David's IB Language and Literature Teaching Blog

We have spent quite a number of lessons looking at a newspaper editorial/opinion column from the British tabloid newspaper, The Sun (see the text in ‘pages’). The text is tricky, not least because of its temporal and cultural contexts; the text is from 1985 (when your teacher was your age!) and is situated around British social and cultural life of that period. Specific cultural references to Bob Geldof, members of the British royal family, and British cultural traditions add to the complexity of understanding the text.

We discussed, at length, the contexts which impact on our understanding of this text, and linked the discussion to audiences, purposes, and language and stylistic features. We revisited ideas we have earlier encountered. For example, we discussed the graphosemantic aspects of the text (in particular, font).

Making a TOK link, we talked about the social construction of reality, and the role of newspapers in forming and influencing public opinion. In these lessons, we considered, in particular, the noun phrase. In newspapers, as elsewhere, noun phrases are frequently modified (either through pre or post modification). Such modification functions, potentially, to skew how we understand social reality. For example, we looked at the importance of naming. In the noun phrase ‘ Pop star Bob Geldof’, the noun phrase ‘Bob Geldof’ is pre-modified by another noun phrase, ‘pop star’. (Where one noun phrase modifies another, the process is sometimes referred to as ‘stacking’). The point to note is the way in which the noun phrase, in effect, ‘creates’ Bob Geldof, establishing him as a ‘pop star’. Few would challenge that Bob Geldof  is or was a pop star; that isn’t, here, at issue. However, potentially, Bob Geldof is many things; he is not ‘just’ a ‘pop star’. Consequently, it is in the way that newspapers use language to label and construct that particular ideologies and values are conveyed.

We touched on the idea of ‘literariness‘. Consider: What makes a text ‘literary’? We normally regard novels and poems as examples of literature, but not newspapers. There are perhaps many good reasons for making this distinction. However, according to one theory, literature involves defamiliarization; that is, literature uses language which draws attention to itself and, in the process, makes the familiar strange. If one accepts this idea as axiomatic (i.e. we take for granted), then, in the article we read, we may arguably suggest that the expression ‘slagging off’ is an example of ‘literary language’ since the extreme colloquialness seems to stand apart and, as it were, draw attention to itself. This is a contentious point, but it is an idea we will return to, particularly in Part 3 of the course. 

Some complex stuff. This week, amongst other goodies, we will be attempting a Paper 1 commentary.

David

This is the first post in a while; it’s been a busy few weeks. However, briefly, since returning to school, we have been working with the following:

(i) We have tried, since the beginning of the course, to maintain the ‘thread’ of language and power. The linguist Michael Halliday famously said that ‘language is the way it is because of what it has to do’. Accepting this as axiomatic, we have considered ways in which language works to empower and disempower individuals and social groups and, in different contexts, functions to persuade and influence. Thus, when we recently considered Will Self’s essay, ‘A Point of View: Why language is integral to modern warfare’ (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-15478001), we looked at the ways in which language is sometimes used to obfuscate. We discussed, amongst other things, the tremendous amount of contextual knowledge required to fully appreciate Self’s argument. It is perhaps ironic that in an article about the uses and abuses of euphemism, Self should write in such a self-consciously arcane way. In our lessons on euphemism, we also talked a little bit about the social and economic contexts of the media which allows euphemism to become embedded in media texts in such an obviously uncritical and unprocessed way. That is, we discussed, for example, the role of organizations such as AP and Reuters, and the public relations industry, in news gathering. We also took a ‘TOK turn’, and considered the extent to which the way language is used may impact on our perception of social reality.

(ii) We have also watched and had a discussion of the PBS documentary, The Merchants of Cool (see ‘pages’ for the worksheet). Whilst the film is a little old, it isn’t that old (!), and many of the arguments the film makes continue to have considerable relevance in the present. And, talking of the present, we are now in the process of doing ethnography in preparation for a Further Oral Activity (FOA), on ‘cool hunting’. In middle age, I’m hoping to learn something!

David

We have reached the half-term break. Well done; you’ve worked well.

