- This combination is important for James Paul Gee because he states that “At any moment we are using language, we must say or write the right thing in the right way while playing… attitudes” (Page 2). What this means to Gee is what is important is not language, or even grammar but Discourses which are saying (writing)- doing-being-valuing-believing combinations. Even the way he capitalizes the “D” in Discourse shows how important that series of combinations is. For example, a Discourse is a way or ways of being in the world, like life forms with identities including physical matter like clothing. Not just the matter of clothing, but where one is, the action one is completing, and what one is doing all play significant and equal factors in Gee’s “Discourse.” If a construction worker, wearing dirty jeans containing paint on them, at a school event asked the principal of his sons school “U got a smoke”, the Discourse is not “there”.
- There is often conflict and tension between the values, beliefs and attitudes of being in the world where Discourses represent. Gee states in passage seven, “Discourses are not bodies of knowledge like physics… you”. This states that Discourses are not just something you can learn, but they are embedded within oneself. One can not just take a “Discourse” class and learn everything one needs to know. Gee also lets us know that based on ones specific Discourse, someone can get a certain job out of it. Also, he says that if people have Discourses that are initial key things, anybody could need, like, for example, the attempt to interact with others in social settings. To become a linguist, one needs the most exact requirements. Linguistics will help give insight to drive people on important aspects of human knowledge. And becoming a historian, studies majors and classes related to the field with the exact requirements. Gee contradicted how to become a linguist by saying: you can teach them the linguistics, but not how to be a linguist which is not completely accurate, but wise.
- Gee talks about these articles for, basically, all of page seven because they are significant to his points. The authors of those articles think one person did a good job, and the other failed, but Gee heavily disagrees. The first case was clearly a failure and the second one sounded decent, but lacked key components. She was lacking the values for that specific task (Discourse). Aside from not answering the question completely, she wasn’t showing good signs. She wasn’t acting very confident and lacked Discourse. In job interviews one is supposed to “brag” about themselves and show themselves off to show confidence and their accomplishments. However, she did the complete opposite. Gee says “She fails to characterize her own expertise in the overly optimistic form called for by such interviews.” This means that during an interview you should not show flaws and you must remain optimistic throughout to show that you are competent.
collreadwrit1a
