Precis #2: Gee and the Nature of Discourse

Gee, James Paul. "Literacy, Discourse, and Linguistics." Literacy: A Critical Sourcebook. Eds. Ellen Cushman, Eugene Kintgen, Barry Kroll, and Mike Rose. Boston, MA: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2001. 525-544.

“We all have many Discourses,” claims Gee in his article, “Literacy, Discourse, and Linguistics (526). This statement is decidedly true. I myself have a myriad of Discourses if you consider the breadth of what Gee considers to be Discourses. For example, I am a student of literature, I am an American, I am a woman, etc. With the idea that what we claim ourselves to be, what our immediate identity is at the moment, how are we to categorize and explain these many Discourses in a sensible way. Gee has presented to us his explanation and example of exactly how to do this.

Initially Gee explains the basics of a Discourse: “A Discourse is a sort of “identity kit” which comes complete with the appropriate costumes and instructions on how to act, and often write” (526). With this individualism between Discourses firmly cemented into our minds Gee must now delve further into defining each Discourse or, discourse. First we are broken down to decipher the differences between primary and secondary Discourses. The primary describes an initial learned Discourse that branches from the family and extends to our later interactions with anyone we become intimate later in life with. The secondary Discourse can be described as one we acquire once we have branched from our families, once we enter churches, schools, or community groups (527).

Then we must decipher between dominant and non-dominant discourses, which Gee considers to be secondary Discourses. These dominant/non-dominant discourses are concentrated on the acquisition of goods. While the dominant is used to acquire necessary and social goods, such as money and status, the non-dominant focuses on finding comfort and protection in a single social network (528).

By focusing on and defining the different levels of discourses, Gee can continue to explain the purpose of discourses in language and literacy. For without the Discourses that everyone contains the process of explaining literacy is unable to be done. We must first fully understand our own Discourses and others to explain there interaction with each other, in order to define literacy.