How the Language Really Works: The Fundamentals of Critical Reading and Effective Writing

Contents 1 Reading/Writing 2 Critical Reading 3 Inference 4 Choice s 5 Ways To Read p.2 p.13 p.19 p.32 p.48

"Never accept things a s they're portrayed." Anthony Shadid, journalist, 1968 -2012 To non-critical readers, many texts offer the truth, the whole trut h, and nothing but the truth. To the critical reader, any single text provides but one portrayal of the facts, one individual's "tak e" on the subject.

Non-critical (or pre-critical) reading is concerned with recognizing what a text says about the topic. The goal is to make sense of the presentation as a sequence of thoughts, to understand the information, ideas, and opinions stated within the text from sentenc e to sentence, paragraph to paragraph. This is a linear activity. Critical reading is an analytic activity. The reader rereads a text to identify patterns of elements -- information, values, assumptions, and language usage-- throughout the discussion. These elements are tied together in an interpretation, an assertion of an underlying meaning of the text as a whole. Critical thinking involves bringing outside knowledge and values to bear to evaluate the present ation and decide what to ultimately accept as true.

criticalreading.com shows you how to recognize what a text says, what a text does, and what a text means by analyzing choices of content, language, and structure. It shows you what to look for, and how to think about what you find. Everyone complains that students cannot read well and yet most high school s and colleges offer no course in critical reading. This i s the website for just such a course. Copyright 2002, 2010 by Daniel J. Kurland. A ll rights reserved.

Reading/Writing

Learning to Read and Write

How can you learn to read and writ e better? More to the point here: How can you learn to read and write better by reading web pages such as these? First of all: Reading is primary. One can write only as well as one reads. Consider: Not all readers are writers. Many people read newspapers and novels and never write an original word themselves. They can decipher words and sentences on the page, but do not have a sufficient grasp of spelling and grammar to construct their own sentences. But all writers must be readers! You cannot write without reading as you write. You cannot write without first understanding how the language works to communicate ideas. All writers rely on their skills as readers. They must realize not only what they have said, but what they have done. And they must evaluate how what they have done will get them where they want to go. What additional ingredients are required? What other aspects must be considered? What misunderstandings must be prevented? To write better, you must learn to read better. To consciously evaluate your writing you must become more conscious of reading behaviors. Finally, throughout our education and employment we are expected to be able to read far more complicat ed texts than we are expected to write. Once again, reading is primary.

Improving Writing
Readers and writers already speak the language. Our concern here, then, is not with knowing the language itselfwith vocabulary and basic sentence structurebut with facility in the use of the written language. And our concern is not so much with the structure of individual sentences, with the correct and resourceful use of spelling, grammar, punctuation, and appropriate word choice, as with the broader elements involved in constructing an extended discussion. These pages are not concerned with traditional rules of grammar and usage, with correct verb agreement or spelling. They do not repeat rules you learned or did not learn in English classrooms. While these issues are important for good writing, these pages focus on broader concerns. Our attention here lies more with shaping and analyzing extended discussion, with broader questions of how thoughts are developed and how meaning is conveyed within a written discussion.

Constructing Extended Discussion

Writing is traditionally taught in terms of examples. Students are asked to read well- formed essays (often examples of rhetorical categories such as argument, explanation, and description) and to mimic their structure. But few if any essays really demonstrate only one form. A text might argue by explaining wit h a description as evidence. Reading can teach us some things about the language, but reading good essays can only go so far in enabling us to become better writers. Seeing how well someone else ex presses himself or herself does not mean we will suddenly be able to do the same ourselves. Just becaus e we appreciate

something does not mean we can mimic, imitate, or duplicate it. Only when we understand how ideas are expressed can we begin to do the same ourselves. What is the structure of James Baldwin's sentence: If we--and now I mean the relatively conscious whites and the relatively conscious blacks, who must, like lovers, insist on, or create, the consciousness of the others--do not falter in our duty now, we may be able, handful that we are, to end the racial nightmare, and achieve our country, and change the history of the world. What resources of sent ence structure does he use? What is he doing that we could learn to do ourselves ? (See sentence structure .) To learn from reading essays, we must learn how to analyze those essays. We must know more about what we can expect to find in a text and more about how to draw meaning from what we find. We must, in other words, become more aware in our reading. Reading instruction is dual -purpose. It serves both to improve our ability to understand texts that we read and to develop our own writing abilities. When we see how we draw meaning from ot hers, we can see how to instill meaning in our own work.

Improving Reading
To fully understand texts, both in terms of what they mean (as readers) and how they are constructed (as writers), you must read and discuss texts in a number of ways. Here we will look closely at three combinations of reading strategies and their respective forms of discussion or account ability: what a text says -- restatement what a text does -- description what a text means -- interpretation The section on Three Ways to Read and Discuss Texts examines how to recognize each style of reading and discussion and when each form of discussion and reading style is most appropriate. The three perspectives are then utilized throughout the later discussion.

Final Thoughts
The discussion throughout focuses on nonfiction texts, simply because the bulk of reading in school, business, and the world involves nonfiction texts. The same principles can, however, be applied to fictional works to stories, drama, and poetry. The approach here is concerned with helping you to realize what you already know about the language as a speak er of the language, and with enabling you to consciously apply that knowledge to reading and writing. The result is a more active, reflective, problem-solving approach to reading, and a more resourceful approac h to writing.

The Need to Improve Your Reading

Elementary School: Learning to Read
We learn to read as children. As the years go by, we read simple material effortlessly, almost unconsciously. We seemingly strip meaning from the page, sent ence by sentence, like tearing tape from a box. We don't necessarily know how we read, we just do it as you are doing now! As we go on in school, reading becomes more difficult. The vocabulary of discussion becomes increasingly technical. Sentence structure is increasingly complex. Most people find reading no longer

effortless. Others continue to read effortlessly, but fail to understand as much as they would li ke to or are expected to.

High School: Reading Facts, Opinions, and Beliefs

Early in our schooling, most of us think published texts offer an accurate view of the world, "the truth, the whole trut h, and nothing but the trut h." To know about a topic, we ha ve only to read a single source. Studying us ually means memorizing. Sometime around high school, our view of reading changes. Questions no longer have single, or even simple, answers. Authors draw finer and finer distinctions. We must recognize diverse perspectives, and distinguish between, social, political, and economic factors, or between personal, social, and institutional concerns. Whereas once we discussed American Indians as a group, we now recognize the diversity of the cultures and the individual conc erns of the various tribes. Studying now involves a deeper understanding. We must recognize and appreciate alt ernative understandings and perspectives. We must distinguish bet ween fact, opinion, and belief.

College: Reading for Underlying Meaning

As we go on to college, teachers no longer ask us to read and remember. Now they ask: How does the author view the topic? What is the underlying thesis of the book? The goal of reading is not simply to see what is said, but to understand the bias, assumptions, and perspectives underlying the discussion. We no longer see the world through a text; we now see how the world is port rayed by a text. Reading comes to mean understanding one writers portrayal of reality. Many students make the transition from reading for facts to reading to interpret quite smoot hly. Others can benefit from specific instruction. In either case, the more you know about how ideas are conveyed by the written word, the more you can apply those principles when the going gets tough. This site is dedicated to that effort.

The Need to Improve Your Writing

Reading may at times seem simple. Writing, for most people, is often a struggle. We are intimidated by the blank page. We are frightened by the possibility of mistakes.

Invention: Finding Something to Say

Writing is, first of all, a proc ess of invention. We must have something to say. We must understand our topic and possess relevant information. All too many documents fail not for their author's lack of skill in writing, but for their author's lack of anything to say.

Structuring an Ongoing Discussion

Writing requires a facility with the language. Sentences must make sense. Grammar, spelling, and punctuation must satisfy rules and conventions. On a broader level, remarks must follow each other in an orderly fas hion. The trip from opening to closing must be as bump free as possible. Done poorly, the path we create leads down rabbit trails and dead ends. The discussion contradicts itself, offers no evidence or proof for its assertions, or simply roams around without focusing on a single issue and our message is lost.

Revision: Polishing the Presentation

Writing is also a process of revision. Writers do not simply produce a finished draft in one writing. Writers constantly make choices and evaluate the effect of those choices. They continually weigh the effects of alternative phrasings, alternative sentence structures, or alternative text structures. All writing thus involves trial and error. We must edit our work, both in our mindaswe write and on the page or computer monitorafterwe have written an initial draft. We must know what we want to accomplish, and be able to recognize whether or not we have achieved that goal. As we write, and re -write, we must adjust the language for optimum effect and constantly assure ourselves of the consistency, coherency, and complet eness of the presentation.

Advanced Concerns
In later years in school and in the professional workplace, our writing must exhibit an element of sophistication. We must distinguish between similar ideas, draw meaningful distinctions, and weave a convincing argument. Finally, in school especially, we must be able to prove not only that we have done the required reading, but also that we have understood that rea ding at the required level of comprehension. And more often than not, we are graded not on how well we have understood a text, but on how well we convey an understanding in writing. Right fully or wrongfully, we are judged by what, and how, we write.

Tactics and Strategies

Writing well involves more than simply having something to say and knowing correct spelling, grammar, and punctuation. Writing also involves an understanding of how ideas can be pieced together to convey broader meaning. And while we can learn much from experience and contact with good examples, we cannot consciously improve our writing without knowing how the language works to convey ideas to readers.

A Linguistic Approach to Reading and Writing

What should we do to improve our reading an d writing?

Traditional Study Skills Approaches

Many writing courses stress study skills. Traditional study plans such as SQ3R (Survey, Question, Read, Recite, Review) and PQ4R (Preview, Question, Read, Reflect, Recite, Review) involve activities such as scanning the Int roductions and Prefaces examining the Table of Contents or headings, previewing sections, reading abstracts or summaries first, asking yourself questions, reciting important passages, and rereading or reviewing sections. Activities such as these can maximize your readingefforts. But they dont tell you what to look for and how to think about what you find. They dont tell you anything about how language is used to communicate ideas.

The Traditional Genre Approach

Freshman composition texts are generally organiz ed on the basis of prose genres: description, narration, explanation and argumentation, and the like. Readings are labeled and grouped according to these notions and students are then taught to write a narrative or a description. While these genres are definitely useful to describe the general nature of a text, no text is limited to one genre. A text may, for instance, use description within a narrative as a way of explaining as part of an argument.

A Linguistic Approach
How then should we go about learning to read and write better? When the going gets tough, our first recourse is to do everything we did before, but more deliberately. We reread words and read aloud to make sense of the remarks, trying to recreate the verbal paus es that might give clues to the structure of sentences. But reading better involves more than simply trying harder. and translating the written into the spoken word. Looking closer, alone, wont do the trick. "Just do it!" won't suffice. You can stare at a car engine all day and come away with no understanding of why your car runsor does nt run! It doesnt help for someone to tell you to work more carefully when you are not aware of what youre doing. If we think about it, we have been told a lot in general about how to approach reading a text, and surprisingly little about how exactly to find meaning in a text. We are asked to summarize, question, and reread, but these are all simply study behaviors. They do not tell us howt o question, whatto look for when we read, orhowto find the meaning to summarize. What should we look for, then, when we read? How are ideas conveyed in writing? And how do readers draw meaning from the written page? The concepts and terminology presented in these web pages will enable y ou to see how the language works to communicate ideas in written form. They will show you ways in which thoughts can be linked within a discussion, bot h in terms of connections from sentence to sentence and in terms of relationships bet ween ideas and sections of a discussion. They show , for instance, how language (unlike, say, numbers) enables continuous levels of qualification, and how this aspect of language enables us to focus our thoughts. We shall see how new ideas are generated from the relations hips of other ideas and that we read and write ideas, rather than merely words. For a broader view of how meaning is conveyed by text, these pages focus on an examination of the choices open to a writer in forming a text: choices of content, language and structure. Choices are examined not only within the view of writing as a sequential activity, one sentence after another, but also in a more holistic or organic way in terms of a mix of ingredients or intert wining patterns of elements throughout a text.

The Spoken Word: The Base For Writing and Reading

Our early experiences with the spoken language provide many important lessons about the language. Consciously or unconsciously, we recognize that language has rules and infer those rules. We learn rules of sentence structure, such as how to use pronouns to replace noun phrases or the order of adjectives before a noun. For examp les of how we learn unwritten rules, see Unconscious and Unwritten Rules

We learn social aspects of language us age. such as when to use slang and when not to. We learn the need to apply prior knowledge and experience when trying to make sense of utterances. We learn that the goal is not to understand words,per se, so much as to understand the ideas behind the words. For examp les of non-verbal aspects of language , see Non-Verbal and Social Aspects of Language Finally, our model of spoken communication serves as a tool for understanding the written language.

Reading and the Spoken Language

The language we learned first, the spoken language, remains our bas e throughout life. We use the model of spoken communication as the basis for much of our inferences when we read. As readers, we imagine the written language to be a transcription of speech. We draw on this model when we imagine ourselves talking to someone as we write, or when we talk about what an author has to say in an article. When we run into trouble reading, we sound out words and read sentences aloud. When discussing the spoken word, we refer to a speaker's tone of voice. Is he or she angry? Ironic? Or perhaps serious? If the language is jarring, we say the tone is harsh. In doing so, we infer emotions on the part of the author. Ultimately, the underlying reason for relying on speech as a model for writing may actually lie in the nature of human understanding. The core of psychological understanding revolves around the notion of motive desire, want, wish, reason. We understand an action when we know what motivated it. The motives for action are usually clear, since action itself usually indicates the motive that prompts it. Why am I paying money to the cashier in a supermarket? S o that I can buy food a nd eventually eat it. We generally act in order to fulfill our manifest wishes. Sometimes the motives for action can be obscure, as when you see me searching frantically in a drawer and don't know that I left a lot of money in there and now can't find it. Motives are internal mental states that cause action and that make sens e of actions; action is seen as rational in the light of motives that lead to it. We apply this reasoning to both the motivation for the ideas of a text as well as to the author's motive for writing that text. (Colin McGinn, Freud Under Analysis,The New York Review, November 4, 1999, p. 20.) Readers, just as listeners, infer intent, motive, purpose, tone, mood, and point of view as a way of making sense of a text. We claim to understand a text when we can identify a clear purpos e and intent. We think beyond the words of the text to what might make sense in terms of a communication between specific people in a specific situation.

Writing to an Audience
Writing, like speaking, is concern ed wit h communicating specific thoughts or information to a specified audience. To be understood, we must take into account the prior knowledge of our audienc e. To be effective, we must recognize issues of power or prestige that our readers have at stake and why they might not initially accept our arguments. We should look at writing not only as a matter of what to say, but also as a matter of what to do. how to int erest our readers, how to educate them, and how to convince them. Just as our readers will image an author behind our text, so we as writers must imagine an audience and be sensitive to the same needs and social conventions that we would consider in face-t o-face speech.

What Did the Author Really Mean?

Viewing texts within the model of spoken language is a useful technique, but it is not without its dangers. On the fac e of it, the author of a text is a figment of the reader's imagination, a mental image constructed from prior knowledge of the real -life author (accurat e or not) and the remarks on the page. Questions about the real author and his or her purpose in writing a particular text can be answered only by talking with the living author. Racists can write non-racist texts and vice versa. E ven then we cannot be entirely sure what an author truly intended. An author might not be forthc oming about his or her purpose. And whatever the author's intentions, he or she may not have successfully communicated that intended meaning within the text. When we ask what an author meant, our referenc e to the author is really a metaphor for the text: what might the text mean? Inferring an author can be a useful tool for making sense of remarks within a text, but we must not make the jump from analysis of evidence within the text to speculation about a person who is not present. While we cannot know what an author intended, we can try to figure out what meaning makes the most sense given all we know from the evidence of the text, about the author and the situation at the time, and the social context. Readers must exert the same caution when discussing the audience of a text as they do when discussing the author. Readers may infer an audience to whom they imagine a text might appeal. As with the notion of the author above, the notion of an audience for a text is essentially a tool for describing and explaining features of a text. It may or may not actually indicate people for whom the text might have been intended.

