Running head: RWS 1301 DISCOURSE COMMUNITY 1

RWS 1301 Discourse Community

Arykah A. Howard

University of Texas at El Paso

DISCOURSE COMMUNITY 2

Abstract

In this paper I will demonstrate what a discourse community is, how to RWS 1301 fits

into the category of being a discourse community and the research that I did to back up my

hypothesis. This paper will prove how the class RWS 1301 is a discourse community. Using

John Swales six characteristics, this paper will expose to be true.

DISCOURSE COMMUNITY 3

RWS 1301 Discourse Community

In 1990, John Swales stated that a discourse community must follow six specific

characteristics to be considered a discourse community. These characteristics include, an agreed

set of public goals, mechanisms of intercommunication with it’s members, uses mechanism to

provide feedback and information, utilize different ways to communicate it’s goals and help it’s

cause, demonstrate a form of lexis, and has threshold of members that suit the position(Swales,

p.220-222). The discourse that this paper will be researching is the English class RWS 1301.

This specific community is a discourse community because it fits all six of Swales characteristics

of a discourse community.

Literature Review

John Swales six characteristics for a discourse community are described in The Concept of

Discourse Community(1990). These characteristics allow us to analyze and discover if a

community belongs to a discourse community. While it may seem like a discourse community is

a confusing topic, it’s quite simple. To be considered a discourse the following criteria must be

applied. It must have a broadly agreed upon set of common goals, which can be written formally

and informally(a rule book or guidelines). Mechanisms for intercommunication among it’s

members(meetings). Uses its participatory mechanisms primarily to provide information and

feedback(emails, discussion boards and q&a sessions). Utilizes and possesses one or more genres

in the communicative furtherance of its aims. Some type of lexis must be established (rhetoric,

ethos, pathos, logos, expository reflection). Lastly, a discourse community must have a threshold

level of members (professor, teaching assistant, students). RWS 1301 is a discourse community,

due to the fact that it follows the six characteristics of Swales.

DISCOURSE COMMUNITY 4

Methods

Conducting my research, the methods that I used to give me my information was

observations and interviews. This paper contains factual evidence from Swales, Bizzell, and

Porter. It also includes my previous knowledge of discourse communities.

Discussion

For a group to be considered a discourse community all six characteristics must be

demonstrated. In the case of RWS 1301 each characteristic has a specific example relating to the

class. A “common set of public goals” would be achieving the highest grade in the class and the

knowledge to accompany it. Communication internally among its member, is the established

office hours as well as sending emails back and forth. The discussion board and syllabus is a

mechanism that provides information. RWS 1301 has many other genres of communication like

textbooks and scholarly articles. An example of specialized language would be the word rhetoric.

A threshold of members in the classroom would be starting with the professor and ending with

the students. From the examples provided RWS 1301 is a discourse community.

Conclusion

Based on the information provided, a discourse community follows six characteristics

given by John Swales. The English class RWS 1301 is a discourse community based on the fact

that all six characteristics are applied. An example for each was provided, giving proof to my

thesis. In conclusion, RWS 1301 is a discourse community, due to the evidence I provided above.
DISCOURSE COMMUNITY 5

References

Bizzell, P. (1982). College composition: Initiation into the academic discourse community.

Curriculum Inquiry, 12(2), 191-207. 10.2307/1179517

Porter, J. E. (1986). Intertextuality and the discourse community. Rhetoric Review, 5(1), 34-47.

Swales, J. (1990). The concept of discourse community. Genre Analysis: English in Academic

and Research Settings, 21-32.