Oh Golly Gee - James has nailed it! Lisa Biscan

James Paul Gee seems to understand the world of language in dual terms of idealized fantasy and real-life practice,as he presents both sides in "Literary, Discourse, and Linguistics: Introduction and What Is Literacy". James Paul Gee does an outstanding job of introducing social influence and experience as an imperative factor in language acquisition. Yet, he does not settle on this factor as an impending doom for underprivaleged or misrepresented language learners. Instead, Gee digs into the ways which we can all reasses our view and practice of language acquistion.

Gee's studies appear to be on the forefront in the field conerning language acquisition. This article was published in the "Journal of Education" in 1989, yet seems to pull from contemporary thought regarding language. The article begins as Gee debunks the traditional conception of language for us, ""Language" is a misleading term; it too often suggests "grammar". It is a truism that a person can know perfectly the grammar of a language and not know how to use that language" (525). This should be obvious to all of us. Yet, clealy this is not the case. If it were, scholars like Gee may not be in business!

Gee focuses a large part of his article on "Discourses...ways of being in the world" (526). Discourses include acts, values, beliefs, and social meanings in which a person identifies themself with (526). The ramifications of the discourse are vast. There are primary and secondary discourses. The primary discourse is formed as a result of intimate relationships (family). This primary discourse affects how we will aqcuire secondary discourses, such as those from outside sources (school, church, organizations)(327). The providers of the discourse are influenced by their own discourse. Therefore, discourse are personally, culturally, politically, socially, and economically charged. Discourse forms a sphere of influence that structures and shapes the manner, place, style, ease or apprehension, of a person's use of langauge. Gee cites Cazden and Heath, and argues that discourses cannot be taught but are acquired through enculturation, or "apprenticeship" into social practices (527).

Yes, the rules of discourse are learned and aqcuired. Still, one must learn and aqcuire the skills to play the game early if they are to be successful in the sport. If one has not been introduced to the game at an early age, then they conceivably are disadvantaged to the veterans of discourse. Yet, Gee points out that the mastery of discourse (much like language) can become both minimalized or stagnant, and manipulated or practiced (535). Gee stresses that both discourse and language be acquired and learned - yet clearly distinguishes the two acts. Finally, James Paul Gee outlines very realistic practices for researchers and teachers of discourse and language to focus on. Gee ends with the idea that researchers must be sensitive to conflicts of primary and secondary discourse and literacy- yet continue to reach for a better understanding.