PB3A

The scholarly article I chose to work with is Acute Clinical Recovery from Sport-Related Concussion. The genre of this publication is a medical journal publication, written by professionals. Concussions are a common injury, especially for young kids who play sports. In converting this article to two different genres, I will tailor it to two different audiences. The first being the parents of these children who often get concussions while playing contact sports - and second the actual children who receive these injuries themselves.

For the parents of these children I will create an informational pamphlet, like the ones you see at the front desk of a dentist office. It will contain more pictures than the original genre, because typically these pamphlets are eye catching. The title will also have to be more interesting. The pamphlet will still include sources, probably on the last side of it, so that the parents feel that the information is credible. The tone will also remain neutral and academic. The jargon, however, will be changed to colloquial words in order for a wider audience to be able to understand the pamphlet. The audience will have a variety of levels of education, so this is important. Another thing that comes to mind is that I often see these pamphlets in both Spanish and English. Now of course I won’t go in to detail with the Spanish pamphlet, but it is important to note that this is a convention of this genre. The pamphlet will be about 4 panels. Some of these panels will include charts, such as the symptoms and perhaps warning signs of a concussion. Another convention of this genre is to have titles for each side of the pamphlet. These are usually short and to the point. Much of the original content will have to be condensed, since these pamphlets are simply overviews and by no means a comprehensive discussion of concussions.

In order to create a genre that appeals to children, I considered a picture book, however I thought that was too young, my target audience was 13 to 17, or somewhere around there. I am considering a chapter in a textbook which focuses on concussions. The chapter will have a number which corresponds to the number of the chapter in a book. Then the sections will be sub-numbered such as 3.9. The different sections will also have a short title which will describe what is being discussed. The language will be slightly less complex than it would be in the original journal. However, some terms will be kept, and , as it often goes in textbook, they will be bolded in order to signify that their definitions are in the glossary. Any charts or figures will be labeled “figure “followed by a number. The tone will be educational and formal. The end of the chapter might have a summary or “review” and it might highlight “key terms.”  There might also be a difference in how the information is organized to make the chapter flow nicely.  

Painting Trees

Walt P Described the tree as a skyscraper, and he made sure to describe the tools he used such as a pallete knife. Over all his perspective on the tree was to treat it from an architectural standpoint.
Mark D used more lines, and charcoal. His painting was overall more dark. He used gray colors but also added whit to pop out certain branches, which he chose meticulously.
Ivan focused on the trunk, which he said was the all he needed to describe the tree. He wanted to make a detailed study and establish an outside shape for it to work. Josh M  took a unique perspective by describing the trees as living things with spirtis. He pointed out that he wanted to work fast the capture the life, and he used a big brush and lighter fluid for this. He let his colors mingle in order to suggest movement , and stated that the background was just as vital as the tree.

WP2 Questions

Q1: I was less happy with it than my WP1. I felt like I didn’t focus too much on the smaller moves, and I felt like I was limited on space (the amount of pages) to do so. I also felt like maybe I didn’t separate the two disciplines as much as I would’ve liked, but maybe grouped them more as scholarly vs media sources.  I also felt like maybe I didn’t use the readings as much as I did for WP1 although I certainly used ideas from them.

Q2: I liked the one that pointed it out I didn’t have too much analyses in the second paragraph because it was specific and allowed me to work on something tangible. I also liked the comment that pointed out that logos may not necessarily be the strongest for an argument. It allowed me to revisit that part of my paper and further consider my argument and how I structured it.

Q3: I really liked it. I thought it was way easier than commenting on paper. It allowed me to write specific comments on a part of the page without having to reference it later on at the bottom.  It was easier than physically having to write on everyone’s paper. 

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1axjgD-VJGO4mnOnurqCFYTlHxJpDR2C6DazI1PmvX50/edit?usp=sharing

PB2B: “Moves”

            Each writer has their own “moves” which distinguish them from other writers. These moves are unique to each writer. They are usually characteristic to the person and can be easily recognized. Murder!(Rhetorically) by Janet Boyd and Navigating Genres by Kerry Dirk both have characteristic “moves” that distinguish the two articles. Some of them are similar, and others are different.

First, the style of the titles is different. Boyd uses an interesting title to draw the reader in. It is unconventional and a play on words which is effective in grabbing the reader’s attention. Dirk’s title is simple and not as attention grabbing. The introductions to both articles are both interesting and effective in different ways. Boyd uses a personal anecdote to introduce the topic of rhetoric. She uses light humor and tells the story of a student calling rhetoric “bullshit” to segway smoothly into the subject. Dirk starts off using a joke about a country song. This works because it makes the reader wonder how it is related to genre; making them want keep reading.  These are both hooks, however the Dirk and Boyd selectively chose different ways to catch the reader’s attention.

