Symposium response.

A s I write this response, the end of the term is nearing, and with it, the end of my weekly meetings with a diverse group of graduate students (literature program, writing program, school of education, composition program) enrolled in my "Literacy and Pedagogy" seminar.The issues raised by this symposium's contributors resonate and echo back with the seminar's term-long collective investigation, so it is from within this context and through the concerns these graduate students have articulated throughout the term that I want to join the conversation.But first a few words about the seminar itself, the historical, theoretical, and ideological scrutiny of literacy and pedagogy it calls for, the reflexive inquiry it incites, and the contributions this kind of inquiry can make to a discussion of "the implications of Literacy Studies research, theory, and practice for Composition Studies" (LiCS Mission Statement).I started teaching this seminar in the late 1980s.What I had initially proposed was a seminar in histories, theories and practices of pedagogy (which eventually, led to my articulation of "pedagogy as reflexive praxis" (Salvatori 4).The intellectual atmosphere of my department at the time was beginning to be hospitable to the idea that advanced graduate students from our different programs, with their different teaching experiences and theoretical backgrounds, could benefit from such a course of study.But, it was suggested, it might be strategic for me to combine "pedagogy" with "literacy, " since as the subject of a graduate seminar, literacy would carry greater intellectual weight than pedagogy, and attract more students (and, I sensed, raise fewer faculty eyebrows).Needless to say, I was taken aback by the suggestion, but because I was equally invested in the study of theories of literacy, I complied and decided to foreground in my course proposal what would have been in any case two of my planned lines of critical inquiry: what kinds of literacy different theories of reading and writing, and their pedagogical enactments, assume and can presume to foster (Cultural Literacy was earning large numbers of academic and non-academic acolytes); and what can a critical and reflexive study of pedagogy contribute to and draw from the study of literacy.The "and" in the title became and has since remained the central focus of the seminar's theoretical investigations, a nexus that through the years, because of different texts and different students, has consistently disclosed new and exciting "matters of concern" (Latour) for graduate students who are about to make crucial decisions about their professional future.Since the very first time, the diversity of students' backgrounds and interests led to more expansive and inclusive articulations of the seminar's original keywords and concepts (Glascott), and consequently of the seminar's affordances (Vieira).Even before we read Street, the use of the singular for literacy and pedagogy in the original title soon felt inaccurate, constrictive, but for bureaucratic reasons, it could not be changed.Thus "the singular" remained.But it consistently occasioned early

The TYCA regional associations invite proposals for their 2013 conferences. The conference dates, themes, contact persons, and deadlines are listed below. For specific information, please contact the regional program chair listed.

In this response I offer a counternarrative to Keith’s dystopian vision and challenge some of his assumptions about the state of our profession. My alternate view notwithstanding, I fully agree with Kroll on more than a few points, not the least of which is the need for more faculty voices to join this conversation at the local and national levels.

Preview this article: From the Editor, Page 1 of 1 < Previous page | Next page > /docserver/preview/fulltext/ce/75/4/collegeenglish22952-1.gif

This symposium explores the role(s) College English has (or has not) had in the scholarly work of four scholars. Lynn Bloom explores the many ways College English influenced her work and the work of others throughout their scholarly lives. Edward M. White examines four articles he has published in College English and draws connections between these and the development of college English over the past fifty years. Jessica Enoch studies College English as an archive whose meaning is developed both on and off its pages. And, finally, Byron Hawk troubles the ideas raised in previous essays, drawing attention to how a flagship journal such as College English can operate within the broader network of scholars in the field. Taken together, these perspectives draw attention to how College English connects to the field at large and how authors and readers may see the potential role(s) the journal plays in scholarly publishing in English studies today.

Other| February 01 2013 Addresses of Contributors to This Issue Rhetorica (2013) 31 (1): 132–133. https://doi.org/10.1525/rh.2013.31.1.132 Views Icon Views Article contents Figures & tables Video Audio Supplementary Data Peer Review Share Icon Share Facebook Twitter LinkedIn MailTo Tools Icon Tools Cite Icon Cite Search Site Citation Addresses of Contributors to This Issue. Rhetorica 1 February 2013; 31 (1): 132–133. doi: https://doi.org/10.1525/rh.2013.31.1.132 Download citation file: Ris (Zotero) Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex toolbar search Search Dropdown Menu toolbar search search input Search input auto suggest filter your search All ContentRhetorica Search This content is only available via PDF. © 2013 by The International Society for the History of Rhetoric. All rights reserved.2013 Article PDF first page preview Close Modal You do not currently have access to this content.

Editor Kathleen Yancey introduces articles for this issue.

