When we think about text, we often think of scholarly work and its content. Doug Eyman discusses text in a more analytical perspective and how it relates to digital rhetoric. Eyman references de Beaugrande and Dressler and their seven criteria. He also notes that “de Beaugrande and Dressler are concerned only with rhetorically successful texts, rather than all texts regardless of the quality of their arguments” (Eyman 21). I argue that text as it relates to digital rhetoric expands beyond the functionalities Eyman provides. The textuality of a work is not only the content itself, but what comprises the content.
Take this blog post, for example. Do readers analyze the “text” as it appears to them via the words and sentences? Or do they look at the bigger picture written within the piece? Readers can analyze both. Some writers make distinct choices within the text that keen readers pick up on and note as important. Writers also make specific alterations to their words to emphasize a point or word (notice how I italicized the word “within”). Text is an unchangeable medium in which writers use their skills to create content, build upon their argument and ultimately captivate their target audience.
When we analyze a piece, we are analyzing the text. The piece contains the bigger picture through smaller details and chunky content. Eyman does a great job expanding upon using digital text by explaining previous ideas for its criteria. From intertextuality to coherence to acceptability, the content that writers create is specifically oriented for an aimed purpose. Writers get their point across, capture their audience, and draw on sources within and on their textuality. I find that if the content is coherent, acceptable, and meaningful, researchers will have little to no issues analyzing the work. Content shapes the overall piece.
Leave a Reply