Response to "Tlilli Tlapalii..."

            In her article “Tlilli Tlapalli: The Path of the Red and Black Ink” by Gloria Anzaldúa explains to us what writing is to her. She describes how her writing is from deep within her soul and how she creates stories in her head in what she calls the Shamanistic State. She has to pick “out images from her soul’s eye” (223) and then has to choose the correct words to describe said images. Her writing is taken from “the human body – flesh and bone – and from the Earth’s body – stone, sky, liquid, soil.” (225).

            This article is similar to those articles about identity. Anzaldúa constructs her identity from what she picks from her soul. It would seem as if her identity, what’s held within her soul, is largely based off of her culture. This makes me also relate this article to Simtherman and Delpit’s articles; those authors are heavily influenced by their culture, like Anzaldúa.

            I really like this article. It was short, captivating and to the point. It was very descriptive in an imaginary sort of way that made it really easy to get into and it felt like I was reading a good book (some sort of fiction title). It was also short so I could take in the whole article easily.

Applying and Exploring Ideas

1.)

            The significance of Western culture’s ‘individual’ styled art contrasting to the communal aspect of tribal art is that it lets us know how her culture affects her identity. You can tell in reading this article that she is very influenced by her culture. Current literacy/art, I think, is becoming more individual. There used to be a huge demand and want to paint/create religious pieces, I think of centuries ago. Now I feel like a lot of artists are going for things that haven’t been done because there are a lot different ideals these days.

2.)

            I don’t think this article would have been more effective in written in a traditional academic format. The poetic style used in this article was done very well; she must be familiar with creative writing. It kept me captivated the whole time, was more fun to read, and definitely was more interesting than reading what we normally read, which is the traditional academic format. It was refreshing.

Response to "VIEWPOINT The Laugh of the Medusa"

            In her article “VIEWPOINT The Laugh of the Medusa”, Helene Cixous argues that women need to write as women. This means that she believes that women should write with a voice of their own. Cixous explains to us that women are being oppressed by men’s literature, and that the world of literacy is ruled by men, for men. She states that women should be able to write as themselves and that when they do this they will feel more free to themselves.
            This article relates to Elizabeth Flynn’s article “Composing as a Woman” in that both articles deal with writing varying from males to females. The difference between the articles is that Cixous doesn’t really seem to care for men’s writing, in fact it seems as though she believes that men writing is evil. Cixous says men have “made for a woman an antinarcissism!” (248) and “the infamous logic of antilove.” (248)
            The article also relates to Jonathan Alexander’s article “Transgender Rhetorics: (Re)Composing Narratives of the Gendered Body”. In his article he talks about transgender theories; helping others understand transgendered ideals. With Cixous’ article she discusses feminist theories, but instead of helping me understand a woman’s perspective it seems she just wants women to write.
            This article was a good read. I didn’t really like it, but the way it was written definitely helped keep my attention. I feel as if Cixous could not have expressed herself any better, but it also felt like half the things I was reading was just jumbled-up emotion that didn’t really help her argument. Overall: good read, but her argument could be put into better light.

Questions for Discussion and Journaling

1.)

            This piece did not make me uncomfortable. It kind of made me annoyed. Yea, the writing was good, but her ideals just seem way too feminist for me. I think she should be able to believe in whatever she wants to, but I don’t think hating a group of people (in this case men).  I do think that Cixous was trying to create a certain level of discomfort for the reader. This creates a certain ‘shock value’ which grabs peoples attention. I think that can be a good strategy in writing sometimes, but I don’t feel that it worked me, it just kind of (as said earlier) made me annoyed.

2.)
            When Cixous tells her female readers to ‘write themselves’ I think she means that they should not conform to standards when they write. They should go all out in their writing. This then really shows your identity. If you ‘write yourself’ (go all out in writing) you reveal, on paper, your raw self. It is the perfect representation of one’s identity.

Response to "Transgender Rhetorics..."

