multimedia Group Project, we decided to focus on the current President of the United States, Donald Trump. Specifically, we wish to delve into the methods Trump uses to communicate to the public. In recent history, social media has largely taken over the way we communicate with one another. In the likes, this storm has swept up the President himself and caused a rather unique approach when it comes to communicating as a President. We hope to analyze this approach and the harm or good that will / has come out of it. With sources including other political leaders around the world and their opinions on the matter, all the way to news outlets that feed on his twitter drama. The question becomes, how does this affect Americans?
Mediums: pictures, tweets, audio
This I Believe
Audio Essay –
Page Link –
Summary and Synthesis Report #1
In chapter 3 of What Writing Does and How It Does It, Ellen Barton discusses the impact discourse analysis may have on different methods of writing. She argues that through discourse analysis, we are given the opportunity to analyze specific features of language in text, and better understand how they contribute to the interpretations of text. In other words, this concept revolves around the idea that discourse analysis provides the reader a different lens to comprehend texts further. She analyzes everything from sentence structure and its impact on a readers understanding, to describing the simplistic ways humans may communicate face-to-face. Further in the reading, Barton explains “In this analysis, evidentials became a rich feature because their use systematically established a difference in the ways that epistemological stance is conventionally expressed by experienced vs. inexperienced writers in academic writing” (Barton 72). The neat way evidentials are weaved into text assist the argument Barton claims, the idea that with sed features they contribute to our interpretation of the text.
The authors of Chapter 8 in What Writing Does and How It Does It, Kevin Leander and Paul Prior, list and describe the applied methods of writing that are ways of representing talk in text. Leander and Prior would find themselves not only agreeing with Barton, but contributing to ways of better interpreting texts. They cover the various ways text is interpreted by, and created for, the reader. From “Think Aloud Transcription” to “Conversation Analytic Transcription,” the reader is provided multiple angles to better comprehend a reading. These methods directly correlate to ways in which text is understood. For example, conversation analytic transcription is the use of many literary devices to translate recorded talk into text. This method “has also extended literary devices in several key ways to capture the details of talk” (Leander and Prior 210). This means devices such as a ‘//’ will be able to help the reader understand that the dialogue has someone overtalking the other. In another example, the use of ‘=’ between two continuous lines of text represents a quick turn in dialogue, with no break. These are techniques that provide an answer to a question, how do we as readers or writers, fluently transcribe verbal conversations into text. Overall, the use of conversation analytic transcription enhances the readers reading experience, which parallels to the concept of adding new lenses for further understandings of the text.
The English language is constantly changing, always adapting to each generation, each cultural phenomenon, each person. In do you speak American?, the author creates a debate between two different kinds of literary minds. In chapter 1, he calls the debate, The Language Wars, and the concepts closely relate to those of Barton’s. Barton believes there are plentiful ways in which specific features of a language can contribute to its interpretation of texts. While Barton may evaluate the subject-verb-object order, this article describes the usefulness of faster communication, and its effectiveness over technical, disciplined speaking . For example, “Those negotiations continuing. Mr. Bush speaking to reporters earlier today. Suddenly optimistic (do you speak american? 28).” In three sentences, the idea is successfully crossed to the reader, while managing to keep the time that is spent dwelling on the subject relatively short. In today’s society, time is as valuable as ever and proper communication is plausible in this short, but grammatically incorrect phrasing. Even translated to text, we are able to understand it because our culture can currently relate to it. This method of communication would be a way in which Barton says we analyze our language and interpret it. It is also a unique feature of analyzation as our language is continually changing. In a few decades or even centuries this form of rapid, or spitball, communication may be non-existent and incoherent in terms of properly using our language.
Thirdly, the author of chapter 10 in What Writing Does and How It Does It, Jack Selzer, reviews certain concepts that help its readers better understand how text has the power of persuasion. The breakdown on contextual rhetorical analysis explains its importance in the role of persuasion. Contextual rhetorical analysis requires the reader to not simply read the text in front of them, but to “understand communications through the lens of their environments” (Selzer 292). This enables a different outlook on the given text to each individual reader. The sheer number of possibilities each reader can interpret and connect with the text is limitless. This method of analysis pushes the reader further, to comprehend the reading as a part of different cultures. The text is given the opportunity to connect on a personal level with everyone. It has the possibility to be timeless, as the reader may always be able to relate the text back to something relevant and current. Barton would agree this method of analysis provides any reader a different lens to interpret the text at hand. Therefore, the concept of contextual rhetorical analysis has successfully managed to grasp an understanding of our language, and use it to continually “add more” to our texts.
In Socratic Commitment and Critical Literacy, we are also given the opportunity to view the negative effects language may have on its texts. Throughout chapter 3, the author addresses critical literacy and how he has seen it applied. In one case, the importance of proper language usage becomes evident. The fact that “The reporters who also really knew what Liang argued, focused on his “grammatical errors” (Socratic 31). In context, Liang had written an argumentative and emotional email that had a clear motive and message. The issue arose when critics, instead of answering the problem presented at hand, turned to specifics of the email that were unimportant. Previously, we have agreed that unique twists in language allows a deeper interpretation for its readers, but in this situation, it is used as a “weapon” to discredit someone. In comparison to the argument Barton created, the issue in Chapter three of Socratic Commitment and Critical Literacy is the misuse or incorrect way to analyze language in text.
Finally, in Scrolling Forward, David Levy provides a unique outlook on the significance of receipts. Previously, we have analyzed practices such as conversation analytic transcription, improper vs. proper forms of communication, and contextual rhetorical analysis. For each of these practices, none of them emphasize the physical form in which they communicate their texts quite like a receipt can. In chapter 1 of Scrolling Forward, we have the opportunity to identify the importance the way text is presented. In modern society, every person is able to identify a receipt by its form factor, small font, and its list format. Although it may not seem like it, Barton’s would have to agree that, although simplistic, receipts have a valid place in regards to using our language to interpret text. Levy praises the receipt for its ability to accomplish so much in a remarkable manner. It communicates to the reader in such a simplistic way, that it becomes extremely useful. “The thin strip of paper, the column of numbers in blocky fixed-width characters, the logo at the top all serve to identify it” (Levy 18). The receipt takes the most basic functionality traits and uses it to its advantage. Simple font, simple words, simple format, simple document. This method allows for quick and fluid exchange between the reader and receipt. Barton would have to agree that the receipt manages to take the most simple aspects of language, and allow the user to interpret it for a single, but a universally useful message.
- How, if even possible, can a writer translate his/her correct message in a text, without cultural conversation analysis causing miscommunication for the reader.
- In a society that is constantly breaking the mold and changing, how will text that’s using informal language translate to future generations? Will it convey the same message? Will the story be hindered because of a rough or improper translation? Would it have been better, in the long run, to stick with the proper form of language?
- With all of these options to interpret text through different features of language, can the reader become more susceptible to misinterpretation?
Word Count: 1372
This I Believe Proposal
– Better executes her argument
4) – More explanation with my logos
– Include more personal stories
– More reliability incorporated
– Use my position (pathos)