Gee discusses two theorems in his study on Discourses. The first theorem states “someone cannot engage in a Discourse in a less than fully fluent manner”. This means that if a particular Discourse is not mastered, than it is not a Discourse at all. Gee says “your very lack of fluency marks you as a non member of the group that controls this Discourse”. I believe this to be controversial because one may argue that acquiring parts of different Discourses can make you a member of each Discourse. However, I agree with Gee in that exemplifying the lack of a certain discourse can leave you a “pretender” in some eyes. Gee’s second theorem states “primary Discourses are limited”. In order for a primary Discourse to be critiqued or analyzed, more than one Discourse needs to be developed. This can be viewed as controversial because the idea of “limited” and unable to expand on a particular Discourse might not sit well with certain people.
“Understand Annotation” Gee states “Mushfake” is making do with less. Therefore “Mushfake” is a certain type of Discourse. (Gee 13)
“Text-to-World Annotation” : The lack of fluency in a certain Discourse can leave you a “pretender or beginner”.
“Understand Annotation”: Gee’s second theorem states a primary Discourse can not be critiqued or analyzed until other Discourses are developed.
“Text-to-Text Annotation” : This is similar to Cuddy’s belief of “Fake it till you believe it”. If one can manipulate themselves to express confidence and knowledge others can be made to believe it.
