Thank you, Tim Rapley, for making sense of this new world of discourse analysis!
After reading the first five chapters of Rapley's Doing Conversation, Discourse and Document Analysis I have more answers, more rationale, and more questions -- my favorite signs of learning-in-process. Here are a few of my new beginnings at sense-making.
When analyzing discourse, I am focused on "how language is used in certain contexts" (p. 2). I am able to view language as constructive - it produces the world I/we live in. The social constructionist traditions tell me that my "understanding of things... is not somehow natural or pre-given but rather is the product of human actions and interactions, human history, society and culture" (p. 4). Further, this knowledge is created by me and by my interactions with others. It is "performative and functional" (p. 7). My goal in discourse analysis is to examine "how the specific thing [I am] interest in routinely occurs or 'comes off' as it does" (p. 21).
Dr. Paulus' references to how people "work up" a "performance" of their identity in action is beginning to make sense. How do I "perform" researcher, student, teacher, etc. in my everyday activities and language use? I invoke certain societal norms when I address my class and say, "Let's get started." The students know how to perform the student role and I know how to perform the teacher role. If I were studying such an interaction, I should look for the unusual, the inconsistent, the disruptions of that performance. Or, I might look at the language in use of these performances to see what they might say about the culture of "doing school." Be patient with me, followers, I am just beginning to understand...
Sunday, September 27, 2009
Saturday, September 26, 2009
Catching up with The Single Woman
On the topic of agency and personal identity:
Early on, Reynolds begins to use phrases of an external "other," sometimes labeled society or the culture and sometimes an unidentified dominance, which is somehow responsible for making resources "available" for single women in their self construction. I find myself troubled by the idea that one is "acted upon" in the viewing of herself. Can it be the responsibility of "culture" to assure that each member of the collective has the tools for examining each self? How is this accomplished? Does the inability of a member of a minority group, such as single women, to be able to imagine, view, speak and act in whatever way she wants about her identity mean that this member or group has been "marginalized" by the remainder of the culture?
"If single women are in some way marginalized, this becomes an issue for their presentation of themselves and their conversational practices" (p. 3).
"Singleness is a discourse regulating conduct" (p. 20).
Could it be that rejecting others' views and language is itself the act of identity formation? This seems the most plausible and empowering view to take. Perhaps I need to explore the evolution of the term "marginalization" further to understand the use of this term in so much of our literature.
I appreciate Reynolds' very open reflexivity statements whereby she positions both herself, the single woman, and herself, the researcher of single women. In outlining the purpose and aim of the book, Reynolds tells the reader that "I expect the single identity to be shaped by the wider cultural resources available to the individual woman, her own personal history and the conversational turns suggested the immediate situation" (p. 25). She further states that she is interested in exploring the questions of "What different ways do they [models and types of singleness] offer a woman on her own of understanding her life and her current situation?" (p. 26).
I find problematic the notion that "society" could allow or hinder the identity formation of its members. I further find it troubling to imagine that anyone needs to be offered models or types of others to understand themselves.
I am grateful to Reynolds for the format and flow of her book. This is a wonderful opportunity to examine the researcher's developing thoughts and not just read a review of the materials she read in preparing her study.
Early on, Reynolds begins to use phrases of an external "other," sometimes labeled society or the culture and sometimes an unidentified dominance, which is somehow responsible for making resources "available" for single women in their self construction. I find myself troubled by the idea that one is "acted upon" in the viewing of herself. Can it be the responsibility of "culture" to assure that each member of the collective has the tools for examining each self? How is this accomplished? Does the inability of a member of a minority group, such as single women, to be able to imagine, view, speak and act in whatever way she wants about her identity mean that this member or group has been "marginalized" by the remainder of the culture?
"If single women are in some way marginalized, this becomes an issue for their presentation of themselves and their conversational practices" (p. 3).
"Singleness is a discourse regulating conduct" (p. 20).
Could it be that rejecting others' views and language is itself the act of identity formation? This seems the most plausible and empowering view to take. Perhaps I need to explore the evolution of the term "marginalization" further to understand the use of this term in so much of our literature.
