James Paul Gee's Discourse Analysis

759 Words2 Pages

Every time people interact with each other, they must choose what words to say and how to act. To do this, they use experiences and must consider who exactly they are communicating with as behaviors yield different results in different circumstances. For example, it is unwise to act similarly with a businessman or doctor as one would a friend. James Paul Gee refers to grouping of behaviors as “discourses.” Gee defines discourses as “ways of being in the world; they are forms of life which integrate words, acts, values, beliefs, attitudes and social identities as well as gestures, glances, body positions and clothes” (Wardle 484). In addition to acting and speaking alike, groups of people share beliefs and values as well.
In order to observe …show more content…

All participants in the tournament exhibited comparable languages, actions and beliefs that would not be applicable in other situations. They specifically molded their behavior in order to feel more included.
After defining a single discourse, Gee goes on to segment them into dominant and non-dominant varieties. A dominant discourse “brings with it the (potential) acquisition of social 'goods'” (Wardle 485). They are a way of being people follow with the intention of gaining money or fame. A non-dominant discourse serves to feel more connected to a group, but does not gain an individual anything else. For example, doctors have a dominant discourse, while people who go bowling on the weekends have a non-dominant discourse.
Starcraft 2 tournaments follow this separation. Commentators earn money and therefore use a dominant discourse. However, even though the language viewers use is near-identical to that of the commentators, they are not also a dominant discourse. The commentators are required to act more professionally and entertain an audience. Their abilities to speak clearly and keep current knowledge about the game are highly valued. Conversely, the tournament viewers' discourse only allows them to effectively communicate with other viewers. They do not stand to procure or forfeit any social goods. This reinforces Gee's idea that a discourse includes all aspects of a person and not just

Open Document