Artemeva, N. & Freedman, A. (eds.). (2006). Rhetorical Genre Studies and Beyond. Inkshed: Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada (original) (raw)
Related papers
2 Investigating Texts in Their Social Contexts: The Promise and Peril of Rhetorical Genre Studies
Innis (1946), the polymath socio-economic and communications scholar, declared that working from the margins, whether those margins be disciplinary, political or economic, produces exemplary innovative work. In this essay I suggest that Rhetorical Genre Studies (RGS) have been making and have the capacity to make a significant contribution to writing research precisely because RGS researchers work at the interstices of various disciplines. In fact, RGS researchers often, to quote Wenger (1998), "broker" or translate between different fields in order to accom-plish their projects, projects that typically involve investigating texts in their social contexts. In order to investigate written or spoken texts in their social contexts, genre researchers have to weave together theoretical and methodological perspectives that permit them to investigate the way that texts interact with and co-construct their social networks. In the fol-lowing I will outline my own journey to craft t...
Genre and the New Rhetoric.:Genre and the New Rhetoric
Journal of Linguistic Anthropology, 1995
Canada, and a preface by the series editor, is one of two volumes arising from a colloquium entitled "Rethinking Genre," held at Carleton University, Ottawa, in 1992. Published as the 11th volume of a series on literacy and education, Genre and the New Rhetoric joins the fairly recent trend in genre studies that, in reaction to the formalist approach, emphasizes the social aspects of genre. The volume conducts the reader from general toward more particular, and finally educational, issues through four parts: an introduction illuminating genre in a historical perspective; a part discussing theoretical issues; a part investigating specific genres; and the last part addressing pedagogical challenges.
Where is the subject? Rhetorical genre theory and the question of the writer
Journal of Academic Language and Learning, 2014
The question in my title arises from the tension between two positions currently held in genre theory: On the one hand, purpose is attributed to the genre, whereas on the other, it is attributed to the subject, whether or not dispersed across participation in a variety of conversations. This difficulty raises an urgent question in the conception we hold of the learner. My paper surveys some recent contributions to the literature on genre and teaching in which this issue is raised. The objective of the paper is to explore the nature and the stakes of the question raised; it will not claim to answer it.
Academic writing has been recently conceptualized as "collective social practices" (Hyland 2004, 1) constructed through particular genre types and disciplinespecific discourses. A significant body of the literature examining genre and disciplinarity has focused on the research article (RA) as a central type of academic writing practice. However, the RA genre has been principally investigated in Science-based disciplines and comparatively overlooked in the Humanities. This paper is an exploratory textual genre analysis study of the rhetorical structure of RA Introductions (RAIs) (Maton 2000a, b) as produced in the writing of its experts; and discusses the results according to their implications on English for Specific/Academic Purposes pedagogy. The study thus reiterates the critical interplay between genre and disciplinarity in the social construction of written knowledge.
Linguistic Attention in Rhetorical Genre Studies and First Year Writing
Since Carolyn Miller’s Genre as Social Action, North American Rhetorical Genre Studies (RGS) has facilitated analysis of how typified rhetorical actions constitute the contexts and communities in which writers write. In first-year writing (FYW) specifically, RGS approaches have focused on macro-level textual constructs, like the audience and evidence expectations of different genres, and have bolstered valuable attention to genre awareness and transfer. In its attention to context and macro-level features, however, RGS has focused less on recurring linguistic patterns in written genres, which has contributed to two gaps in genre-based approaches to FYW: few large-scale analyses of first-year written genres, and little attention to language patterns in genre-based FYW pedagogy and research. This article aims to interrogate these gaps and offer a way beyond them, in three parts. First, it historicizes the institutional separation of U.S. rhetoric-composition and linguistics. Second, i...