Unconscious and Unwritten Rules

Speakers of a language know much about the language without quite knowing how, or even that, they know it. Most rules we learned not from grammar books, but from our experience with the language itself. Indeed, many rules are not even written down any where! If the notion that you know rules you do not know you know s till seems odd, consider the following. No native speaker of English would write, or say, * He bought Spanish purple large seven onions. The word order is wrong. Native speakers know to write or say: He bought seven large purple Spanish onions. How do we know to put the words in this order? We follow a rule for the placement of modifiers before a noun: number / size / color / type / NOUN No one has taught you this rule. You have inferred it on your own. You know the rule, even if you do not know you know itor even know that it exists. With a little thought and experiment ation, you can extend the rule to include other qualities, such as age and texture. Learning a second-language involves learning new and different rules. While adjectives come before a noun in English, white house, they come after in French, maison blanche, or Spanish, casa blanca. One never loses the rules of their first language; rules of the second language must be added on. A similar problem is encountered when shifting from one dialect of a language to another, or from rules of informal speech to rules of formal speech. We may not all be bilingual, but most of us are bi dialectical.

Finally, note that rules such as those described above are descriptive, not b>prescriptive. They describe the way native speakers use the language, not how they should use the language. Indeed, descriptive and prescriptive rules often conflict. We are told to never split an infinitive as this author just did. [We are told not to say "to never split an infinitive," but rather "never to split an infinitive.") In fact, the option of splitting infinitives allows us to distinguish between "to suddenly fire" (to fire without warning) and "to fire suddenly" (to shoot many bullets in a short time). Many prescriptive rules were written to mirror Latin usage, where the infinitive is a single word (to praise:laudare) and therefore cannot be split; English infinitives are t wo words (to praise) and can easily be split. Much of this discussion is not designed to teac h you new concepts so much as to help you rec ognize how much you already know. The more you are consciously aware of how the spoken language works, the better you can apply that understanding to texts, whether when confronting increasingly complex texts or desiring a deeper understanding.

Non-Verbal and Social Aspects Of Language

Non-Verbal Aspects Of Language
Spoken language is based on a face-to-face encounter. One person directly addresses another or others. (The electronic media, such as radio and television are, of course, exceptions, but even there we can envision someone at a microphone imagining an audience to whom they direct their remarks.) Within the face-to-face encounter of speech, communication is not limited to words. Speakers use a wide variety of extra- verbal devices, from emphasis and dramatic pauses to changes in tone or tempo. Speakers also use a broad range of non- verbal clues. They talk with their eyes and their bodies. They use hand gestures and facial expressions to convey ideas. And speakers respond to similar cues from their listenersthe nods and grunts that say, in effect, "I hear you," or the quizzical looks that say, "I don't understand." As we learn a language, we also learn the non- verbal conventions of that languagethe meaning of a shrug, a pout, or a smile. Speech thus often includes not only a face-to-face meeting, but also a meeting of the minds. "Conversation," Steven Pinker notes, "requires cooperation. Listeners assume speakers are conveying information relevant to what they already know and what they want to know. That allows them to hear between the lines in order to pin down the meanings of vague and ambiguous words and to fill in the unsaid logical steps. Speaker and listener are aware of each other's knowledge, interests, and biases. They can interpret remarks within the common social setting in which they find themselves. This mutual understanding, being "on the same page" as it were, is frequently absent with written communication. Information an author would like to assume the reader knows must be included with a text. Writers must make their biases explicit to assure full understanding by the critical reader, and readers, unable to read body language, must subject texts to close scrutiny to "read" attitudes or biases underlying a text.

Using Language In A Social Context

Speech is a tool of social communication. We understand spoken remarks within the context of an exchange of ideas between rational and emotional beings in a social situation. We become aware not only of what one says, but what one does by uttering such a remark, and the effect they might bring about by such a remark. Remarks may serve as expressions of feelings or ideas. Don't give it another thought. This is more than a command not to think about something. It is a promise meaning "I'll take care of it." People not only state ideas, they can also threaten, inquire, and dare. They can be ironic or sarcastic. Can you pass the ketchup? This remark may have the form of a question, but functions as a request. If someone says I can't find the ketchup. they are probably not just announcing their inability to locate a condiment. They are asking for help. Language can be used to request, persuade, convince, scare, promise, insult, order, and, as above, elicit action. Remarks often convey ideas that extend beyond their literal meaning. Listeners must infer unstated meaning. If someone says The government once classified ketchup as a vegetable in the school lunch program. they are probably not simply providing a lesson about the school lunch program. They are offering an example of bureaucratic stupidity. We assume common rules for the use of language, and infer meaning accordingly. Thus if someone says: The robber appeared to have a beard. we assume that they are not sure, not that they are commenting on the mechanics of sight. Listeners infer meaning within the context of social roles and settings. The meaning of an utterance can thus vary with the occasion, the relationship of speaker and listener (or writer and reader) or the listener's expectations of the speaker's purpose. Do you have the time to help me? This question carries different meaning when uttered by an employer or an employee. When uttered by an employer, the remark is a strong request for assistance; one would not generally answer "no." When spoken by an employee, it is more a respectful request for help. An assertion that there is racism in the United States Army takes on different meaning and significance if asserted by a black soldier (an allegation), a white General (an admission), an Army Task Force report (official recognition), or a Moslem priest in Iran (a condemnation).
10

The same comments takes on different significance when asserted in a bar, a Senate hearing room, or an elementary school classroom. When learning to speak, we learn degrees of courtesy and "turn-yielding" cues that function somewhat like over in a walkie-talkie conversation. We learn social communication strategiessuch as how to appeal to someone's vanity (Anyone who buys this cream can look better in days!), or how to imply a fact (Do you still beat your wife?). The late Lord Denning, often referred to either as the best known or the most colorful English judge of the 20 century, observed: When a diplomat says yes, he means perhaps. When he says perhaps, he means no. When he says no, he is not a diplomat. When a lady says no, she means perhaps. When she says perhaps, she means yes. But when she says yes, she is no lady While this may be an obviously sexist and politically incorrect statement, the remark nonetheless demonstrates ways in which language is a complex social tool for communication.

What We Say, Do, and Mean

In the examples above we can distinguish between what is said, what is done, and what is meant. I left my watch home. This remark says that I left my watch home. By making that statement, I do something: I describe where my watch is, or that I am without it. Finally, the meaning conveyed (or inferred) is that I don't know what time it is. says: that I left me watch home does: describes where my watch is means: I want to know the time

The Three Authors and their Implications for Reading

All written texts have three authors. First, and most obviously, there is the human being who wrote the text. Second, we have an imagined author to whom we attribute intent and purpose in our attempt to understand a text. Finally, each and every reader is author of his or her own understanding of any given text. Each of thes e personas has implications for reading. More to the point, each has implications for misreading a text, especially when critical reading is desired.

THE HUMAN AUTHOR

Writing starts with a living human author. The standard model of effective communication also includes an audience, a purpose, and an intended message. When aut hor and audience are known to each other -- as with speec h -- the model holds fairly well. In such circumstances, however, communication takes place within a social context, not simply on the page.

11

Texts present a different situation. While prior knowledge of an author can aid understanding of a text, it can just as likely lead to misreading. Any assumptions about the meaning of a text based on an author's prior texts is at best speculative, and at worst denies that aut hor the ability to express ne w ideas. Questions about the real author and his or her purpose in writing a particular text can be answered only by talking with the living author. E ven then we cannot be entirely sure what an author truly intended. An aut hor might not be forthcoming about, or even aware of, his or her real purpose. And what ever the author's intentions, he or she may not have successfully communicated an int ended meaning within the text.

THE IMAGINED AUTHOR

When readers have no personal knowledge of the actual person who wrote a text they tend to create an imagined "author" as an aid in their interpretation of that text. Writing is a purposeful act of human communication, and so it is a useful heuristic, if nothing else, to imagine an author behind a text. But here again there are inherent dangers. When we imagine purpose or intent we risk risks letting our imagination go bey ond the evidence within the text itself. If our notion of a virtual aut hor is based on textual evidence, why not simply refer to the evidence itself? The goal should not be to imagine the intention of someone who is not present, but to make as best sense as we can of the words upon the page and in so doing to recognize techniques for conveying information and ideas that we might employ in our own writing. Ultimately, any focus on an interpersonal communication between an author and reader leads to assumptions and speculation about motive and intent. Above all, it draws the int erpretive effort away from the text itself.

THE READER AS AUTHOR

In the process of reading, readers become the aut hor of their understanding. Their understanding is their own creation, based on the evidence they find, the knowledge they bring to their reading, and the inferences they draw. Critical readers take possession of a text in two waysboth involving recognition of the nat ure of the material before them. First, critical readers go beyond recognizing what a text says to seeing what a text does, to recognizing and describing the text as a document and tracing the development and support of ideas. Secondly, critical readers recognize and classify the nature of the ingredients of the text. This occurs primarily in recognizing 1) what the examples are examples of and 2) how the nature of the terminology present shapes perceptions and understanding. Consider an example: (from Jean Dres den Grambs's Women over Forty:Visions and Realities, rev. ed., 1989) The changing status of women has been one of the most dramatic of the social upheavals of the second half of the 20th century. Women are entering the labor force earlier and remaining at work for more years, even if they have young children. More women are divorced and heading their own households. More women are going to college, obtaining professional and advanced degrees , and seeking careers in law, medicine, and business. The question, of course, is: What is the nature of the new status of women? To see that we must see what the examples are examples of? And here we might notice a pattern of empowerment, of embracing new positions and responsibilities. Now consider a different set of examples: The changing status of women has been one of the most dramatic of the social upheavals of the second half of the 20th century. Women are entering the labor force earlier and remai ning at work for

12

more years, even if they have young children. More women are divorced and heading their own households.More women are experiencing bankruptcies, often from the loss of health insurance following divorce. Only the last example has been cha nged. But now we have a pattern of increased financial and social pressures that are anything but empowering. Critical reading is not passive reading. Readers must find and classify patterns of elements and infer their overall affect on the meaning of the text as a whole. In so doing all readers become authors of their own understanding.

13

Critical Reading

Critical Reading, at its Core, Plain and Simple

Non-critical (or pre-critical) reading is concerned with recognizing what a text says about the topic. The goal is to make sense of the presentation as a sequence of thoughts, to understand the information, ideas, and opinions stated within the text from sentence to sentenc e, paragraph to paragraph. This is a linear activity. Critical reading is an analytic activity. The reader rereads a text to identify patterns of elements -information, values, assumptions, and language usage-- throughout the discussion. These elements are tied together in an interpretation, an assertion of an underlying meaning of the text as a whole. Critical thinking involves bringing outside knowledge, biases, and values to bear to evaluate the presentation and decide what ultimately to accept as true. The initial step of critical reading involves recognizing a text as a presentation in its own right. This step is concerned with identifying such elements as The existence of a beginning,middle, and end The use of illustrations to explicate remarks The use of evidence to support remarks The use of stylish language to portray topics Organization, or a method of sequencing remarks such as whether chronological, different aspects of the topic, steps in a logical sequenc e The next step involves describing the nature of the se aspects of the text, of classifying the nature of the material within the text The nature of the examples what the examples are examples of The nature of the evidence what kinds of authorities are invoked, what types of evidence are provided The nature of the choice or terms what types of terms are applied to what topics The final step involves inferring the underlying assumptions and perspectives of the discussion, taking into account of all of the elements of the text being as they are throughout the text as a whole. This step is concerned less with sequential development and more wit h recognizing patterns of elements interwoven throughout the presentation as a whole. What is achieved by describing topics a certain way What is assumed by selecting certain types of evidence Throughout, critical reading relies on abstracting, on classi fying the nature of things, The nature of the structure of the text The nature of the language employed The nature of the examples invoked The nature of the illustrations brought to bear And the nature of the thinking that would explain all aspects of the text being as they are. In the end, readers must take control of the text, not just repeat its assertions. At its core, critical reading involves becoming the author of one's own understanding.

14

What Is Critical Reading?

Note: These remarks are primarily directed at non-fictional texts.

Facts v. Interpretation
To non -critical readers, texts provide facts. Readers gain knowledge by memorizing the statements within a text. To the critical reader, any single text provides but one portrayal of the facts, one individuals take on the subject matter. Critical readers thus recognize not only what a text says, but also how that text portrays the subject matter. They recognize the various ways in which each and every text is the unique creation of a unique aut hor. A non-critical reader might read a history book to learn the facts of the situation or to discover an accepted interpretation of those events. A critical reader might read the same work to appreciate how a particular perspective on the events and a particular selection of facts can lead to particular understanding.

What a Text Says, Does, and Means: Reaching for an Interpretation

Non-critical reading is satisfied with recognizing what a text says and restating the key remarks. Critical reading goes two steps further. Having recognized what a text says , it reflects on what the text does by making such remarks. Is it offering examples? Arguing? Appealing for sympathy? Making a contrast to clarify a point? Finally, critical readers then infer what the text, as a whole, means , based on the earlier analysis. These three steps or modes of analysis are reflected in three types of reading and discussion: What a text says restatement What a text does description What a text means interpretation . You can distinguish each mode of analysis by the subject matter of the discussion: What a text says restatement talks about the same topic as the original text What a text does description discusses aspects of the discussion itself What a text means interpretation analyzes the text and asserts a meaning for the text as a whole

Goals of Critical Reading

Textbooks on critical reading commonly ask students to accomplish certain goals: to recognize an authors purpose to understand tone and persuasive elements to recognize bias Notice that none of these goals actually refers to something on the page. Each requires i nferences from evidence within the text: recognizing purpose involves inferring a basis for choices of content and language recognizing tone and persuasive elements involves classifying the nature of language choic es

15

recognizing bias involves classifying the nature of patterns of choice of content and language Critical reading is not simply close and careful reading. To read critically, one must actively recognize and analyze evidence upon the page.

Analysis and Inference: The Tools of Critical Reading

These web pages are designed to take the mystery out of critical reading. They are designed to show you what to look for ( analysi s ) and how to think about what you find ( inference ) . The first part what to look for involves recognizing those aspects of a discussion that control the meaning. The second part how to think about what you find involves the processes of inference, the interpretation of data from within the text. Recall that critical reading assumes that each author offers a portrayal of the topic. Critical reading thus relies on an examination of those choices that any and all authors must make when framing a presentation: choices of content, language, and structure. Readers examine eac h of the three areas of choice, and consider their effect on the meaning.

What is Critical Thinking?

No one always acts purely objectively and rationally. We connive for selfish interests. We gossip, boast, exaggerate, and equivoc ate. It is "only human" to wish to validate our prior knowledge, to vindic ate our prior decisions, or to sustain our earlier beliefs. In the process of satisfying our ego, however, we can often deny ourselves intellectual growth and opportunity. We may not always want to apply critical thinking skills, but we should have those skills available to be employed when needed. Critical thinking includes a complex combination of skills. Among the main characteristics are the following:

Rationality
We are thinking critically when we rely on reason rather than emotion, require evidence, ignore no known evidence, and follow evidence where it leads, and are conc erned more with finding the best explanation than being right analyzing apparent confusion and asking questions.

Self-awareness
We are thinking critically when we weigh the influences of motives and bias, and recognize our own assumptions, prejudices, biases, or point of view.

Honesty
We are thinking critically when we recognize emotional impulses, selfish motives, nefarious purposes, or other modes of self-deception.

16

Open-mindedness
We are thinking critically when we evaluate all reas onable inferences consider a variety of possible viewpoints or perspectives, remain open to alternative interpretations accept a new explanation, model, or paradigm bec ause it explains the e vidence better, is simpler, or has fewer inconsistencies or covers more data accept new priorities in response to a reevaluation of the evidence or reassessment of our real interests, and do not reject unpopular views out of hand.

Discipline
We are thinking critically when we are precise, meticulous, comprehensive, and exhaustive resist manipulation and irrational appeals, and avoid snap judgments.

