IOURNAL OF EDUCATION, Volume 171 Nurnber i, i989

AND LINGUISTICS: LITERACY DISCOURSE, INTRODUCTION famesPaul Gee

Department of Lingtistics, Universitl, 6f ;\outhern California, Ins Angeles

What I propose in the folio'adng papers,in the main, is a way of talking aboutliteracy and linguistics. I believe that a new field of study, integating "psychd' and "socid' approachesto languageirom a variety of disciplines, is emerging, a field which we might call liceracy studies. Much of this work, I think {and hope}, shares at least some of the assumptions of the {ollowing papers.These papers,though written at different timeg and for diffierent purposes,are, nonetheless, based on the ciaim that the focus of literary studies or literacy,but socialpractices. or appliedlinguistics should not be langriage, This claim, I believe,hasa number of socially important and cognitively interesting consequences. "Langu.agd'is a misleading term; it too often suggests"glamrnarl' It is a and not truism that a personcan know perfectiy the glammar of a language just r,r'&a;;'ou say,but how you say know how to use that language-it is not it. If I enter my neighborhoodbar anclsayto nry tattooed drinking buddy,as I sit dowrr, "May I havea match pleaselj' my grarnmar is perfect,but what I that a personcould havesaid is wrong nonetheless lt is lessotten rerrrarked perfectly and str-l? nqt make sense. It is not lust how be able to usea language you say it, but what yon are and cJowhen yo\ say ir:.If I enter my neighborhood bar and say to my drinking buddy, as\ sit down, "Gime a nratch, wolldyaij'while placing a napkin on the bar stool to avoidgetting my newly pressed designerieansdirtli I havesaidthe right thing, but my \ayingdoing" r:ombination is nonethelessall wrons.
I am deeply indebted to Candy Mitchell ior editing this collecl ion of papers,and to fim OBiien lbr copyditing ihe papersappearin3here {or the first tim:. The following peopleare responsible {they may be aghast to hear) Ior having helped to lead me to the views I bold. First, a set of people whose writirqgs harreirupired me: ll'allace Cha{e,Michsel Cole, k'lul Gumperz, Shirley Brice Heth, Dell Hymes, William hbov, Roger and Su:rurne Scollon, Bri;ur Street, Gordon ldblls, and fim \{'ertsch. Second, a group of people not only whose writings hare inspired me, but whose discussion of the issues in these paners witb nre, a.lrell as whose friend-ship, has left me aln"aysin their debt: Elaine Andersen, Maria Brisk, Chip Bruce, Courtney Cazden, David Dickenson, Stert Krashen, Stele Gordon, Stere Griffl'r, Henry Girorrx, Donel lo Macedq Sarah Michaels, Bea Mikulecky, Eliiot Mishler, Candy Miti:hell. Catherine Snow,and Dennie 14blf. These papen ultimately all hale their origin in the kindness that SarahMichaels and Courtney Cazdenextended an interest in their concems. to me when I first arrived irr Boston try rnviting mc to ta-ke l. t989. o{ Education, Vo}umt l,tl, i".lrrniber lor-rrnal (:-,Trustees of Boston University

BOSTON L]NWERSIT}-

F. Niyi Akirrnaso and Cheryl Aiirctuti1lf9!)'. nteylt "simulated iob job training Pro8ram' r ne interviewg' from two lveifare mothers in a CETA job,, askedwhether she has ever shown initiative in a previous ;;-;;,

Agenlv,I *"tk"1i:,1T-:::17 therdsthis Walgreerls r""p"rarhit"ff, y-es, people

opJr"tor, OK. A;d it lvasa snow stonn, OK' And it was usually srx forth {p'34}'This womanis simply usingthe workir/ in a group. . :' *J* ;;"s t*;{ihewrong 'tiiabcrffor this tvp".of (t*dttt:;tl":,tlT:::ltl it iust wodt getyou th-lstype ot loDm It's a fJrfectly goodgrarnmar{diatect},

