Post 12: Mirabelli's "Learning to Serve"

Mirabelli is looking at the idea that some people see waitresses and/or waiters as stupid and the contradicting idea that the literacy of being able to serve food is rather complex. As Mirabelli denotes "Assumptions that waitresses (and waiters) are ignorant and stupid and that waiting on tables contributes little to society are not new. The rebuttals to commonplace, pejorative, understandings of the food service industry suggest, however, that there is a complexity and skill that may go unrecognized by the general public or institutions such as universities" (540). He begins his ethnography talking about a website that is a forum for people who have worked in the food service industry. Once person posts on the horror story page, that if you don't like serving then go get and education and find a REAL job. I feel Mirabelli is trying to disprove this original notion about food industry workers and through out the ethnography he brings up evidence to support this claim. A lot of this evidence was due to the fact that Mirabelli was in the food service industry and he used his personal experience to show that serving is not just an easy job that any one can do; it takes and incredible amount of skill and knowledge.

Mirabelli gathered his data from personal participation, observation, interviews, and the menu of a small town diner called Lou's Restaurant. He also acquired some data using tape recordings and from historic and bibliographic literature. Mirabelli himself had been a waiter for a ten-year period and this was how he was able to easily gather all of this data. Using this data Mirabelli is able to conclude that serving in general is not a stupid and ignorant job it is way more complex than that.

Proposal: Discourse Community Ethnography

I plan on doing my discourse community ethnography about a baseball team and more specifically the Ohio University Club Baseball (OUCB) team. According to John Swales there are six criteria for a discourse community and I believe that this baseball team fits these criteria. The First characteristic is the discourse community has to have a common set of goals. This is true for OUCB team because the goal for the team is to make it to regional, which is basically the end of the year tournament for the National Club Baseball Association (NCBA). The Second is the discourse community has have methods for intercommunication. The OUCB team uses many different mechanisms for intercommunication including mass texting, email, and Facebook. Third a discourse community has to have participatory mechanisms, which for the OUCB team would include going to practice and trying to become a better baseball player in preparation for the season. Fourth, a discourse community uses one or more genres to complete it's goals. There are two major genres for a baseball team and that would be competitive and noncompetitive. Competitive teams scout the best players and tries to be the number one team in the conference. Noncompetitive teams play more for fun then to win, these teams are playing for the entertainment value of baseball. The Fifth, is a discourse community has to have there own specific lingo or lexis. Baseball in general has there own lingo and a good example of this is the term "Got Heem". The sixth characteristic is a discourse community has to have a hierarchy of it's members. The OUCB team fits this because as new player come in they start out as rookies and as they continue playing they move up in the chain of command. The Ohio University Club Baseball team fits all six of Swales criterion and thus qualifies as a discourse community.

I am involved in the OU club baseball team and I have been for the last three years. For next year, I will be the only remaining senior on the team, and because of this I have been elected as the coach for the team. I am very interested to find out how language is used to complete the goals of the baseball team. Baseball teams in general have an interesting use of language to achieve there goals and I would like to understand more about the use of language.

The most important individual that I should interview would be the OU club baseball president of this bast year. He would have the most knowledge of all of the behind the scenes paper work and also most of the on field knowledge aswell. Another person I can interview would be the general manager of the team for next year. This guy will be doiing all of the paper work for next year and it would be great to get his input on the language of this discourse community.

I will be able to analyze many different kinds of texts including text messages and emails. These two are the main forms of communication outside of practice. Due to the fact that I am involved in this discourse community, I will be able to collect a lot of emails and text messages very easily.

Post 10: The Concept of Discourse Community

The discourse community I have decided to take a look at is a fraternity/sororities. Fraternities are groups of college students that form there own discourse community. All the guys in a fraternity all fallow the same basic set of rules created by the founders of that fraternity, most of the rules include doing community service hours and hanging out with brothers. Intercommunication occurs through carious methods some of these would include: email, Facebook, newsletters, chapter meeting, phone, and by online discussions. The reason for such a wide array mechanisms for intercommunication is because fraternities have alumni. As a person joins a frat he is the low man on the totem pole. As they get older they become upperclassmen and then move on to alumni status. This progression is exactly what John Swales explains in his article "The Concept of Discourse Community", this progression would be considered the threshold level of members for a discourse community. The lexis for a fraternity is a little more complicated, but we can consider the slang used by college students would be roughly the same as those students in the discourse community. Minute differences can be observed in the discourse community because these people form their own friendships and come up with new slang words all the time. A fraternity allows the members to participate in meetings and events, these meetings convey information to the individuals about the week and other important details about the brotherhood. Finally, the genre would be the restrictions that a fraternity needs to abide by. These restrictions could be handed down from the university or the national chapter of that fraternity.

Post 8 "The Future of Literacy"

I have had access to a computer ever since 1995 and early on I was a little unsure on how to use it. I started by playing simple games such as solitaire but as soon as I became more computer literate I advanced to more intricate games such as Battlefield which was very popular during the late 90's. My father is in information technology, so he really inspired me to learn more about computers. I then began using my computer a lot more often and I became very computer savvy. Then my school began to incorporated  mandatory computer classes for all students. This is where I began to understand the possibilities behind a computer. I then began using a computer not just for games but also for learning. With any information just a click away it was easy for me to use the computer for homework that was difficult.

