Post 11

            Mirabelli begins his article “Learning to Serve:  The Language and Literacy of Food Service Workers” by describing a website, and testimonials therein, that involve waitresses and their treatment in the workforce.  He includes excerpts from this website:  a bit of hate mail, and the rebuttals of two waitresses.  This opening varies considerably from those of the other authors we have recently read.  Mirabelli’s article looks much more informal in contrast.  However, his article does still seem academic in its overall construction, citing previous work on the subject, then narrowing the focus down to explain what his study adds.  From this introduction, we can infer that he has two intended audiences:  academics and the general public.  I think that Mirabelli is trying to appeal to a wider audience with the use of excerpts from the website bitterwaitress.com.  They seem less formal and more focused on telling a story than making a dense academic argument.  However, these excerpts relate back to statistics and theories that have been previously established.  These more concrete details appeal to a more academic audience by providing a sense of authenticity and quantifiable data.  Mirabelli’s purpose in “Learning to Serve” is to establish that waitresses and more broadly, those who are involved in face to face service positions, have a highly advanced literacy.  Their literacy is based on presentation and identity; the ability to manipulate themselves and others in order to achieve success in the field.  This message can be interpreted as another view of literacy, but also as a statement to those who may be the ones discriminating.  Mirabelli points out that there is a stigma related to these “in person” service occupations.  Many of the people who subscribe to this idea are probably in academic field (like those who would read this article).  Not only does this article explore a discourse community, it also demonstrates a valuable lesson for a group of people who are often disrespected for their work.

Discourse Community Ethnography Proposal

          For the Discourse Community Ethnography project, I intend to examine the co-ed service fraternity Alpha Phi Omega (APhiO).  This community has around four hundred members on campus, but is also divided into families and committees which each form a genre of the group.  I will assess this group according to Swales' six characteristics of a discourse community, and have outlined the application of each.  

            Swales tells us that, "a discourse community has a broadly agreed set of common public goals." APhiO aims to provide community service for the benefit of those in need and its members.  Participants should increase leadership and service skills.  The second quality of a community dictates that it contains, "mechanisms of intercommunication among its members."  APhiO uses emails through listserv and website sign-ins that correspond to personal sign-ins at service events.  Members are aware of these mechanisms and are expected to make use of them.  Furthermore, sign-ins at chapter meetings ensure members are in attendance.  Powerpoints are used to convey information to a large number of members during chapter. Swales' third requirement of a discourse community requires, "participatory mechanisms primarily to provide information and feedback." Members who participate in service are expected to uphold the values and behavior that are discussed in chapter and in out of chapter communication.  Voting occurs regularly on issues that impact members. Ombudsmen request information on various issues regarding membership issues.  Suggestions are requested during chapter. Furthermore, "a discourse community utilizes and hence possesses one or more genres in the communicative furtherance of its aims." To this end, during chapter, each executive member is expected to have a slide on a powerpoint, highlighting their announcements.  These announcements go in a specific order and are expected to last a certain amount of time. Similarly, each committee within the fraternity has a set of language specific to their needs. Swales also requires that a, "discourse community has acquired some specific lexis." Language used to describe service events allows for shorter meetings.  Listerv allows for faster communication between members.  Website information is compressed into shorter terms that allow members to navigate it quickly and efficiently.  Like other fraternities and sororities, some Greek jargon applies.  Bids are used to inform hopefuls of acceptance into the pledge process.  Pledges fulfill requirements to become actives, or in APhiO brothers. Finally, "a discourse community has a threshold level of members with a suitable degree of relevant content and discoursal expertise." Membership size is limited by space for meetings.  Interviews are held to pare down the number of applicants. In order to have a large number of members that is also efficient, the pledge process teaches members the language they will require as actives.

            My interest in this discourse community stems from my own participation.  I think that it will be interesting to view this group in a new light after participating for a year. The jargon that we use has become so familiar to me that it would be interesting to see how much of it is actually exclusive to this group.

            With regards to interviews, I believe it would be beneficial to talk to the head of a committee, since they represent their own genre within the group.  Furthermore, I think that the average, highly involved member would be a good source of information. In addition, there is almost no end to the set of texts that are available to members.  I would draw from the powerpoints used during chapters, emails sent via listserv and the website for the fraternity.  

Post 10

Swales tells us that, "a discourse community has a broadly agreed set of common public goals." APhiO aims to provide community service for the benefit of those in need and its members.  Participants should increase leadership and service skills.  The second quality of a community dictates that it contains, "mechanisms of intercommunication among its members."  APhiO uses emails through listserv and website sign-ins that correspond to personal sign-ins at service events.  Members are aware of these mechanisms and are expected to make use of them.  Furthermore, sign-ins at chapter meetings ensure members are in attendance.  Powerpoints are used to convey information to a large number of members during chapter. Swales' third requirement of a discourse community requires, "participatory mechanisms primarily to provide information and feedback." Members who participate in service are expected to uphold the values and behavior that are discussed in chapter and in out of chapter communication.  Voting occurs regularly on issues that impact members. Ombudsmen request information on various issues regarding membership issues.  Suggestions are requested during chapter. Furthermore, "a discourse community utilizes and hence possesses one or more genres in the communicative furtherance of its aims." To this end, during chapter, each executive member is expected to have a slide on a powerpoint, highlighting their announcements.  These announcements go in a specific order and are expected to last a certain amount of time. Similarly, each committee within the fraternity has a set of language specific to their needs. Swales also requires that a, "discourse community has acquired some specific lexis." Language used to describe service events allows for shorter meetings.  Listerv allows for faster communication between members.  Website information is compressed into shorter terms that allow members to navigate it quickly and efficiently.  Like other fraternities and sororities, some Greek jargon applies.  Bids are used to inform hopefuls of acceptance into the pledge process.  Pledges fulfill requirements to become actives, or in APhiO brothers. Finally, "a discourse community has a threshold level of members with a suitable degree of relevant content and discoursal expertise." Membership size is limited by space for meetings.  Interviews are held to pare down the number of applicants. In order to have a large number of members that is also efficient, the pledge process teaches members the language they will require as actives.