1

Swales Discourse Community in RWS 1301

Luis A. Gutierrez

The University of Texas at El Paso

 2

Abstract

Swales definition of a discourse community gives us a guide to classify the groups in

which we participate every day as a discourse community. Examples within the classroom call

for a detailed review of the RWS 1301 setting in order to make a comparison between its

characteristics and those six characteristics provided by Swales. By interviewing sources and

making observations, we can link activities within the RWS 1301 classroom that clearly

assimilate the characteristics mentioned by Swales. The mechanisms described later in the paper

help prove that the RWS 1301 classroom is without a doubt a discourse community.
 3

Swales Discourse Community in RWS 1301

According to Swales (1990), a discourse community is used within groups to

communicate to achieve a purpose or goal. It is made up of six different characteristic that divide

people into its group depending on what they are familiar with. This paper discusses the six

characteristics brought forth by Swales and provide examples that show why the RWS 1301

classroom is a discourse community.

Literature Review

This research paper focuses on the Swales definition of a discourse community and how

the RWS 1301 classroom becomes a discourse community by following the rules set in that

definition. However, there are other similar points of view that can further describe why RWS

1301 is a discourse community.

Based on Borg’s (2003) writing, “members of a discourse community actively share

goals and communicate with other members to pursue those goals” (p. 398). He supports Swales

understanding that a discourse community is made up of people with a common goal and that

those members are willing to work together to complete it. As is in the RWS 1301 classroom,

students work together along with their professor to accomplish their common goal of passing

the class. Borgs (2003) also says that another element that is used to describe the discussions

within discourse communities is the use and analysis of written communication. This element of

written communication is extremely present in the classroom setting, with most of the work done

by students being done in written form.

Bizzell (1982) defines a discourse community as “a group of people who share

certain language-using practices” (p. 222). Bizzell (1982) suggests that a discourse community is
 4

bound together by its uses of language, be it written or spoken. This common language provides

members of the community with the means to help each other achieve common goals.

Methods

To be able to describe the RWS 1301 as a discourse community this paper includes ideas

from sources outside of my own. To gather the necessary information from those sources this

paper includes interviews with them. Excerpts from their writing serve as evidence that help us

link elements of the classroom with Swales six characteristics that make up a discourse

community. And while the sources differentiate in their wording, they all come to the same

definition of a discourse community in the classroom.

By observing and analyzing specific traits of the RWS 1301 environment I was able to

make connections between the students in the classroom and the professor. Sending and

receiving information is a vital part of a discourse community and that is not the exception in the

RWS 1301 classroom. Professors are in constant contact with their students. As well as students

provide constant feedback to the professor all throughout the semester.

Discussion

Swales 6 characteristics of a discourse community are clearly present in the RWS 1301

setting. The closed group shares a language not used anywhere else. Common goals guide the

students toward success with the help of communication mechanisms provided by the professor.

These mechanisms used in the classroom while present outside the group, are not utilized in the

same way or for the same purpose.

Common Goals

According to Swales (1990), common public goals serve a vital purpose in identifying

groups of individuals as their own discourse communities. Common public goals are mutual
 5

goals individuals in that discourse community must obtain the same outcome. Those goals could

be made public or be kept private depending on the type of group or organization you are a part

of. They may be inscribed in documents or may be tactic. In the RWS 1301 classroom the main

common goal would be to pass the class with an excellent grade. Also, to gain a better

understanding on the rules and criteria of what makes writing well-constructed and concise.

Swales’ characteristics allow knowledge and writing to be communicated in a way that the genre

and the message to that specific discourse community is understood and retained.

Intercommunication Mechanisms

According to Swales (1990), a discourse community is used within groups as a means of

communication to achieve a purpose or goal (p.472). To achieve this communication,

mechanisms must be set in place that allow for an effective exchange of ideas. Mechanisms in

the classroom such as e-mail, blackboard, and lectures provide the members of the group, in this

case the students, the tools to better communicate with one another and achieve their common

goal of passing the class.

Looped Intercommunication

Swales (1990) says that looped intercommunication in a discourse community, is mainly

to “provide information and feedback” (pg. 472). “Looped” meaning to come back around;

“inter” a prefix of between or among; and “communication,” or communicate, derived from the

Latin origin communicat meaning “to share” is a form of conversation between two people, or a

group of people, in which someone asks a question or states a remark, and receives a reply. The

conversation is back-and-forth rather than one-sided regarding the characteristic of what happens

when looped intercommunication occurs. This example of “back and forth” communication can
 6

be seen in the classroom through mechanisms such as Blackboard entries in which students post

assignments and receive immediate responses from their professor or peers.

Dedicated Genres

Genres are formatting styles that are created within a discourse community to fit a

specific need. These formats are recognizable throughout the discourse community as they are

the standardized method of performing the task. Genre’s allow for communication to be passed

throughout the discourse community faster and easier, since certain works are done a certain way

across the board. Genre’s vary between different discourse communities, where one may have a

genre that is almost identical to the other, but a few changes in style have been made that set the

two apart. Genres within the discourse community of the RWS 1301 classroom can be sets of

instructions for which a professor wants a certain task or assignment to be done.

Specialized Vocabulary

According to Swales (1990) specialized vocabulary is the specific language that a group

(discourse) uses in a group setting (p. 473). Specialized vocabulary are the words that are most

often used in a group, which won't be used as much outside a group. Specialized vocabulary is

unique because every discourse is different, and everyone, will use a different vocabulary. In the

RWS 1301 words like rhetoric and discourse are examples of uses of vocabulary inside the group

that cannot be found outside, even if members of the group leave the group. This vocabulary is

specific to the group almost like a different personality that only appears when the member

enters the group and disappears as soon as the member leaves.

Self-Sustaining Hierarchy

According to Swales (1990), self-sustaining hierarchy in a discourse community depends

on a balance of experts and apprentices (p. 473). The balance between the experts & the
 7

apprentices must be met in order for there to be sufficient exchange of discipline & knowledge

between the two individuals. The apprentice must put equal effort into learning what the expert is

teaching or else nothing will be learned. Self-sustainability hierarchy is critical in achieving for a

discourse community to take course within a group. The professor in the RWS 1301 setting is the

very top of the hierarchy, leading his students though his lectures and assignments. As a student

they must recognize this hierarchy and behave accordingly always keeping in mind that there is

an order to how the community works, in this case the classroom.

Conclusion

Based on what Swales defines a discourse community to be, with its six accompanying

characteristics, I can conclude that RWS 1301 is in fact a discourse community. RWS 1301 has

created and uses mechanisms to provide and receive information between its members, which

allows for a successful exchange of ideas. Members of this community all have a common goal

of passing the class and through the hierarchy a balance is reached that allows that goal to be

reached.
 8

References

Bizzell, P. (1992). Academic discourse and critical consciousness University of Pittsburgh Pre.

Borg, E. (2003). Discourse community. ELT Journal, 57(4), 398-400.

Swales, J. (1990). Genre analysis: English in academic and research settings Cambridge

University Press.