Writing and Reading in the Disciplines has been widely acclaimed in all its editions as a superb textbook—and an important contribution to the pedagogy of introducing university and college students to the conventions of writing in an academic milieu. Giltrow draws meaningfully on theory, especially genre theory, while using specific texts to keep the discussion grounded in the particular. Exercises throughout help students to interpret, summarize, analyze, and compare examples of academic and scholarly writing.
The goal of the scheme is to synthesize and articulate aspects of technical and social context that influence discourse usage in CMC environments. The classification scheme is motivated, presented in detail with support from existing literature, and illustrated through a comparison of two types of weblog blog data.
In concluding, the advantages and limitations of the scheme are weighed. Introduction It is by now a truism that computer-mediated communication CMC — defined here as predominantly text-based human-human interaction mediated by networked computers or mobile telephony — provides an abundance of data on human behavior and language use.
Confronted with such abundance, researchers and practitioners have naturally sought to group, label, or otherwise organize CMC into categories that would facilitate its analysis and uses. However, there has been neither systematic discussion of how this should be done nor consensus regarding individual attempts to do so, many of which have been implicit and ad hoc.
As a consequence, how to classify CMC remains a significant unaddressed problem of information organization.
This article is concerned with the classification of CMC for research purposes, with a focus on online language and language use, hereafter referred to as computer-mediated discourse CMD; Herring In contrast to applications in that field, however, which are primarily concerned with information storage and retrieval, the goal of the CMD scheme is to articulate aspects of context — both technical and social — that potentially influence discourse usage in CMC environments, and thereby to bring them to the conscious attention of the researcher.
The organization of this article reflects its goal to motivate, articulate, and illustrate a model.
The next section identifies the basic problem that gave rise to the need for a CMD classification scheme. Following a review of research on discourse classification, I then present an overview of the proposed faceted classification scheme for CMD and describe its dimensions and categories.
This is followed by an illustration in which the scheme is applied to characterize contrasting computer-mediated weblog data samples.
In concluding, the advantages and limitations of the faceted classification approach to online communication are weighed. The Problem Various attempts have been made by linguists to classify CMD, starting in the s and early s. Accustomed to dealing with two basic modalities of language — speech and writing — these linguists first asked: Is it a type of writing, because it is produced by typing on a keyboard and read as text on a computer screen?
These early efforts at classification tended to overgeneralize about computer-mediated language, as if CMD were a single, homogeneous genre or communication type. However, as awareness of CMC spread with the popularization of the Internet, it soon became apparent that computer-mediated discourse was sensitive to a variety of technical and situational factors, making it complex and variable Baym ; Cherny ; Herring Simultaneously, the focus of much CMD research shifted to describing the linguistic features of individual genres of CMD, e.
The genre and mode approaches, however, while preferable to lumping all CMC into a single type, are also limited as a basis for classification of CMD. First, the concept of genre can potentially be applied to communication at different levels of specificity Maingeneauand is thus imprecise.
Herring — each of which is associated with characteristic linguistic practices? Another limitation of both the genre and mode approaches is that they are most easily applied to classify discourse that takes place using established, named technologies cf. Swalessuch as those that are popular on the Internet.
It is less clear how either approach could be used to classify new and emergent forms of CMD, or discourse that takes place via customized systems that operate within restricted e. For these, a more flexible classification system is needed.
These categories cut across the boundaries of socio-technical modes, and combine to allow for the identification of a more nuanced set of computer-mediated discourse types, while avoiding the imprecision associated with the concept of genre.
Since the classification scheme does not rely on pre-existing modes, it can also be applied to discourse mediated by emergent and experimental CMC systems.
The scheme is intended primarily as a faceted lens through which to view CMD data in order to facilitate linguistic analysis, especially research conducted in the discourse analysis, conversation analysis, pragmatics, and sociolinguistics traditions.
CMDA adapts methods from the study of spoken and written discourse to computer-mediated communication data. Similarly, the central role of classification in CMDA can be traced back to traditional discourse analytic concerns.
Discourse analysts have traditionally classified discourse into types according to various criteria. These include modality, number of discourse participants, text type or discourse type, and genre or register table 1. While the definitions and boundaries of these distinctions have been much debated, they can be understood as being in a generally non-exclusive and hierarchical relationship to one another e.
Traditional approaches to discourse classification Despite their disagreements, discourse analysts implicitly agree that classification facilitates analysis. This is because exemplars of the same type of discourse tend to share features that distinguish them collectively from other discourse types; classification makes this explicit, thereby facilitating comparison across types.
Classification may also serve to remind the analyst to attend to important properties of the data under consideration, even when no overt comparison is involved.
A researcher interested in studying sentence complexity might analyze both spoken and written texts, but to do so without taking modality into account could result in overlooking systematic, conditioned patterns in the data.
Moreover, certain linguistic and rhetorical phenomena occur regularly only in certain discourse or text types. Examples include turn taking in spoken dialogue, plot development in narrative, and argumentation in expository discourse Longacre ; Virtanen A researcher interested in turn taking, for example, must identify text type as a precursor to further linguistic analysis.The CMD classification scheme is a core component of the computer-mediated discourse analysis (CMDA) approach developed by Herring (, a);  the scheme is presented here in detail for the first time.
CMDA adapts methods from the study of spoken and written discourse to computer-mediated communication data.
Start studying writing Learn vocabulary, terms, and more with flashcards, games, and other study tools. Search. -Uses what Janet Giltrow calls "reporting expressions" to "attribute" the ideas to May. there are constraints within academic writing which require us to avoid the use of personal dictation.
Janet Giltrow's Academic Writing: Writing and Reading in the Disciplines has been widely acclaimed in all its editions as a superb textbookand an important contribution to the pedagogy of introducing university and college students to the conventions of writing in an academic milieu.
Academic Writing: An Introduction is a concise version of the full work, designed to be more compact and accessible for use in one-term writing courses. This new edition has been revised throughout and contains many new exercises, updated examples, an expanded discussion of research writing in the sciences, new glossary entries, and a new.
Academic Writing has been widely acclaimed in all its editions as a superb textbook—and an important contribution to the pedagogy of introducing students to the conventions of academic writing.
The book seeks to introduce student readers to the lively community of research and writing beyond the classroom, with its complex interactions, values, and goals. Academic Writing has been widely acclaimed in all its editions as a superb textbook—and an important contribution to the pedagogy of introducing students to the conventions of academic writing.
The book seeks to introduce student readers to the lively community of research and writing beyond the classroom, with its complex interactions, values, and goals.