In High School I had taken a computer networking class and this class helped me understand a lot more about computers. I figured out what they where made of, how they worked, and how computers connected to each other to create a network. It then became easier for me to use my computer for things such as Facebook, games, and Adobe Photoshop.

My class experience outside of my computer classes didn't really use computers. The other classes such as History and English used text books. This was very bland and almost out of date to me. When I went home instead of using the book; I would find myself using the Internet for most of the questions. At a young age I became very computer literate thus helping me to answer questions from homework and to learn more about certain subjects.

Post 7 "Sponsors of Literacy"

I feel like Brandt would agree that the sponsor always has something to gain from their sponsorship. She backs this argument by explaining "Loaning land, money, protection, and other favors allowed the politically powerful to extend their influence and justify their exploitation of clients. Clients traded their labor and deference for access to opportunities for themselves or their children and for leverage needed to improve their social standing." This is basically saying that a sponsor offers something in value to someone. This person who is usually in a lower socioeconomic status then the sponsor, uses this item of value to to trade their labor to achieve a better social standing. I feel like Brandt would agree that the sponsor always has something to gain in a sponsorship because why else would you want to be a sponsor at all.

A good example of this would be some employers will supply the money for an obese employee to get a medical procedure called gastric bypass surgery. This would give the employer a more productive worker and the employee get to be a healthier person and a boost in self confidence.

In my life some examples for sponsorship would be my parents. They have invested money in me to get good grades, graduate college, and then get a good job. The benefit to them would be the fact that they don't have to take care of me anymore.

Reflection Essay

I have used Wikipedia so many times throughout my life and I am quite surprised that is had taken me this long to start a Wikipedia account. I had always used Wikipedia to clear something up for class, I would refer to it as as starting point for my research. I was aware that anyone could edit these Wikipedia articles, thus why so many teachers disapprove Wikipedia as a good source. I believe this notion to be false because after going through the process of actually editing a Wikipedia article, I now realize that it takes a lot more to edit an article. It's almost like working on a research paper. You have to gather legitimate sources and bring them together to create an academic article.

These constructs that the Wikipedia community fallows is what makes Wikipedia so useful. The constructs would include writing in third person and keeping any personal bias out of the article. In James Porter's article he argues "The approved channels (referring to how a group of people in a discourse community communicate) we can call them "forums". Each forum has a distinct history and rules governing appropriateness to which members are obliged to adhere." This meaning that a discourse community such as a Wikipedia article there are certain rules that a person should fallow in order to create a proper article. These rules are what set Wikipedia apart from all other encyclopedic websites. The rules help to create uniformity across all of the articles Wikipedia has. Meaning that all the articles will be roughly the same format even though different people write the articles. This also helps prevent people who are not qualified to make an edit that does not make sense, therefore the articles will be more academic. Thus making Wikipedia a better and more legitimate source.

When writing my Wikipedia article I had to think to myself who would be reading this and how would they expect to see this article written. This effected how I worded my article and one example would be at one point  I had to write about how the Vortex (a ride at Kings Island) is celebrating it's 25th anniversary during the 2012 season; but I had to word this in the past tense because it this type of information would be apart of the history of the ride. History therefore meaning the past. When writing a Wikipedia edit you have to think to yourself if I where on Wikipedia reading this article what would it sounds like. This will help make adjustments to stay within those constraints of Wikipedia.

Wikipedia can help us understand more about the professional constraints put on writing. While writing my Wikipedia article I found myself learning a lot about how to write in a more professional manner. At the start it was rather difficult to start my article. In order to understand the constraints Wikipedia puts on their articles I had to read through many articles. Just reading the articles helped me understand the way  your suppose to write on Wikipedia. This would include writing in a third person and to leave the self out. Understanding the constraints in a discourse community will help young people become a better writer in their chosen fields.

My experience with making a Wikipedia edit was great. It was kind of fun to learn how to make a Wikipedia edit. As I said earlier this was my first time making an edit and I would say that would like to do it again in my free time. Especially if you pick an article that you are interested in, you will be able to enjoy the edit thus making it a useful experience. I am so glad that I did this edit because not only was a fun and useful exercise it is also a great way to understand Wikipedia. Before I only had a dogmatic view of Wikipedia after doing the edit I understand how much effort it takes to create a proper/professional article. This makes me realize that Wikipedia still can be used as good reference.  

1)  Exigence- Is an issue or need that can be addressed through conversation or writing. Grant-Davie brings up the idea of cause and effect, meaning that there is a reason for the exigence and because of this there is an effect. An example would be receiving bad service at a restaurant.
2)  Rhetor- Would be the person or persons involved in the exigence. Grant-Davie says that sometimes the rhetor brings with him an ethos that (depending on the situation) could alter the outcome of the exigence. Sticking to the example above, the rhetors' of this situation would be the customer and the person who caused the bad service.
3)  Audience- The people that are not involved in the exigence, rather they are witnesses to it. The audience members can become rhetors but it always depends on the situation. An example would be a baseball team listening to their coach give a pregame speech.
4)  Constraints- Are restraints in language that occur in certain situations. Using the restaurant example, in order to resolve the exigence the waiter needs to compensate the customer for the wrongdoings because the customer is always right.