Category: Discourse Analysis

Meaning comes from “the matrix of relationships in which we are engaged” (Gergen & Gergen, 2000). The term ‘masculinity’ is, undeniably, laden with meaning. As is true of all language, ‘masculinity’ comes accompanied by assumptions, and these in turn depend upon where and when it is used. This essay deconstructs the assumptions underpinning dominant discourse on multiple masculinities, the male role, and a so-called ‘crisis of masculinity’. It examines ways in which context informs individual, relational, and collective knowledge, drawing upon case studies and real-life examples to support the theory. Finally, it addresses how dominant discourse surrounding masculinity affects different demographics to varying degrees, and particularly the impact of these discourses on collectively developing boys, adult men, and women. It should be noted that these generalisations are made for the purpose of addressing a wider problem, but the act of pigeonholing the entire male population into a single category of ‘men’ is problematic in itself, as it ignores the diverse and unique nature of individuals, cultures, and different groups within society.

Social constructivism is based on the premise that knowledge and meaning, rather than existing as individual objective ‘truths’ or certainties, are constructed through social discourse. Discourse refers to the language and practices used to construct knowledge (Foucault, 197_): it consists of the ways humans use language to express; to argue; to convince; to communicate. Individual meaning, therefore, is constructed through social discourse, which varies depending on context, and often reflects and reinforces dominant values and beliefs (Graham, 2005). Wetherell, Taylor & Yates (2001) understood dominant discourse as the language we use in and around “normative forms of behaviour, the sum total of the practices and characteristics which we conventionally associate with (the subject)”. It refers to a dominant collective ‘knowledge’ of masculinity that evidences itself in everyday language.

Prilleltensky and Nelson (2002) proposed a Hierarchical Ordering of the Tripartite Self, a framework that integrates concepts of ‘self’ by approaching self-definition in individual, relational, and collective contexts (Sedikides, Gaertner & O’Mara, 2011). Dominant discourses of masculinity have serious implications at each level of the framework.

Gender is socially constructed, thus differences in behaviour between men and women are the result of socially constructed beliefs and values. These dominant values are both represented and reinforced by ‘masculine’ behaviours, adding to a continuous cycle. It follows that men’s so-called ‘un-emotionality’ comes not from experiencing emotions, but in their ability to understand and express emotions. While these behaviours are often attributed to the biological wiring of men’s brains (Cleary, 2011), in fact they are the result of social conditioning, and based upon dominant values that have developed across history and culture.

Firstly, positions men as “logical, rational, stable, strong etc.” and women as “emotional, random, unstable”. Secondly, encourages use of dominant discourse such as ‘don’t snitch’ and ‘man up’ that are intended to create a division between ‘real men’, those who conform to these norms, and ‘girls’ or ‘pussies’, men and boys who don’t conform. The dominant group exerts power through physical and psychological strategies, encouraging certain behaviours, and punishing others who do not adopt these behaviours. This phenomenon incites fear, uncertainty, and a sense of threat, not only in individuals excluded from the dominant group, but also in ‘weaker’ members of the dominant group, who must then take on behaviours that show their masculinity to make up for having any traits that are considered ‘feminine’ or ‘weak’ (in fact, the two are often interchangeable in discourse).

A study by Cleary (2011) interviewed a sample of young males who had recently made a suicide attempt to explore the emotions and meanings behind their suicidal behaviour. Several themes were apparent, notably a lack of control and the influence of dominant male role models. Some participants found it difficult to differentiate between mental and physical illness, with emotional distress translating into physical symptoms.

Dominant discourse of masculinity typically constructs men as un-emotional, stoic and resilient, in contrast with women, who are constructed as emotional, fragile and unpredictable. These constructions are often justified through claims that differences in behaviour and emotion are biological, that men are innately less emotional and more rational. The study by Cleary (2011) references “gendered beliefs about men’s un-emotionality and women’s emotionality,” in spite of evidence showing similar levels of emotionality between men and women (O’Connor, Sheehy, & O’Connor, 2000). The question then becomes this: where do these gendered beliefs originate?

The implications of these constructions of masculinity are serious. Dominant discourses position expression of emotion as ‘weak’ or ‘feminine’, thus men are discouraged from expressing emotion. This links closely with mens’ reporting of suicidal ideation or thoughts. “Perceived stigma was attached to the expression of emotional pain” (Cleary, 2012; O’Brien et al., 2005). A construction of men as ‘stoic’ and ‘indestructible’ renders them less able to express need for help, for fear of showing weakness and being considered ‘less than’ other men.

That need to identify as a ‘man’ over a ‘woman’ is embedded in their minds from a young age: the message repeats in TV shows and films and books and throughout pop culture. Traits that are labelled ‘feminine’ or ‘girly’ are portrayed as negative, for example “you’re such a girl” is often coupled with a tone of disgust and dismissal, and is associated with lack of courage or “balls”. Indeed, that “having courage” has become synonymous with “having balls” reflects not only the pervasive nature of this constructed concept of masculinity, but the purposeful linking of masculine identity with perceived ‘masculine’ traits, pressuring men and women alike to accept, rather than reject, the dominant construction as valid, and behave accordingly.

Picture a modern game of AFL: masculinity is defined by power, strength, skill, and aggression. Players are cheered as heroes, while at the same time engage in intentional non-game related physical violence against other players, use derogatory language, and show other typically ‘masculine’ behaviours that reinforce dominant values in viewers across the country. Newspapers regularly publish articles with titles such as “Ruthless Giants Annihilate Lifeless Blues” (AAP, 2019) and aggressive behaviour frequently goes unpunished: “Match review officer Michael Christian… said there was insufficient force for a charge against Geelong star Ablett – who ran off his line to collect Kangaroos opponent Sam Wright in the head with a raised forearm – even though he classified the clash as an intentional strike” (Nine News, 2019). Using this language is problematic because the words are gendered, linking masculinity with violence. When perpetrators of violence are framed as positive role models and even heroes, we are actively encouraging men to be violent, and this can lead to serious consequences.

Feelings of emasculation often emerge from being unable to meet certain ‘ideals’ of masculinity, which can lead to individuals feeling the need to engage in ‘ultra-masculine’ behaviours to subvert these feelings and re-assert their identity as ‘a man’. Jewkes (2002) conducted research on intimate partner violence, finding that having ‘fewer resources’ than their wives is associated with domestic violence (Jewkes, 2002). Here, violent behaviour is used to ‘correct’ a situation in which values of male superiority are threatened.

Expression of emotion through using violence is a self-reinforcing, learned social behaviour, and its consequences can be extreme (Jewkes, 2002; Anderson & Umberson, 2001). In the Christchurch terror attack in March 2019, a twenty-eight-year-old Australian terrorist, Brenton Tarrant, shot and killed 50 people in two mosques (ABC News, 2019). One 2015 study used several murder-suicide cases to explain how normative ideas of masculinity can lead to violence. It found themes linking the violent behaviour to loss of control in their lives, hopeless, and marginalised masculine identities, but also evidence that men commit violence to ‘reassert one’s masculine self’ by acting against their perceived marginalisation (Oliffe, Han, Drummond, Maria, Borttorff, & Creighton, 2015). Perpetrators of such violent crimes are not born ‘monsters’, and neither do they have more ‘natural masculinity’ than other men. They are people whose senses of masculinity and identity have been shaped by dominant discourse, and whose ideas about men’s success are shaped by their family members, peers, and the media (Cleary, 2011). Men and boys have been told all their lives that ‘real’ men don’t cry, that ‘boys will be boys’, that they should strive towards the ideal of being a ‘beast’ and knowing how to throw a punch. Men have to learn from a young age that if they don’t exhibit enough masculine behaviour, they become targets. Fear of becoming a target strongly motivates them to engage in the very behaviours that made them a target in the first place. Respect is gained through violence and aggression. These behaviours are both learned and self-reinforcing.

A study by Motschenbacher (2010) examined the language used in magazines to construct female and male identity. It found that discourse around female body parts was more likely to “play a role in the aestheticization of the body”, while male body parts are seen as “more likely to be of functional value” (Motschenbacher, 2010). This dichotomy is interesting because it highlights how normative values influence language around physical differences, but also how use of this gender-separating language serves to reinforce those very same normative values in others. Clarke, Marks & Lykins (2015) investigated dysfunctional sexual beliefs and attitudes in males that were shaped by normative constructions of masculinity: “depictions of normative behaviour can influence males’ attitudes and self-perceptions”. They found that men were more likely to endorse violence towards women after having watched films showing those behaviours (Clarke, Marks & Lykins, 2015).

Take for example the YouTube video posted by the verified account Improvement Pill, entitled “How to Get A Girl To Like You – 3 GUARANTEED STEPS” (Improvement Pill, 2015). The video is based on the premise that men need to do certain behaviours to ‘get’ girls, as if they can ‘catch’ a woman. It divides the entirety of humanity into two limiting categories: men and women. Men should attract women by projecting value, which is made up of the following factors: wealth, popularity, looks, knowledge, and knowing lots of people. The video explicitly states ways men can manipulate women to make the women like them, making the assumption that women are unable to measure value themselves, or decide what is valuable.

The video tells the viewer that certain body language, such as slower movements and taking up more space, indicate confidence, and this projects value. However rather than generalising this to all humans, instead it is gendered. It makes reference to confident men, and instructs men to ‘imitate this confidence’ even if they don’t really believe they are confident, because this will make them more successful in ‘getting the girl.’ Well, my question is: does this method apply to other traits? If men have to adopt this particular norm, what other normative behaviours should they adopt to be successful? Should men behave aggressively, because it will give them more success in ‘getting the girl’?

