INTEGRATED ACADEMIC LANGUAGE SKILLS I

Lesson 1 – Introduction: Why do we write?

Frederick Douglass – The narrative of a life  Autobiography of a slave: he illegally flew away from Carolina
to Pennsylvania to escape from slavery and published this book. It was common sense to think that black
people weren’t made to write or learn, therefore enslavement would never suit him. He felt like something
was being kept from him: knowledge.

Socrates  You’re a philosopher only when you can spontaneously answer to a question without preparing
it in advance, just because you’re a carrier of knowledge.

1. Why writing and reading is important and how to use these skills.
2. Different types of important discourses

Why is writing important? Writing allows you to store information and pass down your knowledge and
thought in a clear and logical way so that other people can understand it and reflect on it. Writing is a
cultural practice to preserve information. Writing is much more accessible, accurate, effective, and reliable
than oral speaking. Grammar, semantics, and logics are the background information necessary to decipher
the code of language. Meaning making via grammar  semantics.

Why do I need to improve my writing skills? To be more straight-forward and convey a message or explain a
theme in a clear and effective way according to the context and the audience.

Derrida’s On Grammatology - Writing before the letter (pages 2-10)

The exergue (incipit) focuses on the concept of logocentrism, intended as the metaphysics of phonetic
writing, which controls the concept of writing, the history of metaphysics and the concept of science. We
can consider grammatology as the science of writing since they are both connected to the concept of sign
and the relationship between speech and writing.

The end of the book and the beginning of writing – Socrates, he who does not write (Nietzsche)

The word “language” has undergone a process of devaluation since it is corrupt by the ideas of loose
vocabulary, cheap seduction, and ignorance. This is a symptom of the critical historic-metaphysical epoch
we’re living in, in which language is facing a problematic situation. Everything that was once intended as
language can now be summarised under the idea of writing, this means that writing now includes
language. Writing cannot be reduced to a simple instrumental function or the notion of technique, this will
result in the death of book and, therefore, the death of speech itself. The death of speech is of course a
metaphor to indicate a change in the history of writing. We use the word “language” and “writing” to refer
to action, movement, thought, experience etc: to designate not only the physical gesture of writing but also
the totality of what makes it possible, both the signifying and the signified face.

Lesson 2 – Taking Meaningful Notes

SQ3R  Survey – Question – Read – Recite – Review

- Survey: reading the title, the back of the book and checking the table of contents
- Question: Why are we reading this text? Who’s the author?  making predictions about the text
- Recite: rewrite with your own words
- Review: looking back at your notes, the structure and compare your thoughts with somebody else

1. Cornell notes: right margin for “active notes” and left margin for questions and keywords
2. Direct notes (highlighters, sticky notes)
3. Note sheet (separate sheet)
 The signifier and the truth

The notion of rationality is embedded in that of logos and, therefore, in the signification of truth in all its
metaphysical determinations. We can define the connection between being and mind as a relationship of
natural symbolisation, while that between mind and logos is a conventional symbolisation. The first
convention is produced as spoken language, while written language establishes and interlinks conventions.

Feelings of the mind constitute a sort of universal language which can then efface itself. The notion of sign
always implies within itself the distinction between signifier and signified, even though De Saussure
describes them as two different faces of the same leaf.  Reference to linguistics, already studied.

The idea of logocentrism (topic discussed in the previous paragraph) supports the determination of the
being of the entity as presence. To the epoch of logos belongs the difference between signified and
signifier, on which depends also the distinction between the sensible and the intelligible.  Consideration:
the sentences seem to be connected by a chain of direct consequences, nonetheless it is difficult to follow
these relations.

As modern structural thought stated, language is a system of signs and linguistics is part of the science of
signs, or semiotics, according to De Saussure. Linguistics represents the basis of the difference between
sensible and intelligible, the last one intended as an absolute logos (the face of God?). The age of the sign if
essentially theological, which means that perhaps it will never end.  What’s the connection with religion?

The signified has an immediate relationship with the logos in general and a mediated one with the signifier.
The paradox is that natural and universal writing, intelligible and nontemporal writing are called metaphor.
It’s a matter of determining the literal meaning of writing as metaphoricity itself.

Different authors are quoted on the idea of metaphor: Galileo, Descartes, Jaspers (“The world is the
manuscript of another, inaccessible to a universal reading, which only existence deciphers.”)  not too
clear. Writing in the common sense is the dead letter, the carries of death, it exhausts life.

Natural writing has a pneumatological rather than grammatological nature since it is united to voice and
breath. It is very close to the interior holy voice of the Profession of Faith. There is therefore a good and a
bad writing: the good and natural is the divine inscription on the heart and the soul; the perverse and artful
is technique, exiled in the exteriority of the body.

The good writing has always been comprehended. The idea of the book is the idea of a natural totality of
the signifier, which is alien to the sense of writing. If I distinguished the text from the book, I shall say that
the destruction of the book denudes the surface of the text.  The death of the book in the previous
paragraph.

- Compare reading experiences: before and after note-taking strategies

- What changed? What was more difficult?
- What is language and what relationship does it have to power?
- Reflect on the challenging aspects of this piece of criticism.

Derrida’s “Of Grammatology” is an important piece of criticism which focuses on the main notions of
language, speech, and writing. The author deal with these themes by using both a philosophical and
scientific approach; therefore, it is noticeable the recurring use of quotations from other important
personalities in the field of linguistic science.