            In his article “Transgender Rhetorics: (Re)Composing Narratives of the Gendered Body”, Jonathan Alexander tries to inform readers  about transgender theories. He argues that transgender theories can “inspire pedagogical methods that compliment feminist compositionist” (195) methods  of understanding gender as a social construct,
            This article can be related to Smitherman’s article because they both seem to be discussing some sort of struggle within minority groups in relation to literacies. I think this also could be related to Wardle’s article, more specifically: identity. The identity in Alexander’s article would be transgendered individuals.
            I found this article very long and tedious. It was interesting, but not enough to completely hold my attention and ‘pedagogy’ or variations of that word were used often and confused me even after looking the word up. Overall I think the article was decent and I am very thankful for the subsections or else I would have been extremely lost.

Applying and Exploring Ideas

3.)

            “Normally” gendered students can gain insight into transgendered lives. This would promote better understanding and probably less conflict due to the understanding. I would say this would hold true for every minority discourse we have read in class.

4.)

            When Alexander describes gender as a “construct” I think he means that it is defined incorrectly for most. When he says that gender is personal and political I think he means that for people their gender is very close to them. An individual can completely feel one way (masculine or feminine) and look/act another due to “political” reasons. A man may not want to act very feminine at his place of work (I’m thinking construction worker) due to fear of being looked down upon because he does not match the ‘role’ of construction worker or just because his coworkers think badly of him for it.

Response to "God Don't Never Change"

            In her article “God Don’t Never Change”, Geneva Smitherman shows the difference between Black English and standard white English. She goes on to argue that the difference between the two is pointless and that the appropriate choice of language has “everything to do with American political reality” and “nothing to do with the educational process” (189).

            I think this article is similar to Wardle’s article because of the ideas of identity and authority. The identity would be the difference between those who use Black English and those who use standard white English and the authority idea would be the fact that there is an authoritative language and that is standard white English. Without using standard white English you kind of lower your chances in the workplace and other situations. This article is also similar to Delpit’s article in that they both argue about oppression and racism in education.
            I didn’t really find Smitherman’s article that interesting but it was better to see that topic in another light, I’ve never thought of racist oppression in education and literature. Maybe the problem is, in school, we come across this topic far too often and at this point it just is boring and redundant. I’m also not sure what I can get out of this article in the long run though, unlike most of the other articles read in this class.            

Questions for Discussion and Journaling

1.)

            Smitherman seems to use black idiom rhetorically by switching to writing in Black English in her article. In doing so she can better explain her perspective of Black English to those who don’t use it. I think this is a very good tactic to use in order convey an abstract idea such as specific languages.

2.)

            Language promotes power for specific races and classes because some languages are more accepted than others. Take standard white English vs. black English; WE is the common language, someone who writes their resume in WE has a better chance of getting a job than someone who writes theirs in BE. I think this is because it’s more comfortable for others, as well as higher educated people seem to have gone to school and learned “standard” English and anything other than that may be looked down upon.

Response to "Composing as a Woman"

Getting Ready to Read

            Gender differences in classrooms never seemed like an issue for me growing up. Occasionally it did seem as if male teachers were harder on male students’ behaviors in class, but rarely, if ever, would it affect a student.

            In Elizabeth Flynn’s article “Composing as a Woman”, Flynn explains that for a long time writing has always been from a male perspective. She argues that both perspectives should be equally shown and presents us with both sides in this article from a hopefully non-female and non-male perspective.

            This article is similar to Wardle’s article in that both authors are discussing identity. Flynn seems to discuss the identity of the work itself; how it’s presented and whom it is supposed to be presented to. It also relates a little to Wardle’s idea of authority when Flynn states that most literature is/was directed towards males from males, males being the authority in literature here.

            When Flynn says, “Women’s perspectives have been suppressed, silenced, marginalized, written out of what counts as authoritative knowledge. Difference is erased in a desire to universalize”, she means that until the want to universalize, join gendered writing together as one, not as male writing and female, all the female writing has been put aside because it does not seem ‘authoritative’ or note-worthy as a males work would be. The silencing of women’s voices relates to the marginalization of other minorities in that they both are actions taken to decrease the authority of a specific group.

Response to "Memoria is a Friend..."

