College Composition and Communication, Vol. 38, No. 3, October 1987

Click here to view the individual articles in this issue at http://www.ncte.org/cccc/ccc/issues/v38-3

Huber, Carole A. Rev. of Teaching Writing: Pedagogy, Gender, and Equity by Cynthia L. Caywood and Gillian R. Overing. CCC 38.3 (1987): 355-357.

Stull, William L. Rev. of Language, Schooling, and Society by Stephen N. Tchudi. CCC 38.3 (1987): 357-358.

Harmston, Richard. Rev. of Roots in the Sawdust: Writing to Learn across the Disciplines by Anne Ruggles Gere. CCC 38.3 (1987): 358-359.

Selzer, Jack. Rev. of Research in Technical Communication: A Bibliographical Sourcebook by Michael G. Moran and Debra Journet. CCC 38.3 (1987): 359-360.

Crowhurst, Marion. Rev. of Sentence Combining: A Rhetorical Perspective by Donald A. Daiker, Andrew Kerek, and Max Morenberg. CCC 38.3 (1987): 360-361.

North, Stephen M. Rev. of Teaching One-to-One: The Writing Conference by Muriel Harris. CCC 38.3 (1987): 361-362.

Harris, Jeanette. Rev. of Talking about Writing: A Guide for Tutor and Teacher Conferences by Beverly Lyon Clark. CCC 38.3 (1987): 363.

Sternglass, Marilyn S. Rev. of Facts, Artifacts and Counterfacts: Theory and Method for a Reading and Writing Course by David Bartholomae and Anthony Petrosky. CCC 38.3 (1987): 363-365.

Mason, Nondita. Rev. of Teaching College Students to Read Analytically: An Individualized Approach by Jan Cooper, Rick Evans, and Elizabeth Robertson. CCC 38.3 (1987): 365.

Roy, Alice. Rev. of Thinking, Reading, and Writing, Integrated by Linda Harbaugh Hillman and Barbara Bailey Kessel. CCC 38.3 (1987): 365-366.

Bean, John C. Rev. of Read to Write: A Writing Process Reader by Donald M. Murray. CCC 38.3 (1987): 366-367.

Calderonello, Alice Heim. Rev. of Why We Write: A Thematic Reader by Robert Atwan and Bruce Forer. CCC 38.3 (1987): 367-368.

Flachmann, Kim. Rev. of Writing: Self-Expression and Communication by Julia Dietrich and Marjorie M. Kaiser. CCC 38.3 (1987): 368-369.

Curl, Thelma D. Rev. of Writing in Action: A Collaborative Rhetoric for College Writers by Lea Masiello. CCC 38.3 (1987): 369-370.

Kinkead, Joyce. “Computer Conversations: E-Mail and Writing Instruction.” CCC 38.3 (1987): 337-341.

Johnson, Robert. “Writing from Artifacts.” CCC 38.3 (1987): 342-343.

Zeller, Robert. “Developing the Inferential Reasoning of Basic Writers.” CCC 38.3 (1987): 343-346.

Crew, Louie. “Rhetorical Beginnings: Professional and Amateur.” CCC 38.3 (1987): 346-350.

Elder, Dana C. “Some Resources for Conclusions in Student Essays.” CCC 38.3 (1987): 350-354.

Larson, Richard L. “Selected Bibliography of Scholarship on Composition and Rhetoric, 1986.” CCC 38.3 (1987): 319-336.

Abstract:

This is an update of the selected bibliography of scholarship in composition and rhetoric published in CCC in 1978. It is organized into the following categories: theories of communication/knowledge; rhetorical theory and performance; processes of thought in composing; composing processes; language/text structure; student development; research processes; instructional advice/tutoring/testing/assignments; instructional trends historical/recent; writing/literacy across the curriculum; writing in non-academic situations; and teacher development.

No works cited.

Arrington, Phillip, and Shirley K. Rose. “Prologues to What Is Possible: Introductions as Metadiscourse.” CCC 38.3 (1987): 306-318.

