Discourse Community Ethnography

Yannis Noel Murari

RWS 1301, Rhetoric and Writing Studies

December 11, 2017

 Introduction

Every person in the world is part of many discourse communities. These share a common

type of communication via a distinct use of language. Groups like the family, a group of friends,

the workplace, a sports team or a religious group are all types of discourse community. This

paper shows that the RWS 1301 course is in fact a discourse community, with the support of the

six characteristics of Swales.

Literature Review

To obtain information on the matter of discourse communities and their aspects within

different types of societies, sources had to be obtained. The research process consisted of

multiple readings and articles. Some of which were made available by the professor, while other

had do be found by the students. These had to then be analyzed and evaluated. In the first course

reading "The Concept of Discourse Community" written by John Swales, he himself identifies

the meaning and principles of a discourse community. He addresses that the common issue is to

identify, verify and separate these correctly. Swales provides six characteristics that apply to

those communities. He states that each of them has a common intention and goal, uses their own

intercommunication mechanisms, such as computers and phones, whilst keeping their connection

in a loop and providing feedback to each other internally.

Other key points include their following of dedicated genres like rulebooks or schedules

that are devoted to them and their opinion and their use of specialized vocabulary specific to

their audience and members. A discourse community also consists of a self-sustaining hierarchy

in which higher ranks can be achieved and replaced over time by individuals within the group.

The second reading is in the The Rhetoric and Writing Studies Handbook e-book and

provided the information out of Swales article with addition to the Formatting Requirements

1
and specific information about this assignment. Another course reading is the class's textbook

The Norton Field Guide to writing with readings by Bullock and Goggin.

An additional secondary source used is a book by David Hailey, ReaderCentric Writing

for Digital Media. It provides information about problems one has writing in digital media and

states possible solutions. It separates its information in three chapters: Theory, Application

and Practice. The first chapter informs about the reasoning behind the difficulty of writing in

digital media and tools that are important in its environment. While chapter two explains the art

of writing persuasion-, quality- and user-centric content in an efficient way, chapter three

describes the working environment where these skills are used.

The last second source, a book written by W.R. Whitaker. J.E. Ramsey and R.D. Smith

Media Writing: Print, Broadcast and Public Relations provides most of the same information

that the second source does, but goes deeper into issues and describes the decision process in

depth. Both secondary sources provide proof that each course and major belongs to its own

discourse community.

Methods

The secondary research consisted of the readings provided in class and online, and two

other necessary print-book sources that had to be used. These sources were all stated and

explained in the literature review above. These sources were then analyzed and evaluated to

come to the discovery stated later on in the paper.

As of primary research, this information was obtained through observation in class. The

main source for this is the composition book. Here students have noted all the information

provided to them since the first class of this semester. This includes all of the lecture material on

2
discourse communities and other important information. This was again analyzed and evaluated

and gave additional information supporting the claim.

Discussion

As the article of Swales states, all discourse communities provide the characteristics

stated before. These can all be found and observed in this course as well. The first criteria it

satisfies, is that the community of RWS 1301 thrives to achieve shared goals. Students wish to

improve their writing and their persuasion skills, and obtain a higher education by graduating

from college, to have an impact on society and their families whilst the professor provides them

with the tools necessary to achieve these goals. Throughout the semester, all participants work

towards these objectives.

RWS also uses intercommunication mechanisms. Whilst mainly oral communication is

used during class, blackboard is the main source of conveyance of information outside of it.

Assignments, reflections, papers and other information is transferred over is medium from

student to professor and/or professor to student. These tools make it easier and simpler to

communicate and share information with each other.

These mechanisms provide the capability of a looped communication. The recipient can

deliver feedback and question anything that was unclear or misunderstood in class (orally) or

online (written). The e-mail platform and blackboard are two prime examples. The instructor can

give information, whilst students can share problems and issues they are having. Looped

intercommunication is also used during class. Whilst the professor lectures, students are asked

questions which they can and should answer with information, they were given before.

The main genre of RWS 1301 is the syllabus. It provides information and rules about the

course and serves as a bible of the class. Other genres such as the textbook, The Norton Field

3
Guide to Writing with readings by Bullock and Goggin and the online e-book The Rhetoric

and Writing Studies Handbook by Padon, are also supplement to RWS and are only usable in

this course. These are used as secondary sources in this course to evaluate claims.

Whilst the web is subject to be used by anybody, some pages provide specific

information only usable in a RWS class that are ignored and irrelevant to others.

During class and in written, academic English is used and mandatory in the community.

Other specific terms (for example: rhetoric, exigence, endoxa and doxa) are specialized for this

class as well and won't be found with the same context in other discourse communities.

The other two secondary sources provide the information that other types of courses and

major, in this major's incident 'media', also satisfy Swales criteria of being a discourse

community. ReaderCentric Writing for Digital Media states that Genres, types of language, the

goal of publishing, the use of different mechanisms and the difference in rank and personal in the

environment has the same importance as it does to the RWS course or any other discourse

community.

Media Writing: Print, Broadcast and Public Relations provides with the same results,

yet goes more in to detail about the different mechanisms and passively shows how they can also

be separated in to their own community. It reveals that each media type shows different values

but still satisfies all criteria necessary.

Conclusion

After analyzing and evaluating different sources and readings, the reasoning behind why

the RWS 1301 course is a discourse community is straight forward. It satisfies all six

characteristics of Swales article and other types of courses and majors in the academic world

provide the same criteria necessary to be such a community. With the information available and

4
newly learned, it is now a simple process of identifying a discourse group in the future and will

no longer take a large amount of time and research.

5
 References

Bullock, Richard H., and Maureen Daly Goggin. The Norton Field Guide to writing with
readings. New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 2016.

Hailey, David. Readercentric Writing for Digital Media: Theory and Practice. Baywood's
Technical Communications Series. Amityville, New York; 4: Baywood Publishing
Company, Inc., 2014.

Padon, Daliborka C. The Rhetoric and Writing Studies Handbook. 1st ed. Follet UTEP Dept.
Of English, 2016. https://shelf.brytewave.com/#/books/9780692759530/

Swales, John. "The Concept of Discourse Community." Genre Analysis: English in Academic
and Research Settings (1990): 21-32.

Whitaker, Wayne R., Janet E. Ramsey, and Ronald D. Smith. Mediawriting: Print, Broadcast,
and Public Relations. New York: Longman, 2000.