Judgment
We are thinking critically when we recognize the relevance and/or merit of alt ernative assumptions and perspectives recognize the extent and weight of evidence In sum, Critical thinkers are by nature skeptical. They approach texts with the same skepticism and suspicion as they approach spoken remarks. Critical thinkers are active, not passive. They ask questions and analyze. They consciously apply tactics and strategies to uncover meaning or assure their understanding. Critical thinkers do not take an egotistical view of the world. They are open to new ideas and perspectives. They are willing to challenge their beliefs and investigate competing evidence. Critical thinking enables us to recognize a wide range of subjective analyses of otherwise objective data, and to evaluat e how well each analysis might meet our needs. Facts may be facts, but how we interpret them may vary. By contrast, passive, non-c ritical thinkers take a simplistic view of the world. They see things in black and white, as either -or, rather than recognizing a variety of possible understanding. They see questions as yes or no with no subtleties. They fail to see linkages and complexities. They fail to recognize related elements. Non-critical thinkers take an egotistical view of the world They take their facts as the only relevant ones. They take their own perspective as the only sensible one. They take their goal as the only valid one.

17

Critical Reading v. Critical Thinking

We can distinguish between critical reading and critical thinking in the following way: Critical reading is a technique for di scovering information and ideas wit hin a text. Critical think ing is a technique for evaluating information and ideas, for deciding what to accept and believe. Critical reading refers to a careful, active, reflective, analytic reading. Critical thinking involves reflecting on the validity of what you have read in light of our prior knowledge and understanding of the world. For example, consider the following (somewhat humorous) sent ence from a student essay: Parents are buying expensive cars for their k ids to destroy them. As the terms are used here, critical reading is concerned with figuring out whether, within the context of the text as a whole, " them " refers to the parents, the kids, or the cars, and whether the text supports that practice. Critical thinking would come into play when deciding whether the chosen meaning was indeed true, and whether or not you, as the reader, should support that practice. By these definitions, critical reading would appear to come before critical thinking: Only once we have fully understood a text (critical reading) can we truly evaluate its assertions (critical thinking).

The Two Together in Harmony

In actual practice, critical reading and critical thinking work together. Critical thinking allows us to monitor our understanding as we read. If we sense that assertions are ridiculous or irresponsible (c ritical thinking), we examine the text more closely to test our understanding (critical reading). Conversely, critical thinking depends on critical reading. You can think critically about a text (critical thinking), after all, only if you have understood it (critical reading). We may choose to accept or reject a presentation, but we must know why. We have a responsibility to ourselves, as well as to others, to isolate the real issues of agreement or disagreement. Only then can we understand and respect other peoples views. To recognize and understand those views, we must read critically.

The Usefulness of the Distinction

If critical thinking and critical reading are so closely linked, why is this still a useful distinction? The usefulness of the distinction lies in its reminder that we must read each text on its own merits, not imposing our prior knowledge or views on it. While we must evaluate ideas as we read, we must not distort the meaning within a text. We must not allow ourselves to force a text to say what we would otherwise like it to sayor we will never learn anything new!

Reading Critically: How Well Does The Text Do What It Does

We can think of a writer as having taken on a job. No matter what the topic, certain tasks must be done: a specific topic must be addressed terms must be clearly defined evidence must be presented

18

common knowledge must be accounted for exceptions must be explained causes must be shown to precede effects and to be capable of the effect conclusions must be shown to follow logically from earlier arguments and evidence As critical readers and writers, we want to assure ourselves that these tasks have been completed in a complete, comprehensive, and consistent manner. Only once we have determined that a text is consistent and coherent can we then begin to evaluat e whether or not to accept the assertions and conclusions.

Thinking Critically: Evaluating The Evidence

Reading to see what a text says may suffice when the goal is to learn specific information or to understand someone els e's ideas. But we usually read wit h other purposes. We need to solve problems, build roads, write legislation, or design an advertising campaign. We must evaluate what we have read and integrate that understanding with our prior understanding of the world. We must decide what to accept as true and useful. As readers, we want to accept as fact only that which is actually true. To evaluate a conclusion, we must evaluate the evidence upon which that conclusion is based. We do not want just any information; we want reliable information. To assess the validity of remarks within a text, we must go outside a text and bring to bear outside knowledge and standards.

19

Inference

Inference: Reading Ideas as Well as Words

Ideally, speakers mean what they say and say what they mean. Spoken communication is not that simple. Much of what we understandwhether when listening or readingwe understand indirectly, by inference. Listening involves a complex combination of hearing words, analyzing sentence structure, and attempting to find meaning within the context of the given situation. The situation with the written word is no different. A text does not contain a meaning. Readersconstructmeaning by what they take the words to mean and how they process sentences to find meaning. Readers draw on their knowledge of the language and of conventions of social communication. They also draw on other factors, such as knowledge of the aut hor (Would Henry say such a thing?), the occasion (No one knew such things then!), or the audience (Hed never admit that publicly.) They infer unstated meanings based on social conventions, shared knowledge, shared experience, or shared values. They make sense of remarks by recognizing implications and drawing conclusions. Readers read ideas more than words, and infer, rather than find, meaning.

Inferring Meaning
Consider the following statement: The Senator admitted owning the gun that k illed his wife. On the face of it, we have a simple statement about what someone said. Our understanding, however, includes much that is not stated. We find meaning embedded in the words and phrases. Unpacking that meaning, we can see that the Senator was married and his wife is now deadalthough this is not actually stated as such. (In fact, the sentence is about an admission of gun ownership.) It is as though the single sentence contains a number of assertions: There is a Senator. He owns a gun. He is married. His wife is dead. That gun caused her death. The Senator admitted owning that gun. Clearly, the original sent ence is a clearer and simpler way of conveying all of this information. Writers take note! On a more subtle level, we rec ognize that a public figure confronts involvement in a major crime. Our understanding need not stop there. We infer that the gun (or at least a bullet) has probably been recovered and identified as the murder weaponor the notion of an admission would make little sense. We also recognize the danger of unwarrant ed inferenc es. We recognize that we do not necessarily know if the Senator's admission is true. We do not really know whether the Senator is in any way responsible for his wife's death, nor do we know that she died of gun shot wounds (she could have been hit over the head with the gun). We do not even know if it was murderit might have been suicide or an accident. Are we reading things in here? Or are these meanings truly within the sentence? We are going beyond that the textsays, but not beyond what it actuallymeansto most readers.

20

Inferences such as these are essential to both written and spoken communication. Writers often only hint at what they mean, and mean much more than they actually seem to say. On the other hand, we can see the danger (and temptation) of assuming facts or interpretations for which evidenc e is not present, and recognize that a critical reader reads with an open mind, open to many possible interpretations. The following story is often present ed as a brain twister. In fact, its a reading ex ercise. A man and his son are driving in a car. The car crashes into a tree, killing the father and seriously injuring his son. At the hospital, the boy needs to have surgery. Upon looking at the boy, the do ctor says (telling the truth), "I cannot operate on him. He is my son." How can this be? Decide on your ans wer before reading furt her. Whether this passage is a brain twister or a reading passage, readers must assume that any lack of understanding is not due to the story, but due to their own lack of understanding. We must work harder to think about how the story might make sense. We quickly see that we have to explain how a doctor can have a son (" I cannot operate on him. He is my son.") when at the same time the father is dead (The car crashes into a tree, killing the father). The answer: The doctor is the boy's mother. Many readers are blinded to this meaning by the sexist assumption that the doctor must be a male. A somewhat similar example has been offered by Robert Skoglund, The Humble Farmer of Public Radio in Maine (http//www. TheHumbleFarmer.com), as follows: We had visitors a week or so ago. Houseguests. Six of them. One of them was Oscar who teaches geology at the University in Utrecht. Now I love houseguests. Usually. But when they arrived I discovered that two of them couldn't even walk into the house. Had to be carried in. And then I found out they couldn't talk, either. What would you have done if you'd been in my place? How do you handle a situation like that? See the end of the page for possibly the most appropriate advice.

Implications For Reading

All reading is an active, reflective, problem-solving process. We do not simply read words; we read ideas, thoughts that spring from the relationships of various assertions. The notion of inference equations is particularly powerful in this regard. Readers can use the notion of inference equations to test whether or not the ingredients for a given inferences are indeed present. To show lying, fo r instance, a text must show that someone made a statement that they knew was incorrect and that they made that assertion wit h the specific purpose of deception. If they did not know it was wrong at the time, its an error, not a lie. If they did not make the statement for the specific purpose of deception, we have a misstatement, not lying.

Implications For Writing

The notion of inference equations is equally useful for writing. Writers must assure that the ingredients of the equation are present and clear, and that the desired relationships are signaled in a clear and effective way. As writers, we must be aware that our readers will interpret our thoughts. We must strive to make our meaning as clear as possible. We must provide sufficient examples to make our ideas clear, as well as to short-circuit undesired interpretations. We must recognize what evidence is necessary and sufficient for our purpose, and assure that it is included.

21

And we must choose our terms carefully for accuracy and clarity of meaning, and spell out our exact thoughts in as much detail as possible. We must recognize biases our readers might bring to the text and explain and support our evidence as much as our conclusions The advice: Buy diapers.

Words
Any discussion of reading and writing is, ultimately, about words and how we us e words to convey meaning.

Classifying, Categorizing, and Conceptualizing

Language begins with words, with spok en and/or written symbols. Words refer to ideas (conflict,truth), feelings (passion, warmt h), things (pigs,teeth), and actions (running,). Words can indicate relationships (however,therefore,on,after) and stand for other references (thes e,him). Some concepts, such as the cold side of the pillow or yellow slush, have no words (at least yet), and some conc epts for which there are words do not exist (such asunicornsorthe k ing of Boston). We assign names (words) to ideas, events, and objects. In so doing we classify that item under a broader, more abstract, heading. We classify when we label a specific song as rap or hip-hop, blues or country. We classify when we recogniz e an action as a certain kind of behavior. Say you see a number of large yellow animals on the African plain. Words allow you to distinguish between "lions", and "lionesses," between "lions" and "pumas," between a "pride" (a group) and a "pair." Without words, we might see the differences, but we could not talk about the differenc es. Finally, words enable us to talk about lions in general a day later, when the lions are no longer there.

Academic v. Informal Discussion

Academic discussion relies heavily on knowledge of relevant concepts and terminology. Informal discussion is commonly about specific events in the here and now. Academic discussion deals with concepts and theories, hypotheses and ideas. Academic writ ers talk more generally about the world. On the street, you might talk about your ninet een -year old cousin Vinny from Detroit taking a job at Mac Donald's. Academic discussion might talk about changing rates of unemployment, demo graphic factors affecting occupation selection, or the expansion of the service industry.

Our Evolving Language

The choice of word for any concept is essentially arbitrary. Words come to have meaning by how they are used by native speakers. ("A rose by any other name," as Shakespeare noted, "would smell as sweet.") The English language, for example, uses the letters d-o-g (and their corresponding sounds) to denote a domestic animal. French uses chien; Spanis h, perro. We name animals by their shape (spoonbill), origin (great Dane), size (horsefly), color (beaver, from Old English beofor, brown), or facial expression (dodo). Animals even talk differently in different languages. In English a duck says quack quack , in Italian qua qua, in Thai gaab gaab, and in Russian k rya-k rya. [ For a listings of animal sounds in many languages, see "Sounds Of The World's Animals," http://www.georgetown.edu/cball/animals/animals.html. ] Note that there is no natural rational connection between most words and the ideas they represent--well, with the exception of words such as plop, whiz, and slide. Language mirrors the history and culture of its speakers. English speakers use words that have descended from earlier forms of English (k nave, from Old English: cnafa) and borrow words form other languages. We use English names for animals (cow, sheep, deer) and French names for their meat

22

(beef, mutton,venison). We use Spanish terms for geological features of the Southwest (canyon, mesa). Dialects often incorporate words or grammatical structures of other languages. Black English, a combination of standard English and West African languages, includes an additional aspect indicating habitual action over time (He be swimminghe has been swimming for a while, not just now, and not just once). [ See "Black English: Its History and its Role in the Education of Our Children," http://www.princeton.edu/~bclewis\blacktalk.html, and "Black English," and http://www.browneyedintelligence.org/ebonics.html. ] Word meanings change with time hence the need to indicate the original meaning of words when we read Shakespearean plays, written around 1600, today. Dictionaries indicate current educated usage, not what a word is supposed to mean, which explains why there have been ten editions of the Merriam-Webster Collegiate dictionary in the past hundred years. When a word is too closely associated with a undesired meaning, it drops out of usage, as with queer (odd) or niggardly (miserly), the latter a word from the Middle English unrelated to the racial epithet derived from the Spanish for "black." Many people lament how, or even that, the language is changing. They want to return to a "pure" form, when no one said "It is me!," "Grow the economy," or "Winston tastes good like (as against "as" ) a cigarette should." Such an attitude is, regrettably, both uninformed and hopeless. Spoken languages constantly change, as surely as the trees turn every fall. One thousand years ago, in Old English, "Happy New Millennium, E verybody" would have been: Bliss on bm cumendum usende eara, Eallum! Finally, in this Age of the Internet, we might note two other written symbols that are a part of what is in essence a written dialect of standard English: emoticons (smileys), facial expressions formed with typographic characters to communicate emotions such as humor :-) , sadness :-( or skepticism :-/ , and Internet acronyms, such as BTW (by the way), OTOH (on the other hand), and IMHO (in my humble opinion).

Inference and Analysis

Inferences are based on evidence. To infer, we must collect evidence. And evidenc e is collected by the process of analysis. Analysis is a particular form of investigation. In general usage, analysis refers to any close, careful, or systematic examination. In the discussion here, the term analy sis is used in its more technical meaning. Analysis is a process of investigating something by breaking it into parts for closer examination. Complex topics are broken down into simpler ones. Intricate patterns are broken down into less complicated elements. A problem is simplified by limiting the amount that must be examined at any one time. The goal of analysis is not simply to discover parts within the whole, but to understand the whole. Once the parts are identified, analysis then seeks to determine h ow those parts are related. From a recognition of the nature of the parts, and the relationships between the parts we infer additional meaning. In the analytic model, the whole is seen as greater than the sum of its parts.

23

Levels of Analysis
Analysis can be carried out on various levels. Any part can be analyzed into smaller parts. A table of contents, for instance, indicates the contents of a book at various levels of analysis: parts, chapters, sections, etc.

Bases of Analysis
Finally, note that a single topic can oft en be broken up for analysis in a number of ways. An anthropologist might view society in terms of cultural values and institutions; the sociologist might look at issues of group identity and social interaction. The anthropologist might look at how justice is administered, the sociologist at the social status of judges. One would speak in terms of mores and ethical principles, the other in terms of social class and socio-economic status. They may analyze the same society, but their different bases of analysis lead to different understandings.

Analyzing Texts
What are the parts of a text? The simplest answer is that texts are composed of words, which form sentences, which form paragraphs, which form larger sections of a the text as a whole. Texts can also be analyzed in terms of elements or themes occurring throughout the discussion, like colors throughout plaid cloth. The discussion throughout these web pages focuses on analysis of three basic elements of choice by the author: content, language, and structure.

Inference: The Process

Inference is a mental process by which we reach a conclusion based on specific evidence. Inferences are the stock and trade of detectives examining clues, of doctors diagnosing diseases, and of car mechanics repairing engine problems. We infer motives, purpose, and intentions.
Inference is essential to, and part of, being human. We engage in inference every day. We interpret actions to be examples of behavior characteristics, intents, or expressions of particular feelings. We infer it is raining when we see someone with an open umbrella. We infer people are thirsty if they ask for a glass of water. We infer that evidence in a text is authoritative when it is attributed to a scholar in the field. We want to find significance. We listen to remarks, and want to make sense of them. What might the speaker mean? Why is he or she saying that? We go bey ond specific remarks to underlying significance or broader meaning. When we read that someone cheat ed on his or her incom e taxes, we might take that as an example of financial ingenuity, daring, or stupidity. We seek purposes and reasons. Inferences are not random. While they may come about mysteriously with a sudden jump of recognition, a sense of "Ah ha!," inferences are very orderly. Inferences may be guesses, but they are educated guesses based on supporting evidence. The evidence seems to require that we reach a specific conclusion. E vidence is said toimply; readersinf er. While this image suggests an intent or power on the part of evidence that does not existhow, after all, can a fact compel a certain conclusion? the image and resulting terminology are useful nonetheless. The sense of inevitability to the conclusion suggests that we did not jump to that conclusion or make it up on our own, but found it by reasoning from the evidence.