Abstract:

Introductions are both text about text, or metadiscourse, and text about content, and contemporary composition textbooks do not do an adequate job teaching students about this dual role of introductions. Arrington and Rose use Aristotle’s description of the purpose of introductions, situating the text in a greater context and identifying the audience and speaker, and Grice’s maxims to analyze four student-written introductions. One of the main problems for students is that the formulas they are given for writing introductions do not help them balance writing for both the teacher and a larger audience, and teachers should show students how to understand the constraints and contexts of the writing situations they will encounter.

Keywords:

ccc38.3 Texts Introductions Students Writers Context Readers Discourse Aristotle Authority Maxims Conventions AcademicWriting Power Attention Audience

Works Cited

Altieri, Charles. Act and Quality: A Theory of Literary Meaning and Humanistic Understanding. Amherst, MA: U of Massachusetts P, 1981.

Aristotle. The Nichomachean Ethics. Trans. Philip Wheelwright. New York: Odyssey Press, 1935.

—. The Rhetoric of Aristotle. Trans. Lane Cooper. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1932.

Bazerman, Charles. “What Written Knowledge Does: Three Examples of Academic Discourse.” Philosophy of the Social Sciences 11 (1981): 361-87.

Berthoff, Ann E. “Is Teaching Still Possible? Writing, Meaning, and Higher Order Reasoning.” College English 46 (1984): 743-55.

Bitzer, Lloyd F. “The Rhetorical Situation.” Philosophy and Rhetoric 1 (1968): 1-14.

Bloom, Harold. Wallace Stevens: The Poems of Our Climate. Ithaca: Cornell UP, 1976.

Burke, Kenneth. A Rhetoric of Motives. 1950. Berkeley: U of California P, 1969.

Cooper, Marilyn M. ‘The Pragmatics of Form: How Do Writers Discover What to Do When?” New Directions in Composition Research. Ed. Richard Beach and Lillian S. Bridwell. New York: Guilford, 1984. 109-26.

Ewing, David. Writing for Results in Business, Government, Sciences, and the Professions. 2nd ed. New York: John Wiley, 1979.

Grice, Paul. “Logic and Conversation.” Syntax and Semantics: Speech Acts. Ed. Peter Cole and Jerry L. Morgan. New York: Academic, 1975.41-58.

Halliday, M. A. K. Exploration in the Function of Language. New York: Elsevier North Holland, Inc., 1973.

Lautamatti, Liisa. “Observations on the Development of the Topic in Simplified Discourse.”‘ Text-Linguistics. Cognitive Learning. and Language Teaching. Ed. Vilijo Kohonen and Nills Erik Enkvist. Turku, Finland, U of Turku, 1978. 71-104.

Odell, Lee, and Dixie Goswami. “Writing in a Nonacademic Setting.” New Directions in Composition Research. Ed. Richard Beach and Lillian Bridwell. New York: Guilford, 1984.

Perelman, Les. “The Context of Classroom Writing.”‘ College English 48 (1986): 471-79.

Phelps, Louise W. “Dialectics of Coherence: Toward an Integrative Theory.” College English 47(1984): 12-29.

Said, Edward W. ‘The Text, the World, the Critic.” Textual Strategies. Ed. Josue V. Harari. Ithaca: New York: Cornell UP, 1979.

Stevens, Wallace. “Prologues to What is Possible.” The Collected Poems of Wallace Stevens, New York: Knopf, 1974.515-17.

Vande Kopple, William J. “Some Exploratory Discourse on Metadiscourse.” CCC 36 (1985): 82-93.

Watson, James D. The Double Helix. Ed. Gunther S. Stent. New York: Norton, 1980.

Williams, Joseph M. Style: Ten Lessons in Clarity and Grace. Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman, 1983.

Dasenbrock, Reed Way. “J. L. Austin and the Articulation of a New Rhetoric.” CCC 38.3 (1987): 291-305.

Abstract:

Dasenbrock asserts that the foundation for the creation of New Rhetoric lies in the work of J.L. Austin, a philosopher of language who is credited for speech-act theory. He explains Austin’s speech-act theory, which is based in the belief that language is a mode for acting in the world, not of reflecting it. Austin’s theories defend rhetoric from attacks that it is only concerned with persuasion and tropes and show that it is possible to construct a New Rhetoric that more accurately reflects the rhetorical needs of the modern world.

