I should've written a more contextualized message, I guess. When I use
the word "real," I simply echo the terminology of "Worlds Apart" and a
series of long discussion we've had here on CASLL/Inkshed and with CATTW
members, discussing "authenticity" of workplace writing vs. school
writing (mostly, from the rhetorical genre perspective & AT). The
observation that workplace writing is "authentic" because it serves a
purpose that is located outside of the activity of writing (i.e.,
writing is used to get something done), while school writing is "not
authentic" because its ultimate goal is a grade doesn't make things
clear to me (nor do I always agree with it). What I have been suggesting
for a while is that we treat "authenticity" as part of the context in
which writing takes place and look at it from the perspective(s) of the
major figures involved in the dialogue: the writers and readers.
Natasha
Tom William wrote:
>Re "not real", my understanding about the concept is that it is simply a
>metaphorical and colloquial term that people often use. Not necessarily we
>often become serious about it, or do we take it literally. We know what is
>real and what is not. You gotta see who says it and what the context is.
>Reality of one context not necessarily the reality of another. For students
>(e.g., undergraduates), many often think I gotta get a good job; I wanna
>live well; therefore, that destination is the "real world" for those
>students. This is just one slice of the pie. Another could be that,
>students finishing Ph.D. and aiming to work in a university, for them that
>university is the "real world" (and in this case it happens to be From a
>university To a university). tom
>
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
To leave the list, send a SIGNOFF CASLL command to
[log in to unmask] or, if you experience difficulties,
write to Russ Hunt at [log in to unmask]
For the list archives and information about the organization,
its newsletter, and the annual conference, go to
http://www.stu.ca/inkshed/
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
