Language and Power: Power Behind Discourse

Discourse communities are all around us—we all belong to a discourse community. A discourse community is a body of persons who share common and unique modes of communication or discourse (“Discourse Community”). In order for a community to identify as a discourse community, the community must possess six defining qualities that categorize it as a discourse community. As defined by John Swales, a researcher and professor of linguistics, discourse communities “have a broadly set of common public goals, mechanisms of intercommunication among its members, participatory mechanisms to provide information and feedback, one or more genres in the communicative furtherance of its aims, an acquired lexis, and a threshold level of members with a

Gee also writes that discourses can influence each other. In well of communities secondary discourses can influence primary discourses, but in poor and uneducated communiites primary discourses can influence secondary discourses. Like the lady who went to the job interview who used a different dialect that was not suitable for an interview.

Gee’s entire assessment of discourses is the highlight of the essay. According to him, discourses cannot be imbibed or simply learnt in traditional classrooms, they cannot be taught to a person but rather they are what one learns through his experiences and social interactions. Since his experiences may encompass a great variety of social interactions and discussions with people from different spheres, these discourses are not very singular and may have conflicts among themselves. It is eventually the amalgamation of discourses that a person experiences that ultimately shape

The concept of discourse is the key to understanding a social constructionist approach to childhood. A discourse is an independent set of interrelated ideas held by a particular ideology or worldview. The social constructionist approach tries to describe the different ways in which knowledge of children and childhoods are constructed.

A discourse community is said to be resistant to internal criticism and self-scrutiny because all ideas that severely contrast the values and beliefs within the community are defined as being on the outside, as demonstrated in the texts. “The Discourse itself defines what counts as acceptable criticism” (Gee 162). All of the articles use similar rhetorical strategies by describing a problem in shared thinking; the common conception that the

Foucault (1977) uses discourse to relate to how language can be used to construct ideas and thoughts about groups. Discourses and language can therefore help construct or reduce oppression (Thompson, 2006). If a group has power, they have the ‘ability and opportunity to fulfil or obstruct personal, relational, or collective needs’ (Prilleltensky, 2008). If the dominant discourse of a less powerful group is positive, the group with power may help that group fulfil their needs. If the dominant discourse of a less powerful group is negative, such as with UASC, the powerful group may obstruct them in fulfilling their needs, and therefore will cause oppression.

Nevertheless, discourse plays a crucial role in the rhetorical analysis process, as Grant Davie explains, the process goes from establishing the subject to identifying where discourse comes from and finally evaluating its importance and point. Moreover, the chamber of commerce is trying to get primarily affluent individuals to move down to Winter Park, Florida. Moreover, to persuade them that living in Winter Park is everyone’s stereotypical American

Life is like a massive highway that have infinite routes anyone can choose take to reach some type of designated goal. Those various routes lead to distinct exits, where one can discover a group or groups that share similarities dealing with viewpoints, beliefs, or understanding towards a particular goal. These groups can be identified as discourse communities. According to, “The Concept of Discourse Community,” in the textbook, Writing About Writing, John Swales stressed that in order to be classified as a discourse community the group has to have all six defining characteristics. Swales emphasized, “A discourse community has a broadly agreed set of common public goals, mechanisms of intercommunication among its members, uses its participatory mechanisms primarily to provide information and feedback, utilities and hence processes one or more genres in the communicative furtherance of its aims, acquires specific lexis, and has a threshold level of members with a suitable degree of relevant content and discourse expertise” (Swales, 221-222). Keeping this key detail in mind, there is numerous type of discourse out there.

“rhetorical discourse comes into existence as a response to a situation…the situation controls the rhetorical response…rhetoric is a mode of altering reality…by the creation of discourse which changes reality through the mediation of thought and action…Let us regard rhetorical situation as a natural context of persons, events, objects, relations, and an exigence which strongly invites utterance” (Philosophy & Rhetoric, Volume 1, 1 –

Discourse communities are everywhere. Everywhere we and go and almost everything we do relates or falls into a discourse community of some sort. Whether it’s a long, pointless conversation on the phone with a best friend or being part of a school croquet club, it’s part of a unique discourse community in some way. Every discourse has it’s own distinct qualities and almost all have a different way of communicating. These discourses are strong influences on all of our personalities. The way every human in the world acts and communicates is influenced by one or multiple discourse communities.

[Authoritative discourse] demands our unconditional allegiance.... [It] permits no play with the context framing it, no play with its borders, no gradual and flexible transitions, no creative stylizing variants on it. It enters our verbal consciousness as a compact and indivisible mass.... It is indissolubly fused with its authority. (Clark, 2003)

Rhetoric is a course in which students are taught the values of persuasion. And yet, behind this course is the utmost power to corrupt the world, changing it into a world of our own policies. This power, even though seldom discussed, has lead to many intriguing discoveries. One such discovery is how people are able to shape the world they live in simply by choosing the right words. Therefore those who would want the world to be a better place must protect this power. If in the wrong hands this power could cause serious damage. Several authors have striven to protect rhetoric and its power. Few agree on the matter of defining rhetoric, but they know that they must protect rhetoric from dark souls. A single definition of rhetoric must maintain a simplistic nature while incorporating every aspect of rhetoric. However, I argue that rhetoric is a means of persuading audiences of a situation and a particular reality through language and personal appeal. In order to prove this definition I will discuss how rhetoric creates a situation, the shaping of a different reality, the audience, the use of language, and the personal appeal. Finally, I will demonstrate the absolute need for rhetoric.

Discourses are the “social and cultural practices through which individuals and groups use language to establish their identities…they provide ways of being, thinking, acting and using language so that people can identify themselves in social and cultural networks” Discourses affect peoples views on all things, for example, two different

Fairclough (1995) clarifies that discourse is not only written and spoken language, but it also visual part that has meaning (p.54).

Language is the inevitable medium that people use as a means of communication. However, how that person uses the language that they have varies from person to person. Some view language as a persuasive political instrument and others view it as a means of expression and empowerment. In the essay “If Black English Isn’t a Language, Then Tell Me, What Is?” by James Baldwin, he was able to illustrate the history of the discrimination of language and how black English is not accepted as its own language. Baldwin also shows that due to the lack of acknowledgement of black English, it lacks the power it needs to empower the people who speak it. In the essay “Politics and the English Language” by George Orwell, he was able to break down language and explain how language shapes reality. Orwell expresses that he is not considering the literary use of language, but language is an instrument of expression and the promotion of cognitive deliberation and persuasion. Furthermore, both these authors agree that language is a political instrument, however, Baldwin uses this instrument to unite people and Orwell uses the instrument to persuade people.