24

The above image implies that everyone will reach the same conclusion. That obviously is not the caseas the examples above suggest. The umbrella might be protection from the sun, the reques t for water might indic ate a need to take a pill, and a footnote may cite only one side of a controversy. Here again, the line between inference and jumping to a conclusion can be awfully thin.

A man gets on a bus. What might be implied by each of the following? He ran to catch the bus. He is carrying a suitcase. He asks the driver for change of a $100 bill.

Inferences are not achieved with mathematical rigor. Inferenc es do not have the certainty obtained with deductive reasoning. Inferences tend to reflect prior knowledge and experience as well as personal beliefs and assumptions. Inferences thus tend to reflect one's stake in a situation or one's interests in the outcome. People may reas on differently or bring different assumptions or premises to bear. Given evidence that PCB 's cause cancer in people, and that PCB's are in a particular water system, all reasonable people would reach the conclusion that that water system is dangerous to people. But given evidence that there is an increase in skin cancer among people who sun bathe, not all people would conclude that sunbathing causes skin cancer. Sun bathing, they might argue, may be coincidental with exposure to ot her cancer causing factors. More often than not, disagreements are based not on differences in reas oning, but in the values, assumptions, or information brought to bear. If we believe that all politicians are crooks, we will infer that a specific politician's actions are scurrilous. If we believe that politicians act for the good of all, we will look for some benefit in their actions. Either way, we will try to use reason to explain the actions. We will look for some coherent explanation as a way of making sense of things. As we saw earlier, if we can understand why someone would do something, w hy someone might say something, why someone might act in a certain way, we feel we have made sens e of the act or statement. It's like a murder trial: if we can put toget her opportunity, motive, and means, we can make a case. The more evidence we have before us, and the more carefully we reason, the more valid our inferences. This principle plays an important role with reading: the more evidence within a text we incorporate into our interpretation, the more likely we have not gone astray from any intended meaning.

Inference: Inference Equations

Inferences are not random. Inferences follow rules. Not mathematical rules, but rules based on common experience and social conventions. We draw inferences from the relationships of cert ain ideas, and can, in effect, write "equations" to suggest this process. Consider the following two remarks. The stock market fell. Burger King laid off 1,000 workers. We have two separate assertions: That the stock market fell and that Burger King laid off 1,000 work ers. But watch what happens when the ideas are related in specific ways. 1. 2. 3. 4. The stock The stock The stock The stock market market market market fell, fell, fell, fell, after Burger King laid off 1, 000 workers. because Burger King laid off 1,000 workers. therefore Burger King laid off 1,000 workers. but Burger King laid off 1,000 work ers.

25

Relating the assertions generates a wide variety of thoughts. (See "Relationship Categories and Terms) In this first case, from evidence of change following an action (after), we might infer the action caused the change (This does not, of cours e, necessarily follow. Just because one event precedes another does not necessarily mean it caused it.) In the second, the relationship is of reason/conclusion (because): the fall in the stock market is explained by the layoffs. In the third, the relations hip is again reason/conclusion (theref ore), but now the layoffs are explained by the fall of the stock market. In the fourth sent ence, the relations hip is of contrast (but), with the suggestion that the events are unrelated. With each set of assertions we draw inferences based on the relationship of the ideas. 1. 2. 3. 4. Burger King's layoffs might have been the cause of the stock market's drop. Burger King's layoffs caused the drop in the stock market. Burger King laid off workers because of a drop in the stock market. The stock market drop did not effect Burger King's laying off of workers.

The overall meaning is conveyed not only by the individual assertions, the content, but also by how the elements of the content are related to one another, the structure. We identify the nature and relationship of parts, and infer underlying or unspoken meanings. Consider anot her set of examples. The class went to the beach and it rained. The class went to the beach although it rained. The class went to the beach before it rained. The information is the same in all three sentences: The class went to the beach It rained. But the relationship of the two assertions is different in each sent ence: 1. 2. 3. The class went to the beach The class went to the beach The class went to the beach [series] it rained. [in contrast to] it rained. [earlier in time than] it rained.

The meaning of each sentence is therefore different: 1. 2. 3. bad luck perseverance or determination good planning

Depending on the relationship between the two assertions, the class is portrayed as disappointed, determined, or lucky. What information would be needed, and how would it be relat ed, to show: Overconfidence. A lack of self esteem. Justified homicide.

26

Inference: Denotation
Words, it has been observed, are sneakythey change meaning when you put them somewhere else. Consider the term "ate" in the following examples: The boy ate the apple in the pi e. The acid ate the metal. His guilt ate into him. The stapler ate staples The word ate means different things in eac h of these sentenc es. * took in solid food as nourishment * caused to rust or disint egrate * produced worry or anxiety * used up The same sequence of letters a t e denotes more than one concept. Whether we think of these various meanings of "ate" as different meanings of the same word or as the meanings of four different words, we still have to recognize the appropriate meaning in any given context. As we read, our brain calls up possible meanings. With barely a pause, we infer an appropriate meaning in each of the remarks. Dictionary citations with more than one meaning are mo re the rule than the exception, as in the following example. table n 1 thin piece of flat wood, stone, etc. 2 article of furniture with a flat top and legs 3 the food served on a table 4 the persons seated at a table 5 arrangement of words, facts, figures , etc., often in columns, for reference 6 index or summary vt 7 to lay aside, as a proposal 8 to postpone indefinit ely Here again, we can think of these eight meanings of table as eight different words, or one word wit h eight different meanings. Either way, readers must recognize the appropriate meaning when they come upon the sequence of letters t-a-b-l-e in a text. Anyone familiar with the language will quickly recognize an appropriate meaning whether a word refers to an object (a noun) Delia sat at thetable. of a quality of an object (adjective), Jessica washed thet ablecover. or refers to an action (verb), The committee willtablethe motion. We have little trouble understanding the three meanings of grade in the following sentence: Youve made the grade when promoted to a new grade as a reward for achieving passing grades. Youve made thegrade(overcome a barrier, been successful) when promoted to a newgrade(level) as a reward for achieving passinggrades(evaluations, marks). From a variety of possible meanings, we infer the meaning appropriate for the given context. We read ideas, not words. We can "fix" a car, a race, a meal, a dye, a cat, or a ship's course. In each instance we do something different. Consider another example: Blackberries are red when they are green. You can almost feel wheels grinding in your head as you do an initial double take before recognizing that, in this context, green does not denote a color, but "unripe." In similar manner, we fill in the appropriate meanings of used in the for-sale advertisement: Used gun. Used for protection. Never been used. Does a reference to a ghetto refer to urban hood or European religious enclave? In each instance, the surrounding discussion provides clues for inferring the approp riate denot ation.

27

Ambiguity
The fact that common words tend to have multiple meanings can lead to ambiguity, a situation in which two or more equally legitimate readings exist. In many instances, any pot ential ambiguity is easily resolved. The k ids played in the snow. Here snow is obviously a reference to frozen water, not heroin (well, in most contexts!). When more than one meaning of a word makes sense, we have lexical (i.e., referring to words) ambiguity. The school had many poor students on scholarships. Are the students on scholarship "not rich" or "not good students"? The sentence is ambiguous. Readers draw on prior knowledge and past experience to infer the appropriate meaning. They at once "read" both the language and their knowl edge of the world. Some of the most striking examples of ambiguity of word meaning can be seen in headlines. Bundy Beats Dat e With Chair At first glance, this headline refers to an attack by an irat e suitor. date = pers on of opposite sex with whom one has a social engagement chair = household furniture In the context of the news at the time, the headline referred to a convicted killer's scheduled execution. date = appointment chair = electric chair Readers infer word meanings consistent with the surrounding discussion. They infer meaning from contextual clues, whether on the page or, in this case, from our prior knowledge and the news of the day. Examples such as this make clear that we do not simply read w ords so much as interpret them. In many, if not most, instances, one meanings is obviously the intended meaning within the given context, the other meaning a somewhat funny alternative meaning. The painting was found by the tree. By can mean "near," or "through the agency of." It is unlikely the tree did the finding. This example, however, involves more than simple lexical ambiguity. We also parse the sentence differently to see the different meanings, as the following suggests. The painting was found by the tree. It was next to the tree. The painting was found by the tree The tree found it. When the ambiguity lies in how we analyze a sentence, rather than in deciding the meaning of a word, we have syntactic ambiguity. We saw a clear case of syntactic ambiguity in Chapt er One: He did not marry her because he loved her. The meanings depends on how you analyze the sentence. The following headlines provide examples of ambiguity. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 1. Drunk Gets Nine Months in Violin Case 2. Iraqi Head Seeks Arms 3. Prostitutes Appeal to Pope 4. Kids Make Nutritious Snacks 5. New Vaccine May Cont ain Rabies 6. New Study of Obesity Looks for Larger Test Group 7. Include your Children when Baking Cookies 8. Police Begin Campaign to Run Down Jaywalkers 9. Red Tape Holds Up New Bridge 10. Local High School Dropouts Cut in Half

Identify which word in each sent ence has multiple meanings.

28

Inference: Association and Reference

Further evidence that we read ideas, not wordsas well as of the social nat ure of languagecan be seen in the ways readers and authors rely on shared cultural understanding. June 9th, 1998, between the fourth and fifth games of the National Basketball Association championships, Dennis Rodm an, Chicago Bulls forward, missed practice to attend a wrestling match with noted wrestler Hulk Hogan. Responding to dismay at Rodmans behavior, The New Y ork Timescolumnist Harvey observed: Compared to some of the company many N.B.A. players k eep, Hulk Hogan is practically the dean of Harvard Business School. Of course, Rodman is the Jok er to Jordans Batman and Scotties Pippens Robin. In his third and presumably last season wit h what no longer is a mere bask etball team but a collection of action heroes, Rodman as what Jack son calls the anti-hero has made himself a windfall as Jordans evil twin. With Rodman around, Jordan has become more of a deit y than ever. Harvey Araton, "He's Nobody's Business But the Bulls', The New Y ork Times, Austin edition, June 10, 1998, p. C21. To someone from anot her planet, or just someone who doesnt follow American basketball and culture, much the above may make sense grammatically but have little meaning. To follow the thought, a reader must bring a familiarity with the bold faced references. Compared to some of the company many N.B.A. players k eep. Hulk Hoganis practicallythe dean of Harvard Business School. Of course, Rodman is theJokertoJordan s Batman and Scotties PippensRobin. In his third and presumably last season wit h what no longer is a mere bask etball team but a collection of action heroes, Rodman as whatJacksoncalls the"anti-hero"has made himself a windfall as Jordans evil twin. With Rodman around, Jordan has become more of a deit y than ever. None of these terms or phrases is in most dictionaries. We are dealing with cultural associations and references, not denotations or connotations. Readers must provide the appropriate concepts: Compared to some of the company many N.B.A. players k eep. Hulk Hogan(a popular wrestler) is practicallythe dean of Harvard Business S chool (the leader of a respected, conservative institution). Of course, Rodman is theJoker (fool)toJordan s(the all-time greatest basketball player and nice guy) Batman(respected leader)and Scotties PippensRobin (trusted assi stant). In his third and presumably last season with what no longer is a mere bask etball team but a collection ofaction heroes (super powerful figures) Rodman was whatJack son(coach of the Bull s)calls theanti-hero(anti thesi s of a heronot a model person)has made himself a windfall as Jordansevil twin (opposite personality). With Rodman around, Jordan has become more of a deity than ever. The author assumed readers would be familiar wit h the appropriate references. In so doing, the authors can imply additional meanings, convey a sense of shared understanding, and express thoughts in a more picturesque way. Referenc e and association are often us ed to imply acceptanc e or rejection, approval or disapproval. Referenc e and association work in somewhat similar ways. Reference calls attention to a particular person, event, or idea. It draws a link to shared knowledge outside the text. Association invokes ideas and feelings through a particular reference. The difference between association an d reference is not as important as the key similarity: both reference and association involve inferring meaning or feelings not explicitly stated within a text. You do not have to be able to distinguish between reference and association. It is enough that you infer meanings and judgments that seemingly go beyond the specific words on the page. Rely on both

29

your prior knowledge and your imagination. Test your understanding by looking for consistency of meaning with the earlier and later discussion. Referenc es and association are common in articles in the popular press. While not as common in academic works, reference and association are often present, generally in a more subtle fashion.

Allusions
One special form of reference deserves special mention: allusions. Allusions are brief references to a well-k nown figures or events, often from literat ure, history, Greek myth, or the Bible). Plan ahead: it wasn't raining when Noah built the ark . Readers fill in their knowledge of Noah that he built a boat to endure forty days and night of rainto infer the appropriate meaninghere that a lack of preparation for unanticipated danger can have catastrophic consequences. SAYS: Make plans early. (Noah built an ark when it wasnt raining.) DOES: The remark issues a command to plan early and offers an allusion in support of that idea. MEANS: If you dont anticipate problems, you can run into major problems. Referenc e, association and allusions draw on shared cultural knowledge to enrich discussion. They exist in the mind of the reader, and need not be true. In the past decade, " Tiananmen Square" has come to trigger associations of a massacre. In June, 1998, in conjunction with President Clintons trip to China and his welcome in Tiananmen Square, various newspapers referred to a massacre of students demonstrators there on June 4, 1989. Tiananmen, where Chinese students died Baltimore Sun headline, June 27, 1998, p. 1A [the place] where pro-democ racy demonstrators were gunned down. USA Today, June 26, 1998, p. 7A the Tiananmen Square Massacre [where armed troops ordered to clear demonstrators from the square killed] hundreds or more Wall Street Journal, June 26, 1998, p. A10 the site of the student slaughter New Y ork Post, June 25, 1998, p. 22 In fact, there is no available evidenc e that students died in Tiananmen Square that night, as originally reported in various newspapers, includingThe New Y ork Times.Although others died in or near the square, the student demonstrators were allowed to leave peacefully. Nevertheless, in the varied phrasings, the reference works: Tiananmen=student massacre. ("The Myth of , And the Price of a Passive Press,"Columbia Journalism,September/ October 1998, p. 12. Readers initially unprepared to accept the above account should also note the author's res ponse to a follow-up letter, November/December, 1998, p. 10.)

