Pendery 1

Max Pendery Prof. Vetter 9 April, 2013 Project 3

A very creative and captivating title As a human race, what sets us apart from other living things is our ability to connect through communication at basic and advanced levels. Much research has been accomplished on this communication in order to better understand what contributes to these messages between participants of discourse communities. Ann Beaufort has established this working definition of what a discourse community is: A discourse community is a social entity distinguished by a set of writing practices that results from the communitys shared values and goals, the physical conditions for getting writing done, and individual writers influence on the community (Beaufort 199 and 59). These three factors underlying goals and values, physical conditions, and individual inputscan be applied to all discourse communities in order to understand the conditions influencing them. Carol Berkenkotter and Thomas Huckin take communication into extreme focus and analyze the specific communication within a genre and discourse community. They attempt to describe how communication functions and how it is learned through a network. Drawing from these three researchers, this report will discuss localized jargon and the knowledge that follows. I will detail human communication inside a specific discourse community in an attempt to show the meaningfulness and the atmosphere of the culture in which this language is used. There are over 6,000 spoken languages in the world today. The reason I quote languages is because, as a society, we have turned this word into something almost subjective. Language is defined as: the words, their pronunciation, and the methods of combining them used and understood by a

Pendery 2 community by Merriam-Webster dictionary. As one can see by the definition, the word language can include, for example, the wide range of vernacular that a doctor uses. We can apply this to professions, games, generations, or any localized way of speaking as well. Similarly, we can apply this to the basketball community. Growing up playing basketball and being immersed into its culture, I realized that I was among few who understood and genuinely knew the game to an expert level. However, not until I conducted this ethnography did I fully gauge the extent of my knowledge of basketball compared to the average person. Beyond me, there are countless basketball minds that far surpass my knowledge of the game as well. I relate this review to a brain surgeon having to explain their job to a novice. The doctor has done this job for many years and has naturally made their tasks and knowledge of the subject matter second nature. Having to describe the job to a high school student is far different for the surgeon than communicating in the operating room with other doctors performing a surgery. Basketball is similar due to the amount of localized terminology used that is seemingly scientific mumbo-jumbo to a nonspecialist, but in reality is very functional and necessary to the success and efficiency of the discourse community. As two researchers put it, for the speakers of the language themselves, these generic languages and professional jargons are directly intentionalthey denote and express directly and fully, and are capable of expressing themselves without mediation for [outsiders], the intentions permeating these languages become things, limited in their meaning and expression. (Berkenkotter Huckin 84 and 477). So clearly, there is a method to the madness of the crazy lexis used in the nations most exciting sport. Now that we know that there are direct intentions to this language, how could one research this topic? Carol Berkenkotter and Thomas Huckin aid our search for clarity by noting that, this intentional dimension can be fully understood and appreciated only by observing insiders (Berkenkotter Huckin 83 and 476). Therefore, I had to look at coaches, players, announcers, and other network affiliates of basketball to comprehend the discourse community to its fullest extent.

Pendery 3

LOCATION The NCAA tournament happens annually and is the biggest stage for college basketball drawing over 10 million viewers in 2013 through March and into April. CBS and turner broadcasting struck a $10.8 billion deal to televise all 67 tournament games for the next 14 years. This tournament is the postseason playoffs for division I mens basketball teams in their quest to crown themselves champion. Everything that happens in the tournament is under a microscope as the whole country is watching and implications loom large. The tournament is structured in a bracket format where the winner of one bracket plays the winner of the next bracket. This system is arranged perfectly for the bracket challenge which has caught the attention of many Americans fans or not. The very popular tournament-time game has gained major popularity just for the fun of the competition. There are office pools and friendly bets made on the success of individuals brackets every year. A common challenge in selecting a successful bracket (which holds a big part of the fun) is the task of seeking out the big upsets of the playoffs. This exciting endeavor is why the event has been given the nickname March Madness and has caused a nationwide interest since the tournament started. To be successful in this tournament, with all of this pressure there is an essential need for the best communication possible. The NCAA tournament is clearly the perfect stage for this research. Watching as many of the 67 games as humanly possible is where I conducted the bulk of my research.

