Understanding the Concept of Discourse Communities

In this assignment, I explored the concept of a “discourse community” and examined whether a small county school system's IT department fits this description. I learned that while the IT team shares common goals, jargon, and communication methods, it struggles to meet the more exclusive definition of a discourse community. John Swales’ six characteristics of discourse communities—shared goals, communication styles, information exchange, genres, jargon, and expertise—provided a useful framework for analyzing the group. However, I found that many of these traits overlap with other IT teams, which challenged the uniqueness required for a true discourse community.

Adapting the Definition

Through the analysis, I realized that rather than focusing solely on shared goals or jargon, we should look at how these goals are accomplished and how the communication methods and jargon are contextualized. This nuanced approach allows us to better define groups with similar missions but unique methods. The IT department’s use of specialized jargon, like “FFU ready,” for example, reflects a local understanding that distinguishes it from other groups.

Reflection on the Assignment

This assignment helped me develop critical thinking skills when it comes to applying academic concepts to real-world examples. It challenged me to question whether traditional definitions, like that of a discourse community, are always applicable. Ultimately, I believe that while the IT team in my case fits many aspects of Swales' definition, adjusting our perspective on what constitutes uniqueness in communication and goals makes for a more accurate classification.