this type of societl'. The secondwoman {the authord "succesd'case}respondt19.t .t*"]?t reaxy l clrclrIt office' the to handle ' ' alone ' was lett . .I question by saying:". But I had enough experience to ded with any situafrarr. a tot of there-was "*p.ii.tt""' . . and those trrat t coutdat handle at the time, if ;;.'up. ;;a; had more erperience than rnyself, I askedqlSstronsto find out someonern-ho I drddt Know wno what procedure I would use' if something came up encllt I rvouldr/t forget io ,""fiy Soto, I would iot it down . . .o', a pie"e of paper,sottrat alf them about itr"i if iiy""" that was more qualified ihanrnysclf, I could hrndling iust i .rra n *:l *ruid go about so^lvingit. So I feel I'm capable of JU""i*y .i*ation,"whether it's on hy ovrn or rurder superviti"d,' !p ,111}^r].t got a real problem with her grammar (remeab:r,thls ls speecn' woman ha^sr1t sheputs tlat not wziting), nor is there any real problem with the useto which in charge srasrmar, but sheis expressingthe wrong vaiues' Sheviews beingleft peopldd' nairelv., supervision bv "other ;'a';;;sion, f.;;;;il;-;;;; knowledg"an<lexpertise.^aoa'h"failstocharacterizeherownexpertisein .p,imisiic form called for by such interviews' Using this response it* "*.:i oi "successfultrainingl; is only possiblebecausethe authors' ,n.*"*pit that "" o*rr" th"t i"rr5uage is more.than grammar {namely, 'trsd'}, are unaware use' communicatiorris more th\ language we-mustsayor write the rightthing t"rrgu"g-e At any !non'].ent\r aie "tlg to hold the in ttt" ,iglrt *"y while playing tf,e right iocial role and (appearing| b"ti*ts, and attiiudes. Thus, what is important is not language, ;i-d; "rfur,not granrmar,but saying (writing)-doing-being-valuins-belieuirtS surely :nid -"iiiioA""r."These combinaiions I call'Discoursesi'with a capital 'Tl' {'$s,dj, to me, means connected stretches of language that ;;"*.,, w-ith a little 'Di5orrrs9!e1e]^/:l)nlg!!g!{}g *"k ."rr"t, ,o "discoursd'is part of "Disc"*d\: in thelrorlG; !hef'are
,Xpi"i'ir"rU: p"ffr"ir.a ,tticles that arereprintedhere,citetions ,ft;;i.,i];.h;.*; cist of multiple iistingsfor the same ,rrJt" o*ts it"rreb.in ,.,pd"tea'*lie..,pptopri"te'll.l.the to tlre originalcitations' beenadded ha',e iontt t" t"tt.i'"rj' 'b';',"a ;;J;f#,il"*.l.ot]tn" herervith a capital"D'rnarksa sligbtshift fromGedseallier lrsused - " Editols ncte:"Dissourse" in thrsvolume' "WharIs Literacy?" useof the term. Set rheessav
.A combined reierencelist for all the articles m this issueof the /ournal is bund at the back-of t}at originailv

TURNAL OF EDUCAflON,

Volurne l7l }trumber l' 1989

posliTlglances' well asgestures' -bod1' at@ with the gjao*ffi*se complete comes which kit'' of "identitv a sort is to act' talk' and often write' so t'ow ot' io"' ii't*ct and appropriatecostume ttto,c"o: 'B*"H "tt"-"1':it-1 asto takeon ilpartrcurar;t^b;;;;;.Yryfiink' andactlike a linguist' anoto r r".*"i il;ff;;;,,'f" rrles of Discourses: (enact'i-o'5o*t ot ntr-exam. *nt" t"o]"Jo "-'p""t'

recogrize otheo a member of a cero'. t"* Russian' a or Amencan ing) being an " ""oman' e:acuti\re' a doctor" a-boarrlroom .r""",'"ir..;;;;;k; rain socioecono*" student ot an admrnistrator' ()r a student' a or a hospital patient, "i""i"" a setins circle' a club a strcet ;;;t"il.tf iit'Jltt]t:t' or ohvsicsor a st,ra."t ut atlharrmartv tocalbar'

o' " "s'1" "' " !ans,alunchti-" 'o"ia J"ti'JiiJ

Discourses' " ^"-io* out that much that is claimed' o Discounie rlisc'lr trqef lt tums outr i It 'a ao." one acquire geacquir;ition or socially situatec la:rgua, controversiar.ry,to be true oi second Krashen' tpsr Crosiean'1982; DJav];;';;##n' rgss; 1984) cosrition tseebe, e' Lave' ipga Larre' ; nogoff

