Though scholars have begun to explore how texts mediate design, little is known about rhetorical invention in design. To investigate how heuristics used for rhetorical invention and design might be related, the author analyzed how one disciplinary design heuristic, the information system cliché, influenced the production of both a computer system and a specification text for the system. The cliché was used to generate design proposals, which designers evaluated using at least three criteria: projected context of use, correspondence between the proposals and their textual inscriptions, and system coherence. Results indicate that disciplinary heuristics and rhetorical topics overlap in design; however, the rhetorical character of disciplinary heuristics is obscured in textual representations of the design. Both types of heuristic serve as interpretive instruments and are used dialogically to develop the parts of a design or text within the context of the whole.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Adelson, B.
, & Soloway, E. (1989). A model of software design. In M. Chi, R. Glaser, & M. Farr (Eds.), The nature of expertise (pp. 185-208). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
2.
Aristotle
. (1984). Poetics (I. Bywater, Trans.). In The rhetoric and the poetics of Aristotle (pp. 219-266). New York: Oxford University Press.
3.
Aristotle
. (1991). On rhetoric: A theory of civic discourse (G. A. Kennedy, Trans.). New York: Oxford University Press.
4.
Atman, C. J.
, Chimka, J. R., Bursic, K. M., & Nachtmann, H. L. (1999). A comparison of freshman and senior engineering design processes. Design Studies, 20, 131-152.
5.
Buchanan, R.
(1995). Rhetoric, humanism, and design. In R. Buchanan & V. Margolin (Eds.), Discovering design: Explorations in design studies (pp. 23-66). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
6.
Condor, S.
, & Antaki, C. (1997). Social cognition and discourse. In T. A. van Dijk (Ed.), Discourse studies: A multidisciplinary introduction: Vol. 1. Discourse as structure and process (pp. 320-347). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
7.
Consigny, S.
(1974). Rhetoric and its situations. Philosophy and Rhetoric, 7, 175-186.
8.
Doheny-Farina, S.
, & Odell, L. (1985). Ethnographic research on writing: Assumptions and methodologies. In L. Odell & D. Goswami (Eds.), Writing in nonacademic settings (pp. 503-535). New York: Guilford.
9.
Enos, R. L.
, & Lauer, J. M. (1992). The meaning of heuristic in Aristotle's rhetoric and its implications for contemporary rhetorical theory. In S. P. Witte, N. Nakadate, & G. Cherry (Eds.), A rhetoric of doing: Essays on written discourse in honor of James L. Kinneavy (pp. 79-87). Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.
10.
Evans, D. L.
, McNeill, B. W., & Beakley, G. C. (1990, July/August). Design in engineering education: Past view of future directions. Engineering Education, 517-521.
11.
Farrell, T.
(1993). Norms of rhetorical culture. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
12.
Fleck, L.
(1979). Genesis and development of a scientific fact (F. Bradley & T. J. Trenn, Trans.; T. J. Trenn & R. K. Merton, Eds.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press. (Original work published 1935)
13.
Flower, L.
, & Hayes, J. R. (1981). A cognitive process theory of writing. College Composition and Communication, 32, 363-387.
14.
Katz, S. B.
(1992). The ethic of expediency: Classical rhetoric, technology, and the Holocaust. College English, 54, 255-275.
15.
Kaufer, D. S.
(1997). From tekhne to technique: Rhetoric as a design art. In A. G. Gross & W. M. Keith (Eds.), Rhetorical hermeneutics: Invention and interpretation in the age of science (pp. 247-278). Albany: State University of New York Press.
16.
Kaufer, D. S.
, & Butler, B. S. (1996). Rhetoric and the arts of design. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
17.
Keith, W.
(1997). Engineering rhetoric. In A. G. Gross & W. M. Keith (Eds.), Rhetorical hermeneutics: Invention and interpretation in the age of science (pp. 225-246). Albany: State University of New York Press.
18.
Kostelnick, C.
(1989). Process paradigms in design and composition: Affinities and directions. College Composition and Communication, 40, 267-281.
19.
LeFevre, K. B.
(1987). Invention as a social act. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.
20.
Leff, M.
(1983). The topics of argumentative invention in Latin rhetorical theory from Cicero to Boethius. Rhetorica, 1, 23-44.
21.
Lewis, B.
(1999, April). Mediating texts in engineering education. Paper presented at the meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Montreal, Canada.
22.
McKeon, R.
(1987). Creativity and the commonplace. In M. Backman (Ed.), Rhetoric: Essays in invention and discovery (pp. 25-36). Woodbridge, CT: Ox Bow.
23.
Medway, P.
(1996). Virtual and material buildings: Construction and constructivism in architecture and writing. Written Communication, 13, 473-514.
24.
Miller, C. R.
(1985). Invention in technical and scientific discourse: A prospective survey. In M. G. Moran & D. Journet (Eds.), Research in technical communication (pp. 117-161). Westport, CT: Greenwood.
25.
Miller, C. R.
(1987). Aristotle's “special topics” in rhetorical practice and pedagogy. Rhetoric Society Quarterly, 17, 61-70.
26.
Miller, C. R.
, & Selzer, J. (1985). Special topics of argument in engineering reports. In L. Odell & D. Goswami (Eds.), Writing in nonacademic settings (pp. 309-341). New York: Guilford.
27.
National Science Foundation
. (1996). Women, minorities, and persons with disabilities in science and engineering (NSF 96-311). Arlington, VA: Author.
28.
Polanyi, M.
(1958). Personal knowledge: Towards a post-critical philosophy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
29.
Prelli, L. J.
(1989). A rhetoric of science: Inventing scientific discourse. Columbia: University of South Carolina Press.
30.
Rich, C.
, Waters, R. C., & Reubenstein, H. B. (1987). Toward a requirements apprentice. In Proceedings: Fourth international workshop on software specification and design (pp. 79-86). Washington, DC: Computer Society Press of the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE).
31.
Rogoff, B.
, & Lave, J. (Eds.). (1984). Everyday cognition: Its development in social context. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
32.
Roman, G.
(1985, April). A taxonomy of current issues in requirements engineering. IEEE Computer, 14-21.
33.
Schön, D. A.
(1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. New York: Basic Books.
34.
Sigwart, C. D.
, Van Meer, G. L., & Hansen, J. C. (1990). Software engineering: A project-oriented approach. Irvine, CA: Franklin, Beedle.
35.
Simon, H. A.
(1981). The sciences of the artificial. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
36.
Sommerville, I.
(1989). Software engineering (3rd ed.). Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
37.
Spilka, R.
(1990). Orality and literacy in the workplace: Process- and text-based strategies for multiple-audience adaptation. Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 4, 44-67.
38.
Vygotsky, L. S.
(1962). Thought and language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
39.
Winsor, D. A.
(1990). Engineering writing/writing engineering. College Composition and Communication, 41, 58-70.
40.
Winsor, D. A.
(1994). Invention and writing in technical work: Representing the object. Written Communication, 11, 227-251.
41.
Winsor, D. A.
(1998). Rhetorical practices in technical work. Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 12, 343-370.
42.
Witte, S.
(1992). Context, text, intertext: Toward a constructivist semiotic of writing. Written Communication, 9, 237-308.