“What about all of those catcallers who catcall women all day? That doesn’t work.” Rather than addressing catcalling as a form of harassment, the video completely misses the point and tells men that it “doesn’t work because they’ve skipped the first step of creating attraction.” In this sidestepping the issue, the article reduces the negative behaviour of catcalling to simply ‘missing a step’, with the implication that this behaviour is okay if the first step is completed. It fails even to label the behaviour as wrong, let alone address the consequences of such behaviour on women who are catcalled. And the consequences are not simply ‘being put out’; this sort of behaviour contributes to a much larger oppressive force. Catcalling is a behaviour that reinforces the belief that women are objects to be commented upon and used.

Another article published in Marie Claire magazine asserts “a girl who’s truly ‘one of the guys’ never has trouble attracting men” (Marie Claire, 2014). Again, there is the assumption that the girl wants to attract men: but there’s also the implication that girls should aim to be like a man, because that’s what men value. It is important to note that the category of ‘masculinity’ itself and its implicit contrast with ‘femininity’ is problematic, not just the form of current dominant models of behaviour (Cleary, 2011).

This article is from a woman’s perspective, and provides advice for other girls on how to become ‘one of the guys’. The advice, predictably, is based on engaging in behaviours that reflect dominant constructions of masculinity: you have to drink lots in order not to be considered “a pussy”; you can’t cry, because expressing emotion shows weakness and is annoying; you can’t “be a mother” by showing caring behaviours, because those behaviours are considered too feminine. The article explicitly states that when girls receive unwanted attention, they should be thankful when ‘the boys’ respond with aggression and violence. This rejection of ‘feminine’ behaviour positions women as ‘less than’, but also shows a highly generalised view of ‘the guys’ and failure to acknowledge diversity (Andersson, 2008). Particularly problematic is construction of men as ‘non-dramatic’ and ‘chill’, but also as aggressive. Emotions such as contentment or anger are valued, but sadness, compassion, and worry are not.

References

1. AAP (2019). AFL stars Ablett, Fyfe escape sanction. Retrieved from https://wwos.nine.com.au/afl/fyfe-ablett-face-nervous-waits-over-hits/ec1de6e9-e333-4ae1-b656-22aa700f4807
2. ABC News (2019). Christchurch shooter Brenton Tarrant charged with 50 counts of murder over mosque attack. Retrieved from https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-04-04/christchurch-shooter-brenton-tarrant-charged-with-50-murders/10969764
3. Anderson, K. L., & Umberson, D. (2001). Masculinity and power in men’s accounts of domestic violence. Gender and Society, 15(3), 358-380. Retrieved from https://www.jstor.org
4. Andersson, K. (2008). Constructing young masculinity: A case study of heroic discourse on violence. Discourse & Society, 19(2), 139-161. Retrieved from https://www.jstor.org.
5. Azjen, I. (2002). Perceived behavioural control, self efficacy, locus of control, and the theory of planned behaviours. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 32(4) 665-683, DOI:10.1111/j.1559-1816.2002.tb00236.x
6. Benwell, B. (2004). Ironic discourse: Evasive masculinity in men’s lifestyle magazines, Men and Masculinities, 7(1), 3-21, DOI: 10.1177/1097184X03257438
7. Cleary, A. (2011). Suicidal action, emotional expression, and the performance of masculinities, Social Science & Medicine, 74, 489-505
8. Clarke, M. J., Marks, A. D. G., & Lykins, A. D. (2015). Effect of normative masculinity on males’ dysfunctional sexual beliefs, sexual attitudes, and perceptions of sexual functioning. Journal of Sex Research, 52(3), 327-337. DOI:10.1080/00224.2013.860072
9. Festinger, L. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Stanford University Press, Stanford, CA.
10. Foucault, M. (1972). The discourse on language. Learning and Scholarship, 1(2) 72-1135. Retrieved online from https://www.monoskop.org
11. Graham, L. J. (2005). Discourse analysis and the critical use of Foucault. Australian Association for Research in Education. *presented at the annual conference.
12. Harmon-Jones, C., & Harmon-Jones, E. (2007). Cognitive dissonance theory after 50 years of development. Zeitschrift für sozialpsychologie, 38(1), 7-16, DOI:10.1024/0044-3514.38.1.7
13. Improvement Pill (2016). How to get a girl to like you – 3 guaranteed steps . Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9MFrslI2aM4.
14. Jewkes, R. (2002). Intimate partner violence: Causes and prevention. The Lancet, 359(9315), 1423-1429
15. Jordan, A., & Chandler, A. (2019). Crisis, what crisis? A feminist analysis of discourse on masculinities and suicide, Journal of Gender Studies, 28(4), 462-474, DOI: 10.1080/09589236.2018.1510306
16. Mac an Ghaill, M., & Haywood, C. (2010). Understanding boys’: Thinking through boys, masculinity and suicide. Social Science & Medicine, 74(1), 482-489. Retrieved from https://www.elsevier.com/locate/socscimed
17. Motschenbacher, H. (2009). Speaking the gendered body: The performative construction of commercial femininities and masculinities via body-part vocabulary. Language in Society, 38(1) 1-22. DOI:10.1017/S0047404508090015
18. Oliffe, J. L., Han, C. S. E., Drummond, M., Maria, E. S., Borttorff, J. L., & Creighton, G. (2015). Men, masculinities, and murder-suicide. American Journal of Men’s Health, 9(6), 473-485. DOI: 10.1177/1557988314551359
19. Prilleltensky, I. (1997). Values, assumptions & practices: Assessing the moral implications of psychological discourse and action. American Psychologist, 52(1), 517-535
20. Prilleltensky, I., & Nelson, G. B., (2002). Doing psychology critically: Making a difference in diverse settings. Palgrave Macmillan, 2002. ProQuest Ebook Central, https://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/unda/detail.actiondocID=3027500
21. Santos, R. (2010). 6 ways to be one of the guys. Retrieved from https://www.marieclaire.com/sex-love/a4312/one-of-the-guys/
22. Sedikides, C., Gaertner, L., & O’Mara, E. M. (2011). Individual self, relational self, collective self: Hierarchical ordering of the tripartite self. Psychological Studies. 56(1), 98-107. DOI: 10.1007/s12646-011-0059-0

Language is a system of communication wherein sounds, signs or a combination of the two conveys actions and ideas. Language is one of the most precious gifts God gave us. It is a characteristic that makes a man fully human. Humans are above the animals because they have the ability to convey messages and information formally.

According to Mayell, H. (2003), language is ultimately important because it is the primary means through which humans have the ability to communicate and interact with one another. Some linguists go so far as to suggest that the acquisition of language skills is the primary advancement that enabled our pre-historic ancestors to flourish and succeed over the hominid species.

Generation may be a time wherein people are classified reckoning on the year or time they were born. There are different generations which are: Baby Boomers, Generation X, Millennials, and Generation Z. In different generations, different types of attitude and technology are involved. There are so much discussion about different generations, from the Generation of Baby Boomers to Generation Z. In an article by Renn (2008), the author claims that everybody are labeled, categorized, sometimes even stereotyped simply according to our date of birth.

Meanwhile, Macon & Artley (2009) examined and described the characteristics of various generations, including background, preference, and characteristics and so on. According to the authors Baby Boomers who were born between 1946 and 1964 strives for economic prosperity and are lifelong learners. Throughout most of their lives Boomers respect authority and believe that younger generations are rude. They also believe in the spirit of teamwork, expects to be one in all the simplest on the team. They have good work ethics and expect others to possess the same. They respond using e-mails on a usual basis.

However, Generation X who were born between 1965 and 1976 were the first generation to incorporate digital technology in their youth. Generation X prefers receiving and using short, brief messages instead of lengthy ones. Generation Xers spent considerable time at home alone. The Xers are independent, not intimidated by authority, creative but cautious. They are committed to family values and local causes; they want less structure with more dialogue.

While, Generation Y or Millenials who were born between 1980 and 1994 have been always around technology and have been able to be consistently connected with computers, cell phones and the Internet. Change is the norm for them. People in this generation like to keep busy and ask lots of questions and need to be structured and require deadlines.

Meanwhile, Generation Zers who were born between 1996 – present grew up as digital natives, whose internet is part of their daily lives; they spent much of their lives in front of screens which have led to specific communication preferences. They are technologically advanced and know how to use a smartphone from an early age; they absorb tons of new information every day. Generation Zers expects fast responses from whomever they’re sending a message. The best way to communicate with them is face-to-face.

Moreover, a research conducted by Dan (2019) found that Philippines, currently has a total population of 107.3 million. Of that population 76 million or 71% are active social media users, age group 18-24 makes up the largest proportion of social media users or 52.7% who belongs to the Generation Z.

Generation Z from a cultural perspective is clearly different than those that came before them, sometimes they have their own meaning of words. For instance the word woke, woke by its nature is referred to as the past tense of wake which is to become awake after sleeping. Meanwhile, wake has other meaning in Generation Z which is to be aware of social issues, to possess the ability to identify something as problematic. In addition, the word lit, as it turns out, is not a new term. Its earliest recorded use was in 1918 though then it is primarily described the feeling of intoxication. Meantime, the word lit is used as the equivalent of “cool” or “fun”. With this, there are problems with regards to the language used by the Gen Zers compared to other generations and this may lead to misinformation and clash of language.

References

1. Mayell, H. (2003, February). When did “modern” behavior emerge in humans? National Geographic News.Retrived from http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2003/02/0220 030220 human origins
2. Renn, M.(2008). Issues & Observation-Debunking generations differences. Leadership in Action, 28(1), 23-24. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.liberty.edu:2048/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=31735197&site=ehost-live&scope
3. Macon, M., and Artley, J. B. (2009). Can’t we all just get along? A review of the challenges and opportunities in a multigenerational workforce. International Journal of Business Research, 9(6), 90-94. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.
4. liberty .edu:2048/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=21264987&site=ehost-live&scope=site
5. Dan(2019).Social media statistics in the Philippines. Retrieved from https://www.talkwalker.com/blog/social-media-statistics-philippines

There is often much more meaning behind the language used in speech, texts and advertisements than what appears on the surface. Ideologies, from a critical point of view, are considered to be descriptions of worldly features which build, support and challenge the dynamics between different groups of individuals (Fairclough, 2003). Dominant groups embed these ideologies in different methods of communication in order to manipulate and persuade the public to conform to an idea that primarily promotes the interests of the dominant group (De Saussure & Schulz, 2006).

Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) is a range of instruments used by scholars to analyse and decipher written texts as well as spoken language (Machin & Mayr, 2012). Together with semiotics, or the study of how meaning is made and represented through signs, it allows a view into the ideology hidden in the words and icons (Chandler, 2001). CDA does not seek to categorize these implied meanings into right or wrong, but rather make audiences aware of the implied meanings and assumptions (Wodak & Meyer, 2001). In the case of advertisements, which this analysis will focus on, the ideology is not always obvious, and analysts must look beyond what is present on the page and figure out what is missing, or what is left unsaid, in order to determine the true intentions behind the piece (Fairclough, 2003). The phrases and words used can seem neutral on the surface, but when each is viewed as a lexical choice, attempts to shape the perceptions of the target audience become visible.

Since the ideologies behind the advertisements are used until they become legitimised, scholars such as Machin, Mayr and Fairclough state that the study of critical discourse analysis aims to ‘reveal connections between language, power and ideology that are hidden from people’ (Machin & Mayr, 2012, p.5). While the language used is important to consider, most advertisements also rely on images, or icons, and the relationship between the language and visual is what most effectively communicates meaning (ibid.). Using CDA, the following analysis seeks to demonstrate that the ideology of women fulfilling their role as wives and mothers by being in the home and focusing on home tasks is present in advertisements for different products, even though they are years apart (Kroska, 2007). We will look at the different linguistic strategies used by the advertisements to promote the ideology as well as the multimodality of it, and how the images complement the language.

First, we look at an advertisement for the fast food restaurant Hardee’s from the 1940s. The icon shows a woman standing at the kitchen sink, she is wearing a white dress, and her hair is neatly done. She is looking through a window and outside is a smartly dressed man carrying a young girl. Of the accompanying text, one sentence is in bigger font than all the rest and it says, “Women don’t leave the kitchen!” This has two possible interpretations, it can be understood as a command due to the exclamation point, but the following sentence leads us to believe that it is intended to be interpreted as a commonly known fact. It begins “we all know …’ the use of a factive verb presupposes that the target audience, in this case men, are already familiar with the information presented (Goddard, 1998). It also suggests that the ideology is legitimized since the phrase implies a consensus of the information.

This advertisement also employs structural opposition. With the use of the pronoun we, the advertiser has placed themselves in a group with the target audience and placed that group against women (Bloor & Bloor, 2007). The word ‘we’ can also be considered synthetic personalization, which Norman Fairclough states is a method of building a relationship between the advertiser and the consumer (Fairclough, 2001). The distinction between the two groups is emphasized by the lexical choices used in relation to each. Women are described as ‘little miss’, are meant to be ‘cooking a delicious meal’ and ‘waiting on’ their men. The use of the attributive adjective ‘delicious’ would suggest that only the best tasting meal would be good enough to please a man, yet the meal offered by Hardee’s is ‘sloppy’ and ‘hastily prepared’. The contrasts between the descriptions of the meals are indexical of the differences between the single life, and the married life.

Next, we examine a cereal advertisement from the 1970s. In this advertisement the masculine figure is completely suppressed and is therefore not shown in the image. The image is simply a woman cleaning a window and across the middle, in bold text it says, “Keep up with the house while you keep down your weight”. The typographical layout suggests that this is the message that is important to the audience (Goddard, 1998). This phrase not only presupposes that women are the ones who do the house work, but also that they want to lose weight (ibid.). In the small print beneath that, the advertisement uses a few loaded words in an attempt to capture the reader’s attention. One example is the use of the word ‘vitality’, in this context they could have used words such as energy or stamina but the choice of the word vitality, which means full of life, is an attempt to persuade the target audience, in this case women, to purchase their cereal.

Another attempt to manipulate the audience is seen further down in the text when they write “Total watches your vitamins, while you watch your weight”, this gives the impression that the cereal is doing something for you (Wodak & Meyer, 2001). This advertisement uses statistics but has no credible source to support them. They claim that their cereal ‘gives you 100% of the minimum daily adult vitamin and iron requirement’ but there is no official source substantiating this claim. They also state that their cereal contains more vitamins than any other cereal, but this language is ambiguous and doesn’t tell the target audience which vitamins, or which other cereals.

Finally, we have an advertisement from 2011 that was part of a coupon for a household cleaning product brand. The image shows a woman cleaning with a child standing next to her and helping. Even though it uses the passive voice and does not explicitly say that women are the ones being referred to, through the reference to Mother’s Day and the icon chosen, we can infer that they mean women. Though this ad is the one with least language of the three analysed, it implicitly says the most. The text that follows reads, “get back to the job that really matters”, this phrasing diminishes whatever other jobs women may hold, and reinforces the ideology that women should be housewives and look after their homes while also being nurturing and passing those traits onto their daughters (O’Barr, 2006). The use of the adverb ‘really’ in the phrase also adds emphasis to the importance of the ‘job’ they are referring to.

Unlike ad number 2 which suppressed men, this ad does show a masculine figure, but it portrays him as an authoritative figure as if he knows best about the cleaning product. This authority is supported by the use of the colour red in the writing of his name, since the colour red is historically known to be a dominant colour (Kaya & Epps, 2004). The graphology of the icon can also be analysed since the masculine figure is placed towards the front with the woman cleaning in the back, this symbolises that the role of the woman is secondary to the role held by the man (Hodkinson, 2017).

Overall, though the three ads are from different time periods, the ideology is consistent. Women are portrayed as individuals whose primary focus should be cooking, cleaning, and losing weight. As shown in the analysis above, the use of structural opposition, synthetic personalization, emotive words, suppression, and presupposition as well as the typographical and graphological choices made all aid to push the ideology forward. These elements would not be as effective if used individually, instead they all come together to manipulate the public into adopting an ideology that which accepts the concepts presented and promotes the sale of these products. Through Critical Discourse Analysis scholars have the ability to break down these advertisements as well as written texts and other forms of communications in order to inform audiences, from a neutral point of view, of the implications behind them.

Political discourse is a broad field of study and it is identified by its participants that is politicians. Politicians actively participate not only in politics itself, but also in every kind of activity that may become helpful in gaining political aims. They are the group of people, who are elected and given trust by the society. However, politicians are not the only participants or members of the political domain. From the discourse analysis point of view various recipients of political events should be taken into consideration. In other words, the society is an important part of political discourse. Going further, politics consists of all people to whom all the political actions are addressed. Those may be defining as citizens, the public or political target domain group. Moreover, citizens might be divided into sub-categories like voters or political demonstrators etc. All these groups may be active in political process. What is worth noticing here is that when discussing politics, we must remember about political ideologies, institutions and organizations that to the same extent as people shape the political discourse. Summarising, political discourse involves political actions, structures, organizations and broadly defined audience. (Van Dijk, Teun. (1998)

Politics has always been associated with males. For the long time the role of women in political life has been neglected and ignored. Consequently, public male speakers have always been more influential than male ones. However, together with the appearance of Women’s Movement, females became more powerful and gained the audience’s attention not only in the field of politics. Participation in the public sphere by women changed to a larger extent the way in which political discourse is perceived today. (Sivric, Marijana, 2014)

In this paper I will analyse the concept of gender differences in political discourse discussing certain features and characteristics of language that appear among males and females in the context of political discourse these days. Politics includes all sort of communication between politicians and the target audience. It requires s the use of specific kind of language in order to persuade the intended messages.

Following this argumentation, gender discourse is a part of political discourse since both males and females tend to use different linguistic tools while giving their speech performances. What distinguishes the language used by male and female politicians is the use of syntax, semantics, pragmatics, lexical style and most importantly rhetorical strategies and manipulative language constructions that shape political speech. In general females’ conversational style is associated as sympathetic, supportive. It might be so due to existence of certain stereotypes about women. On the other hand, men’s style of speech may be generalised as strong due to stereotypes about males as well. Men are generally perceived as straightforward whereas their style as one showing strength. (Sivric, Marijana, 2014). They want to maintain their status. Many gender researchers agree that women use adjectives more frequently than men. When expressing themselves they emotional adjectives like “cool”, “pretty”, “lovely”, “cute”. Men on the other hand tend to use more neutral and distant adjectives like “good” and “great”. Additionally, men are more direct when expressing their thoughts, whereas women are more reversed. (Baikalova, Natalia)

When analysing political discourse men and women tend to exhibit certain different characteristics of speech.

Syntactical analysis of speeches performed by male and female politicians shows no significant differences. Both sexes when delivering their public speeches use different syntactic strategies such as topicalization, different tenses, personal and possessive pronouns. (Bailkova, Natalia). Probably, one of the best samples of political linguistic performances are campaigns. It is during campaigns that politicians deliver many speeches, paying detail to every single word or phrase they produce. All candidates want to sound as much convincing as possible in order to encourage their potential voters. To achieve this goal, they must use all kinds of rhetorical and linguistic devices. This is most visible during presidential campaigns.

They involve debates in which candidates must interact with each other. The political debates follow strict regulations and the rules of conduct which must be obeyed by the politicians. All these imposed rules significantly affect the way in which candidates speak and behave. In this sense political discourse involves communicative face-to-face interaction. They interviewers usually ask candidates controversial questions. That is why campaigns are interesting and useful material for the linguistic analysis. Firstly, presidential debates are expected to be emotional, they usually contain a lot of verbal attacks on the part of the candidates.

Secondly, they are supposed to be approved and accepted by others. Here, the contribution of Brown and Levinson’s politeness theory may be helpful to understand all the linguistically shaped political mechanisms. In pragmatics, keeping positive face deals with the desire of being accepted by others whereas the negative face concerns with the freedom of actions and the fact of not being imposed by others. Keeping a positive face is one of the most important goals in political interaction.

