Discourse communities are everywhere. When identifying discourse communities, it can be tempting to think small, think more material. I caution you: don’t be fooled by that trap.
Jillian Grauman’s “What’s That Supposed To Mean? Using Feedback On Your Writing” and John Swales’ “The Concept of Discourse Community” share a surprising link when it comes to how discourse communities works.
Grauman
Getting feedback on writing and knowing how to handle it is a near universal skill. Her explanation of “Use your feedback for guidance on the development of your ideas and how well your organization works.” feels almost too simple, yet at its core that’s what feedback is. So why doesn’t it feel intuitive? Why does it come with so much angst and anxiety?
People have ways of viewing themselves. I, for one, have a decently high opinion of myself as a writer. Even when I started college, I knew I was capable. The first time I got feedback on a paper absolutely enraged me. My professor was adamant: my writing would be good, if it were clearer and less flowery. I vowed to make my next paper as boring and dry as I possibly could – she gave that paper an A+ and plenty of praise. It had such an effect on me that years later, I still write all of my academic papers the same way. It’s also, incidentally, the exact opposite of how I write for fun.
Swales
Swales has six specific criteria for identifying discourse communities. These criteria, or “characteristics” as he calls them, are integral for understanding what makes these communities function the way they do. I personally know and recognize all of these as things I do every day, just by being an active fandom member/hobbyist. It’s these six that most established fandoms or professional organizations are built on.
They are, a bit surprisingly, relatively common and basic. The first is a common set of goals, shared by everyone in the group. Next is intercommunication – essentially how the groups communicate between and among themselves. Third, participation is mostly for feedback and sharing/gaining information. There’s also what Swales calls “specific lexis” – words or vocabulary specific to that group. Someone in psychology may know what a “Phineas Gage Pole” is, while someone in the gaming sphere might recognize that “MCC” means Minecraft Championships. As with all communities, there exists a threshold of membership, and within that threshold are multiple levels of expertise. From novice to pro and everything in between, communities rely on a good amount of each to survive.
Finally, there’s genre. I put this last (and separately) deliberately. To me, it warrants a bit more explaining. Genre, put simply, is mostly textual tools ie, documents, based on the needs (rhetorical situation) it has to fit. They all have conventions they work off of.
As always, additional background on discourse communities and conversations around them are useful for full contextual understanding.
The Hidden Connection
Oddly enough, the connection between Grauman and Swales is in fanfiction. Where Grauman talks about feedback, Swales mentions the use of intercommunication. It’s a small overlap that points to a much larger spiderweb. Fanfiction is a vast network, of course there are pockets where even psychologists have their niches.
Fiction collections titled “Can You Tell I’m Studying Psychology” or “Psych Student Overanalyzes Again” are just the tip of the iceberg. I spend a good amount of my time hopping fandoms, leaving comments, reading different takes on canon or headcanon analysis. Fandom, by its own rules, is a massive spiderweb of discourse communities. Fanfiction makes up such a large section of the communities that Grauman’s words are applicable all on their own, even if they weren’t providing a way to navigate discourse communities.
I still remember my first time giving constructive feedback to someone new to fandom. “What you wrote was great, but it wasn’t a lemon. It was a lime. Lemons are more explicit.” The Citrus Scale, at that time, was in heavy use, and this person had no idea the distinction in ratings between a lemon and a lime. Those simple fruits, for us readers, had expectation upon expectation attached to them.
It takes time to learn the intricacies of discourse communities, and identifying discourse communities, just as it takes time to learn what to do with feedback and how to apply it. That shared skill is useful in both instances, and is one that I have spent innumerable hours learning for myself.
For further discussions, see our class webpage: https://eng2020.chrisfriend.us/
Leave a Reply