Inference: Figurative Language

Further evidence of the need to read ideas, not simply words, comes from the use of figurative language. We often convey meaning by suggesting that somet hing is like something else. Mervin runs lik e a duck . The comparison is, of course, only suggestive. Mervin doesn't really run like a water bird. Here again, we must not talk only of what the remark says (Mervin runs with a waddle.), we must recognize wha t the remark does (It compares Mervin's running to that of a duck.) and from that infer what the remark means (Mervin is awk ward.) When, in Shakespeare'sRomeo and Juliet, Merrcutio says

30

A plague o'both your houses,... we know he is not wishing termites on certain dwellings, but cursing two families. In the commentary on Dennis Rodman [Cf.Inference: Association and Reference] , the final comment is a use of figurative language. With Rodman around, Jordan has become more of a deit y than ever. Michael Jordan has obviously not become an actual God, merely an object of admiration and inspiration. We read remarks such as these for the essence of the thought rather than for literal meani ng. We interpret an unspoken, and yet, we feel, implied meaning. How do we know statements are meant to be read figuratively? Quite simply: because the literal meaning does not make sense and another meaning does. When the literal meaning doesn't make sense, we try alternative understandings. Figurative meaning is not always obvious, as with the simile Time is lik e a river. or the metaphor Life is a game. We find meaning by using imagination, reason, and trial and error. In the case of Time is lik e a river. The meaning may be that both life and a river go on endlessly, or that time follows a definite but wandering path. We look for some common element. The metaphor Life is a game. might be suggesting that in life there are winners and losers, or that rules must be followed. We must turn to the larger context to be sure. Martin Luther King was a master of figurative language. Notice how easily your mind shifts bet ween literal and figurative meanings. In those days the Church was not merely a thermometer that recorded the ideas and principles of popular opinion; it was a thermostat that transformed the mores of society. Martin Luther King, Jr., "Letter from Birmingham Jail" Now is the time to lift our national policy from the quick sand of racial injustice to the solid rock of human dignity. Martin Luther King, Jr., "Letter from Birmingham Jail" One hundred years later, the life of the Negro is still sadly crippled by the manacles of segregation and the chains of discrimination. Martin Luther King, Jr., "I Have A Dream" Lik e a boil that can never be cured as long as it is covered up but must be opened with all its pus flowing ugliness to the natural medicines of air and light, injustice must lik ewise be exposed, with all of the tension its exposing creates, to the light of human conscience and the air of national opinion before it can be cured. Martin Luther King, Jr., "Letter from Birmingham Jail" Figurative language can shape perc eption. The metaphors of "surfing the Web" or "cruising the electronic highway" imply different mental images, and with that different understandings of the Internet: whether as a natural phenomenon to be experienced vicariously or a man -made network to be traveled with a purpose. (The topic is being investigated by an Internet metaphor study, http://www2.umdnj.edu/~ratzan/imet a4.html.] New denotations for words can evolve from figurative use of words. Consider the computer mousea cursor device that scurries around like the rodent. Computer users are the only ones to wallpaper windowst hat is, install a background image (wallpaper) on a portion of a computer screen (window).

31

Example: Translation and the Sixth Commandment

Translat ors attempt to capture bot h the denotation and connotation of words, as well as the cadence of the language. A translator's linguistic struggles," it has been obs erved," extend far beyond dictionary definitions, every word is surrounded by a halo of connotations and associations that radiate far beyond their literal meanings. And since all words carry meanings and suggestions in one culture that don't necessarily have an exact counterpart in another, it is inevitable that translators will end up with colors, tones, and meanings that don't exist in the original. Michele Rosen, " Translate This: 'A Man, a Plan, a Canal, Panama!" Or Was It Paraguay?,"The New York Times, July 25, 1998, p. A13. Translations, and Biblical translations in particular, are oft en subject to great debate. E veryone knows the Sixth Commandment:Thou shalt not k ill.The commandment has been invoked to argue against murder, abortion, mercy killing, ethnic cleansing, religious persecution, and assisted suicide, bearing arms in time of war, homicide in self defense, and the criminal death penalty. The original Hebrew term for "kill", however, actually means "murder." The command should read: Thou shalt do no murder. Which of the above would be excluded by this translation?

Implications For Reading

The choice of words can shape how a text portrays the world, and so readers must be sensitive to those choices. They must see what words say, do, and mean. Readers need not identify whether a meaning is a matter of denot ation and connotation. It is enough to be sensitive to both what words mean (denote) and to what words imply (connote). Si milarly, readers do not have to identify the specific form of figurative languagewhether you are dealing with a simile, metaphor, or any other form of figurative language. They must, however, see that the text does use figurative language and infer an appropriate meaning behind the words.

Implications For Writing

By choosing bet ween potential terms, authors define their topic and shape their reader's perception of that topic. One of the most critical decisions an author makes, then, is in the choice of wordsexactly what to call things. Writers must be alert to their possible choices, and sensitive to the meanings and nuances of each. They must not only convey the desired meaning, but the desired overtones as well. The broader one's vocabulary, the great er their sensitivity to the meaning of words. When in doubt, consult a dictionary. Figurative language is more picturesque. It enables writers to indicate layers of meaning. Figurative language ups the reader's interest and often conveys meaning hard to con vey in words.

32

Choices

Choices: The Ingredients of Texts

When examining a text, we would like to look for those elements, obviously, that control the meaning of a text. But what are they?

Choice: Photography
We can find a useful analogy between phot ography and texts. Photography seems objective. Photographs record "what's there," and nothing more. Or so it might seem. In fact, all photographers make choices that affect the final photograph. Anyone taking a picture must select the situationwhere to be, and when the camera and lenswhether to view a wide or narrow angle, with or without filters that adjust the color balance or image the filmwhether to use black and white or color film, slide, print or digit al film, and the sensitivity of the film to low light (ASA rating) the settingsthe effects of the lens opening (f-stop) and exposure time (shutter speed) on the sharpness and clarity of the image the shotwhere to aim, what to foc us on, and when to click the shutter Finally, photographers must choose how to process the film and develop subsequent prints factors that further affect the clarity and impact of the final image. A single phot ograph can only depict one portion of a particular scene at a particular instant as seen from a particular perspective. E very photograph presents a subjective view of the world. This is not to say that photographs do not have value. Clearly they do. While the selection may be subjective, the image may indeed provide an objective account of that portion off reality. Y et the choices outlined above ultimately control any meaning a viewer might find in the final print. Photographs don't lie, as the saying goes, but they do offer only select testimony.

Choice: Texts
As with photography, all written expression involves choices. Imagine you are seated before a blank page. What choices must be made? For openers you have to say something. Whether you start with an observation, a statement of belief, or simply a thought, you have to say something. We'll call that content. Having decided on something to say, you have to decide how to phrase your remark. What words will you use? Different terminology, aft er all, can change the meaning of a remark. Will you claim someone cheated, bent the rules, or committed a crime? Will you refer to President Bill Clinton, William Jefferson Clinton, or Monika's Bill? We'll call that a choice of language. Finally, you cannot simply rattle off disconnected remarks. (Well, you could, but they would have little meaning!) The remarks must be related to one another, from sentence to sentence and within the discussion as a whole. We'll call that structure,

33

Critical readers are consciously aware ofthe choice ofcontentThey look at the content, at the evidence marshaled for an argument, the illustrations used to explain ideas, and the detai ls present ed within a description. That uniqueness is defined by choices of cont ent, language and structure. . They distinguish between assertions of fact, opinion, and belief. They are aware whether evidence consists of references to published data, an ecdotes, or speculation, and they evaluate the persuasiveness of a text accordingly. Critical readers are aware ofhowlanguageis being used. They notice whether a text refers to someone as a "bean counter" (no respect) or "an academic statistician" (suggesting profess ionalism), whet her some is said to have "asserted a claim" (with confidence, and no need for proof) or "floated a claim" (without backing, as a trial balloon). And they draw inferences from the choic e of language they observe. Critical readers are aware ofthe structureof a discussion, both in terms of the movement of ideas from beginning to end and in terms of the relationship of ideas throughout the discussion. They distinguish between assertions offered as reason or conclusion, cause or effect, evidence or illustration. They recognize patterns of contrast and distinguish whether cont rasting ideas are shown to be dissimilar, competing, or cont radictory. All authors confront three areas of choice: the choice of content the choice of language the choice of structure Choic es must be made in each of these areas, and each choice contributes to the thought of the text as a whole. Note that we do not list elements such as tone, style, perspective, purpose, and message. While thes e are all us eful perspectives for discussing texts, they are all based on, and reflect, the choice of content, language, and structure.

Implications For Reading

To non-critical readers, texts provide facts. Knowledge comes from memorizing the statements within a text. To the critical reader, any single text provides but one portrayal of the facts, one individual's take on the subject. The cont ent of a text reflects what an author takes as the facts of the m atter. By examining these choices, readers recogniz e not only what a text says, but also how the text portrays the subject matter. The first step in an analysis of a text, then, must be to look at the content, at the evidence marshaled for an argument, the illustrations used to explain ideas, and the details presented within a description. Not that any particular author/text is necessarily wrong. We simply recogniz e the degree to which each and every text is the unique creation of a unique author. That uniqueness is defined by choices of content, language and structure. Critical reading thus relies on an analysis of choices of content, language, and structure. Critical readers are consciously aware of the act of choice underlying the content. They distinguish between assertions of fact, opinion, and belief. They are aware whether evidence consists of references to published data, anecdotes, or speculation, and they evaluate the persuasiveness of a text accordingly. Critical readers are aware of how language is being used. They notice whether a text refers to someone as a bean counter (no respect) or an ac ademic statistician (suggesting professionalism), whether some is said to have asserted a claim (with confidence, and no need for proof) or floated a claim (without backing, as a trial balloon). And they draw inferences from the choice of language they observe. Critical readers are aware of the structure of a discussion, both in terms of the movement of ideas from beginning to end and in terms of the relationship of ideas throughout the discussion. They distinguish between assertions offered as reason or conclusion, cause or

34

effect, evidence or illustration. They recognize patterns of contrast and distinguish whether contrasting ideas are shown to be dissimilar, competing, or contradictory. These web pages examine each of the three areas of choice. They considers their effect on the meaning, and how readers might identify and respond to them.

Implications For Writing

Your first step as a writer is to generate some content, to put forth assumptions, evidence, and arguments that you can then defend and from which you can draw conclusions. Having generated some initial discussion, the task as editor is then to adjust the discussion to assure that it presents a coherent, consistent, and comprehensive discussion As we shall see in Chapter Twelve, what we take as evidence lies at the basis of all argument, and shapes and predetermines the outcome of an argument. Writing is ultimately concerned with what we say (content), how we say it (language), and the flow from one assertion to another, how ideas connect to one another to convey broader meaning (structure). We may initially write in an unstructured manner, concerned simply with getting some ideas on the page rather than in creating a finished document right off the bat. Revision and editing then focuses on two concerns: correcting spelling, grammar, and punctuation ensuring a coherent flow of ideas. To ensure a coherent flow of ideas, we must focus on the three areas of choice: providing appropriate and sufficient arguments and ex amples ? choosing terms that are precise, appropriate, and persuasive? making clear the transitions from one thought to another and assured the overall logic of the presentation We edit to assure the content and language and structure. An increas ed awareness of the impact of choices of content, language, and structure can help students develop habits of rewriting and revision.

Choices: The Choice of Content

People obtain information and ideas from many sources. They meet people, attend classes, and overhear conversations. They watch television, listen to the radio, read newspapers, and surf the Internet. Some information they gain vicariously, some they seek out. They experience some things first-hand, on their own; others they experience second-hand, through the reports of others. Any two people will have different experiences. They will be in different places and see different things. They will meet different people and be influenc ed by different values and information. They will come to be interested in different topics, concerned with different issues, and hold different beliefs. From our unique knowledge and ex perience, we each make sense of the world. We come to accept different assertions as "the facts" of the matter. We make evaluations, form opinions, assert priorities, and arrive at conclusions. We reachand preachdifferent perceptions and understandings of the world.

35

Example: America
Imagine someone asked to list examples of American culture. They might mention the space shuttle, rap music, "Jeopardy," teen pregnancy, or Little League baseball. All of these are examples of American culture, yet each portrays America differently. The picture offered depends on the evidenc e chosen. America is all of them, you say? But it is also so much more. Any list would be incomplete, but one portrayal of reality Example: Time Capsules.

Example: Beard's History

At one time, many considered Charles Beard's A Basic History of the United States the aut horit ative text in its field. Students wanting to know American history read Beard. At some point in each student's career, however, each came to the realization that Beard's his tory of the United States offered just thatnot the history of the United States, but Beard's history of the United States. Beard, himself, was quite aware of the subjectivity of his own work: Every student of history k nows that his colleagues have been influenced in their selection and ordering of materials by their biases, prejudices, beliefs, affections, general upbringing, and experience . . . . Every written historyof a village, town, count y, state, nation, race, group, class, idea or the wide worldis a selection and arrangement of facts, of recorded fragments of past actuality. And the selection and arrangement of factsa combined and complex int ellectual operation is an act of choice, conviction, and interpretation respecting values, is an act of t hought. Facts, multitudinous and beyond calculation, are k nown, but they do not select themselves or force themselves automatically into any fixed scheme of arrangement in the mind of the historian. They are selected and ordered by him as he think s.
Charles Beard, "Written History as an Act of Faith,"American Historical Review, vol. 39, no. 2, p. 220.

Like any other text, Beard's offers but one of many credible accounts and interpretations. We can expect no more. Using the notion of fiction to suggest the extent to which all authors must transmit their own vision of the world, another writer observed: Realit y presents a random, infinite supply of details, and the job of writers whether you consider yourself a historian, a biographer, or a novelistis similar: to create a coherent narrative. You can't select everything, and in mak ing choices, thus putting an emphasis here and diminishing it there, you invariably move into the realm of fiction. {Jay Parini, Delving Into the World of Dreams by Blending Fact and Fiction, The Chronicle of Higher Education, February 27, 1998, p. B4.} A recent high school Americ an history text, Build Our Nation, covers the Depression Era and the entire term of President Roosevelt in thirty-three lines. On the other hand, it devotes two full pages to Baltimore Orioles shortstop Cal Ripken, Jr. 's breaking of Lou Gehrig's Iron Man record for consecutive baseball games played. What image of America do thes e examples, taken together, portray?

Example: Breast Feeding

The New York Timesposed the following question: The American Academy of Pediatrics recommends that babies be breast -fed for at least one year and beyond " for as long as mutually desired." Do you agree? The opposing ans wers appear below. YES Ruth A. Lawrence, M.D. Professor of Pediatrics, University of Rochester Our society has been so critical of women who have nursed beyond one year. It is perfectly normal. It is done around the world and has been for centuries. Babies wean at different times; in fact, many anthropologists think the normal time to breast-feed is about four years. In multiple studies, we find

36

that babies who are breast-fed beyond one year, instead of clinging to their mothers, are stable, selfassured children. The sexualization of the breast does not occur in this age group under ordinary circumstances. Babies associate the breast with nourishment and have no reaction that may be considered sexual. As for the father's role, it is equal but different. E very baby needs a non -nutritive cuddler. That's the father. NO Joan K. Peters Author, "When Women Work: Loving Our Children Without Sacrificing Our Selves" Late nursing limits the father's involvement and means that the husband can't take on some of the most intimate child-rearing tasks. His parenting is not about that close bonding, making it harder for him to participat e. Late nursing is also difficult for working women. When 66 percent of mothers of children under 6 work, who is available in that way and who wants to create that kind of dependence that such nursing engenders? It may be medically correct, but all decisions about children must be weighed, medical vs. social vs. psychological. What is best for a family must be considered, and that includes what is best for a child, because ultimately it means what is going to create the happiest atmosphere.
"Pro & Con: When to Say When To Breast-Feeding,"The New York Times, November 24, 1998. p. D8.

What are we to make of the disagreement? Indeed, why do the two respondents differ? The answer comes in examining the nature of the pattern of examples they eac h offer. The first looks at the effect on the baby, arguing that the practice is accepted as in the baby's best interest by the world, anthropologists, and studies. It rejects arguments related to advers e affects on sexuality and a denial of the father's role in the baby's life. The second looks at the effect on the parents and parenting, in fact granting the medical argument that it might be in the baby's best interests. In each case, the choice of content both det ermines and reflects the overall pers pective and understanding.

