Discussion Leading

Discussion Leading
(part of 15% Intellectual Participation Grade)

As part of your intellectual participation, I will ask each of you to "master" a term and come to class prepared to discuss how it relates to our topic on a given day. While I am not asking you to give a formal presentation, or to hand anything in, I am asking you to prepare some substantive comments on how that term illumines our questions and concerns. Sometimes, the connection of your term to our class discussion may seem obvious and explicit; at other times, it may seem inferential and implicit. At all times, your term will most likely reveal something useful about the social, historical, or linguistic contexts of what we read. We are not relying on you to provide us with a generic definition of your term. We are relying on you to help us understand how the nuances of your term can both complicate and intensify our reading of the text.

By the end of Week 1, I will randomly assign the following terms:

• affective fallacy (10/29 with Miller) - Marjulie (Tracy) Avril
• alterity (11/26 with Gates) - Gabrielle Bacetti
• commonplaces and/or topoi (9/3 with Aristotle) - Dr. Graban (my gift to you)
• deconstruction (10/8 with Lakoff and Johnson) - Nicole Chmura and Justin Veghte
• dialectic (9/5 with Barthes) - Dr. Graban (my gift to you)
• dialogic criticism (10/3 with Bakhtin 11/7 with Mitchell) - Blanca Villagrana Kaitlin Bezold
• dialectical materialism (11/14 with Benjamin) - Nick Cleary
• diaspora (11/26 with Cooper and Johnson) - Summer Davis
• differance (10/1 with Derrida) - Andrew Ealum and Katelin Wilkerson
• ecocriticism (9/17) with Welling - Stephen Fenech
• ecriture feminine (11/21 with Butler) - Daniel Lange
• episteme (9/5 with Foucault) - Dr. Graban (my gift to you)
• erasure (10/1 with Derrida) - Marilyn Malara
• feminist criticism (9/12 with Campbell) - Joe Miller
• gynocriticism (11/21 with Butler) - Will Oldham
• hegemony (11/26 with Gates) - Cristina Palmer
• heteroglossia (10/3 with Bakhtin) - Alek Pierce
• hybridity (11/21 with Butler) - Tanner Roan
• identification (11/19 with Burke) - Jude Rodriguez and Jordan Gregory
• intentional fallacy (10/29 with Miller) - Lee Fowler
• intertextuality (10/24 with Ridolfo and DeVoss) - Alexander Fundora
• langue and parole (10/8 with Lakoff and Johnson) - Jordan Gregory
• logocentrism (10/10 with Burke) - Morgan Hough
• Marxist criticism (11/7 with Mitchell) - Kayla Hughes
• meiosis (11/5 with Killingsworth 11/7 with Mitchell) - La Rhonda Johnson
• reader-response criticism (10/31 with Landow) - Kimberly Kelly
• sign and/or signification (9/24 with Locke) - Meghan Kelly
• socialist realism (11/12 with Bolter and Grusin) - Jordan Gregory 
• speech act theory (10/8 with McCloud) - Duante Smith
• structuralism (10/31 with Landow) - Taylor Stork
• stylistics (10/3 with Bakhtin) - Austin Tillery
• symbol (10/10 with Burke) - Hannah Toshie

One more thing! These are the texts I expect you to consult:

• The Bedford Glossary of Critical and Literary Terms (our required text) 
• The Oxford English Dictionary (OED) (online access with FSU login)
• Critical Terms for New Media (if relevant)
• Introductory Glossary of Literary Theory (if relevant)
• Silva Rhetoricae (if relevant)
• The Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy (if relevant)
• The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (if relevant)
• our background readings ("skimmers") in Bb (if relevant)

and if you feel like you need more background, any of the following texts at Strozier Library will be helpful (yes -- that means you would need to go there):

• A Glossary of Literary Terms, 9th Edition (eds. M. H. Abrams and Geoffrey Galt Harpham), in Strozier reference
• The Columbia Dictionary of Modern Literary and Cultural Criticism (eds. Joseph Childers and Gary Hentzi), in Strozier reference
• Encyclopedia of Rhetoric and Composition: Communication from Ancient Times to the Information Age (ed. Theresa Enos), in Strozier reference
• Rhetoric: Concepts, Definitions, Boundaries (William A. Covino and David A. Jolliffe), Strozier 4th floor

While they have great merit on their own, dictionaries, simple encyclopedias, and search engines are not sufficient by themselves for this task (although a really great encyclopedia article might be able to enhance the other sources above). You owe yourselves much more than that, and I cannot accept less than that. Enough said.

As always, I am on hand to assist.

-Dr. Graban