Thursday, November 1, 2012

Project 3 Introduction


The discourse community, in its most basic definition, is a collection of people brought together by a common practice, setting or interest. The community can be scattered across a nation or contained to a single classroom. There can be fervent disagreement between members, total understanding or variations of each that generate sub-communities that live inside the discourse itself. This formation, unity, coming-togetherness is what substantiates the community, what gives it meaning. Without an audience, regardless of its size, discourses will fail to maintain relevance. Practicing members are imperative, essential, obligatory.

            Once you’ve penetrated a discourse community–or at least absorbed its rhythms, stances, vocabulary–you’re able to move and interact within it without hesitation. Eventually, through repetition and immersion, you’ll begin to speak and act in a way you’d think of as artificial, or at least odd, prior to immersion. Maybe that immersion never happened, or you didn’t consciously recognize it due to its drawn out gradualness.
           
            I digress. As important as the birthing of a discourse community, it is not the focus of this article. I intend to focus my research on the discourse community itself, the affects it has on its members and participants, and how it shapes, alters and fosters language. I also plan to observe the affect a discourse community can have on the facets of life that are largely disconnected or unrelated to the community. To aid me with my research, amongst others, are scholars of the highest academic caliber: John Swales, James Paul Gee, Elizabeth Wardle, Amy Devitt, Anis Barwashi, and Mary Jo Reiff. Though their theories on the discourse community conflict and contrast with each other, they all remain steadfast in their belief of the discourse community’s inescapable affect. Swales argues that there are six defining characteristics to every discourse community, each of them crucial and indispensable. Theoretically, Swales suggests, you can adapt and integrate into a discourse community; the community can be learned. On the opposite side of the spectrum, James Paul Gee argues that you are more or less, involuntarily, a part of a discourse community. There is no integration, no willful intrusion. You’re either in or out.

            To better gauge the community, Devitt et al., stress the importance of genre analysis when studying a discourse community. Genre analysis, as defined by Devitt et al., (to paraphrase) is a deep understanding of the genre or subject the discourse community bases its self from. Once you feel you’ve got a firm and definitive grasp on the genre, Devitt et al., suggests, you’ll be able to penetrate and research your community.

            With these scholars, along with the community itself and the members I’ll observe, my research will be enhanced tenfold.

No comments:

Post a Comment