Complicated wording, very long. Hard to understand on the first read-through
Too long to get to the point
The explanation of the HKSC is very niche, distracts from the article (show how language works in the real world, he is using “field research”).
Includes useless information that can’t be used outside academia (most people aren’t going to read this).
It was for a class.
Discourse community, that is.
If we take this as true, in your own words describe what you think Swales sees as the gap in this conversation he’s participating in (the conversation described by the editors in the preface to the chapter). Clarification of what “discourse” means. There are different definitions of what discourse can be.
In your opinion, how does this piece fill that gap?There are differences between the discourse community and speech community. He fills it by giving six criteria. Go above and beyond to articulate his point.
Who do you think is the audience for this essay? I think that the audience is people who are academics and Linguists. It’s structured in a way that states facts and reiterates on them.
What’s the danger of an essay like this?Shuts down anything else. Too deep- declines any further research basically.
Elona's Blog 