983; xrash*#'; e;; li' 1 l 98sa,t98sb; i e-82. Discourses Discou$es' ;;;;'^"quisitionof obviousli;; more iat:t, is, in andhardly lesssottranlanguages'
by ot'ent#tt"ti'"" t"*^" but arenot rnastered sirtins in a classrooml' t"t]gtt"gt t""ot'a atqJiJ fluently ever anyone atta t"affold"a thnottgh " tltTttt ('app"#i*'h'lii;1\t*fi byencuttuatior, the Discourse rrastered *5" tti'i *'iti-nto-i3lt intc'"""oo supponed lreadv acquired'ournatillanguage Heath,f lSai' fno' ts howweall 1988; tCazden, all later' rnole puDucwe'acquire how is ft oittontt"' and our home-based youdodtget t()trteJocialpractice' Ily#t^i'"t' orientedDisco""t'' '"tttt rr' voi *-'-',o**s oorrr navc it'
Discourse, you vou;;;;;;= '"* lflj^::::t"'TTl, the Discourse, in in the bodies of not ffilJ; ,.i,"'oo* ?t ":tv*'!:t*tt ,Dffi" are ijt*."*., " phYsicqPl like know you ca! thF to be a
LUuq*' e-- -iThe various ljlscounies w urL'
Lwrrrrollr ing and often are not luly

The qlost You l4rl do is to

' rer; theie is often conflict

iiY.nff :T"T":ff; 'r"H#tif"ffi cons"ll:-,T'L:,*3in,,,r",r.tioo"l ftdlv not uses i"s *i.t"; $yres, b"lt'ltfl1llfl?li"'.,-,., the.values' ;?;;*;t",*"t .rr,.,,,ore Discourses wavs ;,;";l;r{1111*::*;X":i"-"1;"""1 an., ;#ffi i or ili"ff ol language' ;:,nffi "^ ;ili in which we humansareconsislenj -;e '*T: '#,"?".:il.::?'H".:"::'i";:;'**+:{"jl*:ffi wellintegrateocreaturssuur; too, whjle we are rve do T:*ffi J;; {rrJthus most Discourses assum(
i.nteractional styles, uses

represent. Thus, there is r

- ---,:+:.6 ^r c^"irl "i';;;;th;oC',

in hct,

in them]. )of

ffi

peer gro{]p, which I c;rll

on-ea1-ry#r*-r;r*t*ff.r* socicirz{tft a\ -'-' ' n., rrrro.ul,ourpnl'nrzry ' Disccurst:' lms initid Discourse'
: initial

itrt"t.

. .^

cense- o{ of to make ^n7',' sense

the world and inte

with

BOSTON UNTVERSITY

originai asd home-based sense of identity, and, I believe, it can be seen whlnerrer \ ie are interacting with "intimated' in totally casual {unmonitored}

social interaction. l{b insamember Further

Discourse, not

a"cariet''

