In the readings for this week, Philipsen and Katriel tell us about different ways that cultural groups have conceptualized "communication." One thing we know for sure is that communication is not believed to accomplish the same goals or be useful for the same things in each cultural community, and that different communities develop different ideas about what "kinds" of communication exist. Philipsen and Katriel do research in some communities in the U.S. to explore two different forms of communication that exist in those communities "small talk" and "real communication" which are believed by those communities to accomplish two very different sets of conversation goals.

Are these two forms of talk that Katriel and Philipsen identify familiar to you? Do you use them yourself? What other kinds of communication can you think of? Give one example and try to identify some features of that "way of speaking." What is it used for, with who, in what settings?

Philipsen researches what it means to "speak like a man" in Teamsterville. What does it mean to "speak like a man" in your community? How is this similar or different from the community Philipsen is in?

Philipsen points out that there are implications for our identity in the way we talk and that speaking in a particular way is, in part, how we maintain our association with particular cultural communities. This is evident when some members of the community Philipsen studys leave to go to school and return speaking differently. The community takes this as a sign that the person has changed and wonders if they "belong" anymore. In this way, the way we speak is deeply tied to our cultural communities. What do you think the consequences of this are for debates about the need for everyone to speak "Standard English" rather than "Black English," or "Latino English." Are we not only asking people to speak differently, but perhaps abandon their culture or communities?