Blog 3 - Shaggy Dog analysis

In terms of what Shaggy Dog stories do, it is almost impossible to deem one of Gee's building tools as more relevant than the other due to the fact that each Shaggy Dog story is different. One Shaggy Dog story may rely entirely on the receiver of the story understanding a reference from something pre-existing (intertextuality), while another story may be poking fun at a certain hot-button topic (Conversations). With this in mind, it is my belief that every one of Gee's tools is equally important to one another, and it is only within the context of a specific Shaggy Dog story that one building tool may take priority over the others.

In order to obtain more concrete answers, the third story in the list, the one about the string and the beer, shall be looked at in depth. The kind of research questions that would come to mind include "Why does this story 'work?’” and  "Which of Gee's building tools are incorporated into this story and why are they effective?". We decided to explore two of Gee’s building tools, Social Languages and Discourses, to see how they contributed to making the joke “work”. In essence, we wanted to know what factors helped this story to be funny.

What sorts of social languages are involved in the story and what purposes do they serve?

The Frayed Knot joke uses a couple of different Social Languages. The language of the String, for example is laid back and represents an average Joe type of character. His line, “Bartender, Gimme a beer” is repeated four times in the story. The use of the of word “gimme” is an intentional misuse of the term “give me” and is used to help develop his character as an average Joe at the bar. It shows us that the String is laid back, perhaps uneducated, and just wants to get straight to his beer with no chitchat. The bartender’s response is always, “I’m sorry sir, we don’t serve strings here”. The use of the word ‘Sir’gives the statement a formal feel, as does the sentence structure. The phrase is recognizable as one that any usual customer service representative might use when giving bad news to the customer. It is slightly more formal than a bartender should sound. The purpose of this might be to help the bartender’s final remark, “aren’t you that string that was in here a few minutes ago?” to sound even stronger. Where the bartender was previously polite and distant, he now takes on characteristics of a typical disgruntled bartender. The result is that the audience tunes in more closely for the string’s response, and are gratified with the pun joke answer.

What Discourses are involved? How do they help develop the socially situated identities & activities?

In order to understand the joke, the audience is required to have familiarity with certain discourses. The Bar is a type of discourse: people look, speak, and act a certain way in bars. The reader needs to fill in these details with their imagination. Particular phrases in the joke help them to do this. The String’s style of speech, (“gimme a beer”) brings to mind the average Joe type of person who would be in a bar (characters). Also the phrase “hopped onto a barstool” helps develop the mental picture of a bar with barstools lined up in front of it (setting). The Discourse of a Bar (bar people, bar sayings, bar activities) is the backdrop of the joke and is part of what makes the joke funny. It is humorous that this is a “typical” bar setting but there is an absurd character, a String, walking around it, yet no one points out that this is not normal. If the audience member is not familiar with the Bar Discourse, the joke will not be as effective.

In regards to the patterns which occurred within the story, we found that there were a lot of repetitions of phrases. The dialogue “Bartender, gimme a beer” and “I’m sorry sir, we don’t serve strings here”  was repeated three times in the story. (A classic 3 part pattern common from Oral tradition) I think that the repetition contributes to “What makes the joke work”. People understand by being able to hear things more than once.
To conclude on what made the joke work, we saw that it is necessary to have the background knowledge of a bar as well as “bar jokes”. This is a type of Discourse community involving not only the language of bars, but the other “stuff” that goes with it. The String story also uses Social languages to make the story “work”. The social languages of the average Joe at a bar and of a bartender help to develop the characters of the story, the absurdity of the situation, and to emphasize the final punchline.

What is Analysis? - Blog 2

When I picture an analysis I see a long, boring document with lots of charts and figures. That’s probably a false idea, based on the research I’ve done for psychology classes in the past.

The purpose of an analysis, to me, would be to gather together a lot of information on one topic and to somehow make sense of it. A good analysis would not be boring, it would take the information and make it understandable to the average audience, and it would make a point that is clear, interesting, and defendable.

Based on our discussion in class, I can add that an analysis is an in-depth look at something. I think it would involve research. But researching the topic alone is only the first part. Making sense of the information is the second part. That would entail arranging it in a logical way, finding patterns and proposing ideas about it.  

An analysis should take time. Looking at a frog can take a second, analyzing a frog should take several. Time is inherent in the meaning of the word.It means looking at all the possibilities, considering the meaning of the information that turns up, playing around with it, going deeper.

Simple research on a topic can involve very little of the writer – just taking information and putting it back out again.  An analysis requires thought. It requires real involvement.

What would I like to analyze? It’s still hard to say. There is so much about language that interests me. Perhaps what aspects of writing in English are the most challenging to ELLs, or why people think it is easier to learn how to write a new language than speak it, whether language is simple a puzzle (figure out all the pieces, and you can learn a new language) or if it’s something organic that has to be cultivated. If its organic, how can we “incubate” the process so to speak, help it to happen effectively?

I want to pick a topic that is manageable but interesting. Not too simplistic, but not too involved.

First thoughts on a topic - Blog 1

There is so much about language that I find interesting. It will be hard to pick a topic for my research. I am hoping to narrow it down to something that will help me professionally, perhaps something related to my professional fields of interest. This would probably mean something in regards to ESL. Examples of possible topics include what aspects of language do learners find most difficult? Why are certain languages considered harder to learn than others? Something that could be very interesting in regards to developing ESL curriculum would be to look into what ways people find most effective for learning language. Since I believe native speakers are always learning their native language, I think even people who speak one language would be able to give some ideas on what were the most effective learning experiences in their past.

If I stray away from a strictly professional intent, there are many other topics surrounding language that I find interesting. One thing that is very intriguing is the idea of “awkward”. How, when we are speaking with someone, do we come to the conclusion that they are socially awkward? What aspects of their spoken and nonverbal communication get this idea to us, and what grounds (valid or invalid) are we making this judgment on? What qualifies something as an awkward? Why do we feel that way?

I’ve also thought of writing something like a “book of unspoken things” talking all about topics that people never state directly, but are all aware of. How and why we are able to allude to ideas without stating them. Another idea is how people who know each other well speak more ambiguously to each other, because there is a lot of presumed knowledge between them. For example, explaining an idea to my sister would be much easier than explaining an idea to a stranger. There is a lot of information that  my sister and I are mutually aware of that I would not need to cover. This is a dynamic which affects how we feel about hanging out with friends versus hanging out with an acquaintance. There is something mentally taxing about being with new people, with whom you need to cover so much background information in order to have a decent conversation.

These are my ideas. There are so many things I could do! I will have to start thinking about some of the things I have always wanted to ask people. (perhaps “awkwardness” has prevented me from doing so already?)