124 RHETORICA Díaz Marroquin's most original contribution appears in the study's final chapters: Is it possible to move the current public's affects and passions, living in a society so far apart from the early-modern one, both conceptually and psychologically? As an answer, she chooses late 20i,z century artists who, using different means, achieve similar goals as those attained by the classical masters of rhetoric, by the authors of the baroque plays and by the early composers and librettists of the proto-operatic dramas. Some of these are the videoartists B. Viola and Nam June Paik, the stage director P. Sellars and the group La Fura dels Baus. The study's last section operates as a foreword for the present economic crisis. In view of the economic difficulties many theatres -including opera theatres- are currently encountering, Diaz Marroquin wonders whether the practice of performing repertoires created centuries ago may still achieve coherence on the 21st century stage. She concludes that the key lies in the controversial field of memory. This concept may be understood in the classical sense, as one of the cannons of rhetoric, but also in the mnemonic, in the historical one and, over all, as the affective memory described in treatises on dramatic technique such as Garcia's or, later on, Stanislavski's. As she affirms, "[La] memoria estetiza la experiencia personal y, superadas las fases de dolor en el acceso a determinadas zonas, se la ofrece, fertilizada, a la interpretación dramática" (p. 297). Human beings, no matter whether we live within the limits characterizing the pre-Romantic subjectivity or beyond them, seem to experience similar patterns of thought and emotion, although our circumstances may be different according to the diverse power schemes we live in. Analyzing the pre-Romantic emotion, therefore, implies identifying these circumstances and translating them to codes intelligible to the 21st century reader and performer. Diaz Marroquin's La retórica de los afectos operates as this kind of translation: A lucid, lively and critical travel across the at times tortuous, but always fascinating territories of reason and emotion. Aurelia Pessarrodona Universitd di Bologna, Fundación Española para la Ciencia i/ la Tecnología. Christopher Lyle Johnstone, Listening to the Logos: Speech and the Coming of Wisdom in Ancient Greece. Columbia: University of South Carolina Press, 2009. 300 pp. ISBN 978-1-57003-854-9 Christopher Lyle Johnstone's Listening to the Logos: Speech and the Com­ ing of Wisdom in Ancient Greece revisits rhetoric's relationship to philoso­ phy; Johnstone's contribution is to examine this relationship in light of an­ cient notions of wisdom. The book demonstrates that speech will not align neatly with rhetoric nor wisdom with philosophy. Rather Johnstone main­ tains that both rhetoric and philosophy use language to develop different Reviews 125 kinds of wisdom: philosophy leans toward metaphysical or natural wisdom, while rhetoric is inclined toward practical wisdom. Listening to the Logos traces Greek conceptions of wisdom from Homer to Aristotle, emphasizing throughout that wisdom has always relied on logos. Though Johnstone concludes his history of wisdom with Aristotle's tax­ onomy of knowledge, his challenge is to trace sophia and phronesis backwards. Early on Johnstone confronts the problems that attend reading ancient texts. Much of the book, for example, focuses on pre-Socratic nn/thos and logos for which we have only fragmentary sources. However, Johnstone's interpreta­ tions are buttressed by commentaries and secondary sources. He recovers very early notions of sophia, which, he argues, is "a kind of active knowledge or competence that is linked specifically with the practice of a techne, an art or craft" and phronesis is linked to the body, especially the heart (p. 29). Since in these mythopoetic texts sophia and phronesis do not yet suggest their Aristotelian meanings, Johnstone searches for other analogues. Based on his interpretation of narratives, Johnstone concludes that in a mythopoetic worldview "[h]uman wisdom is derivative" and "comes from the gods, who alone can apprehend true justice, who alone can know what the Fates have ordained" (p. 31). People are wise, then, when they understand the gods through history and myth (p. 31); knowledge of the...

