Click on any of the keywords to see a listing of chapters tagged with that keyword. On the main information pages for each volume, you can also download full versions of Volume 1 or Volume 2. A special thanks to Richard Haswell for helping us to apply CompPile's tagging system. Search Search this site: Writing Spaces Open Textbook Chapters. Rhetorically Speaking Boyd, Janet Vol. What Were You Thinking? Web Writing Style Guide 1. Barton, Matt and Karl Klint.
Annoying Ways People Use Sources. Steps Toward Rhetorical Analysis. Beyond Black on White: Document Design and Formatting in the Writing Classroom. Digital Strategies for Group Work. An Exercise in Patchwriting. Composition as a Write of Passage. Critical Thinking in College Writing: From the Personal to the Academic. Finding Your Way In: Lessner, Steven and Collin Craig. Anzaldua , audience , bullets , composing , creativity , critical freewriting , exercise , focused freewriting , freewriting , FYW , graphic organizer , inquiry based , invention , outlining , peer evaluation , reader strategy , rhetorical , sample.
From Topic to Presentation: Making Choices to Develop Your Writing. Each discourse community expects to see a writer construct his or her argument using their conventional style of language and vocabulary, and they expect a writer to use the established intertext within the discourse community as the building blocks for his or her argument.
In order for a writer to become familiar with some of the constraints of the discourse community they are writing for, a useful tool for the academic writer is to analyze prior work from the discourse community. The writer should look at the textual 'moves' in these papers, focusing on how they are constructed.
Across most discourses communities, writers will:. Each of the 'moves' listed above are constructed differently depending on the discourse community the writer is in. For example, the way a claim is made in a high school paper would look very different from the way a claim is made in a college composition class. Porter Contrary to some beliefs, this is by no means plagiarism. Writers should also be aware of other ways in which the discourse community shapes their writing.
Other functions of the discourse community include determining what makes a novel argument and what a 'fact' is. The following sections elaborate on these functions.
It is important for any writer to distinguish between what is accepted as 'fact' and what is accepted as 'opinion'. Wikipedia's article Fact misguides writers in their interpretation of what a fact actually is. The article states that "A fact derived from the Latin factum, see below is something that has really occurred or is actually the case".
But this is not how writers think of facts. Writing professionals hold that, "In a rhetorical argument, a fact is a claim that an audience will accept as being true without requiring proof".
The audience can be thought of as a discourse community, and a fact can suddenly change to become an opinion if stated in a different discourse community. This is how writers within discourse communities manage to present new ideas to their communities. Any new opinion would need to be proven by making a rhetorical argument, in which the writer would weave together what his or her intended audience will accept as 'facts' in a way that supports his or her idea.
Therefore, knowing the intended discourse community is a very important part of writing. Across discourse communities, what is considered factual may fluctuate across each community. A key concept in this change is learning to recognize that facts aren't so much inherently true statements as they are claims-that is, assertions that most of a given audience has agreed are true because for that audience sufficient proof has already been given. You, like most people, would probably classify the statement "the Earth is round" as a "fact.
What Kantz wants us to see is that what makes the statement a fact is not how "true" the statement is but that most people have agreed that it's true and treat it as true.
Statements about which we haven't reached this consensus remain claims, statements that people argue about. Kantz's work here demonstrates why it's so important to read texts-even "factual" works like textbooks and encyclopedias-as consisting of claims, not facts. Within discourse communities, writers build on top of the ideas established by previous writers. One of the most common misconceptions about writing is the idea of the 'lonely writer'; that great writers' papers are filled almost entirely with original ideas and messages.
But this is simply not the case. Discourse communities introduce new ideas and claims, and from these, writers expand on them. James Porter, a scholar of Rhetoric at Indiana University, uses The Declaration of Independence as an example to illustrate this point. Porter points out that Jefferson merely pulled the phrase "That all men are created equal" straight from his commonplace book he made as a boy.
Porter also points out that, "'Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness'" was a cliche of the times, appearing in numerous political documents. Jefferson wrote this great work by weaving together the intertext of his discourse community. As Greene describes in his article, "Argument as Conversation", academic writing can be thought of metaphorically as a conversation between those in the discourse community. Just like in a conversation when you listen to the ideas of the others who are involved and formulate your own opinion on the topic, a writer may be reading a paper done by another writer in the discourse community and from this paper, the scholar may obtain inspiration to expand the claims expressed in the paper or address them from other angles.
Good academic writers know the importance of researching previous work from within the discourse community and using this work to build their own claims. By taking these ideas and expanding upon them or applying them in a new way, a writer is able to make their novel argument. Intertextuality is the combining of past writings into original, new pieces of text. The term intertextuality was coined in by Julia Kristeva.
All texts are necessarily related to prior texts through a network of links, writers often unwittingly make use of what has previously been written and thus some degree of borrowing is inevitable. This generally occurs within a specific discourse community. Factoring in intertextuality, the goal of academic writing is not simply creating new ideas, but to offer a new perspective and link between already established ideas.
This is why gathering background information and having past knowledge is so important in academic writing.
A common metaphor used to describe academic writing is "entering the conversation", a conversation that began long before you got there and will continue long after you leave.
A quote from Kenneth Burke encapsulates this metaphor:. When you arrive, others have long preceded you, and they are engaged in a heated discussion, a discussion too heated for them to pause and tell you exactly what it is about.
In fact the discussion had already begun long before any of them got there, so that no one present is qualified to retrace for you all the steps that had gone before. You listen for a while, until you decide that you have caught the tenor of the argument; then you put in your oar.
Someone answers; you answer him; another comes to your defense; another aligns himself against you, to either the embarrassment or gratification of your opponent, depending on the quality of your ally's assistance. However, the discussion is interminable. The hour grows late, you must depart, with the discussion still vigorously in progress. Intertextuality plays into this because without it there would be no conversations, just hundreds of thousands of writings not connected or able to build on each other.
The listening until you can join the conversation can be seen as doing research. All of the research you read, is built on research instead of self-knowledge. This can be connected to the part of the metaphor where no one in the parlor is qualified to bring you up to speed, just as the papers your researched were researched also.
Porter inspirationally explores the essence of intertextuality in one of his articles Intertextuality and the Discourse Community:. Intertextuality reminds us that "carrying out ritual activities" is also part of the writing process. Barthes reminds us that "the 'I' which approaches the text is already itself a plurality of other texts, of codes which are infinite". The power of this statement is the idea that one can turn intertextuality into ones own favor only once one "does not exist" when writing academic text and only once one realizes that there is no universal reader to which the text can be attributed to.
The text lives its own life with its own purpose and the author is not the actual creator of the text.
Read the Recommendations for the Conduct, Reporting, Editing, and Publication of Scholarly work in Medical Journals.. Browse Download.
Cues for recognizing scholarly journals, news sources, popular magazines, and sensational periodicals. Click on the TABS below for tips on how to recognize these publications. Scholarly.
The University of Toronto expects its students to write well, and it provides a number of resources to help them. To find what you need investigate Writing Centres and Writing Courses, consider attending one of the workshops in our Writing Plus series, look at our Writing Advice pages, and read the most recent news about writing support and . guntuyuk.tk 25 May Page 4 of 13 • use of generic names instead of brand names or trademarks. In summary, scholarly writing displays the erudition.
TIP Sheet WRITING ABOUT NON-FICTION BOOKS. At some point in your college career you may be asked to review a non-fiction book to enable you to learn more about some aspect of your course work. Each of these titles is available under a Creative Commons license (consult the individual text for the license specifics). Click on the title to view the chapter abstract and a downloadable PDF of the chapter.