Both sexes when delivering their public speeches use different syntactic strategies such as topicalization, different tenses, personal and possessive pronouns. (Bailkova, Natalia). Personal pronouns play an important role in political discourse, because they help politicians maintain this strategy of positive representation of themselves, and on the other hand negative representation of the other-the political opponent. Politicians, regardless of their sex, frequently use the personal pronoun “I”. It is because they want to underline the fact that they are independent individuals having their own opinions and beliefs. One of the most interesting campaigns recently conducted was the presidential campaign in the USA in 2

016, more precisely the rivalry between Hilary Clinton and Donald Trump. Undoubtedly, after the campaign and the victory in elections Donald Trump became probably the most recognizable politician in the world. I will analyse the features of political discourse present both in Hilary Clinton’s and Donald Trump’s performances giving most attention to the Presidential Campaign of 2016. In general Trump throughout the whole presidential campaign used the strategy of speaking slowly and clearly. (A critical discourse analysis of Donald Trump’s language Use in US Presidential Campaign)

He was using simple and short structures in order to attract more people, especially those of lower incomes. Both candidates used personal pronouns consistently while delivering their speeches. The following passages from the first Clinton-Trump debate show the frequent usage of pronouns by both politicians. Trump “(…) but we have to stop our jobs being stolen from us,” we cannot let it happen,” Clinton: “now, we have come back from that abys” or “I think science is real”. Both politicians constructed their sentences by means of fillers. In linguistics a filler is a sound or word used by the interlocutor to signal a pause or a hesitation. The most popular fillers are “like”, “you know”, “okay”, “so”,” actually” etc. Following fragments show Trump’s usage of fillers: “yeah, for 30 years,” “well, he approved NAFTA,”, “so is it President Obama’s fault? Clinton’s use of fillers is as follows: “Well, at least I have a plan to fight ISIS,” “Yeah, well, let’s start the clock again, Lester,” So you’ve got to ask yourself, why won’t he release his tax returns?”

The given fragments prove that Hilary Clinton and Donald Trump applied the tactic of constant use of fillers. The most frequent ones were “well” and “so”. Fillers helped politicians to keep the impression of spontaneity. From the first debate onward, each candidate maintained the strategy of using a significant number of personal pronouns and fillers.

It seems that Trump used more repetitions than Clinton. It is visible in the following fragments: “I did not. I did not. I do not say that… I do not say that”. The strategy of using repetitions may have helped Trump in maintaining his point of view. Moreover, the majority of his repetitions were phrases conceptualizing the issue of Americanism. Trump used such expressions like “Americans”, “(our) country”, “(our) nation’, “(our) people”, “(our) citizens”, “American Prestige”, “Constitution”, “Democracy”, “American dream”. In Trump’s discourse Americanism may be summarized as “America first”. His campaign slogan “Make America Great Again” clearly underlines his view on American nation. The concept of Americanism may also reflect Trump’s nationalistic visions of the country. Americanism was also visible in his acceptance speech: “Tonight I will share with you for action for America. The most important difference between our plan and that of our opponents, is that our plan will put America first. Americanism, not globalism, will be our credo”, “It is finally time for a straightforward assessment of the state of our nation.” or “We will honor the American people with the truth, and nothing else.” In Donald Trump’s victory speech repeatedly appeared phrases like” we will” or “I will”. (Mohammadi, M, 2017)

It is worth noticing though that Trump unlike Clinton used strong and emotional discourse throughout the whole campaign. He also adopted the style of powerful gesticulation. His strategy in delivering the speeches was based on verbal attack, offensive, oftentimes vulgar language. Democratic party candidate used sexism language towards women during campaign which can be exemplified by the following tweet: “If Hilary Clinton can’t satisfy her husband what makes her think she can satisfy America?”. Trump used sexist discourse not only in social media, but also in interviews: “I think Hilary is an embarrassment to our country. She does not have the strength or stamina to be president. Hilary needs to be trashed at every opportunity that presents itself! This bitch must be stopped”. In this fragment Trump seriously insults Clinton. Vulgarism “bitch” was repeated in Trump’s speeches many times.

Summarising, Trump throughout the whole presidential campaign used different discourse strategies, rhetorical or lexical to diminish and humiliate other candidates, especially women.

Hilary Clinton’s style of discourse differentiated significantly from the one represented by Donald Trump. Firstly, she avoided using non-verbal communication and body language. Secondly, Clinton adopted the strategy of more emphatic and polite discourse concentrating on issues important for American citizens. Unlike Trump she didn’t sue any kind of strategies that were based on verbal attack and insult. Her speeches were calm, rather devoid of emotional content. She developed the strategy of personal pronouns in order to defend her viewpoint, whereas Trump often employed personal pronouns not necessarily to persuade audience, but mainly to attack and offend the rival.

To sum up, the most vital aim of political discourse is persuasion. Politicians adopt several linguistic and rhetorical strategies in order to attract the audience. Moreover, language itself allows political actors to manipulate the citizens and create a blurred vision of reality. Political discourse undoubtedly proves that language can be an extremely powerful tool in achieving different goals. This can be exemplified by Donald Trump’s strategy of discourse. By adopting offensive, vulgar and sexist language he managed to attract the citizens, later wining the elections. The US presidential campaign of 2016 shows that women and men tend to differ in the choice of language use.

REFRENCES

1. Baikalova, N( 2016). Gender Differences in Female Political Discourse: The Construction of Hilary Clinton’s Political Image. Journal of Siberian federal university doi: 10.17516/1997-1370-0030
2. Blake, A. (2016, September 26.). The First Trump-Clinton presidential transcript, annotated. Retrieved from https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/09/26/the-first-trump-clinton-presidential-debate-transcript-annotated/?utm_term=.e5385f209888
3. Daraweesh, D. Abbas (2016). A Critical Discourse Analysis of Donald Trump’s Sexist Ideology. Journal of Education and Practice, 7 (30)
4. Retrieved from :https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1118939.pdf
5. Mohammadi, M (2017). A Critical Discourse Analysis of Donald Trump’s Language Use in US Presidential Campaign, 2016. International Journal of Applied Linguistics & English Literature, 6(5) doi: 10.7575/aiac.ijalel.
6. Plumer, B. (2016, July 22). Full Transcript of Donald Trump’s acceptance speech at the RNC. Retreived from https://www.vox.com/2016/7/21/12253426/donald-trump-acceptance-speech-transcript-republican-nomination-transcript
7. Sivric, M (2014). Gender differences in Political Discourse. Journal of Foreign Language Teaching and Applied Linguistics doi: 10.14706/JFLTAL152227
8. Tamulis, Alex. (2017). Conversational Fillers and Linguistic Identities.
9. Van Dijk, Teun. (1998). What is Political Discourse Analysis. European Journal of Political Economy, 11(1), 11-52 doi: 101075/bjl.11.03dij

Even though numerous grammatical characteristics of day to day, spontaneous discourse are judged wrong by the principles followed by written discourse, these characteristics of spoken grammar should not be viewed as off base deviations from the written or standard English. In contrast to written discourse, spoken discourse is typically unconstrained and spontaneous and created progressively with no open door for amending (CULLEN and KUO, 2007). This suddenness delivers some unique characteristics, as speakers manage and adjust to the weights of ‘constant handling,’ bringing about a ‘well ordered gathering’ of discourse. Moreover, discourse, as a rule, happens up close and personal, bringing about profoundly intelligent circumstances with a ‘common setting’ (Cameron, 2001). Along these lines, the nature and qualities of conversational English itself lead to a few unmistakable linguistic highlights of spoken English as speakers endeavour to satisfy the relational and intelligent elements of spoken discourse in real-time.

This essay comments on the grammatical, discourse and lexical features of the given extracts that distinguishes it as a spoken discourse rather than written discourse and the reason for why spontaneous speech is different from standard written language.

Spoken language is ordinarily related by linguists with discussion that is created, handled, and after that assessed with regards to up close and personal trade and grounded in relational connections that are regularly unmistakably settled. Speech is adjusted to an explicit group of onlookers and to social settings and networks that are apparently present, working in a setting of without further ado. On the other hand, written language is regularly connected with the language seen in books and illustrative exposition, for example, is found in schools. Composed dialect is formal, scholastic, and arranged; it relies on the past and is recreated so that later on it very well may be handled by changed readerships. (Horowitz and Samuels, 1987)

There are a number of features that make spoken grammar distinct on the basis of discourse, grammatical and lexical features. The discourse features of spoken grammar includes:

• Hesitation pauses that are either filled with gap fillers or left unfilled. This could even be considered as a non-fluency feature, where hesitation pauses or fillers interrupt the flow pf speech.
• Repetition is another distinct feature of spoken grammar where repetition can be either due to lack of fluency, for example, if we were on the-the right track; or used to emphasis on that part of the conversation, for example, she keeps talking and talking in the class. Where ‘talking’ is repeated to show the emphasis on how much talking had taken place.
• False starts is a non-fluency discourse feature where the speech starts with a failed attempt to start the speech with actual complete utterance, for example, wh-where is that ball?
• Incomplete utterances are another feature found only in spoken language. It is when the sentences or utterances are left incomplete which are either left unfilled or filled by the listener themselves. This depends upon the shared knowledge of the parties involved in a conversation.
• Recasting is a feature seen when a linguistic unit is repeated in a amended form either to make something more clear or to correct something said earlier, for example, the biggest they’ve got 20 which she needs is a 22.
• (Self) repair is when the speaker or the audience makes or suggests an alteration to correct or clarify a previous contribution in the conversation.
• Phatic talk is done in spoken grammar where utterances are used basically just to maintain interpersonal relationships using simple adjacency pairs, for example, how are you?/ fine, and so on. (Biber, 1999)
• The grammatical feature of spoken grammar includes:
• Lack of subordination, where there is more parataxis than hypotaxis in spoken grammar. Parataxis is where the sentences, phrases or clauses are not coordinated or subordinated.
• C-units are seen to be clustered together while speaking, where small, independent grammatical units come together, for example, vocabularies like, right, got it, etc.
• Spoken discourse often only consists of simple phrase structure so that the listener or the addressee understands the speaker in less time easily.
• Right/left dislocation is another feature of the spoken grammar where the speaker decides to follow the topic with the comment or vice versa.
• Ellipsis is a feature observed very commonly in the spoken language where a grammatical structure is omitted from the sentence. This is done to bring out a more casual and informal tone to the talk. (Biber, 1999)

