Q1:
Devitt follows some fifty years of popular contemporary theory and criticism in her road to the conclusion, "the recurrence of situation cannot be a matter of material fact but rather what Miller calls 'an intersubjective phenomenon, a social occurrence'" (578). In this vein of thought, does the primacy placed on linguistic mediation necessarily preclude the pre-linguistic? Is it possible to have--as the popular "nature versus nurture" argument might be answered by "both"--a both/and approach to genre, rather than Devitt's either/or? What might this look like?
Q2:
What Reiff demonstrates that we've seen often in other Rhet/Comp articles this session is an intentional disclosure of the author's meta-cognitive process of and about the writing act performed: rather than focusing on content alone, she aims to express and expose the steps that led to that content. How does this compare to our responsibilities as tutors in the writing center or instructors of the ENC courses? Of course this is a broad question, but as you anticipate how you intend to teach students how to think about writing, how do you predict this type of writing might frame your praxis?
No comments:
Post a Comment