In comparison to "Backpacks v. Briefcases," Grant-Davie's perception comes across a little more straight-forward. His definitions and examples paint a vivid picture in describing and explaining rhetorical situations.
Monday, January 30, 2012
Post 6
If you are a man, you drink Dos Equis. If you want woman, you drink Dos Equis. Gender Roles/Gender Identities are clearly the matter of discussion demonstrated here. Grant-Davie attempts to establish and distinguish the exigence, rhetor, audience and constraints demonstrated in the rhetorical situation. In the image posted below, the exigence is that men, at times, have trouble at finding woman and talking to them. The exigence is also focused on man's strive for perfection. The rhetor would be the Dos Equis man himself, aka "The man all men wish they could be like." The audience is men in general. Specifically, these ads target men that are of legal drinking age. It focuses on the audiences' insecurities. The legal drinking age could also count as a constraint. The saying is somewhat of a constraint because some people may not be able to comprehend it. The fact that it only targets heterosexual men creates a constraint not reaching woman and the gay community. Personal taste and opinion is a constraint that turns people away from Dos Equis as well.
In comparison to "Backpacks v. Briefcases," Grant-Davie's perception comes across a little more straight-forward. His definitions and examples paint a vivid picture in describing and explaining rhetorical situations.
In comparison to "Backpacks v. Briefcases," Grant-Davie's perception comes across a little more straight-forward. His definitions and examples paint a vivid picture in describing and explaining rhetorical situations.
Thursday, January 26, 2012
Post 5
Honestly, this is a very difficult example to come up with! Since there has not been any political commercials released yet for the 2012 election, at least none that I have seen, the only example of rhetoric I can come up with that I come across on a daily basis are the signs that are put up in my apartment complex. These signs are somewhat typical for a complex completely occupied by college students: "Please dispose of trash properly, failure to do so will result in fines." printed above a cartoon showing individuals plaving trash in a steel can.
There are many factors that must be considered by the landowners and management before placing these warnings around the complex. First, the locations which they are placed must be carefully considered to make sure that all residents will be exposed to them on the way to their apartments. Second, they must consider the audience (residents). Clearly, there must be a problem with trash disposal, otherwise there would be no reason to put up all of these signs all of a sudden. Therefore, they must realize that the residents are either 1. Lazy or 2. Unsatisfied with the location or availability of the dumpster. Regardless, This exigence is the reasoning behind the signs being placed.
There are a handful of constraints that may restrict the persuasive strategy of the landowners and management. First, they cannot make the residents stop and read these signs, and there is a slight possibility that some of the residents do not pass them at all. They could take the time and make the effort to place a warning on every resident's door, but some residents might look at it as a threat considering they are try to persuade them with negative reinforcement in a fine. Another constraint is the fact that they cannot make the residents heed their warnings. If the residents do not bother to dispose of their trash properly after seeing the signs, then the signs clearly had zero affectiveness in persuading them. Although I do believe the majority of residents will make the effort to avoid the consequences, I guarantee there will be a select few that will blow it off.
There are many factors that must be considered by the landowners and management before placing these warnings around the complex. First, the locations which they are placed must be carefully considered to make sure that all residents will be exposed to them on the way to their apartments. Second, they must consider the audience (residents). Clearly, there must be a problem with trash disposal, otherwise there would be no reason to put up all of these signs all of a sudden. Therefore, they must realize that the residents are either 1. Lazy or 2. Unsatisfied with the location or availability of the dumpster. Regardless, This exigence is the reasoning behind the signs being placed.
There are a handful of constraints that may restrict the persuasive strategy of the landowners and management. First, they cannot make the residents stop and read these signs, and there is a slight possibility that some of the residents do not pass them at all. They could take the time and make the effort to place a warning on every resident's door, but some residents might look at it as a threat considering they are try to persuade them with negative reinforcement in a fine. Another constraint is the fact that they cannot make the residents heed their warnings. If the residents do not bother to dispose of their trash properly after seeing the signs, then the signs clearly had zero affectiveness in persuading them. Although I do believe the majority of residents will make the effort to avoid the consequences, I guarantee there will be a select few that will blow it off.
Monday, January 23, 2012
Post 4
*What harm is there, according to Porter, in imagining writing "as individual, as isolated, as heroic"? What problems does doing so cause?
Porter's writing is both intriguing and creative, yet highly debatable in my opinion. He holds a strong belief that all texts are intertextual, which means they rely on previous works to have meaning. I agree with him to this extent. One's writing is based on what they have learned or been exposed to in the past. In Porter's eyes, imagining writing as individual, isolated, or as heroic is imagining writing in a ignorant, almost uneducated perspective, at least that is how his opinion came across to me in his writing. He believes that in order for a work of writing to be successful it must be accepted by society or at least select readers. Therefore, their work cannot be inclusive.
