Final Project Venue

Thanks to Dr. Burton's post about undergraduate research, I've found a journal I'd like to submit my final paper to. I'll submit my final paper about perceptual dialectology and smartphone technology to the Literary and Linguistics Computing journal published by Oxford Journals. I will submit the findings of my survey and other data in the traditional style of a linguistics research paper.

So far about nine students from one of my professor's UVU ESL class have taken my survey, and this week the director of the International Student Association at BYU should be sending out my survey to a few thousand international students. I'll be analyzing the data as more students take the survey and keep you all updated.

The Altruistic Scholar

So I read about what Heidi was researching with Diigo. You can find her post and my comments here. She's exploring gamification and more specifically gamification in the workplace. I think this idea is really relevant. Games are a large part of U.S. culture, and as we've discussed in class many times, they're not just for teenage boys anymore. Games can be used as teaching tools and can offer motivation and incentive. Heidi found some good sources that predict more companies will be gamifying elements of their workplaces to engage employees.

I searched on the library website to find some scholarly references for her. I found an article where researchers made a game for a university course to see if it affected students' performance. They found some positive impacts: better overall score and better scores in practical assignments. This isn't directly related to gamification in the workplace, but maybe Heidi will find it useful. It looks like there are some other helpful articles in the same journal.

I also searched online to find more about gamification in the workplace. I found an article from InformationWeek about Blue Shield trying out a gaming app for health and wellness in their workplace. They think it has been beneficial to their employees.

It was kind of fun being an altruistic scholar. It was easy to do research and find something helpful, and I enjoyed learning about a topic that I'm interested in but not exploring in depth. Hopefully I will get some good feedback on my post as well.

Final Project: Smartphones and Dialects

For my final project, I wanted to combine the digital world and linguistics. I was just reading online when I came across an article about people in the U.K. having issues using their voice activated Smartphone features because of their dialect or accent. It seems that Smartphones aren't really programmed with the capability to understand non-American dialects. The article is a bit dated, but it got me thinking, and I did some more research.

My husband has an Australian coworker, and I asked her if her Smartphone understood her voice. She said it was horrible at understanding her, but she thought there might be some way to change a Smartphone to get it to recognize your dialect. I work at the Office of Information Technology on campus, and I asked some programmers I work with if they knew anything about a dialect app for Smartphones. They said they hadn't considered that problem and didn't know of any, but one told me about high tech voice recognition software called Dragon.

This led to more researching. I found an article from USA Today detailing helpful Smartphone travel apps, including language apps. None of the apps mentioned have the ability to recognize foreign dialects. They are all mostly for translation purposes, which makes sense, but there is a need for a lot of improvement in this field as well.

Then I found another article where I found out that Google and other companies are using Dragon software to improve their Smartphone's recognition. I also found out that Google and other companies are crowdsourcing to find a solution to their phone's voice recognition problems. The article also discusses a little how complicated it is to have Smartphones recognize dialect. Voice recognition technology relies a lot on statistical models of language that try and predict which words will come next in a sentence based on probability. A Google product manager interviewed in the article gives the example of saying the "empire" into your Smartphone. He says that statistically it is more likely for someone to follow that word with "state building" or "strikes back" than another word. He also mentions that continuously collecting linguistic field data helps improve voice recognition.

But is there really a demand for an app that can recognize different dialects and not just foreign languages? I found another very recent article from 2013 in Forbes magazine about what customers want in a new Smartphone. Among the list of wants is better voice recognition. The author acknowledges that even with just a standard American accent, his iPhone has trouble understanding what he says at times. He also recognizes that dialects and other "lingo" make a potential Smartphone user's experience not ideal.

So this brings me to my project. I've met with the director of the International Student Association, and he has agreed to send out a Qualtrics survey for me that would get the students' opinions and experiences on using the voice activated features on their Smartphones. I chose the International Student Association because I knew that they would all have non-American accents and that, for the non-native speakers, their English was at a level where they could read and understand the survey questions. I am sending this survey to get an idea of the demand for a Smartphone or a Smartphone app that would allow them to use voice activated features with their version of English.

What are your thoughts?      

Content Like Queequeg: the Ability to Be Alone in the Digital Age

For my first post this week I analyzed two paragraphs from Chapter 10: A Bosom Friend. You can find the post and text here. The paragraphs describe Queequeg from Ishmael's perspective. As I read closer, I noticed something interesting that I think applies very well to the digital age.

"I had noticed also that Queequeg never consorted at all, or but very little, with the other seamen in the inn. He made no advances whatever; appeared to have no desire to enlarge the circle of his acquaintances. All this struck me as mighty singular; yet, upon second thoughts, there was something almost sublime in it. Here was a man some twenty thousand miles from home, by the way of Cape Horn, that is--which was the only way he could get there--thrown among people as strange to him as though he were in the planet Jupiter; and yet he seemed entirely at his ease; preserving the utmost serenity; content with his own companionship; always equal to himself. Surely this was a touch of fine philosophy; though no doubt he had never heard there was such a thing as that."

In today's world where it seems vital to be connected to each other through our Smartphones, tablets, laptops, etc., could any of us be like Queequeg? Are we content with out own companionship? Are we equal to ourselves? I personally am an introvert, and so I don't always need as much interaction and connection with people than others do. However, I do greatly value connection with others, like family and friends. This class has also taught me about the value of connecting with strangers. There is no doubt that social media and connection through technology serve valuable purposes. But at the same time, I do worry that people are beginning to rely on constant connection with others through technology to avoid deep contemplation about themselves and their life. I know I've done this. I will distract myself with media when I feel depressed, overwhelmed, or find myself unsatisfied with my life in some way. 

