Response to "What Is It We Do When We Write..."

            In his article “What Is It We Do When We Write Articles Like This One – and How Can We Get Students to Join Us?”, Michael Kleine attempts to show students how to change their way of researching papers from a formulistic method to a method filled with inspiration and purpose. He argues that most students just go to the library and transcribe text into their own text to put on their professors’ desks for the sole purpose of getting the paper done. Kleine wishes to change this by having students write about topics they care about and want to learn/spread knowledge about.

            This article relates to the article “Argument as Conversation” in that they both are attempting to get writers to change their simplistic, everyday ways, into something with a real purpose, something that has real meaning to the writers themselves.

           

Getting Ready To Read

           

A friend of mine’s most recent experience of writing using sources and mine share many similarities. We both used our class textbooks and articles on the Internet that were brought to our attention via online catalogues. When used in our writing we both had quotes and cited information that we took out of the articles and summarized in our own words. This seems to me, to be the basic method of writing using sources.

Questions for Discussion and Journaling

1.)           

Kleine is talking about my experiences exactly when he talks about the night library. Going to the library and not focusing on what I am writing about, just blindly transcribing text after text. The way he describes his idea about writing and researching will undoubtedly be my new basis for writing. Rather than boring transcription of books, I will find something interesting in the subject and pursue that, keeping my interest in the subject, and digging deeper and deeper.

3.)

            The sources play a decent role in the research of the professionals Kleine interviews. After all you need at least some information to have an idea of what you’re writing about. Although I think the biggest part of their research was through debating. Passing ideas around between others researching the idea. The role that sources have played in my past research efforts is huge. All of my information I used I had gathered from my sources. The difference between this is that the professionals used sources then debated back and forth about patterns they’ve found and translated and used that information, whereas I just translated the source and put it on paper.

4.)

            What I would change about my research if I did what Kleine talks about would be to boil down the information I have gained from all my sources and debate this information with others who know about the topic. This would increase my knowledge rather than just barely learning anything by transcribing text.

            I think this article was very informative. I was able to see my own research methods from a different point of view and criticize them that way. I realize now that my ‘research’ was hardly research at all! From now on I will have to pay more attention to topics that I research and pick a topic that interests me personally so I can feel as if I have something to gain from the paper.

Response to "Argument as Conversation"

          In his article "Argument as Conversation", Stuart Greene attempts to explain how scholarly inquiry is different from an argument and more similar to a conversation. He also attempts to explain to the reader how to engage in such inquiry. He argues that a scholarly inquiry is a more researched kind of conversation and only relates to arguments due to it's back-and-forth nature.
          This article is quite similar to the previous, "'Create a Research Space' (CARS) Model of Research Introductions". The similarities between the two are that they both attempt to explain writing as more of a science than an everyday chore.

          Getting Ready to Read

          I would define an argument as a fight using language to attempt to prove someone wrong on a certain topic. In everyday conversation the word seems to have a negative connotation associated with it, as if people want to stay away and out of arguments. In an academic setting the word seems to be associated with intellectual debates and research papers. The difference between the two is quite obvious, the first is associated with brutism and the second is associated with intelligence.

 Questions for Discussion and Journaling

2.)            

In paragraph 6 Greene quotes Burke in order to better get his message across to the reader. Burke’s idea fits perfectly into Greene’s argument that arguments have an infinite back-story, or history. The “oft-quoted passage” is a perfect extended metaphor describing this using the image of an argument taking place in a parlor. In this argument one man leaves only to have another man take his place, and each man keeps gaining supporters on his or her side until the starters of the argument are no longer present. At some point during this situation the original arguers leave and the argument continues and progresses more. This metaphor presents writing as ongoing and infinite. Every topic we argue has an infinite history. Another idea about writing that this challenges is that writings have one voice behind them but this would suggest that writings have an infinite number of inspirations.

3.)

            The concept of framing is to setup a written piece in a light that supports your side of the argument. The underlying metaphor is that of a photographer setting up his shot. The photographer tries to show his picture in the same way he sees it, whether that be lighting change, angles or Photoshop. This concept is important for Greene because he needs to get readers to see his point of view. Framing allows the writer to get the reader to see differently and possibly change his/her mind about a subject.

Applying and Exploring

2.)

            Greene’s article itself is a conversation between the reader and itself. He frames his argument by backing himself up with other’s arguments and sources. Greene definitely practices what he preaches in “Arguments as Conversation”.

          I found this article extremely interesting. Once again looking at reading as a science is amazing! And the quote from Kenneth Burke really got me thinking, and not just about writing! Will it be helpful to me? I really think so, it so far has really increased my interest and focus when reading. I also think it will help me when arguing and debating, rather than being biased in an argument i'll start looking into others peoples side and actually learn rather than be stubborn.

Response to "Create a Research Space"

          In his article "'Create a Research Space' (CARS) Model of Research Introductions", John Swales is trying to help writers and readers better formulate and understand research article introductions. He argues that the three keys to a successful introduction are establishing a territory and niche, and then occupying that niche. This will help writers create an understandable and informative introduction as well as help readers understand your introduction better.
          This reading is very similar to the "Argument as Conversation" article in that they both go over techniques to help specify writings. The difference between the articles is the technique used. This article uses the three moves technique whereas "Argument as Conversation uses a technique known as 'Framing'.
          I think this reading was interesting because it helps you see the process of writing not only from the perspective of a writer, but from the perspective of a reader. It makes writing seem more like a science and less like an everyday task. I do believe that this will be helpful to me as both a reader and a writer because writing is used almost everyday and I can better understand how readers want things laid out. I never thought of writing this way!