After reading “Speech Acts, Genres, and Activity Systems: How Texts Organize Activity and People” by Charles Bazerman, I was able to develop a strong connection between our major assignment one, and the prime points Bazerman touches on in his piece. In the opening paragraph, Bazerman introduces analytical concepts, a technique he relied on to “suggest how people using text create new realities of meaning, relation, and knowledge” Bazerman, 309). These concepts consist of social facts, speech acts, genres, genre systems and activity systems. The two concepts that I found most important when considering my discourse community and writing our preliminarily analysis were speech acts and social facts.
Social facts are defined as anything that people believe to be true can be used to define a specific situation. In most context, however, social facts are mainly used in terms of social understands, as one can determine if someone truly possess power, or can be considered for a leader role. One example that I liked from Bazerman’s writing is where he compares social facts to a teacher’s syllabus, and how if all students understand what is required, it could be considered an analytical concept. However, if they student interpreted the information in a different way than what the teacher anticipated, they will have their own opinion on what is right from wrong. Speech acts, on the other hand, can be defined as how our words carry significant meaning, and could also justify our actions. Social facts can also be used to identify what is true, or even false within your selected discourse community. One situation that Bazerman created that can link to my discourse community it how he explains taking loans out of banks and how the speech act from the bank is simply saying that your loan has been approved. This comparison can be linked to scientific discourse because Bazerman is using an example to which most people experience daily, which establishes credibility, and he also is using a logical example to explain his point, which is the appeal of logos. One final aspect of Bazerman’s chapter that I analyzed was how he defined activity systems and how genre ties into it. On page 319, Bazerman states, “Considering the activity system in addition to the genre system puts a focus on what people are doing and how texts help people do it, rather than on texts as ends in themselves. In educational settings, activity puts the focus on questions such as how students build concepts and knowledge through solving problems, how instructional activities make knowledge and opportunities for learning available, how instructors support and structure learning, and how and for what purposes student abilities are assessed” As stated, activity systems work with genre systems to determine what people are doing and how they rely on texts to do it. With this being said, one question that is related to my discourse community that I may focus on would be: what can an investor do to get a step-ahead when determining the price of stocks and which way they are going to climb. Also, as a business major, one other question that I’ve been considering what styles of leadership could an executive use in order to generate a more positive work atmosphere. These relate to scientific discourse because they both can identified through research by using appeals, incorporation canons such as delivery, style, and invention, and finally by setting a rhetorical situation, such as context and purpose. As I continue to research and adjust my focus point, some potential interviewees could be one of my management professors, a finance teacher in the School of Business, or even a writing professor to help guide me in which direction I should turn my attention to.
3 Comments
When rhetorically analyzing a text, it is critical to visualize what the author is trying to explain in his passage, as well identify where canons and appeals are added as they amplify the overall message. In science writing, the three appeals that an author can use to enhance is writing are ethos (credibility), pathos (appeal to emotion) and logos (logic). As far as cannons, the five major ones consist of invention, arrangement, style, memory, and delivery.
The journal article that I decided to focus on for this analysis came from a New York Times magazine and its titled It’s a 401(k) World”, by Thomas Friedman. To this date, this has been one of the hardest articles for myself to analyze, as Friedman is very persuasive, but covers it up through his article with figurative language, and his unique style of deep description. For example, in Thomas’ opening paragraph, he states “so let me try to put my finger on it: We now live in a 401(k) world – a world where everyone needs to pass the bar exam and no one can escape the most e-mailed list” (Friedman, Pg. 1). Now as a reader, if you came across this sentence in the introduction paragraph, you would have no idea what this man is talking about. The way Friedman wrote his article was he presented his thesis statement in the opening paragraph and then went into the body paragraphs to explain this meaning. Now, I understand that this may seem like the traditional way to write an article, but Friedman’s arrangement is what threw me off. As he talks about the most emailed list in his introduction, he is really referring to the way data is collected based on reviews that stories get, and how they get ranked based on viewership. With this arrangement, he also offers his opinion about his overall message, which is that world we live in today is no longer about working for a profit, but working for a retirement plan and how your contribution defines your specific outcome; what you put in is what you will get out. Toward the end of his article, he writes “I find a lot of this scary. We’re entering a world that increasingly rewards individual aspiration and persistence and can measure precisely who is contributing and who is not. This is not going away, so we better think how we help every citizen benefit from it”. I found this interesting because not often do you see an author give a reflection in a persuasive/informative article, but then again, this goes back to his unique style and delivery as he is persuading his audience with his own opinion. As far as the appeals of scientific discourse, I was only able to identify logos. Logos, being the appeal to logic and can be used to enhance your persuasion, can be found numerous times throughout Friedman’s article. One line, however, that stood out the most stated I’m always struck that Facebook, Twitter, 4G, iPhones, iPads, high-speech broadband, ubiquitous wireless and Web-enabled cellphones, the cloud, Big Data, cellphone