These files are maintained strictly for historical reference, research, and recordkeeping purposes,
and the content has not been altered or updated since archiving.
Content on this site may not meet current digital accessibility standards.
If you require an alternative, accessible format of any information found on this site,
please contact Bruce Jones, bjones@ucsd.edu to request an accommodation.
These files are maintained strictly for historical reference, research, and recordkeeping purposes,
and the content has not been altered or updated since archiving.
Content on this site may not meet current digital accessibility standards.
If you require an alternative, accessible format of any information found on this site,
please contact Bruce Jones, bjones@ucsd.edu to request an accommodation.
Thanks Eugene. I have found Gee's work useful - especially in defining 'discourse', and I like Andy Hargreaves' work, too. I think Jay Lemke's text is on my pile of 'reading to do', but I was unaware of the relatedness of Latour's text, so an especial thank you for that.
I'm looking at using a concordancer for some of my data analysis and incorporating some techniques from corpus linguistics to compare Government and teacher 'education language'. I'm hoping that from the comparison I will be able to tease out evidence of how teachers think about the proces of teaching and what 'education' means to them. And how it parallels/deviates from Government thinking. I've found the work of Michael Stubbs and Susan Hunston helpful here. And again, Norman Fairclough does something similar in his 'New Labour, New Language?' (2000).
Regards
Gill
Gill Boag-Munroe
23 Shenstone Avenue
Norton
Stourbridge
DY8 3EJ
01384 863590
gxb822@bham.ac.uk
---------------------------------
Want to chat instantly with your online friends? Get the FREE Yahoo!Messenger
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Sep 01 2003 - 01:00:07 PDT