Reflection on "The World on Paper"

The title of the first chapter is eye-catching. Like many readers or scholars, I found several preliminary assumptions about literacy are more than true to me. The importance of the literacy could not have been emphasized enough ever since I was little. Olson argues that the importance of literacy has been over-rated; he offered his own perspective on issues of the relationship between writing and speech, their hierarchy, literacy as the organ of social development, and instrument of cognitive development, etc. I’m with him when he takes on a viewpoint about the role of literacy as a means of enslavement. It reminds me of the fact that in the ancient China, women were not allowed to go to school so men can prohibit the distribution of female individuals into a hierarchy of castes. When Taiwan was colonized by Japan from 1895 to 1945, Taiwanese were not allowed to speak Chinese in school and forced to use Japanese in all occasions. Literacy was used as a means to brainwash and establish social control.

The idea of concepts as “collective representations” in the second chapter is notable. Olson emphasizes the formation of concepts is based upon the social conditions, and the changes of concepts also rest on the social consensus. He brings up the role culture plays in society that some concepts may look awkward in one culture while totally acceptable and appropriate in another due to the social milieu in which they are created. In Taiwan, talking about issues such as divorce and sex in public is politically incorrect while in western culture, they may be common issues to talk about (I don’t know much about the true social norms; this idea comes from the drama/comedy “sex and the city.” I guess most of the elements are exaggerated). The notion that writing is simply a resource enabling individual to participate in social communication strikes me. As a language teacher, I was trained to help students to master a second language, to develop their reading/writing proficiency, while one thing that I often left out was their cognitive operation. If they don’t know what to write about, they may get stuck as they write even though they could recognize ABC’s and know all the words and phrases in the textbook.

One thing that stands out for me in Chapter 3 is Goody’s (1987) argument that “skepticism can arise because writing allows the accumulation of evidence,” and Olson’s critique at the end of that passage. My idea of writing can facilitate formation and accumulation of knowledge came from my writer friends. They told me that one needs to prepare himself/herself to write graphically, convincingly, and impressively by reading a lot of divergent information. I always thought the reading of the information is the accumulation of knowledge and where the originality comes from. Olson’s follow-up proposition leads me to think deeper. Is writing a source of human knowledge or merely an instrument that foster the writer to read and think in a different attitude? I think I know better now. Writing itself does not formulate new concepts, but the inspiration, and epiphany achieved after interpreting the written text bring about innovative ideas.

The locutionary and illocutionarly forces seem to be ubiquitous. I remember watching Will and Grace the other day, and the conversations between Karen and Pamela at a gay/lesbian event at The Human Rights Campaign Gala at Waldorf-Astoria Hotel, was hilarious because of the speech act involved.

[At the Human Rights Campaign Gala, Waldorf-Astoria Hotel, Karen enters and stops at the top of the stairs to make an announcement.]
Karen: Ladies, gentlemen, and undecided... I'd like you to meet someone. He's been plucked, coiffed, buffed, and fluffed. May I present to you... My cousin Barry!
[Cut to the silent auction room. Pamela is overseeing the silent auction when Karen enters and looks around after making the announcement.]
Karen: [To Pamela] There's some cute guys here, huh? Too bad they're all 'mos. Ha ha ha…
Pamela: It doesn't really matter to me, I'm a lesbian.
Karen: Oh... [Giggles] Honey, we're all lesbians when the right guy isn't around, huh?

“Ladies, gentlemen, and undecided.” This announcement reflects the semantics-pragmatics mapping (Grice, 1975; Person, Kreuz, Zwaan & Graesser, 1995). When making announcement, “Ladies and Gentlemen” is very commonly said by people. However, the “undecided” would not be understood if it is said in a normal situation. In the gay/lesbian event described here, the word “undecided” can be understood by audience as “those who have not decided to be gays or lesbians” or “those who have not decided to play the role as women or men” because of the salient and immediate context the announcement is made. The contextual information provided allows audience to understand what Karen refers to even though people might have never heard about it before. The illocutionary force was obvious here. On the other hand, semantics is complemented with conversational implicatures and the Karen says things that her listeners would be able to understand in the specific context (Grice, 1975). This sample may also be used to support the off-record strategy when the Karen makes an announcement in a vague way, leaving the interpretation to the listeners due to the ethical issue involved. Undoubtably, written text can never record everything in the spoken language. Readers would not be able to understand the transcription of the spoken language unless more contextual information is provided.