various social lcultural, ethnic, regional, and economic) ,@"*tf""ross groups in the United States. ift"t o* initial socialization furour home colnmunity, each of us intersocial institutions-institutions in the pubactswith various non-home-based lic sphere,beyond the family and immediate kin and peer group' These may be local siores and churcheq schools, community groups, state and national businesses,agenciesand organizations, and so forth. Each of these social institutions commands and demands one or more Discourses and we acquire these fluently to the extent that we are given accessto these institutions and are allowed apprenticesbips within them. such Discourses I call secondary Discourses. We can also rrake an important distinction betweendominant Discowses and nondominant Dticourses. Dominant Discourses are secondary Discourses the mastery o{ which, at a particular place and tirne, brings with it prestige,statuqetc'}' Nonthe (potentiali acquisition of social "goodd' {mc'rrey, doruinant Discogrses are secondary Discourses the mastery of which often brings solidarity with a parricular social network, but not wider status arrd social goods in the society at large. findb, and yet more importantly, *e can always ask about how much tension or conflict is pfesent between a y two of a persods Discourses (Rosaldo,i989). We have argued abovc that some degreeof conflict and teniion {il only becauseof the discretehistorical origins of particular Discourses) wilI almost dways be present. Howevel, some people experience more o'lert and direct conllicts between two or more of their Discourses than do others feminist {for example, urany \r/omen academicsfeel conflict between certain literas traditional bis"o,o..r artd certain standardacademicDiscoursessuch ary criticism|. I argue that w-hensuch conflict or tension exists, it can deter or, at least, acquisition of one or the other or both of the conflicting Discourses-, of use {e.g',irr affectthe fluency of a masteredDiscotuseon certain occasions stressfi.rlsituations such as interr.ier+'s). Very often dominrnt groups in a sociery apply rather constant "testd' ol the fluenry of the dominant Discourses in which their por*er is symbolized. tests of "natiled' of at least, "fluent Tnese testi take on two frrnctions: they 41e toexclude "non-natived' {people userdr of the Discourse, and they ete Sates whose very conilicts with dorninant Discourses show they were not, in fact, "borrf' to them]- The sorts of tension and conflict we harrcmentioned here are particulariy acute when they involve tension and conflict between onds primarl' Discourse and * dr-rminantsecondaryDiscourse.

later in l!$. PrimarYDiscourses

OURN,\L OF EDUCATION,

Voi':rne l7l Number l, 1989

Discourseq primary and secondary,can be studied, in some ways, like Ianguages. And, in fact, some of what we know about secondlanguageacquiDiscourses can sition is relevant to them, i.{oniy in a metaphorical way.Ttaro tnterfete wirh one anotheq like tw-olanguages;aspectso{ one Discourse can be tansferrcl" to another Discourse, asone can tr.rnsfr.ra grammatical fuature from one language to enother. Iior instance, the primary Discourse of many middie-class homes has been influenced by secondary Discourses like those used in schools and business.This is rrruch lesstrue of the primary Discourse in rnany lower socioconomic black hornes, though this primary Discourse has inlluenced the secondary Discourse used in black churches. Furthermore, if one has not mastered a particular secondary Discourse which nonetheless one must try to use, several things can happen, things which rather resemblewhat can happenwhen onehasfuiled to fluendy master a second tanguage.One can fall back on r:nds primary Discourse, adiusting it in various waysto try to fit it to the neededfunctions; this responseis very cornmon, but almost always socially disastrous. Or one can use another, perhaps related, secondary Discourse . Or one can use a simplified or stereoaresimilar typed version of the required secondaryl)iscourse. Theseprocesses pidginization, to those linguists study under the rubrics of /angr agecontact, and creolization. I belierc that efiy socially useful definition of "litereqy'' must be couched in terms of the notion of Discourse. Thus, trdefine "literacy'' as the mastery of or fluent control over a secondary Drscourse.Therefore, literacy is always plwal: fiteracr'es{there are many of them, since there arc many secondaryDiscourset and we all haw some and hil to haw others).I{ vrewanted to be rather pedantic and literalistig then r+ecould define "literacy'' as"mastery of or fluent control o\Er secondaryDiscoursaslrra./v:ngpnnl' {which is alrnost all of them in a modem society|. But I seeno gain foomthe addition of the phrase"involvthe feelings of people committed {asI am notf urg printi other than to assuage to reading and writing as decontextualized and isolable skills. Wb can talk about domina nt litetacies andnondominailt literacies intemrs of whether they involle mastery of domin'nt or nondominant secondaryDiscourses.We can also talk atrout a literacy b engliberating {"powerful"f il it can be used as a "meta-languagd' ia set of rneta-words, meta-values, meta-beliefsf for the critique ol other literacies and the way they constitute us as persons and situate us in society. Liberating literacies can recon-stitute and resituate us. IvIy definition of "literad' rnay seem imrocuous, at least to someone already corwinced that decontextualized views of print are meaningless. Nonetheless, several 'theorems'' follow from it, theorems that have rather direct and unsettling consequeirces. First theorem: Discourses {andtherefore literaciesl arenot like languages in one very important regard. :.-rmeonecan speak English, but not fluently. However, someone carinot cngagein a Discourse in a less than fully fluent manner. You are either in it or vodre not. Discourses are connected with dis-

