The value of formal writing conventions has been diminished in mainstream composition scholarship; although research on occupational writing suggests that formal conventions are important, these findings are hard to generalize. This study, a content analysis of 12 professional style manuals, achieves generalizability by elucidating the institutional norms of disciplinary writing (a subset of occupational writing to which much scientific and technical writing belongs). Formal conventions prove to be highly valued. More important, the use of formal conventions often is justified on rhetorical grounds, suggesting that the dichotomy between formalist and rhetorical axiologies posited in composition scholarship is false.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Allen, Harold B.“Education of English Teachers.”Toward an Understanding of Language: Charles Carpenter Fries in Perspective. Ed. Peter Howard Fries. Amsterdam Studies in the Theory and History of Linguistic Science. Ser. IV, Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 40. Amsterdam: Benjamins, 1985. 19-25.
2.
Anderson, Paul V.“Survey Methodology.”Writing in Nonacademic Settings. Ed. Lee Odell and Dixie Goswami. New York: Guilford, 1985. 453-501.
3.
Anderson, Paul V.
. “What Survey Research Tells Us about Writing at Work.”Writing in Nonacademic Settings. Ed. Lee Odell and Dixie Goswami. New York: Guilford, 1985. 3-83.
4.
Baron, Dennis E.Grammar and Good Taste: Reforming the American Language. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1982.
5.
Baugh, Albert C.
, and Thomas Cable. A History of the English Language. 4th ed.Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1993.
6.
Broadhead, Glenn J.
, and Richard C. Freed. The Variables of Composition: Process and Product in a Business Setting. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press, 1986.
7.
Charney, Davida H.
, and Jack R. Rayman. “The Role of Writing Quality in Effective Student Résumés.”JBTC3.1 (1989): 36-53.
8.
Cherry, Roger D.“Politeness in Written Persuasion.”Journal of Pragmatics12 (1988): 63-81.
9.
Collins, Janet Duthie
. “The Impact of C. C. Fries' Work in Historical Linguistics.”Toward an Understanding of Language: Charles Carpenter Fries in Perspective. Ed. Peter Howard Fries. Amsterdam Studies in the Theory and History of Linguistic Science. Ser. IV, Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 40. Amsterdam: Benjamins, 1985. 161-170.
10.
Connors, Robert J.“Mechanical Correctness as a Focus in Composition Instruction.”College Composition and Communication36 (1985): 61-72.
11.
Connors, Robert J.
. “The Rise and Fall of the Modes of Discourse.”The Writing Teacher's Sourcebook. Ed. Gary Tate and Edward P. J. Corbett. 2nd ed.New York: Oxford University Press, 1988. 24-34.
12.
Cooper, Marilyn
, and Michael Holzman. “Talking about Protocols.”College Composition and Communication34 (1983): 284-293.
13.
Couture, Barbara
, ed. Functional Approaches to Writing: Research Perspectives. London: Pinter, 1986.
14.
Rpt. in Journal of Technical Writing and Communication8 (1978): 207-216.
15.
Dillon, George
. Constructing Texts: Elements of a Theory of Composition and Style. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1981.
16.
Doheny-Farina, Stephen
, and Lee Odell. “Ethnographic Research on Writing: Assumptions and Methodology.”Writing in Nonacademic Settings. Ed. Lee Odell and Dixie Goswami. New York: Guilford, 1985. 503-535.
17.
Drake, Glendon F.The Role of Prescriptivism in American Linguistics, 1820-1970. Amsterdam Studies in the Theory and History of Linguistic Science. Ser. III, Studies in the History of Linguistics 13. Amsterdam: Benjamins, 1977.
18.
Elbow, Peter
. Writing with Power: Techniques for Mastering the Writing Process. New York: Oxford University Press, 1981.
19.
Emig, Janet
. The Composing Processes of Twelfth Graders. National Council of Teachers of English Research Report No. 13. Urbana, IL: NCTE, 1971.
20.
Encyclopedia of Associations 1993. Ed. Deborah M. Burek. 27th ed.Detroit: Gale Research, 1993.
21.
Faigley, Lester
, and Thomas P. Miller. “What We Learn from Writing on the Job.”College English44 (1982): 557-569.
22.
Finegan, Edward
. Attitudes toward English Usage: The History of a War of Words. New York: Teachers College Press, 1980.
