Prcecis/Critical Response to Gee

In this article, Janes Gee is essentially proposing a way to talk about literacy and linguistics. According to Gee, language can be misleading because oftentimes, it is referred to as grammar. He affirms that an individual can know the grammar of a language and not know how to use that language. In other words, it's not what you say, but how you say what you say. Gee promotes the beleif that language is not just grammar, and, communication is more than the use of language. In saying and writing the correct thing, and, while having the right belief system, the right values, and the right attitudes, we are using language that suggests, what is important is not the language we use, neither the grammar, but the connection of all these forms of life, that Gee refers to as "Discourse."

There are many types of Discourse. According to Gee, we are all born with an inherent Discourse. He writes: "All of us, through our primary socialization, early in life in the home and peer group, acquire (at least) one initial Discourse. This initial discourse, which I call our primary Discourse, is the one we first use to make sense of the world and the interact with others" (Gee 527). This discourse, Gee asserts, continues our original and home-based sense of identity. It can be identified through the interactions we have with familiar people. It is acquired not from education, but from being a member of a primary socializing group such as a family or peer group. There are dominant Discourse and non-dominant Discourse. Dominant Discourse are secondary Discourses that can potentially bring money, prestige, or status to an individual. Non-dominant Discourse is secondaru Discourse that often brings solidarity with a particular social network, but no greater status in the society at large.

Gee believes that Discourse and literacy are somewaht interwined. A brief social definition of literacy that Gee uses is such: "Thus I have defined literacy as the mastery of or fluent control over a secondary Discourse" Gee 529). The author says that literacy is plural. There are many of them. Furthermore, he gives a possible second definition of literacy: "If we wanted to be rather pedantic and literalistic, then we could define "literacy" as" mastery of or fluent control over secondary Discourse involving print...."(Gee 529). There are two theories that Gee uses to support his argument. First, Discourses are not like language. A person can speak a language, but not fluently. However, that same person would not be able to fully engage in a discourse without the ability to engage fluently. The second theory states that primary discourses, no matter whose they are, can never really be liberating literacies. In order for literacy to be liberating it must contain both the Discourde it is going to critique and a set of meta-elememts such as language, words, attitudes, and values.

Many parts of this article were strong and insightful. I particularly found the meaning of literacy to be insightful. I have always known that literacy is a broad term. Many linguist define it differently. Gee's definition seems to be one of the best I've read. In defining literacy, Gee admitted that he was first compelled to define some other terms. The term he chose to define first, discourse: "a socially accepted association among ways of using language; or thinking, and of acting that can be used to identify oneself as a member of a socially meaningful group or "social network" (Gee 537). Literacy, then, is a means of identifying to the world just who one is. This can be through a belief system, a value system, an economic system, or a status system.

With Gee's article, my understanding of literacy has greatly expanded. First, I never thought of literacy as a discourse. Like many people, I often associated language with grammar. Although I am aware that language is communicative, I rarely looked at it from that perspevtive. In reading this article, I am learning why? That, is, because communication is more than language skills. Literacy braodly delves into an individual's world view. How do we see the world, ourselves, and what do we believe when we see what we see? What do we value in life, what are our attitudes, where do we socially fit in society? All of these entities are all an aspect of literacy in its truest meaning.