Keywords:

ccc38.3 Rhetoric JLAustin Language Discourse JLocke ClassicalRhetoric Plato NewRhetoric Sentence Utterance Perlocutionary Illocutionary Persuasion Performative Philosophy

Works Cited

Aristotle. The Rhetoric of Aristotle. Trans. Lane Cooper. 1932. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1960.

Austin, J. L. How to Do Things with Words. Ed. J. O. Urmson and Marina Sbisa. 1962. Cambridge: Harvard UP, 1975.

Bach, Kent, and Robert M. Harnish. Linguistic Communication and Speech Acts. 1979. Cambridge: MIT, 1982.

Connors, Robert J., Lisa S. Ede, and Andrea A. Lunsford, eds. Essays on Classical Rhetoric and Modern Discourse. Carbondale: Southern Illinois UP, 1984.

Corbett, Edward P. J. Classical Rhetoric for the Modern Student. 1965. New York: Oxford UP, 1971.

Corder, Jim. “On the Way, Perhaps, to a New Rhetoric, but Not There Yet, and if We Do Get There, There Won’t Be There Anymore.” College English 47 (1985): 162-70.

Fish, Stanley. Is There a Text in This Class?: The Authority of Interpretive Communities. Cambridge: Harvard UP, 1980.

Grice, Paul. “Logic and Conversation.” Syntax and Semantics: Speech Acts. Ed. Peter Cole and Jerry L. Morgan. New York: Academic Press, 1975.41-58.

Howell, Wilbur Samuel. Eighteenth-Century British Logic and Rhetoric. Princeton: Princeton UP, 1971.

Kinneavy, James. A Theory of Discourse: The Aims of Discourse. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall, 1971.

Knoblauch, C. H., and Lil Brannon. Rhetorical Traditions and the Teaching of Writing. Upper Montclair: Boynton/Cook, 1984.

Lanham, Richard A. Literacy and Survival of Humanism. New Haven: Yale UP, 1983.

—. Revising Prose. New York: Scribner’s, 1979.

Leech, Geoffrey N. Principles of Pragmatics. London: Longman, 1983.

Locke, John. An Essay Concerning Human Understanding. 1690. Ed. Peter H. Nidditch. Oxford: Oxford UP, 1975.

Lunsford, Andrea A., and Lisa Ede. “Classical Rhetoric, Modern Rhetoric, and Contemporary Discourse Studies.” Written Communication l (1981): 78-100.

Mailloux, Steven. Interpretive Conventions: The Reader in the Study of American Fiction. Ithaca: Cornell UP, 1982.

Plato. Gorgias. Trans. W. C. Helmbold. Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill, 1952.

—. Phaedrus. Trans. W. C. Helmbold and W. G. Rabinowitz. Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill, 1956.

Searle, John. “Austin on Locutionary and Illocutionary Acts.” The Philosophical Review 77 (1968): 405-24.

—. Expression and Meaning: Studies in the Theory of Speech Acts. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1979.

—. Speech Acts: An Essay in the Philosophy of Language. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1969.

Steinmann, Martin, Jr. “Speech-Act Theory and Writing.” What Writers Know: The Language. Process, and Structure of Written Discourse. Ed. Martin Nystrand. New York: Academic Press, 1982. 291-323.

Strawson, P. F. “On Referring.” Mind 59 (950): 320-44.

Enos, Richard Leo. “The Classical Tradition(s) of Rhetoric: A Demur to the Country Club Set.” CCC 38.3 (1987): 283-290.

Abstract:

Enos argues against the belief that classical rhetoric cannot (and should not) be adapted for the contemporary composition classroom. His rebuttal advocates for an open mind in two ways. First, he resists the notion that first-order scholarship, research of rhetoric, is superior to second-order scholarship, research that applies rhetorical theories to other disciplines and fields. Second, he points out that classical rhetoric is not antiquated or monolithic but rather an continuous aggregate of traditions and theories that do have resonance for the contemporary college composition classroom.

Keywords:

ccc38.3 Rhetoric ClassicalRhetoric Scholarship Composition Tradition Communication Research Study Scholars Discourse History Historians

Works Cited

Bryant, Donald C. “Rhetoric: Its Function and Scope.” The Province of Rhetoric. Ed. Joseph Schwartz and John A. Rycenga. New York: Ronald, 1965. 3-36.