The Choice of Content: An Example

The dawning of the millennium saw resurgence in interest in time capsules. One writer collected suggestions from the residents of Fountain, Color ado. The proposed artifacts included: a piece of barbed wire a microprocessor a penny squashed by the local coal trains a pack of cigarettes a high-school code of conduct an issue of Girls' Life a hood ornament from a '57 Chevy a Beanie Baby a brick a Nintendo 64 a hearing aid a pumpkin seed a pack of wildflower seeds an audiotape of a high-s peed police chase Prozac Valium a television remote control a menu from Ralph's Fine Dining a Purple Heart Suggestions from other countries included:

37

Bharatpur, India (population 160,000) a bag of soil a closed-circuit camera a chillum, a traditional clay pipe a gold nose ring blue and white Bata "Hawaii" flip -flops Mantes-la Jolie, France (population 45,000) Einstein's brain vial of AIDS-tainted blood "The Communist Manifesto" by Marx and Engels and "The Revolution Betrayed" by Trotsky an unmodified, unsiliconed woman a kiss Bulawayo, Zimbabwe (population 1,500,000) a bottle of soil a condom a plastic beggar's cup ak ierie, a walking stick also used for hunting a pair of Bata " Toughies" school shoes Curitiba, Brazil (population 1,500,000) songs of Antonio Carlos Jobim processed, packaged meat indoor toilet Ipe amarelo, a local tree with yellow flowers pair of jeans James Bennet, "A Few of Our Favorite Things." The New York Times Magazine,"The New Y ork TimesDecember 5, 1999, p. 139. How do the different choices reflect the different cultures? What images of society do they project?

Recognizing What Examples Are ExamplesOf

To talk is to talk about the world. We might talk about our feelings when it rains, an event a century ago, the price of popcorn in Slovenia, how to tie a shoe lace, or the issues involved in creating a missile defense system. Whatever we talk about, we provide illustrations, examples, or evidence fr om the world. E ven when discussing deeply philos ophical issues, we us e examples of specific behaviors or actions. Examples justify and illustrate generalizations. Examples make abstract ideas concrete. Probably the single greatest key to critical reading is the realization that critical reading is not concerned with what the examplesare, as with what the examples are examplesof. For quick insight into this notion, consider the remark: Mervin runs lik e a duck . The statement uses a duck as an exampl e to suggest how Mervin runs. To understand how Mervin runs, we must recognize what running like a duck is an example of. After all, if ducks ran with grace and ease, the original statement would be a compliment ! An alternative statement such as Mervin s wims lik e a duck . has an entirely different meaning. The comparison takes similar form: Mervin's actions are compared to those of a duck. But we quickly see that the example of swimming like a duck is an example of something very different (grace) from running like a duck (awkwardness). In fact, wanting to suggest awkwardness, the author of the original statement, Mervin runs lik e a duck . need not have referred to a duck. Any example conveying the same image would do. Mervin runs lik e a goose. Mervin runs lik e an alligator.

38

Mervin runs lik e an obese emu. All of these statements convey the same message: Mervin runs in an awkward manner. The specific example does not matter; meaning lies in what the ex ample is an ex ample of. The example above is an example of figurative language; we expect one idea to stand in for another. And yet examples work much the same way, whether we are talking figuratively or not.

Conclusion v. Example: The Example Wins!

The impact of the choice of examples on our understanding cannot be overemphasized. Consider what happens if a text labels someone as moral, but offers an ex ample of that person behaving in an immoral manner: The candidate is a just and honorable man. He beats his wife an d lies to children. The example He beats his wife and lies to children. contradicts the claim The candidate is a just and honorable man. Which do you believe? The example wins. We disregard the claim and draw our own conclusion from the evidence: the candidate is not just and honorable, he's wicked! If we do not simply reject the passage for being contradictory, we must interpret the claim that he is just and honorable as sarcasm. But in no case will we disregard the evidence and accept the conclusion as offered. The importance of recognizing what examples are examples of cannot be overstated. This is the hallmark of an active, reflective, and critical approach to reading. Careful readers verify for themselves that the evidence offered does indeed justify the generalizations.

Numbers As Examples: Doing The Math

"Some statistics, " the syndicated columnist William Raspberry has noted, "contain their own dissertations, providing enough ammunition to support virtually any theory that comes to m ind." Measurements and numbers function in much the same way as other content. Just as we can ask what examples are examples of, we can ask what numbers are examples of. Authors, after all, do not cite a specific number just to convey information, but to s uggest that the price is small or large, warranted or ridiculous. In many cases, it is necessary to do some calculations to discover the significance of numbers. How might you respond to the following? Save $750 on your next new c ar! Seven hundred and fifty dollars might sound like a large sum of money. (It is!) But does it really represent a big savings? Is this an example of a bargain, a good deal compared to the usual discounts, or simply an appeal to financial savings? For a $15,000 car, $750 a mounts to 5 percent (750/15,000 = .05 = 5%), or 5 cents on each dollar. Such a discount may or may not be portray ed as significant by the text. The decision of whether it is actually a meaningful savings is up to each reader.

Examples From The Writer's Point Of View

Examples are specific instances of more general concepts or remarks. They are more concret e or actual repres entations of abstract or theoretical concerns. Writers use examples to describe, explain, or justify other remarks. When writers wish to show someone's behavior as unstable, they use an example. They select an example that portrays the evidence as they wish it to be seen. Not any example will dothe example chos en must be one that will be seen as an example of instability. But examples are just that: examples of something. They are not import ant in themselves, but for the ideas they represent. Finally, no author truly expects readers to remember the examples. Examples are there to play a role, to suggest or support broader ideas. And authors assume readers will infer that broader idea.

39

Examples From The Reader's Point Of View

When an author asserts a generalization, we, as readers, want proof. We want evidenc e (an example). We want evidence that is o o o reliable(t hat is, accurate and truthful representative(that is, not anecdotal or an exception relevant(that is, that applies to the situation at hand

Finally, as we saw above, we want evidence that is evidenceofthe generalization it claims to support. Without these qualities, examples fail to offer valid support. They are merely additional unproven assertions. When I come across a generalization or a general statement in history unsupported by illustration, historian Barbara Tuchman has observed, I am instantly on guard; my reaction is, 'Show me.' If a historian writes that it was raining heavily on the day war was declared, that is a detail corroborating a statement, let us say, that the day was gloomy. But if he writes merely that it was a gloomy day without mentioning the rain, I want to k now what is his evidence; what made it gloomy. Or if he writes, 'The population was in a belligerent mood,' or 'It was a period of great anxiety,' he is indulging in gener al statements which carry no conviction to me if they are not illustrated by some evidenc e. For a text to portray a person as just, miserly, intelligent, demented, or charming, it must do more than simply claim it. Some evidence to justify that generalizat ion must be present ed. When reading a text, we must first recognize that examples are indeed present. We must see that certain statements offer specific support for more general remarks. We can then take the next step and recognize what those examples are examples of. In the first instance, we describe the use of examples by the text, what the text does. In the second instance, we infer additional meaning from those examples, and, in the process, test whether the text really offers support for its conclusi ons.

Controlling Inferences: Patterns Of Content

The Problem
Discussion ofthe choice of contentincluded examples describing American culture. the space shuttle rap music "Jeopardy" teen pregnancy, or Little League baseball.

Say someone selected "Little League baseball" from the list. What would they be trying to show?
an interest in sports a preoccupation with sports from an early age a community group activity the formal organization of leisure activity a training program for professional sports, or the "American game"

Taken alone, the example is unclear, or ambiguous, at best. The example could be an example of any, or all, of the above.
40

Consider another example. How are we to interpret the following information? James Jones, candidate for mayor, was arrested for speeding.
Is this evidence of personal inadequacies an adventurous spirit social irresponsibility, or poor judgment

The same behavior, in different contexts, might be viewed as an example of different qualities. In different contexts, the candidate's bad driving record might be offered as
reason for voting for another candidate an irrelevant factor in assessing the candidate's qualifications negative evidenc e overridden by other more relevant evidenc e

For communication to work, authors must have some means of controlling how readers interpret their examples. They must find some means to assure that readers will classify concepts as they intended.

The Solution
The solution to the problem above lies inpatterns. Consider the earlier example of Little League baseball onc e again, this time within a pattern of examples: Little League baseball Fourt h of July picnics Election day voting

Within this pattern, Little League baseball is but one example of traditional American cultural activities, all involving a sense of community and fair play.
In the grouping Little League baseball teen beauty pageants school talent shows the example of Little League baseball might suggest a child version of an adult activity, or an activity that allows children to show off specific abilities additional examples might be needed to lock in a specific interpret ation. We check our interpret ation of any single example against other examples offered to support the same idea. Finally, consider the following list of assertions.

41

Copper bracelets can alleviate arthritis. Alcohol is modest amounts is good for digestion. A little pot never hurt anyone. On the face of it, these are all examples of liberal, but otherwise reasonable, thinking about health. But add one more: Copper bracelets can alleviate arthritis. Alcohol is modest amounts is good for digestion. A little pot never hurt anyone. The moon is made of green cheese. The statementCopper bracelets can alleviate arthritis.is now but one more example of an absurd claim. The more examples an author adds, the more a reader's options for interpreting any single example are constrained. Skillful aut hors supply sufficient examples to force a certain understanding of the overall pattern. Careful readers look for patterns of evidence so as not to res pond with an inappropriate reading of any single example.

Classifying Patterns Of Content

Interpretation begins with recognizing patterns of content throughout a text patterns of references, examples, illustrations, or ideas. As you read a text, group examples together to isolate between two and five major patterns. (Any fewer than two would not provide p atterns to work with; any more than five would probably fail to clearly distinguish major patterns). You might look at how how how how different different different different groups are portray ed, actions are presented, sources are characterized, historical periods are described,

Whatever a text does, you want to seehowthat text does it. The patterns you detect should include all of the assertions within a text (or the analysis would only be partial) and each pattern should be clearly distinguishable from others (or they would not be individual patterns). Having decided that a group of items go toget her, you must supply a name to indicate what the examples are examples of. Such a name should be general enough to encompass all of the items in the group, and specific enough to exclude items that do not belong. The processes of grouping and classifying actually go hand in hand, each directing the other as you expand the classification to include additional elements or contract the classification to exclud e other elements.

The Range Of Classification

Recall the earlier example: The government once classified k etchup as a vegetable in the school lunch program. Elsewhere we suggested the speaker/writer probably is not simply providing a lesson about the sch ool lunch program, but offering an example of bureaucratic stupidity. In light of the pres ent discussion this example might be read as an example of: an error by an unnamed employ ee of the Department of Agriculture typical bureaucratic mismanagement of a federal program evidence that government actions can be absurdly idiotic and counter to people's best interests

42

the incompetence of humankind How broadly can we safely abstract from the specifics of the original ex ample? Here again we must rely on patterns. We must look at other examples and generalizations within the text to judge how far the text wants, or will allow, us to go.

Example: Chevron Ad
As a final example of the power of recognizing what the example are examples of, consider how, in the following advertisement, Chevron Oil conveys an image of compassion and caring. To protect marine life, it helps to speak the language. When we dismantled four offshore oil platforms near Santa Barbara, we projected ki ller whale calls underwater to coax creatures away while we worked. A sonogram of the sound is pictured at left. It was just one part of an effort that went beyond regulat ory requirements to ensure not a single marine mammal was hurt. We began by hiring an independent marine mammal consultant who prepared a wildlife protection plan, especially crucial since the Santa Barbara Channel hosts one of the most diverse mixes of sea life in the world. To avoid the gray whale's migration season, we scheduled dismantlement during summer and completed it in the fall by working 24 hours a day. A legally required 1000-yard safety zone was voluntarily extended to four miles around each plat form. A large research vessel, smaller boats, aircraft and an underwater remot e-operated camera were all used for observation. Divers, acoustic specialists and scientists watched and listened for any wildlife entering the safety zone. Many of these measures were not required by government agencies but were dictated by our own policies. To us, environmental protection is not only right, it's smart business. So that we're not just known for how we work in an area, but how we leave it. Almost every assertion is an example of a broader idea. Implied meanings are in boldface. To protect marine life, it helps to speak the language. When we dismantled four offshore oil platforms near Santa Barbara, we projected killer whale calls underwater to coax creatures away while we worked. we cared about the well-being of those creatures, not only about our oil platform A sonogram of the sound is pictured at left. It was just one part of an effort that went beyond regulatory requirements we didn't have to do it--we cared enough to to ensure not a single marine mammal was hurt. We began by hiring an indepen dent marine mammal consultant we wanted to be objective to make sure we did the right thing from the animals' standpoint who prepared a wildlife prot ection plan, we were comprehensive in our efforts especially crucial since the Santa B arbara Channel hosts one of the most diverse mixes of sea life in the world. the task was difficult and complex with a great amount at stake To avoid the gray whale's migration season, again, we were knowledgeable and sensitive to the animals' needs we scheduled dismantlement during summer and completed it in the fall by working 24 hours a day. we worked extraordinarily hard and were extraordinarily careful. A legally required 1000-yard safety zone was voluntarily extended to four miles around each plat form. again, we took extra precautions and did more than we had to A large research vessel, smaller boats, aircraft and an underwater remote -operated camera were all used for observation. again, more care and expenditure to assure safety Divers, acoustic specialists and scientists watched and listened We were all eyes and ears for any problem s for any wildlife entering the safety zone. Many of these meas ures were not required by government agencies but were dictated by our own policies. makes explicit what has been implicit in the examples To us, environment al protection is not only right, it's smart business. So that we're not just known for how we work in an area, but how we leave it.

43

The boldfaced comments are not cases of reading in whatever we like, or even of reading in addit ional information. They express the very ideas the examples were designed to communicat e. We see, then, a number of patterns of content running throughout the text: actions taken for the benefit of the animals actions taken beyond regulatory requirements actions that go beyond the simple, the easy, or the obvious All of these actions depict Chevron in a caring light. This same process of classifying evidence and inferring meaning can be applied equally to the choice of language.

Patterns of Content: An Example

PoliceMagazine
In March 1995,Policemagazine published excerpts from the Firearms Discharge Assault Report for 1993. It indicated the targets fired at by New York City police officers. Critical readers do not simply read the data; they look for patterns in the data. They will notice patterns of targets fired at and patterns in the rate of success at each type of target. TARGET NUMBER OF SHOTS FIRED Perpetrators Dogs Accidental Discharge Protecting Other Officer Officer Intoxicated Suicide Into Locker Vehicle Girlfriend Attempted Suicide 928 155 43 18 10 8 6 5 3 3 NUMBER OF HITS 173 111 17 10 0 8 0 0 3 2

What inferences can you draw about the officers, their behavior...and their aim?

44

Choices: The Choice of Language

Just as authors must choose what to say, they must choose how to say it. The choice of content and language are closely related. Choices of content and language reflect and reinforce eac h other. On August 31, 1998, after an unprecedent ed three -year period of rising prices, the stock market dropped 513 points, the second largest point (as against percentage) drop in history at that time. For USA Today, it was an exciting day at the office: The Dow Jones industrial average [the most common stock market performance indicator] plunged 513 points Monday, erasing all of its 1998 gains as investors fled a global crisis that is upending the longest-running bull market in history. The Dow's 6.4% decline to 7539 brought its six -week loss to 19.3%, less than 1% shy of an official bear [selling] market. It now is down 5% for 1998. Damage was even greater in the broader markets; the Nasdaq composite [anot her stock performance indicat or] dropped 140 points, or 8.6%, to 1499 in its worst-ever point decline. "Dow's yearly gain gone on Wall Street,"USA Today, September 1, 1998, http://www.usatoday.com/ money/mphotof.htm. updated 02:21 AM ET. A reliance on statistics lends an objective tone to the coverage. Nevertheless, the pattern of terms plunged erasing fled upending down dropped worst -ever point decline clearly emphasizes the fall of the market. Other newspapers viewed the event differently. The opening paragraphs of the news articles below provide essentially the same information (content), but they tell somewhat different stories, implying different implications and consequences. For the Austin American-Statesman, it was a particularly dramatic day: The stock market's summer swoon turned into a dramatic rout Monday as the Dow Jones industrial average plunged more than 500 points, its second-worst point drop in history. Stocks now teeter on the edge of their first bear market since 1990. James F. Pelt z, "Do w dives 512 points,"Austin American Statesman, September 1, 1998, p. 1. The selection of dramatic terms (summer swoon dramatic routplunged teeter on the edge) cannot be missed. A writer for The New York Times saw the event in a more psychological vein: Gloom, fear, pain and queasiness. Around the nation, anxieties ran high yesterday as investors big and small watched the jagged lines fall and much of the year's profits evaporate in a breatht aking 512point plunge on Wall Street. Many called it scary, but almost no one seemed ready to panic. Robert D. McFadden, "It's Disturbing, to Put It Mildly, But Investors Say They'll Hold On," The New York Times, September 1, 1998, p. 1. Gloom, fear, pain and queasinessanxietiesbreathtaking plunge scarypanic. The choices of content and language focus more on the reaction of investors than on the stock market itself. A pattern of terms of adverse psychological feelings is apparent. The choice of terms invariably shapes how a topic is portrayed. All of the above articles convey the fact that the stock market dropped significantly. All of the articles also interpret the significance of that drop through their choice of language. Indeed, there is no way to convey the information without coloring the report in some way! To use bland language would itself downplay the significance of the event. The stock market average dropped 513 points yesterday. It had dropped by more once before. How we say something is often as important as what we say.