The lexical features that are commonly found in spoken grammar includes:

• Vagueness is speech is very common as the utterances tend to have low precision in meaning and may sound unassertive, for example, use of phrases like and so on, whatever, etc.
• Spoken language tends to have fewer nouns and more pronouns.
• Hedges are a very common feature of spoken language as they are vocabulary used to soften the language used, for example, perhaps, maybe, etc.
• Deixis is another important feature is spoken discourse as the conversation takes place in real time where words such as ‘here’, ‘there’, etc are used to refer to something outside the text, in other words a way of verbal pointing which very dependent on the context of the conversation
• Dialect plays a major role in spoken discourse where the speaker tends to have their own distinct grammar and vocabulary patterns which is associated with the region or the social use of the language.
• Contraction is quite often done while speaking where words are shortened to their reduced forms using apostrophe. It is also seen that some sounds of a syllable are omitted or slurred onto the other syllable making two or more words into one, for example, want to be as wannabe, going to as gonna and so on. (Biber, 1999)

The data in their respective contexts were observed carefully and the following features were noticed to be there that make it evident that the given data is a form spoken discourse. The data consists of a number of pauses among which most of them were micro pauses which are pauses that last even less than a second. Almost all of these pauses were just pauses that occurred without any specific purpose other than showing a transition from one sentence to another. These pauses are evidences or spontaneity in speech and shows that the delivery is unplanned. There does not seem to be any long pauses in the talk and this is probably because these are scripts from a TV soap opera. Since, the data provided are both scripts, they are written in such a way to look natural, spontaneous and unplanned, for example,

• well clean ‘em again (.) you smell (.) milky
• Okay (.) thanks.

There were instances found where pauses were found to be there before moving to a different topic or before introducing a new topic, for example,

• so (1) what stage of relationship
• well who else would it be (2) I’m sorry Gail…

Phatic talk was a common feature of spoken grammar was found in the start of the second context

• morning
• morning Gail (.) and how you feeling today babe

This is an example of phatic talk that does not contribute in any other way to the topic of the conversation other than just to make an interpersonal relationship bond before moving into the intended topic of the talk. This is a feature found in spoken language very often because it makes the participants of the conversation more comfortable with each other to make the talk smooth. The above given is also an example of adjacency pairs which is very common in speech that shows active involvement of the participants involved in a conversation. Moreover, following a pattern of adjacency pairs is a common trend found in phatic talk.

Another feature that is very commonly come across in spoken language is the influence of dialect while speaking which includes the use of slang as informal vocabulary or vocabulary that is only found in the region of the speaker. For example,

• …get all mardy…

Where ‘mardy’ means sulky or moody in the Lancashire dialect.

• I’m that het up about seeing her

Where ‘het up’ is another phrase for upset

This shows the informality and casualness in the talk. It also shows the importance of shared knowledge among the speakers in a conversation. This makes the talk more personal and evokes a sense of closeness in the participants.

The data also seems to have informal vocabulary which would not be found in written text, for instance,

• …don’t tut at me
• …treasz getting your support
• my mum…
• …feeling today babe

The words ‘tut’ and ‘treasz’ are informal vocabulary that would not usually used in written language and is casually used while talking. The words ‘mum’ and ‘babe’ are informal ways of addressing a person which is very common in spoken language and cannot be found in written language other than some sort of informal discourse like, online chatting, mailing and so on.

The data also has instances of idiomatic expressions that is an evidence of spoken language, for example,

• like a cat on a hot tin roof
• …masculinity sliding down the drain

This happens in the spontaneity of the speech and because of the common expression used by the speaker which shows the lack of pre-planning while speaking.

The data in the second context shows an instance of incomplete utterance.

• ph… look I just thank…

The could be an instance of non-fluency feature that occurred because the speech was not pre-planned and did not have enough time to plan out what to say and was seen to be self-corrected by the speaker themselves by not completing the utterance and instead producing and continuing with the amended form.

Contraction in speech when one reduces a word or more to a reduced form by omitting out parts of them and is usually replaced by an apostrophe, for instance,

• you’re
• ‘em
• I’m
• yesterday’s
• haven’t
• ‘ave

Contractions are made in order to reduce the time take to produce the words and to speed up the process of talking. It shows the casual and informal nature of the spoken language. Elision is another way of joining words and cutting short the length of words, for example,

• gotta
• gonna

Similar to every other spoken discourse, the data provided also consists of a number of discourse markers, which are words that are not a part of the propositional content or in other words, they are vocabulary that do not add any meaning to the utterance. The function of discourse markers is basically in the pragmatic sense. They are usually used in a conversation to mark turn-taking by the speakers, to show their attitude towards what the participant has uttered and to help the listener to follow the conversation as in the following instances,

• So
• Oh
• well

Another evidence from the data that shows they are spoken discourse is the presence of ellipsis, where words or more are excluded from the utterance in order to reduce repletion in the talk. Language has a lot redundancies which be omitted and still the listener could comprehend the entire meaning of the utterance through previously said dialogues in a conversation, shared knowledge or through paralinguistic features. Instances from the data that portray ellipsis are,

• I’m not
• I never

Spoken grammar is usually seen to lack in subordination and does not seem to consist of many intricate connectors rather the same effect is seen to be brought about by pauses in some cases. The lack of subordination maybe to reduce the complexity in the speech and not to overload the listener with too information at once. The data also seemed to consist of simple and short phrase structures as they are faster and easier to produce by the speaker and process by the listener.

There are many ways in which day to day spoken language differs written language, some of them are as follows. Written discourse is usually permanent and textual discourse cannot be generally changed once they have been penned down or worked out. While spoken language is generally transient except if recorded, and the participants of a conversation can correct themselves and amend their expressions as they speak. Textual discourse can be used to for communication over time and space until the specific written language is understood by the parties involved in the communication. While spoken discourse is generally used for real-time interaction that needs a reaction then and there (Horowitz and Samuels, 1987). Composed dialect is in general considered to be more sophisticated and multifaceted than discourse with longer sentences and many subordinate conditions. The accentuation and format of written language have no equivalence in the spoken language. Be that as it may few types of written discourse, for example, texts and email, are similar to spoken discourse because it’s casual nature in their execution. Spoken discourse will, in general, be loaded with redundancies, inadequate sentences, adjustments and intrusions, except for formal discourses and other scripted types of discourse, for example, news reports and contents for plays and movies. In the case of written discourse there are no prompt criticism from their readers, aside from in electronic-based correspondence. Thus they can’t depend on setting to elucidate things so there is more need to clarify things obviously and unambiguously than in spoken discourse, with the exception of in composed correspondence between individuals who know each other well. Spoken discourse is normally a active connection between at least two individuals. Setting and shared learning plays an important role, as there are content that are indirectly implied or unsaid that can only understood if the speakers share the same knowledge about the topic of conversation. Written discourse utilizes punctuation marks, format, heading, hues and other graphical methods to enunciate the important parts while spoken discourse utilizes timing, tone, stress, volume to add emotional enunciation to speech. Composed material can be perused more than once and repeatedly analysed, and notes can be made on the composition surface. Just recorded discourse can be utilized along these lines. Some syntactic developments are just utilized only in writing, for example, some intricate concoction and legitimate terms. Some kinds of vocabulary are utilized just in spoken discourse. These incorporate slang articulations, and vocabularies like y’know, yo, and so forth. (Biber, 1999)

Linguists argue that language should be looked at through a continuum view, instead of considering written and spoken language as two different things (Paltridge, 2006). In written language, the gathering of people is missing; this requires a level of unequivocality of message so as to convey thoughts obviously one-path to the audience. This unequivocality isn’t as vital in spoken language as the gathering of people is not left out, however present and a functioning member in the interpretation of the conversation. Conversation is suggested to be “interactive, interpersonal and informal” and as a result utterances are usually of low precision because the speaker has an opportunity to repair and produce a altered version. Since speakers can support their conversation with paralinguistic features like body language and facial expressions, therefore, the language in a spoken discourse need not be as rigid, accurate and precise as that of in a written discourse (Paltridge, 2006). In a written discourse the writer has to rely completely on linguistic features and has to convey the intended meaning without any other source other than the writing on the paper. In fact, it can also be noted that a sentence read out aloud by a person could convey a completely different meaning from that when read out of a paper. For instance, any dialogue from the scripts provided when read may not have enough feelings as that of when they are spoken out aloud accompanied with extralinguistic hues and the variations in the voice of production. Even the most upfront seeming utterance requires much shared and tacit knowledge, not just linguistically but also socially and culturally in order to be interpreted correctly. Written discourse is often not interactional and does not need an immediate reaction, response or feedback from the addressee but in the case of a spoken discourse, the response to an utterance by the addressee is very important to lead the conversation rightly. In fact, the major reason for the appearance of pauses and fillers in a conversation is because of the involvement of turn-taking in spoken language. Since, speaking happens in real time and requires a feedback and contribution in very less time, the features that are unique to the spoken discourse, as mentioned above, will not generally be found in the written discourse (Brown and Yule, 1983).

Even though the provided data were not absolutely authentic as they were scripts, but they were scripted in a way to look very similar to an authentic scenario of the same. Hence, the discourse, lexis and grammatical features of the spoken language could be observed, which when compared to features of written language were in contrast with each other for the above mentioned reasons.

