El saber no ocupa lugar (just server space)

May 17, 2012

a flood of connections

Filed under: learning German — admin @ 1:57 am

I’m always looking for cool yet not too clichéd lines to put on my gravemarker (just a marker as I think I’ll be cremated) or to leave friends and family in a farewell letter, and I was struck by the line on Marlene Dietrich’s grave: “Hier steh ich an den Marken meiner Tage” (Here I stand at the milestone of my days).  This is a paraphrase of a line from a sonnet by Theodore Körner– “Abschied vom Leben” (Farewell from Life).  Too cool.  And probably not too clichéd.

How did I arrive at this Wikipedia fact?  I googled “Marlene Dietrich songs” because we’re studying Berlin in my German class and we were told that the reading comprehension portion of my chapter test will actually be a Marlene Dietrich song (presumably about Berlin).  I decided to find the lyrics of such songs to study from.  Of course, it turns out that people have compiled entire albums of MD songs about Berlin, so I’ve got my work cut out for me if I’m really going to study the lyrics to every Berlin-themed song.  This, in turn, is sending me to iTunes for a little music searching.  I swear, my afternoons of reading always seem to end in my buying books or music.

 

May 3, 2012

Meaning

I was co-writing an article with a colleague yesterday in which I had to discuss communities of practice, and she stopped me as I was reading a section that I’d written.  She asked what the connection was between the community of practice concept and identity.  I shook my head with those little short frustrated shakes that you do when the answer is obvious and you think other people should be able to read your mind.  Of course I realized I needed to make this “obvious” connection clear in my writing.  So how do I explain it?  I guess the important idea here is that people’s actions communicate some sort of meaning that position them, or perform some kind of identity.  Thus practice is a performance of identity and repeated practice against a backdrop of shared meaning within a domain of practice creates a persona.

But… just to throw a wrench in here… we know that it is common that the intended meaning behind an action is not always the same as the meaning “taken up” by another.  This all depends on shared assumptions– often whether or not the individuals are part of the same community of practice.  Does this keep us from putting our symbols out there?  I know that for weddings, couples often include text that tells participants how to interpret various symbolic acts and material objects.  In everyday life, is this also true, or do we let people understand acts as they may?  How much do we care?  And really, are there times when we want our actions to be ambiguous?

April 27, 2012

Chapters

If I were to write a book on wedding interviews and identity, I would want to include chapters on the following:

1. The blurring of the distinction between performance and performativity

2. Ritual, genre, and schema

3. Traditional mainstream weddings and Others

4. Narrative and Identity

5. Positioning with what is said and what is left unsaid

6. Intersectionality, Identity, Legitimacy

April 15, 2012

German update

Filed under: learning German,linguistics — Tags: , , — admin @ 3:54 am

Thursday we watched a documentary film in class—it seemed to be from the German equivalent of the history channel here in the US.  It was funny that it had the same voiceover of a serious tone by a deep-voiced man.  The film was on the Battle of Vienna (Turks, Polish, Hapsburgs) and the reason J chose it was because we’d been studying about Vienna in the textbook.  Of course, everything we saw in the textbook was on music—opera, famous composers, etc., so it was interesting to see that the outside source that he brought to class was on WAR.  Frankly, it was interesting, so I’m not complaining.  He gave us a vocabulary sheet with a bunch of military terms like powerkeg and encampment on it.  I didn’t understand much of the German, but you could catch the gist of it from the visuals.  I also skimmed the Wikipedia page on the Battle of Vienna on my iPhone during the film, and that helped.

Friday we had a quiz on adjective endings.  Ugh, I’m not so good at memorizing cases in German and they just keep coming!

T made a flowchart Thursday evening to help determine what to do with adjective endings.  Is it plural, dative, or genitive?  If so, the adjective ending is –en.  If not, then is it a der word?  If so, masculine is –en and others are –e.  If not, it must be an ein word.  In this case, if feminine, it ends in –e.  Neuter ends in –es and masculine ends in –er for nominative and –en for accusative.

It wasn’t really memorize-able for the quiz , but it’s a nice little chart!  I searched online for some method or trick, but really you have to know them.  I think I probably got about 75% of them on the quiz.

