Trevino 1

Sarah Trevino
3.27.2015
Discourse Analysis
Discourse of the Service Professional in Practice, Discourse Analysis ePortfolio Part 1
Through Discourse Analysis I have managed to take the back end of interpreting and
understand exactly how much it affects the front end. By this I mean, that what you see
standing in front of you in an interpretation; the hands, the face, the bodythat is all the front
end of interpreting. It is the front showroom of the store. But the back end is all of the work that
goes into interpreting; the word processing, changing English words into an understandable and
clear message, or vice versa ASL signs into a clear, understandable English message.
Throughout this process of learning, we have written many works discussing and reflecting upon
pieces of discourse. This is an important process, because if we cannot understand what we are
thinking and how we are coming to the word or style choices that we are, whether it be in ASL or
English, we cannot know why we might have picked a word or sign. This is important because if
we can know what is more effective or what is less effective then we can know what to eliminate
from our work as interpreters. I will be analyzing my past works in Discourse Analysis based on
three different categories; Analytical Reflection about own learning, Professional Discourse
Style and, Academic Presentation and Organization.
In Analytical Reflection, one should be able to introduce and define discussed topics,
provide relevant and specific examples, clearly explain how and why the examples support the
argument and incorporating past input into future works to improve assignment. I see from my
work in the beginning of the semester with my reflection on Deborah Tannens book (Jan 25)
Thats Not What I Meant! I began to use specific examples such as the example of when two
people get into an argument, they may just say Fine. Just to end the argument, when in reality
they are still upset but dont want to talk anymore. Specific examples were seen as well, in my

Trevino 2
first reflection, Meaning Based Interpreting for Terps (Jan 18) with the examples of the old Lets
eat, Grandma joke and my sisters story of manipulation. However, throughout my work, not
only in the reflection on Tannens work, but also even my most recent piece, Hatch and
Instructor Commentary (March 22) I notice that I was not using specific enough examples in
able to refute my point. This is an indication that I was not applying Dr. Winstons feedback
Specific examples are needed throughout.(Tannen Jan 25) Not only does not applying the
feedback hold my works back from becoming more influential and more effective, but it also
makes the arguments less effective. By not using specific examples, or introducing my topicsas exemplified in the Jan 18th article by my statement this reminded me of an earlier article I
read that said all languages are equal.. By not introducing where I had read that, it weakened
the validity of the point in even mentioning that quote. For all the reader knows, I could have just
made the quote up. For the future I need to work on taking Dr. Winstons feedback and put
specific, relevant and sometimes from my own experience (Tannen Jan 25), examples into my
work
In the usage of Professional Discourse style it should include using professional
discourse that includes objective description of language and relating the discussion to work
and professional discourse. In my last written piece, Hatch and Instructor Commentary (March
22) using subjective was a large issue, and in fact Dr. Winston commentated on it in the
beginning of the first paragraph Eliminate subjective language(Winston Feedback March 22)
as she was referring to my usage of the word I felt. This is not effective to analyzing because it
is not professional, and similarly to eliminating examples, weakens the point that I, the writer,
was trying to make. Later on in the same piece I go on to say sounded more proper. It seems
as though my usage of judgmental language (Winston Feedback March 22) also led to the
belief that I had not understood or read all the requirements for the work, as noted in Dr.
Winstons feedback The essay needs to demonstrate in much more depth that you have read

Trevino 3
all required materials and specifically applied them to your learning.. This was another place
that the Hatch (March 22) piece was ineffective, as noted by Dr. Winstons feedback It also
requires specific and exact examples from the videos, as we have practiced before in class.
The other part of using professional discourse style is relating the discussion to work and
professional discourse. This (Hatch March 22) seems to be the first piece of work that note was
made about a lack of relation to class. In fact, in my Tannen piece (Jan 25), Dr. Winston made
the comment of excellent synthesis of other topics studied! Not using subjective or judgmental
language is detrimental to effective and professional description. Judgmental language weakens
the point being made by relating it to ones feelings and opinions rather than disputable or
indisputable-if your argument is strong enough- facts. Similarly, especially for the sake of
academic works, not relating the discussion to other pieces of work creates an air of
misunderstanding within the piece. Connecting it to other pieces helps create a more effective
point, a more reliable argument and overall a more clear understanding of the point. This is
seen by the fact that my Tannen piece was an overall more effective piece, and received a
grade of 8/10 (80%), rather than the less effective and influential Hatch piece, that only received
a grade of 11/15 (73%).
The final piece of analysis is Academic Presentation & Organization. This is represented
by works reflecting careful review of instructions and explanations, the piece of work addressing
all requirements effectively, referring to examples, study sheets, review notes etc, clearly and
thoughtful organized with cohesive discussion, effectively proofread, includes accurate and
effective references and citations, demonstrates correct formatting and addresses any and all
other academic and professional expectations. Out of the three sections (Analytical Reflection,
Professional Discourse Style, and Academic Presentation), I would say this is the section that
included the most ineffective work. Almost every piece of work comes with the feedback More
proofreading is needed (Interpreters as Applied Linguists, 1/18) and Citations and references

Trevino 4
of the resources is needed. This, similarly to my analytical reflection issues, indicates that
feedback is not being taken into consideration during the writing process. However, just as
important as specific examples, and objective language is to the effectiveness of a message,
citations and proofreading is important to the effective and completion of an assignment. Many
places, including the University of Cincinnati, not citing sources are reason to believe
plagiarism, which is grounds for expulsion from the school. So not only is citing sources
important for general fairness to the author, and to the reader-but it is also important for
academic validity. Part of the backroom of interpreting includes being able to understand and
analyze not merely ASL, but also English. In English class, proofreading is an important piece of
the writing process because it cleans up writers work, makes the writer more aware of their
mistakes and gives them a chance to fix them before submitting a final draft. As evidenced by
the fact that almost every one of my essays or reflections has a note of proofreading being
necessary, this is something Dr. Winston requires as well. In order to create effective
interpretations in ASL it is important to be aware of your problems in English. This will be
something that will be worked on from here on out, as it is necessary to create a clear and
concise message, which cannot occur without proofreading. Another important aspect to
Academic Presentation is submitting an assignment in the correct format. When the second set
of English TAP discourse mappings were being submitted, the goal of submitting the correct
format was not being met. This is evident by the reflection in my grade of 1s-3s out of 10 due to
not submitting the three maps in one complete file. However, since then I have made sure to
submit the correct file, whether it be .EAF, .DOC or .PDF. Not since that second round of
discourse maps, have I submitted a file in the wrong format.
This analysis has brought to my attention the flaws in my work, as well as the point in
following a piece of feedback from an instructor. For the future I know that I need to provide
specific, and sometimes personal examples into my work in order to solidify and further explain

Trevino 5
my point; elimination of all judgmental words, as they do not add to the message anything other
than to create a less effective and less professional description; and finally to always cite my
resources and proofread over my assignments as this will make them both more clear and,
more reliable and valid. The feedback provided by the instructor is not meant to merely tear
down the confidence of the student, but to strengthen their future work so that instead of
focusing on how unprofessional and unreliable the work sounds, the reader is able to focus on
what the argument the writer is trying to make and how they are going about that point.
References (list by date, most current first)
1. Instructor input <Hatch and Instructor Commentary> <March 22, 2015>
2. Instructor input < Tannen> <Jan 25>
3. Instructor input <Meaning Based Interpreting> <Jan 18>
1. Original essay <Hatch> <March 22>
2. Original essay <Tannen> <Jan 25>
3. Original essay <Meaning Based Interpreting> <Jan 18>