45

Choices: The Choice of Structure

The third area of choice open to an aut hor, and hence the third area to focus when analyzing and constructing texts, involves structure. Here we look at two meanings of structure, following the two parts of analysis. The first sense of structure we examine is in the sense of parts coming together to form a larger unit. The second sense is in terms of the relationships between parts.

Recognizing Parts
Analysis makes sense of something by breaking it into parts. Instead of examining a whole all at one time, we examine smaller, more isolat ed portions. Consider the following string of letters: XXOOXXOOXXOOOOXXXXOOOXXXOOO To make sense of the whole, we try to break it into more manageable, and hopefully more meaningful, parts. Initially we might see clusters of letters within the string: XX OO XX OO XX OOOO XXXX OOO XXX OOO From one perspective, we have grouped similar elements together, X's with adjacent X's and O's wit h adjacent O's. From another perspective, we have separated the whole into parts, either X's or O's. Either way, we break the whole into parts. Writers use this process when they signal the boundary of words with spaces, the boundaries of sentences with periods, the boundaries of paragraphs with indentation, the boundaries of sections with headings Readers use this model when they group words within a sentenc e into phrases or group paragraphs of a text into larger sections. From another perspective, we can analyze the earlier string as patterns (of X's or O's) running throughout the string. XX XX XX XXXX XXX OO OO OOOO OOO

OOO

We use this model when ex amining patterns of content or language usage throughout a portion of a text. In the above ex ample, we recognize that certain elements go together to form parts or patterns. Part and parc el of this action is recognizing how those elements go togetherand giving them a name. When we group items we classify them under a common heading. We recognize what they have in common and how they differ from other items. With texts, we talk about kinds of evidence, kinds of language usage, kinds of structure. As we shall see in detail below, much of critical reading depends on not only seeing what the ex amples are, but what the examples are examples of.

Recognizing Relationships
Forming parts is only the first step in analysis. We must then recognize how the parts are rela ted to each other. In the discussion here, we are conc erned with how words are relat ed to form phra se s and sentences how sentences are related to form paragraphs how paragraphs are related to form complete texts , and

46

how patterns of content and language are related to shape the thought of a text as a whole . The first case, grouping words to find meaning within sentences, involves the study of English grammar (see the Appendix). The remaining cases can be discussed in ter ms of the same set of relationship categories. The primary relationships of concern throughout our discussion are: elements in a series : a listing of similar items, often in a distinct order, whether in terms of location, size, importanc e, etc. time order or chronological listing : a series of events in order of occurrence general/specific relationship : examples and generalizations comparison : similarity and/or difference (contrast) logical relationships : reason/conclusion, cause/effect, and conditional relationship between factors

47

Ways To Read

Three Ways to Read and Discuss Texts

How we discuss a text is directly related to how we read that text. More to the point here, how we read a text is shaped by how we expect to discuss it. While you may not be asked to write about texts at school, and probably will not be asked to write about texts in your job, you must learn how to talk about texts to discover what makes them work.

Reading and Discussion

The follow excerpt (from the sample text ) serves as an example to define three forms of reading and discussion. In his social history of venereal disease, No Magic Bullet , Allan M. Brandt describes the cont roversy in the US military about preventing venereal disease among soldiers during World War I. Should there be a disease prevention effort that recognized that many young American men would succumb to the charms of French prostitutes, or should there be a more punitive approach to discourage sexual contact? Unlike the New Zealand Expeditionary forces, which gave condoms to their soldiers, the United States decided to give American soldiers after-the-fact, and largely ineffective, chemical prophylaxis. American soldi ers also were subject to court martial if they contracted a venereal diseas e. These measures failed. More than 383, 000 soldiers were diagnosed with venereal diseases between April 1917 and December 1919 and lost seven million days of active duty. Only infl uenza, whic h struck in an epidemic, was a more common illness among servicemen. You have read this passage, and someone asks you "to write about it." What should you say? What you write will vary, of course, with how you read. Your response to the text m ight take any of the following following: 1. Unlike the New Zealand soldiers in WWI, who rec eived condoms, American soldiers received after-the-fact and ineffective medicine that resulted in the loss of seven million days of active duty over close to a three year period. The passage compares the prevention techniques and diseas e outcomes of Americ an and New Zealand soldiers in World War I, noting that unlike the New Zealand soldiers in WWI, who received condoms, American soldiers rec eived after -the-fact and ineffective medicine that resulted in the loss of seven million days of active duty over close to a three year period. By examining the outcome of various approaches to condom use during World War I, the text makes a case for more realistic approaches to diseas e prevention in the future.

2.

3.

Each of thes e responses reflects a different type of reading, resulting in a different form of discussion. The major difference in the discussions above is in what is being discussed. 1. Unlike the New Zealand soldiers in WWI, who rec eived condoms, American soldiers received after-the-fact and ineffective medicine that resulted in the loss of seven million days of active duty over close to a three year period. The passage compares the prevention techniques and disease outcomes of American and New Zealand soldiers in World War I, noting that unlike the New Zealand soldiers in WWI, who received condoms, American soldiers rec eived after -the-fact and ineffective medicine that resulted in the loss of seven million days of active duty over close to a three year period. By examining the outcomes of various approaches to condom use during World War I, the text makes a case for more realistic approaches to disease prevention in the future.

2.

3.

48

Only the first res ponse is about the topic of the original text: American soldiers. The next two discussions are in some way about the text. More specifically, the three modes of respons e mirror our earlier distinction between what a text says, does, and means. 1. 2. 3. The first discusses the behavior of soldiers, the same topic as the original text. It restate s the original information. The second indicates how ideas or information are introduced and developed. It de scribe s the presentation. The third attempts to find a deeper meaning in the discussion. It interprets the overall meaning of the presentation.

In each of the responses above, a reader gains, and is accountable for, a different kind of understanding. Restatement restating what the text says talks about the original topic Description describing what a text does identifies aspects of the presentation Interpretation analyze what a text means asserts an overall meaning We can tell which type of discussion we have before us by examining what it talks about. How are these three different understandings achieved? To look beyond a literal, sentence -by-s entence meaning (restatement), you might ask two questions: What is the text doing, and what are the example examples of ? In this example the text contrasts two approaches to potential venereal disease among military troops, A -- recognizing that soldiers would succumb to prostitutes and providing condoms B -- attempting to discourage sexual contact combined with aft er-the-fact, and largely ineffective, chemical prophylaxis and the threat of court marshals. The text claims that approach A was a failure and offers evidence of that failure in terms of statistics ["More than 383, 000 soldiers were diagnos ed with venereal diseases bet ween April 1917 and December 1919 and lost seven million days of active duty." ] and a comparis on ["Only influenza, which struck in an epidemic, was a more common illness among servicemen."]. The extent of failure is conveyed by examples of a large number of affected persons and a comparison to a major diseas e outbreak. These realizations lead to the description of the text. An interpretation goes one step further. In this example, we recognize a message is conveyed by showing the failure of one approach over another. To find a greater meaning, we must recognize what the two approaches are examples of , and what the choice of one over the other might represent.

Example: A Statement
Your doctor tells you to eat less chocolate and drink less beer. A restatement would repeat the statement, The doctor said I should eat less chocolate and drink less beer. A description would describe the remark: The doctor advised me to change my diet. An interpretation would find underlying meaning in the remark: The doctor warned me to reduce my calories for the sake of my health. Only this final discussion attempts to find significance in the examples, that the foods mentioned are high calorie.

49

Example: Nursery Rhyme

Mary had a little lamb, Its fleece was white as snow, and everywhere that Mary went The lamb was sure to go. A restatement would talk about Mary and the lamb. Mary had a lamb that followed her everywhere. A description would talk about the story within the fairy tale. The nursery rhyme describes a pet that followed its mistress everywhere. The interpretation talks about meaning within the story, here the idea of innocent devotion. An image of innocent devotion is conveyed by the story of a lambs devotion to its mistress. The devotion is emphasized by repetition that emphasizes the constancy of the lambs actions (everywheresure to go. ) The notion of innoc ence is conveyed by the image of a young lamb, whit e as snow. By making it seem that this is natural and good, the nursery rhyme asserts innocent devotion as a positive relationship. Note the effort here to offer as much evidence from the text as possible. The discussion includes references to the content (the specific actions referred to), the language (the specific terms used), and the structure (the relationship bet ween characters). Try another nursery rhyme yourself. These ways of reading and discussion, --- restatement , description , and interpretation ---are is discussed in greater detail elsewhere.

Different Ways Of Reading For Different Occasions

Readers read in a variety of ways for a variety of purposes. They can read for information, sentence by sentence, taking eac h assertion as a discrete fact. They can read for meaning, following an argument and weighing its logical and persuasive effects. They can read critically, evaluating unstated assumptions and biases, consciously identifying patterns of language and content and their interrelationships. We can read any text, whether a nursery rhyme or complicated treatise on the origins of the American political system, in various ways. On the simplest level, Cinderella is a story about a girl who marries a prince. On another level, it is about inner goodness triumphing over deceit and pettiness. On occasion, we might read the same text differently for different purposes. We can read a news paper editorial backing a tax proposal to learn the content of the proposal, to see why that newspaper supports the proposal, to identify the newspaper's political leanings, to learn facts, to discover opinions, or to determine an underlying meaning. We can read a newspaper article on a drive by shooting as an account of the death of an individual or as a symptom of a broader disintegration of civility in contemporary society. We can even look at the names in a telephone book to find the phone number we want or to assess the ethnic diversity of the community. No single way of reading a text is necessarily better. They are simply different.

Which Way to Read

How we choose to read a particular text will depend on the nature of the text and our specific goals at the time. When we assume a factual presentation, we might read for what a text says. When we assume personal bias, we look deeper to interpret underlying meanings and perspectives.

50

Recall the opening paragraph of the health care article at the beginning of the chapt er. To answer the question, How did the New Zealand army prevent its soldiers from cont racting venereal disease during World War I? we read to see what the essay says. To answer the question, What issues does the text discuss? we read to see what the essay does. To answer the question, What concerns underlie the essays analysis of history? we read to see what the essay means. As a reader, you must know what you intended to do, and whether or not you have accomplished it. You must adjust how you read to the nature of the reading material, the nature of the reading assignment, and the manner in which you will be held accountable for your reading.

Restatement: Reading What a Text Says

Reading what a text says is more notable for what it does not include than for what it does. Reading what a text says is concerned with basic comprehension, with simply following the thought of a discussion. We focus on understanding each sentence, sentence by sentence, and on following the thought from sentence to sentence and paragraph to paragraph. There is no attempt to assess the nature of the discussion and no concern for an overall motive or intent. Reading what a text says is involved with rote learning. Restatement generally takes the form of a summary, paraphrase, or prcis. Restatements should avoid the same language as much as possible to avoid plagiarism and to show understanding. Reading what a text says is common under a variety of circumstances: when learning the definitions and concepts of a new discipline, when there is agreement on the facts of a situation and their interpret ation, when a text is taken to offer a complete and objective presentation, or when the word of a specific aut hor or source is accepted as authoritative. Readers simply accept what a text states. When first studying any academic topic, your initial goal will be to understand what others have discovered before you. Introductory courses ask students to learn terms, concepts, and dat a of the particular area of study. You are expected to use your imagination and your critical faculties to understand the concepts; you are not expected to question the assertions. The goal is to learn the commonly accepted paradigm for discussing topics in that field of study. Finally, remember that repeating the assertions of a text need not suggest a denial of critical thinking, merely a postponing of, or preparation for, critical thinking.

Description: Describing What a Text Does

Read an essay about AIDS, and you think about AIDS. But you can also think about the essay. Does it discuss preventive strategies or medic al treatments? Or both? Does it describe AIDS symptoms or offer statistics? Is the disease present ed as a contagious disease, a Biblical scourge, or an individual experience? What evidence is relied on? Does it quot e medical authorities or offer anec dotes from everyday people? Does it appeal to reason or emotions? These are not questions about what a textsays, but about what the textdoes.They are not about AIDS, but aboutthe discussionof A IDS. This second level of reading is concerned not only with understanding individual remarks, but also with recognizing the structure of a discussion. We examine what a text does to convey ideas. We might

51

read this way to understand how an editorial justifies a particular conclusion, or how a history te xt supports a particular interpretation of events. At the previous level of reading, restatement, we demonstrated comprehension by repeating the thought of the text. Here we are concerned with describing the discussion: what topics are discussed? what examples and evidence are used? what conclusions are reached? We want to recognize and describe how evidence is marshaled to reach a final position, rather than simply follow remarks from sentence to sentence. This level of reading looks at broad po rtions of the text to identify the structure of the discussion as a whole. On completion, we can not only repeat what the text says, but can also describe what the text does. We can identify how evidence is used and how the final points are reached.

Descriptive Formats: Ways to Describe a Discussion

Beginning, Middle And End Model: Changes In Topic
The simplest way to describe a text is in terms of a beginning, middle, and an end. In writing class, teachers often speak of texts having an introduction, body, and conclusion. The parts of a text do not have to be of the same length, and may not necessarily coincide with paragraph divisions. You can determine a beginning, middle and end only aft er having read the complete text. Many shifts that you note in your initial reading will seem minor once you get further into the text. What you take as the main idea in the early paragraphs you may come to see later as merely the catalyst for the discussion, or as a viewpoint refuted later in the discussion. Section headings may guide you, but critical readers verify that such headings adequately describe the text. How should you distinguish bet ween parts in deciding on a beginning, middle and end? The most obvious shifts are changes in topic. The discussion might shift in terms of discussing parts of a whole, one after another steps in a sequence, such as large to small, major to minor different time periods (chronological order) steps in a logical argument alternative conditions or circumstances shifts in viewpoint or perspective Note that parts need not be equal in length. One part may include a single sentence, another part five paragraphs. The point is not to divide the whole equally, but to divide it into units that recognize major features of the presentation as a whole. Finally, note that this model can be expanded to lower levels of analysis: beginning of discussion middle: main argument o beginning of main argument o middle of main argument o end of main argument end of discussion

52

The act of isolating a beginning, middle, and end of a discussion, by itself, doesn't tell us very much. But the effort can help you see the cont ent more clearly. The activity of trying to divide the text into major parts may be the first step in seeing the content in detail.

The Relationship Model

Statements, and hence ideas, are usually related to each other in one of the following ways: sequence or series a listing of similar items, oft en in a distinct order, whether in terms of location, size, importance, etc. time order/chronology : a series of events in order of occurrence general/specific relationship: examples and generalizations comparis on similarity differenc e (contrast) logical relationships reason/conclusion, cause/effect, conditional relationship bet ween factors These relationships are usually signaled by an appropriate term, such as one of the following: sequence or series: next, also, finally, lastly, then, secondly, furthermore, moreover time order/chronology : before, after, then, since, soon, until, when, finally general/specific relationship: examples, such as, overall, for instanc e, in particular comparis on o similarities similarly, lik e, in the same way, lik ewis e o differenc es (contrast): however, unlik e, otherwise, whereas, although, however, nevertheless, still, yet logical relationships o indicating reason/conclusion, cause/effect, and/or a conditional relationship bet ween factors: hence, because, if, therefore, so, since, as a consequence, in conclusion

These relationship concepts and terms can be used to discuss connections between paragraphs or larger sections of a text, as well as the relationship of patterns of content or language throughout a text. A particular fact may serve as a reason for a certain conclusion, a cause for a given effect, or an example for a generalization. An assertion isn't a reason, after all, until it is used as the basis for reaching a conclusion. An assertion doesn't nec essarily specify a cause until you assert an effect resulting from it. And any single sentence can be, at once, both a conclusion for the preceding discussion and an assumption for the following one.