10

BCSTON I.INIVERSFY

plays of an identit7j failhg to fully display an identity is tantarnount to annor-rncing 1cu donlt harc that identity, that at best yor.rlrea pretender or a beginner. Very often, learners of second languages"fossilizd' at a stageof development significantly short of fluenry. This cadt happen with DiscoursesIf yor/w fosilized in the acquisition of a Discourse prior to full "fluel{' {rtta of apprenticeship!, then your verv lack of fluenry are no longer in the prcrcess marks you as a nonlmembe.r of *re group that controls this Discourse. That is, you dodt harrcthe identity or social role which is the basisfor trheexistence of ttre Discourse in the fust place. In fact, tle lack of flr'rencymay very well mark you as a pretender to the social role instantiated in the Discourse {an outsider with pretensicns to being atinsiderl. There iq thus, no t'orkable "affirmative actiorl' for Discourses: you carlt be let into the game after missing the apprenticeship and be expectedto have a tair shot at playing it. Socialgoups will not, usually, give their vrcial goodswhether these are status or solidarity or both-to those who are not "natiw:d' or "{luent lrsery' {though "mushIake," discussedbelow.,may sometimes provide a way for non-irritiates to gain access|.While this is an empirical clatrn, I belierie it is one rastly supported fu the sociolinguistic literature {Milroy, 1980, 1987rMilroy &, Milroy, 19851. This theorem {that there areno people who are partially literate or semiliterate but not fluently so) has one practical literate, or, in any other \tr'ay, consequence: notions like "functional literad' and 'tompetenry-based literad' are simply incoherent. As far as literacy goes,there are only "fluent reme:nber,Disspeakers'ard "apprenticed imetaphorically speaking,because coursesare not iust rvayso{ talking, but waysof talking, acting, thinking, valuing, etc.). Secondtheorem: Prirnary Discourses,no Inatter whose they are/can never really be liberadng iiteracies fur a literary to be liberating it must contain both the Discotuse it is going to E'ritiqueand a set of meta-elements{language, words,attitudeq values|in terms of which an analysisand criticism can be carried out. Prirnary Discoursesare initial and contain only themselves.They 1\ can be embeddedin later Discoursesand critiqued, but they can nelrerserve '{r as a meta-languagein terms of which a critique of secondaryDiscourses can d\ *J sr I be carriedout. Our secondtheorem is not likely to be wry popular.Theorem f,\i' I 2 saysthat ali primary Discourses are limited. 'Liberatiod' {"powe1'},in the Nr 1 senseI am using the term here,residesin acquiring at least one more Discourse in tenns of which ow own primary Discourse can be analyzed and critiqued. This is aot to saythat primary Discoursesdo not contain critical attitudes and critical language {indeed, nuny of thern contain implicit and explicit ertauthen;tr'ccritiracism and classisml. It is to saythat they cannot carry oro;t cisrn, because*rey cannot r,erbalize the words, actt values,and attitudes they Theorem 2 is quite use,and they cannot nobi-lize enplicit meta-knowledgc. theorem that the traditional and conser tive-it is the analogrreof SocrateCs