I decided to do some research about this tendency, and I found something interesting on the American Psychological Association website that relates well to the above Moby Dick quote.  

"It’s a great psychological truth that if we don’t teach our children how to be alone, they will always be lonely. When they’re always connected, children, adolescents and adults become dependent on the presence of others for validation in the most basic ways . . . Rather, other people are used, as what one might think of as part objects — spare parts to support a fragile self."

We've talked a lot of about social proof in this class, which is valuable and necessary for academia and other projects or trains of thought we undertake. But I think it would be sad to live in a society where we need social proof about our own self-worth. Will we only feel good about ourselves and be confident in our own ideas unless we get positive feedback from X amount of people or get X amount of likes on Facebook? There really is a beauty in being satisfied and confident with who we are and in enjoying spending time with ourselves. This is part of the beauty Ishmael sees in Queequeg. Ishmael calls this trait about Queequeg "a touch of fine philosophy."  

I searched Google+ for more insight about this topic. I found this image.

    

Although this quote is from a comedian, it brings up an interesting philosophical issue. Is the ability to "just sit there" to just be a defining feature of what it means to be a human being? Be is contained in the word "being" after all. I think the capability to have internal peace and an "utmost serenity" as Ishmael puts it is an important aspect of what it means to be human. It speaks to a sense of self-mastery and disciplined contemplation that makes human beings capable of great things. Look at all of the rich insights that the character Ishmael comes to from his own contemplation and observations. Perhaps he would have come to greater truths with more networking and social interaction, who knows? But we value Ishmael as a narrator and give him credibility because of his reflective prowess. The journey through Moby Dick would not have been the same from a third person point of view where we read dialogues among characters and see all of their social interactions. Ishmael's own contemplations about other characters and the world around him add a thought-provoking personality to Moby Dick. Ishmael is able to come to these thoughts because he is on a lonely ship, isolated from towns and cities of people. His solitude shapes the story.    

With constant connection, we can forget about the importance of solitude and contemplation. I've talked with friends and family about this topic. One of my family members is a hard worker and thoroughly enjoys being busy. Sometimes they are so good at being busy that they don't take time to reconnect with themselves and evaluate whether they are truly happy. I have also done this as well. There are times when I just don't want to sit alone and meditate on my life, but when I do take time to contemplate, I never regret it. We lead busy demanding lives, and it is rare that we have the opportunity to just do nothing. But in this digital age it is important to remember that disconnecting from media can mean reconnecting with ourselves. 

Moby Dick Typography

So I made Moby Dick digital by taking the following excerpt from Chapter 10: A Bosom Friend and putting into a Linguistic Inquiry and Word Count (LIWC) analysis machine. You can find the link for it here. Just put any text over 200 words into it for an analysis about what an author's writing reflects about his or her emotional and psychological state. I chose an excerpt from Chapter 10 for analysis simply because I like this chapter. I think Ishmael's reflections on his new friend Queequeg are interesting and heartwarming. Here's the excerpt.

"With much interest I sat watching him. Savage though he was, and hideously marred about the face--at least to my taste--his countenance yet had a something in it which was by no means disagreeable. You cannot hide the soul. Through all his unearthly tattooings, I thought I saw the traces of a simple honest heart; and in his large, deep eyes,fiery black and bold, there seemed tokens of a spirit that would dare a thousand devils. And besides all this, there was a certain lofty bearing about the Pagan, which even his uncouthness could not altogether maim. He looked like a man who had never cringed and never had had a creditor. Whether it was, too, that his head being shaved, his forehead was drawn out in freer and brighter relief, and looked more expansive than it otherwise would, this I will not venture to decide; but certain it was his head was phrenologically an excellent one. It may seem ridiculous,but it reminded me of General Washington's head, as seen in the popular busts of him. It had the same long regularly graded retreating slope from above the brows, which were likewise very projecting, like two long promontories thickly wooded on top. Queequeg was George Washington cannibalistically developed.

Whilst I was thus closely scanning him, half-pretending meanwhile to be looking out at the storm from the casement, he never heeded my presence, never troubled himself with so much as a single glance; but appeared wholly occupied with counting the pages of the marvellous book. Considering how sociably we had been sleeping together the night previous, and especially considering the affectionate arm I had found thrown over me upon waking in the morning, I thought this indifference of his very strange. But savages are strange beings; at times you do not know exactly how to take them. At first they are overawing; their calm self-collectedness of simplicity seems a Socratic wisdom. I had noticed also that Queequeg never consorted at all, or but very little, with the other seamen in the inn. He made no advances whatever; appeared to have no desire to enlarge the circle of his acquaintances. All this struck me as mighty singular; yet, upon second thoughts, there was something almost sublime in it. Here was a man some twenty thousand miles from home, by the way of Cape Horn, that is--which was the only way he could get there--thrown among people as strange to him as though he were in the planet Jupiter; and yet he seemed entirely at his ease; preserving the utmost serenity; content with his own companionship; always equal to himself. Surely this was a touch of fine philosophy; though no doubt he had never heard there was such a thing as that. But, perhaps, to be true philosophers, we mortals should not be conscious of so living or so striving. So soon as I hear that such or such a man gives himself out for a philosopher, I conclude that, like the dyspeptic old woman, he must have 'broken his digester.'"

Here are the results. 

