University of Rome III - Degree in Languages & International Communication - Convener: Patrick Boylan - Academic year   2007-08

COURSE: 712-o  MODULE II   English I for English minors, OCI
 
TASK N° 2     Due date: May 7, 2008


Ethnographic Report Evaluation Form

1. MAXIMUM 4 POINTS FOR THE QUALITY OF THE LANGUAGE OF THE REPORT.

Explanation: The student should write as her/his double would write.  For example, if the double is Crocodile Dundee (who hates formality, gentlemanliness, hedging) the report will be what Crocodile Dundee would write for a high school or college teacher in Broad Australian (not cultivated Australian). The report will be linear, explicit and responsible because that is intrinsic to any Anglo mentality, but only minimally formal, hedged, gentlemanly. (because Dundee considers these things “false”)   Another example: if the double is Lady Diana (who was a very poor student), the report will be in Standard British English and it will be formal, hedged, gentlemanly because that is how Diana learned to speak in her exclusive Sloan Square clubs.  But it will be only minimally linear, explicit and responsible (=documented) because, although Diana has an Anglo mentality, she didn't learn to organize and document her thoughts in a highly precise way at school (she failed many exams at school and was never accepted by any university).

POINTS: 
4 = there are a large number of precise language features; it has a highly particular style.  
0 = there are very few or only generic indications of style; the report does not seem linguistically characteristic of anyone in particular.
3, 2, or 1 = between the two extremes.

2. MAXIMUM 4 POINTS FOR THE QUALITY OF THE MAXIMS.

Explanation: The Italian counter-maxims should really help an Italian person to distance himself/herself from Italian culture; thus, the themes should concern what is essential to the stereotype of an Italian.  Of course, no Italian conforms to ALL of the stereotypical traits.  But if an Italian does not conform at all to ANY trait, then s/he is probably considered “a little original” or “peculiar” by other Italians. Thus the Italian counter-maxims are good if the student, after repeating them out loud and internalizing them (using Stanislavsky's “Magic IF”), feels really peculiar. If s/he interacts with other Italians, s/he should seem “original” to them. If so, the maxims are good.

With respect to the double's maxims, they should characterize the double as an accepted member of some recognizable community of native English speakers.  The Group Leader can apply the same test as above. After internalizing the double's maxims, s/he should feel like a “new person,” someone who corresponds at least to the stereotype of the double's community of native English speakers. If so, the maxims are good.

Points:
4 = “The double's maxims do not simply give new ideas, they make the student feel like someone who would fit into the double's culture.”
0 = “The double's maxims are generic and do not distinguish very well the double's culture; after a student says them, the student continues to feel like an Italian, although with some new ideas.”
3, 2, or 1 = between the two extremes.

3. MAXIMUM 4 POINTS FOR THE QUALITY OF THE ETHNOGRAPHIC OBSERVATIONS + INTERPRETATIONS.

Explanation: What counts here is not “how successful” the student was in living her/his double. What counts here is how well s/he attempted to live her double and how intelligently s/he interpreted her attempt and its effects (whether positive or negative). In the report the student should indicate what s/he saw and heard that was "strange" – if everything in her/his home seemed normal to her/him, then s/he probably did not enter into her/his double's mentality. Attention: the Group Leader should penalize attempts by the student to exaggerate feeling differently. Example: One student last year wanted to be Tolkein, author of The Hobbit and Fellowship of the Ring. So the student wrote: “When I sat down at the dinner table with these strange people [= HIS FAMILY], I noticed that they all used a strange box on the table to communicate to each other; two people would speak to each other while looking at the box [= THE TV SET THAT THE FAMILY WATCHED WHILE EATING].” This is clearly NOT a natural observation. It is an idea that the student invented “tutto di testa” to be clever, perhaps imagining what a Hobbit would say. But it is not possible that the student, as Tolkien, could have felt the TV set as some strange interpersonal communication device. Thus, this observation (justly) got zero points.