            In his article “Memoria is a Friend of Ours: On the Discourse of Color”, Victor Villanueva discusses the concept of memoria. He argues that memoria, “the inclusion of memory and past experiences” in literature greatly improves the sense of identity that readers get out of a text. He says that Plato’s prophecy of literacy being the fall of memory is coming true. He thinks that literature needs to use memoria more often to create a greater sense of identity and to successfully show pathos, logos and ethos.
            This article is similar to Elizabeth Wardle’s article and Paul Heilker and Melanie Yergeau’s article. All of these article discuss identity and with Villanueva’s article he extends this idea of identity more so, showing how memory can be used successfully to create a better picture of an individual’s identity. Villanueva uses poems, which I believe is a great way to show identity, as poems are a very good expression of someone’s identity.
            I found this article almost fun to read. His use of poetry kept me excited to read more as well as took some space out of the large margins of this book. It was a little confusing as it was a much different way to look at discourse communities.

Questions for Discussion and Journaling

7.)

            Villanueva’s primary discourse is the discourse from his New York side. His secondary discourse would be that of his Puerto Rican heritage.  To me they seem fairly straight forward, but to get into them deeper you have to take a lot more in than just face value, whether that be his family’s background or what he did in New York to after school, or even what he did in Vietnam.

Response to "Autism and Rhetoric"

            In their article “Autism and Rhetoric”, Paul Heilker and Melanie Yergeau argue that autism spectrum disorders are themselves rhetorics. Heilker and Yergeau describe it “as a way of being in the world through language”. Heilker tells his side of the story through his life, as his son is autistic and this gives us a good view into the rhetoric that is autism. Yergeau lives with Asperger’s Syndrome and gives us a first hand account into the rhetoric.
            I think that this article is similar to Elizabeth Wardle’s article “Identity, Authority, and Learning to Write in New Workplaces” in that the idea of autism as a rhetoric brings up the idea of identity which Wardle explains in detail. Heilker and Yergeau both do a great job making their identities clear which really opens the article up to really show the community that grows around autistics.
            I found this article more interesting that any of the other articles we’ve read in this class. It’s a really interesting way to look at autism, which I find interesting in itself. Reading about Eli was great and it seemed as if he was in his own, imaginative world, which is really cool to think about. 

Project 3 Intro/Conversation

            Discourse communities; a community of people who congregate in order to discuss specific goals and learn about specific things based on which community they are a part of. John Swales, an American linguist, proposed six rules that communities must meet in order to be called a discourse community. These rules are that the group must have a set of common goals, methods of intercommunication among its members, use the methods of communication to spread information, utilizes one or more genres in order to grow as a community, has specific acquired lexis and has a threshold level of members with suitable relevant content to contribute.

            The use of discourse communities helps us understand how writing and language work together with social groups when studied. When we look at specific discourse communities we can understand the six rules they follow. More specifically when it comes to writing and language the acquired lexis of a discourse community can give us insight into the communities writing style. Some discourse communities seem to have their own language, or with Reddit, the discourse community I am studying, have a sort of ‘inside joke’ style of communicating. With the intercommunication aspect of Reddit you can see how their language almost works as a combined writing experience. Someone will comment on a thread and a comment can either be written onto that comment or onto the parent comment/thread before. This creates an almost essay formatted kind of thread.

            John Swales, as stated earlier, is a very important person when it comes to defining what a discourse community is due to his six main rules. Although Swales is a big name when it comes to discourse communities, his is not the only name that comes to mind. Elizabeth Wardle expanded on the idea of discourse communities. She uses the concept of ‘Identity” and gives three ‘modes of belonging’ for individuals. These modes are Engagement, Imagination, and Alignment. The first two seem to explain themselves by their titles, but alignment is a bit different. Alignment is a concept that means to be able to come to common ground with others sometimes resulting in the destruction of an individual’s identity. There is an article written by Devitt et al titles “Materiality and Genre in the Study of Discourse Communities”. In this article Devitt et al, dig deeper into the idea of genres within discourse communities. They argue that genres are used for organization within the discourse community. Without these genres there would be a whole lot of information to sort through seeing as there are no genres (I think you can see genres as sub-sections of the community).
            Some ways that I believe that my ethnography could add to this conversation is that I can look further into genres by explaining ‘subreddits’. Subreddits are a great way to view genres and explore them in comparison to each other (other genres). I will also be able to expand on Swales’ six rules of discourse communities because I feel as if Reddit is very open in that all the information is easily accessed due to its use of genres and lexis and the fact that I have been using Reddit for quite sometime now.

Response to "Identity, Authority, and Learning..."

