This essay reappraises conventional distinctions between oral-like and literate-like discourse, particularly Tannen's (1985) distinction between involvement focus and message focus. Rather than seeing message in tension with involvement, this query treats message as an embodiment of involvement. Cohesion particularly is treated as an aspect of a developing writer-reader relationship, an outgrowth of a thickening commitment to a mutual orientation. Speculations are offered for rethinking what is called “literate orientation.”
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Bazerman, C.
(in press). Shaping written knowledge. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.
2.
Bernstein, B.
(1971). Class, codes, and control (Vol. 1). London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
3.
Bizzell, P.
(1982). Cognition, convention, and certainty: What we need to know about writing. Pre/Text, 3, 213-243.
4.
Brandt, D.
(1986). Toward an understanding of context in composition. Written Communication, 3, 139-157.
5.
Chafe, W.
(1985). Linguistic differences produced by differences between speaking and writing. In D. R. Olson, N. Torrance, & A. Hildyard (Eds.), Literacy, language, and learning: The nature and consequences of reading and writing. New York: Cambridge University Press.
6.
Collins, J.
, & Michaels, S. (1986). Speaking and writing: Discourse strategies and the acquisition of literacy. In J. Cook-Gumperz (Ed.), The social construction of literacy. New York: Cambridge University Press.
7.
Dyson, A. H.
(1985). Second graders sharing writing: The multiple social realities of a literacy event. Written Communication, 2(2), 189-215.
8.
Faigley, L.
, Cherry, R. D., Jolliffe, D. A., & Skinner, A. M. (1985). Assessing writers' knowledge and processes of composing. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
9.
Flower, L.
, & Hayes, J. R. (1981). A cognitive process theory of writing. College Composition and Communication, 32, 365-387.
10.
Halliday, M.A.K.
(1978). Language as social semiotic: The social interpretation of language and meaning. Baltimore: University Park Press.
11.
Halliday, M.A.K.
, & Hasan, R. (1976). Cohesion in English. London: Longman.
12.
Halliday, M.A.K.
, & Hasan, R. (1980). Text and context: Aspects of language in a social-semiotic perspective. Tokyo: Sophia University Press.
13.
Heath, S. B.
(1983). Ways with words: Language, life, and work in communities and classrooms. New York: Cambridge University Press.
14.
Labov, W.
(1972). Language in the inner city. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
15.
Latour, B.
, & Woolgar, S. (1979). Laboratory life: The social construction of scientific facts. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
16.
Nystrand, M.
(1987). The structure of written communication. Gainesville, FL: Academic Press.
17.
Olson, D. R.
(1980). Some social aspects of meaning in oral and written language. In D. R. Olson (Ed.), Social foundations of language and thought. New York: Norton.
18.
Olson, D. R.
(1981). Writing: The divorce of the author from the text. In B. M. Kroll & R. J. Vann (Eds.), Exploring speaking-writing relationships: Connections and contrasts. Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English.
19.
Olson, D. R.
(1984). “See! Jumping!” Some oral language antecedents of literacy. In H. Goelman, A. Oberg, & F. Smith (Eds.), Awakening to literacy. Exeter, NH: Heinemann.
20.
Olson, D. R.
, & A. Hildyard (1983). Writing and literal meaning. In M. Martlew (Ed.), The psychology of written language: Developmental and educational perspectives. New York: John Wiley.
21.
Ong, W.
(1982). Orality and literacy: The technological of the word. New York: Methuen.
22.
Porter, J. E.
(1986). Intertextuality and the discourse community. Rhetoric Review, 5(1), 34-47.
23.
Rommetveit, R.
(1974). On message structure: A framework for the study of language and communication. New York: John Wiley.
24.
Rosen, H.
(1971). Toward a language policy across the curriculum. In D. Barnes, J. Britton, & H. Rosen (Eds.), Language, the learner and the school (rev. ed.). London: Penguin.
25.
Tannen, D.
(1985). Relative focus on involvement in oral and written discourse. In D. R. Olson, N. Torrance, & A. Hildyard (Eds.), Literacy, language, and learning: The nature and consequences of reading and writing. New York: Cambridge University Press.
26.
Vande Kopple, W. J.
(1985). Some exploratory discourse on metadiscourse. College Composition and Communication, 36(1), 82-93.
27.
von Franz, M.-L.
(1964). The process of individuation. In C. Jung (Ed.), Man and his symbols. New York: Dell.