The Rhetorical Model

An alternative model looks at the rhetorical nature of remarks. This model uses categories such as the following: definition : indicating what a term means explanation : discussing what an idea means description : indicating qualities, ingredients, or appearance

53

narration : recounting events elaboration : offering details argumentation : reasoning, or otherwise defending an idea evaluation : judging or rating In very general terms, we argue and evaluate positions, define and explain concepts, describe objects, and narrate events. Aspects of any or all may appear any where in a discussion. Recall the observation that relatively specific remarks tend to support other remarks by offering description, reasons, or examples. This model describes that process.

The Role Model

A text can also be examined according to the roles different portions play wit hin the discussion. Roles might include: Raise an initial idea, topic, or question Shape the scope or direction of the discussion Di scuss and/or explain an idea Conclude the idea or otherwise draw elements toget her Add material for emphasis, clarification, or purposes of persuasion, Remarks carrying out these roles can be found throughout a discussion, at all levels of analysis.

The Task Model

The final model presented here reflects tasks that different elements fulfill within a discussion. What has to be shown to reach a particular conclusion? What evidence is required? What aut horities would be applicable? What assumptions must be made? Whether we are trying to shape our own thoughts or evaluate the effectiveness of a presentation, we can attempt to determine the ingredients necessary to make a certain point. To show a lie, for instance, we have to indicat e a statement that contradicts the speaker's beliefs, and that the speaker intended to deceive. Without these specific elements, we might simply have someone misspeaking, more a case of ignorance than deceit. We might think of this model somewhat in the way we think of recipes. Recipes indicate not only the ingredients, but also how they are mixed, not only what to include, but also what to do. Recipes indicate steps to be accomplished and the ingredients with which each step is executed.

A Variety of Descriptive Formats

Here we look at various models for describing the development of thought within a discussion as a whole. We shift from a focus on the trees, if you will, to the forest.

Recognizing Structure: An Analogy

To a casual observer, a tennis match consists of one person serving the ball, anoth er returning it.over and over again. To someone who sees no structure, the game is simply a series of disconnected events. To someone who understands a tennis game, play is divided into games, games into sets, and sets into matches. The game has a structure. We make sense of the game as a whole by understanding each action within the overall structure of the match as a whole. Winning a point, for instance, has different implications at different parts of the game. Winning a point may be a minor occurrence early in the game, or match point at the end of the game.

54

Just as a tennis match involves more than exchanging serves, a text consists of more than simply a series of assertions. The notion of discussion, itself, suggests a starting point and a journey to other ideas. Let's say an essay starts: We hold this truth to be self-evident, that all people are created equal. Where could the discussion go from here? it could explain or explicateone of the topics mentioned: What do we mean by creat ed equal? Equal how? offer reasons or evidencefor the assertion: How self-evident? Why equal? draw a conclusion or inference Does this imply people should be treat ed, or how government should be formed? look at related thoughts Other statements may or may not be truths, or may be truths but may not be self-evident. examine historical examples What role does this idea play in the French Revolution? The Russian Revolution? The American Revolution? A text could do any, all, or none of the above. It all depends on where the author wants to go. Different authors will choos e to follow different lines of argument and different paths for the discussion to different conclusions. To fully understand the disc ussion as a whole, to understand the remarks within the context and in relationship to eac h other, we must be aware of the direction the discussion takes. Whatever a text may say, however a text may be organized, readers assume that the material upon the page is the realization of a plan. If a text is well written, there is a logical structure to the argument. There is a clear beginning and end, a clear starting point on which reader and writer can agree, and a clear conclusion developed and support ed by the earlier material. There is a clear intent and purpose to the remarks and the overall organization. We know where the author is going, and can watch as the text progresses to a seemingly inevitable conclusion. As when on a trip, readers want to know the ultimate destination and how long it will take to get there. As they travel/read, they want to be able to rec ognize the route or plan. We want to know whet her a story or article is one page or seventeen so that we might allocate our time and attention eff ectively. The shorter the piece, the longer we might dwell on each argument. The longer the piece, the more we might continue on when confused to see if the later material mak es things clearer. We want to have a sense of where a text or argument ends so that we can see our progress in perspective. To recognize a plan we must possess a double awareness: what the essay asserts about people and the world what the text says how the discussion within the essay is structuredwhat the text does We want to recognize an underlying strategy to the remarks, a sequenc e by which remarks play different roles in the development of the final thought. As with the tennis match, we anticipate a conclusion and try to recognize where we are at any step along the way.

A Variety Of Descriptive Formats

What a text "does" can be described in a variety of ways. Different models and terminologies view the structure of texts differently. Some models overlap one anot her, and aspects of a variety of models can be brought to bear to capture insights about any single text. Here we look at five models.

55

Beginning, Middle And E nd Model: Changes In Topic The Relationship Model The Rhetorical Model The Role Model The Task Model These models are explained at Descriptive Formats: Ways to Describe a Discussion All of these models have a common purpose: to describe the flow of discussion and/or indicat e how arguments are advanced. In practice, you should draw on as many models as you can to describe the structure of a presentation. The ideas here should be familiar to most readers. The point is not that you must use all of these models in a discussion of a text, but that models and terminology such as thiscan be used to recognize and discuss what a text does at any point in the discussion. NOTE: We should note one additional factor. We can oft en describe one remark in a variety of ways. Just as a person may, at the same time, be a son, father, and brother to different peopl e, or a politician may hold views to the right of one politician and to the left of another politician, so a single sentence can be described in a variety of ways. A sentence may be a reason, an explanation, or a description in relationship to different remarks. This is one reason for having a number of descriptive models. To truly describe something we often have to describe if from a variety of perspectives and in a variety of different relationships to other things.

Example: A Solution
The following passage is from a chemistry textbook. A SOLUTION is a mixture of t wo or more substances dispersed as molecules, atoms or ions rather than as larger aggregates. If we mix sand and wat er, the sand grains are dispersed in the water; since the grains are much larger than molecules, we call this mixture a suspension, not a solution. After a while, the sand will settle to the bottom by gravity. Imagine doing this experiment with finer and finer grains. When the grains are small enough, they will not sink to the b ottom, not matter how long you wait. We now have a colloidal dispersion. Though we cannot see the individual grains, the mixture appears cloudy in a strong beam of light (Tyndall effect). If, however, we stir sugar wit h water, the grains disappear and the result is a liquid that does not scatter light any more than water itself. This is a true solution, with individual sugar molecules dispersed among the water molecules. What have we here? A SOLUTION is a mixture of two or more substances dispersed as molecules, atoms or ions rather than as larger aggregates. The passage opens with a definition of solution. Note that a solution is not simply a mixture of two or more substances but of two or more substances dispersed as molecules, atoms or ions We must note the complete noun phrase. The passage continues: If we mix sand and water, We recognize the beginning of a hy pothetical experiment, presumably as part of an explanation the sand grains are dispersed in the water; further description of experiment. since the grains are much larger than molecules, reason we call this mixture a suspension, not a solution. An alternative situation and alternative definition of a suspension After a while, the sand will settle to the bottom by gravity. continuing description of hypot hetical experiment

56

Imagine doing this experiment with finer and finer grains. continuing description of hypot hetical experiment When the grains are small enough, they will not sink to the bottom, not matter how long you wait. same experiment, different size particles. We now have a colloidal dispersion. and third definition: colloidal dispersion. Though we cannot see the individual grains, the mixture appears cloudy in a strong beam of light (Tyndall effect). further description of colloidal dispersion. If, however, we stir sugar with wat er, additional change in experiment the grains disappear and the result is a liquid that does not scatter light any more than water itself. This is a true solution, with individual sugar molecules dispersed among the wat er molecules. final explication of a solution, emphasizing the size of the dispersed material as molecules. A critical, self-aware reader thus reads on two dimensions: both what the text says and what it does. Indeed, each feeds the other recognition. Each is impossible without the other.

Implications For Reading

A description of a presentation might draw on any or all of the previous models at various levels of discussion. Differing perspectives might be employed at different levels of analysis. The goal of each is the same: to isolate elements that shape how ideas are portrayed within the discussion. We can ask why a statement is included in a text whic h is like asking why a speaker would bot her saying it. What does it help accomplish? What purpose does it serve? How does it lead into or follow from ot her remarks? How are the ideas connected?

Implications for Writing

"What to say...what to say." It's the traditional writer's lament. "Where do I start?" "What should I say?" But writing is more than saying. Writing a text--producing a completed text, not just writing sentence after sentenc e--involves constructing a discussion. To "make a case does not mean to simply say certain things. To make a case a writer must construct an argument, piece together ex amples and illustrations and justifications and explanations and conclusions. It's not only what we say, it's also what we do. As we've seen above, many ideas are conveyed not by stating them so much as by the reader inferring them from the relationships of ideas within the discussion. When we know exactly what we want to say, we simply go out and say it. Other times, we have to assemble our evidence and our thoughts. We weigh which remarks should come first, and what additional evidence and arguments are essential to our conclusion. However we start, after some initial writing all writ ers must become readers. We must realize not only what we have said, but what we have done. And we must evaluate how what we have done will get us where we want to go. What additional ingredients are required? What other aspects must be considered? What misunderstandings must be prevented? This proc ess is facilitated by two concepts: the notion of structure, and the notion of doing as well as saying. The models for describing texts suggest other ways of outlining a text. We can outline not only shifts in topic, but also shifts in tactics, as when we shift from introduction to explanation to argument as with the rhetorical model. We can outline in terms of tactics of enticing, addressing, and convincing the reader as with the role model. We can outline in terms of similarities, differences, and logic al implications as with the relationships model. And we c an mix the various models.

57

Finally, we can outline not only from beginning to end, but also in terms of patterns running throughout a text. We can outline the various viewpoints to be evaluated or the various participants to be discussed to make sure we hit all the required bases throughout the discussion. The better the writing, the more the sentences clearly follow from, and lead, to one another. Writers can lead their reader and assure their own structure by making sure to include transition and relationship words. A sign of poorer writing is independent, disconnected thoughts and with that assertions that are not support ed by details, reasons or examples.

Interpretation: Analyzing What a Text Means

This final level of reading infers an overall meaning. We examine features running throughout the text to see how the discussion shapes our perc eption of reality. We examine what a text does to convey meaning: how patterns of content and language shape the portrayal of the topic and how relationships between those patterns convey underlying meaning.

Repeating v. Analyzing: Making The Leap

Rightly or wrongly, much of any student's career is spent reading and restating texts. For many, the shift to description and interpret ation is particularly hard. They are reluctant to trade the safety of repeating an author's remarks for responsibility fortheir ownassertions. They will freely infer the purpose of an action, the essence of a behavior, or the intent of a political decision. But they will hesitate to go beyond what they take a text to "say" on its own. They are afraid to take responsibility for their own understanding. Others are so attuned to accepting the written word that they fail to see the text as a viable topic of conversation.

Look at Leonardo da Vinci's painting Mona Lisa, and you see a woman smiling. But you are also aware of a painting. You see different color paint (well, not in this illustration!) and you see how the paint was applied to the wood. You recognize how aspects of the painting are highlighted by their placement or by the lighting.

When examining a painting, you are aware that you are examining a work created by someone. You are aware of an intention behind the work, an attempt to p ortray something a particular way. Since the painting does not come out and actively state a meaning, you are consciously aware of your own efforts to find meaning in the painting: Is she smiling? Self-conscious? Alluring? Aloof? Looking at the Mona Lisa, you know that you are not looking at Mona Lisa, a person, but The Mona Lisa, a painting. You can talk not only about the meaning of the picture, but also about how it was crafted. What is the significance of the dream landscape i n the background? Why, when we focus on the left side of the picture, does the woman looks somehow taller or more erect than if we focus on the right side? The more features of the painting that you recognize, the more powerful your int erpretation will be. When reading texts, as when reading paintings, we increase understanding by recognizing the craftsmanship of the creation, the choic es that the artist/author made to port ray the topic a certain way. And yet there is still that feeling that texts are somehow different. Texts do differ from art insofar as they actually seem to come out and say something. There are assertions "in black and white" to fall back on. We can restate a text; we cannot restate a painting or action. Yet a text is simply symbols on a page. Readers bring to their reading recognition of thos e symbols, an understanding of what the words mean within the given social and historical context, and an understanding of the remarks within

58

their own framework of what might make sense, or what they might imagine an author to have intended. There is no escape; one way or another we are responsible for the meaning we find in our reading. When a text says that someone burned their textbooks, that is all that is there: an assertion that someone burned their textbooks. We can agree on how to int erpret sentence structure enough to agree on what is stated in a literal sense. But any sense that that person committed an irresponsible, impulsive, or inspired act is in our own heads. It is not stated as such on the page (unless the author says so!). Stories present actions; readers infer pers onalities, motives, and intents. When we go beyond the words, we are reading meaning. Readers infer as much, if not more, than they are told. Readers go beyond the literal meaning of the words to find signific ance and unstated meanings and authors rely on their readers ' ability to do so! The reader's eye may scan the page, but the reader's mind ranges up, down, and sideways, piecing together evidence to make sens e of the presentation as a whole.

Additional Observations
A number of observations should be made lest there be misunderstanding.

All Three Modes of Reading and Discussion Are Legitimate

The models are designed to identify varying levels of sophistication and insight in reading and discussion. While one approach may be more complex than another, no one way of reading a text is necessarily better than another. They are simply different, and involve different observations and reasoning. The key thing is to know which style of reading you want to do at any time, how to do it, and how to tell whether you are actually doing it successfully.

All Reading Involves More Than One Form of Reading

The divisions bet ween the three modes of reading are, to some extent, artificial. Dividing reading into reading what a text says, does, and means is somewhat like dividing bicycle riding into concern for balance, speed, and direction. They are all necessary and affect one another. Speed and direction both affect balance; we will fall off, or crash, without all three. And yet we may focus on one or another at any particular time. We can parse each out for analysis. While the modes of reading and discussing texts can be separat ed out for purposes of discussion, and it is relatively easy to distinguish bet ween the resulting forms of discussion, in practice these reading techniques overlap. Any particular text can, and will, be read at various levels of understanding at once. We cannot understand what a text says without recognizing relationships between sent ences. We cannot even understand sentences without drawing inferences that extend beyond the words on the page. Observations and realizations at any one level of reading invariably support and spark observations at anot her. Observations characteristic of all three forms of response can be included in an interpretation. Finally, while it is relatively easy to distinguish bet ween forms of discussion. restatement, description, and interpretationa description might include restatement for the purposes of illustration, and an interpretation may be supported with descriptions of various portions of the text and even restatement of key points (see the example above). In the end, the "highest" level of remark characterizes the discussion a whole.

These Are Not the Only Ways To Respond To a Text

Restatement, description and interpret ation are not the only ways one can respond to a text. But they are the ones of interest here, if only because they are the responses that must precede most other forms of response. Readers can obviously offer their own ideas on a topic but that does not fall under the topic of discussing a text. Readers can criticize an author's handling of a topic bas ed on

59

their own knowledge or views, evaluate the writing style, or attack the honesty of the author. These too are legitimate forms of respons e, but they require a critical reading of the text first if they are to be meaningful. The first order of business is to make sense of the text, and it is with that task that our efforts are concerned here. Finally, we might note that book reports or reviews often contain additional elements, such as a feeling for the writing style, comparison to other works, the reviewer's emotional res ponse to the reading experience, or the circumstances of publication. And book reviewers often use the book under reviews as a taking-off point for a discussion of the topic itselfall elements that go beyond, but depend on, a careful reading of the text in question.

60