Reviews 113 to emergent communities, heretical selves: mystics or Ranters, for instance. Instead, lapses into heretical selfhood are signaled by the emergence of affect, which requires subvention by the inarticulate, as if emotions had to wait for the inchoate in order to appear. For example, as both character and play, Hamlet "foregrounds" the inarticulate as a "cultural construct," as a "means by which 'feeling' could surface," and as a principle of inter-subjective vulnerability (176). Perceiving this counterintuitive pulsion at work, seeing the inarticulate in a "more positive light," requires an exploration of a Tudor "aesthetics of feeling," Mazzio contends (180). Nowhere does she offer such an aesthetics. Rather, she relies on contemporary literary theory for many of her historical arguments, and readers are frequently directed to Eve Sedgwick or Lacan, Jean-Luc Nancy or Hegel in lieu of evidence from the period. Yet The Inarticulate Renaissance succeeds: Mazzio focuses our attention on the suitability of English for worship and ceremony, scripture and poetry, on the fortunes of theatrical mumbling and print polemic, on audiences as 'assemblies,' above all on what Tomkis in Lingua calls a "tunes without sense, words inarticulate." However, in some ways, Mazzio's inquiry is reminiscent of the decline of rhetorical engagement late in the period she studies, of the ways in which past thinkers distrusted rhetoric as a guide to both speech and practice, of the ways oratio was emptied of ratio. In this ambitious, learned work, Mazzio is equally wary: a focus on the inarticulate is symptomatic of distrust. But it also signs a trend in contemporary scholarship. Boredom, ennui, anxiety, and now the inarticulate are experiencing a renaissance, in part because current perceptions of (early) modernity are conditioned by its failures, by its perils not its promises. One promise was transparency—of both method and communication—and 'words inarticulate' court opacity. But as 'feeling' rather than 'telling,' as a rhetoric that develops and refines a deepening commitment to pathos, inarticulation necessarily assumes the eloquence of the age. Stephen Pender University of Windsor Carolyn Eastman, A Nation of Speechifiers: Making an American Public after the Revolution. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2009. xi + 290 pp. ISBN 978-0-226-18019-9 Jeremy Engels, Enemyship: Democracy and Counter-Revolution in the Early Republic. East Lansing: Michigan State University Press, 2010. xi + 316 pp. ISBN 9780087013980-2 114 RHETORICA Sandra M. Gustafson, Imagining Deliberative Democracy in the Early American Republic. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2011. x + 271 pp. ISBN 978-0-226-31129-6 Jennifer R. Mercieca, Founding Fictions. Tuscaloosa: University of Alabama Press, 2010. xi + 274 pp. ISBN 978-0-8173-1690-7 In 1690, as the Enlightenment was just glimmering on the English hori­ zon, John Locke calumniated rhetoric (Essay Concerning Human Understand­ ing III.10). In 1790, as the Enlightenment's dusk settled over Koenigsberg, Immanuel Kant similarly decried the art (Critique of Pure Judgment 1.53). Though a century and a continent apart, they expressed a common disdain for rhetoric. Notably absent from this account are the American continents. Recent scholarship, however, finds that the American Enlightenment yielded a wealth of innovative rhetorical practice, placing public argument at the heart (or rather in the agora) of healthy democracy. Brian Garsten's Saving Persuasion (2009) exemplifies a now common effort to catalogue the British and European hostility to rhetoric while lauding United States thinkers, such as James Madison, who celebrated free public debate. If the Euro­ pean Enlightenment philosophically counseled, sapere aude, then the Amer­ ican Enlightenment pragmatically retorted disputare aude. Four recent books, two by historians and two by rhetoricians, more fully chronicle this prac­ tical response to the philosophical penchant, a rhetorical contrast with the philosophes' critical Enlightenment. Sandra Gustafson's Imagining Deliberative Democracy in the Early Amer­ ican Republic charts the course of U.S. "deliberative democracy," which "emphasizefs] the political power of language and advancejs] a commit­ ment to dialogue and persuasion as the best means to resolve conflicts and forge a progressive tradition" (220). She highlights dueling conciliatory and prophetic traditions of public address. The conciliatory tradition dominated the United States circa 1815-1835. Paying particular attention to political and pulpit oratory, Gustafson contrasts the Hellenistic William...

Welcome to Double HelixSeattle has its double helix pedestrian bridge.The Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory (Fermilab) outside Chicago has its gold-colored double helix staircase within the Proton Pagoda

Introduction| January 01 2013 Introduction Kirilka Stavreva; Kirilka Stavreva guest editor Search for other works by this author on: This Site Google Christopher Kleinhenz Christopher Kleinhenz Search for other works by this author on: This Site Google Pedagogy (2013) 13 (1): 43–47. https://doi.org/10.1215/15314200-1814161 Cite Icon Cite Share Icon Share Facebook Twitter LinkedIn MailTo Permissions Search Site Citation Kirilka Stavreva, Christopher Kleinhenz; Introduction. Pedagogy 1 January 2013; 13 (1): 43–47. doi: https://doi.org/10.1215/15314200-1814161 Download citation file: Zotero Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex toolbar search Search Dropdown Menu toolbar search search input Search input auto suggest filter your search Books & JournalsAll JournalsPedagogy Search Advanced Search The text of this article is only available as a PDF. © 2012 by Duke University Press2012 Article PDF first page preview Close Modal You do not currently have access to this content.

