Discourse Analysis Paper
“Gamer Transcript”
Jill Arnold
This essay discusses the differences between “gamer intelligence” and having intelligence with other technologies such as Microsoft Word and other software. The main thing that will be discussed is the interaction between the interviewer and the interviewee. By interpreting what is being said between the interviewer and the interviewee, we can further understand what is being said in the transcript. Therefore, discourse analysis will be used to appreciate what is happening in the conversation. Discourse analysis is simply analyzing the language used in the transcript. The research question that is being approached in this paper is how an interview can be analyzed through the lens of an outsider. The methodology that will be used to analyze this transcript is interactional sociolinguistic. Also, the lens that this transcript will be viewed through is at the macro level.
In this excerpt, “Ch” is interviewing “B” about their experience with different types of technology. The beginning of the conversation it seems as though the two people in the excerpt are friendly with each other. The interviewer “Ch”, jokes around with the interviewee “B” about how they bullied them into being competent with software. This is a way for “Ch” to start the interview by making “B” comfortable. The interactional sociolinguistic approach explains that “through interactions people can construct relationships between and among texts, events, and contexts”. Even though it is clear that these two people already have a relationship with each other, they are creating a different type of relationship in the interview and using these first few sentences as conversational building blocks.
Macro level approaches to discourse analysis include broader, social, cultural, or political processes. Throughout the transcript, “Ch” is asking questions about “B’s” interactions with technology. This is a topic that affects our world today. Even though “Ch” is asking “B” questions about them self, they begin to relate it to the bigger picture by relating it to other technologies that many people use. I believe this subject is on the macro level because they are many people that this article can be related to. But, the interviewer is taking a “soft” approach by generating questions that are starting points and can lead to other, more promising answers.
It is easy to tell that “B” is the person being interviewed because of the flow of conversation between them. Even though there are other clues such as the fact that “Ch” is the one who is asking the questions, “B”, even though as ease, seems to be like they are trying to get through the interview quickly, while “Ch” is wanting to ask many questions and find out more information. “B” also seems as though they are younger than “Ch” and might be a little intimidated by “Ch”. You can see examples of this throughout the transcript when “B” stumbles over their words a few times by saying “ah” and “you know” a few times throughout the transcript. These terms also might be alluding to the fact that “B” is comfortable with “Ch” and I believe by using those terms “B” thinks that “Ch” understands what they are talking about, without having to explain in extreme detail.
Another way to tell that “Ch” is older and more educated is because throughout the transcript “Ch” is sort of educating “B”. As discussed in the article, these parts of the transcript are moments of “learning opportunities” for both parties involved. When “B” discusses how they learned how to use programs, “Ch” explains to “B” that what they are describing is literacy. “Ch” does this again later in the transcript when “B” discusses preparing for different processes. Again, “Ch” educates “B” by explaining to them that that is similar to making moves. After that interaction, “B” agrees with “Ch”’s explanation. It is clear that “B” values what “Ch” has to say and that they look at them as an authority figure. Also, “B” might have a fear that their answers are wrong, so they want to agree with “Ch”, the person in charge of the interview.
Even though it is clear that “Ch” is still interested in teaching “B”, “B” is also teaching “Ch” some things as well. Since “B” is the one that is being interviewed, it is clear that they have information that is wanted. “Ch” is interested in finding out “B”’s association with technology and how they view different types of technology. By having information for each other, they are keeping each other interested in the conversation.
It is important for the interviewer and interviewee to have trust with each other or else there will not be a successful interview. I believe this is a successful interview because “B” seems to open up to “Ch”. Since “Ch” says something about “B”’s stepdad, it is assumed that they know each other before this interview because a stepdad is not mentioned in this transcript. “Ch” also says in the beginning that they bullied “B” into being competent with certain software, so “Ch” is making connections between the event they are constructing and a previous event. This skill is presented to us in the article. Since they seem to be compatible, it is assumed that a good interview would be produced.
Another reason that the two people seem to be compatible with each other because “laughter” is said a few times in the transcript. It is obvious that these two people are on a comfort level with each other, and might even be friends with each other because the interview comes off to as professional, but friendly. As also stated in the article, it is important that the people in the interview signal to each other using all different types of communication, not just verbal. One way which is stated in the transcript is laughter. This is a type of contextual cue that assures both parties that they are comfortable. The article also explains that it is important for the reporter to document these to get a shared sense of what they are collectively doing. “Laughter” can also be a signal to each other to interpret each others actions and communicate their intentions. This is important for both people in the interview so that they can continue to have a positive and informative conversation.
As discussed earlier, the power relations in this transcript are apparent. “Ch” is the person in the power role and the one with the dominant discourse and “B” is the one who is abiding by that persons rules. Even though they are on a friendly level with each other, it is important for “B” to follow “Ch”’s rules and listen carefully to the questions that are asked. In the last sentence of the interview, “B” compares what they are talking about in the interview to a song they have heard on the radio. I believe that “B” is assuming that “Ch” will know what the song is and goes on by explaining a quote that is in the song. “B” might be doing this because they are not sure what else to say and they feel more comfortable expressing it from a song instead.
Furthermore, it is not hard to decipher the power relations in this transcript. Even though “Ch” and “B” seem friendly with each other, you can tell that “Ch” is the one with the power, not only because they are the one interviewing, but also the way that they are asking and answering the questions. They are responding to “B”’s answers by giving more information about what “B” is trying to say.
Therefore, breaking down the interview through the interactional sociolinguistic method means analyzing further into the transcript that what is clearly presented. By using discourse analysis, one is able to break down the interview moment by moment by unfolding not only the text and verbal cues, but also signals and interpretations.
