In chapter four Social Languages, Conversations, and Intertextuality in An Introduction to Discourse Analysis Theory and Method by James Paul Gee I really liked Section Two Social Languages. Not only did that part remind me of a classroom discussion in New Media Studies, but it also made me realize how easy it is to not notice changes in your own personality. Sometimes, I think people do not want to admit they change and other times not realizing the change makes sense. The changes can be so subtle. If I performed the experiment described, I think my changes would not be that noticeable.  But, I do think my word choice would change slightly. Unlike Jane, I would be less proper with my parents. The only explanation I can come up with is the fact I am more comfortable with my parents. I am comfortable because I know my parents would not judge me, if my grammar is not correct, or think less of me.

In addition I also thought it was interesting the chapter said, “we tend to think of writing, at least academic writing, as clear, unambiguous, and explicit in comparison to speech, . . . .” (Gee 51). I have experienced the complete opposite. Like I mentioned in class, teachers have understood my speech more at times, and teachers have made me realize it depends on who is writing and the purpose of their writing. Some people write to be understood while others write to sound and appear intelligent. But the same can be said with speech, like Dr. Zamora clearly told us one day in class. So, once again it all depends on the person.

Moreover, all the different ways Gee tried to interpret a sentence makes me think about why I love hearing people’s opinions. I love hearing different interpretations and statements that make me think. I see in my poetry class alone just how amazing our minds are and how we can take a simple image or word and transform it into something amazing or unique.