April 12, 2012

Direction Change

The current research project on weddings that I’ve been working on for the last couple years and will continue working on for the next year involves interviews with couples and the analysis of oral language (conversation, stories).  I had originally wanted to include a more literary side to the project so it straddled humanities and social sciences, but I never found exactly how to do that.  However, I ran across several original essays and stories in the library yesterday of writers on same-sex marriage and on weddings.  Now I’m thinking there’s got to be a way to do what I originally wanted without changing the current research project too much.  Onward literature and linguistics!

April 5, 2012

Questions

Q1: What is the difference between ideology and discourse? It’s easy to slide between the two and be talking about the same thing.  Traditionally, I’ve thought of discourses as “ways of speaking” and discourse as “institutional talk”.  I think this emphasis on institution is probably good here because of the fact that French thinkers often are using the state and the institutional language and the Catholic church and the institutional education system and other aspects of hegemonic French life as the backdrop for many ideas.  That was the historical context for writers like Foucault and Derrida.  Now (or as my students like to say these days, nowadays, in these modern times,…), there are other entities to resist than just the institutional ones, though those are still strong and worthy of resistance.  The issues are much more localized now, though, with gender policing and identity management taking place in small groups– that’s why the word community is so used now.

Back to the question, then.  The reason the French thinkers slip easily between ideology and discourse is because they saw little reason to separate out the language used by the institutional hegemony and the values espoused by the institutional hegemony.  Linguistics is concerned with pointing out what is related to language and what is not, so the distinction gets made more often in linguistics, but it does seem a bit false to draw a line between values and the language used to communicate them.  Values are not things in themselves without communication of them, so ideology exists through discourse processes.

Q2: How is social positioning related to discourse? Through our subjectivity– the way we see ourselves and the world see us– we are inserted into the social world.  This social positioning is a process that occurs usually through language, though I can size someone up and draw a conclusion about the nature of our relationship before I open my mouth, often.  So language or other communicative / semiotic processes are the means for social positioning to occur.  There are “ways of speaking” that allow us to size each other up and make our relative positions or stances known– through simple greetings, conversation, small talk, classroom talk, dinner conversation, stories, etc.  All of these types of talk– different genres, modes, registers– are potential ways to do social work– to position ourselves and others.  I can present myself a certain way in comparison to the other actor in my story over lunch with a mutual friend, and I’m not only telling a story, but also positioning myself and others socially.  So social positioning is the social work that gets done via discourse.

 

March 24, 2012

My research and CDA

One way to look at my research on weddings and identity is to consider the whole affair frivolous, like studying the use of gendered language in Japanese romance trash novels or Ahmadinejad’s blog to the American people.  These are current issues reflecting cultural ideologies, and definitely worthy of study, but sometimes it’s harder to feel like you’re making a difference doing this in comparison to those whose research is dedicated to revealing and questioning racism in housing, systematic exclusion of obese people in the workforce, or the openly hateful rhetoric against people moving from one national boundary to another to settle into a different life.

Critical discourse analysis generally analyzes social problems, asking how inequity gets perpetuated and positing that there is a strong connection between language and power.  Any social institution involves a great deal of power and language, and so my reasons for choosing to study weddings (and indirectly marriage) stem from a CDA perspective, though I’ve had to lighten up a bit on the idea that weddings are a social problem– though I see them as such. I suppose I believe that marriage is a social problem, and that weddings are a hidden symbol of the issue.  However, when I interview couples about their weddings, I find that they genuinely believe in weddings and are personally injured when I try to explain the idiocy of the ritual and what kind of social reproduction it participates in.  It’s hard to tell people that they are practicing exclusion of gays by going through the black and white heteronormative party of a lifetime, or that they are repeating some of the most misogynistic symbolic acts of humankind when they just want to publicly celebrate love.  Even my own partner gets embarrassed / ashamed or feels like it’s overdone when I harp on marriage and weddings– I know the eye-roll well (it translates as “please stop beating this topic into the ground; you’re over-sensitive”).  I think, actually, that I’m not sensitive, but just being critical, and that’s why I would call my own research aligned with CDA.

March 16, 2012

how does my research connect to real world problems?

Filed under: critical theory,discourse,linguistics,weddings — Tags: , — admin @ 4:50 am

One of the reasons I am in the field of sociolinguistics is that I am aware of the extremely political nature of words, strings of words, written words, spoken words, in various genres and from a variety of perspectives.  Recently, the research I have entered into surrounds the cultural shift taking place regarding the role of weddings in the lives of people.  And of course, one cannot talk about doing research into weddings without touching on the controversial topic of gay marriage.

