An interesting tidbit from WAC-L. Forgive me if you've already seen it. If nothing else, the term "writing silos" really ought to become part of the Inkshed nomenclautre. Forwarded message: > From root Sun Jan 22 > Date: Sun, 22 Jan 1995 16:18:39 -0700 > From: "David E. Schwalm" <[log in to unmask]> > Subject: Re: Scholarly Audiences and Beyond > To: Multiple recipients of list WPA-L <[log in to unmask]> > > All kinds of evidence points to the fact that our language performance tends > to fall apart when we find ourselves in strange territory, where we are > unfamiliar with the concepts, lexicon, and rhetorical expectations of the > denizens of that territory. Is this, then, an argument for learning to write > in "writing silos," tall but narrow disciplinary or conceptual spaces? Maybe. > But when we move from writing silo to writing silo, we usually bring some > stuff with us--some abstract syntactical and rhetorical forms, paradigms, > whatever. In other words, it's not as if we're moving from Spanish to Japanese > when we move from writing about philosophy to writing about biology. And I > suspect that the better command we have of these abstract language paradigms > the faster we are able to acquire the specific writing conventions in any > given writing silo. Great hack writers tend to get comfortable in other > people's silos really quickly. My point is that to learn to write you have to > write, and in learning to write you are learning at least two different kinds > of things: language abstractions and silo conventions. > > -- David E. Schwalm, Vice Provost for Academic Programs > ___Arizona State University West > ___4701 West Thunderbird Rd. > ___Phoenix, AZ 85069-7100___(602) 543-4500__IACDES@ASUACAD >