Taylor 1

Andy Taylor
De Piero
Writing 2
7 December 2015
Moving into the Holidays
Imagine you have a broken television. You ask a repairman for advice and he
suggests that you let him fix the problem. You also ask a salesman for advice, but
instead of repairing the old television, he suggests you buy a new and improved one.
The difference between these two men is that they are approaching the same issue
from two different perspectives. This is an everyday example, but it is also a situation
that translates into the writing world. Similar to the men from different fields, different
writing genres and disciplines approach a topic or issue with different perspectives and
purpose according to their own interests, and utilize different moves and strategies as a
result.
To prove this point we can look at scholarly and unscholarly texts from different
disciplines to see how they approach the topic of holidays. The publications we will look
at are The Reading Behavior of Junior Secondary Students During School Holidays in
Botswana, from the Journal of Adolescent & Adult education discipline, The quality of
internal medicine hospital care during summer holiday season, from the Department of
Neurology at the University of Turku, and Is there a right time to buy holiday plane
tickets? from CNN.com. We will refer to these as source 1, 2, and 3 respectively.
While all of these sources are on the topic of holidays, they are coming from very
different angles and address the issue based on their perspectives.

Taylor 2
An obvious difference between each publications approach to the topic is the
purpose. As the repairman and salesman give advice with hopes of marketing
themselves, so do these disciplines write about holidays in their own interests. In the
case of source 1, the authors write about student reading behaviors during holidays.
This is because they are writing from the education discipline and this topic is a way that
holidays directly affect them. Since source 2 is written from the neurology discipline, a
topic like that would have no relevance. Instead, the authors address internal medicine
care during the holidays because it has a much more personal relevance to their field.
Source 3 is a mainstream news source and as a result addresses a consumer related
aspect of holidays; when to buy plane tickets. Each of these sources decided on their
topic because it holds relevant to their particular disciplines or genres. It wouldnt make
sense for a discipline to approach an issue that does not impact them directly.
The purpose of each source is also directly related to the audience. While both
of the scholarly sources write for people of their own discipline, neurology and
education, the unscholarly news article directs its information to the general public. As a
result, the authors use moves they know will be effective with their particular audience.
For example, each publication appears to use jargon or vocabulary that is specific to
their field and is best understood by those in that field. Source one writes, The label
thus encompasses complete illiteracy, functional illiteracy, and aliteracy (Arua 590).
Since this source is a scholarly text, it uses terminology that would mostly be effective
with qualified readers that are studying in the field of education. Source 2 uses this
same strategy, but rather with terminology used in the neurology discipline. We
analysed nationwide mortality and hospital discharge data over a 10-year period related

Taylor 3
to internal medicine wards (Sipil 328). This is clearly written for people with prior
knowledge in the field. Using language like this on another audience could potentially
confuse the reader and lose their interest. Source 3 is not a scholarly source, and as a
result there is clearly a different audience. As a mainstream media source, this article is
obviously intended for the general public, and as a result uses moves that are effective
on that audience. One move they use is asking the reader questions like Are you
cheap and flexible (Hetter)?. This type of informal writing is a move that couldnt be
used by a scholarly source like 1 and 2, which is why source 3 is unique.
The fact that source 3 is able to use informal language that couldnt be utilized by
sources 1 and 2, sparks an interesting discussion about the effectiveness of genres.
Often times publications are forced to use different strategies to stay within their genres
conventions. While you may think this would limit a papers effectiveness, staying within
these conventions can actually build credibility. Kerry Dirk writes in her essay
Navigating Genres, I imagine that you would probably not share a risque joke with
your mom, send a Hey Buddy email to your professor, or update your Facebook status
as X has a huge wart on his foot (Dirk 252). She is trying to explain that certain
language and strategies are only appropriate for certain audiences and situations. The
first two sources, for example, are catering to an audience of well educated scholars
that have the objective of being informed. Therefore, if these sources were to use
informal language, they would lose credibility and the reader would not be interested.
Instead they use very rigid and professional language like Abstract, Methods and
Discussion, etc. Source 3 on the other hand has much more room to move when it
comes to the strategies they use. The news article genre has much less rigid

Taylor 4
conventions as a result of its less formal audience. An example of a strategy used by
this source is the large pictures they place at the top of the page. This grabs the
readers attention, but it is a strategy that could not be used effectively in a scholarly
source like 1 and 2.
Another rhetorical feature that differs between disciplines is the tone used.
Different disciplines use different tones depending on how they want the issue to be
perceived. Using words with negative or positive connotations is a move that authors
will use to put their own spin on the topic. For example, in source 1, the introduction
takes on a type of incredulous tone. They write, Without supporting evidence, the poor
reading culture label is difficult to justify for any population group in Botswana (Arua
589). By using this tone, the author creates a kind of anti-ethos appeal in which they
discredit the opposing argument. This is a useful move to present their own argument
more positively. However, if we look at source 2 from the neurology department, the
author is trying to accomplish something else with their tone. However, inexperience,
workload and structural problems promoting discontinuity have been associated with
negative effects on the adequate use of resources, length of hospital stays and patient
satisfaction (Sipi 327). This author is also trying to put a spin on the topic but in this
case that spin is negative. These are two sources, both credible, discussing the same
topic. By comparing these different tones it is clear that these two disciplines are
approaching the topic in a different manner.
All these rhetorical features, moves, and strategies can be view as tools that a
writer is utilizing to accomplish a goal. Now, that goal is often determined by the
interests of a genre or discipline. With that being said, different moves and strategies

Taylor 5
will be used for different goals. Keeping this in mind, it is only logical that writers from
different disciplines and genres will approach the same topic much differently. There
are more ways than one to skin a cat, and there are more ways than one for authors to
approach a topic.