METHODOLOGY I approached this report with two methods in mind. But as Seth Kahn, author of Putting Ethnographic Writing in Context, demonstrated, ethnography plans are bound to change. The basis for my methodology was clearly my own personal experiences with the game of basketball. This is a necessity when analyzing a topic so localized. The plan was for an email interview with a collegiate

Pendery 4 basketball coach, but only one of my dozens of emails was answered. The response was to inform me of the busy schedule that the particular coach had, and that he had several requests per day just like my own. The next best thing to replace this primary communication was watching these coaches during the NCAA tournament. Interpreting these coaches and players reactions to situations would surely bring me the research that I needed. Although this effort seemed sufficient, I needed something else; something tangible. I turned to online research for articles and information about basketball language and terminology. To my dismay, I found only several texts and excerpts from websites that discussed this topic. The hope for choosing these two research methods was that by observing and academically researching, I would be presented with a fresh perspective on the inner workings of the basketball community.

RESULTS There are many different coaching and playing styles in basketball. Some coaches, like Iowas Fran McCaffery, scream in their players faces as an attempt to motivate and instigate emotion. On the other end of the spectrum, there are coaches like Butlers Brad Stevens who take a very calm bench presence to demonstrate by action to his players how to control emotion during a game. This shows that social action is equally important to the language used in affecting players play. Meanwhile, there is an abundance of verbal communication on the court and in the locker room as well. One of the main teaching points of a coach, even in elementary basketball, is the stress on communicating. Watching many of these tournament games, it is clear that players were talking amongst themselves, coaches talking to other coaches, coaches talking to players, and coaches and players were addressing the refs. Some players and coaches were more talkative than others, but just about all teams communicated at a high volume. What these participants were conversing over was highly localized, even to other basketball teams. When a player would walk the ball down the court, he verbalizes and signals an

Pendery 5 offensive play or strategy to the rest of the team. Berkenkotter and Huckin put it eloquently by stating, the authentic environment of an utterance, the environment in which it lives and takes shape, is dialogized heteroglossia, anonymous and social as language, but simultaneously concrete, filled with specific content and accented as an individual utterance (Berkenkotter Huckin 83 and 475). These plays, although mostly just single words or motions, hold an incredible amount of meaning. For instance, the Louisville Cardinals (eventual tournament champions) had a play that I observed over the course of the tournament that was signaled by their point guard by one swoop of his outstretched pointer finger around in a circle like a helicopter motion. This motioned to his team to start a play which included a double ball-screen at the top of the key while one other player flashed to the wing and leaving the other player an option for a screen and fade or for a cut to the hoop. This last sentence would leave an outsider wondering what was just said, but to a specialist these terms hold vast meaning. One halfsecond motion with no words set this event and all 5 players into choreographed motion. Most plays however are signaled with a word or phrase attached to the motion as well. Most examples of verbal communication are in-game chatter between players. This is incredibly vital for a teams immediate execution and success especially on the defensive end of the court. During the tournament, a consistent muffled sound of the coach on the sideline yelling at his players to TALK! on the floor was heard through the television set. Teams that did not talk on the defensive end were 5 separate players struggling to guard their man. When teams communicated with each other, on the other hand, they were one team playing defense which showed to be much more effective. How did this language and all of these communications develop? Just like any other discourse community, basketball has grown and will continue the change. Much of the terminology we see in todays game can be attributed to specialists interpreting the game and verbalizing it through expressions and repeated words. Similar to how words in the English language end up in the dictionary, basketball terminology is used over and over until there is a community-wide

