In Eyman’s “Intertextuality,” he emphasizes it as a core criteria for what makes something a “text,” meaning specifically when it comes to textuality. He relies on earlier scholars to stress the fact that digital text is not just something displayed. Instead, it is something that can be tied to other text-kind of like a web. This is what makes digital rhetoric so complex.
Key Features
Eyman mentions that almost any type of text will always be referenced or alludes to something else. It will be inspired or borrowed from other text; there will always be a connection (quotes, links, images).
Intertextuality is so easily recognized because of those connections. As they build up or expand, these ties don’t stay the same, they change depending on the audience, context, and setting.
The author also lists intertextuality with other criteria that are essential to being considered a text-situationality, coherence, acceptability, etc.
Why These are Impactful
Intertexuality is something that is reusable. But with this comes responsibility. When reusing text, writers need to be mindful that they credit the text they are referencing. Also, with each reuse, the original meaning of those texts may change or be reinterpreted. This is why intertextuality is so important and impactful, it evolves and allows people to form new perspectives that otherwise were missed.
Consequences of Intertextuality
Writers should always remain alert to the assumptions their text carries. They should be aware of the possible misinterpretations when choosing sources. Eyman pushes the fact that digital texts are not isolated. They can always be crossed with other text or media. How we analyze those texts shows our awareness and composition.
Leave a Reply