A similar move both authors utilize is referring to the reader directly. Specifically Dirk states that “this was my first time writing an essay to you, a composition student.” This gives the readers the impression that although Dirk has written many things, even he still encounters new genres. This further adds to an informal tone where the reader can relate to Dirk, making him seem like an actual person behind the article. Boyd also addresses the reader, for example saying “I have also included responses from other student writers for you to consider.” The use of “you” creates an informal tone in both articles. This is engaging to the reader because it creates a more conversational tone. Although the tone is informal, Boyd still keeps the article academic by adding words such as “succinct” and “crux.” Another interesting word used by Boyd is “dazzle.” These word choices are a bit unconventional, and therefore spark the reader’s attention.

Another similarity in the two articles is organization. Whenever both authors presented a list it was separated from the paragraphs of the articles and the items were organized into a bullet-point form list. This made the list stand out from the rest of the information so that it wasn’t confusing or overwhelming. However, a difference in organization is Boyd’s subtitles. Boyd chose to title each topic she discussed with titles such as “getting in touch with your inner detective” and “cultivating your inner coroner.” These titles certainly add interest to the article while effectively organizing the individual topics.

Furthermore, another difference in the moves Dirk and Boyd make are the choices of examples used to explain genre and rhetoric, respectively. Dirk uses references to other scholarly authors about genres. For example he referenced Anne Freedman, a specialist in genre theory, and Carolyn Miller, a professor in the field of technical communication. Boyd on the other hand uses her past students and their writing to explain rhetoric. The choice Dirk makes to reference professionals in the field of genre seems to be more effective. It adds credibility to the information presented and genre is explained in more detail. Boyd’s choice to explain rhetoric using her past students work is still effective, however it lacks standing. It is still effective because it shows how aspects of rhetoric are used, such as jargon; however it might have been good to add scholarly sources too.

One other move that Boyd makes is using numerous parentheses.  The way Boyd uses parentheses is almost like a side note or an aside to the reader. For example: “ in writing up the case (whoops I have given you a clue).” Boyd uses the parenthesis to fit a thought that may not exactly connect with the rest of the sentence if written regularly. The message in the parenthesis is usually not as important as the information around it, yet still important to put in the article. Therefore parentheses was a clever way to incorporate the thoughts and have it flow nicely.  Dirk on the other hand does not use too many parentheses. Dirk does however use many questions to encourage the reader to think about the material he is discussing. He prompts questions such as “why am I telling you this” and “how is this possible.” By doing so Dirk is clear in what he is explaining and prompts the reader to think about certain things they otherwise wouldn’t have. This in my opinion was a very effective move because it made the ideas in the article connect well while guiding the reader through them.
Overall, the different choices Boyd and Dirk made had different effects. Some of them were effective, and others less so. Moves are significant, and when the right ones are made the author strengthens their writing. 

PB2A

I will be comparing SCIgen to “Prevalence of chronic kidney disease and decreased kidney function in the adult US population: Third national health and nutrition examination survey”. This is an academic piece belonging to the American Journal of Kidney Diseases. They share multiple similarities, however their differences are significant.                                                          

The two papers are both scholarly and formal. They both share the common purpose of sharing knowledge and research among other professionals in their corresponding field. Since often this requires collaboration among multiple researchers, the authors must receive credit. In both genres credit is given to the authors at the top of the page, under the title. In the kidney publication the authors are credited and their professional education level is given such as MD or PhD. In SCIgen the author’s name is simply given, which is one notable difference. In a medical publication is makes sense to note if the professional has a PhD or an MD or both. This however may not be necessary in a computer science paper given that the author is most likely a professional with a PhD.  Both publications have a clear title placed at the top of the page.

 The two publications contain an abstract to introduce the topic. The abstract is used as a short summary of the whole publication, like an overview for the reader. An abstract is necessary in both of these genres because they are both lengthy and dense reads. The abstract for the kidney publication differs a bit in that it is separated into “background , methods, results, and conclusion,” while the abstract for SCIgen is shorter and more concise. This is due to the kidney publication consisting of more complex details following a scientific experiment. Therefore the reader would need a clear summary of the background of the survey, the methods used to conduct it, the overall results, and the conclusion/significance of the results.

