“Autism and Rhetoric,” Paul Heilker and Melanie Yergeu

IWA: 4/12/13

Summary: In their article, “Autism and Rhetoric,” Paul Heilker and Melanie Yergeu attempt to tell their audience, mainly English professors and scholars, that autism can be considered a form of rhetoric. They argue that autism has enough of its own way of speaking and therefore can be considered its own form of rhetoric.

Synthesis: This article is a lot like the Smitherman and Flynn articles because it discusses a more ignored community and the way they communicate. Although autism is not a race or gender it is still consists of its own group of people and all three of these articles discuss the language patterns within these groups.

Afterthoughts: I enjoyed this article mainly because it was our last one and I was very motivated. On a different note it was nice to relate it to my other classes. In my CSD class we discussed autism and the different ways people with autism communicate. It was cool to be able to semi link it back to this class and the article I was reading.

“Composing as a Woman” and “Contextualizing ‘Composing as a Woman,’” Elizabeth Flynn

IWA: 4/10/13

Summary: In her articles, “Composing as a Woman” and “Contextualizing ‘Composing as a Woman,’” Elizabeth Flynn attempts to tell her audience, probably teachers, that males and females have different writing styles because of the differences in their genders and the way they are raised. She argues this through the use of students’ writings. Her second article, however, sort of argues against her first article since it is written several years later. She argues these different writing styles are not as prevalent today because of the differences in society and the way males and females are raised.

Synthesis: I would say this article is a lot like Alexander’s piece because they both look at gender roles and how they affect the way students write. In addition you could possibly relate it to Bryson. Both talk about how language and writing have changed over time and people grow to accept it.

QD 1: I honestly have mixed feelings about it. I think it could make her seem more credible because she admits that what she writes is open to change and not 100% accurate but at the same time it could take away her credibility because most people would believe a scholarly article is supposed to be 100% accurate and the writer must know everything they’re writing about.

QD 3: To me this basically means people have wanted women to write more like men because it makes everyone’s writings more alike and in doing so their viewpoints are neglected and no longer do they have their own style. This relates to other minorities in a way like Smitherman discussed. In trying to universalize the way people write we lose a lot of their voice and culture.

QD 5: I agree with her view to some point. I think it all is relative to your own experiences and the way you were raised. I think generally she is write that males are raised more-so to deny relationships than females are but again it depends on the way you were raised and your personality. I think overall it’s kind of a touchy subject.

QD 6: Okay I can see this in multiple ways. She discusses in the article how a ladder means achievement and the web means interconnections. I could see it being this way where males are focused more on success and women are focused more on intermingling with one another. However I also think it suggests that men want to reach a higher point in their life and try to take the quickest route towards it while women may not take as quick of a route but they use the connections they have to achieve what they want.

AE 2: The historical context that prompted Flynn to write this piece was that, at the time, women were viewed more as dainty and belonging in the kitchen while their husbands brought home the bacon, so to speak.

AE 3: If I’m understanding this correctly I might say Bernherdt because he’s discussing layout of a paper and the process to go through to get the perfect paper layout and analyzes the audience to understand what would work best for them.

AE 4: I don’t think her generalizations add any limitations to her article. Generalizations to me are kind of like stereotypes where everybody recognizes them but may not necessarily agree with them. I think if anything it would benefit the article because people are able to better relate to it.

MM: I think we could possibly look at numerous article because several of them were written in a time very few of us experienced so they don’t seem as relevant. I know in class when we talked about discourse communities and class none of us (from the same generation) agreed that the way people speak proves what social class they’re from while the instructor felt it did. It shows that times change and we don’t always understand the viewpoints writers are talking about.

Afterthoughts: I think this article was pretty interesting. For the first time an author questioned her own writings years later and proved that time always marches on and what we write now may not be relevant 15 years from now.

“The Politics of Teaching Literate Discourse,” Lisa Delpit

IWA: 4/3/13

Summary: In her article, “The Politics of Teaching Literate Discourse,” Lisa Delpit attempts to tell her audience, probably students and other scholars, that, in contrast to Gee, it is in fact possible to belong to more than one discourse community. She argues through the use of many success stories that we can keep our dominate discourse that we learn at home but throughout our lives our experiences help to mold other discourses.

Synthesis: This article obviously reminds me of every article we read recently but, to be more creative, it reminded me of Brandt’s piece from the beginning of the semester. Both used real life examples to demonstrate their argument which helped their piece seem more credible. Also the way she discussed how other discourses are formed reminded me of our literacy sponsors.

QD 1: To me I don’t think it matters whether she identifies her race or not. I also don’t think she should address it. Honestly I believe it’s better if she remains a “figment of my imagination” so to speak because it means she becomes less biased in her writing.

QD 3: I agree with Delpitt’s argument and think she argued it in a good way by using several different examples of people who became successful. Using several different examples really helps support what she’s arguing. However it does, in a way, make her seem bias. Every good argument needs to show the other side as well so if she had included other, minor examples of how people failed it would make her seem more reliable.

AE 2: I think she started off her argument in a good way by saying that she first agreed with him but upon further inspection found trouble with his argument. It proves that she really thought about the subject and that it’s okay to argue with other sources. I’m not sure if we could use this in our own work but it definitely helps to know that we don’t have to agree with everyone in our projects.