REFERENCES

1. Biber, D. (1999). Longman grammar of spoken and written English. [Erscheinungsort nicht ermittelbar]: Longman.
2. Brown, G. and Yule, G. (1983). Discourse analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
3. Cameron, D. (2001). Working with spoken discourse. London: Sage.
4. CULLEN, R. and KUO, I. (2007). Spoken Grammar and ELT Course Materials: A Missing Link?. TESOL Quarterly, 41(2), pp.361-386.
5. Horowitz, R. and Samuels, S. (1987). Comprehending oral and written language. San Diego: Academic Press.
6. Paltridge, B. (2006). Discourse analysis: An Introduction. London: Continuum.

‘Critical discourse analysis and the ethnography of language policy’ by David Cassels Johnson

The author analyzes the agreeable relationship between ethnography and critical discourse analysis (CDA) for the study of language policy. He examined how critical discourse analysis (CDA) combined with ethnography procures a foundation for discerning how particular policies are recontextualized in particular contexts, how such recontextualization is related to more widely circulating policy text and discourse, and what this means for language policy agents. Hence, to understand more the topic, we need to define first one of the main subjects of this paper, which is critical language policy.

Critical language policy (CLP) emerged (Tollefson, 1991) as an alternative to earlier language planning paradigms that attempted to analyze language as an entity devoid of socio-cultural context. CLP conceptualizes language policy as a mechanism of power with the ability to marginalize (especially) minority languages and minority language users: ‘[L]anguage policy is viewed as one mechanism by which the interests of dominant sociopolitical groups are maintained and the seeds of transformation are developed’ (Tollefson, 1991, p. 32).

The continuous problem of language policy makers in connecting macro and micro, and between macro-level policy texts and discourses and microlevel language use, has been hardy solve for several years, as language policies instead of uniting citizens, only create social inequality and establish hegemony in language use. Because of this phenomenon, Critical language policy seeks to develop more democratic policies that reduce inequality and promote the maintenance of minority languages. Critical discourse analysis also coincides with the aims of Critical language policy, as they both commit to social justice.

However, Critical language policy has also been criticized for being too deterministic… (see Ricento & Hornberger, 1996), not considering language policies as potential instruments of social justice that can develop implementations and ideological space for minority and indigenous languages (Hornberger & Johnson, 2010). Critical language policy didn’t perceive the concept of ethnography of language policy.

Hornberger and Johnson (2007) introduced the ethnography of language policy as a method for examining the agents, contexts, and processes across the multiple layers of creation, interpretation, and appropriation of policy. Ethnography reveals how language policy agents make sense of their policy environment, how their interpretation of macro-level policies impacts appropriation, how they engage in their language policy development, and how local language policy development interacts with macro-level policy text and discourse because it focuses on the perspectives, beliefs, and practices of participants. Through ethnography, the balance between policy power and interpretative agency that is committed to issues of social justice is created, which particularly pertains to the rights of indigenous and minority language speakers.

This is exactly what Mamet is picturing in his play: the lost opportunities for proper and functional human connections. As Greenbaum puts it, Glengarry Glen Ross faithfully captures the “sad ethos of American capitalism.” The capitalist discourse and its inherent demand for “cut-throat competition, duplicity, and stratification” enhance “the predatory nature of masculinity” (42). Mamet’s salesmen represent masculinity gone wrong. The dynamics of dominance and success, the exercise of power, and the hierarchies of control lead to a dysfunctional network of male connections and interactions. Here there is no longer a male-female binary that shapes the human connections; it is rather a new duality of male-lower male that structures these connections. Connell and Messerschmidt believe that “the idea of a hierarchy of masculinities grew directly out of homosexual men’s experience with violence and prejudice from straight men” (831). The constant struggle for success and dominance in Mamet’s play, however, moves beyond the actual sexual orientations and preferences of the salesmen and becomes a more practical kind of concept, attributing to the lesser successful men the very invectives originally used for the homosexual men, and thus belittling and humiliating them. This could be the ultimate blow to a man’s ego in such a society. And, this, definitely is a situation to avoid, no matter what the price is.

Glengarry Glen Ross could be, as Mamet himself puts it, “a gang comedy about men, work, and unbridled competition” (qtd. in Kane 256). But Mamet purposefully moves beyond this and captures the essence of a flawed and defective system which is an ineluctable byproduct of the contemporary capitalist discourse. He peoples his world with men who are unable to connect and interact efficiently and methodically since male bonding and male friendship as imperative constituents of a healthy life system are unattainable. Mamet’s play, through “creating a safe aesthetic distance” allows us “to explore the flashpoints of discomfort” (Holmberg 1). The salesmen in Mamet’s play are angry, bitter, lonely, abusive, and manipulative. Verbal violence is their means of survival and strength. As Holmberg claims, since it is a quite difficult task for men to acknowledge their need for male friendship, “they concoct pretexts to stay in touch: doing business, fixing cars, shooting hoops” (2). As the contemporary capitalist society does not allow for such constructive alliances to form, these kinds of rituals of male bonding and brotherhood cannot thrive. The unfeeling, pitiless world of business allows Mamet to explore the turbulent dynamics of male friendship and rivalry and the interplay of absolute selfishness and loyalty and the eventual consequences. With the dominant and over-arching capitalism as the main infrastructure of modern life, the traditional patriarchy is dismantled. Men are no longer the incontestable rulers of both the private and public spheres. Uprooted and displaced, they find themselves thrust into a world of harsh, unfair, and exigent competition where the rule is that the success of one equates to the failure of the others. The language of comradery and friendship cannot function anymore and the discourse of competition is the dominant discourse.

Introduction

Media has become an inseparable part of everyone’s life and that makes genre analysis in media discourse even more worthwhile. The topic of this essay is genre analysis in media discourse and is based on Machin and Van Leeuwen’s article (2014). I will focus on the multimodal social media discourse and more specifically on Instagram discourse. After discussing the above-mentioned article, the characteristics of media discourse, and the multimodality of this genre I will apply this theory to an Instagram example.

Machin and Van Leeuwen’s genre analysis in media discourse.

In their article “Genre Analysis in media discourse” Machin and Van Leeuwen define genres as “kinds of communicative acts” that encrypt specific kinds of interaction and relationships between the participants. But, according to them, genres are not simply “communicative acts”, but are defined by the type of communication encrypted in them, as well as the social relations they reflect; they also consist of multiple stages, each serving a specific communication function. (Machin & T, 2014, p. 172-173)

Concerning the genre analysis, Machin and Van Leeuwen refer to Longacre’s four different types of Genres. The narrative, which aims to entertain, the procedural, which explains how-to-do something; the expository, which describes the world and lastly the hortatory which aims at influencing the addressee. (Machin & T, 2014, pp. 174-175) According to Longacre, the above-mentioned different types of the genre can be characterized as chronological and or prescriptive.” Some narratives interfere with two different genres, one of which is the surface and the other one constitutes the “deep structure”. (Machin & T, 2014, pp. 174-176) For instance, in the case of fairytales, the narrative is just the surface and the deep structure is hortatory because the storyteller’s purpose is to influence the addressee.

Machin and Van Leeuwen first examine linear genres and for that reason, they refer to Labov’s narrative stages, which according to him apply also to non-narrative genres. The narrative stages are six: the abstract, the orientation stage, the complication, the evaluation, the resolution, and the coda, which is the only optional one (Machin & T, 2014, pp. 176-178).

In multimodal texts, which consist not only of written text but also of other forms, such as pictures, the structure is non-linear. The structure in these texts can be horizontal, for example, the picture on the left side of the page and the text on the right side, or visual, where one element is above the other; lastly the structure can be concentric, in this case, the core information is located in the center (Machin & T, 2014, p. 179).

Finally, Machin and Van Leeuwen examine genre in two different versions of the magazine Cosmopolitan, and they enlighten the social aspect of the genre analysis. More specifically, their analysis has to do with the problem-solution genre in international versions of the above-mentioned magazine. (Machin & T, 2014, p. 180) For this purpose, they used the Dutch and Indian versions and they examined how women’s work is presented in each version and what is the role of images in each case. The topic selection and the way that this topic is presented are strongly influenced by the woman’s role in each society. (Machin & T, 2014, pp. 181-190)

Genres’ social aspect.

According to Tardy and Swales, genres are strongly influenced by social values since they constitute a rhetorical category that is compounded by social context. Αs they state, “Genres both shape and are shaped by the communities and contexts in which they exist.” (Tardy & Swales, 2014, p. 166) That’s why Bateman in his book “Multimodality and Genre” (Bateman, 2008, p. 184) refers to two perspectives on genre; the genre as social semiotic and the genre as social action.

The social semiotic perspective reflects Halliday’s theory and systematic-functional linguistics. According to this theory, language is strongly bonded with society and culture. The main task of a linguist according to the systematic-functional theory is to stipulate the expectations between features of a social situation and identifiable linguistic features (Bateman, 2008, p. 185). Moreover, according to Bateman within the frame of this theory, texts and communicative events that are characterized by a specific genre are seen as “staged sequences of purposive actions, where each stage can take on a distinctive register.” (Bateman, 2008, p. 185)

The social action perspective, on the other hand, reflects the North American linguists’ ideas, Chomsky’s genetic grammar, and Hymes’ ethnomethodology. (Bateman, 2008, p. 188) Besides that, traditions from literary and rhetorical studies helped to the institution of the New Rhetoric, which provided the area where specific usages of the genre could grow. Language utterances are seen as “social activity types” and these are later absorbed into the genre. (Bateman, 2008, p. 188)

Media Discourse.

O’ Keefe in her book “Investigating Media Discourse” (O’Keeffe, 2006, p. 16) refers to the characteristics of media discourse, which are the following.

