Running head: DISCOURSE COMMUNITY ETHNOGRAPHY 1

Discourse Community Ethnography

Karina Alvarez

The University of Texas at El Paso

RWS 1301

Dr. Vierra

February 26, 2019

Abstract

Rhetoric and Composition 1301 is a discourse community as defined by Swales. This

class meets the characteristics described by Swales as we strive to achieve a public common

goal.
DISCOURSE COMMUNITY ETHNOGRAPHY 3

Discourse Community Ethnography

Discourse communities need to meet specific criteria in order to function. According to

Swales (1990), a discourse community consists of a group of people who gather up in order to

pursue similar objectives or goals (p. 220). The six characteristics that Swales defines all have

important roles that make up and help identify a discourse community. Members of discourse

communities all input their knowledge to succeed and reach that community’s common goal. As

such, Rhetoric and Composition 1301 is a discourse community that falls into all six of Swales

characteristics and demonstrates how the members of that discourse community work together to

achieve their specific common goal.

Literature Review

Many authors have tried to define what a discourse community is but fail to identify its

meaning specifically. According to Swales (1990), a discourse community consists of a group of

people who gather up in order to pursue similar objectives (p. 220). As Swales continued to

explain how discourse communities work, he provided us with knowledge of how some authors

have even tried to define discourse communities as speech communities. However, Swales

(1990) explained that a speech community consists of shared linguistic forms, regulative forms,

and cultural concepts (p. 219). As we can see, these two communities differ in many ways.

Furthermore, Swales (1990) proceeded to list the six characteristics he believes shape a discourse

community as; having a broadly agreed set of common public goals, having mechanisms of

intercommunication among its members, using its participatory mechanisms primarily to provide

information and feedback, utilizes and possesses one or more genres in the communicative

furtherance of its aims, has acquired some specific language, and has a threshold level of

members with a suitable degree of relevant content and discoursal expertise (p. 220-222). These
DISCOURSE COMMUNITY ETHNOGRAPHY 4

characteristics give us a better idea and understanding of what a discourse community is and how

they function.

The principle of intertextuality in writing is part of a discourse community. According to

Porter (1986), the principle we know as intertextuality is the principle that all writing and speech

develop from one network, where texts refer to other texts often when writing and rely on them

for meaning (p. 34). As we know, a discourse community consists of a group sharing similar

interests. Therefore, if other authors borrow from other texts, it means that the text relates to

what that author is trying to write, making it a network that develops into a discourse

community. Porter (1986) also mentioned that writing assignments should be explicitly

intertextual so that an individual writer’s work is part of a web and part of a community (p. 43).

If all writing assignments were only intertextual and that was the standard, then we would all be

part of that discourse community. This expresses the idea that in fact, intertextuality plays a big

role in shaping discourse communities in writing.

Academic discourse communities can sometimes cause conflict that has a lot to do with a

person’s membership as well as diversity within the group. According to Johns (1997), some

individuals that are fully initiated in the discourse community are separated by certain factors, as

well as some members rebelling. Even if they did not rebel, there is constant argument and

dialogue within those communities as members compete for power and identity (p. 332). This

explains to us more in depth how individuals in academic discourse communities feel the need to

rebel to promote their points of view and approaches to work that others might disagree with

because of their differences. However, these discourse communities still manage to work

effectively to accomplish work together despite cultural and social differences in order to keep

the academic discourse community operating.

Methods

This research uses primary sources known as artifacts which are created by people

themselves. Research will also use secondary sources. In this case, we used observations

obtained during class as our primary research and observed the use of artifacts used in this class

based on Swale’s characteristics. A few of those artifacts were email, blackboard, and Word

document. Email and blackboard can both be used by the professor and students to communicate

about assignments, grades, or use for group discussions. Word document is used for the

professor to comment and provide feedback on assignments when we do Cloud Based Formative

Assessments before turning in major assignments.

Discussion

Common Goals

Rhetoric and Composition 1301 possesses common public goals. Common public goals

for this class may include passing the class and graduation. According to Swales (1990), public

goals may be formally inscribed in documents or in some cases, the goals may be high level or

abstract (p. 220). Accordingly, this class possesses a high-level goal which is to pass and proceed

to graduate while also having the common public goal inscribed in a document which is their

diploma and degree certificates. This can be a motivation to society to succeed and also provide

employment to graduates that help society in various ways.