            In her article “Identity, Authority, and Learning to Write in New Workplaces”, Elizabeth Wardle discusses the importance of individual’s identities and the concept of authority in the matter of learning to write in new workplaces. She argues that individuals have three modes of belonging that they need to follow in order to be able to learn to write in new places which are: Engagement, Imagination, and Alignment. She discusses a man named Alan, and his choices in a new workplace. She explained how he rebelled and used email in ‘inappropriate’ ways. Thus he created conflict by not adapting and was not accepted by co-workers. He should have adapted and should have been willing to consider other ways, but he did not.

            Her article is very similar to the article by Swales and Devitt et al. in that they both discuss discourse communities. Wardle adds a new element to her discussion though. She takes the conversation to a place that discusses how an individual should act within the community rather than discuss the community as a whole. This really helps one understand the inner workings of the communities and made me really think about Reddit (my project 3 topic) in a way that I had not previously.

Response to "Materiality and Genre..."

            In their article “Materiality and Genre in the Study of Discourse Communities”, Amy J. Devitt et. al. attempt to show readers that the use of genres in discourse communities really help play a role in the sorting of information within discourse communities. They argue that without genre analysis discourse communities would be a confusing place with a lot of unorganized information as well as a weaker bonded community.

            This article relates to Swales’ article in that they both talk about discourse communities although Swales focuses more on discourse communities as a whole where as Devitt et. al. focus on genre and genre analysis.
            I read this article after I submitted my proposal for project three but I think if I would have read it prior to my proposal it would have helped me more. Overall I am still a little confused about discourse communities but I think in time and with reading more articles that my understanding will improve. With this said the article was a little confusing but I think after class I will understand more.

Project 3 Proposal

Discourse Community: Reddit

            Reddit qualifies as a Discourse community according to Swales by matching all of Swales’ six characteristics:

1.) Broadly agreed set of common public goals:

Reddit is a website whose goals are that of spreading information, whether that information is funny pictures, music, answering question, and even scientific articles.

2/3.) Mechanisms of intercommunication among members/these methods used primarily for providing information and feedback:

Reddit has a message system where you can, if you are a member, send and receive messages from other redditors. Most messages are sent in order to let other members know something that they may have done wrong (not following rules etc.) or compliment them on a certain post. Per each post there is a comment section where users can provide feedback on specific posts that all members and even non-members can see.

4.) Utilizes and posses one or more genres:

Reddit has many “subreddits”, each possessing a main focus on a different genre. For example, there are subreddits such as r/funny, r/politics, r/science, r/audioengineering, and so forth. Each of these “subreddits” focuses on a separate genre, which are usually obvious based on the subreddits title (funny, politics, science, and audio engineering respectively).

5.) Acquired specific lexis:

Reddit has a few very specific things that most people wouldn’t understand if they were not members or lurkers. The word lurker for example is part of the lexis. There are also other words/grammatical styles used. A lurker is someone who never comments or votes on posts but still browses. When someone says “r/” then says a words such as “r/science” they are talking about that subreddit. This is because the URL for subreddits is www.reddit.com/r/science. That would be the URL for the subreddit science. People also post comments sometimes using what I would call a meme style. They use the constant text from a meme and post it in a way that makes sense in context mainly used as a joke. Redditors (people who partake in Reddit goodness), at least most, have acquired a knowledge of memes; those memes depend on what subreddits are browsed. One of the most important lexis would be Reddiquette. These are basically the rules of posting and each subreddit has a variation of Reddiquette that needs to be followed, and at the whole-site level (not specifically subreddits) there are a very general set of rules that ALL subreddits must follow.

6.) A threshold level of members with a degree of relevant content and discoursal expertise:

Reddit has millions of active members and each subreddit has a counter of ‘subscribed’ readers as well as a counter of online readers. Some subreddits die and therefore are no longer active, but for the most part subreddits get a lot of relevant content, and if it is too off topic the moderators of said subreddit can remove it. Although not all posts are on topic (the subreddit r/funny is notorious for having posts containing nothing to do with their goal), most subreddits do have very relevant content posted often.

          My interest in Reddit is mainly because I am on it far too often and waste away most of my life on it. I think it will be easiest for me to pick Reddit for the project. As for learning more about it I think maybe getting to know the creators more would be a good piece of knowledge and probably even interesting. I think if possible interviewing one of the creators, Steve Huffman and Alexis Ohanian. The set of texts I can analyze would be a couple subreddits, more specifically NOT r/funny.