Click to increase image sizeClick to decrease image size ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Space does not permit us to express adequate thanks to those who contributed essays for this special issue, nor to the more than 30 other scholars whose proposed essays we could not include. We hope that many of them will publish the work they proposed in this or other journals. Thanks also to the TCQ editors who helped and encouraged us throughout the development of the issue: Scott Mogull, Ken Baake, Ryan Hoover, Brent Henze, and the patient and kind Amy Koerber. Our humble thanks finally to the wise and generous scholars who served as reviewers of proposals and manuscripts: Michael Bokor, Daniel Ding, Sam Dragga, Richard Hunsinger, Robert Johnson, Kyle Mattson, Mya A. Poe, Jingfang Ren, Julie Stagger, and Huatong Sun. Additional informationNotes on contributorsHuiling Ding Huiling Ding is an assistant professor of professional communication at North Carolina State University. She has published in Technical Communication Quarterly; Rhetoric, Globalization, and Professional Communication; Written Communication; China Media Research; Business Communication Quarterly; Rhetoric Review; and English for Specific Purposes. Gerald Savage Gerald Savage is a professor emeritus from Illinois State University. He has published in numerous journals and essay collections and has coedited several books, including Negotiating Cultural Encounters: Narrating Intercultural Engineering and Technical Communication, coedited with Han Yu and forthcoming from Wiley-IEEE.

Abstract Information and communication technology for development (ICTD) involves using information and communication technologies (ICTs) to improve the well-being of people in resource-constrained environments. Because ICTD projects involve crafting technical information and the ICTs that convey it, ICTD involves challenges familiar to technical communicators, such as balancing stakeholder interests and building credibility necessary to influence stakeholders. This article presents how trust and credibility affect ICTD projects, describing implications for development contexts and for distributed work environments. Keywords: credibilitydistributed workinformation and communication technologyresource-constrained environmentstrust ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The author would like to thank the project stakeholders who participated in this research, as well as the Microsoft Research Technology for Emerging Markets research group, M. Haselkorn, B. Kolko, C. Lee, and K. Toyama for their support of this work. Additional informationNotes on contributorsRebecca Walton Rebecca Walton is an assistant professor at Utah State University. Her research explores how human and contextual factors affect the design and use of information and communication technologies in resource-constrained environments.

Abstract From Aristotelian logic and sensate perception to Lakoffian rational and experiential meaning-making, I merge theories: Metaphor is emotive change, a use of language that expresses emotion and evokes emotion, which can inform behavior and persuade. The power of metaphor is in the physiological relationship between reason and emotion in the brain, supported by recent research from Alice Flaherty, neurologist and writer. Metaphors are sensory experiences, images brought-before-the-eye, which effect persuasion as rhetorical tools in argument. I argue that emotion-language-thought is in dialectical relationship, expressed by metaphor. Notes 1I appreciate RR reviewers Pat Hoy and Duane Roen for reviewing and offering suggestions for revision of my manuscript. Additionally, many thanks to Sara Newman for her patience and response to my inquiries. With her support and guidance, the relativity of rhetoric in everyday life continues to be seen and studied. Lastly, thank you to Theresa Enos and others at Rhetoric Review who have taken the time to allow this work publication. 2Recently, I read about being a sheep or goat from an Orthodox Christian perspective. The message was developed from a verse in the New Testament: "All nations will be gathered before Him, and He will separate them from another, as a shepherd divides his sheep from the goats. And He will set the sheep on His right hand, but the goats on the left. Then the King will say to those on His right hand, 'Come, you blesses of My Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world'" (Mat. 25:32). Interestingly, the article that follows attributes negative characteristics to those who are like goats as ones who: take, exploit, hoard, fear, judge, mock, and as ones who are unsatisfied, selfish, and distrusting of others. With this context, I understand anew the reference that my in-laws made to the goat in my kitchen. Meaning changes as one's knowledge base shifts over time, and metaphorical expressions evolve, even after they've been spoken.

Preview this article: From the Editor, Page 1 of 1 < Previous page | Next page > /docserver/preview/fulltext/ce/75/3/collegeenglish22108-1.gif

Published on 01/01/13

Published on 01/01/13

This index covers all technical items - papers, correspondence, reviews, etc. - that appeared in this periodical during the year, and items from previous years that were commented upon or corrected in this year. Departments and other items may also be covered if they have been judged to have archival value. The Author Index contains the primary entry for each item, listed under the first author's name. The primary entry includes the co-authors' names, the title of the paper or other item, and its location, specified by the publication abbreviation, year, month, and inclusive pagination. The Subject Index contains entries describing the item under all appropriate subject headings, plus the first author's name, the publication abbreviation, month, and year, and inclusive pages. Note that the item title is found only under the primary entry in the Author Index.

Preview this article: From the Editor: A 21st-Century Dappled Discipline, Page 1 of 1 < Previous page | Next page > /docserver/preview/fulltext/ccc/64/2/collegecompositioncommunication22114-1.gif