Conley, Thomas M. “The Greekless Reader and Aristotle’s Rhetoric.” Quarterly Journal of Speech 65 (1979): 74-79.

Connors, Robert J., Lisa S. Ede, and Andrea A. Lunsford. “The Revival of Rhetoric in America.” Essays on Classical Rhetoric and Modern Discourse. Ed. Robert J. Connors, Lisa S. Ede, and Andrea A. Lunsford. Carbondale: Southern Illinois UP, 1984. 1-15.

Corbett, Edward P. J. “The Usefulness of Classical Rhetoric.” CCC 14 (1963): 162-64.

Dieter, Otto A. L. “Stasis.” Speech Monographs [now Communication Monographs] 17 (1950): 345-69.

Enos, Richard Leo. “The Classical Period.” The Present State of Scholarship in Historical and Contemporary Rhetoric. Ed. Winifred Bryan Horner. Columbia: U of Missouri P, 1983. 10-39.

Enos, Richard Leo, and Elizabeth Odoroff. “The Orality of the ‘Paragraph’ in Greek Rhetoric.” Pre/Text 6 (1985): 51-65.

Gage, John T. “The 2000 Year-Old Straw Man.” Rhetoric Review 3 (1984): 100-05.

Hudson, Hoyt H. “The Field of Rhetoric.” Historical Studies of Rhetoric and Rhetoricians. Ed. Raymond F. Howes. Ithaca: Cornell UP, 1961. 3-15.

Moss, Jean Dietz, ed. Rhetoric and Praxis: The Contribution of Classical Rhetoric to Practical Reasoning. Washington: Catholic U of America P, 1986.

Murphy, James J. Prologue. The Rhetorical Tradition and Modern Writing. Ed. James J. Murphy. New York: MLA, 1982. v-vii.

Nichols, Marie Hochmuth. “The Tyranny of Relevance.” Spectra 6.1 (1970): 1, 9-10.

Solmsen, Friedrich. “The Aristotelian Tradition in Ancient Rhetoric.” Aristotle: The Classical Heritage of Rhetoric. Ed. Keith V. Erickson. Metuchen, NJ; Scarecrow P, 1974. 278-309.

Thompson, Wayne N. “A Conservative View of a Progressive Rhetoric.” Contemporary Theories of Rhetoric: Selected Readings. Ed. Richard L. Johannesen. New York: Harper & Row, 1971. 9-17.

Welch, Kathleen Ethel. “Research in Classical Rhetoric: Context, Relational Meaning, and a Usable Past.” Oldspeak/Newspeak: Rhetorical Transformations. Ed. Charles W. Kneupper. Arlington: Rhetoric Society of America, 1985. 119-26.

Windt, Theodore Otto, Jr. “Everett Lee Hunt on Rhetoric.” The Speech Teacher [now Communication Education] 21 (1972): 177-92.

Welch, Kathleen E. “Ideology and Freshman Textbook Production: The Place of Theory in Writing Pedagogy.” CCC 38.3 (1987): 269-282.

Abstract:

Welch argues both that freshman composition textbooks do not reflect current research and theories in the field of composition and that instead, the theories that drive most freshman composition textbooks are based in Cicero’s five classical canons and Alexander Bain’s modes of discourse. Welch argues that the antiquated theories presented in the textbooks are written for instructors more so than students; textbooks both train new teachers and reinforce the current-traditionalist beliefs of veteran teachers. Welch advocates a pedagogy that favors written student texts over a textbook. By using student texts, an instructor can more effectively teach the importance of the context of whole discourses, which is difficult to do with the short excerpts used in textbooks.

Keywords:

ccc38.3 Writing Textbooks Language Rhetoric Canons Students Theory Composition Modes FYC Texts Power Plato Discourse Ideology Belief Pedagogy

Works Cited

Applebee, Arthur N. Tradition and Reform in the Teaching of English. Urbana: NCTE, 1974.

Aristotle, The Rhetoric of Aristotle. Trans. Lane Cooper. Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill, 1932.