Response to "The Concept of Discourse..."

            In his article, “The Concept of Discourse Community”, John Swales shows readers what a discourse community is and explains the rules they need to follow. He argues that a discourse community is different from a speech community and that they are defined by:

1.) Broadly agreed set of public rules
2.) Mechanisms of intercommunication between its members
3.) Mechanisms providing information and feedback
4.) Utilizes and posses one or more genres

5.) Acquired specific lexis
6.) A threshold level of members with a suitable degree of relevant content and discoursal expertise
            This article is similar to Greene’s article “Argument as Conversation”. In Greene’s article he explains that each argument takes place in a certain discourse community and in Swales’ article he explains discourse community more thoroughly. It is nice to get a look deeper into what a discourse community actually is.
            I found this article to be very dry. The way Swales writes really bores me. I think it would have helped me to read this before I wrote my first essay because it seems after reading this that discourse communities are a very important piece in arguments. Although overall I did not enjoy this article due to the dryness.

Before You Read

            The last time I can remember that I felt out of place was when I went to a part with my brother and everyone there, besides me, was wearing metal-band t-shirts and metal was playing. I was not into metal music at the time but in the end it turned out to be pretty fun.

Questions for Discussion and Journaling

            A discourse community I belong to would be the discourse community Steven Wilson fans. The goals are basically to keep up to date on what he is recording with each of his different projects. The lexis would be the discographies of his projects and re-mixes (Porcupine Tree, Solo albums, Jethro Tull, King Crimson, etc.). The genres would be music (Progressive Rock, Metal, Ambient/Drone, and Jazz/Jazz Fusion), live performance videos, and behind the scenes work.

           
           

Response to "The Sticky Embrace..."

            In her article “The Sticky Embrace of Beauty”, Anne Francis Wysocki attempts to show readers the effectiveness of visual objects in readings and how they can portray objects certain ways (in this case beauty) depending on how they are used. She uses many different visual techniques to help explain this.

            This article is similar to Bernhardt’s article “Seeing the Text”. Both writers use a lot of images to help prove their point. In both articles they discuss the idea of beauty and how different people see beauty differently. The differences between the two articles are mainly the ages of the images used and everything that comes with this time difference (social ideas of beauty, social portrayal of women, etc.).

            Overall I enjoyed this article. The immense amount of visual techniques used were interesting, although at times it felt a little overwhelming. It was definitely a different kind of article and really got me thinking about how one could use visual techniques to alter the light an idea is put into. I think Wysocki did a great job using all those visuals though.

Before You Read

            The ad I found gives me contrary feelings due to the picture itself. While I like the message (don’t talk on the phone and drive), the particular image is kind of disturbing, and mildly graphic:

http://goo.gl/A6ick

Questions for Discussion and Journaling

2.)

            Wysocki sets up the text visually for me as a reader using very bold tactics. First thing I saw was the ad on page 79. Then I turned the page to see bold text, lines across the page, and another full picture. I think Wysocki sets up the text using a very in-your-face method, not really low-visual text. It seems as if Wysocki is going too far visually, but at the same time it still helps me as a reader understand what is going on and helps me understand her ideas.

3.)

            The Peek ad does work for me as a consumer. I do not necessarily want to buy the book because of it, but I do want to know more about it. I think this is mainly because, as a male, the basically naked woman is an obvious attracter of attention. And that image was the first thing I saw when I opened the book to this article.

Applying and Exploring Ideas

2.)

            Beauty is definitely in the eye of the beholder. I do think some things are inherently beautiful but at the same time I do not think that “the beautiful is that which pleases universally”. I think that when it comes to finding beauty in other humans that it is all subjective. Yes, social forces do play a role, but how big of a role, if any, depends on the person and how susceptible they are to being influenced by outside sources. When it comes to things that I would say are inherently beautiful, I think that these things are all based on nature, such as Niagara Falls and national parks. I think these things are inherently beautiful because of the ‘awe-factor’ that they have.

Meta Moment

            This statement applies to Wysocki’s article because the reader does not expect all these visual objects being used in a typical article (pictures, highlighting, other graphics, etc.) therefore she pushes the conventions and expectations, but it also works to help her ideas. The charts/graphics used help convey her message in a logical manner and I think that this is what makes the visuals effective.