Liwc Dimension	Your Data	Personal Texts	Formal Texts
Self-references (I, me, my)	3.29	11.4	4.2
Social words	8.72	9.5	8.0
Positive emotions	3.29	2.7	2.6
Negative emotions	1.74	2.6	1.6
Overall cognitive words	5.81	7.8	5.4
Articles (a, an, the)	7.17	5.0	7.2
Big words (> 6 letters)	20.54	13.1	19.6

The numbers listed are in percentages. So for example, in the passage analyzed, 3.29% of the words from the passage were self-reference words. The percentages are also compared to a range of other personal and formal texts. So we see that Melville really didn't use very many self-reference words at all in this passage. I initially found this very surprising considering the entire book is from a first person perspective (Ishmael's), but I realized that this passage may not be as characteristic of the whole novel because Ishmael is primarily describing Queequeg in this passage. Or maybe it is reflective of the book as a whole since Ishmael spends a great deal of time describing the things and people around him. 

Here is what the word categories mean. Here is the link where I found this information.

Self-references: People who use a high rate of self-references tend to be more insecure, nervous, and possibly depressed. They also tend to be more honest.

Social words: Social words are words that make reference to other people (e.g., they, she, us, talk, friends). Generally, people who use a high level of social words are more outgoing and more socially connected with others.

Positive emotion words: The more that people use positive emotion words (e.g. happy, love, good), the more optimistic they tend to be. If you feel good about yourself, you are more likely to see the world in a positive way.

Negative emotion words: Use of negative emotion words (e.g., sad, kill, afraid) is weakly linked to people's ratings of anxiety or even neurotic. People who have had a bad day are more likely to see the world through negatively-tinted glasses.

Overall cognitive words: These are words that reflect how much people are actively thinking about their writing topic. Examples include: thinking, wonder, because, knowledge.

Articles: The three article words -- a, an, and the -- account for a huge percentage of the words we use. People who use articles at a high rate tend to be more concrete and impersonal in their thinking.

Big words (words with more than 6 letters): Use of big words is weakly related to higher grades and standardized test scores. People who use a high rate of big words also tend to be less emotional and oftentimes psychologically distant or detached.

Some interesting takeaways for me when looking at this data are 

1) For such a grim story, Melville uses a surprising amount of positive emotion words, more than most personal and formal texts.

2) Melville uses a high percentage of articles, yet according to the above information, people who use high amounts of articles "tend to be more concrete and impersonal in their thinking." However, I would not describe the tone of Moby Dick as impersonal. I think it is very personal. Ishmael is a very personable narrator, so this analysis seems to be a little off. 

3) Melville uses a lot of big words; 20.54% of the words in this passage are 6 letters or longer. I think this is interesting because this percentage is much closer to formal texts and a great deal above that of personal texts. We know that Moby Dick's form is hard to define: is it a novel, en epic, etc? However it is a non-fiction story, and people recognize it as a novel, so it surprises me that in this part of its analysis, it reads like a formal piece. I guess I always considered novels to be more like personal texts than formal ones.

Congratulations if you've read this whole blog post and made it down to this point. Do any of these findings strike you as interesting? Do you think they are accurate? This type of analysis is obviously not an exact science, but I think it is still revealing.

Moby Dick Digitized

(focusing on illustrate the text/make typography art, #7 and #8 on this post about making literary text digital)

I was originally going to translate sections of Moby Dick into Spanish and use my mic to make an audible Spanish version, but my mic is quiet so I decided to do something else: typography art. Then it got me thinking of something else that's taken texts and even movies into the digital world. Minimalist posters are everywhere on the internet. So I did a bit of both and may have even gotten carried away with it. Here are some minimalist posters-ish pictures I found for Moby Dick (image 1, image 2, image 3) if you don't know what they are and don't understand my creations below...

Minimalist Posters (made using Windows Paint - can you guess which was hardest?):

This is for Chapter 61 titled Stubb Kills a Whale, featuring the whaling
boats. The quote is found in the last paragraph of this chapter.

So we have the captain's hat for Chapter 28: Ahab where Captain Ahab is really introduced.
The quote describing Ahab is found on the first page of the chapter.

We have Moby Dick's tail featured in Chapter 41 dedicated to none other
than Moby Dick himself. The quote is found on the first page of the chapter.

Chapter 99: The Doubloon features the coin Ishmael describes
on the first page of this chapter.

Now for the typography pictures that will be under the read more to save on scrolling space.

Goodreads Review of 1984

Most of you have probably already read 1984. I have to say it is the most unsettling book I've read. 1984 and other books like it are particularly disquieting because their plots are just possible enough to make you question the reality you live in and what could happen in the future. You can check out my review on Goodreads here.

As far as information and using technology to spy on and control people, 1984 is definitely applicable, especially after all of these NSA scandals have come about. Who knew our government was spying on the German Chancellor's cell phone! But of course now that our president is aware of such spying, that's horribly wrong, but spying on United States citizens without probable cause is perfectly acceptable. Sorry for the short political rant. Anyway, 1984 follows Winston Smith who is a citizen of Oceania, one of the three world superpowers in the future. All of the party members, a semi-intelligent class of people that work for Big Brother, are monitored day in and day out by telescreens and the Thought Police. The telescreens constantly play Big Brother propaganda and also collect audio and visual recordings of everyone within sight of the screen. Big Brother is a totalitarian regime that has found devastatingly efficient ways to oppress its citizens through brainwashing, distraction, information control, and fear.

