"Coaches Can Read, Too"

Establishing the Territory

-       When Sean Branick begins to establish a territory regarding his discourse community of football coaches, he does this very effectively. Swales refers to this move as  “providing necessary background on the topic.” Branick does this by giving a brief intro about the football coach discourse community. He says that they come from your everyday people to “legends”. This knowledge is important because it provides with a little insight on the community before diving into it.

Establishing a Niche

-       In this part of the introduction, according to Swales, is when an atuthor makes their claim or says their purpose. Sean Branick does this in this particular article by making a statement claiming that the work coaches put in is overlooked and that there is many behind the scene factors that go into making a successful coach.

Occupying a Niche

-       In this mode the author will fill in the gaps. They will say how they will accomplish their research question. Sean does this by stating in the final sentence of his introduction the great attributes and characteristics a coach must have to be successful.

"Learning to Serve"

            I thoroughly enjoyed reading Tony Mirabelli’s “Learning to Serve”. Not only because the discourse community I am studying is a restaurant, but also because I found it extremely interesting. I believe that Mirabelli’s research question was more of a point or thesis then a particular question. I thought his point, which is stated in sixths and seventh paragraph of the introduction, is that he believes there are literacy skills required in the restaurant industry that are important for being successful. These skills cannot be taught in academic setting. “How the waitress or waiter understands and uses the texts such as the menu and how she or he “reads” and verbally interacts with the customer reflect carefully constructed uses of language and literacy.”(Pg. 541) He also mentions that he hopes his work will help people in general; especially the “academics” come to a realization that there is something to be respected about service work.

            The data that Mirabelli uses to analyze Lou’s is from his own experiences, observations, notes, documents, interviews, recordings, and transcriptions, as well as some useful literature. (Pg. 543) After his analysis of Lou’s Mirabelli finds modes of communication and knowledge about the menu and food are critical concepts a waiter or waitress must be familiar with to be successful. The last sentence in this article says a lot about what Mirabelli is trying to get at: “The low status of waitressing and waitering belies the complex nature of this kind of work and the innovative and creative ways in which such workers use language.” (Pg. 554) In other words, saying that waiters and waitresses are low status and uneducated because of their job is untrue because to be good at what they do they must use language in new and innovative ways that are very intelligent and creative. People who don’t know what the job entails shouldn’t be so quick to judge. A degree doesn’t always necessarily make you more intelligent.  

Project 4 Proposal

For project four, The Discourse Community Ethnography, I am going to observe and analyze my place of employment, Bagel Street Deli. Bagel Street Deli is a local deli in Athens Ohio. It has been around for many years and it is a crowd favorite in the area. I am a member of this discourse community because I work there. I have been working there since spring of my freshman year (I am now a junior). I think this would be an adequate discourse community to analyze and report on because as employees at Bagel Street Deli we have a way of communicating that may seem foreign and/or incomplete to an outsider or non-native. We refer to certain items or ingredients in the deli by nicknames or abbreviations. There is a certain language that we as Bagel Street Deli employees pick up on, and the longer you work there the more comfortable you become with this particular language. In my project I am going to focus on the differences between a new member or “rookie” verse a “veteran” of the discourse community. I will be asking a rookie and a vet the same interview questions and analyzing the differences and similarities between the two members of the community.

I think it will be interesting to analyze this particular discourse community because I have worked at other restaurants in the past and I think it will be interesting to see how this discourse community compares to the others that I have worked at. I hope to learn how the language and ways of communication affect the group dynamic and comradery of the employees or group members. Being part of this community, I recognize that establishing a good reputation within the community goes hand in hand with being able to understand the lexis and ways of communication within the community. It takes times to build your way up to being respected within the group. I’m going to add and build on what Ann Johns touches on when she discusses authority. Except when it comes to Bagel Street it is more of hierarchy then actual authority with the members. Although we do have authority, owners and managers obviously have authority over most employees, but I want to focus more on the hierarchy of the regular workers within the community. I will try to add to the conversation by touching on the relations and hierarchy or members.

A source I will focus on when writing this ethnography will be “Discourse Communities and Communities of Practice” by Ann M. Johns. I will focus on her section discussing Issues of Authority.  Another source I will be referring to is the article we most recently read by Elizabeth Wardle entitled “Identity, Authority, and Learning to Write in a New Workplace.” This particular article relates very well to the angle that I plan on going with my ethnography because Wardle discusses the modes or ways a newcomer uses to inherit a sense of belonging within the discourse community. Since I intend on focusing on that as well, this article will I’m sure prove to be extremely beneficial. Another source from Writing About Writing that I plan on using in my ethnography is “The Concept of a Discourse Community” by John Swales. I will refer to Gee’s 6 characteristics of a discourse community in “Literacy, Discourse, and Linguistics” as well. I will majorly use Gee and Swales for my description of Bagel Street Deli, and convincing my audience that it is in fact a suitable discourse community to study. I will draw more from Wardle and Johns to state my points and to add to the ongoing conversation of the discourse communities.

"Identity, Authority, and Learning to Write in New Workplaces"

In Elizabeth Wardle’s article “Identity, Authority, and Learning to Write in New Workplaces” she discusses the three ways that newcomers try to belong to a new community. The three ways that newcomers try to belong to a community include engagement, imagination, and alignment. The first way of belonging, engagement, is very important because it is the way that the newcomers of a discourse community become first associated with the older members of the community. For example at my discourse community, Bagel Street Deli, the newer employees must begin a conversation with the older employees to begin to conjure up a relationship with them. If they were to come into Bagel Street and not engage in conversation or even participate in the work, they would never be accepted into the discourse community.