Response to "From Pencils to Pixels"

            In his article “From Pencils to Pixels: The Stages of Literacy Technologies”, Dennis Baron claims that we overlook things as being technology that are in fact technology, such as pencils, other writing tools, the computer, and the telephone. He argues that we are so used to the technology we use that we no longer consider it technology.

            This article relates to Scott McCloud’s article “Vocabulary of Comics” in that both authors are showing us something that we would not normally look at in a certain light. McCloud speaks of icons and Baron speaks of technology that is usually overlooked.

            Overall I found this article kind of interesting. It is strange to look at a pencil and think, “wow this was ‘space age’ technology at one point.” I cannot think of anyone who would immediately see a pencil and think of it as technology.

Before You Read

            Technology to me would be something that is used/manufactured to make things easier in life. Examples would be cell phones, computers, and cars. I think at one point everything (non-natural) was a considered new technology.

Question for Discussion and Journaling

2.)

            I can definitely see technology changing the shape/nature of writing. Look at texting or instant messaging. We have a whole generation of people who are now typing in shorthand because it’s faster. People do this so often that it becomes second hand. So I would definitely have to say that technology changes the shape/nature of writing and I think that Baron would agree.

            

Response to "Sponsors of Literacy"

            In her article “Sponsors of Literacy”, Deborah Brandt argues that literacy is inherited; not learned by people on their own. She claims that sponsors are necessary for learning and shaping ones literacy and the way the literacy is developed is based on the sponsor’s own literacy.

            This article relates to the article Greene’s “Argument as Conversation” in that the sponsor idea is similar to the idea that arguments are ever present and ongoing. Brandt saying that literacy of a sponsor is spread to the sponsored very well illustrates this point.

            Overall I thought this article was interesting but it also seemed like an obvious concept worded in a way so that it sounds special. To me it is obvious that Brandt’s sponsors shape the sponsored’s literacy. It just like being raised by your parents, you are bound to end up kind of like them. The sponsor idea seems the same to me.

Before You Read

            The reasons usually given for being a good reader/writer are that you need to be able to read to get a job. People take your writing and reading skills into consideration when it comes to jobs. Whether or not you are fit for the job not being able to read/write is a major turn off for employers. Most people think that people with bad writing/reading skills are uneducated and in general unintelligent although this is not always true. The people who put these reasons in place are usually higher educated people who read and write well and are biased in the situation.

Applying and Exploring Ideas

2.)

            I have had literacy sponsors who have withheld or at least tried to withhold certain kind of literacies from us as students. Certain, usually inappropriate books were banned from our school. The administration would not assign, lets say, 50 Shades of Grey for reading. We always had a reading list in school, from “To Kill a Mockingbird”, to “The Great Gatsby”. Me, not really being that big of a reader, was introduced by some books not mentioned in schools by my brother and parents, although it wasn’t often I would read one of those books.

Response to "Good English and Bad"

            In his article “Good English and Bad”, Bill Bryson attempts to show how some grammatical rules are irrelevant, and how those irrelevant rules came to be. Bryson argues that these rules were formed for no logical reason, but solely because people wanted these rules to exist. These added rules, Bryson argues, makes language much more confusing in general.

            “Good English and Bad” relates to Stuart Greene’s article “Argument as Conversation” in that both articles present ideas that are not usually thought about. Greene does this by attempting to shake the construct of arguing as pointless and negative, and Bryson is showing readers that some of the rules we follow in writing (grammar) are confusing and just plain worthless. Bryson’s article also relates to Peter Elbow’s article “Voice in Writing Again: Embracing Contraries”. Elbow is explaining how voice in writing can be used to get a point across, in “Good English and Bad” Bryson explains how a man named Robert Lowth changed grammar solely because he wanted it changed. Robert Lowth used his voice in order to convince people that grammar should be changed the way he wanted.

            I personally was a little bit bored of this article. To me it seemed quite mundane; learning about the origin of strange grammatical rules is not something I am excited about. Although with this aside, I never would have thought about these things. It never occurred to me that ending a sentence with a preposition is a rule that is obviously in it’s name, but I had not looked at it like that before.

Before You Read

3.)

