Running head: DISCOURSE COMMUNITY 1

Discourse Community Ethnography

Daniel Orellana

The University of Texas at El Paso

RWS-1301

Dr. Vierra

September 27, 2018

DISCOURSE COMMUNITY 2

Abstract

This paper has no abstract.

DISCOURSE COMMUNITY 3

Discourse Community Ethnography

Using Swale’s characteristics, the RWS 1301 class is a discourse community. Discourse

communities suffered a dilemma of not having a proper definition until Swales set out to give the

world a common ground on it. According to the characteristics of a discourse community laid out

by Swales which are having a common goal, intercommunication, has use of information and

feedback, use of genre’s, a specific lexis, and a level of members. Applying Swale’s

characteristics to the RWS 1301 class allows us to show that it is a discourse community and

there is a plethora of examples all around the class. The class exhibits every trait not only once

but in plenty of different devices that can be accessed on or off campus proving the class to be a

discourse community.

Literature Review

According to Swales (1990), a discourse community is a community that has an agreed

set of goals, has good communication amongst its members, provide information and feedback to

each other, has one or more genres in it, acquired its specific lexis, and has a system of levels

within its members. He spends some time trying to show how we do not have a specific

definition, and everyone who has tried defining discourse communities leaves the definition

vague, creating a “circulatory problem”, this allows for everyone to interpret the definitions

differently, which makes using the term properly harder. Swales sets on keeping everyone able to

have the same understanding of what a discourse community is by setting criteria for it.

Kain & Wardle (1997) claim that understanding activity theory can create a “lens” to help

students analyze text, language, and how people work in groups for common motives. Kain and

Wardle try addressing the problem of not having an appropriate explanation of activity theory for

undergraduate students. The essay is to describe to student’s what activity theory is, originally a
DISCOURSE COMMUNITY 4

psychological theory that sees all aspects of activity as shaped by people’s social interactions

with each other and the tools that they use, and how to use it to “study how people engage in all

kinds of activities” (p. 395) in their societies. Once releasing the essay to their own students,

“they have been using it ever since” (p. 396), showing that it did help their students understand

activity theory and provide them with that new “lens” (p. 395).

According to Porter (2017), a discourse community’s audience influences textual

production and, in so doing, guides the development of the writer which can in term cause less

individuals to emerge, but strengthen the community. Porter’s text shows how the audiences

determine what writers produce because of the discourse community’s rules or guidelines. He

goes on to list examples like the medical professions and justice system. However, he states that

“we want to avoid both extremes” (p. 543), by having the culture influence but not completely

constrain the writer, and with the right mix, combines to strengthen a discourse community to

flourish and establish ourselves with writing and rhetoric in the discourse communities we are a

part of.

Gilstein (2013) says a discourse community does not need to be formal and uses the

example of academic journals because they provide a similar language technique to which

people who are looking to read academic journals may be looking for. This is in line with

Swales’ characteristics on discourse communities because they are reading the journals for a

lexis specific to their discourse community. Gilstein lists and agrees with Swales’ six

characteristics and his definition for a discourse community.

Methods

To do our research, there were three main methods used. The methods are surveying,

interviewing, and observing. The class surveyed each other by finding things that make it a
DISCOURSE COMMUNITY 5

discourse community. Then interviewed by discussing what would make this class a discourse

community and lastly observed what was discussed and used it to prove how the RWS 1301

class is a discourse community.

Discussion

The RWS 1301 class exhibits common public goals. According to Swales, a common

public goal is an objective or achievement set out to be accomplished by a community (p. 220).

The common public goal exhibited in RWS 1301 is acquiring a diploma. The students are

determined to get a diploma because they are paying thousands of dollars to receive an

education. The students strive to further their education and in return for their money, they

receive their education and a diploma to show that they achieved that further education. This

helps students create change and further our societies in all aspects.

The RWS 1301 class displays intercommunication. According to Swales,

intercommunication is a participatory mechanism that allows for meetings, communications,

conversations, and so forth (p. 221). The intercommunication in this class can be demonstrated

through BlackBoard and student e-mails. On BlackBoard, there are threads that allow the

students to talk amongst each other. The student e-mails allow for an extremely fast system of

intercommunication by being able to be accessed almost anywhere and anytime with today’s

technology. With most people having smart phones, they can easily wherever they are, receive

and respond to any of their peers without hassle.

The RWS 1301 class demonstrates how info and feedback can be used. According to

Swales, info and feedback is the uptake in informational opportunities (p. 221). Info and

feedback can be demonstrated in the class by using BlackBoard. Blackboard allows the students

to submit their papers to the professor and the professor can provide feedback on their paper.
DISCOURSE COMMUNITY 6

Another example is OneDrive, through OneDrive a student and professor can work on an

assignment and instantaneously receive feedback on their assignment directly from the professor.

The RWS 1301 class expresses the use of genres. Swales described genres as a class of

communicative events in which the members of the discourse community share some set of

communicative purposes. An example of genre in the discourse community of RWS 1301 is a

PowerPoint. The PowerPoint serves to communicate to the class the professors message and

enables the class to read and understand what the professor is communicating.

A specific lexis is required and used in the RWS 1301 class. Swales describes a lexis as

being a specialized speech or way of communicating in the discourse community. RWS 1301

requires the lexis of its discourse community to understand what it is we are learning, and how to

use the things we learn. An example could be the syllabus, it teaches the members of the

discourse community how to should act and speak in the classroom and how the classroom

should be able to run smoothly.

The RWS 1301 class exhibits a level of members. Swales describes a level of members as

changing memberships where individuals enter as apprentices and work their way higher in the

discourse community. The level of members in the RWS 1301 class is displayed by Dr. Vierra’s

authority of the class and the students, the apprentices, who acknowledge his higher level of

membership in the classroom.

The literature used in the RWS 1301 class according to Swales is unique to our discourse

community. The literature used entails mostly textbooks and course readings assign to the

students. With the literature the RWS 1301 class can read and learn about topics and discuss

amongst themselves their opinions.

DISCOURSE COMMUNITY 7

Conclusion

The RWS 1301 class has demonstrated every characteristic of a discourse

community as defined by Swales. It differs from speech communities by the existence of

common public goals. By reviewing the literature provided and our newfound knowledge of

discourse communities, Swales most likely would have agreed with the class being a discourse

community due to all the proving factors such as its display of use in intercommunication,

providing information and feedback with each other, and all the other attributes of a discourse

community.
DISCOURSE COMMUNITY 8

References

Kain, D., & Wardle, E. (2014). Activity theory: An Introduction for the Writing Classroom.

Porter, Games. (2016). Intertextuality and the Discourse Community. In D.D. Elizabeth Wardle

(Ed), (pp. 542-558) Bedford/St. Martin’s

Swales, J. (1990). The Concept of Discourse Community.

Gilstein, J. (2013). Discourse community. Salem Press Encyclopedia. Retrieved from http://0-

search.ebscohost.com.lib.utep.edu/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ers&AN=90558295&site=

eds-live&scope=site