JOURNAL OF EDUCAfiON, -',blume17i Nurrrber l, 1989

ll

uncxamined hfe is not *'orth living. tnterestingly enough,\'ygotsky (1987, chapter 6| comes very closely to statlqg this theorem explicitly. Other theorems can be deducedfrom the theory of literacy here developed, but these two shor.ild make clear what sorts of consequencesthe theory has.It should also make it quite clear that tJretheory is not a neuttal in terms of which one can argue for iust any conclusionsabout meta-language literacy. Not all Discourses involve w::ithg or readiag, dtough many do-However, all vrnting and readir.g is embedded in some Discc,urse,and that Discourse always involves more than writing arrd reading {e.g.,ways of tdking, actinS, valuing, and so fonh). You cannot teach anyone to write or read outside any Discourse (there is no such thing, unless it is cdled "moving a per/' or "typing" in the caseof writing, or "movilg onds lipd' or "mouthing wordd' in the caseof reading|.Within a Discourse)'ou arealwaysteaching more than writing or reading. When I say "teacH' here, I mean "apprentice someonein a masterapprentice relationship in a sccial practice {Discourse}wherein you scaffold their growing ability to say',dc, value, beliele, and r;oforth, within thet Diswhen course,through demonstratirg your mastery and supporting theirs e'ven it barely exists [i.e.,you make it look as if they can do what they really carlt do)1'That is, you do much the samething middleclass, "super bab/' producrng parentsdo when they o books' with their child1sn. Now, there are many Discourses connected to schools {different onesfor different rypesof school activities and dilferent pans of the curriculum) and other public institutions. These "middle-classmainstreant'' sorts of Discourses often carry with them power and prestige.It is often ftlt that goodlisteners on the petty and good readersought to pay attention to maaning and not Socus details of mechanicg "correctness/' the superficial fuatures of language.Unfortunately, many middle-class mainstream status-giving Discoursesoften do suchsuperficial stresssuperficial teatureso{ lalrguage.\,!try? Preciselybecause in the "righf place, f':atures arethe best test asto whether one wasapprcnticed at the "righ/' tirne, with the "righf' people.Suchsupe.rficialbatures areexactly the pans of Discoursesnrost irnpervious to owrt instruction and areonly fully mastered when everytJrilg else in the Discourse is rnastered.Sincethese Discoursesareusedas "gated'to ensurethat the "righC' peopleget to the "righf piacesin our society,such superficial featuresareided. A personwho writes in a petition or office me'mo: "If you cancel the show,all the performers would have did all that hard work for nothingl'has signaled tbat he or she isdt the "right sort of persorf' (was not frrlly acculturated to the Discourse that supports this identity). That signai staysmeaningfui long after the content of the memo is iJrgotten, or even when the content r^/asof no interest in the first place. Now, one can certainiy encouragestudents to simply "resist" such of languagel'And, indeed,they will get to do so from the "superficiai featurc.s

BOSTONUNTVER.SITY bottom o{ society, where their lack of mastery of such superficialities was p pl"o them anyway.But, of course,the problem is that such ,,super_ 1t:T: hcralitieg' cannot be taught qr a regular classroorn in any case;they car{i be "picked u1' later, outside the f'll context of an early apprenticeship(at home and at schoollin "middleclass-likd' school-based *lo a"ing tii o. tu", "f is preciselywhy they work sowelles "gatesf'This is alsoprecisety "rra tire tiateay

