Think 53: Food Talks: The Language of Food (Spring 2017)

Schedule (Tentative)

Week	Date	Homework	In class	Readings or Videos (to be read/watched before class)
Module 1: Does language influence how we think, perceive, or taste?
1	Apr 4	-	Introduction to the course [slides]	No reading If you want more info: original works mentioned in lecture: Joshua Freedman and Dan Jurafsky. 2011. Authenticity in America: Class Distinctions in Potato Chip Advertising. Gastronomica 11, 4: 46-54.
	Apr 6		Language and Culture [slides]	Takao Suzuki. 1978. Words in Contexts. Chapter 1, Language in Culture, pages 10-29. Kodansha If you want more info: original works mentioned in lecture slides: Boroditsky, L. 2009. How does our language shape the way we think? In Brockman (Ed.) What's Next? Dispatches on the Future of Science. Vintage Press Fausey, C. M., Long, B. L., Inamori, A., and Boroditsky, L. (2010). Constructing agency: the role of language. Frontiers in psychology, 1 John McWhorter. (2014). Languages Conditioning Worldviews Matsumoto, Yoshiko. (1988). "Reexamination of the universality of face: Politeness phenomena in Japanese." Journal of Pragmatics 12.4: 403-426.
2	Apr 11		Language and Thought [pdf] [pptx]	Whorf, Benjamin L. (1956). The Relation of Habitual Thought and Behavior to Language. In Carroll, J.B. Language, Thought, and Reality: Selected Writings of Benjamin Lee Whorf. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press. pp. 134-159 If you want more info: original works mentioned in lecture slides: Fuhrman, O., McCormick, K., Chen, E., Jiang, H., Shu, D., Mao, S., and Boroditsky, L. (2011). How linguistic and cultural forces shape conceptions of time: English and Mandarin time in 3D. Cognitive science, 35(7), 1305-1328 Regier, T., Kay, P., and Khetarpal, N. (2007). Color naming reflects optimal partitions of color space. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 104(4), 1436-1441. Jurafsky, Dan. (2014). The Language of Food. Norton. Chapter 13: Why the Chinese Don't Have Dessert Pinker, Steven. "Mentalese". Chapter 3 of "The Language Instinct". Harper.
	Apr 13		Sound Symbolism and Synesthesia [slides pdf] [slides pptx]	Jurafsky, Dan. (2014). The Language of Food. Norton. Chapter 12: Does This Name Make Me Sound Fat? Why Ice Cream and Crackers Have Different Names. Plato. Cratylus, the 3 very short selections in boldface here (CTRL-F search for "Food Talks" 1, 2, and 3 in the rtf file)

Module 2: Metaphor and Magic in Language
3	Apr 18	-	The Magic of Food Names and the Ideophone [pdf slides]	Strauss, Susan. 2005. "The Linguistic Aestheticization of Food: A Cross-Cultural Look at Food Commercials in Japan, Korea, and the United States." Journal of Pragmatics 37(9): 1427-55. Read only pages 1442-1452 focusing on English and Korean. If you want more info: original works mentioned in lecture slides: Matsutani, Minoru. "Impress Your Hosts with Osechi Meanings," Japan Times. Dingemanse, Mark. "Do You Know This Feeling?" (blog entry) Dingemanse, Mark. "Sound Symbolism in Language: Does nurunuru mean dry or slimy?" (blog entry) Freeman, Ellen. "15 Japanese Food Onomatopoeias,"
	Apr 20	Paper #1 Due Apr 20, 11pm	How to define a Word [pdf slides] [pptx slides]	Wittgenstein, Ludwig. 1945. Philosophical Investigations. Paragraphs #66 and 67
4	Apr 25	-	Frames, Conversation, and Food [pdf slides]	Matsumoto Y. (2015) The power of the ordinary: Quotidian framing as a narrative strategy. Journal of Pragmatics 86:100-105 If you want more info: original works mentioned in lecture slides: Tannen, D., and Wallat C. (1987) "Interactive Frames and Knowledge Schemas in Interaction: Examples from a Medical Examination/Interview," Social Psychology Quarterly 50:2.205-216.
	Apr 27	-	Metaphor [pdf slides]	Lakoff, George and Mark Johnson. 1980. Metaphors We Live By. University of Chicago. Page 1-26, 41-45 If you want more info: original works mentioned in lecture slides: Reddy, M. J. (1979). The conduit metaphor: A case of frame conflict in our language about language. In A. Ortony (Ed.), Metaphor and Thought (pp. 284-310). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Thibodeau, Paul H., and Lera Boroditsky. "Metaphors we think with: The role of metaphor in reasoning." PLoS One 6, no. 2 (2011): e16782.

