further evidence that, in terms of academic focus, i'm right where i belong:

[fox]

reading this stuff for the discourse paper? it's flying by. i get it. it makes sense to me. i disagree with it often enough, because i think deborah tannen's arguments are often, hm, circular, but at least i know what it is i'm not agreeing with. i picked up the book (couple hundred pages) at 5:00 and i'm two-thirds of the way through it, having made notes that'll be good for three pages of analysis.

i had to read through grice five times in order to understand davis. and i had to open a vein to get that paper written.

a goodish chunk of the other stuff i have to read is commentary on this book, and even more is other stuff related to the same topic. i'm golden. i'm not afraid.