« not always what it seems (authorship 21.2/25) | Main | intertextual terminology (authorship 22.1/25) »

January 11, 2006

underlying (authorship 21.3/25)

Scollon, Ron. "Plagiarism and Ideology: Identity in Intercultural Discourse." Language in Society 24.1 (March 1995): 1-28.

1 sentence summary: the ideologies underlying notions of plagiarism aren't as culturally consistent as we might assume; plagiarism rests on an understanding of the identity writers occupy that can be appropriated or called into question, and if that identity is concieved-of differently, so are infractions against it.

passages
1-2. "treatments of academic plagiarism tend to presuppose a common ideological ground in the creative, original, individual who, as an autonomous scholar, presents his/her work to the public in his/her own name"; "they do not probe further into whether the underlying presuppositions are in need of examination"--but contexts are characterized by different assumptions. for example "what might be called plagiarism in academic contexts is viewed as common daily practice in putting out the daily news."
5. "put most simply...definitions of communication reflect not universal characteristics of communication, but a cultural model which can be located in terms of a particular historical moment and a particular cultural group"
22. (in summary): "eight problems in constructing 'the author'"

(a) production format: speaker (and writer) roles must be more finely analyzed as author, principle, and animator. none of these can be expected to line up in a one-to-one and unique relationship with any biological person.
(b) footing: stepping out of one's stance is a common, not an exceptional, occurrence.
(c) enactment: we frequently take on temporarily enacted roles of a greater permanence than changes in footing, but of lesser permanence than social roles...
(d) social role: we may be simultaneously a parent, a child, a teacher, a musician, a man or woman. we borrow authority for speaking or writing from our social positions; we become who we are by how we speak.
(e) face: our selves have both internal (character) and external (social) faces; any of the communicative roles can be played out in either inner or outer configurations.
(f) politeness pragmatics: the selves we communicate in discourse are jointly constructed, maintained, and legitimated among participants....
(g) metaphors of self and communication: the langauge we use to talk about communication produces a metaphorical blindness to other conceptualizations, and to these deeply multiple realities.
(h) innatist/social concepts of knowledge: our language comes borrowed complete with the voices of our society. originality is only achieved with difficulty.
23. thus "it is very difficult to find contexts in which the simple paradigm of speaker or writer is manifested in communication"; "the concept of plagiarism...disguises these complexities by masking them in the idea that animators, authors, and principles speak and write as unified biological persons who always represent themselves in a straightforward and sincere way, as fully legitimated social actors within authorized roles"

Posted by ttobryan at January 11, 2006 11:20 PM

Comments

Post a comment




Remember Me?

(you may use HTML tags for style)