Constructing Relationships Between Science and Practice in the Written Science Communication of the Washington State Wine Industry

Written Communication Apr 2016

Constructing Relationships Between Science and Practice in the Written Science Communication of the Washington State Wine Industry

Erika Amethyst Szymanski

Abstract

Even as deficit model science communication falls out of favor, few studies question how written science communication constructs relationships between science and industry. Here, I investigate how textual microprocesses relate scientific research to industry practice in the Washington State wine industry, helping (or hindering) winemakers and wine grape growers in making research relevant to their work. Critical discourse analysis of a corpus of wine science texts suggests that textual microprocesses continue to enact a deficit paradigm: scientists as knowledge producers and the industry public as knowledge deficient. Through its extension of features of scientific discourse, the industry-oriented literature abstracts research practices from context which could aid in drawing relationships with industry practices. In aggregate, these texts suggest an opportunity to increase research relevance to industry practice by writing the research–industry relationship differently, recontextualizing research in practice.

Journal: Written Communication
Published: 2016-04-01
DOI: 10.1177/0741088316631528
Open Access: Closed
Topics: discourse analysis multimodality scientific writing

Citation Context

Cited by in this index (1)

Watts (2021)

Rethinking Graduate School Research Genres: Communicating With Industry, Writin…

Journal of Technical Writing and Communication

Cites in this index (7)

Dahl (2015)

Contested Science in the Media

Written Communication
Luzón (2013)

Public Communication of Science in Blogs

Written Communication
Huckin et al. (2012)

Critical Discourse Analysis and Rhetoric and Composition

College Composition and Communication
FAHNESTOCK (1998)

Accommodating Science

Written Communication
HYLAND (1996)

Talking to the Academy

Written Communication

Show all 7 →

MYERS (1996)

Out of the Laboratory and Down to the Bay

Written Communication
PAUL et al. (1995)

Introducing Chaos (Theory) into Science and Engineering

Written Communication

Also cites 35 works outside this index ↓

10.1207/s15327884mca0404_6

↗
10.4324/9781410609526

↗
10.1080/00913367.2005.10639207

↗
10.1038/nature01018

↗
10.1515/9781503621749

↗
10.1016/j.respol.2014.06.008

↗
10.1002/(SICI)1098-240X(199906)22:3<203::AID-NUR3>3.0.CO;2-9

↗
10.1002/(SICI)1097-4571(199404)45:3<124::AID-ASI2>3.0.CO;2-8

↗
10.1002/jhbs.10036

↗
10.1177/0306312705054526

↗
10.1177/030631277700700112

↗
10.2307/3178066

↗
10.1016/j.foodchem.2011.09.101

↗
10.1002/asi.22811

↗
10.1016/S0271-5309(96)00023-7

↗
10.1177/03063127030333004

↗
10.1080/07409710.2014.892733

↗
10.4324/9780203481141

↗
10.1111/j.1467-954X.2008.00808.x

↗
10.1177/0306312712456947

↗
10.1353/tech.2000.0167

↗
10.1002/9780470995235

↗
10.1021/jf103230b

↗
10.2307/j.ctv1220nc1

↗
10.1177/0957926512455377

↗
10.1177/030631285015004002

↗
10.1177/1461445603005002006

↗
10.1057/9781137017581

↗
10.1111/1467-6451.00185

↗
10.1177/0963662514549141

↗
10.1177/0963662504042690

↗
Szymanski E. (2016)

10.34068/joe.54.01.33

Journal of Extension ↗
10.1080/09571264.2015.1083954

↗
10.1002/9780470753460.ch19

↗
10.1088/0963-6625/1/3/004

↗

CrossRef global citation count: 1 View in citation network →