I’m interested in finding out what couples think it means to have a wedding and commence marriage– I ask if they consider it the start of their relationship and they say no, that their relationship hasn’t really changed from before they were married.  I ask if the marriage legitimizes children and they say that has nothing to do with it.  I ask if the marriage gives them legal rights and benefits that they were seeking, and some say yes, to get into a particular apartment complex or to grant access to their children from a previous marriage without problems from the ex-spouses.  I ask about the wedding– if having a ceremony with invited guests served a purpose, and some have a hard time saying what the purpose was– to make parents happy, to have a party, to receive gifts.  In other words, couples don’t really have a clear, hegemonic sense of the purpose of marriage and the purpose of weddings.

This brings me the point about gay marriage.  Many opponents to the concept cite marriage as a foundational institution for the culture and the nation.  My results show that it’s not.  And if that argument is beaten down, it seems to me that what we’re left with is simply a desire to control people who haven’t historically had power, who have historically been ostracized and kept in the margins, and that seems like humans behaving badly.

So there are two issues here– how heterosexual couples view marriage given the shift in its utility, and access by same sex couples to marriage, whatever it may mean.

February 28, 2012

What is your definition of discourse?

I get this question from people in various disciplines who are familiar with the term discourse and are curious how I’m using it within linguistics and in my particular research.  It’s good to have a stock answer, though it changes based on who I’m talking to and what I assume about the person.

Generally, I consider discourse to be the use of language in social interaction to produce and consume ideas that are attached to that language.  More specifically, I think there are recognizable patterns of language use that point to shared beliefs or ideas, and that people make use of these patterns in order to encode those beliefs, which may or may not be taken up by a listener, depending on how much shared context there is.  When I talk about discourses out there, I refer to both the language patterns in use by a group of people and the ideologies (explicit or implicit) that such language patterns carry with them.  Some people in the humanities refer to intertextuality– the concept that one idea/way of speaking is always in reaction to, or in dialogue with, other ideas/ways of speaking.  This is an important aspect of discourse– how it gets repeated and taken up by others.

Some people ask me if discourse is oral or written, and I feel that we should be inclusive about the scope because much of the distribution of ideas through language occurs in both written and spoken forms (and today, through the visual more and more).  Linguistics is usually more concerned with oral language because it’s considered “natural” when produced spontaneously, and communications, cultural studies, and literary criticism are usually more concerned with written language.  However, this dichotomy is not necessary when studying discourse because linguistic social interaction occurs through various modes.

A syntactician once asked a discourse analyst if discourse analysis was psychoanalysis.  I understand why he asked this question– because ideologies, beliefs, values– these are all cognitive; however sociologists are interested in the same concepts and find ways to observe the ways in which people demonstrate, enact, and reproduce these cognitive concepts.  In a similar way, a discourse analyst observes language use, takes into account the social context, and finds systematic patterns that reveal the connection between language structures, the ideas in our minds, and social behavior.  So no, discourse analysis is not psychology, but it does attempt to go beyond descriptive linguistics and ask how language functions in interaction.

February 27, 2012

Making Feelings Scientific

Linguistics is interested in what human language is and how it works, and sociolinguistics is interested in how human language works in interaction.  So much of the humanities is about evaluating feeling and attitude such as in aesthetics and ethics, but it’s hard to bring intention and feeling into social science since we work with data and ask what the data reveal to us.  For this reason, I’m glad to have happened upon Martin and White’s engagement theory and particularly the chapter on attitude (ways of feeling).  It provides a way to analyze semantics of affect, ethics, and aesthetics.  Basically the discourse analytical approach is to search out lexical items that index affect like heart, tears, cruel sobs, etc. or that index judgment like right/wrong, bully, perverted justice.  In the case of aesthetics, lexical items like pretty, so pleasant, unspeakably tedious would stand out.  The analyst goes through a text or a transcript and searches out these lexical items, categorizing them, and then draws conclusions about the feeling of the work.  This sort of method is potentially quite useful for my wedding research since the stories people tell me about their weddings often involve lots of feeling.

Older Posts »

Powered by WordPress