He argues that intertextuality provides rhetoric with an important perspective, a perspective that is currently neglected according to him, and he sees this as a problem. Another aspect he points out is that the attention of authoritive figures is less significant than social context in our society. He believes the writer is simply a part of a discourse tradition, a member of a team, and a participant in a community of discourse that creates its own collective meaning. Rather we realize it or not, believing that our writings are not intertextual is nonsense. Having that prospective can cause complications in regards to plagiarism. Complications can also arise in the distrubtion of the work, connecting with the society around us, considering there would be no writings to relate their work to.
Porter's writing is both intriguing and creative, yet highly debatable in my opinion. He holds a strong belief that all texts are intertextual, which means they rely on previous works to have meaning. I agree with him to this extent. One's writing is based on what they have learned or been exposed to in the past. In Porter's eyes, imagining writing as individual, isolated, or as heroic is imagining writing in a ignorant, almost uneducated perspective, at least that is how his opinion came across to me in his writing. He believes that in order for a work of writing to be successful it must be accepted by society or at least select readers. Therefore, their work cannot be inclusive.
He argues that intertextuality provides rhetoric with an important perspective, a perspective that is currently neglected according to him, and he sees this as a problem. Another aspect he points out is that the attention of authoritive figures is less significant than social context in our society. He believes the writer is simply a part of a discourse tradition, a member of a team, and a participant in a community of discourse that creates its own collective meaning. Rather we realize it or not, believing that our writings are not intertextual is nonsense. Having that prospective can cause complications in regards to plagiarism. Complications can also arise in the distrubtion of the work, connecting with the society around us, considering there would be no writings to relate their work to.
Tuesday, January 10, 2012
Post 3
The following is based on the readings of Stuart Greene's "Argument as Conversation" and Michael Kleine's "What is it we do when we write articles like this."
Greene and Kleine speak of two different modes in regards to doing research. Greene focuses on a concept of research that is based on an argumentative approach. The individual conducting this research is aiming to find reason and meaning behind their stance in the argument, putting themselves in the argument in one side or the other. Kleine on the other hand focuses on a concept of research that is based on information and facts. Instead of choosing a side, the individual conducting this research is looking at the big picture, trying to figure out the most useful and valuable information.
I feel like each author prefers/recommends their own mode of research. Although they seem to be writing to individuals conducting research at all levels, Greene's writing seems to appeal more so to the average college student. While Kleine's writing comes across as appealing to individuals such as professors. These audiences vary and change the content of the writing just based on the structure that both Greene and Kleine have in getting their points across. Greene's structure is very opinionated and confrontational, which parallels the mindset of most college students. While Kleine's structure is more straight-forward yet open-minded to the big picture.
Personally, I enjoyed reading Greene's mode of research more so than Kleine's. I felt that his writing appealed more to me and honestly I could relate to his concept of seeing research as an argumentative conversation. Both articles were interesting and informative.
Greene and Kleine speak of two different modes in regards to doing research. Greene focuses on a concept of research that is based on an argumentative approach. The individual conducting this research is aiming to find reason and meaning behind their stance in the argument, putting themselves in the argument in one side or the other. Kleine on the other hand focuses on a concept of research that is based on information and facts. Instead of choosing a side, the individual conducting this research is looking at the big picture, trying to figure out the most useful and valuable information.
I feel like each author prefers/recommends their own mode of research. Although they seem to be writing to individuals conducting research at all levels, Greene's writing seems to appeal more so to the average college student. While Kleine's writing comes across as appealing to individuals such as professors. These audiences vary and change the content of the writing just based on the structure that both Greene and Kleine have in getting their points across. Greene's structure is very opinionated and confrontational, which parallels the mindset of most college students. While Kleine's structure is more straight-forward yet open-minded to the big picture.
Personally, I enjoyed reading Greene's mode of research more so than Kleine's. I felt that his writing appealed more to me and honestly I could relate to his concept of seeing research as an argumentative conversation. Both articles were interesting and informative.
Sunday, January 8, 2012
Post 2
Prior to the reading, I thought of Wikipedia as a secondary source for information. I would take my chances browsing the internet through search engines such as Google for specific websites that related to the topic at hand. Over the years, I have only heard negative things about Wikipedia through teachers, students, etc. The website has somewhat of a stigma that comes along with it, since it appears to be very opinion-based and open to fault due to the freedom of postings. I have to admit it, despite the many warnings I have received, I have used Wikipedia numerous times as a source for varies papers. I also tend to use the site as a "quick fix" for getting immediate answers and information online. Wikipedia always seems to come up as the first link in a Google search, so I tend to click on it more often than not.
After the readings, I realize the valuable potential Wikipedia truly has as a source and finding sources through the website. I always saw the external links throughout my Wikipedia searches and at the bottom of the pages but I never really gave them a second look of took advantage of them. Although there is a common misconception that anyone can post anything on Wikipedia, I knew that the people that run the website check postings before they are officially placed on their website because I have tried to post something "goofy" about my brother on there in the past. I still believe that I should be careful when using Wikipedia as a source by checking the sources each page lists and maybe varifying the information on other websites, but the readings give Wikipedia a little more value and credit in my book. One thing that really stood out to me is the fact that you can see how a page has developed on the website, this was something I did not know prior to the readings. I also never knew about the five pillars that form Wikipedia's fundamental principles of operations. These guidelines make Wikipedia a more valuable source, more reliable, and provide freedom while maintaining regulations and a safe, user friendly environment.
