The terms “digital rhetoric” almost seem too complicated to define. But when you break down the words and think about the meaning of each word individually, the definition becomes more clear. In my previous blog post, I defined digital as free forms of language. According to the Merriam – Webster dictionary, Rhetoric can be defined as the art of writing or speaking effectively. So exactly what does it mean? It can mean effectively understanding or knowing a form of language. If an individual has experience in a specific way of communication, they could be considered digital rhetoric.
How Does It Relate to Me?
Have you ever felt like you were really good in something, almost like you were fluent in it? Being digital rhetoric is similar to that feeling. When you have familiarity and experience with anything with communication you could fall into the category. Being fluent in something is a step up than rhetoric. Rhetoric requires experienced and comfortability, but does not require more than that. For example speaking a second language would be considered fluent in two languages. Being able to understand, but not speak a second language would make an individual rhetoric. I like to think of rhetoric as a more complex word for literate. Just as you can be literate in many different things, the same thing is for rhetoric.
Is Digital Rhetoric More Complex?
In “Digital Rhetoric: Theory, Method, Practice,” by Doug Eyman, he describes how a lot of old researchers argued that digital rhetoric was more comprehensive. I definitely agree with the researchers. I believe that the term seems way more complex then something like literate or digital. It is important to think deeply about what you are discussing. It may seem complicated, but it definitely can be dissected for more people to understand.
Leave a Reply