            Technology has changed the way we speak to each other in that we no longer want to/need to write things out and use proper grammar. Spell check is now a necessity for some and abbreviations are becoming commonplace. I think technology is taking a lot of emotion out of what people are writing, not only due to how people write, but also the medium. Texting doesn’t have the emotion that writing a letter does. I think some ‘new’ words would be words like “bro”, “dude” and the ever-hated-by-me, “swag”. There are also abbreviations such as lol (laugh out loud), brb (be right back), and omw (on my way).

Questions for Discussion and Journaling

1.)

            The Construct that Bryson is challenging is that all the rules of grammar always need to be followed. Bryson argues that this isn’t necessarily true. The phrase “you were” is not logically correct. “You was” makes more sense logically but no one uses that phrase anymore. You can still get your message across without having to follow all of grammar’s rules.

Applying and Exploring Ideas

1.)

            Bryson says language changes over time. Some of the ways this happens are when self-appointed authorities say something wrong and it sticks, or they just want to change it and say X is now Y because I want it to be. An example of this in modern English would be the change from “you was” to “you were” as I explained earlier. I think Bryson would condone this change.

Meta Moment

            I don’t normally consciously think of parts of speech as I write. Normally writing is a subconscious/muscle memory kind of thing. Everything about the English language that I know I have learned in school throughout the years. I do think that knowing the parts of speech helps me write better, but not because I am consciously thinking about it, but because I know what needs to go where subconsciously. If I had never learned them I’m sure I wouldn’t be able to write nearly as well as I can currently.

Intro/Conversation

            In society today there is a huge construct about argument. To understand this you first have to understand what a construct is. A construct is a misconception about a certain topic. The construct held about argument is that all arguments are negative; there is nothing to gain from arguments except for an angered release. This is a large misconception. Arguments should be viewed more as a debate; a conversation with sides, where each side is explaining their point. You see this way there is no negatives, and you can also now see that each argument has the potential to last forever, always being added to.  Through research and writing it can be proven that arguments are not negative, but informative, helpful conversations.

            The article “Argument as Conversation” by Stuart Greene, this construct is explained and put into new light perfectly. Greene argues that arguments are more scholarly than people tend to believe. He explains arguments as conversations that need to be entered into with background knowledge on the subject and once in the conversation a person can debate and attempt to change other participants’ minds on the subject.

            In his article “Vocabulary of Comics”, Scott McCloud attempts to prove that most things people see are in fact icons; things that represent an actual object.  This article is perfect for helping to see past the construct of argument being negative.  People see arguments as something that they are not, negative and violent. What they are actually seeing is the word argument and the negative connotation that comes with that word. The argument itself is neither negative nor violent, but helpful and scholarly.

            In his article, “Argument Structure: Representation and Theory”, James Freeman explains the logic and point behind arguments. Freeman states that the point of argument is to draw conclusions about problems based on facts. He then explains the logic being arguments. This article as a whole is all about how arguments are a scholarly method of proving points. This, again, is helping to disprove the idea of arguments being negative.

            Caroline Park, Cheryl Kier, and Kam Jugdev conducted a study using debate (argument) as a teaching strategy, and published their findings in the paper “Debate as a Teaching Strategy in Online Education: A Case Study”. They attempted to prove that arguing is a good form of education by conducting a case study. They came to the conclusion that arguing was a useful method of learning/teaching, once again fighting the construct as arguing as negative.

            In David Jonassen and Bosung Kim’s article “Arguing to Learn and Learning to Argue: Design Justifications and Guidelines”, Jonassen and Kim explain that “learning requires deep engagement with ideas.” They go on to show how arguing encourages this deep engagement, and also explain how to argue. This helps to justify that argument is a positive thing that helps arguers learn and come to a conclusion about a topic.

Response to "Seeing the Text"

            In his article “Seeing the Text”, Stephen Bernhardt hopes to show readers and writers that making a text visually appealing can change a message and alter appreciation for a text. He argues that fonts, color, graphics, and other visual aspects can really have an effect on how an individual reads and understands a text.

            This article is very similar to the article “Vocabulary of Comics” in the McCloud uses a comic to visually show readers what he is talking about. The articles differ in that their messages aren’t the same. In “Vocabulary of Comics” McCloud is showing us HOW things represent objects, whereas Bernhardt is showing us what representing objects can do for us.

