Paragraph 1
We understand from Gee that a Discourse may be primary, secondary, dominant, or non-dominant. Where do you locate your chosen Discourse in that framework? In your response, engage with a specific passage from Gee that defines/explains that kind of Discourse and attempt to provide some evidence (from your artifacts) to support your interpretation. If no single category fits, might you have a Discourse we might consider “hybrid”? Might that enable you to ADD TO or CHALLENGE Gee’s categories?
I would say that my discourse of hockey is a secondary discourse. The reason why I think that hockey is my secondary discourse is because a secondary discourse is “learned through social institutions”. With hockey, we participate as a team everyday and we have to make time in our schedule because its very important to us. The reason that its not a primary discourse is because were not doing it for a living. Hockey isn’t our job that we get paid for to make a living. If hockey was to be my primary discourse I would have to be considered a professional.
Paragraph 2
The relationship between my secondary discourse and the combination of doing,being,valuing and believing is many things. Once you start playing hockey, you get involved with all of these trends as time goes on. Some examples of the combinations would be the doing phase. Everyone knows that one of the doing phase is to score more goals than the other team. The being part for hockey is that every team is too only dress 20 players and three goalies. Something that most people in hockey value is that, it is one of the fastest flowing sports in the world and takes a lot of skill to play. These are just a few examples of these combinations relate to most people involved in hockey. I believe that if you are passionate about the sport of hockey, then you will know most of these combinations.
Time: 2 hours
collreadwrit2e