When reading Sommer’s description about cultural language issues and how society views the linguistical differences that arise now in a more diverse community of learners, I found many areas that are problematic when determining the cultural attachment and connections between region and language. Sommer’s seems to be correct in recognizing the past dissertion that typically people who knew a language could be recognized as living in a specific region of the world. But as she also states, the problem now is that society generally tries to maintain this regional recognition and bypassing the idea that knowing multiple languages is a common necessity in a world where cultures are diversifying and migrating to different regions than they may be primarily from. Unfortunately, there still seems to be some necessity for implementing a national language for learning purposes. I, as a teacher don’t know all the languages represented in the world. Yet, I may have students who come from various regions and require more instruction than I might be able to provide. Do we force the teacher to learn the languages or do we encourage the students to see the value of learning the primary language of that region? It seems a dilemma that is far from close to being solved with a solution that is fair and legitimate.
Eng 609 week 4
In “Historical Scholarship,” Gallagher comments about the ways that literature, the author and the text have been analyzed and tore apart by historical contexts and critics. I think that there has to be some happy medium where they are all intertwined and only useful when considering each aspect of the invention. When I envision a piece of text, I find that understanding where the author came from and how they lived to be useful in understanding the reasoning behind some of the things that they write about. I don’t believe that this is the only instrument necessary for understanding the text, but I think that it should be the initial approach when considering the hidden agendas and meanings. Another aspect that Gallagher commented on is how the text is called “literature.” Even in writing this, I find it difficult to differentiate literature and the text. Anything of written makeup is considered literature; yet, you also have film and art as literature in its own unique sense? I think that the focus should be how to use the text, history and the author as approaches that can be conjoined and used together, rather than separate entities with separate interpretational value.
English 609 week 3
When considering the implications that are heard in Bartholomae’s essay, one might think that the purpose of our existence as English Studies students is quite pointless and insignificant. The underlying argument still stands about what Composition is and what makes up a Composition course. Is it a class that meets the basic needs of College Freshmen? How do we distinguish the “scholarship of compostion” and the “scholarship of rhetoric”? For years and even decades there has been a question about whether or not language and the formation of language is important for students to understand and be able to differentiate. Do students really need to know what the difference between a noun and verb are in order to properly write? Bartholomae seems to imply that they don’t, but unfortunately students must understand the placement of the noun and the verb in order to write what we call a proper sentence. Without the grammar fundamentals, students are lacking the foundation required. Another question that may arise: Do students need to understand how language is modified through the author’s voice in order to write a letter of intent for employment, as an example? If a student is applying for a position, no matter what field of study it falls into, they can be taken seriously or as a joke based on the way that they compose the letter with rhetoric. It seems that rhetoric and composition will follow the student, no matter what field of employment they belong to.
week 2 eng 609
Week 2 Eng 609
Under Construction’s Introduction by Farris and Anson addresses the many conflicts that arise from having several authors with varied points of view contribute to composition and theory. One of the problems with developing a coherent theory for composition is the reaction to new technologies and the inclusion of these technologies in the curriculum. Theories also arise when trying to determine the ways in which theory can be practically applied. Another conflict is the quality of writing that theorist believe is appropriate and “good writing.” Other writers explain that we are too quick to stay with what we know and not address the needs of the students represented in our society. We are not only addressing cultural differences, we are also addressing those who the material can find relevance. And finally, there are new theories that have yet to be addressed in the scheme of composition which demand further research and study.
week 1 reading
Week 1 Eng 609
In Susan Romano’s, “Tracking Composition Research on the World Wide Web,” she explains how the research curriculum should be studied more thoroughly to include utilizing the internet and technology. She mentions, “What research activities currently are underway among compositionists? What alterations in topic, procedure, and presentation are in progress? How does one go about locating on the World Wide Web a body of research on writing instruction?” (182) Romano also discusses the purpose of using the internet for not only producing textual research, but also as a research topic. Again she examines the transition from completely textual materials to using what could possibly be a more complete mechanism and strategy for the purpose of researching. The call to action is to encourage growth within the educational institutions to research how the world wide web can contribute and build upon all of the texts that we might find on the library bookshelf. Now that researchers and scholars have become more used to using the internet, Susan Romano also encourages research and new approaches in the classroom environment.
In the “Epilogue: The Scholar in Society,” by Bruce Robbins, we see what he calls an upcoming and progressive crisis within the humanities department of upper division learning. He comments that the funding from these programs, the ones that have only enabled the variety of other departments and professions, has been drastically and unconventionally cut. Critics have begun to try to “legitimize” the humanities and what they do. Many say that English doesn’t work to change the environment; but think about the cultural literature that is represented in our libraries and all through the internet. It seems that no one debates that English is necessary for communication, but doesn’t fulfill the needs of the students who wish to be inspired and intrigued, as a disciplinary study.