Module 3: Eating High and Low -- Food and Social Class
5	May 2	Food Review Due	Taste and Class [pdf slides]	Johnston and Baumann. 2007. Democracy versus Distinction: A study of omnivorousness in gourmet food writing. American Journal of Sociology 113:165-204. If you want more info: original works mentioned in lecture slides: Bourdieu, Pierre. 1979. Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgement of Taste (Translated by Richard Nice in 1984). Chapter 3: The Habitus and the Space of Life-Styles. pp 169-208. Harvard University Press.
	May 4	-	Eating High and Low: Sushi and Ramen [pdf slides]	Fukutomi, S., "Rāmen Connoisseurs: Class, Gender, and the Internet," in Rath, E. C., and Assmann, S. (2010). Japanese Foodways, Past and Present, pp. 257-274. Urbana: University of Illinois Press. If you want more info: original works mentioned in lecture slides: Shiga Naoya, "The Shopboy's God," (1919) in Rimer, J. T., and Gessel, V. C. (2005). The Columbia Anthology of Modern Japanese Literature, pp. 508-514. New York, N.Y: Columbia University Press. Netflix documentary "Chef's Table," episode on Ivan Orkin
6	May 9	-	How to Read a Menu [pdf slides]	Jurafsky, Dan. (2014). The Language of Food. Norton. Chapter 1: How to Read a Menu
	May 11	-	Sweetness and Power [pdf slides] [long pptx slides]	Sidney Mintz. 1979. "Time, Sugar, and Sweetness". Marxist Perspective 2(4);56-73

Module 4: Food, Language, and Gender
7	May 16	Paper #2 Due 11pm	Cooking, Gender and Language [pdf slides]	Netflix documentary "Chef's Table," episode on Niki Nakayama If you want more info: original works mentioned in lecture slides: Eckert, Penelope and McConnell-Ginet, Sally. (2013). Language and Gender (second edition). Chapter 8: Mapping the world. Cambridge University Press.
	May 18	-	Food, Sex, and a Scroll [pdf slides]	Rath, Eric C. "Sex and Sea Bream: Food and Prostitution in Hishikawa Moronobu's Visit to Yoshiwara," in Allen, L. W., Meech, J., Rath, E. C., Takeuchi, M., and Asian Art Museum of San Francisco,. (2015). Seduction: Japan's floating world: the John C. Weber Collection. If you want more info: further optional reading Allison, Anne. 1996. Japanese Mothers and Obentos: The lunch box as ideological state apparatus. In Permitted and Prohibited Desires: Others, Comics and Censorship in Japan. University of California Press. 81-103.
8	May 23	-	Sex, Drugs, and Sushi Rolls [pdf slides]	Jurafsky, Dan. (2014). The Language of Food. Norton. Chapter 7: Sex, Drugs, and Sushi Rolls. If you want more info: further optional reading Caitlin Hines. 1999. Rebaking the Pie: The WOMAN AS DESSERT Metaphor. In Reinventing Identities: The Gendered Self in Discourse, Edited by Bucholtz, M. and Liang, AC and Sutton, L.A. Oxford University Press
Module 5: Multiculturalism, Food Migrations, and Identity
	May 25	-	Food Migrations [pdf slides]	Jurafsky, Dan. (2014). The Language of Food. Norton. Chapter 4: Ketchup, Cocktails, and Pirates If you want more info: further optional reading Jennifer 8 Lee. "Solving a Riddle Wrapped in a Mystery Inside a Cookie" NY Times, Jan 16, 2008
9	May 30	-	Comfort Food and the "Exotic" [pdf slides]	Proust. The "madeleine episode" from Proust, M. Remembrance of Things Past. Volume 1: Swann's Way: Within a Budding Grove. Barthes, Roland (1970). Empire of signs. (Translated by Richard Howard in 1982, Chapters "Chopsticks," "Food Decentered,")
	June 1	-	Socializing Taste	Ochs, Elinor, Clotilde Pontecorvo, and Alessandra Fasulo. 1996. Socializing Taste. Ethnos Vol 61:1-2.
10	Jun 6	-	Conclusion
	June 8	-	NO CLASS TODAY [DEAD WEEK]
11	June 9	Final Paper Due [instructions with rubric]

Course Information

Assignments and Grading

Attendance and Participation (30%) Attendance is required. All students are expected to actively and productively participate in lectures, sections, tutorials and other course related activities. Missing any of these lowers grades.
Short Written Assignments (2) (30%) Students will write two short papers (~4-5 pages, double-spaced):
1. Reaction to the Whorfian hypothesis [April 20th]
2. Write a food review analysis
  1. Restaurant outing (ungraded but required) [Weekend following Week 3]
  2. Write a food review (individually) (ungraded but required) [May 2]
  3. Second draft (individually) (graded) [May 16th]
Final Group Research Project (including individual paper and group presentation) (40%)
Some sample topics:
1. Study the effect of food advertising on how food is perceived
2. Compare the language of men and women on TV food shows
3. Study food-related metaphors in popular culture (including music)
4. Contrastive study of ethnic food descriptions

Learning Goals

Students in all Thinking Matters courses will:

Develop a sense for what a genuine question or problem is, and what it means to think about an important idea with the sort of disciplined, creative, and critical reasoning characteristic of a university-trained mind.
Develop broad, transportable skills that are required in (almost) any branch of university work, including: analytical, expository writing; careful, critical reading; analytical and critical reasoning; and capacities for effective oral communication including active listening and responsive discussion.

