PB2A: Comparing Genres

              There are a countless number of specific genres.  Ripping them apart and comparing them together reveals the conventions and rhetorical features used.  To get a more in depth perspective on the use of genre, you should comparing two pieces of writing within the same genre.  I compared the rhetorical features of the “SCIgen” genre generator and of the academic publication “Political Traditions and Political Change: The Significance of Postwar Japanese Politics for Political Science” written by Professors Bradley Richardson (Ohio State) and Dennis Patterson (Michigan State).  The similarities of both of the publications all follow the conventions of the specific genre of academic writing.  There are 2 main similarities between the two pieces: the tone and the audience. 

             A tone of a paper sets the initial perspective of the paper for both the reader and the writer.  Genre conventions greatly affect the specific tones used for every single genre.  Wither it is a comic strip or a press release, the genre determines the tone.  There is a very unique tone used then it comes to academic papers.  The tone is that of formality and precise.  When trying to get the most amount of information across, the authors specifically try to be as clear as possible while maintaining a scholarly disposition.   This can be seen in both of the papers chosen.  “Two properties makes this approach perfect: our algorithm…”  (1, SCIgen) and with the Richardson and Patterson’s paper “…electoral mobilization has been a frequent theme in descriptions of Japan’s political arrangements…”  (5, Richardson & Patterson)  Instead of commentary on the subject itself, the authors make a distinct choice to limit their writing to specific material on the subject itself. 

             The audience of the writing piece is a particularly crucial part of scholarly writing.  This is the main convention of the genre and is the baseline for the tone and style to be based off of.  The audience is limited to those qualified and educated in the topics of the subjects being written on.  These publications are not for those who are alien to the subjects at hand.  There is no baseline introduction to the overall subject of the paper nor is there a summary or breakdown of the arguments or topics being written.  This is unique to scholarly writing because it is usually difficult to find the writing without seeking it out.  This leads to the presumption of those who seek out the writing are already in the know about the subject.  In the SCIgen paper, “The evaluation of 64 bit architectures has constructed…” (1, SCIgen)  This sentence is the first line of the introduction section of the paper.  For such a complex and specific topic to be discussed that early in the paper, it is easily shown how the audience is meant for those with prior knowledge within the subject.

             There are a lot of similarities within the genre of academic writing, but there is a very distinct difference between all of the writings.  The different disciples that are the subject of these writings provide a unique structure and style of writing.  While science writing is much more quantitative with extreme specifics, social sciences and humanities is much more observational and deductive.  “Elections inevitably involve an interaction between what politicians do to gain popular support…”  (13, Richardson & Patterson)  This is a very distinct difference between these different writings within this genre.

             Genre is critical to the formation of proper writing and the basic understanding of those writings.  We can pick part and compare writings within the genres to really understand what the conventions actually are.

                                                                  

Works Cited

"Eggar: A Methodology for the Investigation of Link-Level Acknowledgements." Eggar: A Methodology for the Investigation of Link-Level Acknowledgements. SCIGen, n.d. Web. 01 Feb. 2015.

Richardson, Bradley, and Dennis Patterson. "Political Traditions and Political Change: The Significance of Postwar Japanese Politics for Political Science." Annual Review of Political Science 4 (2001): 93-116. Annual Reviews. Web. 31 Jan. 2015. <http://www.annualreviews.org/doi/pdf/10.1146/annurev.polisci.4.1.93>.