Characteristics of the discourse community

          Many authors have presented different theories about discourse communities.  Specific characteristics should be taken into account at the moment of deciding if a group belongs to a discourse community or not. Swales (1990) presented a list of six items to analyze if a determined group belongs to a discourse community or not. It is the aim of this work to analyze characteristics of the discourse community taking into account Swales’ theory.

Swales (1990) states that it is necessary to have common goals with the group to be a discourse community, having certain objectives and sharing specific interests. Kutz (1997, cited in Kristine-Kleese, 2004), exemplifies this, “its members have, overtime, developed a common discourse that involves shared knowledge, common purposes, common relationships, similar attitudes and values, shared understandings about how to communicate their knowledge and achieve their shared purposes, and a flow of discourse that has a particular structure and style”(p.9).

Apart from having common goals, according to Swales (1990), it is necessary to have participatory mechanisms. McLaughlin and Talbert (1993, cited in Wenzlaff, Terri L, Wiesman, K.C, 2004)clearly express that to maintain a discourse community, not only there must be a collaborative culture but also there has to be an environment that supports risk- taking, otherwise, the group probably could not be able to rich their goals without the participation of its members.

Swales (1990) makes also reference that it is important to have a community-specific genres. On Kristine- Kleese (2001, p.5) words “community colleges comprise their own discourse community because the two-year college culture does not include an expectation of faculty scholarship as it exists in the research university”. This statement bears out the fact that each group will have a specific genre, despite of being in the same environment.

In a discourse community, according to Swales’ theory (1990), it is supposed to be used highly specialized terminology, through the use of abbreviations and acronyms. For instance, “teachers rely on primary and secondary artifacts to reflect on their own practice reflection,” (Hoffman, Artiles & Torres, 2003, p. 10). Therefore, with this example presented it is seen that teachers make use of a specific terminology within their community.

 Swales (1990) mentions the importance of high level of expertise. Cazden (1993, cited in Hoffman, Artiles & Torres, 2003), explains that the groups’ practices will shape the normative, ways of acting and the belonging in the inquiry community. The novice people that want to participate in the inquiry group, assistance strategies should enlist them, before they become fully competent in the use of such practices).

We might conclude that the members of a certain group should have specific characteristics to be recognized as a discourse community. Swales’(1990) list encompassed, having high level of expertise, high level of terminology, a determined genre and participate inside that group to be named a discourse community. The characteristics have been exemplified in groups of teachers and community colleges, consequently it could be said that if a certain group follows the characteristics presented by Swales, that group might be called a discourse community.

References

Hoffman-Kipp, P., Artiles, A. J., & Lopez Torres, L. (2003). Beyond reflection: teacher learning as praxis. Theory into Practice.Retrieved October 2007, from http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0NQM/is_3_42/ai_108442653

Kelly-Kleese, C. (2001). Editor’s Choice: An Open Memo to Community College Faculty and Administrators. Community College Review. Retrieved October 2007, from http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0HCZ/is_1_29/ai_77481463

Kelly-Kleese, C. (2004). UCLA community college review: community college scholarship and discourse. Community College Review. Retrieved October 2007, from http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0HCZ/is_1_32/ai_n6361541

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

Wenzlaff, T. L., & Wieseman, K. C. (2004). Teachers Need Teachers To Grow. Teacher Education Quarterly. Retrieved October 2007, from http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3960/is_200404/ai_n9349405