23.
Flower, Linda S.
, and John R. Hayes. “The Dynamics of Composing: Making Plans and Juggling Constraints.”Cognitive Processes in Writing. Ed. Lee W. Gregg and Erwin R. Steinberg. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, 1980. 31-50.
24.
Fries, Charles Carpenter
. American English Grammar. New York: Appleton Century, 1940.
25.
Fries, Charles Carpenter
. The Teaching of the English Language. New York: Nelson and Sons, 1927.
26.
Fries, Peter H.“C. C. Fries' View of Language and Linguistics.”Toward an Understanding of Language: Charles Carpenter Fries in Perspective. Ed. Peter Howard Fries. Amsterdam Studies in the Theory and History of Linguistic Science. Ser. IV, Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 40. Amsterdam: Benjamins, 1985. 63-83.
27.
Fulkerson, Richard
. “Composition Theory in the Eighties: Axiological Consensus and Paradigmatic Diversity.”College Composition and Communication41 (1990): 409-429.
28.
Fulkerson, Richard
. “Four Philosophies of Composition.”College Composition and Communication30 (1979): 344-348.
29.
Gebhardt, Richard
. “Process and Intention: A Bridge from Theory to Classroom.”The Writing Instructor1.4 (1982): 135-145.
30.
Hairston, Maxine
. “Not All Errors Are Created Equal: Nonacademic Readers in the Professions Respond to Lapses in Usage.”College English43 (1981): 794-806.
31.
Hagge, John
. “Humanism False and True: George Dillon's Theory of Composition.”Centrum ns 2.1 (1982): 61-72.
32.
Hagge, John
. “The Process Religion and Business Communication.”Journal of Business Communication24.1 (1987): 89-119.
33.
Hagge, John
. “The Spurious Paternity of Business Communication Principles.”Journal of Business Communication26.1 (1989): 33-55.
34.
Hagge, John
, and Charles Kostelnick. “Linguistic Politeness in Professional Prose: A Discourse Analysis of Auditors' Suggestion Letters, with Implications for Business Communication Pedagogy.”Written Communication6 (1989): 312-339.
35.
Hicks, Carol E.
, James E. Rush, and Suzanne M. Strong. “Content Analysis.”Subject and Information Analysis. Ed. Eleanor D. Dym. Books in Library and Information Science 47. New York: Dekker, 1985. 57-109.
36.
Hirsch, E. D., Jr.The Philosophy of Composition. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1977.
37.
Howell, John Bruce
. Style Manuals of the English-Speaking World. Phoenix: Oryx, 1983.
38.
Kinneavy, James L.A Theory of Discourse. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1971.
39.
Knoblauch, C. H.
, and Lil Brannon. Rhetorical Traditions and the Teaching of Writing. Upper Montclair, NJ: Boynton/Cook, 1984.
40.
Krippendorf, Klaus
. Content Analysis: An Introduction to its Methodology. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage, 1980.
41.
Leonard, Donald J.
, and Jeanette W. Gilsdorf. “Language in Change: Academics' and Executives' Perceptions of Usage Errors.”Journal of Business Communication27.2 (1990): 137-158.
42.
Leonard, Sterling Andrus
. The Doctrine of Correctness in English Usage 1700-1800. University of Wisconsin Studies in Language and Literature, 25. Madison, 1929.
43.
Limaye, Mohan R.
, and Roger D. Cherry. “Pragmatics, `Situated' Language, and Business Communication.”JBTC1.1 (1987): 68-88.
44.
Lindemann, Erika
. A Rhetoric for Writing Teachers. 2nd ed.New York: Oxford University Press, 1987.
45.
Macrorie, Ken
. Telling Writing. 3rd ed.Rochelle Park, NJ: Hayden, 1980.
46.
Mansfield, Carmella E.“We Hear You Mr./Ms. Business... The Resume and Cover Letter.”The ABCA Bulletin39.3 (1976): 20-22.
47.
McDowell, Earl E.“Perceptions of the Ideal Cover Letter and Ideal Resume.”Journal of Technical Writing and Communication17.2 (1987): 179-191.
48.
Mendelson, Michael
. “Teaching Writing Inductively.”Journal of Business Communication25 (1988): 67-83.
49.
“The Modern View of Grammar and Linguistics.” NCTE Commission on the English Curriculum. The English Language Arts. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1952.