i;ssi1.*rni"i points out that without having mastered an extensive list of Lir.i"riii", p.ogte.;an beJanaoftenaref oaluded from "goodC, contron"d by ;rr-.r:l-rrt;;"p, m the society. Hirsch is a'rong-in thinking that this can be taught {in a=ciassroom.of all pla""ul) the sociariyiituated practices thai rhesegroups ."p"tt.ft9T have rncorporated into their homes and daily lives. There is a real coritradicIonh9f,-engwe ignoreit at theperil of ourstudents andour** "ga f"liV (no middle-class 'tuper bab'y',producing parelrs ignore it!. !*y""4 slenging thesocial structurg is there much hope? No, there is 39t. so -weberter get on about the process of changing the social structnre. Now, whose iob is t}'at? I would say,people who have bien allotted the job of teaching Discourses, 6orexample, English teacherq languageteachers,'cornposition teacherq TESOL teachers,studies-skills teachers.we can pause,also. to remark-on the paradox that e\ren though Discourses ,,ofb" overtly taughg and carrnot readily be masteredlate in the game,the"rt university **,. teachersto olertly teach and wants students to demonstrate mastery.riachers of Discourses take on an impossible iob, allow themsehrs to be eviuated on how wellthey do it, and accep {airly low status all the whire for doing ir. So what can teachers of Discourses do? WeIl, tlere happens to i-. * advantageto failing to master mainstream Discourses, that is] ihere is an atlvanuge to being socially "maladayrtedl' \{hen we havereally masteredarrythrng a Discoursef, r*e havelittle or no consciousawareness {e.g., of it lindeed,tikJ d3*"*s, Discourses wouldrlt work if people were consciously aware of what they were doing while doing itl. uowevei when we come acrossa situation where we are unable t* accommodateor adapt (asmany mfurority students do on being faced, late in the game, with having to acquire mainstrearn Discourses),we becorneconsciously awareof wh"t w" at tryorg to do or ,r. b"org called upon to do. Let rne girrean examplethat works similarly, that is, the caG ot classroornsecondlanguageleaming. Almost no one really acquiresa second laqguage in a classroom- Howener, it can happen that exposrire to another languap, hevins to uanslate it into and otGrwise rehL it t. 1=o, u*r, c:ut cause you to b9c9me consciously ar,r.are of frow yo* fioi fanguage, ramrks it means}. This {horv "meta-lorowledgd,can actualry make you language better able to manipulate your first language. Vygotsky {1987}saystJrat iearning a foreign lauguage%llows the chiid to . *9:ry*ld language as a single instantiatiorrif Fgnative t;;""1, {p' 2221.Anti here we have a crue- crassroom instruction "hrrgrriJi; 6nguage, co;1in

of E' D.Hi:sch,|rlsmuch-talked-aboui bookculrarai tit"-or

|OURNAL

OF EDUC.{tr*ION. Voiume lZi Number l, 1989

-tJ

position, study skillg l{Titirrg, critical thinking, content-based literacy, or harE iead to metak.to-l.dg., to seeinghorr the Discourses),rou *t "rtr "t"*.tgot relate to those you are atteiiipting to acquire, and how F o* yo{ already are tryirig to acquire relareto self and society.Metaknorvledgeis libe.rationand po'*a UJ"".6.it leadeto the ability to manipulate, to anallze, noresist while advanclng. Such metaknowledge caa make "maladapted' students smarter than %daited , ones.Thus, the liberal classroonrthat arpids oven talk of form and supei{icialities, of how thiags work, as well as of their socio-cultutalpolitlcal baslq is no help. Suchtalk can be por*erful so long asone neverthinks that in talking about gr-amrraq fcrm, or superficialities one is gettlng Peo_Ple to actually aJquire Dit"onts"r {or laaguageq ior that matter}. Such talk is always political talk. ttroug5 actirie il.ri, ttt bg qn"stion: If ore cannot aequireDiscogrsessave lt is di{ficult ta compete with the mastery o( those adsocial piactic., "''a mitted early to the game when one has entered it aslate ashiglr school or college, what can be done to see ro it rhat meta-knor,vle@ *d resistance are colupled with Discourse developmentSThe problem is deepenedtry the -fa9t thai true acquisition oi many mainstrerm Discoulses involws, at ieast_while betng in them, active complicity with values that conflict witt onds homeDiscourses,especiallyfor masy r pmen and minorities. and Jommunisy-based The question is too big for me, but I harretwo views topgsh-nonetheless' First, true acquisition (wbich is alwaysfull fluency) will rarely if oier happen. close to acquisition to occur, classrooms must be active Even for "qtitti"s mu* co-n' apprenticeships in'hcademiC social practices, and, in most cases, the outside n".t *ith thise social practices as they are also carried on 'tompositior/' cr "languagd' clasg eisewhere rn the Unirarsity' *con{ though mre acquisition is probably not possible,"mushfrkd' Discourse is possible.Mack {in press)detines "mushfakei' a term hom prison culture, ai making "do wiih somethrnglesswhen the red thing is not available. So when prison inmates make hats {rom underwear to protect their bfil from lice . the hats ale mushfake.Elaboratecraft items madeftromusedvooden rnatch sticks arc another exanrpleof mushfakej' "Mushgke Discoursd' means partial acquisition coupled with meta-knowledgpand strategiesto "make dd' having a memo edited to ensure-noplwal, posfstrateges-rangingfrom alwal's ,d, agreement errors to active us of black culture !"sLrJ, atrd third-person skils at "psychingout'' interviewe$, or to skategiesof "rising to the meta'lerel in an intiwiew so the interviewer is thrown off stride by having tlre rules of the game implicitly refurred to in the act of carrying them outf' - , ;'M*hI"k this seemsto me like agood ;' toistance, and meta-lcnon'ledge: combination for successfulstudents and successfulsocial clrange.SoI propose that we ought to produce "mush{akingi resistitg students, fulI of metaknorvledge.but isrlt that to politicize teachingl A Discourse rs an integration of sayingfdoing, and va.iuing,and ail socially basedvaluing is political. All suc-