I appreciate Reynolds' very open reflexivity statements whereby she positions both herself, the single woman, and herself, the researcher of single women. In outlining the purpose and aim of the book, Reynolds tells the reader that "I expect the single identity to be shaped by the wider cultural resources available to the individual woman, her own personal history and the conversational turns suggested the immediate situation" (p. 25). She further states that she is interested in exploring the questions of "What different ways do they [models and types of singleness] offer a woman on her own of understanding her life and her current situation?" (p. 26).
I find problematic the notion that "society" could allow or hinder the identity formation of its members. I further find it troubling to imagine that anyone needs to be offered models or types of others to understand themselves.
I am grateful to Reynolds for the format and flow of her book. This is a wonderful opportunity to examine the researcher's developing thoughts and not just read a review of the materials she read in preparing her study.
Tuesday, September 15, 2009
Stammering in Public
OK, now.... I believe this course should have a disclaimer (or warning label) posted that says, "This course may cause hemming and hawing in your speech acts. Beware, teachers!" I cannot tell you how many times I catch myself wanting to say [something] and instead pausing [and thinking] about all of the ways my words might be used. My speech acts while teaching the undergraduates would be a horrible source for analysis due to the confounding of my pauses with "turns" in the dialogue. Speaking of which, I am fascinated by the ideas of analysing the turns in discourse; asking what is this doing here....
I hate that I missed the discussion on The Single Woman, but I have a fun image for anyone reading. Here I am, on the back of my husband's Harley Davidson Electra Glide Classic, heading to Washington, D.C. to protest irresponsible leadership and spending, wearing my leather "biker chick" jacket and reading.....The Single Woman! Let me tell you about the looks some time!
I hate that I missed the discussion on The Single Woman, but I have a fun image for anyone reading. Here I am, on the back of my husband's Harley Davidson Electra Glide Classic, heading to Washington, D.C. to protest irresponsible leadership and spending, wearing my leather "biker chick" jacket and reading.....The Single Woman! Let me tell you about the looks some time!
Thursday, September 3, 2009
Extending the discussion from Doug's Blog
I am enjoying reading thoughts and comments from others. I am also hyper-aware of my novice posture with blogging. It is intimidating to put one's ideas, thoughts, etc. out there without a review, peer edit, revision, etc.. It is my own discomfort with the permanency of one's written words...
That said,
I was able to post some thoughts on others' sites, but was unable to post a comment to Doug's blog site without a Google password. Here are the observations I would like to make about the conversation between Dr. Paulus and Doug.
(I don't seem to possess the ability to paste comments from Word here, either...)
Dr. Paulus:
"This is particularly important when doing analysis from a DASP perspective - you want to identify all the possible angles, assumptions, beliefs going on in a particular conversation segment, and working with people you don't share a lot in common with can help with this."
I understand and deeply value the benefit of trying to uncover/discover the multiple meanings of language, the background possibilities, the intentionality, etc. Jessica Lester and I are working on a project to speak directly into and at our own assumptions and the origins of those thoughts on a topic in which we disagree. It is quite informative and I am anxious to experience it with others. The key for me is mutual regard and respect and a willingness to expose your own hidden meanings....
Doug:
"You espouse a centralized view of instruction and pedagogy that is not only diametrically opposed to my point of view, but to the overwhelming view of higher education."
What, specifically, are you talking about here? This "centralized view of instruction" is what, specifically? How does the "overwhelming view" of others work to bolster your point?
That said,
I was able to post some thoughts on others' sites, but was unable to post a comment to Doug's blog site without a Google password. Here are the observations I would like to make about the conversation between Dr. Paulus and Doug.
(I don't seem to possess the ability to paste comments from Word here, either...)
Dr. Paulus:
"This is particularly important when doing analysis from a DASP perspective - you want to identify all the possible angles, assumptions, beliefs going on in a particular conversation segment, and working with people you don't share a lot in common with can help with this."
I understand and deeply value the benefit of trying to uncover/discover the multiple meanings of language, the background possibilities, the intentionality, etc. Jessica Lester and I are working on a project to speak directly into and at our own assumptions and the origins of those thoughts on a topic in which we disagree. It is quite informative and I am anxious to experience it with others. The key for me is mutual regard and respect and a willingness to expose your own hidden meanings....
Doug:
"You espouse a centralized view of instruction and pedagogy that is not only diametrically opposed to my point of view, but to the overwhelming view of higher education."
What, specifically, are you talking about here? This "centralized view of instruction" is what, specifically? How does the "overwhelming view" of others work to bolster your point?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)