One thing I find particularly interesting about the book from a linguistic perspective is the language control Big Brother uses. Big Brother communicates through Newspeak, which is founded on the principles of English Socialism. The intent of Big Brother is to reduce the English language to such a degree that words for rebellion and critical thought will no longer exist. This brings us back to the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis in a way because Big Brothers seems to think that language structure in part affects people's ability to think or at least structures their thinking to a certain degree. For example, Newspeak morphology is simple. Orwell uses the example of the word "good" to explain it. So there is the root word "good," and it's opposite is simply "ungood." It's comparative and superlative forms are "doublegood" or "doubleplusgood." It's adjective form is "goodful."

I find this morphology interesting for two reasons: Newspeak morphology seems to be mathematical, which in my mind strips language of expressiveness and Newspeak morphology only has root words and standard prefixes and suffixes that attach to change the word, which to me makes it harder for opposing connotations to stick to words. When I say mathematical I mean the root word and its affixes make a symmetrical continuum that goes like this doubleplusungood doubleungood ungood good doublegood doubleplusgood. There are no nuances or creativity possible with such a language, which is exactly what Big Brother wants. Using a root word with affixes to change meaning rather than using a different word makes it hard for bad connotations to stick to the negative word in a pairing. Take some word pairings for example: grateful/ungrateful, smart/dumb, considerate/inconsiderate, nice/mean. Which ones seem to be stronger opposites? To me the ones where the words are not linguistically linked make it easier to assign a bad connotation to the negative words and a good connotation to the positive words. But in Big Brother's world, there is no "good" and "bad." There is just "good" and "ungood." So in a way, everything that Big Brother does is somehow related to the concept of goodness. So Big Brother is never bad or anything with a negative connotation. I hope that makes sense. I realize this is just my own opinion and may not be true for any of you or be true for all word pairings. Perhaps I have been biased in my choice of word pairings, but those were the ones I thought of off the top of my head. Anyway, it's something interesting to think about. 

Have many of you read 1984? What do you think of it?
 

Copyright Monstrosity

The monster of copyright.
This image, of course, from Wikimedia Commons.

Is calling copyright a monstrosity a little too much? Well, yes. But I don't think anyone will disagree with me that the system is monstrous. I'm an editor, as I've mentioned before, and I've had to deal with copyright in varying levels of depth in different jobs.

Let me introduce you to my not-so-little friend, the Cornell copyright cheat sheet.

I can't tell you how many times I've referenced this PDF. I don't expect you to read all of it. Please don't read all of it. But you can get the gist of it. You can see why I love the year 1923--public domain and nothing you can do about it! Don't some of the terms seem excessive, though? I'm trying to think of a reasonable purpose for having a copyright extend 70 years past the death of the author (not even just when it was published), but I can't.

Also, it's just too complicated for any non-expert to work through. Do people really expect others to know that works published from July 1, 1909 to 1978 in Alaska, Arizona, California, Hawaii, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Oregon, Washington, Guam, and the Northern Mariana Islands (if it was published in a language other than English and without subsequent republication with copyright notice) should be treated as unpublished works until such date as US-compliant publication occurred? It's laughable.

Now, a lot of what I deal with is print or at least something for official publication, and a lot of people seem more concerned with being able to share things on the Internet non-commercially without being tracked down and sued. I think both points are fair, and I have one main suggestion for simplification.

If you are using something non-commercially and it doesn't affect the market for the copyrighted work, it should be fair use. I know that that is part of fair use, but there are other stipulations. Personal example: If I am wanting to use an image in the design of a non-profit, non-sold-at-all, student-project magazine, I think in most instances I should be able to without paying a royalty. In my particular case, it will in no way affect a market for the photograph or photographer.

Of course, there are a lot of other areas that need to be simplified, but that's my first thought and whack at it. We need to not make the common people into victims who are in charge of defending their innocence in violating laws made too complicated for most of them to understand.

Exploring Wikis

I'm sure all of you have been to Wikipedia, which is probably the most popular wiki. Although all of my high school teachers told me to never cite Wikipedia in an academic paper, I've had some college professors who are ok with it. Wikis seem to be gaining more respect in the academic world. They are emerging as a collaborative way for researchers to document and write about their findings. I did some research about the history of the wiki, and here is what I found, on wikipedia of course.

"A wiki is usually a web application which allows people to add, modify, or delete content in a collaboration with others. Text is usually written using a simplified markup language or a rich-text editor."

"Wikis can serve many different purposes both public and private, including knowledge management, notetaking, community websites and intranets."

Ward Cunningham invented the wiki, and the word "wiki" is Hawaiian for "fast" or "quick."

Academic Uses

• Wikis have been used as a language learning tool. 
• Professors, students, and researchers have used wikis as a publishing and review tool.
• Teachers have used wikis for their classes.
• Wikis are also just used a source of information about a topic like Dr. Burton's wiki on rhetoric.

There are also wiktionaries, which are wiki dictionaries. I'd like to do start off using the wiki I create as a wiktionary probably. I would define terms that are specific to different internet subcultures or just choose one subculture to focus on and create a wiktionary about the terms members of that subculture use to communicate.

Pop Culture Uses
Wikis are also used for less scholarly pursuits. There are wikis that detail specific popular games, movies, TV shows, books, etc. For example there is a wiki for Final Fantasy, World of Warcraft, Marvel comics movies, The Hunger Games, and more.

I think creating my own wiki will be fun, and since I am applying for the master's program in linguistics at BYU, it will be a good research tool for me. It is nice to have a place where you can organize information from different sources relating to the same topic.

