1) In class, we learned the main parts of discourse analysis: Identify, Classify, Count. We talked about the four children and what their actions and words really meant, and what we can learn from them. We discussed the power hierarchy, who had power and why, and how the children represent themselves. Discourse analysis gives us an opportunity to learn from actions rather than just the words. It also gives us an opportunity to analyze subtext, tone, and meaning in writing and communication. Dr. Chandler said something that I really liked - to paraphrase, "unless you take the time to be conscious of the ideology you subconsciously write, you may be presenting an ideology you don't even subscribe to".
2) I think that the most difficult thing about studying discourse analysis is the way it is discussed. For me, it seems like I have to continually remind myself what the terminology means as we are discussing things and as I read about them. The text and the discussions are very "jargon-y", so despite the fact that I understand the meaning of the words being used, they are more difficult to understand because of their context. Does that make sense? For example, Bloome says, "discourse analysis studies need to acknowledge both micro level and macro level processes" and I have to read that as "[the study of language use] needs to acknowledge both [one on one conversation] and [group or community conversations]." I suppose that as I become more familiar with the terminology, it will be much easier, but for now it can be very confusing.
3) I actually liked that we were re-assigned the same reading after discussion this week. Talking about the chapters as a class gave some insight about discourse analysis that I didn't have the first time through. The second reading was much clearer (although still a little confusing,) and I feel like I got more out of it. I like the idea of revisiting the same information after discussion.
No comments:
Post a Comment