• Participants are often unfamiliar with each other.
• The addresser (media persona) is often ‘’known’’ to the audience, but the audience (the addressee) is unfamiliar with the media persona.
• The participants of the conversation are not equal. Usually, one (the media persona) has more power than the other participant and so can control the conversation at all levels (opening, closing, turn-taking).
• Even if the audience reacts to what it hears or watches, this has no impact on the ongoing utterance.
• Due to the wide usage of the internet, any media audience has the potential to be global.

These characteristics though refer mostly to traditional media, in this essay, I will examine genre in social media, which constitutes a new and widely used form of communication, advertisement, and socialization.

Social media genre analysis.

Social media have been so widely used during the last few years that have turned into a social phenomenon, that has stigmatized an entire generation. In this essay, I will do a genre analysis of Instagram discourse. Instagram accounts are distinguished into two categories, private accounts, and professional accounts. I will, also, examine the language used in both of those two categories and point out the differences. The most important characteristic of professional accounts is that they have many communication goals; the main goal is to influence, and that’s why professional Instagrammers are also called influencers. So, in terms of the Longacrean genre analysis Instagram posts belong to the hortatory type of genre (Machin & T, 2014, pp. 174-176). Additionally, most of the time they also aim to advertise a product.

The following images reflect an Instagram post of a Greek Instagram persona, named “Fosbloque”, who creates mainly fashion-related content. In this post, she is advertising a pair of sneakers and at the same time, she suggests a specific outfit. So, we could say that this post is both an advertisement and a fashion-related suggestion.

Descartes’s opening statement in the first part of his discourse claims that common sense; or rather good sense of reasoning is equal amongst all. The idea that every individual has an equal amount of “good sense” (Descartes, 4) means that they should have the ability to decide whether something is true or false and the ability to “judge correctly” (Descartes, 4). Good sense gives us the ability to develop our sense of reason and through this “we direct our thoughts along different paths, and consider different things” (Descartes, 4). Our equal capacity for reasoning does not necessarily mean we will view things in the same capacity as others rather our reason allows us to explore different viewpoints in pursuit of truth and good judgment. Descartes believed that it was “not enough to have a good mind” if it were not used properly, in pursuit of true knowledge. Humans are rational beings, and that is what distinguishes us from animals. Descartes says though he has wished for qualities that he lacked; there is no quality other than good sense that can help perfect the mind. He humbles himself in saying that his mind is no better than most men since good sense is equal among all men. The differences in its “degree exists only among accidents” (Descartes, 6) as in our life experience require different degrees of good sense. Descartes understanding of the world is developed through his own considerations, maxims and developed methods in which he uses his good sense to understand his experiences. He uses his good sense and experiences to cautiously judge himself and though he presents the text as a “painting, in order that each may judge of it” (Descartes, 5) he allows for public opinion as he presents his methods and maxims in hopes that it will be a learning experience for him to develop his thinking and judgment. We are all brought up on the notion that truth is within the books we are taught with and rarely are we encouraged to question what we are taught and what is printed in books. It was only after he had completed his basic level of education that he became “so encumbered with doubts and errors”(Descartes, 6) realizing he was in fact more ignorant than he realized. The young minds he was surrounded by, who were judging him and learning alongside him encouraged him to pursue his own self-judgments. His teachings, he states, were essential in understanding myths, ancient texts and historical entities, which allow us to develop our judgments. The works we are taught in our upbringing are “like a good conversation with the greatest gentleman of past ages, – in which they make the best of their thoughts known to us”(Descartes, 6) and through this Descartes was able to formulate his own judgments by reading about another’s. Understanding other individuals’ judgments allows us to “judge our own more soundly” (Descartes, 7) so that we understand different perspectives of things that we may otherwise believe to be wrong. Observing different ways of life, as Descartes spent years doing, allowed him to understand that there are different mores amongst people but they still have the capacity for reason though it may differ. Those who have not observed different ways of life may believe that different mores are ridiculous because it is not what they have been accustomed to. There needs to be a balance in understanding the practices of the past and the present so that one may not be so focused on one as to become ignorant of the other (Descartes, 7) in order to ensure knowledge is developing. Those who have developed their reasoning and in turn their judgments, are persuasive enough with their words to make others agreeable to their accounts.

Descartes was fascinated with mathematics because of its certainty, of its ability to be completely true. Though mathematics is firm in its foundations, he is in awe that “we had built nothing more noble above them”(Descartes, 8) and instead our morals, “built on nothing but sand and mud” are held to such a high regard though they are less concrete. Ancient pagan writings that Descartes studied praised virtues and made them out to be held to a high regard though they did not have any concrete form. Descartes submits to theology and philosophy. Similar to most men, he wants to attain heaven but the way to heaven is no different for an ignorant man and a wise man and that the truths to achieve heaven are beyond human understanding and he does not claim to be able to use his good sense to get him there. Similarly in philosophy, some of the wisest minds have presented many discoveries and yet they can all be refuted and doubted so he does not claim he is better apt to present new ideas. He rejects previously plausible philosophical concepts because their foundation is infirm so that he can now judge them for himself. He does not try to understand concepts that are above his scope of knowledge through false pretenses and the works of those “who profess to know more than they do know”(Descartes, 9). With his desire for truth, he abandoned study under teachers and letters presented to him and began to search for his own knowledge. He looked within himself to discover his truths through travel, by understanding how others reason and live. He used his life experiences and interactions with people to develop truths as he “might discover much more truth in each mans reasoning about affairs that are important to him” (Descartes, 9) in which poor judgments will affect him more profoundly, rather than try to uncover truth in a man who stays in his study reading letters. He places value on life experiences as they are able to give us a more definitive truth through human interaction rather than through writings, which may not be practiced and never leave the pages of a book. Knowledge-based solely on letters is vain and may lack common sense because it is not necessarily put into practice. This type of knowledge-based solely on letters requires even more persuasion and intelligence to ensure the learning’s are credible that is why Descartes places emphasis on real experiences and understanding another’s ability to reason. His travels allowed him to observe that there are many different ways of life, which may seem unbelievable to some but are actually commonly accepted by others. With this revelation he states that he lost belief in things that were taught to him by “example and custom”(Descartes, 10), and instead begins to peruse his own mind for new teachings by choosing different methods of reasoning.

Descartes signed up for the war in his early years in order to experience different aspects of life. During this period of his life he had a lot of down time to develop his thought. One of the radical ideas that he considered during this time was that a building as he illustrates, is more beautiful when developed by one master rather than one that is developed by a few. He believed that architects that singularly developed a building created something more profound than those that used walls that were previously there for other purposes to construct a redefined building. He directs this thought onto cities too, that begin as towns and later blossom into larger cities. He does not believe that the planning for these cities is correct; rather he would have one architect or one engineer to lay out the plans for the whole city. He would attribute the inconsistencies in the city to “chance, rather than the wills of some rational men” (Descartes, 11). As a rational man could not allow these inconsistencies, like a crooked street to appear in a city if they were given the opportunity to develop the city on their own rather than with multiple masters. He applies this concept to religion as well stating “precepts made by God alone, must be incomparably better ruled than all others” (Descartes, 12). God gave him the ability to reason and until you are able to challenge the customary view, you adopt it because it was what was revealed in the book of God. The church fathers have given knowledge and Descartes accepts that knowledge until he is able to challenge it himself. The reason some may never challenge customary views is because they find no reason to, it is what is revealed to them and that is what they accept. Descartes however, challenges these notions. In respect to laws, he mentions if a state was flourishing it was because one man created laws that “all tended to the same end” (Descartes, 12). These ideas tie into his desire to question his previous education because it is based on the opinions of many people. These opinions that are crafted by many individuals have no certain proof and therefore may not be true. The way to truth is through mans ability to utilize good sense in different life experiences using rational criterion. The difficulty arises in the fact that as children we were governed and persuaded by adults who had diverse opinions and may not have agreed with one another and it is because of this that we do not always receive the best counsel. Therefore, similar to his analogy about building a new building from scratch, an individuals judgments can not be as pure and true in the later stages of life after they have already been taught by teachers as it could be if we “had the complete use of our reason from the day of our birth, and if we had been guided by it alone” (Descartes, 12). This revelation led him to want to reject all his previous teachings, and to use his reason to build up his own judgments to either replace what he was taught, or accept his teachings by arriving to the same conclusions using his own judgment. In this way he believes he can successfully develop his reasoning and judgment to conduct his life properly. The challenge in this idea is that it is sometimes more difficult to pave a new way of thinking when the old way of thinking suffices and has been adopted by many, though it may not be the most certain way of knowing, its acceptance among majority makes it easier to pursue. This is also why Descartes had difficulty in believing those of a high status who are “always suggesting ideas for some new reform” (Descartes, 13) when they have not developed their own good sense in the way that Descartes believes would be most successful. He reiterates then that his method of abandoning previous teachings to redevelop accepted notions may be too bold of a task for many and he is not directly “advising anyone to imitate it” (Descartes, 14). There are two kinds of minds that Descartes presents with regard for their capacity of reason and judgment. The first being composed of individuals who give themselves unwarranted credit and are haste in their judgments without proper consideration and if they were to abandon their previous notions, they would spiral in their attempt to properly direct their minds. The second mind belongs to those who know they are not capable of truly distinguishing between what is true and false and accept customs and teachings instead of pursuing the truth themselves. Descartes enters the concept of questioning previously taught notions slowly, and not to reject everything all at once without having a plan in place to use his reason to discover truth or if not guided by reason to reject a notion. Descartes then presents his method, in order to give us direction to science. It is composed of four steps. The first step is to not accept anything that is not wholly true, to avoid haste and bias when making a judgment. It means we should only accept something if it is completely certain that there is no reason to create doubt. The second step is to divide a problem so that its basic components create ease in its solution. This is also how he pursued his mathematics. By designating a certain truth in basic components of straight lines to be manipulated into answering more complicated problems that include curved lines and shapes for example. He used the concept of ratios to understand different subjects by mirroring concepts. The basic components act as reference points to assist in solving problems at a larger scale. This segues into the third step in which it is crucial to understand the smaller scale concepts and objects in order to build upon them to understand something that is more complex. The last step is to make assertions that are so thorough and complete that a judgment may not be further questioned.