Exploring George Orwell's 1984

I’m reading George Orwell’s 1984. I want to look specifically at “newspeak” and other ways Big Brother tries to control language to control people. I’d like to look at the spread of information in digital culture today and compare that with Big Brother’s suppression of information and texts.

Preview

I noticed the chapters do not have titles, and the book is divided into different sections. The lack of chapter names probably goes along with the bleak theme of the storyline and possibly the suppression of information and texts by Big Brother. There is the appendix at the end with The Principles of Newspeak. I started skimming the appendix, and there Orwell outlines the rules of Newspeak: the vocabulary, morphology, grammar, etc. Apparently Newspeak was created to diminish the overall English vocabulary and limit thought. I’m interested to see how Newspeak is actually used in the novel.

Early Social Proof

I put up a Facebook status on Tuesday morning telling my friends I was reading 1984, and I asked if they had read it or had any thoughts about it. I mentioned that I saw connections between Big Brother’s use of language and today’s politically correct language. I got a few thoughtful responses. My high school AP English teacher said, “The recent Snowden leaks about the NSA make me realize Big Brother is watching us at all times. We also are seeing the simplification of language. Have acronyms everywhere... Even shorter than contractions like "minipax." Torture was big a few years ago. Orwell was just 30 years ahead of his time.” A girl from my homeward said, “I think that the ‘perpetual war’ of 1984 is akin to the perpetual conflict between major political parties. It is a self-sustaining industry that keeps people busy and gives the impression of progress without really changing much.”

Similar Books

I searched Amazon and Google. Both sites recommended other books by George Orwell, but Amazon recommended some others that had similar themes to 1984. Amazon recommended Brave New World by Aldus Huxley, Lord of the Flies by William Golding, and Fahrenheit 451: A Novel by Ray Bradbury. Both Brave New World and Fahrenheit 451 are set in dystopian futures. The Lord of the Flies deals with the reality of the brutal aspects of human nature. All three books are cautionary tales about the possibilities of the future.

Who Cares?

I searched for “George Orwell 1984” on Facebook and Google+. Facebook informed me that 1,118,543 people “like this topic.” On Google+ I found a lot of posts from newspapers and individuals talking about the NSA surveillance scandal, PRISM, and how sales of 1984 have skyrocketed since news of the government spying broke out in the media. Apparently 1984 is still very relevant to today since people are actively talking about it, and more people are reading it with all of the concerns about big government.

Formal Reviews

I searched for reviews on the library webpage. There were several, but one I thought that was really relevant to digital culture was countering another reviewer’s claims that Orwell was not a genius. In his “Homage to George Orwell” published in the Midwest Quarterly, Peter Firchow writes, “All of his work, let me repeat, even including some minor, transitory pieces like reviews, is still in print, and his fiction and major essays a, along with much of his journalism, have been translated into just about all of the major Western languages.” He cites the availability and circulation of Orwell’s texts as a sign of Orwell’s genius as a writer. This reminded me of today where the mass circulation of someone’s words and writings can be so common that it would not necessarily distinguish them as a genius. But then again all of Orwell’s writings were published into print, and many of them are available online. One of the things that Firchow thinks is characteristic of Orwell’s literature is the tendency to create an environment that exists in the real world but to not have many specific cultural or other references to that place. In this way, Orwell creates a timelessness and a situation that everyone can place themselves in. He does this is 1984 too, where you know the main character is in England, but the character could really be in any dystopian city or country. It makes the story very applicable and powerful that way.

Informal Reviews

One review I particularly enjoyed on Goodreads gave a synopsis of the book through a completely modern lens. The reviewer says, “In George Orwell's 1984, Winston Smith is an open source developer who writes his code offline because his ISP has installed packet sniffers that are regulated by the government under the Patriot Act. It's really for his own protection, though. From, like, terrorists and DVD pirates and stuff. Like every good American, he drinks Coca-Cola and his processed food has desensitized his palate to all but four flavors: (sweet, salty-so-that-you-will-drink-more-coca-cola, sweet, and Cooler Ranch!(tm)). His benevolent overlords have provided him with some war happening somewhere for some reason so that he, and the rest of the population, can be sure that the government is really in his best interests.” This really brought the story home for me. It is obvious that 1984 can be compared to our day, but I think review is a creative way to analyze the story in today’s context and to provide social commentary.

Multimedia

A lot of media has been created about 1984. I searched tried searching for George Orwell 1984+digital culture, but I didn’t get the greatest results, so I simplified my search to 1984. I found a lot of remix images of 1984 themes and today’s politics like this picture.

 To be continued . . .

11 Untranslatable Words from Other Cultures

In class recently we've talked about the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis. I saw this on Facebook a while back. I think it relates well to how speakers of different languages may see the world a little differently or at least have certain cultural priorities or things of worth that are uniquely expressed in their language. I'm in the process of curating some information and facts about the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis, and I think I will discuss it in more depth in a later post. What do you all think about these 11 concepts? Do the people who speak these languages really see the world differently from English speakers?

Mary's Midterm 2 Moby Dick Pre-writing

Here are some of my thoughts for my paper.

In class we discussed how machines are like mirrors in a way; they reflect ourselves back to us. They help us gain self-understanding, but we can't fully master them. Moby Dick is a symbol throughout the novel to Ahab, Ishmael, and the readers of whatever we want him to be. We use symbols as tools to represent what we want them to represent. I think Ahab uses Moby Dick as a tool/machine to represent himself/self-loathing/evil. Ahab sees himself reflected in Moby Dick. But because Moby Dick is a machine, Ahab is never able to master him, or if Moby Dick is a symbol for Ahab, then Ahab can never fully master himself or at least the dark parts of himself. It's significant that Ahab has an ivory leg. He sees more of himself in MD because of this.