There is much to learn about academic and research-based writing from the processes that happen on Wikipedia. The reviewing, conversing, revising, and sharing processes that Wikipedia uses can be seen as a valuable model for how we should base our writing process. Following these same steps will help us develop, refine, and broaden our work before submission. Overall, I found the readings interesting and informative. My outlook on Wikipedia has slightly changed and I can see myself using it more comfortably as a reliable source in the future.
After the readings, I realize the valuable potential Wikipedia truly has as a source and finding sources through the website. I always saw the external links throughout my Wikipedia searches and at the bottom of the pages but I never really gave them a second look of took advantage of them. Although there is a common misconception that anyone can post anything on Wikipedia, I knew that the people that run the website check postings before they are officially placed on their website because I have tried to post something "goofy" about my brother on there in the past. I still believe that I should be careful when using Wikipedia as a source by checking the sources each page lists and maybe varifying the information on other websites, but the readings give Wikipedia a little more value and credit in my book. One thing that really stood out to me is the fact that you can see how a page has developed on the website, this was something I did not know prior to the readings. I also never knew about the five pillars that form Wikipedia's fundamental principles of operations. These guidelines make Wikipedia a more valuable source, more reliable, and provide freedom while maintaining regulations and a safe, user friendly environment.
There is much to learn about academic and research-based writing from the processes that happen on Wikipedia. The reviewing, conversing, revising, and sharing processes that Wikipedia uses can be seen as a valuable model for how we should base our writing process. Following these same steps will help us develop, refine, and broaden our work before submission. Overall, I found the readings interesting and informative. My outlook on Wikipedia has slightly changed and I can see myself using it more comfortably as a reliable source in the future.
Wednesday, January 4, 2012
Post 1
Hello, my name is Mathew Simon Peters and I am currently a senior at Ohio University in Athens, Ohio. I am pursuing a Bachelor's of Specialized Studies Degree in Management and Psychology. Born and raised in Cleveland, Ohio, I am a huge Cleveland sports fan. If I am not watching sports, I am playing them! I have played travel baseball, city basketball, club football, collegiate varsity lacrosse, collegiate ultimate frisbee, indoor co-ed volleyball, co-ed soccer, and I was also a varsity bowler in high school. I have spent each year of my collegiate career at a different university. Freshman year I was enrolled at Xavier University in Cincinnati, Ohio. I then transferred to Walsh University in North Canton, Ohio where I played lacrosse. I returned to Xavier my second semester sophomore year. For my junior year, I transferred to Barry University in Miami Shores, Florida where my brother was attending graduate school at the time. Finally, this year I transferred to Ohio University to complete my Bachelor's degree.
Since this is my first year at Ohio University, I was never enrolled in English 151. I have taken numerous english classes throughout my collegiate career though, and one recommendation I can make is to give the students more freedom. Let us control our curriculum to a certain extent for this course! I believe that will bring out true creativity and our imagination in our writing. If we have the freedom to choose what we write about, there is a better chance that we will feel a deeper connection to our writing.
This course design, for the most part, is on par with english courses I have taken in the past. The workload seems to be significant, but the topics do not seem mundane and should keep our attention. In the past I have seen the good, the bad and the ugly in my english courses. I have had courses that have exemplified my writing abilities and have truly sparked my motivation to write and participate. On the other hand, I have had courses that were like chewing on nails to get through. Boring, mundane, and structured to the point that my personality could not show through my writings. We were given tedious work that was at times completely irrelevant to the course's goals.
Honestly, I hope that this course is entertaining. I hope that this is a class that I look forward to going to twice a week. I understand that there is work to be done, and I also realize that there are topics that need to be covered at times that are somewhat boring and tedious, but I believe this course has a lot of potential to be both educational and entertaining from what I have seen thus far.
Since this is my first year at Ohio University, I was never enrolled in English 151. I have taken numerous english classes throughout my collegiate career though, and one recommendation I can make is to give the students more freedom. Let us control our curriculum to a certain extent for this course! I believe that will bring out true creativity and our imagination in our writing. If we have the freedom to choose what we write about, there is a better chance that we will feel a deeper connection to our writing.
This course design, for the most part, is on par with english courses I have taken in the past. The workload seems to be significant, but the topics do not seem mundane and should keep our attention. In the past I have seen the good, the bad and the ugly in my english courses. I have had courses that have exemplified my writing abilities and have truly sparked my motivation to write and participate. On the other hand, I have had courses that were like chewing on nails to get through. Boring, mundane, and structured to the point that my personality could not show through my writings. We were given tedious work that was at times completely irrelevant to the course's goals.
Honestly, I hope that this course is entertaining. I hope that this is a class that I look forward to going to twice a week. I understand that there is work to be done, and I also realize that there are topics that need to be covered at times that are somewhat boring and tedious, but I believe this course has a lot of potential to be both educational and entertaining from what I have seen thus far.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)