How text is viewed is an interesting topic, since it is normally connected with it being printed so it can be read. But, a discussion on defining what the term is in full detail can open up more options and possibilities on what it is. All tying with digital rhetoric, the term needs to be thought of beyond its assumed only definition. My brain already hurts from expanding previous concepts and terms, so I will make it hurt some more by reading more of Eyman.
In the article, Eyman brings in the cultural studies approach regarding text. He elaborates that any “object, collection of objects, or context” can be “read”. That, I can agree with since there are many ways to “read” an object or something else. The reading being done by tracing and analyzing the network, connection, and context that the object has. Along with this, he mentions Robert de Beaugrande & Wolfgang Dresssler and their view on “text” is.
Robert de Beaugrande & Wolfgang Dresssler
To de Beaugrande and Dressler, text is a “communicative event that meets several specific criteria of textuality. The criteras being cohesion, coherence, intentionality, acceptability, informativity, situationality, intertextuality. While each of these are important, Eyman mentions how the criteria is largely concerned with successful texts and not all texts in general regardless of its quality.
Ali Darwish and text
Going further with this, Eyman goes on to mention another person (again), Ali Darwish. Dawrish work with what de Beaugrande and Dressler, but reframes their elements and further develops it. Dawrish argues that text is comprised of 6 layers: textual, contextual, cultural, temporal, intentionality, and intertextuality. He uses digital image production as metaphor, since each scenario can vary from the other, “depending on the writer’s effective use of rhetoric to connect with the reader”. In short summary, Darwin argues that degree of transparency is determined by how well the reader takes in the information in it’s intended way the writer wanted and meant it.
Gunther Kress
Eyman also goes on to mention Gunther Kress. Kress proposes a theory regarding that includes 3 categories: aesthetically valued, culturally significant, and mundane. Kress believes that each category is the result of specific design choices. Along with this, they make two observations. The first being that “text is not only constructed of meaningful symbols, but is the result of social action”. And the second being “text is a material entity, drawing on the resources”.
Leave a Reply