In a way Ahab sees everyone as a tool or machine. He sees them all the tools of destiny or fate. He uses his crew, his charts, compass, etc. to hunt down Moby Dick. In a way, man is the lesser machine in the novel and nature (Moby Dick) is the greater machine. This brings up the whole human vs. nature debate. And In our own lives with the technology we have, aren't we the lesser machines? I mean the machines we design have far greater capacities than we do. So maybe Moby Dick then is the machine Ahab designs in way, the symbolism he places on Moby Dick gives Moby Dick a life, meaning, etc. that he wouldn't have in the story otherwise. Moby Dick could have just been any other sperm whale, a white one, but just another whale in essence. But because Ahab uses Moby Dick as machine/tool as a symbol for his self-loathing/evil, Ahab really kind of creates Moby Dick. Frankenstein?

Another point with machines/tools and humans: why are humans pitted against machines? We create machines after all, yet in our culture there are several movies where humans are at war with machines. Where does this enmity come from? Maybe humans envy machines because of their greater capacity. Maybe Ahab envies Moby Dick. There is the speech he gives on the deck talking about sperm whales and their unknown world, everything they've seen and experienced, knowledge they have that man will never know. Maybe Ahab envies this. One thing that seems to separate human and machine is passion and purpose. Machines don't have a passion or self-purpose (we create machines for a purpose, but they don't have one on their own). Ironically, Ahab's own passion to hunt for Moby Dick really turns Ahab into a machine. He abandons his wife and child, endangers his crew, and become inhumane. He then pursues a single-minded ultimately meaningless objective to kill Moby Dick. Aren't machines designed to pursue single-minded objectives until they accomplish their assigned task?

So back to digital culture: we use so many social media tools that reflect ourselves back to us. Although we don't use social media with the intent to destroy it, we maybe use it as a machine to represent ourselves and in a way find ourselves or come to understand ourselves. But we cannot fully master our digital culture or social media because it is a mirror of us. And like Ahab maybe this means we can't fully master ourselves. Maybe that's why we spend hours and hours on the internet, creating profiles, and sharing our thoughts with others. Moby Dick is like a mirror for Ahab and our digital culture is like a mirror for us as individuals and as a people.  

So that was long and convoluted, but hopefully you all understand what I'm trying to get at. What are your thoughts?

Mary's Midterm 1 Reflective Post

Here are my previous blog posts:

Collaboration in Research

The Spiraling Whirlpool of Constant Revision and Balance
"ending the tyranny of the hit"
Moby Dick: the Video Game
How reliable are rating systems for media? It depends on what you're looking for.
Online Identity: Happily Undefined
Blogging: I took the one less sailed by

Transcending Time and War: Moby Dick and the Literary Canon

A Christian Savage and Christian Savagery
My Intro

It's difficult to say if there's a common theme among all of them, but some topics that I have been interested in are online identity and the potential for anyone's creations to be circulating and consumed through the internet. 

I've learned a lot about digital culture so far in this course. Some key topics that come to mind include digital culture's wide-spread influence, the creation of subcultures and networks, and online identity. 

Digital culture is affecting so many fields and areas of life: education, business, arts & culture, journalism, government, medicine, etc. Kayla did a great post about oDesk and freelancing as a writer, editor, or designer. Her post illustrates how digital culture has changed business and how companies can now outsource online for cheaper labor like they already do in the physical world. 

Because of digital culture, networks of people can connect like never before. Several digital subcultures have developed. This goes along with the Long Tail a little in that non-mainstream things are produced and consumed at huge rates. Similarly, non-mainstream people can connect, create non-mainstream products, sell them, and consume other non-mainstream products more effectively.

New types of genres have developed because of the potential for digital creation and because of mainstream culture and subcultures. Here are few examples: memes, apps, the rant, the manifesto, the tutorial, the vine, fanfiction, and gif. How are some of these text-based genres different from written their print counterparts? Do they all even have counterparts or print comparisons?

Digital culture raises questions of tension in several areas: identity, authority, openness, control, participation, isolation, consumption, creation, the natural, the artificial, human, and technology. But these conflicts can be resolved, and depending on perspective some of these concepts mesh together rather than cause conflict. Derrick comments on the conflict between humans and nature in his post. He argues that humans and nature don't have to be in conflict. 

As mentioned above, one conflict that comes with digital culture is identity: how people portray themselves, how their online identities match with their physical ones, whether they are a part of a subculture in the real-world vs. online subcultures, and if those groups are the same. 

I am particularly interested in pursuing research on online identities and subcultures through a linguistic perspective. There are plenty of subcultures in the physical world: geek, burn-out, jock, hipster, goth, gamer, etc.; just think high school. There are also a variety of subcultures online. One thing that defines a subculture or culture is its language. Any group of people develops their own in-group language that distinguishes them from others. There has already been some linguistic research done on this topic, like Chris Taylor at Rice University has done. I'm interested in doing my own research on this subject. Does the mode of communication (internet) change how groups develop their own linguistic traits? Are there different dialects for members of subcultures that only interact online vs. members that also interact in person? What will be the most prominent features of online subculture language: vocabulary, syntax, register, orthography, etc.?