This week we rounded off our brief look at advertising, looked back to the Paper 1 common assessment task, and reflected on the past 8 or 9 weeks.

We started the week by discussing aspects of the common assessment task that was less successful. In particular, we considered contexts - understanding texts in socio-cultural and temporal contexts. We re-considered the wine label from the previous lesson. We asked the following questions about the text:

How could the text be read and interpreted differently by two different readers?

If the text had been written in a different time or place or language or for a different audience, how and why might it differ?

How and why is a social group represented in a particular way?

Which social groups are marginalized, excluded or silenced within the text?

How does the text conform to, or deviate from, the conventions of a particular genre, and for what purpose?

How has the text borrowed from other texts, and with what effects?

Now, the above questions can, in principle, be asked about every text you consider. You may find that the questions, depending on the text you are reading, are of more or less relevance. Nevertheless, they should be considered essential questions for exploring texts and contexts.

We looked briefly at a range of images, and I suggested to you that a great deal of what we find in written texts are also evidenced in visual texts. This is an important point to remember. For example, we saw how irony can be conveyed in the visual mode. We also looked at metonymy, and it was suggested that understanding visual metonymy requires considerable cultural awareness; without such awareness, understanding metonymy is, at best, difficult. 

At the end of the week (counting down to our break), we looked at an advertisement for Nurofen. In our discussion, we revisited a range of ideas we have considered previously. We also introduced some new ideas. We discussed, for example, the narratee of the text; that is the imagined reader addressed in the text as you. We talked about the way in which the narrator - the ‘voice’ in the text - expresses a particular ideology or world-view. In the Nurofen ad, the narrator seems to suggest that Nurofen is a new, fast, and effective form of pain relief. Importantly, Nurofen (the ad implies) is especially well-suited to people who are in a hurry and do not have time to slow down when a headache strikes. This notion is reinforced in the visual mode through the metaphor of the motorway road sign.  Understanding the intended meaning of the road sign requires a particular cultural awareness. The ad seems to assume that the narratee shares the ideology of the narrator. That is, the narratee is someone who ‘lives life in the fast lane’, and has no time to slow down for headaches. Since this is so, Nurofen becomes an obvious ‘solution’ to the ‘inconvenience’ of a headache. Presumably, the real reader - people like you and me – have a cultural understanding of the ad’s ideology, and are encouraged to associate, or ally ourselves to this position. However, it is important to understand that our reading can be oppositional. We do not have to buy into the life in the fast lane ideology of the ad. This particular ideology is, I suggest, typical of late modern capitalist societies. It is possible to eschew or reject the ideology. Thus, if we get a headache, it may in fact be symptomatic of a life lived too hectically. In other words, there is nothing per se good about fast living, and nothing obvious about taking Nurofen in the event of a headache.

We also (Read on …)

We have turned our attention to advertising, continuing the themes of persuasive language and power. We began this ‘unit’ by considering a range of texts, and the various contexts in which they are written and received. Initially, we discussed what we might include, and what we could exclude from the appellation ‘advertisement’. In considering various text types, such as a ‘speed limit’ road sign and a university prospectus, it became apparent that defining advertising can be more challenging than we may initially assume. I found it revealing (although I was not surprised) that when some of you turned to the dictionary to provide a definition, it was shown to be an inadequate guide to determining what is and what isn’t an ad. A salutary lesson, I hope. We talked about the significance of intention; for example, a road traffic sign is not intended as an ad, albeit it shares some of the functionality of advertising. And, we discussed other texts, such as a university prospectus. Again, this is a problematic text; whilst it aims at being persuasive, it also has other functions. It is, for example, an informative text.

After this introductory discussion, we turned our attention to one specific text – a wine label. We worked with this on Conceptboard (see http://conceptboard.com/). Judging by the noise and laughter, you enjoyed yourselves! This is, I suggest, an interesting text to discuss. Not least, wine is involved in a complex cultural practice of buying and consuming. The study of the label is revealing of many kinds of relationships – social, cultural, economic and legal. The wine label has many, complex communicating functions; it must address, amongst others, shippers, wholesalers, buyers, store managers, shelf stackers and consumers, and it must address them in a very limited period of time.