Pendery 6 understanding of the word or phrases meaning. Coaches, players and even the announcers of the games have contributed to this language. There is an announcer for CBS who color commentated most of the games and is known for his analogies and basketball sayings. He will say something like he just got Dairy Queened Brent, DQd. He got DisQualified DQd. This is his way of telling the audience that the player committed his fifth foul and is therefore out of the game or disqualified. Other fun playful interactions with language and basketball are what this particular announcer, Clarke Kellogg, is known for. Mr. Kellog is not nearly the only one who brings unique sayings to the game. A slew of other broadcasters have famous lines and catchphrases that have become a part of the game. One of my personal favorites, Gus Johnson, is known for several of his emotion building statements such as rise and fire meaning to pull up for jump shot, and from the parking lot referring to a shot taken extraordinarily far from the basket. These icons are etched into basketball history overtime and become engrained into the culture of basketball constantly adding to the social contributions of the culture itself. It seems as if the reason for all of this jargon, initially, is for one overarching theme; to get through to the mind of the players and for the better communication. A common positive quality of the greatest players in the game is often referred to as the player being an extension of the coach out on the court. This denotes how well the player understands the game and how well these two specialists (star player and coach) communicate their plan of action. Berkenkotter and Huckin are again on the record as stating that communication functions within disciplinary cultures to facilitate the social interactions that are instrumental in the production of knowledge (Berkenkotter Huckin 83 and 475). To apply all of this information to Beauforts factors influencing discourse communities should shed the light on this discourse community that I intended. Community Goals and Values: All basketball teams should have the same essential goal. To win. To do this, teams realize that this communication is imperative to success. Teams have different strategies to accomplish these goals which there in lies the difference

Pendery 7 between a winner and loser. Physical Conditions: The more cohesive and together these teams were, the better communication they had. This collaboration is equally important in the effort for success. Individuals input: Looking at a single team, the quality of the coaches and their knowledge is vital to success. Past contributors such as announcers and famous coaches make this easier to communicate basketball ideas and spread them through the team for a collective approach. These factors apply effectively to the basketball community and show us how communication is one of the key attributes to a winning team.

Pendery 8 Bibliography Beaufort, Ann. (1999). The Institutional Site of Composing: Converging and Overlapping Discourse Communities. Writing in the Real World. P 30-61. Berkenkotter, Carol. Huckin, Thomas A. (1993). Rethinking Genre from a Sociocognitive Perspective. Written Communications, volume 10(4),p. 475-501.

Kahn, Seth.

Works Consulted
http://www.coachesclipboard.net/BasketballTerminology.html http://ehis.ebscohost.com/eds/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=180f8bb4-17c9-4fe3-a4589054e4dbbc17%40sessionmgr115&vid=4&hid=107 http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/language http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/tournament/2013/story/_/id/9097812/2013-ncaatournament-ratings-highest-15-years-first-week

Pendery 9 Reflection I felt that this section was very interesting. I know some class members complained that there was too much work to do so we shortened the amount of readings which I thought was very helpful. I felt that the readings in this section were a lot easier than readings in the past section. If I had to pick out a reading that gave me the most trouble, I would have to say it was the beaufort reading. However, this reading gave me the most information and insight which helped me write the paper to the best of my abilities. The Kahn reading helped me most in my ethnography and helped me focus on the important things I needed to focus on in order to complete this project the right way. I learned many strategies that will help me in any field I end up in, however by doing this ethnography, I learned a lot about my chosen career path that I can use in the future. Summing up the information in this essay would help with that answer. As for my methods in discovering this data, I could have hoped for a better outcome. When you are not part of a discourse community, especially on this localized, it is almost impossible to get into that community or even talk to someone in it. After emailing a number of coaches and even calling several coaching offices, I found that no one was willing to answer a few simple questions. This may be because of the number of emails and contacts they receive in this same vein. I had to help myself by using what I knew and applying it to the tournament and information I found online. Overall I liked this project for the simple fact that it had me thinking about these things. Once again, this class has provided me with great perspective that I hope I will never lose. However, this project in particular has made me feel like I am in a graduate class. To have four of these in one class is a major workload. Advice I give to other students would be to make sure that your other classes are absolute cakewalks, or you will have a very busy semester surely cutting into free-time. This shows me that to have a class truly teach you something, you will have to be prepared for hard work. I now know this information will stick with me forever. The ethnography part of this paper was very frustrating because it just made me realize how irrelevant and far away from a job that I really am. I think my essay

Pendery 10 works well, but again I dont believe that I am a great writer. So I would ask that you review this paper with as much constructive criticism as possible.