The third part of the discourse opens up with the building analogy that Descartes mentions in his second part. In tearing down the old house and rebuilding it he says that you must be trained in the art of rebuilding the house properly. In the time that the house is being built, you must find somewhere to stay where you can be comfortable. This is an analogy for his methods, as you are breaking apart previous notions, there are some that you must comfortably accept from customs until you are able to question them using proper reasoning. In the time that he spent “rebuilding ones lodging” (Descartes, 20) as in rebuilding his state of mind he developed several maxims. The first of the maxims is to “obey the laws and customs of my country” (Descartes, 20). Preserving belief in God because God gave him the grace to be able to develop his reasoning and direct his life according to his own judgment. Until he was able to subject all his opinions to examination, he would follow the opinions of the most sensible individuals that surrounded him. Though he could have found more sensible people in different countries and ethnicities but he believed it was more practical to “regulate himself according to those with whom I would have to live” (Descartes, 20) and observing the way they act rather than the way they talk because what is said is not always true, it is more accurate to observe mannerisms to understand an individual. Sometimes an individual does not even know their true opinion that is why it is not always accurate to take their word. He followed the most moderate opinions so that he would not stray too far from his pursuit of the truth, he did not want to accept extreme truths because they may give up liberty of thought. Descartes is not strict in his thought either; if something he once believed to be true ceases to be true, he no longer accepts it as such and no longer praises it. Instead he pursues a different truth. The second maxim he presents is “to be as firm and resolute in my action as I could be”(Descartes, 21) and to follow a certain direction in pursuit of knowledge. He explains this by using the analogy of someone lost in a forest, rather than wandering around and changing direction, the person who is lost must move forward in one direction. This applies to the way Descartes approaches an action or a thought process, he pursues it in one direction unless his reason directed him otherwise. This illustrates that until we are able to come to the truest conclusions we can accept ones that are the most probable. The third maxim he presents focuses on the self, and the importance he places on his own desires rather than the world and its fortunes. By focusing on the self, he also understands and states that we should become “accustomed to the belief that nothing is entirely within our power except our thoughts”(Descartes, 22) and as such we must focus on developing the mind and in turn, reason, since we have control over it. Descartes found contentment in this maxim because he did not desire anything he could not acquire, as a strong will allows us to only desire things in which we are capable of attaining. This is a maxim that many philosophers practiced as they were only focused on things within their reach and their own thoughts, they did not desire things outside this realm and rather felt content in what they already had and the capacities of their mind. With these maxims he dedicated his life to fostering his reason and the pursuit of truth, because there was no other occupation of man that appealed to him. He found happiness in his pursuit of knowledge and his methods of obtaining it, cultivating his mind is what brought him peace. There is virtue that results from these maxims that pursue a true judgment as “judging well is sufficient for doing well” (Descartes, 24) insofar as if we are judging in the most thorough way then it must also follow that we are also “doing the best that we can” (Descartes, 24). Ethics also arise from Descartes method as based on reason, which is the highest point in his new building. Ethics emerge through this method of science, as we are able to question the ethics we believe to be true using our own reasoning. If there comes a time where one does not know, as Descartes does, they should rely on customary ethics until they are able to question it for themselves. Thus Roman Catholicism is adopted by default for some. Ethics that are revealed have a human component; using reasoning we are able to separate this component from what is divine. As he continued his travels he acted as a spectator amongst interactions and in this way he was able to develop his reasoning and judgment. His approach imitates the skeptics insofar as he questioned what was previously taught to him and tries to find truth in it. Whereas other skeptics such as the Pyrrhonians, suspend judgment because they do not believe something can be known to be certainly true. Skeptics do not question concepts further because of epoche; there being no reason to challenge customary views. Rather they follow appearances contending that what they can basically derive from a situation is to be true for that situation. For example, if an individual were ill, they would consider the symptoms and prescribe something that targets the symptoms they would not try to uncover the truth and derive the cause of the illness because it does not matter to them. Descartes in turn, would rather use reasoning and pure judgment to arrive at certain truths using his methods and maxims to find reasoning. The reasoning he strives for has intolerant edge because of its thoroughness whereas the Pyrrhonians are more tolerant in this regard because they are aware that they do not know something completely. He does not doubt truths for the sake of doubting them rather he wants to arrive at these truths by utilizing his own reason and judgment. Though he wanted to make his own observations to assert his beliefs, he used the foundations of the “buildings” he tore down to allow him to further establish his truths. This intermediate stage of thinking, where he is deciding what he wants to pursue in its whole truth by breaking down previous notions does not emphasize enlightment rather these maxims are the steps to becoming enlightened.

Cross country is more than just a sport. There is the obvious mental and physical toughness, but there is also raw emotion that is evoked. Coaches and teammates have the utmost respect for one another. When you run for your school, the final year becomes something memorable. For me, running in high school my senior year was the most illustrious year of running for me. I had been running under the same two coaches since the beginning (freshman year of cross country) and all the success I had during my high school tenure was coming to an end. My final cross country had me in tears as I painstakingly crossed the finish line. While I still had winter and spring track, something about crossing the line that day made it seem like everything I had done in high school was over. All I could do was reminisce over all my success from all four years. But, something was missing. I felt like there was a void that needed to be filled. Luckily, just like every previous senior class, I had my chance to fill that void.

Allow me to explain just how cross-country runners live out their lives in our little running community. This will better help you understand the importance of wanting to fill that void after my last high school cross-country race. The obvious goal of my high school’s cross country team is to win as much as possible and to be the best runners that we can ever be. We have goals that expand beyond just running including respect, learning to be a respectable teammate, and being a better student. Just like John Swales explained in his essay about The Concept of Discourse Communit[ies], we have “mechanisms of intercommunication [amongst ourselves]” (221). We use group chats, texts, calls, emails, and verbal ways of communication to bring ourselves closer to one another as more than just teammates, but also our own family.

We had/have a tradition for every senior runner of Highland Regional High School’s cross country team (men and women) to write a commemorative letter to our coaches for all that they have done for us. It was/is sort of a bittersweet way of saying, “Thanks for everything, but now I won’t be running for you anymore.” (Well, maybe not sounding so stuck-up). The letters (at least for mine) included every cherishing moment of cross country, from freshman year to senior year, and the hard work it took to get from the beginning to now. Amongst ourselves, we runners never really spoke to each other on a personal level; it was more fun and joking around, so writing the “Thank You” letters kind of deviated from how we communicated, granted that they were for our coaches and not amongst ourselves. The letters were more personal. Especially since we seniors were expected to read our letters out loud at our cross-country banquet, the emotions were/are noticeable. This is an example of how even though we may joke around and focus on success, our cross country focuses on giving back to those who have helped us out through the tough times and best of times.

The banquet for the 2018-2019 Highland Regional High School Cross Country team (and only the cross country team) was held on December 13th, 2018 in the school’s cafeteria. Members included family, friends (for some), coaches, and ourselves. The usual routine included the coaches introducing the members of the team, presentation of awards (Varsity, Junior Varsity, team titles/trophies, All-Conference plaques if anyone got them, etc.), and then the reading of the “Thank You” letters. The introduction of the team and awards has always begun with the girls.

Typically, the impact (emotionally) of each read letter is dependent on the way the speaker (a senior on the team) articulates his/her voice, the audience’s reaction (whether it be the team, family, the coaches, or anyone in the cafeteria), and overall presentation. They’re examples of what English professor at Utah State University Keith Grant-Davie calls “constraints” (356) in his essay about Rhetorical Situations and Their Constituents. If the speaker’s voice is too soft, the audience may react with the typical “Can you please speak up?”, diminishing the aura of appropriate emotions within the audience as well as the coaches. If the speaker’s presentation includes him/her just reading words off the letter, the coaches (and possibly the audience) may think that the speaker wrote the letter because he/she was forced to. Usually, in a commemorative speech (even though it is a letter), rather than focusing on chunks of information about the person(s) being honored, the speech should make reference to the emotions of the audience and respect those emotions—whether directly or indirectly.

My letter read almost like a narrative, going in chronological order of every important meet and workout. For the seniors who ran all four years since freshman year cross country, like myself, it was even more emotional. I was one of only two men to have run since freshman year cross country. The letter’s purpose was pretty self-evident; it was to thank my coaches for being my coaches for all my years of running at Highland Regional High School. It was meant to show just how much the coaches meant to me. It was supposed to bring out the emotional side of me from being a runner.

While the focal point of the letter was for the coaches, it also targeted coaches who may want to think of ideas of how they should be thanked for their hard work by their team. Thinking about it now, maybe people thinking about starting running could have used my letter. Since the letter details all the runs and workouts I did, maybe non-runners pursuing running can see what they should expect.

Referring back to John Swales, “a discourse community has developed and continues to develop discoursal expectations.” (221) The seniors are to also play a role. Besides leading the team, they are to show respect to the coaches with the “Thank You” letters. The need for us seniors to write the letters came from our hearts and traditions. The tradition of having seniors write the coaches “Thank You” letters and reading them at the banquet was set since the beginning. No senior class ever broke the tradition of writing “Thank You” letters, so the expectations (you could say) were high. Those letters showed the deeper aspect of the sport of cross country. It exemplifies the respect and character it builds.

Works Cited

1. Grant-Davie, Keith. ‘Rhetorical Situations and Their Constituents.’ Writing about Writing: A College Reader. 3rd ed. Eds. Elizabeth Wardle and Doug Downs. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2017, pp. 264-79
2. Swales, John. “The Concept of Discourse Community.” Writing about Writing: A College Reader. 3rd ed. Eds. Elizabeth Wardle and Doug Downs. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2017, pp. 217-29