MODULE 5 WEEKLY ASSIGNMENT 1

Module 5 Weekly Assignment

Molly A. Simon
Department of M.A TESOL, Campbellsville University
TSL 670: Discourse Analysis
Dr. Eduardo L. Trindade, Ph.D.
April 17th, 2023
MODULE 5 WEEKLY ASSIGNMENT 2

Module 5 Weekly Assignment

English is a challenging language for both non-native and native speakers due to its

intricate structures and various complexities, which can present numerous challenges that require

a significant amount of effort to overcome. Concepts such as idiomatic complexities and difficult

grammar can affect written and spoken speech in such a way that only through analysis, we can

discover the true meaning of a person’s words. One linguist, Edward Sapir, went as far to say,

“English is one of the most difficult languages in the world to learn, not only because of its many

obscure grammatical rules, but also because of the vast idiomatic complexities of the language.”

(Sapir, 1921). With this being said, analyzing a particular set of words through discourse analysis

is just one way to discover hidden meanings and purposes. This exact process with be done

through this paper for Problem 1 (pg. 16-17) and Problem 2 (pg. 21-22). Specifically, I will use

the following theories and concepts to support each claim I make: generic/inclusive “we”,

Communication Accommodation Theory, immediacy and authenticity, Theory of Conversational

Maxims, and the concept of power and dominance in conversation.

Problem 1 revolves around a teacher, Karen, who is recounting an episode in which an

administrator at her school, Mary Washington, received a call from a historian named Sara.

Plainly said, Sara expressed an interest in doing research into Black history and working with

local school children. Based on the given context of the text, “we” in “we have a person” refers

to the school as an institution and the people attending/working there (Gee, 2014). However, it

does not directly include Sara. The “we” used in this phrase is referred to as a generic or

inclusive we (Lakoff, 1975). Generic and inclusive forms of we are used to conceptualize a

group of people, rather than singling out a section or person of the group (Lakoff, 1975). The

context of this text suggests that after receiving the call from the historian, Mary Washington
MODULE 5 WEEKLY ASSIGNMENT 3

reached out to Karen to inform her of the historian’s wishes. Thus, “we” likely refers to the

school as a whole and those who would be involved in the decision-making for Sara’s proposal.

In regard to Karen’s intent for her use of “we”, it could be inferred as a way for Karen to

emphasize the involvement and importance of the school in reference to the historian’s proposal.

Within the field of linguistics, it is proposed that the use of inclusive language such as “we”,

creates a sense of unity and shared responsibility (Turner, 2010). Therefore, Karen’s use of “we”

emphasized the shared responsibility of the school and the decision-making council in regard to

Sara’s proposal.

So, then it must be asked, why did Karen choose to state, “We have a person from

Woodson” rather than, “There is a person from Woodson…”. Just as it was concluded earlier,

“we” is often used to implicitly indicate shared responsibility and involvement (Turner, 2010).

Moreover, Karen is implying that the school as a whole is actively involved and committed to

the potential success of Sara’s proposal. The “we” here is not specifically defined; it could refer

to any specific individuals within a varying amount. Therefore, Karen could be using this “we”

in “We have a person from Woodson” to align herself with Mary Washington and present it as if

they are a unified front of support for Sara’s proposal. However, as it is stated in the textbook,

when quoting people, individuals often ascribe words that were not actually said, but rather

words that capture what the speaker wants to accomplish (Gee, 2014). The goal of Karen was not

to ascribe exactly what was said, but rather effectively communicate her intentions in regard to

Sara, the historian.

The use of “number” within this text can be analyzed in the same sense. The word,

“number”, is neither a deictic nor a proper name, but rather a content word that has a fuller

meaning (Gee, 2014). The use of the word, “number”, in this text refers to Sara’s phone number,
MODULE 5 WEEKLY ASSIGNMENT 4

which was provided so Karen can have a line of contact to Sara. This can be inferred simply

through context. Mary Washington answers, “And here’s her number / Give her a call,” (Gee,

2014) which implies that Karen is being provided the phone number for the sole purpose of

calling Sara. The context of this situation easily narrows down the particular meaning of

“number”. It is unlikely that “number” could refer to anything other than phone number in this

situation.

While the simple words of “we” and “number” in this text can be analyzed, so can the

more complex inclusions such as Karen repeating which university Sara comes from. Everyone

in the meeting knew Sara was from Woodson (Gee, 2014). However, Karen specifically

references that Sara is from that particular university. Karen might be unknowingly utilizing the

Communication Accommodation Theory (CAT). CAT refers to how people use redundant

language and repeating information to facilitate comprehension (Gile, 2007). Accordingly, Karen

may be revisiting the fact that Sara is from Woodson to emphasize and facilitate comprehension.