50.
Moffett, James
. Teaching the Universe of Discourse. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1968.
51.
Mullins, Carolyn J.A Guide to Writing and Publishing in the Social and Behavioral Sciences. New York: Wiley, 1977.
Olson, David R.“From Utterance to Text: The Bias of Language in Speaking and Writing.”Harvard Educational Review47 (1977): 257-281.
54.
Perl, Sondra
. “The Composing Processes of Unskilled College Writers.”Research in the Teaching of English13 (1979): 317-336.
55.
Rpt. in The Writing Teacher's Sourcebook. Ed. Gary Tate and Edward P. J. Corbett. 2nd ed.New York: Oxford University Press, 1988. 113-118.
56.
Pianko, Sharon
. “A Description of the Composing Processes of College Freshman Writers.”Research in the Teaching of English13 (1979): 5-22.
57.
Pyles, Thomas
, and John Algeo. The Origins and Development of the English Language. 4th ed.Fort Worth, TX: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1993.
58.
Robins, R. H.A Short History of Linguistics. 3rd ed.London: Longman, 1990.
59.
Rogers, Edward
. “Elements of Efficient Job Hunting.”Journal of College Placement30 (1979): 55-58.
60.
Sampson, Geoffrey
. Schools of Linguistics. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1980.
61.
Searle, John R.Speech Acts: An Essay in the Philosophy of Language. London: Cambridge University Press, 1969.
62.
Selzer, Jack
. “The Composing Processes of an Engineer.”College Composition and Communication34 (1983): 178-187.
63.
Sloan, Gary
. “Frequency of Errors in Essays by College Freshmen and by Professional Writers.”College Composition and Communication41 (1990): 299-308.
64.
Sommers, Nancy
. “The Need for Theory in Composition Research.”College Composition and Communication30 (1979): 46-49.
65.
Rpt. in The Writing Teacher's Sourcebook. Ed. Gary Tate and Edward P. J. Corbett. 2nd ed.New York: Oxford University Press, 1988. 119-127.
66.
Spinks, Nelda
, and Barron Wells. “Letters of Application and Résumés: A Comparison of Corporate Views.”The Bulletin of the Association for Business Communication50.3 (1987): 9-16.
67.
Stalker, James C.“C. C. Fries on Standard English.”Toward an Understanding of Language: Charles Carpenter Fries in Perspective. Ed. Peter Howard Fries. Amsterdam Studies in the Theory and History of Linguistic Science. Ser. IV, Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 40. Amsterdam: Benjamins, 1985. 205-219.
68.
Stine, Donna
, and Donald Skarzenski. “Priorities for the Business Communication Classroom: A Survey of Business and Academe.”Journal of Business Communication16.3 (1979): 15-30.
69.
Storms, C. Gilbert
. “What Business School Graduates Say about the Writing They Do at Work: Implications for the Business Communication Course.”The ABCA Bulletin46.4 (1983): 13-18.
70.
“Students' Right to Their Own Language.”
Special Issue of College Composition and Communication25 (1974): 1-32.
71.
Tate, Gary
, and Edward P. J. Corbett, eds. The Writing Teacher's Sourcebook. 2nd ed.New York: Oxford University Press, 1988.
72.
Tibbetts, Arn
, and Charlene Tibbetts. What's Happening to American English?New York: Scribner, 1978.
73.
Tomlinson, Barbara
. “Talking about the Composing Process: The Limitations of Retrospective Accounts. Written Communication1 (1984): 429-445.
74.
Warfel, Harry R.Who Killed Grammar?Gainesville: University of Florida Press, 1952.
75.
Weber, Robert Philip
. Basic Content Analysis. 2nd ed.Sage University Paper Series on Quantitative Applications in the Social Sciences, 07-049. Newbury Park, CA: Sage, 1990.
76.
Webster's Third New International Dictionary of the English Language Unabridged. Ed. Philip Babcock Goveet al.Springfield, MA: Merriam-Webster, 1981.
77.
Wells, Barron
, Nelda Spinks, and Janice Hargrave. “A Survey of the Chief Personnel Officers in the 500 Largest Corporations in the United States to Determine Their Preferences in Job Application Letters and Personal Resumes.”The ABCA Bulletin44.2 (1981): 3-7.