An important aspect of our discussion related to the polivocality of the label (Mikhail Bakhtin called this heteroglossia). That is, we may say the label is (because it must be) ‘many voiced’. It addresses not one, but many audiencies. 

We looked carefully at the very different styles which co-exist in the wine label. For example, your attention might be drawn to the use of inclusive pronouns in the upper part of the label, and to exaggerated language which aims to persuade us that wine drinking will enhance our lives. This can be contrasted to the mandatory government warning in which the reader is told that wine drinking may damage your health! We discussed 2nd and 3rd person forms of address, high modality, and the intertextual inclusion of a scientific register and terms frequently associated with medical discourse.

We discussed the significance of the barcode, and the economic and legal contexts which explain its presence and position on the label. We also discussed graphosematics; for example the graphic design rules/lines, foreground and background, and layout and font. In the case of font, in particular, it is important to consider the various connotative effects: What does a particular font suggest?

Finally, we considered what the label does not include. Thus we talked about significant ‘absences’ such as a lack of information about the amount of alcohol in the wine, and the legal contexts which may account for this.

In the next lesson, we will consider a more conventional ad, this time for headache tablets. That’s something one may need after drinking too much wine.

David

In recent lessons, our focus has turned to assessment  - your first written task (writing a speech) and your first attempt at Paper 1 (written commentary). You should continue to work independently with your written task during my absence this week.

Next week, we will take a closer look at the Paper 1 task, considering what went well and what can be improved.

Thereafter, we continue to look at persuasive language, this time through a consideration of advertising. As we move towards this unit of study, you should consider what counts and what doesn’t count as an advertisement.

David

This week, we have studied President Barack Obama’s inaugural address, which he gave in Washington DC on 20 January 2009 (a particularly cold day). Unlike John Keating’s more impromptu (and fictional) speech in Dead Poets Society, President Obama’s speech was written to be spoken and delivered to a vast and diverse audience. Some of you asked who wrote his speech; here is an article about Obama’s chief speech writer, a 27 year old man named Jon Favreau: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jan/20/barack-obama-inauguration-us-speech Not bad for such a young man!

We considered in some detail the range of rhetorical strategies included in President Obama’s speech – and there were many! We noted, for example, many instance of listing and repetition, particularly the use of 3-part lists. Frequently, the 3-part list was employed as a form of ‘clap trap’. When Obama delivered his speech, the intonation of his voice shifted, and increased emphasis was put on each additional item in the list. The audience was induced to clap. Other rhetorical devices included contrasts. And we talked about pronoun usage. There were many inclusive pronouns. Keep in mind, however, that, in the context of the speech, the same pronoun sometimes referred to different groups; the meaning of ‘we’, for example, shifted. Some pronoun usage, of course, was less inclusive, and was used to establish a dichotomy between an ill-defined ‘them versus us’.

You did well to identify other more ‘literary’ techniques, such as alliteration, anaphora (a from of repetition, or parallelism), metaphor, and euphemism. Metaphor and euphemism, remember, were used to great effect, and enabled President Obama to appeal to a wide and diverse audience.

We also looked at the lexical cluster around ‘America’, ‘nation’, and ‘nationhood’, and we talked about the frequent allusions and references to historical figures and events, and the ways in which Obama established a sense of continuity with the past and the present. At this point, we took a little ‘side road’ and made a ‘TOK connection’ to discuss the significance of teaching history (or is it histories?). In the context of the discussion, we mentioned a particular ‘experiment’ in some Cypriot schools to teach the same history books to both Greek and Turkish children on the divided island. I made mention of Benedict Anderson’s claim that the nation state is an imagined community. If you are interest in pursuing this idea, you could read Anderson’s book Imagined Communities (http://www.amazon.com/Imagined-Communities-Reflections-Origin-Nationalism/dp/0860915468). It’s a good, but slightly challenging read. 

We talked too about intertextual references, particularly to The Bible, and Obama’s inclusion of religious discourse in his speech. As the lesson came to an end we discussed modality (the attitude or ‘truth status’ of what Obama said) and  sentence structure, particularly the effect of the short, punchy sentence. This took us onto a discussion of Batman and Robin; but that’s another story…

Next week, we will revisit some of the many ideas we have introduced. In my absence, on Friday, you will begin your first Written Task. Are you the next Jon Favreau?

