This article first reviews the role of oral and written discourse within social constructionist theory. The author discusses both the differences and the similarities between oral and written discourse and suggests that writers emphasize the similarities rather than the differences since the implicit rules of conversation have much to offer to the technical writer. In order to apply these conversational principles, however, technical writers need to alter their attitudes toward their audiences. The article concludes with an example of how the principles of conversation can be applied to the process of writing instructions.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
MaimonE. P., Maps and Genres: Exploring Connections in the Arts and Sciences, in Composition and Literature: Bridging the Gap, HornerW. (ed.), University of Chicago Press, Chicago, pp. 110–125, 1983.
2.
BruffeeK. A.Collaborative Learning and the Conversation of Mankind, College English, 47:7, pp. 635–652, 1984.
3.
OngW. A., S. J. Literacy and Orality in Our Times, in Composition and Literature: Bridging the Gap, HornerW. (ed.), University of Chicago Press, Chicago, pp. 126–140, 1983.
4.
CooperM., Context as Vehicle: Implicatures in Writing, in What Writers Know: The Language Process and Structure of Written Discourse, NystrandM. (ed.), Academic Press, New York, pp. 105–128, 1982.
5.
RobinsonJ. L., Basic Writing and Its Basis in Talk: The Influence of Speech on Writing, in Fforum: Essays in Theory and Practice in the Teaching of Writing, StockP. L. (ed.), Boynton/Cook Publishers, Inc., Upper Montclair, New Jersey, pp. 116–128, 1983.
6.
BrandtD., Social Foundations of Reading and Writing, in Convergences: Transactions in Reading and Writing, PetersenB. T. (ed.), National Council of Teachers of English, Urbana, Illinois, pp. 115–126, 1986.
7.
AugustineD. and WinterowdW. R., Speech Acts and the Reader-Writer Transaction, in Convergences: Transactions in Reading and Writing, PetersenB. T. (ed.), National Council of Teachers of English, Urbana, Illinois, pp. 127–148, 1986.
8.
BialostoskyD. H.Dialogics as an Art of Discourse in Literary Criticism, PLMA, 101, pp. 788–797, 1986.
9.
MillerC. R., The Ethos of Science and the Ethos of Technology, Proceedings of the Technical Communications Sessions, 31st Conference on College Composition and Communication, Washington, D.C., pp. 184–191, 1980.
10.
CooperM.The Ecology of Writing, College English, 48:4, pp. 364–375, 1986.
