At first, the concept of a discourse community was difficult to grasp. It seemed daunting and challenging to wrap my head around. However, after reading what John Swales had to say in his piece “The Concept of Discourse Community,” it has become clearer. I am a very structured person; I appreciate rules and lists, and I don’t function as efficiently without some sense or organization. I believe this is why, after reading the six pieces of criteria Swales has suggested for a discourse community, I easily grasp what this once-foreign concept means.
He explains these criteria as being a broadly agreed set of common public goals, mechanisms of intercommunication among its members, participatory mechanisms primarily to provide feedback, having and using one or more genres, possessing specific lexis, and having a threshold level of members with a suitable degree of relevant content and discoursal expertise. With these six elements, the definition of a discourse community is simplified for more straightforward comprehension. I agree with Swales’ proposal here, and I believe that this is a strong set of criteria that covers all of the bases in defining a discourse community.
communityIt’s interesting to me to now take note of these six pieces of criteria and attempt to see what fits them all. A discourse community can be anything, from employees at Target to a political group, as long as it fits the criteria according to Swales. In doing this, it becomes clear how vast the possibilities are for something to be considered a discourse community, and how versatile that really are.
Leave a Reply