Gee Summary & Synthesis

Summary:

Gee redefines the term, "language." He argues that the term has too much of a connotation that suggests grammar. Instead, he puts focus on how the language is used instead of what it is. It is the combination of speech (writing), actions, existence, and beliefs. These combinations are also called Discourses, "ways of being in the world; they are forms of life which integrate words, acts, values, beliefs, attitudes, and social identities as well as gestures, glances, body positions, and clothes" (484). There are two different types of Discourses: the primary discourse and the secondary discourse. The primary Discourse is also known as the initial Discourse. It is what makes up our identity that we developed at home. The second Discourse is developed from social institutions outside of our homes. These Discourses allow "apprenticeships" or students achieving fluency within that particular language. Gee also redefines the definition of "literacy." He argues that it is "the mastery of or fluent control over a secondary discourse" (486). Two theorems evolve from this definition. The first theorem is that one is not able to engage in a Discourse without being fluent. The second theorem is that primary discourses can never be "liberating literacies." Gee states that for literacy to be liberating, it must be able to critique the Discourse and have a set of meta-elements including language, words, attitudes, and values. For liberation, a person must have the ability to criticize and analyze the literacy. Secondary Discourses are important because it can help the person gain a realization of his or her primary Discourse. What truly is liberation is metaknowledge. The result of classroom instructions of compositions, study skills, writing, critical thinking, etc. Students who are ill-prepared can use the metaknowledge to become "smarter" than students who are prepared. Gee proposes a big question. How can we help students gain metaknowledge and resistance and also develop their Discourse at the same time if they entered it at a later time? Gee cannot offer a solution, but what he can offer is an experiment. He hypothesizes that by "mushfaking," or making do "with something less when the real thing isn't available" (490). Gee finalizes his argument by saying that successful students can be produced by teaching them "mushfake," resistance, and metaknowledge.

Synthesis:

Gee's theory on Discourse contrasts quite a bit from Swales's opinion on a discourse community. First, the reader must identify Gee's term of Discourse. It has two main types: the primary and the secondary. The primary Discourse revolves around the member's identity and that it is developed at home. We can argue that it is actually similar to Swales's initiation of the speech community. In the speech community, people are entered by birth. The second Discourse is developed through social interactions and institutions outside of the home such as churches, schools, clubs, etc. which resembles more of Swales's discourse community. The difference between these two discourses, however, is that Swales believe that a spy can become a part of the community while Gee's discourse is harder to enter. A spy cannot be a part of Gee's discourse because he or she would not be completely fluent. Swales's requirements for a discourse to be a discourse community is also more numerous, but he insists that a discourse community does not affect the identity of the person. Gee disagrees. He believes that the identity of a person is made up of his or her Discourses.