The exercise “Spending a day as your double” is about feeling things differently for a day, not being inventive or clever for a day. Here is an example of a satisfactory report written by another student, who also became Tolkien for a day. He wrote: “The dinner table conversation in the Italian family was frightfully insipid – if you allow me the expression, it was downright boring. All they talked about is what fantastic things they had eaten at some previous dinner at someone's home. Or who was ill among their numerous aunts and cousins. What drivel!” Now THIS is Tolkein speaking.

In addition, the Student should note the pressures s/he felt to conform. Since s/he is writing in Anglo style, s/he must document the pressures: “The mother of the family repeated again and again that she found me distant, and to 'close the gap' she kept offering me things to eat and asking me to smile while eating and say that the food was good. Now I see how Italian mothers tie their children to them for life: through food which must be consumed together happily Probably the Catholic ritual of communion, which has the same value of creating a community through the consummation of a host, is of Italian origin.”

Note that in the cases above the student gives both the observations and the interpretation of values together. It could be possibile however for the student to give them separately, like this:
-- 1. Things seen and heard that were “strange”.
-- 2. The pressures to conform
-- 3. The values that (1.) and (2.) represent
Normally, however, it is better to explain the values immediately, after each example.

Points:
4 = the report of OBSERVATIONS OF STRANGENESS and PRESSURES TO CONFORM was detailed, documented, profound and gave a good ethnographic picture of the Italian family from the standpoint of the double.
0 = the report was a simple narrative, largely generic, leaving all the work of interpretation to the reader. It did not have any cultural focus (it did not seem to be written through the eyes of any particular double).
3, 2, or 1 = between the two extremes.

4. MAXIMUM 4 POINTS FOR THE QUALITY OF THE LINGUISTIC AND BEHAVIORAL INTERACTION.

Explanation: The student should indicate what s/he said and how s/he interacted during the day as her/his double. There should be a large number of transcriptions (made from memory, unless the student used a hidden recorder) of sentences actually said, both by the student and by her/his family members, as well as descriptions of their way of interacting. The sum of these transcriptions and descriptions should give the idea of a language (and of interactional behavior) different from Italian. It should appear to be an Anglo “way to mean” things, specifically the way used in the double's community.

Furthermore, the student should indicate the sense of the reactions of her/his family members. That sense should reveal the characteristics of the culture of the double. For example, if the family says to the student (alias Crocodile Dundee) “Ma che maniere che hai oggi, mica viviamo nel bosco”, the Group Leader knows that the student expressed Australian “outback” coarseness. The opposite applies to Lady Diana, of course.

Points:
4 = the report of VERBAL and BEHAVIORAL interaction was detailed, documented, profound and gave a good picture of what English is as a “will to mean” in a particular way (in the way used by the double)..
0 = the report did not document, with transcriptions, but only described generically the interactions.
3, 2, or 1 = between the two extremes.

5. MAXIMUM 4 POINTS FOR THE QUALITY OF THE CONCLUSIONS (IN ITALIAN).
In her/his final commentary, the student should demonstrate a profound awareness of the value of the exercise “Spending a day as your double”, in terms of appreciating what English is, what it means to speak English (or any second language), how a language is an expression of a culture, how her/his own way of seeing things and saying things in Italian is shaped by the multiple influences of her/his family: habits, household furnishings and decorations, rituals, linguistic expressions, etc.

On the other hand, the student could, instead, criticize the exercise “Spending a day as your double” as worthless or even counterproductive, giving her/his reasons for this opinion.

Or the student could formulate a compromise between the two positions. What is important is that the arguments be well reasoned and presented.

Points:
4 = the conclusions gave a rigorous evaluation of the worth of the exercise “Spending a day as your double”. After reading them, the Group Leader should be able to recommend the exercise in the future or the contrary, justifying his/her position.
0 = the final remarks were inconclusive or just a summary of what was written above.
3, 2, or 1 = between the two extremes.