A Discourse Community is not Absolutely Independent “Discourse Community” is first constructed by Martin Nystrand in 1982 (Heilker & Vandenbergh). All of us can be considered as a part of discourse community. Sometimes we do not recognize that we are in discourse communities, but we will feel a sense of belonging when we in the right discourse communities. However, what is “Discourse Community”? and how to divided discourse communities? According to James E. Porter, “ A discourse community is a group of individuals bound by a common interest who communicate through approved channels and whose discourse is regulated” (400). That is to say, some people who have same interest or same goals; use the same media to connect each other; and
…show more content…
Moreover, we speak the same language. And in this community, we use “WeChat”, a popular social media in China to communicate. It is the channel we use in this community. In addition, we have the rules and constitutions which are the regulations of the community. So, the OUSCSS can be considered as a discourse community. Theoretically, it seems that discourse communities are clear and unambiguous groups. But, in reality discourse communities are not absolutely independent. In this essay I am going to talk about discourse community by arguing that discourse communities have blurred boundaries, a person can belong to multiple discourse communities, and there are close connections between discourse communities. When people knowing the blurred boundaries, and connections between discourse communities, it will help people to choose the discourse communities they want to belong to, to achieve their goals. For instance, when people are in the right discourse community, they may feel confortable and welcome, but if they go to another discourse community they may feel marginalized and uncomfortable. So, trying different discourse communities can help people get mor practices and find better ways to achieve goals. And the discourse communities …show more content…
According to Hohn Swales, “sketching the boundaries of discourse communities in ways that I have attempted implies that individuals may belong to several discoures communities...” (225). In other words, people can have various interests and goals, which will make people acquire the different discourse communities. In addition, people live in the society, they may have family, and the family is their primary discourse community. The schools, working groups, and academic fields can be other discourse communities they belong to. For instance, in “Intertextuality and the Discourse Community” James E. Porter agrees with what Swales says by claiming that “An individual may belong to several professional, public,or personal discourse communities” (400). For example, a person who teaches Physics in a university acquires the professional discourse by being a member of the physics group. If he or she likes Van Gogh’s paintings, then he or she is also a member of the “Van Gogh Painting Fervor” group. Last but not least, he or she bust belong to their family group. Overall, if a person holds many different interests and goals, it is possible for he or she to join different groups, as long as the group he or she chooses can achieve their goals and interests. Additionally, their ideal that “ people can belong to multiple discourse communities” strongly
Moreover, we speak the same language. And in this community, we use “WeChat”, a popular social media in China to communicate. It is the channel we use in this community. In addition, we have the rules and constitutions which are the regulations of the community. So, the OUSCSS can be considered as a discourse community. Theoretically, it seems that discourse communities are clear and unambiguous groups. But, in reality discourse communities are not absolutely independent. In this essay I am going to talk about discourse community by arguing that discourse communities have blurred boundaries, a person can belong to multiple discourse communities, and there are close connections between discourse communities. When people knowing the blurred boundaries, and connections between discourse communities, it will help people to choose the discourse communities they want to belong to, to achieve their goals. For instance, when people are in the right discourse community, they may feel confortable and welcome, but if they go to another discourse community they may feel marginalized and uncomfortable. So, trying different discourse communities can help people get mor practices and find better ways to achieve goals. And the discourse communities …show more content…
According to Hohn Swales, “sketching the boundaries of discourse communities in ways that I have attempted implies that individuals may belong to several discoures communities...” (225). In other words, people can have various interests and goals, which will make people acquire the different discourse communities. In addition, people live in the society, they may have family, and the family is their primary discourse community. The schools, working groups, and academic fields can be other discourse communities they belong to. For instance, in “Intertextuality and the Discourse Community” James E. Porter agrees with what Swales says by claiming that “An individual may belong to several professional, public,or personal discourse communities” (400). For example, a person who teaches Physics in a university acquires the professional discourse by being a member of the physics group. If he or she likes Van Gogh’s paintings, then he or she is also a member of the “Van Gogh Painting Fervor” group. Last but not least, he or she bust belong to their family group. Overall, if a person holds many different interests and goals, it is possible for he or she to join different groups, as long as the group he or she chooses can achieve their goals and interests. Additionally, their ideal that “ people can belong to multiple discourse communities” strongly