This volume examines the role of social factors in the nature and development of written communication. Unlike previous works, the volume is dedicated to examining the ways in which written communication affects and is affected by the community of writers and readers who produce and interpret written language. It focuses on the extent to which writing depends upon principles of social context that are posited for language in general. Intended for both researchers and teachers in language, composition, education, and communication, the volume draws together a number of distinguished scholars in linguistics, communication, education, anthropology, and sociology. It offers theoretical and applied perspectives on aspects of written communication that share in the social foundations of language.

Preview this article: Audience and Information, Page 1 of 1 < Previous page | Next page > /docserver/preview/fulltext/rte/23/3/researchintheteachingofenglish15517-1.gif

This study investigated the assumption that proficient writers, unlike nonproficient ones, adapt their essays for a particular and occasion. Good and poor writers wrote a persuasive essay for a real that expressed topic-relevant attitudes and opinions in an interview presentation. Essays were then coded for ideas mentioned in the interview. Results showed that good writers take greater advantage of information than poor writers, but that good and poor writers both favor adaptations from explicit statements over more subtle statements. Studies of in human communication help to show how individuals manage in a world of diverse attitudes and opinions. Researchers in related disciplines, recognizing that effective discourse requires an understanding of situation including aspects of have shown many ways that people alter their messages for different contexts. In the field of writing, however, situational influences have received relatively little attention, though today's textbooks devote many more pages than before to matters of and intention. Overall, there seems to be little consensus about just how aspects of are manifested in writing. I use the term here and elsewhere as a general term to denote issues of awareness and adaptation. Where necessary, I distinguish between awareness, which refers to a writer's or speaker's focus of on readers or listeners irrespective of the communicator's language behavior, and adaptation, which refers to the audience-conditioned language behavior resulting from this awareness. What constitutes adaptation and how it can be measured is a question not always faced squarely by researchers. Some investigators have adopted quite general (and vague) criteria. In a study conducted by Flower and Hayes (1980), for example, categories labeled audience and reader and response to the larger rhetorical problem were used in analyzing protocols for evidence of awareness. Similarly, Hilgers (1980) rated adaptation in students' writing samples according to the criterion attention to the specific needs of the audience. This article is adapted from the author's doctoral dissertation from the Department of Language Education, University of Georgia, 1984, under the direction of Donald L. Rubin. Research in the Teaching of English, Vol. 19, No. 3, October 1985

This study concerns two related issues pertaining to the evaluation of students' written compositions: the relative effects of content versus mechanics on judgments of quality, and the extent to which raters are able to follow instructions directing them to attend more to one aspect of writing than to another. A college-level expository essay was made weaker in content (by reducing the number of underlying propositions) and in mechanics. The original and altered versions were rated analytically and holistically according to different sets of rating instructions. Analysis of variance indicated that mechanics had a greater influence on raters' judgments than either content or rating instructions. Thus the results suggest that evaluators may not be able to focus on individual criteria of writing quality.

Preview this article: Syntactic Complexity and Readers' Perception of an Author's Credibility, Page 1 of 1 < Previous page | Next page > /docserver/preview/fulltext/rte/17/2/researchintheteachingofenglish15716-1.gif