Intertextuality and the Discourse Community
James Porter, a Professor in the Department of English and Armstrong Institute for Interactive Media Studies at Indiana University shares his views on the idea of Intertextuality and its uses with in Discourse Communities. Porter’s article challenges the idea of plagiarisms. He makes the argument that the intertextuality (text within text) we use to convey ideas can only be understood by examples or past experiences and that all text refers to other text and that we rely on the other text for meaning. Porter writes “All texts are interdependent: We understand a text only insofar as we understand its precursors” (pg 34). This means that text depends on each other and that our understanding can only be understood by its past text or influence text. Porter instructs us to look for the traces of other text within text and gives the example of William of Baskerville quoting “Not infrequently books speak of other books.” (pg 34) William of Baskerville is claiming that most authors refer to other people’s ideas in order to build and strength the own. Porter goes on to explain the two different types of Intertextuality, Iterability and Presupposition. The iterability within intertextuality is when we borrow from other text or use any image to strength our point and draw parallels to our own ideas, this is usually repeated within the text. In presupposition text uses assumptions for the reader that have not been written in original text. An example of this would be the sentence Jane no longer writes fiction. The sentences presupposition would be that Jane exists and that at one point within her existences she wrote fiction.
Porter examines Thomas Jefferson and the writing of the Declaration of Independents for the use of intertextuality. Porter explains that Jefferson was a good writer but when historians and composition writers examine the Declaration of Independents the research suggest that Jefferson’s writing shows traces of borrowed text and ideas. This is something all writers do weather it is consciously or unconsciously. Jefferson’s uses of other writings like George Mason’s Declaration of Rights for Virginia and a political pamphlet authored by James Otis are examples of Intertextuality. Discourse Community also plays apart in shaping the Declaration of Independents. The ideas floating around the colonies of political philosophy inspired by John Lockes was another major influence on Thomas Jefferson. Discourse Community also played apart in the editing of the Declaration of Independents. When Jefferson submitted his draft of the Declaration to congress they made eighty-six changes including changing text, which they deemed to have an emotional style. Porter explains a Discourse Community as a group of people who share common goals. Jefferson as apart of the Discourse Community of Congress shares these common goals and also represents his Discourse Community and vise versa. When you are in a Discourse Community, a writer is required to uphold to a particular type of writing. What makes Thomas Jefferson a skilled writer is his ability to borrow traces efficiently and find appropriate context.
Discourse Communities show what subjects are appropriate for examination and discussion. These subjects should be related and show evidences to the Discourse Community. The speaker of the Discourse Community must be qualified and well informed to talk, as they will represent the Discourse Community. Porter explains this by stating “This creates limits and regulations of who may speak, what may be spoken, and how it is to be said” (pg 39). Text is only accepted only if it relates and shares the same ideas as the Discourse Community. Text must contain knowledge to the field; a medical journal would hold truths for the medical Discourse Community but not to a Law setting and vise versa. When a text is submitted to the Discourse Community it must use a scientific method such as credited research and results to strength the idea. The text submitted will challenge or strength the common goals of the Discourse Community. These regulations might be tough on any outside thinkers for the Discourse Community but does not make it impossible for outside ideas to be accepted. Porter gives the example of Gregor Mendel a nineteenth century biologist whose work was excluded from his Discourse Community. Mendel’s work would be found as true but only years later after further research and data was discovered. These theoretical perspectives shows the power of Discourse Community and raise the question of the freedom of the writer.
Discourse Communities limits the writer from any form of original ideas. The writers text must carry some mark of plagiarism and familiarity for any idea to be accepted. Porter believes that the writer must be free to think rhetorical in any context to further the understanding. To change the views of the Discourse Community is to be original and creative in your writing. This approach will expand your Discourse Communities common goals and establish your identity within.
James Porter, a Professor in the Department of English and Armstrong Institute for Interactive Media Studies at Indiana University shares his views on the idea of Intertextuality and its uses with in Discourse Communities. Porter’s article challenges the idea of plagiarisms. He makes the argument that the intertextuality (text within text) we use to convey ideas can only be understood by examples or past experiences and that all text refers to other text and that we rely on the other text for meaning. Porter writes “All texts are interdependent: We understand a text only insofar as we understand its precursors” (pg 34). This means that text depends on each other and that our understanding can only be understood by its past text or influence text. Porter instructs us to look for the traces of other text within text and gives the example of William of Baskerville quoting “Not infrequently books speak of other books.” (pg 34) William of Baskerville is claiming that most authors refer to other people’s ideas in order to build and strength the own. Porter goes on to explain the two different types of Intertextuality, Iterability and Presupposition. The iterability within intertextuality is when we borrow from other text or use any image to strength our point and draw parallels to our own ideas, this is usually repeated within the text. In presupposition text uses assumptions for the reader that have not been written in original text. An example of this would be the sentence Jane no longer writes fiction. The sentences presupposition would be that Jane exists and that at one point within her existences she wrote fiction.
Porter examines Thomas Jefferson and the writing of the Declaration of Independents for the use of intertextuality. Porter explains that Jefferson was a good writer but when historians and composition writers examine the Declaration of Independents the research suggest that Jefferson’s writing shows traces of borrowed text and ideas. This is something all writers do weather it is consciously or unconsciously. Jefferson’s uses of other writings like George Mason’s Declaration of Rights for Virginia and a political pamphlet authored by James Otis are examples of Intertextuality. Discourse Community also plays apart in shaping the Declaration of Independents. The ideas floating around the colonies of political philosophy inspired by John Lockes was another major influence on Thomas Jefferson. Discourse Community also played apart in the editing of the Declaration of Independents. When Jefferson submitted his draft of the Declaration to congress they made eighty-six changes including changing text, which they deemed to have an emotional style. Porter explains a Discourse Community as a group of people who share common goals. Jefferson as apart of the Discourse Community of Congress shares these common goals and also represents his Discourse Community and vise versa. When you are in a Discourse Community, a writer is required to uphold to a particular type of writing. What makes Thomas Jefferson a skilled writer is his ability to borrow traces efficiently and find appropriate context.
Discourse Communities show what subjects are appropriate for examination and discussion. These subjects should be related and show evidences to the Discourse Community. The speaker of the Discourse Community must be qualified and well informed to talk, as they will represent the Discourse Community. Porter explains this by stating “This creates limits and regulations of who may speak, what may be spoken, and how it is to be said” (pg 39). Text is only accepted only if it relates and shares the same ideas as the Discourse Community. Text must contain knowledge to the field; a medical journal would hold truths for the medical Discourse Community but not to a Law setting and vise versa. When a text is submitted to the Discourse Community it must use a scientific method such as credited research and results to strength the idea. The text submitted will challenge or strength the common goals of the Discourse Community. These regulations might be tough on any outside thinkers for the Discourse Community but does not make it impossible for outside ideas to be accepted. Porter gives the example of Gregor Mendel a nineteenth century biologist whose work was excluded from his Discourse Community. Mendel’s work would be found as true but only years later after further research and data was discovered. These theoretical perspectives shows the power of Discourse Community and raise the question of the freedom of the writer.
Discourse Communities limits the writer from any form of original ideas. The writers text must carry some mark of plagiarism and familiarity for any idea to be accepted. Porter believes that the writer must be free to think rhetorical in any context to further the understanding. To change the views of the Discourse Community is to be original and creative in your writing. This approach will expand your Discourse Communities common goals and establish your identity within.