David              

This week, we managed to complete your summer reading presentations. Amongst other things, you tried to discuss ways in which the books you read could be understood differently at different times and in different cultures. Please don’t forget to complete your reflections on this exercise prior to Tuesday’s lesson.

In the remainder of Friday’s lesson, we picked up the ‘red thread’ (what was that Dutch translation?) of language and power. We introduced the idea of rhetoric – using language to persuade others of your view. We began by looking at a quotation from Dale Carnegie and discussed the importance of ‘winning over’ an audience.

We then watched 10 minutes from the 1989 film Dead Poets Society. Perhaps this isn’t an obvious place to begin the study of rhetoric. We saw, however, in the ‘rip it up’ scene, the various ways in which John Keating (played by Robin Williams) successfully wins over his class to his views on poetry, literature, and life. You have a transcript from the film, and you can watch the clip again (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wOENu0fK0uM). Notice the way in which Keating plays the role of intellectual outlaw, using the metaphor of a ‘battle’ for hearts and minds. The class (Keating’s audience) aren’t passive; they are busy ripping out pages from their textbook! In other words, Keating’s rhetoric involves more than words. Keating is expert at addressing his audience in terms familiar to them (e.g. American Bandstand), and shows considerable empathy for the lives and aspirations of his students. At the close of Keating’s speech, he quotes Walt Whitman (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walt_Whitman) and, as it were, hits the intellectual baseline of the students. Keating, very skillfully, has won his audience.

Prior to Tuesday’s lesson, please watch President Barack Obama’s inauguration address (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VjnygQ02aW4). Enjoy the spectacle. And, as you watch, ask yourself what it means to be political.

David 

We have been studying the course for just over two weeks. A quick reminder, then, of where we have been:

As we continue to study together, please try to bring concepts and ideas with you and, as it were, build on them. Try too to make connections to other subjects you are studying (not least, TOK), and to your life in general; after all, we use language all the time.

We started by reorganizing the furniture in ‘The Great Game of Power’. The game is borrowed from the Brazilian theatre director Augusto Boal (for more detail see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Augusto_Boal).

Once the furniture was back in place, and having discussed the game, we looked at language use in everyday contexts. Specifically, we considered naming, and the way in which naming plays a crucial role in negotiating our relationship to other people in different social contexts. We discussed the way in which we may be positioned and position others when using names. Naming often encodes aspects of our social identities (sic), and is used as a way to establish and resist relationships where  power is embedded.

After a consideration of naming, we moved on the read Richard B. Lee’s ‘Eating Christmas in the Kalahari’ (http://windward.hawaii.edu/facstaff/dagrossa-p/articles/EatingChristmas.pdf). We discussed Lee’s culture shock when he failed to understand the Ju/’hoansi practice of ‘insulting the meat’. We highlighted the significance of Lee’s ethnocentrism as the basis for his misunderstanding. Other concepts we considered were cultural relativism, cultural competence, and cultural capital (a term made popular by the French sociologist Pierre Bourdieu: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cultural_capital). We also returned to consider the notion of power.

Power became important in a linguistic context when we turned our attention to read about the contradictory linguistic strategies of ‘white’ and Aboriginal Australians. We noticed, in particular, how different communicative practices can lead to cross-cultural misunderstandings and may work to disempower Aboriginal Australians. We raised the idea that it may be useful to talk of ‘Englishes‘ rather than ‘English’, and we suggested that language not only reflects existing social relations; it may also construct and challenge them.

As I say, try to hold on to these ideas.

Looking forward, we have begun to prepare for your summer reading presentations. These will start on Thursday next week (Tuesday being a holiday). Please speak to me or mail me if you are uncertain or are experiencing difficulties.

David

Hello,

This is the first post on my new blog. The blog is intended primarily for my UWCSEA students following the IB English A Language and Literature course. I’m entering the 21st century – late in the day. Have patience.

David