Collaboration in Research

I liked Dr. Burton's lecture about researching using people instead of just documents. I also liked his example about posting on google+ or facebook about a topic you're exciting about and then waiting to see the responses. Someone else mentioned that the way we post about research we're doing is important. They said when we show enthusiasm for what we're researching, others will become excited too and probably offer to help us more. Once I figure out exactly what I want to research in more depth, I will post on facebook and see what happens.

I've always done the google or wikipedia search to initially learn about a topic, then I've moved on to more scholarly sources to get more in depth. I've never tried researching through social media. I think researching using people comes back to the idea of collaboration, and that collectively people know more about a topic than an expert in the field. It's interesting that's once we've written something, we want feedback and others' opinions and help. But we do not seek the same help or feedback while we're researching and formulating our ideas. I wonder why that is. Perhaps it's just cultural. We view thinking of ideas and making connections between concepts for our own work as a solitary pursuit. But it makes sense that we would receive the same benefit from others reviewing our ideas and unfinished work than we would from others reviewing our finished written pieces. Collaboration is an opportunity for us to refine, reinvent, and reconsider our conclusions. This can lead to great progress and produce higher quality work.

The Spiraling Whirlpool of Constant Revision and Balance

Here is my blog post responding to Dr. Burton's posts about the three phases of academic blogging and spiraling. I find the concept of social proof interesting. It makes sense that in order to be admitted into a more serious blogging sphere about a particular topic, you have to test the waters and put yourself out there to see if your ideas really hold water (yeah, I'll continue with the Moby Dick metaphors throughout this post). It seems like spiraling combined with social proof creates the perfect storm of continued progress in academic blogging. Reviewing his or her work and submitting content for peer review is what any good researcher does. But when does spiraling end? Is it infinite? How do you know when you're really done with something you write or post?

Some writers argue that you're never done. There can always be improvement. I wonder if using blogging as a platform to publish your ideas can suck you up in a spiraling whirlpool that drags you down into oblivion because you chased the white whale of perfection. Digital culture and online forums change the way we write. If you can get constant, somewhat instantaneous feedback from people all over the world about your ideas, you could potentially be revising your work forever. I suppose that's where your own analysis and your own spiraling around comes in. Although others can spiral around your work like sharks waiting to feed or like dolphins that splash you with waves of praise, you ultimately decide your writing's fate and when it ends.

I know when I'm writing something important, I like to take breaks and spiral back around to review it again to get a fresh perspective on it. I think this is very helpful. I also appreciate the feedback of others. Writing works well as a collaborative process. Although I am a bit intimidated by the idea of collecting social proof, I think it will be a great help in eventually moving me to phase three of my academic blogging as Dr. Burton says. I just hope to find balance between the feedback of others and my own spiraling, so I can produce great work. It's going to be hard to be so vulnerable in posting work in differing stages of completeness, but writing is a learning process. We are all learning to have confidence in ourselves while being open to criticism. Do any of you have fears about balancing spiraling and social proof? When do you know when you are satisfied or finished with a piece of writing? Is perfection in writing possible? Should it even be pursued?

Moby Dick: the Video Game

I was intrigued by our discussion of video games in class on Wednesday. I grew up with a Nintendo 64 and a Gameboy Color. We only had two games for each of these devices, so needless to say, I wasn't really a gamer. But the class discussion brought to my awareness some of the great things about video games and what potential there is for learning, narrative, and art. This got me thinking about what Moby Dick would be like as a video game. I googled to see what games had been created. There is one here if you're interested. It's pretty funny. You play as Moby Dick; smash people's boats; eat people and other marine life; and dodge harpoons and nets.

But if Moby Dick were a full-fledged video game, what would it be like? What sorts of tasks would you have to complete to capture Moby Dick? Would you be able to play as Ishmael, Queequeg, Ahab, Starbuck, Stubb, Flask, or the harpooners? Would mastering the video game be a metaphor for how hard it is to read Moby Dick?

Some whaling skills could definitely be translated into features of a video game. For example, when Queequeg is harnessed and suspended over the deck to help with collecting the whale blubber, he is dodging sharks, trying to balance, and do his job. During this ordeal, Ishmael is on deck watching Queequeg and the harpooners are stabbing the sharks below. Or maybe as part of the game, you could listen to Ishmael or Ahab's ponderings on the philosophies of how humans and nature interact. You then would have to summarize what they said or interpret their words into a meaningful life lesson for yourself. And of course there is tremendous potential in gamifying the actual rowing out and harpooning of the whales.

These musings of Moby Dick as a video game make me think of how students could gain a greater appreciation for the narrative, symbolism, and world created by authors of other literary masterpieces. How fun would English class be if every great work of literature you read had an accompanying video game that helped you delve into the book more fully and connect with complex characters and themes? In a way, I think this would be awesome! Is it realistic? Probably not, but it would be a new avenue of instruction that would be a great marriage of technology and the humanities. What do you think? Wouldn't Moby Dick make a cool video game? What parts of the book could be gamified to help readers experience a greater depth of understanding and relation to Melville's work?

"ending the tyranny of the hit."

After reading Chris Anderson's "The Long Tail," I was struck by how the profitability of non-hits is increasing collaboration and expanding the ability of artists to get their work out to the masses. I loved the example about the two books, Touching the Void and Into Thin Air, where the first book only became popular a decade after it was written because of online recommendations connected to the second book. This reminds me of Moby Dick. Of course Moby Dick didn't become popular during World War I because of online recommendations, but it is similar in that it did not sell many copies when it was first published in the 1800s and later became popular because of renewed interest. Perhaps this revival came about because of the cultural and political changes going on at the time. This is not so different from today, where previously lost or passe movies, music, books, etc. become popular again or for the first time because of cultural and political changes. For example, I have seen George Orwell's 1984 referenced a lot on internet forums and social media recently because of the government surveillance scandals going on right now.