Course-specific Goals: After THINK 53, students will be able to:

Intellectually engage with an important part of their lives and develop a reflective dimension that will enrich their current and future lives.
Become more aware of how their and others' behaviors and cultures can be topics of academic inquiry.
Acquire tools to offer analyses in the humanities and social sciences.
Develop skills for cultural interpretation, historical thinking, evaluative reasoning and judgment.

Honor Code

Violating the Honor Code is a serious offense, even when the violation is unintentional. The Honor Code is available at: http://studentaffairs.stanford.edu/communitystandards/honorcode. Students are responsible for understanding the University rules regarding academic integrity. In brief, conduct prohibited by the Honor Code includes all forms of academic dishonesty, among them copying from another's exam, unpermitted collaboration and representing as one's own work the work of another. If students have any questions about these matters, they should contact their post-doctoral fellow.

Provost's Statement concerning Students with Disabilities

Students who have a disability which may necessitate an academic accommodation or the use of auxiliary aids and services in a class must initiate the request with the Office of Accessible Education's Disability Resource Center (DRC). The DRC will evaluate the request with required documentation, recommend appropriate accommodations, and prepare a verification letter dated in the current academic term in which the request is being made. Please contact the DRC as soon as possible; timely notice is needed to arrange for appropriate accommodations (phone 723-1066; TDD 725-1067).

Evaluation in Thinking Matters Courses

Thinking Matters assignments challenge students to ask authentic and rigorous questions that will guide their exploration of a topic. Students apply their questions to a critical analysis of material using approaches appropriate to the scholarly methods modeled in the course -- such as close reading of a literary text or film; consideration of context or history; assessment of ethical or scientific models; and accurate measurement of observable data.

Upon completion of this exploration (reading, assessment, measurement etc.), students develop a claim about the topic, connected to the course material and relevant to their guiding questions, in order to articulate a critical perspective in a logical and sustained argument.

Evidence drawn from the analysis is organized to support the claim and to persuade the reader of the validity of the argument.

Students' communication of the questions, the claim, the argument and the evidence cohere in a presentation that conveys the extent to which critical thinking skills have been learned through the assignment.

Evaluation of student work is tied to achievement of standards articulated for each of the four dimensions of the assignment:

Questions developing from a critical engagement with course material and lecture:
- o significant, answerable, penetrating
Evidence in support of claim or argument:
Communication and presentation:

Section Participation: Thinking Matters courses encourage vigorous intellectual exchange, the expression of various viewpoints, and the ability to speak effectively and cogently. Participation includes but is not limited to in-class discussion. As part of the participation grade, fellows may assign activities and written assignments such as individual or group presentations, on-line forum entries, reading responses, lecture summaries, problem sets, debates, etc.

Participation will be evaluated on the following guidelines, which stress the quality rather than the quantity of contributions.

A range: The student is fully engaged and highly motivated. This student is well prepared, having studied the assigned material, and having thought carefully about the materials' relation to issues raised in lecture and section. This student's ideas and questions are substantive (either constructive or critical); they stimulate class discussions. This student listens and responds respectfully to the contributions of other students.

B range: The student participates consistently in discussion. This student comes to section well-prepared and contributes regularly by sharing thoughts and questions that show insight and a familiarity with the material. This student refers to the materials discussed in lecture and shows interest in other students' contributions.

C range: The student meets the basic requirements of section participation. This student is usually prepared and participates once in a while but not regularly. This student's contributions relate to the texts and the lectures and offer a few insightful ideas but do not help to build a coherent and productive discussion.

Failure to fulfill satisfactorily the criteria for participation will result in a grade of "D" or below.

Other Logistics

We use the mailing list generated by Axess to convey messages to the class. We will assume that all students read these messages.

Professors:	Fellows:
Dan Jurafsky (jurafsky@stanford.edu) Dept. of Linguistics and Dept. of Computer Science Office Hours: 117 Margaret Jacks Hall Tuesday 2:30-3:30 and by appt (except: May 25: 5:00-6:30)	Bronwen Tate (brtate@stanford.edu) Thinking Matters Teaching Fellow (Course Coordinator) Office Hours: Wednesdays 10-11am Sweet Hall 220A and by appointment	Gabe Rodriguez (gabeysf@stanford.edu) Thinking Matters Teaching Fellow Office Hours: Wednesdays 2-3pm, Sweet Hall 2nd Floor, and by appointment

Yoshiko Matsumoto (yoshikom@stanford.edu) Department of East Asian Languages and Literatures and (by courtesy) Department of Linguistics Office Hours: 310 Knight Building, Tues 2:30-3:30 and by appointment	Sarah Perkins (sperkins@stanford.edu) Thinking Matters Teaching Fellow Office Hours: Tuesday, 2:30-3:30, Sweet 223A and by appt	Elise Stickles (stickles@stanford.edu) Thinking Matters Teaching Fellow Office hours Tuesday, 3:00-4:00, Sweet Hall Second Floor, 220D, and by appointment	Chenshu Zhou (chenshuzhou@stanford.edu) Thinking Matters Teaching Fellow Office Hours: TBA Sweet Hall 217A, and by appointment