apps and Skype did not exist or were in their infancy a decade ago when I wrote a book called “The World Is Flat.” All of that came since then, and the combination of these tools of connectivity and creativity has created a global education, commercial, communication and innovation platform on which more people can start stuff, collaborate on stuff, learn stuff, make stuff (and destroy stuff) with more other people than ever before” Not only does Friedman share his opinion on what technology is doing to our world, but he explains the potential impacts it could have too, tying back in his unique style of writing. This is an appeal to logic because he pointing out actual threats in our world today and connecting them to being one of the reasons 401(k) and retirement plans are being more important than ever before. It's a 401(k) World Article Link In my current major of Business Management, one course that I'm required to take is called Organizational Behavior. In this course, we are studying the habits of people and how they typically act in a workforce. Specifically, we are interested in how these people respond and act to various factors such as moods, emotions, and relationships During our first week of class, we were given the opportunity to read an article titled "A College Student Embraces Career Readiness, Takes it into the Workplace". In this article, author Dara Warn writes to inform readers how the demand for “career readiness” or prior preparation to the real world, is at an all-time high, and, how acquiring “soft skills” can significantly impact your future. Throughout this article, Warn explains how her and a team of colleagues launched a program titled Career Readiness Bootcamp, which strived to help people develop the traits needed to be successful in a business atmosphere In Jack Selzer’s “Rhetorical Analysis: Understanding How Texts Persuade Readers,” the word rhetoric is questioned early in his article, as the term doesn’t possess a true definition. As he continues through his passage, he comes across the study of language and how persuasion has come to play a major role in the term rhetoric. When combining both rhetoric and persuasion, he then states “rhetorical analysis or rhetorical criticism can be understood as an effort to understand how people within specific social situations attempted to influence others through language” (Selzer, 281). This quote stood out to me because through Dara Warns Career Readiness article, her message was to persuade her readers to consider early exposure in a business type atmosphere, as you could learn vital information that you may already not possess. For example, an interview in Warn’s article about a student who contemplated joining the program at first, and then successfully completed it, stated “I remember previously being offered some workplace readiness training, but at that point in my life I thought I knew everything and didn’t think I needed it.” Once he enrolled and started taking the assignments, he realized how much insight the program contained. “It was a lot of information I didn’t know, and I found out I could improve things I’d never thought about,” The final piece of evidence that I pulled from Selzer’s rhetorical analysis was the way he discusses organization and structure. From analyzing two pieces of scientific writing so far, I can tell that there is usually some sort of specific standard, or organization method that is usually followed, such as an introduction, findings, problem, data, and discussion. In most business articles, there is a brief introduction about the author and what you will be reading about, and then it goes directly into the story displaying fact after fact with strong reasons/arguments to follow. Drawing a comparison between these two authors was quite interesting as well, as Selzer seems to focus more on actual analysis whereas Warn establishes credibility as a teacher, and turns attention to research/gathering results. Career Readiness Article Link Here Montgomery first begins to discuss the rhetoric of science writing on page 9, where he analyzes how this unique form of writing can ultimately be used. First, he states scientific writing can be used to tell a story; you can introduce a problem, analyze your data, and report your findings. Secondly, Montgomery discusses the importance of persuasion. "Science writing is also engaged in rhetoric— it aims not just to tell but persuade. It wants to convince us that the results not only has meaning but is meaningful" (Montgomery Pg.9). Throughout chapter 1 of The Chicago Guide to Communicating Science, Montgomery appears to use the term "rhetoric" in context of persuading an audience in your writing. Persuasion alone is a critical component to writing as it increases credibility, strengthens your claim, and makes your overall work more appealing to an audience. In Montgomery's case, using rhetoric in your writing helps an audience truly understand the message that the writer is trying to get across. Put this in perspective: I am a Business major with no prior exposure to science, or even science writing. If I were to read a science article, I might have trouble understanding some concepts or even the main message of the author. Montgomery stresses rhetoric for situation like this, as science writing needs to be feasible for all audience members.
In chapter 2, The Language of Science, Montgomery draws a connection between science and literature writing, stating that many techniques are shared between the two topics in order to persuade their readers. One technique to convey rhetoric in your writing can be to include the five fundamental questions that are essential to creating a scientific story. They are "what did you do, why did you do it, how did you do it, what did you find and what does this mean". Using these 5 fundamental questions, he then refers to a journal entry to display how using this technique can directly strengthen your writing. To me, I believe rhetoric is important in any form of writing, where it’s a report, a novel, or even a proposal. But for me, I see rhetoric in a science writing class as an opportunity. As a business major, establishing memo's, creating proposals, and analyzing numbers for reports are all first nature for me; I know how to do them efficiently. Using rhetoric in science provides an opportunity to expose myself to a new form of writing, which hopefully can help develop me into a more well-rounded writer. |
Nick GrayAlways looking for comments, questions and concerns. Please do not hesitate to comment! Archives
April 2018
NotesTo comment, click the title of my blog and once the page loads, scroll to the bottom and leave a response! |