AE 4: I think there are certainly people who enter college without the proper skills. I believe some lack the responsibility to attend class and study and sometimes even the social skills to be willing to break out of their bubble and meet new people. However I do not think we should judge these people any less. Everyone develops at their own rate and are trying their best. Eventually they may catch up. I believe we should judge them based upon whether they’re actually trying to change or not and how well they accomplish this change.

Afterthoughts: I thought this article was really nice because it showed me that it’s totally okay to properly argue with another scholar in my own work. It also showed me that sometimes to appear more credible you can argue others’ works.

“Materiality and Genre in the Study of Discourse Communities,” Amy Devitt et. al

IWA: 3/28/13

Summary: In their article, “Materiality and Genre in the Study of Discourse Communities,” Amy Devitt and colleagues attempt to tell their audience, mainly scholars, students, and teachers, that the idea of genre analysis can help people better understand their discourse community. They argue that becoming familiar with these different discourse genres will help professionals better associate with their discourse and become better equipped to fit in with the crowd and argue it through the use of their three essays, which each look at the idea from a different aspect.

Synthesis: This article is like Gee, Swales, etc. because they all discuss different pieces and concepts of the discourse community. This one showed us yet another piece of it.

QD 1: I suppose one of the discourses I am part of would be the English 1510 discourse community. Some of the genres imposed upon us are the horrible grading contract and scholarly language used in class such as discourse community. We are definitely forced into using these for any and all situations with the class.

QD 3: I would say some of the genre sets on campus would include things like sorority girls, frat boys, ROTC individuals, townies, or maybe even our grade level. Of all of these listed I would definitely fit in with the last one; freshman. However I’m sure I have many other genres but I can’t think of them.

AE 1: We clearly can see that sometimes in order to properly understand what a group is trying to tell you, you need to have some understanding of their discourse. Oftentimes you can become confused if say a member of a theatre company told you to sit stage right. You would probably sit on the right side of the auditorium when that is in fact house right (stage left). I’d say the misunderstanding definitely depends on the situation. In this case it’s simply a fact of not understanding the discourse and having a lack of knowledge on the material.

AE 2: Bawarshi essentially says genre is the language people use in a discourse community that would define the group while Swales says it’s a group’s language that guides the way they act. Although they seem to say the same I believe Swales’ makes it seem more like a guideline others in the discourse use and Bawarshi’s is a way of showing how others view them. For a classroom I would say Bawarshi’s is better.

MM: Ethnographic fieldwork is hands down the best way to understand a discourse community. I have always been taught that it is easier to learn something when you experience it hands on. Oftentimes while reading you can zone out or be confused on the wording so don’t get the full effect about what the author is describing.

Afterthoughts: I think this article will be very helpful for our project 3 and gives us more information to think about when examining our discourse communities. I also think it’s evident we can use this source since all three gave their own input with their essays. However I am really sick of reading about discourse community so my brain sort of went dead while reading this.

“Identity, Authority, and Learning to Write in New Workplaces,” Elizabeth Wardle

IWA: 3/22/13

Summary: In her article, “Identity, Authority, and Learning to Write in New Workplaces,” Elizabeth Wardle attempts to tell her audience, people entering a new job, that it is crucial to learn their way of writing since it is a new discourse. She argues that it is better to conform than to continue your own ways by telling us about “Alan,” a man with a lot of education who did not fit in with his new job and was seen as causing conflict at the job.

Synthesis: This article reminds me of Gee and Glenn because they both talk about different discourses and assimilation into them. It probably reminds me more-so of Gee because they're really only talking about one type of discourse.

QD 2: I have several examples and run into them nearly every day. People tend to be bias when it comes to their writing (whether they mean to or not) and can sometimes voice their opinions indirectly. In high school, for example, I was the editor in chief of our paper and had to read countless articles and quickly came to know the staff simply by their writing. Oftentimes when they had to write about politics they would lean one direction and give more positive quotes from one side than the other.

QD 3: I don’t think Alan’s experience ended well because of the way he handled the situation. Sometimes you need to realize there’s a time to speak up and a time to conform. When entering a new workplace it’s best to conform right away until you can work your way up and then voice your opinions. As opposed to being aggressive he should’ve acted calmer and talked in a more adult way. In addition he could’ve waited till he could be of more authority.

QD 5: I would have to side with Wardle on this one not only because I disagreed with Gee but because I have strong opinions when it comes to the corporate latter. I don’t think a new employee should speak up about how things are run or anything unless their life is in danger or it’s something extremely serious.

QD 7: Yes  indeed. Some of my managers at my job have made me realize they aren’t necessarily suited to be in charge. Oftentimes they let customers walk all over them (which I understand the customer is SUPPOSEDLY always right) but they’ll give them lower prices when the sticker price (located directly underneath the item and labeled with the item’s name and the date the tag was printed) clearly states the price the cashier rang up. When they lost this authority over the customer it made me realize I shouldn’t necessarily rely on them.

MM: I think these relate to authority because it is the leader of a discourse and the model other members of the discourse follow. It can help me as a writer because it shows me the way to “properly” write according to the authority figure and basically give me brownie points because I assimilated.

Afterthoughts: I think this piece was very informative for not just English use but practical use. It shows that sometimes it’s best to conform with an authority figure to help you better your chances of working up the corporate ladder.