Discourse Analysis

Discourse Analysis
In his article Inquiry and Discourse, Gees presents a more different concept of discourse than that we have studied earlier in this semester. For him discourse it is not that stretch of sentences and utterances that we produce in order to communicate with others. For him, discourse is a way of “combining and integrating language, actions, interactions, ways of thinking, believing, valuing, and using various symbols, tools, and objects to enact a particular sort of socially recognizable identity”(21). For him discourse is the scenes that we live everyday in every place (our homes, schools , streets, workplace, etc…) The discourse he is talking about is that one connected to previous discourses; the discourse he is addressing is a complex net of relations. The idea he wants to communicate is that our life is a thread of beads. Each bead represents a discourse and each bead consists of different elements. In her chapter Putting One’s Business on Front Street, Monroe takes one bead of her life and the lives of some people in two schools in Michigan State and analyses its elements. In her chapter she wants to show how these elements ( technology, people, institution, and knowledge) interact together to produce a different discourse.
The findings of her analysis are in sync with Gee’s idea that discourse changes according to time, situation, and people. The results she is presenting only applies to her situation. The people she was studying, the technology she was using and the situation she was in were unique in terms of identities, culture, family backgrounds and quality. Since I was a teacher of English as a foreign language, I had a similar experience of using technology in teaching. My people were female and male, Libyan students who formed a
homogenous group in terms of race, class and culture. My situation was teaching Advanced Composition. My time was Spring 2007. The topic I was teaching was How to Write a Formal and Personal Letter. The assignment was to write two letters( formal and personal) and send them over email to me. The results were different from Monroe’s, of course. My students did very well with formal letters. The expressions they used and the topics they broached were so formal. The topics ranged from applying to a job or a university, asking for one day leave from the boss or inviting me to a party to writing a formal complaint to the dean. The students made every effort to use so formal expressions that many native speakers may not write in similar situation. In sum, their emails were amazing.
The students’ problems arose when it came to writing a personal letter. Around 90% of them wrote about formal topics and used less formal expressions than those written in the previous letters. The topics were about some hot issues in the media, discussing some points in class, or explaining the recipe of some dishes. Only 10% of them performed very well on this assignment. They talked about their personal lives- their likes and dislikes, families, hobbies, etc… And all of them were male students.
The reason was our culture. The student-teacher relationship is so formal in Libya. When a student converses with his instructor, he should use titles such as Dr., your honor, discuss formal topics, and talk while standing even if the teacher is sitting. It is such nice a dream to have a seat in her office. This is why my students wrote perfect formal letters and failed to write personal ones. In my point of view, they found it difficult to paint a picture in their minds of their teacher other than that of a stern and scowling face. It is true, then, that a discourse draws another discourse.