Description
The following is the supervisor's evaluation of the thesis, and I hope to modify it as required.
“You do a fantastic job of breaking down the definition of discourse communities and using your sources well to ground readers so they understand the criteria and aspects that involved defining DCs and a DC. Good work in these citations and use of sources!
I think it is interesting that you draw connections to all of the criteria Cheng, but we never know what your DC is and we never see samples of literacy practices from that specific DC. Remember that this essay is supposed to look at 2-3 direct literacy practices from your DC and show how this communication helps them achieve their goals. Be explicit in what your DC is, and what their goals are. Then find samples of their communications (explicit ones), and draw these connections.
The organization of the first half of the essay is strong, however, once we get to page 3, I'm not sure what is guiding the organization anymore. We should be looking at samples of communication, direct examples that you can quote and use here and connect to the DCs goals. I'm not sure where the simplicity, tone-none reliance, and content review info is coming from. For revisions, make sure to focus on the organization and prompt for the second half of the paper. Also make sure your references are on a separate page and you have a header with page numbers.
Cheng, the fist half of this piece is strong. IT defines DCs well, but what is your DC? We need to know what our author is involved in (and avoid first person when talking about it), and we need to physically see their samples of literacy practices so we can draw these connections of seeing how the DC communicates and how this helps them achieve their goals. If you have questions about this feedback, please let me know. ”
Explanation & Answer
Attached.
1
Student’s Name
Professor’s Name
Subject
Date
Discourse Community
How Does a Discourse Community Use Writing to Communicate?
Many authors have defined discourse community differently based on their independent
researches and experiences. However, the bottom line that seems to be characterizing all the
definitions is that it refers to a group of people who communicate regularly about a specific
topic, mostly through discussions. John Swales, a notable linguist, defined discourse
communities as “groups that have goals and purposes, and use communication to achieve their
goals” (Swales 14). These definitions, therefore, illustrate that communication is one of the most
crucial tools that characterize discourse communities. According to Swales, community regards
“the ability to pass information or an opinion from an individual to the rest of the members”
(Swales 14). Although the common means of communication between discourse communities
has always been through speech, writing has since emerged as a complicated method that various
discourse communities find effective and easy to implement. However, Swales also presents
eight criteria that discourse community must fulfill.
Swales’ Criteria that my Potential Group Fulfils
The first requirement that Swales states is that a discourse community must focus on
public goals that ease communication. According to Swales, the discoverable set of goals that a
DC potentially has “may be publicly and explicitly communicated” (Swales 14). For instance,
2
teachers of a specific institution can form a discourse community whose general goal is to
educate students and bring public awareness. In this case, writing will come in handy because it
will be the means through which this discourse community communicates its “missions” and
“visions,” both of which form a significant part of their goals. Secondly, members of a DC m...
Review
Review