            I found this article very interesting. Before I read this article I never thought to change my font from Cambria to anything different when writing something not for personal use. Now I see that changing font, font size, color, etc., can actually be useful in sending a message, and how the message is received.

Before You Read

            It is hard to look at a written article and not read it. I am writing this before I have read the Framing the Reading section and I can see two pictures, some indents, titles, and a heading (the number 1).

Questions for Discussion and Journaling

3.)

            I do feel like I am writing the same paper repeatedly. Writing always seems so formulaic to me and each research paper always seems like the same process. If I add visual clues this will stop because my writing will no longer feel like a list of facts, but more like a collaboration of facts to create a well-written paper. Bernhardt would recommend I do this by leading the reader instead of showing the reader.

Applying and Exploring Ideas

2.)

            Changing the font can have a profound effect on a paper. If I change the font to a bold, heavy font, the paper seems to come off as aggressive. If the font is changed to Comic Sans though, the paper comes off as annoying (I hate comic sans). When typing in Cambria, what is being used now, the paper doesn’t necessarily seem boring, but it does seem formal and informational.

After You Read

            Scott McCloud would have represented Bernhardt’s argument perfectly, as visual elements are obviously and extremely important in comics/cartoons. McCloud would have drawn out pictures and used different fonts and font sized to show the reader information visually.

Meta Moment

            To me the most appropriate time to visually think about a text is when the text is about something physical, which is just what seems natural to me. The writing assignment for this course that calls for the most visual thinking about presentation of text would be project #2.

Response to "Intertextuality and the Discourse Community"

            In his article “Intertextuality and the Discourse Community”, James Porter tries to show readers how “all texts contain ‘traces’ of other texts” (86). He argues that plagiarism is harder to define than it is usually defined and that originality is hard to find due to all the ‘traces’ in writing.

            This article is related to the articles “Argument as Conversation” and “Voice in Writing Again: Embracing Contraries”. “Argument as Conversation” has a concept very similar to Porter’s ‘traces’ idea. This is the idea that all arguments stem from previous arguments. “Voice in Writing Again…” is also similar to the ‘trace’ concept because the traces you use can be used to relate to cultural events and subjects in a way that will help persuade readers to swat one way or another. This is shown when Porter describes the Pepsi commercial relating to Spielberg’s Close Encounters of the Third Kind.

            This was a very informative and interesting article in that it really makes you think about what you are reading. Where did the idea for X come and how do I as a reader view this subject with my previous knowledge. It kind of gives you an insight into the psychology aspect of writing for persuasion. The more I read in this class the more my view on writers and writing changes.

Before you Read

            What is the difference between an author and a writer? A writer is someone who puts information down on paper and articulates the information to be understandable. An author is the person who originally comes up with the idea that the writer writes about. An author can also be a writer, but one does not necessarily have to be the other. I would call someone an author when they create something and I would call someone a writer when they put something (not necessarily their own) down on paper.

Questions for Discussion and Journaling

4.)

            I did not think about the specific communities before I read this article. It makes more sense this way though, that writing should be evaluated in a community that has knowledge of the traces used in it. Most of my past writings were evaluated from a community that had knowledge of my subject prior to reading my writing. This is mainly because most of my writings have been for classes in which most of the students wrote about the same 3-4 topics.

5.)

            His own work reflects the principles he’s writing about quite well. He uses quotes and cites other articles that demonstrate the purpose that his article is demonstrating. I’m sure if I went through his multitude of sources he has cited in his reference page and read them that it would be very obvious that his work is reflecting his principles.

Applying and Exploring Ideas

2.)

            I think that plagiarism is looked at as oversimplified but in reality that is just the shorthand version that teachers and professors tell us. Plagiarism is using someone else’s work and calling it your own. This is basically the same as the typical school definition, but I think people are just worried that being ‘unoriginal’ is the same as plagiarism and that is where the confusion takes place.

Meta Moment

            Porter’s study has changed the way I imagine writers and writing in a way that I now see writers as having more of a logically based way of doing things. The more they read/write the more information they add to their arsenal of writing tools. Now writing seems more of a science than just sitting down and scrawling letters onto paper. It also made me think of the psychology behind choosing how and what to write in order to get people to see things certain ways.