I+

BOSTON LINTVERSTT "'

coninculcates Discourse and not iust cessful teachin'g,that is, teaching that tent, is political. That too is a trursrn' in.the functioning of languagem ;;sted As a lirguist L* pt"";; is how arrdhorr the

this sortof linguistics andu,",""i"tlnia?r[i:n"iti"" + Discourses apprenticeships) ;iarv situated language-within-urr**'"lii ;t'q:,li,id 6 transfur into' intertete wt -rr' languagesr'orn aiffetittt Diicoursgs
the linguistic.,"-:*: "1^**l: and otherwise un "o""'i"#;,h;;;-f"t* gtottpt rl.sgci;w' To seewhat is at stake i*"t'"u*l-u"t"* L"i.ai* which clearlv brings out a host of "tJio briefiv ai'"t'"I ;;;;J here,l will oi its context' in *ris d"J*"i"' ittlt tto' with anexplanation important issues umts in termsof "lines"and"stanzas;' J"msrcated ,"*.i, n b"il. i#;; " *riJ"u i Lri"* arethe basisoi speech:
rerularlv readsstorybooks partv' CONTEXT OF TEXT: A yourg middiell-ass-mottter h"d hadabirthdav tieiJ-v,e"t--otd to bothhers-t ,at v""tJia*al"friJ"' next seve:al told the s-year 9ld'has fw {ays whichhadhad so*t p'oUit* i'ithe ol her in thelanguage

;il;t#;bJi*;

whenthe A i* tiiq" primaryDiscourse couldnot cie' "v"tt*' ti'? il>i"'-Ji Gaittt t '*ted to "read"{she bookto her T-ve""'o, a; what had.haipened *C^yP:::]hng andpretena,,i code), good'but eventual"'L-'iffi*" oifoitt"l'ti"rnpt at this wasnot very the othergirl'-the p"tty Ht' il.iili"f,iiv to te"dins lv aftera fev*'ui"', **ti#iJJ*-th'the.mo'ht' ^r.irir*Grlory-*hi.hir ttot otner ul thelanguase

ui*fr*"v p*iy' "pon-s'tttt^e'ents -l'ater' astoryreading motherrvas

'd#Ji_i,iJii"a"*a ,i,.

{iust}

Primary Discourse sYstem: STAI\rZA ONE (Inttoductionl l. This is a story oncefriends ;. G;G;kid'*how' 3. But got into a big f$ht not 4- And wlere hng of Genre} Signal STANZA TWO {Frame: your storyDooK i'n 5. You can readalong 6. I'm gorurareadaLoud prosodyirom norvonl {story-readi4g STANZA THREE ll itle) 7. "F{orr'theFrienJsCot Untriend" tntroduction of CharactersJ SI\NZA FOUR {Settir^g,: three girls 8. Once upon a tlme ihE" *"t *uee boys.'n - -L ^ ^:,r^ Betty Lnu, Paliis' and Parslun'were the Srrrs ;. iG.;; "amed and Aaron wcre tne Doys Jason' I0. And Michael, I l. TheY were kiends STANZA Fl\ {?roblem: SexDifferences} 12. The boys would play lianstormers Patches i5. A;d;hA girls would play Cabbage

r;ilil