Axelrod, Rise B., and Charles R. Cooper. The St. Martin’s Guide to Writing. New York: Sr. Martin’s, 1985.

Bain, Alexander. English Composition and Rhetoric. New York: D. Appleton, 1866.

Bleich, David. Subjective Criticism. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins UP, 1978.

Bramer, George R., and Dorothy Sedley. Writing for Readers. Columbus: Charles E. Merrill Publishing Co., 1981.

Burke, Kenneth. Counter-Statement. 2nd ed. Berkeley: U of California P, 1968.

—. Permanence and Change. 3rd ed. Berkeley: U of California P, 1984.

Cicero. On the Character of the Orator. Cicero on Ortory and Ortors. Trans. J. S. Watson. Carbondale: Southern Illinois UP, 1984.

Connors, Robert. Review of The St. Martin’s Guide to Writing. by Rise B. Axelrod and Charles R. Cooper. Rhetoric Review. 5 (1986): 106-10.

—. “The Rise and Fall of the Modes of Discourse.” CCC 32 (1981): 444-55.

—. “Textbooks and the Evolution of the Discipline.” CCC 37 (1986): 178-94.

Crews, Frederick. The Random House Handbook. 3rd ed. New York: Random House, 1980.

Donald, Robert B., Betty Richmond Morrow, Lillian Griffith Wargetz, and Kathleen Werner. Models for Clear Writing. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1984.

Eagleton, Terry. Literary Theory: An Introduction. Minneapolis: U of Minnesota P, 1983.

—. Walter Benjamin: Or Towards a Revolutionary Criticism. London: Verso, 1981.

Elbow, Peter. Writing Without Teachers. London: Oxford UP, 1973.

Flower, Linda. Problem-Solving Strategies for Writing. 2nd ed. San Diego: Harcourt, Brace, Jovanovich, 1985.

Gunn, Janet Varner. Review of American Autobiography by G. Thomas Couser. American Literature 52 (1980): 314-16.

Havelock, Eric A. “The Alphabetization of Homer.” Communication Arts in the Ancient World. Ed. Eric A. Havelock and Jackson P. Hershbell. New York: Hastings House, 1978.

Kennedy, George. The Art of Persuasion in Greece. Princeton: Princeton UP, 1963.

—. Classical Rhetoric and Its Christian and Secular Tradition from Ancient to Modern Times. Chapel Hill: U of North Carolina P, 1980.

Kirszner, Laurie G., and Stephen R. Mandell. Writing: A College Rhetoric New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, 1985.

Knoblauch, C. H., and Lil Brannon. Rhetorical Traditions and the Teaching of Writing. Upper Montclair, N. J.: Boynton/Cook, 1984.

Lauer, Janice M., Gene Montague, Andrea Lunsford, and Janet Emig. Four Worlds of Writing. New York: Harper and Row, 1985.

Ong, Walter J. “McLuhan as Teacher: The Future Is a Thing of the Past.” Journal of Communication. 31.3 (1981): 129-35.

—. Orality and Literacy: The Technologizing of the Word. London: Methuen, 1982.

—. The Presence of the Word. Minneapolis: U of Minnesota P, 1981.

Plato. Phaedrus. Trans. W. C. Helmbold and W. G. Rabinowitz. Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill, 1956.

Rhetorica Ad Herennium. Trans. Harry Caplan. Cambridge, MA: Harvard UP, 1954.

Polanyi, Michael. Knowing and Being. Chicago: U. of Chicago P, 1969.

Rose, Mike. “Sophisticated, Ineffective Books: The Dismantling of Process in Composition Texts.” CCC 32 (1981): 65-73.

—. “Speculations on Process Knowledge and the Textbook’s Static Page.” CCC 34(983): 208-13.

Stewart, Donald. “Composition Textbooks and the Assault on Tradition.” CCC 29 (1978): 171-76. Rpt. in The Writing Teacher’s Sourcebook. Ed. Gary Tate and Edward P. J. Corbett. New York: Oxford UP, 1981. 180-86.

White, Fred. Reconsidering the Usefulness of Rhetoric Textbooks in Freshman Composition Courses, ERIC, 1984. ED 250 685.