Critical Reading: The Steps

 write non-racist texts and vice versa. Even then we cannot be entirely sure what an author truly intended. An author might not be forthcoming about his or her purpose. And whatever the author's intentions, he or she may not have successfully communicated that intended meaning within the text. 
When we ask what an author meant, our reference to “the author” is really a metaphor for the text: what might the text mean? Inferring an author can be a useful tool for making sense of remarks within a text, but we must not make the jump from analysis of evidence within the text to speculation about a person who is not present. While we cannot know what an author intended, we can try to figure out what meaning makes the most sense given all we know from the evidence of the text, about the author and the situation at the time, and the social context. 
Readers must exert the same caution when discussing the audience of a text as they do when discussing the author. Readers may infer an audience to whom they imagine a text might appeal. As with the notion of the author above, the notion of an audience for a text is essentially a tool for describing and explaining features of a text. It may or may not actually indicate people for whom the text might have been, intended.
Unconscious and Unwritten Rules
Speakers of a language know much about the language without quite knowing how, or even that, they know it. Most rules we learned not from grammar books, but from our experience with the language itself. Indeed, many And, as we shall see, many rules are not even written down – anywhere! 
If the notion that you know rules you do not know you know still seems odd, consider the following. No native speaker of English would write, or say, 
* He bought Spanish purple large seven onions.
The word order is wrong. Native speakers know to write or say: 
He bought seven large purple Spanish onions.
How do we know to put the words in this order? We follow a rule for the placement of modifiers before a noun: 
number / size / color / type / NOUN
No one has taught you this rule. You have inferred it on your own. You know the rule, even if you do not know you know it—or even know that it exists. With a little thought and experimentation, you can extend the rule to include other qualities, such as age and texture. 
Learning a second-language involves learning new and different rules. While adjectives come before a noun in English, 
white house,
they come after in French, 
maison blanche,
or Spanish, 
casa blanca.
One never loses the rules of their first language; rules of the second language must be added on. 
A similar problem is encountered when shifting from one dialect of a language to another, or from rules of informal speech to rules of formal speech. We may not all be bilingual, but most of us are bi-dialectical. 
Finally, note that rules such as those described above aredescriptive, notprescriptive. They describe the way native speakers use the language, not how they should use the language. Indeed, descriptive and prescriptive rules often conflict. We are told to never split an infinitive — as this author just did. [We are told not to say "to never split an infinitive," but rather "never to split an infinitive.") In fact, the option of splitting infinitives allows us to distinguish between "to suddenly fire" (to fire without warning) and "to fire suddenly" (to shoot many bullets in a short time). 
Many prescriptive rules were written to mirror Latin usage, where the infinitive is a single word (to praise:laudare) and therefore cannot be split; English infinitives are two words (to praise) and can easily be split. 
Much of this discussion is not designed to teach you new concepts so much as to help you recognize how much you already know. The more you are consciously aware of how the spoken language works, the better you can apply that understanding to texts, whether when confronting increasingly complex texts or desiring a deeper understanding. 
Non-Verbal and Social Aspects Of Language
Non-Verbal Aspects Of Language
Spoken language is based on a face-to-face encounter. One person directly addresses another or others. (The electronic media, such as radio and television are, of course, exceptions, but even there we can envision someone at a microphone imagining an audience to whom they direct their remarks.) 
Within the face-to-face encounter of speech, communication is not limited to words. Speakers use a wide variety of extra-verbal devices, from emphasis and dramatic pauses to changes in tone or tempo. Speakers also use a broad range of non-verbal clues. They “talk” with their eyes and their bodies. They use hand gestures and facial expressions to convey ideas. And speakers respond to similar cues from their listeners—the nods and grunts that say, in effect, "I hear you," or the quizzical looks that say, "I don't understand." 
As we learn a language, we also learn the non-verbal conventions of that language—the meaning of a shrug, a pout, or a smile. Speech thus often includes not only a face-to-face meeting, but also a meeting of the minds. "Conversation," Steven Pinker notes, "requires cooperation. 
Listeners assume speakers are conveying information relevant to what they already know and what they want to know. That allows them to hear between the lines in order to pin down the meanings of vague and ambiguous words and to fill in the unsaid logical steps. 
Speaker and listener are aware of each other's knowledge, interests, and biases. They can interpret remarks within the common social setting in which they find themselves. This mutual understanding, being "on the same page" as it were, is frequently absent with written communication. Information an author would like to assume the reader knows must be included with a text. Writers must make their biases explicit to assure full understanding by the critical reader, and readers, unable to read body language, must subject texts to close scrutiny to "read" attitudes or biases underlying a text. 
Using Language In A Social Context
Speech is a tool of social communication. We understand spoken remarks within the context of an exchange of ideas between rational and emotional beings in a social situation. We become aware not only of what one says, but what ones does by uttering such a remark, and the effect they might bring about by such a remark. 
Remarks may serve as expressions of feelings or ideas. 
Don't give it another thought.
This is more than a command not to think about something. It is a promise meaning "I'll take care of it." 
People not only state ideas, they can also threaten, inquire, and dare. They can be ironic or sarcastic. 
Can you pass the ketchup?
This remark may have the form of a question, but functions as a request. If someone says 
I can't find the ketchup.
they are probably not just announcing their inability to locate a condiment. They are asking for help. 
Language can be used to request, persuade, convince, scare, promise, insult, order, and, as above, elicit action. Remarks often convey ideas that extend beyond their literal meaning. Listeners must infer unstated meaning. If someone says 
The government once classified ketchup as a vegetable in the school lunch program.
they are probably not simply providing a lesson about the school lunch program. They are offering an example of bureaucratic stupidity. 
We assume common rules for the use of language, and infer meaning accordingly. Thus is someone says: 
The robber appeared to have a beard.
we assume that they are not sure, not that they are commenting on the mechanics of sight. 
Listeners infer meaning within the context of social roles and settings. The meaning of an utterance can thus vary with the occasion, the relationship of speaker and listener (or writer and reader) or the listener's expectations of the speaker's purpose. 
Do you have the time to help me?
This question carries different meaning when uttered by an employer or an employee. When uttered by an employer, the remark is a strong request for assistance; one would not generally answer "no." When spoken by an employee, it is more a respectful request for help. 
An assertion that there is racism in the United States Army takes on different meaning and significance if asserted by a black soldier (an allegation), a white General (an admission), an Army Task Force report (official recognition), or a Moslem priest in Iran (a condemnation). The same comments takes on different significance when asserted in a bar, a Senate hearing room, or an elementary school classroom. 
When learning to speak, we learn degrees of courtesy and "turn-yielding" cues that function somewhat like “over” in a walkie-talkie conversation. We learn social communication strategies—like how to appeal to someone's vanity (Anyone who buys this cream can look better in days!), or how to imply a fact (Do you still beat your wife?). The late Lord Denning, often referred to either as the best known or the most colorful English judge of the 20 century, observed: 
When a diplomat says yes, he means perhaps. When he says perhaps, he means no. When he says no, he is not a diplomat. When a lady says no, she means perhaps. When she says perhaps, she means yes. But when she says yes, she is no lady
While this may be an obviously sexist and politically incorrect statement, the remark nonetheless demonstrates ways in which language is a complex social tool for communication. 
What We Say, Do, and Mean
In the examples above we can distinguish between what is said, , what is done, and what is meant. 
I left my watch home.
This remarksaysthat I left my watch home. By making that statement, Idosomething: I describe where my watch is, or that I am without it. Finally, themeaningconveyed (or inferred) is that I don't know what time it is.
says: that I left me watch home 
does: describes where my watch is 
means: I want to know the time