Discourse Community Analysis:

1. Look at your individual discipline’s Writing About guidelines and other research on library
databases.
2. What kinds of “artifacts” or textual products that are produced in your discipline and think
about which one you might want to analyze for Project 1. Cases/case studies
3. How is knowledge constructed in that discourse community? Research papers formatted
in Chicago- footnotes
4. How might established members of your academic discourse community act as
gatekeepers and determine the modes of discourse that emerge in your discipline? They
are the policy makers. They are the ones in the fray. They are the ones who set the
precedent for the modes of discourse
5. What kinds of citation practices are utilized? Why? Chicago is most common. APA as
well
6. How is metadiscourse useful in your field? Condenses communication and makes things
run smoother
7. How does it help you evaluate sources? Footnotes are v helpful
8. What does it mean for genre and methodology? Genres may vary across the board but
methodology tries to stay constant as there are set standards in which one has to
conduct their work. If you work outside of those standards, you could really mess up
your work and someones case
9. How does corporate metadiscourse enable leaders to shape ethos? ?
10. What is the relationship between intentionality and function of the form? How much are
they shaping and being shaped by the discourse? ??
11. Use passages from Hyland and Swales to support your thinking.

Overall points to address in the Project:

1. What kind of words/terms/language patterns, genres, and mediums are unique to your
field? Use specific examples/quotes from your artifact. Has this shared language
changed over time (think the last 10-20 years)? For example, in communications and
journalism, the discourse community has changed radically with the advent of social
media with new language being introduced all the time and the medium has shifted
radically from print to digital forms, which has introduces all sorts of new words and
language. “The court is granted…” “despite the fluid state of things…”
2. What does your field value in terms of methodology, activities, etc? Has this changed
over time? For example, in journalism the methodology shifted because media
organizations had to turn out their news so much more quickly. Similarly, the
methodologies of research and access to information in other fields influenced by
technological advances have changed significantly over the past few years.
Demonstrate with specific examples from your artifact. There are very set methods in
which to build a defense and work with colleagues. Communication has only become
greater over time but there is greater pressure put upon you because at many firms,
every second you are billing someone no matter how small the things you do for their
case is.
 3. What kinds of things does your field assume? This includes knowledge base, ethical
stance etc. How does this show up in your artifact? Again, in the sciences the assumed
knowledge base is changing all the time with new discoveries and better science.
Additionally, with media some would argue that what is valued now is less deep
investigative journalism, and more entertainment-style journalism (what will sell vs. what
is important for the public to know). Remember to demonstrate with evidence. Innocent
until proven guilty. Most cases arise out of a lack of communication and a
misunderstanding.

Finding and Interviewing your Expert:

1. define “expert” in relation to discourse community - who might an expert be in this case
in your discipline? Someone who works in the field or close to it
2. What kinds of questions might you want to ask your “expert” if you are making a visual
text to teach someone about the discipline? In other words, what kinds of questions
might help you determine the discourse conventions of your discipline? Keep in mind
you’re asking about the how not the what. How do/did you communicate with
colleagues? How does clear communication within your field help/ influence your work?
What is a recurring theme you see in your work? How has communication changed in
your field in the past 10 years?
3. Think about who you might reach out to to interview professors who teach law
courses/justice courses
4. Develop a set of questions that will be useful to ask your experts. How do/did you
communicate with colleagues? How does clear communication within your field help/
influence your work? What is a recurring theme you see in your work? How has
communication changed in your field in the past 10 years?
5. How will you reach out to them: by email? Office hours? By telephone? If you email, be
sure to provide a heading and a closing and be sure to give them enough time to answer
your questions (so send the questions off asap). Email and in person

Rhetorical Analysis of your Artifact:

Step 1:
● Conduct another careful and thorough reading of the Writing About Guidelines for your
field or discipline (depending on the guidelines available). These guidelines are written
and checked by professionals in the field, provide basic information the features and
conventions of texts in specific fields or disciplines, and should give you a good basic
understanding from which you can grow your knowledge. Use what you learn from
reading the guidelines for your field to write interview questions or look for examples of
features or conventions in other texts. ✓
● The goal here is to conduct a thorough investigation of a discourse community in your
chosen field or discipline, including explanations of the features that constitute it as a
discourse community and a list of the different genres of texts circulated within the
community. ✓
Specific questions to answer about your artifact:
4. Author/s: How many authors are there and what do you know about them? How do you
know it? Is there a note? If so, where is this note? How does/do the author/authors
establish authority or hierarchy? Authors are the justices involved
5. Purpose/Aim: Does the text seek to inform, instruct, analyze, persuade, argue, or
evaluate? How do you know? Inform, analyze, and evaluate
6. Audience: Does the text write to members of the discourse community or to outsiders or
to both? Is the text primarily targeted to equals, experts, or beginners? In short, who is
the audience and how do you know? How much is the audience expected to know
already? What kinds of information is assumed? All cases become public knowledge but
are mainly used as reference material for future cases that people can look back on and
use the rulings as a way to build a case. Things are usually laid out in a way that anyone
could read and interpret it with ease.
7. Rhetorical Situation and Context: Where is this text situated/published? Are there ads
surrounding the text or anything else? What can you tell about the venue as a whole?
See above—what information is assumed? I found the site in the University
database.The site is called Westlaw. No advertisements. You have to pay to use their
database so Appstate does.
8. Sources: Does the site use other sources? If so, how many and of what kind? Are they
peer-reviewed sources or not? How can you tell? How does the author treat the
sources? Respectfully or critically or both? How are the sources cited? No outside
sources are used. It is a source itself
9. Content Level: How specific or broad or difficult is the content, the ideas and information
in the text? Broad in the opinion section but the actual case gets more in depth
10. Format: What is the structure or layout of the text? Is there an abstract? Are there key
terms? Are there sections or is it one long text? Columns? Endnotes or footnotes?
Everything is in paragraph form. Various sections that are in columns. No footnotes that I
can tell.
11. Language: How would you characterize the tone of the text? The writing style? Is the
passive voice or active voice dominant? Is the first person or third person dominant? Are
the sentences long or short? Is there use of figurative language such as metaphors and
similes? Offer a sample sentence or two as evidence for analysis. The tone is serious.
No figurative language.
12. Visuals: Are there any visuals, such as charts, graphs, or pictures? What kinds of
appeals does the site use primarily (ethos, pathos, or logos)? Ethos and Logos
13. Remember, this is not just an observation. Rather, it is an analysis which means
you draw conclusions from the observations you make about the text (i.e. what does it
mean that it uses passive voice? What does it mean that sources are cited with the date
first instead of the author? etc.) ✓