            The next way newcomers become accepted into a discourse community would be imagination. Imagination is important because when using your imagination, you are expanding yourself and your experiences. You create new images of the world and of you and by doing this you become more open minded to becoming part of the discourse community. In my discourse community, Bagel Street Deli the newcomers use their imagination to become accepted when they begin to try to “picture” or imagine what jobs they will succeed at or when they are figuring out what jobs they enjoy doing the best. For example figuring out what techniques of “bageling” or bagel making work best for you.

            The final way newcomers use to become accepted into a discourse community is by alignment. Alignment is the negotiation or the acceptance of how the discourse community works. When becoming accepted into the community new members must align their particular ways with the older members. This requires a combination of conforming and figuring out what works for you. At Bagel Street Deli it would be making sure that you are doing the job in a way that is acceptable to the other members, using your own techniques and what others taught you.

            Each new employee enculturates the discourse community because every time we hire a new person, new relationships form, new methods are created, and new jobs are discovered or maybe old jobs are done in new ways. Each new employee eventually brings something new and great to the restaurant.

"Discourse Communities and Communication of Practice"

In the introduction to “Discourse Communities and Communities of Practice it is touched upon that this particular article is an extension of an ongoing conversation between John Swales and James Gee. In Summary this conversation is made up of Swales commenting that just because you are involved with a discourse community, doesn’t necessarily mean that you belong to that particular community. Gee on the other hand discusses that a person “from non-dominant home discourses can only join dominant ones through mushfake.”

            Ann M. Johns adds much to this conversation in this article. While both Gee and Swales failed to mention the conflict within the discourse communities. John brings up the notion that perhaps discourse communities is not the best term for describing the community, but Communities of Practice is better suitable. She claims this title is better equip for the term because” it refers to genres and lexis that hold communities together or separate them from one another.” A point that John touches on again and again is that students must be introduced to a wide range of  their own genres in the classroom. She says that is important to draw from our students own experiences and to have the students learn from each others different Communities of Practice.

 I found the most interesting part of John’s article was when she discusses the community conflicts. She lists the cost of affiliation, issues of authority, conventions and anticonventionalism, and dialogue and critique as some of the conflicts that can arise within a community. These conflicts are mostly affiliated with the academic communities and how students adjust to the academic Communities of Practice.  But Johns talks about more then just academic communities in the article. She discusses professional communities, which are discourse communities within the work force. She also discusses Social, Political, and Recreational Communties, which are communities that are developed within a certain group of interest. An example of a recreational community would be a cycling group. All of these groups are very different and Johns says that it is important for students to be familiar with because they must understand the importance of group practices.

"Literacy, Discourse, and Linguistics"

In the article “Literacy, Discourse and Linguistics” James Paul Gee discusses the constant “tests” of discourse communities. In these tests members of the community test a person to see if the person is a “native” or “non-native” to the community. This can cause strain between primary and secondary discourse communities. But in many cases a primary discourse community has been influenced by a secondary discourse community. I can attest to this being true in my life when looking at my discourse community of my house here at Ohio University as my primary discourse community, but it is influenced by my secondary discourse community, twitter. Much of the language my 6 room mates I pick up on is funny stuff we pick up on twitter. We all have a twitter account and follow each other so twitter talk is often discussed within the house. This influences the way we communicate with each other via text message or even face to face.

            Another point I think Gee is making is that to be accepting and kept in the discourse community, you have to be shown that you are in the loop. On page 487 Gee states, “Social Groups will not, usually, give their social goods to those who are not native.” This emphasizing that these tests are the “gates”, as Gee calls them to getting in and staying in the discourse community you belong to. Gee discusses how superficial language can be and I agree. I think the point he is trying to make is discourse communities can go back to economic class, which can seem superficial indeed.

"The Concept of the Discourse Community"

1.     A discourse community has a broadly agreed set of common public goals.

- In other words Swales is saying that each discourse community has a known agenda; that each person in the community is well aware of what the discourse community intends to achieve or do. This agenda could be written or just known. An example in my life would be the discourse community of my soccer team in high school. We had common goals that we all wanted to achieve, winning. This necessarily didn’t need to be said, although it was.

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

- Swales means that each discourse community has its on different way of communicating depending on the discourse community. For example within the discourse community of my roommates we use a language and way of communicating just with each other that other people may find offensive or not understand, but to us it seems normal. For example calling each other words that are usually insulting is in our discourse community humorous; yet we would never say them to someone outside the community.

3.     A discourse community uses its participatory mechanisms primarily to provide information and feedback.

- To me Swales is saying that because a person is a member of the discourse community the way they interact with other people, members or nonmembers is in a way to possess feedback. For example when working at Bagel Street Deli to better the service or quality of the food, I may ask someone how they enjoy their bagel. The next day another member of the community may do the same thing. It is a tactic we use to advance the success of the store.

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

- I believe Swales is touching on how within a discourse community there are many different functions when it comes to communicating and because of this the discourse community is always expanding and changing. For example my extended family discourse community is always growing. People are getting married and having children and consequently roles are changing. My Aunts are now becoming grandparents, while my cousins are now becoming parents.

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

- Swales is commenting on the discourse community having a very specific way of communicating. I think he also touches on how technology can be brought into this aspect of discourse communities as well.  In the work place this is very common. At Bagel Street Deli I know there are words that we say that if a normal customer heard they wouldn’t know what we were talking about.

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

- I think Swales is talking about the variety of people that are in the discourse community and how they are all on different levels as far as hierarchy and importance goes. For example at my Dad’s company where I work over the summer there is a clear “food chain.” My Dad is the boss at the top, then the other reps who work for him, then the secretaries, then his assistant, and then me.  All of the people above me know more then I do about the community.