Through mentioning Sara’s affiliation with Woodson University, Karen may be desiring to

emphasize the potential benefits of collaboration with a specific institution.

On a different note, Karen specifically uses Mary Washington’s full name when

speaking, but only Sara’s first name (Gee, 2014). One reason this is the case is due to Karen’s

familiarity with Mary Washington. It can be assumed that Karen has a closer professional

relationship with Mary than she does with Sara. Therefore, using Mary’s full name may be used

as a sign or respect and formality. On the flip side, Karen may not be very familiar with Sara, so

she does not use her full name. However, it may not be only one of these propositions, but rather

a combination of the two.

MODULE 5 WEEKLY ASSIGNMENT 5

In an article for the Harvard Business Review, Annette Simmons argues that using direct

quotations can help establish trust and build credibility (Simmons, 2002). She also suggested that

it demonstrates a commitment to honesty and transparency (Simmons, 2002). To build on this,

the field of discourse studies advocates that the use of direct quotes brings forth a sense of

immediacy and authenticity (Kramer, 1994). Correspondingly, it can be gathered that the content

of the call from Sara is given as a direct quote and not just summarized to build immediacy,

authenticity, and honesty (Kramer, 1994). Through providing a thorough account of what was

said, Karen communicates the exact nature of the request. The level of detail Karen supplies

conveys a significance of the call and the potential importance of the proposed project.

As per why Sara may have interrupted at the exact point that she did in this text, it is not

clearly defined. However, while not clearly defined, the Theory of Conversational Maxims may

provide us with some supportable reasons. According to this theory, there are four conversational

maxims (be truthful, provide enough information, be relevant, and be clear and concise) (Searle,

1975). A speaker may violate one of these maxims as a way asserting dominance or expressive

frustration (Searle, 1975). It can be inferred that Sara is not trying to assert her dominance but

may be expressing frustration. This might be the exact reason for Karan’s anger and perturbance.

Sara, as the historian, is coming to the school with her proposal. Karen, due to her social

position, may believe Sara’s interruption was highly rude and thus Karen became angry. This is

due to the concept of power and dominance in conversation (Brown, 1987). This theory comes

from the field of linguistics, and it suggests that individuals who hold a position of power

(socially) may feel a greater sense of entitlement to lead and control conversations (Brown,

1987). This can bring forth the reason as to why Karen may be upset with Sara. Perhaps, she felt
MODULE 5 WEEKLY ASSIGNMENT 6

Sara was leading the conversation too much or directing the topic of the conversation. In fact,

this theory may have been the exact reason as to why Sara interrupted in the first place.

Through this paper, I analyzed a particular set of words through discourse to discover

hidden meanings and purposes of Karen and Sara. This exact process was done through Problem

1 (pg. 16-17) and Problem 2 (pg. 21-22). Specifically, I used theories and concepts such as

generic/inclusive “we”, Communication Accommodation Theory, immediacy and authenticity,

Theory of Conversational Maxims, and the concept of power and dominance in conversation, to

support each claim I made in reference to what Sara and Karen said.
MODULE 5 WEEKLY ASSIGNMENT 7

References

Brown, P., & Levinson, S. C. (1987). Politeness: Some universals in language usage. Cambridge

University Press.

Gee, J.P. (2014). How to do discourse analysis: A toolkit (2nd ed.). Routledge.

Giles, H., & Coupland, N. (1991). Language: Contexts and consequences. Open University

Press.

Giles, H., & Ogay, T. (2007). Communication accommodation theory. In J. G. Oetzel & S. Ting-

Toomey (Eds.), The SAGE Handbook of Conflict Communication: Integrating Theory,

Research, and Practice (pp. 77-99). Sage Publications.

Kramer, M. (1993). Oral narratives. In T. A. Van Dijk (Ed.), Discourse studies: A

multidisciplinary introduction (Vol. 2, pp. 1-11). Sage Publications.

Lakoff, R. (1975). Language and Woman's Place. New York: Harper & Row.

Sapir, E. (1921). Language: An introduction to the study of speech. Harcourt, Brace and

Company.

Searle, J. R. (1975). Indirect speech acts. In P. Cole & J. L. Morgan (Eds.), Syntax and

semantics: Vol. 3. Speech acts (pp. 59-82). Academic Press.

Simmons, A. (2002). The Storytelling Power of Direct Quotes. Harvard Business Review, 80(6),

116-123.

Turner, J. H., & West, R. L. (2010). Introducing communication theory: Analysis and

application. McGraw-Hill.