Personally, the most challenging aspect of reading this text was not only to be able to truly understand its
meaning – task in which I haven’t fully succeeded – but also to manage to follow the articulated structure of
the sentences. In fact, a strategy that I found particularly useful while reading the text was to highlight only
the core of the sentence, intended as the essential piece of information conveyed. This is the first method
that I always use when I have to deal with a difficult text since it allows me to clarify the main concepts.

Underlining the main concepts and sentences is the first technique that I adopted while I was reading both
extracts, although I haven’t followed the exact same strategy in doing it. The first time - when I read the
section “Socrates – he who does not write” – I limited myself to making a sort of summary of the extract by
simply rephrasing the sentences that appeared more substantial and whose meaning was more explicit. The
second time – when I read “The Signifier and the Truth” – I tried to dig deeper into the text, therefore I
didn’t only highlight the clearer sentences, but also the ones that have raised interest or arose some doubts
in me.

To conclude, a combination of the three different note – taking strategies proposed in class has proved to be
effective. During the first reading I took direct notes on the text by highlighting the main sentences. Then I
proceeded to a second reading, during which I rewrote the concepts in my own words on a separate sheep.
Finally, I read my notes one more time and I added some personal consideration and question on the right
margin, according to the Cornell method.

Three differences between first and second approach:

1. Dividing into paragraphs

2. Approach to the text: what method
3. Asking questions

Digesting your notes

1. Mind map
2. Outline

Shitty First Draft

What if they told you that you have only fifteen minutes to write the most beautiful piece of writing of your
life? What if they told you that your entire future as an author will depend on this piece of writing? Can you
imagine anything scarier? Personally, I don’t.

I remember the first time I tried to write a novel, I was 9 and I thought I wanted to become a novelist one
day, just because I loved reading, and I loved the sound of words coming out of my mouth while I was
reading my favourite books. I remember I bought a new notebook for my book, whose title was going to be
“My Light”. I didn’t really know what I wanted to write about, but that single word was so intense that I
thought it could be worth naming my book after it. I had the notebook, and I had the title of my book, but I
still had no idea of the content. So, I simply started writing about my life, as I’m doing right now.

I understand that the life of a 9-year-old girl might not seem so interesting or worth reading about, on the
contrary I’m convinced that the younger version of me had much more things to say and feelings to express
than the older me. This may sound poetic in a way, but it’s really frightening. In fact, the biggest challenge
of writing is that you need to have something to say. You can’t talk about yourself, otherwise you might
sound too proud or too delusional, and you can’t write about current events in the world because you
never know other people’s point of view and you could easily hurt someone or just create a conflict. In the
end, if you cannot neither write about yourself nor about what’s currently happening around you, what’s
left to write about if not writing itself? That’s exactly what I’m trying to do here, I’m trying to figure out the
real reason why I’m writing.

A sentence is a syntactic unit that expresses an idea, question, command. In English a sentence must have a
subject and a predicate. A paragraph is made of sentences. It begins with a topic sentence; it has a body
sentence and a concluding sentence that summarises or demonstrates the above topics.
 - EM-DASH – longer pause.
- EN-DASH - add information.
- Semi-colon  needs to introduce a full sentence.

PANEL DISCUSSION – What is the use of the humanities?

- 30 minutes long + 10 minutes Q+A

- Opening statement (2-3 minutes)  write an introduction based on research.
- Debate (20 minutes)

The humanities are academic disciplines that study aspects of human society and culture. They include the
studies of foreign languages, history, sociology, philosophy, language arts, performing and visual arts. All
these disciplines encompass the full range of human thought and creativity. For this reason, they can be
considered basis of human cultures. Humanities expand our knowledge of human cultures and help us
understand what binds us together and what differentiates us from one another. What distinguishes them
from the sciences is the approach used: the humanities rely primarily on a critical, speculative, or
interpretative method, as opposed to the empirical scientific approach.

Quoting a poster created by the university of Utah in 2015: “Science can tell you how to clone a
tyrannosaur rex. Humanities can tell why this might be a bad idea”. The relationship between the
humanities and the sciences has developed in different ways throughout the centuries. Going back to the
1800s, there was a sort of collaboration between the arts and the sciences, since they were both interested
in nature but from two different perspectives. The novel “Frankenstein” by Mary Shelley is a perfect
example of how the sciences can examine the nature of life. By the end of the century, the sciences gained
importance over the humanities, which lacked a scientific method. In the 20th century, they became two
separate cultures that didn’t understand each other. Only the sciences could provide answers and achieve
new knowledge. What is the use of the humanities then? From a collaborative relationship between the
sciences and the humanities we can broaden our investigation capacity, extend the parameters of truth,
and add a qualitative value to the quantitative reasoning. The best way to find solutions to current issues is
that both disciplines focus on a shared problem, providing different perspectives to achieve a common
goal.

Nowadays, in the era of science and technology, the humanities are sometimes considered worthless, on
the contrary it is right now that they play the most important role in shaping daily life. The humanities are
important because they offer people opportunities to discover, understand and evaluate society’s values at
various points in history and across every culture. They represent the mean through which people can ask
themselves meaningful questions on their existence and on what surrounds them. Furthermore, they
provide practical applications that can enhance your professional skillset such as critical thinking,
communication skills, teamwork, personal and social responsibility. In fact, employers want professionals
who can come up with fresh approaches to solving problems, express themselves clearly, collaborate with
others, and act in a responsible, ethical manner.

How’s the essay graded?

 Argument: content of the text.

 Structure: paragraphs, thesis statement.
 Form: Krug document, punctuation, proofreading.
 Style: grammar, vocabulary.