Now more than ever the masses are really deciding who the artists actually are. Before with the economic hit model that Anderson talks about, only artists that could make it big and produce hits had their work available to the majority of the population. Lesser-known or independent artists had their work sold more in specialty stores and not at mainstream retailers. But now everything has changed. Anderson mentions that because physical factors are no longer a limitation, there just needs to be a group of people somewhere willing to consume what is produced in order for it to be successful. I think it is fantastic how creation, the ability to create and share your creations, is becoming more and more democratic.

This really raises questions about what is art and what is quality art. Anderson deconstructs a common myth about art that the one hit model has propagated. He says, "We equate mass market with quality and demand, when in fact it often just represents familiarity, savvy advertising, and broad if somewhat shallow appeal." Because mainstream art can be shallow and its success can depend heavily on advertising and connections rather than on quality and craftsmanship, I am so happy that the tyranny of the hit is ending. I think the possibility that anyone can become an artist and that anyone can share their work with the masses is a thrilling prospect. Not only does it encourage individual creativity and group collaboration but it also allows quality work to come forth that otherwise may have been relegated to obscurity. In short, huzzah for the long tail!

How reliable are rating systems for media? It depends on what you're looking for.

Cheri and Kayla both wrote posts on the potential for a book rating system, similar to movies and video games. I've considered this concept before, but one thing that I think is interesting about rating systems is the tendency for them to lose meaning over time. As society changes, what is appropriate for certain audiences changes as well. For example, a PG-13 rating for a movie now allows for more explicit content than a PG-13 movie from 15 years ago. The Motion Picture Association of America explains this on their website under Ratings History, "As American parents' sensitivities change, so too does the rating system. Elements such as violence, language, drug use, and sexuality are continually re-evaluated through surveys and focus groups to mirror contemporary concern and to better assist parents in making the right viewing choices."

This approach is perfectly reasonable if you don't have fixed opinions about appropriateness based on what you think are absolute truths. If your opinions are based on relative truths subject to change and influenced by the greater opinion of society at large, then this system probably works for you, if you agree with the direction society at large is traveling in concerning media. But if you are someone in the absolute truth category and the ratings system doesn't reflect those absolute truths, then the system loses meaning for you.

For example, it is apparently not a contemporary concern if 13-year old children hear the F word twice in a PG-13 movie because that is considered acceptable content for a movie of that rating. I don't think this is appropriate for a 13-year old. I understand that many 13-year olds hear that kind of language walking through a school hallway five time a week; nevertheless, I don't see a reason to put that language in a movie that is rated as appropriate for 13-year olds.

To get back to the discussion on a rating system for books, I think a rating system for books could be useful. However, I assume such a rating system would be similar to the MPAA's rating system, and that means the system would be subject to constant change based on the opinions of contemporary parents and their concerns, which of course probably will not match up with my concerns. Don't get me wrong, I think the idea of parents evaluating media on a semi-regular basis is generally good. I just think that rating systems are always a product of a society's values at a given time, and because they change, they are not very effective.

What do you think? Would a rating system for books be patterned after a rating system for movies? Should there be different independent rating systems: a national one and others run by groups of parents with more specific concerns? As mentioned by a commenter in one of the other blogs on this subject, how would a ratings system restrict children from reading books worth their while that do have some more mature content?

Blogging: I took the one less sailed by

Exploration and self-discovery go hand in hand. In order to really explore, we need an uncharted territory, a place we've never been. Digital culture has been an uncharted territory for me. For example, I hadn't really blogged before I started taking this class. Now I am exploring the world of blogging, which has taught me some things about myself and led to more self-discovery than I thought.

Blogging has reaffirmed to me the importance of writing my thoughts down on paper or rather typing my thoughts on my laptop and sharing them with the online community. There is value in being able to express myself through writing. The creative process that is writing allows me to develop insights and connections I might have missed if they were stored away in the sometimes chaotic space that is my mind. Because I have to reflect in order to write, I think deeper and consider more. 

I also think the comments feature of blogging is so valuable. Journals are great. Like I said, writing thoughts down on paper leads to discovery, but sharing them with others enriches the exploration so much more. If I had simply written these blog posts and not shared them, it would be the equivalent of writing in a journal. But because I've received thoughtful feedback and because I've read the "journals" of others, I have expanded my horizons and traveled to previously unknown regions.  

Lastly, blogging has made me reflect on how I present myself and in turn made me reflect on who I am. Figuring out who I am will be a lifelong journey I'm sure, but exploring my identity in new ways, exploring my thoughts, feelings, and opinions on a work of literature that portrays life so well helps me understand what storms I've braved, what seas I'm crossing, and what sites I want to see. 

I really like the comparison between the theme of adventure in Moby Dick and exploring digital culture. Though Ishmael goes on a physical journey into the vast watery unknown, he goes on several metaphorical voyages that impact him just as much as the harrowing chase after Moby Dick. At times his tangents seem rudderless, but like Dr. Burton said, faith is needed for exploring, and we all put our faith in Ishmael as a narrator as he describes the events of his journey and the peculiarities of human nature. Meanwhile Ishmael puts his faith in his unexplainable drive for adventure. I think we've all chased a white whale, and we hope our pursuit will satisfy our yearnings for discovery, adventure, and meaning in life we couldn't capture while in a safe harbor.