Participatory Mechanisms

Participatory mechanisms are heavily used in Rhetoric and Composition 1301. According

to Swales (1990), discourse communities use participatory mechanisms to provide information

and feedback and allows a member of that community to uptake information. In Rhetoric and

Composition, it is required to have the Word document app and use one drive word documents in
DISCOURSE COMMUNITY ETHNOGRAPHY 6

which the professor accesses for Cloud Based Formative Assessments to provide feedback and

comments on the current progress of major assignments. Hence, as the professor uses this form

of providing feedback and comments, the students themselves are intaking this information to

better their drafts. As this mechanism is used in class, it falls into the category of participatory

mechanisms making it a discourse community.

Intercommunication

Intercommunication is used daily in Rhetoric and Composition. According to Swales

(1990), discourse communities that include intercommunication consist of meetings,

telecommunications, correspondence, or conversations, along with many other forms of

communicating in that discourse community (p. 221). As such, this class uses many forms of

intercommunication. These may include, the heavy use of email to connect with professors,

Blackboard to turn in assignments and receive grades, and office hours that professors provide

either online or in person for any questions or concerns students may have. Therefore, as

students use intercommunication heavily in this class, it falls into the category of a discourse

community.

Genres

The use of genres in Rhetoric and Composition is very common. As mentioned in

Bullock and Goggin (2016), genres are kinds of writing one uses that may include letters,

blogposts, and journals (p. 61). According to Swales (1990), a discourse community uses one or

multiple genres. The community includes expectations in the discourse that involve the

appropriate use of topics, forms, functions and positions of elements, and the play of text roles

for the operation of this community (p. 221). This class uses APA stylings for writing and citing

sources, which can be seen as a genre since it is a type of writing. As well as the way we write
DISCOURSE COMMUNITY ETHNOGRAPHY 7

our drafts, they can be distinguished as a genre because we are writing professionally instead of

writing the way we would on social media.

Specialized Language

Specialized language is permanently used in Rhetoric and Composition. According to

Swales (1990), a specific lexis has been acquired in a discourse community. This involves

special and technical terminology that many others might not understand, and this built in and

shared terminology within the communities is understood by them because it was where the lexis

was developed (p. 222). As such, Rhetoric and Composition 1301 has acquired a specialized

language because in this class we use a professional and scholarly vocabulary and acronyms. For

example, we do not speak to our professors the way we would with our friends. Also, not just

any random person would understand what the acronym RWS is or the use of citations when

speaking about other author’s work, the way we do because they are not part of this community.

Therefore, this class has created a specific specialized language between its members.

Hierarchy

Hierarchy is an important characteristic used in rhetoric and composition. Hierarchy

defines changing memberships in which a member enters as one thing and leaves as another.

According to Swales (1990), hierarchy is where discourse communities have changing

memberships; where individuals enter as apprentices and leave by death or in other less

voluntary ways (p. 222). Therefore, a member’s level is constantly changing depending on the

discourse community they are a part of. The images provided are artifact examples for hierarchy.

Students in the discourse community enter as undergraduates and once all their courses are

complete, they graduate. That is a change in status of their membership in the discourse

community they were a part of. The professor is hired to teach but will have to retire some day
DISCOURSE COMMUNITY ETHNOGRAPHY 8

and someone else will replace him, changing his status in the discourse community he was a part

of.

Conclusion

After carefully observing artifacts and research on discourse communities, it is concluded

that Rhetoric and Composition 1301 is in fact a discourse community that falls into all six of

Swales characteristics. All of these characteristics are important but those that stand out at most

are intercommunication and common public goals. As a class, it is important to communicate in

order to achieve the common goal for this class, which is to pass and graduate. Thus, all of

Swales characteristics are important and have to apply in order to make a discourse community

function smoothly.
DISCOURSE COMMUNITY ETHNOGRAPHY 9

References

Bullock, R., Goggin, M.D. (2016). The Norton Field Guide to Writing with Readings Fourth

Edition. New York: W.W Norton & Company.

Johns, A. M. (1997). Discourse Communities and Communities of Practice: Membership,

Conflict, and Diversity. Text, Role, and Context: Developing Academic Literacies, 319-

341. Cambridge, UP.

Porter, J. (1986). Intertextuality and the Discourse Community. Rhetoric Review, 5(1), 34-47.

Retrieved from https://www.jstor.org/stable/466015

Swales, J. (1990). The concept of discourse community. Genre Analysis: English in Academic

and Research Settings. 215-228. Boston: Cambridge UP.