paired with “Grammar, Identity, and the Dark Side of the Subjunctive”

This discussion is designed to deepen interaction with the primary text by connecting to paratext in the form of YouTube comments, which critique the main arguments emerging from personal narrative. It may be most useful as a follow-up discussion and can link to other discussions or assignments about forms of writing.

Introduction

JS: Phuc Tran’s TedTalk offers a compelling personal story, in part because he weaves his humor and self-confident geekiness with powerful memories of his family’s refugee experiences and resettlement in the U.S. Like other Vietnamese American, refugee, and immigrant authors, Tran turns to his personal story to tell his family’s story in order to speak of history that is not well understood or appreciated in mainstream American culture. Indeed, his narrative not only exposes the bullying pressures to assimilate that he and his family faced but also becomes an expression of how he has command over this culture to spin his own story and to emerge as the person he really wants to be.

Yet, if we listen closely to his presentation, at times, he relies on his own experiences to make broader claims about language, expression, relationships, and identity, which don’t always hold up. Many of the YouTube comments below his video offer rebuttals and complications in what he says about the Vietnamese language in particular. The exchange that occurs between the main text and this paratext flesh out some of the underlying arguments about language and outlook, which one might not interrogate by listening to Tran’s narrative alone.

The following discussion activity is designed to dive deeper into the core issues raised in Tran’s talk and may also generate productive conversations about the extent to which we can rely on our personal experience to develop arguments and the value of incorporating multiple perspectives for deeper understanding.

Guide

Close Read: Audience Reactions

One of the affordances of engaging with a YouTube video as text is that there is so much information around the main content which can provide some clues on how to complicate the ideas presented. In the case of Phuc Tran’s talk, he presents a personal narrative that becomes the basis of an argument about language as a lens, which means it can shape our personal, cultural, and even national outlook. Take a look at some of the YouTube comments that begin to push back on the ideas he presents.

Use the ones below or go back to the YouTube page to find your own leads:

Discuss: Grammar and Identity

In many ways the title of Tran’s talk, “Grammar, Identity, and the Dark Side of the Subjunctive” tells us about the key concepts that link his personal narrative and his argument about language. Yet, the YouTube comments above complicate his story. Beyond strict grammatical “rules” dictating what’s possible in language—for example, whether the subjunctive mood exists—the audience’s comments suggest that one’s use of language reflects both cultural preference and individual choice and that there are many ways of expressing concepts beyond a simple grammatical structure.

• In what ways do Tran’s stories really seem to reflect language, and when do you see other dynamics? Focus on one of the key moments in the video and discuss again how Tran describes language working. Then, discuss how you see other forces like culture or experience shape this moment. How are these two interpretations related? What’s more convincing to you and why?
• The Sapir-Whorf hypothesis contends that the structure of a language determines how native speakers perceive the world and categorize experience. This is also known as linguistic relativity, an approach in linguistics that has been debated, criticized, and largely discredited. What are the implications of this hypothesis for understanding culture, communication, and even identity? To what extent do linguistic differences reveal a different outlook and at what point does this lead to stereotypes? Revisit some of the key moments of miscommunication and misunderstanding that Tran recounts. You may also want to revisit the validity of his claim that “different nations’ feelings of optimism” reflect their languages.

• Connecting the ideas from Tran’s TedTalk, the youtube comments, and insights from your discussions, what do you think is the relationship between language, culture, and identity? How do you experience this? How might you “re-understand” your own languages (as Tran suggests) as a result of these discussions? You may even start by reflecting on how you inhabit the subjunctive and indicative moods.