Unlike other types of writing, professional writing uses rhetoric purposely to argue or persuade implicitly and explicitly. Also, professional writing has a huge emphasis on the audience. In other words, it accommodates an actual, concrete audience while also conforming the audience to a set standard to make decisions and perform actions. The reading uses the example of “ethical and legal standards”. The author of a professionally written document is under the obligation make the media user friendly as a well as possible for the audience as well as persuade or inform the audience to conform under one idea. Usually, this idea is that of the authors own personal ideas within regards to some higher power (ethics or the government).
The study of rhetoric helps to understand the operation or function of professional writing. For example, the reading discusses rhetorician Lloyd Bitzer’s “rhetorical situation” or the “context of persons, events, objects, relationships, and an exigence which strongly invites”; or plainly, the rhetorical situation is a set of circumstances that calls discourse into action [31]. I particularly enjoy this term to define professional writing, because when a professional paper is written, it is under the circumstance that a call to action is required. For instance, climate change affects the agriculture of the planet; therefore, people are called to action to write and argue or persuade their ideas on what should be done.
Bowdon and Scott discretely focus on the role of the writer. A concept they have defined to analyze the role of the writer is discourse community, or a group of people bound by a common interest who share and regulate specialized kinds of knowledge and ways of communicating [33]. In other terms, Bowdon and Scott realize that the writer has responsibilities to advisers and coworkers, but also they have a responsibility to the audience. The role of the writer is to keep all of these thinking humans in balance by the way ideas and thoughts are communicated, while presenting the cause or purpose that all these people have in general interest. This is a difficult task considering not everyone is of equal power, and maintaining good relations with each person is a discourse community is essential for persuasion.
Another concept brought up to better understand professional writing is the concept of audience invoked versus audience addressed [35]. Bowden and Scott recognize that the relationship between the communicators and the audience is one of the most important elements in any rhetorical situation. Therefore, two specific ways the communicators can reach out to the audience are: audience invoked, the audience the writers call to and help shape through the language of the text, and audience addressed, the actual readers who encounter and use the text [35]. To be more general, audience invoked is when the authors go to the audience, and audience addressed is when the audience goes to the author. I personally thing that audience invoked would be the better method for professional writing, especially if cause or idea must be known.
I can produce professional writing from my public interest narrative in two main ways: by finding my discourse community and utilizing audience invoked. Once I have found a community of people that share my same interest, it will be easier to invoke my audience. I will know exactly who my audience is and my role for writing my professional statement. Thinking about rhetoric in this way will assist my work in that I will be more consciousness about the presentation of my ideals and thoughts. In my public interest narrative, I only considered myself and used first person tense; however, realizing that rhetoric involves the persuasion and communication between numerous amounts of people under one general idea, I must consider their specific ideals and my writing for not for me, but for the public.
The definition of rhetoric has been discussed by English classes abroad for as long as our language has taken true form. To me, rhetoric is the use of language to persuade an audience through the use of figures of speech and many different compositional techniques. In response to Katherine’s blog post, my unprofessional definition of rhetoric coincides with hers as she states that rhetoric is used “purposely to argue or persuade implicitly and explicitly.” I agree with this statement and how she says the author of a professionally written document must make the media they present user-friendly so that they are able to persuade and inform the intended audience so that they conform under one idea. The author can use a certain style of rhetoric to convey their ideas normally with another thought in mind such as ethical or government issues.
In the passage from Bowden and Scott, it is highlighted that a rhetorical situation involves a rhetor who responds to the situation and an audience to whom the text is addressed. Rhetoric is all about the audience and Bowden and Scott know this by explaining two methods to reaching the audience: audience invoked and audience addressed. I agree with Katherine that audience invoked would be the better method for professional writing since the writer reaches out to the audience of their choice and can shape the language to a certain way that provokes that audience. Rhetoric is a powerful tool that can take a regular student to an accomplished writer, a simple lawyer into a politician, and a small idea or belief into a widely-known ethical issue.
As we discussed last class with Booth’s piece on the rhetorical stance, the relationship with the audience certainly play an essential role in rhetoric of all sorts. Writing without an audience is writing without rhetoric, I believe. Consequently, I completely agree with your statement that professional writing “accommodates an actual concrete audience while also conforming the audience to a set of standards to make decisions and perform actions”. However, you stated that the main difference between other types of writing and professional writing is the implicit/explicit argumentation. I thought that Bowdon implied that a concrete audience was the distinction. In professional communication, the audience is known to be coworkers or supervisors or peers. Persuasive speeches, commercials, and other forms of rhetoric have an intended audience, but not a concrete one. Therefore, I view professional communication as a more specific version of the other forms of rhetoric. In other words, with the audience known, a stronger relationship between writer and audience develops. Accordingly, a writer may use rhetorical tools, such as the rhetorical appeals, much more effectively.
Further on, you brought up the topic of audience addressed vs audience invoked. You stated that “two specific ways the communicators can reach out to the audience” are audience invoked and audience addressed, then followed up by saying “I personally thing [sic] that audience invoked would be the better method for professional writing”. I interpreted your words as asserting these two ideas are merely techniques for writing. Personally, I believe Bowdon implied that audience addressed is not a tool for writing, but an unchangeable aspect of rhetoric. The addressed audience is the audience who encounter and use the text. A writer may choose his audience (audience invoked), but he/she cannot fully choose or predict the audience addressed. Writers can try and account for different opinions outside of the intended audience, but cannot possibly appeal to all.
As we discussed last class with Booth’s piece on the rhetorical stance, the relationship with the audience certainly play an essential role in rhetoric of all sorts. Writing without an audience is writing without rhetoric, I believe. Consequently, I completely agree with your statement that professional writing “accommodates an actual concrete audience while also conforming the audience to a set of standards to make decisions and perform actions”. However, you stated that the main difference between other types of writing and professional writing is the implicit/explicit argumentation. I thought that Bowdon implied that a concrete audience was the distinction. In professional communication, the audience is known to be coworkers or supervisors or peers. Persuasive speeches, commercials, and other forms of rhetoric have an intended audience, but not a concrete one. Therefore, I view professional communication as a more specific version of the other forms of rhetoric. In other words, with the audience known, a stronger relationship between writer and audience develops. Accordingly, a writer may use rhetorical tools, such as the rhetorical appeals, much more effectively. Further on, you brought up the topic of audience addressed vs audience invoked. You stated that “two specific ways the communicators can reach out to the audience” are audience invoked and audience addressed, then followed up by saying “I personally thing [sic] that audience invoked would be the better method for professional writing”. I interpreted your words as asserting these two ideas are merely techniques for writing. Personally, I believe Bowdon implied that audience addressed is not a tool for writing, but an unchangeable aspect of rhetoric. The addressed audience is the audience who encounter and use the text. A writer may choose his audience (audience invoked), but he/she cannot fully choose or predict the audience addressed. Writers can try and account for different opinions outside of the intended audience, but cannot possibly appeal to all.
sorry for the double post, the website said there was an error in posting, yet still posted I guess