ENGL 120: Profile of a Member of a Discourse Community

Context: All of us occupy different discourse communities. Even if two people grow up in the
same city or town perhaps even if they attend the same schools and share the same group of
friends each person is likely to feel comfortable within some discourse communities, but not
others. For example, one person may feel comfortable walking into a Catholic church, while the
other may not, because of his or her religious identity and (lack of) familiarity with the churchs
use of discourse (in its rituals, prayers, songs, homilies, etc.). In another example, a white
American walking into an international foods store for the first time may feel lost or uneasy
because the discursive space is unfamiliar and unpredictable food groupings may be difficult to
understand or anticipate, labels may be written in languages other than English (or poor English),
and ingredients may be foreign for the shopper. Even online spaces can be considered discourse
communities, which may or may not be welcome for all users for example, The Washington
Post recently reported that more than 40 percent of Internet users have experienced abuse, with
women the primary victims. Specifically, the article notes that Twitter, Reddit, and 4Chan tend to
be sexist online spaces because users are more often men than women, whereas Facebook and
Pinterest are more welcoming for women (Dewey).
These different experiences of discourse communities are directly tied to our personal identities,
as people who have a variety of cultural, racial, ethnic, national, economic, linguistic, religious,
gendered, sexual, and political histories. We carry these histories with us to the communities we
occupy; these histories can stratify us or bring us together; and these histories influence how we
use language, and how language uses us.
Assignment: For this assignment, you will write a profile of a member of a discourse
community. You will be paired with a member of our class and will preform interviews of each
other. The focus of the profile will be on how your classmate functions within a specific
discourse community, how the discourse community uses language in particular/distinctive ways,
and how the identity of this individual has allowed him/her to navigate the discourse community
successfully. To provide concrete examples of the regular language practices of this discourse
community, you will want to collect key documents/texts (composed by your interviewee or
other members of the community), and you may also choose to observe the place(s) where these
language practices take place. The discourse community may be an online or physical space.
In this essay, you will develop a portrait of your interviewee, but the way in which you compose
this portrait may vary for example, you might focus on a single place/space described by your
partner that represents the discourse community he/she occupies, or you might focus on how this
individual has personally developed through her/his interactions with the discourse community
over time. Your goal will be to ask questions of, and collect information from, your partner, as
well as the discourse community itself, that will help you construct a profile that is focused on
your partners experience of, or history with, this discourse community. After you have written
this profile, you will then present your essay to the class in 3-4 minutes so we may all get to
know each other better.
For background on this assignment, you should review your notes from class, the required
reading from The Call to Write, (including parts of Chapters 7 & 16), and the readings assigned

Weeks 1-4. We will discuss interview techniques and generate lists of interview questions
together in class, and you will receive feedback from myself and your peers regarding the focus
for your profile.
The Rhetorical Situation:
Genre: The genre is a narrative profile essay.
Purpose: The purpose of this assignment is two-fold: First, it is meant to produce a
profile of an individual member of our class who is a member of a specific discourse
community. And second, this assignment should help you make analytical connections
among place/space, identity, and literacy.
Audience: NDSU students and faculty, who may or may not be aware of the discourse
communities around them.
Style/Voice: For this assignment, you should use a style of writing called plain style,
which is a combination of both first-person prose and a more objective, straightforward
delivery of content.
Social Context: Your audience and topic exists in the present, and both audience and
topic exist in an academic setting specific to NDSU and the university classroom. As
such, youre writing a public document to be presented within this classroom, with the
potential to reach other audience members across campus.
First Draft Due: Tues, Sept 13 (bring 2 hard copies & upload to Blackboard)
Peer Review Stages 1 & 2: Tues, Sept 13 & Thurs, Sept 15 (participation credit)
Final + Process Note Due + Presentation: Tues, Sept 20 (1 hard copy to class & upload to
Blackboard)
Value: 150 points (10 points for the first full draft and interview evidence; 10 points for process
note with final written draft; 10 points for presentation; 120 points for final draft)
Length: final written draft must be at least 900 words
Grading Criteria (Final Written Draft + Process Note):
Defines key aspects of the discourse community.
Demonstrates a clear focus on identity, language, and place/space.
Makes use of the conventions associated with a written profile.
Demonstrates rhetorically effective choices in writing (structure; style/formality;
grammar/syntax; creativity; design [as appropriate]).
Integrates evidence from interview(s) with the profile subject integration is rhetorically
appropriate and technically accurate.
Integrates evidence from observations of and/or key texts within the community
integration is rhetorically appropriate and technically accurate.
Process note, worth 10 points additional: See Blackboard for instructions
Works Cited:
Dewey, Caitlin. Men Who Harass Women Online Are Quite Literally Losers, Study Finds. The
Washington Post. The Washington Post, 20 July 2015. Web. 5 July 2016.