Both papers are targeting an educated audience, most likely professionals in their field. However, because SCIgen and this kidney publication are of two different disciplines, much of the language they use is different. The kidney disease publication is full of medical jargon. For example the sentence “the sample was analyzed on frozen nonhematuric specimens” is not easily understood by someone who does not have an MD or PhD in this field. The language is very specific to the study and uses accurate medical descriptions. Another notable difference is the use of scientific data. An example of this is the line “CCr estimates were assigned a maximum value of 200 mL/min/1.73 m².” Again this data is not easily understood by anyone other than the professionals in this field. There are also multiple equations pertaining to the study.

The two articles contain graphs and supporting figures. For SCIgen the figures are labeled and contain a short phrase describing it.  For the kidney publication the figures are much more detailed, as are the descriptions. The descriptions are several sentences in length. The graphs include tables of the data surveyed, something that was not present in the SCIgen paper.

The SCIgen paper’s layout also differs from the kidney publication. The SCIgen paper contains numerically numbered topics in bold letters to split up the information. The kidney publication on the other hand has no numbered sections, but it is organized into the sections: keywords, methods, statistical analysis, results, estimates and comparisons of two equations, prevalence of CKD, discussion, and finally acknowledgements.  The SCIgen paper and the kidney publication both end with references.

In my opinion organization is crucial to the SCIgen and scientific journal publication. The authors could have amazing evidence and data to present, but without organization it will fall short of what it is trying to convey. The use of language is also important because it each genre has its own specific terminology to detail their publication. Furthermore, the references are especially important in both of these genres. Without references, the publications might be considered plagiarism. Adding references also heightens the author’s credibility, making their publications much more trustworthy of accurate information. 

PB1B

PB1B: Inspecting Genre Generators

Computer Science papers are very formal and scholarly. They are probably used to share knowledge and research among other professionals in this field, and thus they must convey it in an official manner to add to their credibility. Since many professionals can collaborate in research, credit is given to all those authors at the top of the page. The Title is clear and informative, placed at the top of the page. These papers are obviously meant for highly educated people, and targeted mostly to other professionals in this field. This being said, these papers all use an “abstract” to introduce the topic. An “abstract” is like a short summary of the whole paper; an overview for the reader. The abstract is followed by a table of contents, an introduction, and numbered following topics. The information is neatly organized, as a formal paper probably should be. This allows the reader to easily see the topics being discussed, and further more allows the authors to communicate the information effectively. Computer science papers also include graphs and other figures. These are numbered and are followed by a short description of the figure underneath it. These figures allow the reader to further support their data pertaining to their research. The numbering allows them to easily refer to it in their paper. Lastly, the research paper has citations referring to references they made in their research paper. The references are then listed at the end of the paper. This is typical of a research paper, and pretty much mandatory if the authors want to avoid plagiarism in the academic field.

The comic strip generator showed that comic strips are targeted towards a much broader audience. The audience does not have to be above average intelligence to understand comics. Even so, comics can be crude and may not be suitable to a younger audience. The comic strips are mainly illustrations, contained in separated boxes. The illustrations aren’t too detailed, yet they are colorful, and contain two people sharing a dialogue. The dialogue isn’t too long, and is contained in white speech bubbles. The main purpose of a comic strip is to be comical of course; to make the reader laugh. Therefore they are usually pretty short, and serve to throw a punchline. They are straight to the point. Comic strips don’t tell a detailed story, but instead present a brief humorous situation.

The meme generator was particularly amusing because memes have recently become quite popular.  Memes are targeted at a large audience of internet users. Personally, I’ve seen a six year old and a fifty five year old laugh at the same meme. To understand a meme, however, I think the viewer has to understand the reference it is making. As I scrolled through the memes I noticed they usually used references to popular TV shows, pop culture, or a picture that had gained internet fame. So although memes can have a large audience, they can vary in who might actually understand them due to the reference. The memes were all a large picture in a square. Another common feature was that some meme’s had a similar background: alternating triangles in different colors. The main goal of a meme is to be funny or amusing. The text used to do this is usually white in a large font, often at the top and bottom of the picture. There are also reoccurring phrases such as “what if I told you” or “ not sure if”. What is also interesting is that memes can use the same picture to make a different joke each time, but they will still follow the same structure.

In studying these websites we can see that generators outline the main conventions of whatever they are generating. This makes it clear what is staying the same in a particular genre. Thus we can see the “skeleton” of a genre and further understand why it has those conventions. Using a generator allows us to easily identify these elements in order to classify genres.