Classical scholars
conveyed varying ideologies of the relationship between professional writing
and rhetoric. Some studiers of the art
of discourse believed the two stood as separate disciplines, where a second set
of theories emerged and identified both specialties to be counterparts, yet
able to thrive independently. A third group of intellectuals further developed
the notion that professional writing and rhetoric cohabitate; one could not
thrive without the presence of the other. These exploratory thinkers employed
professional writing as the means of transmitting messages to an audience and
rhetoric symbolizing creative methods to translate that information.
When professional
writing is considered a rhetorical practice and art, the perceived role of the
writer can be established. (45-46). Faigley elaborates on three major
theoretical perspectives – textual, individual, and social – to institute the
relationship. First, the textual encompasses features of language and genre,
readability, and style and format the writer uses to communicate information
(48-49). The individual perspective is fluid; they change based on behavior,
the development of cognitive thinking, and the evaluation of the writing task
(49). The social perspective is impacted by interaction within an environment, comprehension
of the philosophy of language, and the understanding of cultural relationships
– discourse community (50-52). Since communities change and overlap, academic,
work, and public environments, the relationship between professional writing
and rhetoric must be modified to accommodate each audience and the level of
which information is transmitted to varying audiences.
Miller further
constructs the presumed relationship by determining the practical and conceptual
application of professional writing (61-63). Richard Bernstein states, “The
practical man is one who is not concerned with theory (even anti-theoretical or
anti-intellectual), who knows how to get along in the rough and tumble of the
world,” (61). To be practical, is to accomplish a task or goal effectively and
efficiently, an action founded on directness. On the other hand, a conceptual
understanding provides justification for a necessary action. Problems and goals
are identified and the appropriate action weighed. Why is this essential to
technical writing? Technical writing, in this case, is thought incorporate the
practicality of an action due to a well-founded reason for the action. In other
words, a writer must know why a message needs to be transmitted, the objectives
for writing, and methods for presenting the information in a practical way to
evoke the audience’s understanding through rhetorical communication.
Furthermore, Miller
examines practice as descriptive or prescriptive – what is and what ought to be
– within higher education versus the professional arena (64-67). Students are
often equipped with a theoretical understanding of writing but lack
consideration of common practice. Institutions have afforded students an opportunity
to connect the relationship between vocational preparedness and cultural
awareness (65). Work settings create a cultural standard that does not always
coincide with best practiced theories. Students who are unable to (and sometime
unwilling) integrate their ethics, textbook knowledge, and organizational
cultural often struggle with identifying the relationship between professional
writing and rhetoric (69).
Regli bases the
relationship on knowledge, collaboration, and application in the writing field.
Knowledge has typically been thought of as a noun and to some technical writers
the transmittal of information in no more than seen as a product, an invention
(71). However, the transmittal of knowledge is considered a verb to the rhetor.
Rhetors treat knowledge as an activity, elaborate process of developing,
producing, and testing (73). To master a connection of writing and rhetoric,
collaboration, communication, and articulation must occur (74-77). A problem
must be identified, followed by conducting analyses of the situation, audience,
and structure to adhere to constraints and satisfy expectations. Succeeding
these steps, changes or revisions can be successfully articulated prior to
production – the representation of knowledge.
Slack, Miller, and
Dock explore the relevance of the communication theory, providing the framework
of the transmission view of communication, the interpretation and
reinterpretation of messages, and the articulation aspect of communication
(81-94). This theory credits technical writers as mediators of communication
through interpreting, articulating, and transmitting information to an audience
via power, authority, and expertise in their respective industries. They are
foremost neutral facilitators of message and negotiate the relationship with
receivers of information to avoid miscommunication (81-82).
Since communication
is not a linear act and more of a negotiation, both the sender and receiver can
possess power over meanings, either negative or positive; communication is an
ongoing struggle for power, unevenly balanced toward encoding (87). The sender
has power when the message is encoded effectively and the receiver respond in
the intended manner (83). The receiver establishes power when the message interpreted
appropriately and can initiate a correlating action, or practice (86-89). When
effective articulation, or rearticulation, occurs meaning and discourse are
transformed (90). In cases where messages are not encoded or decoded properly,
technical writers reevaluated and revise information. They edit transmissions
in support of ever-changing social practices, cultures, and situations to
maximized application.
Writing is producing
useful context allowing senders to express and readers in specific situations
to interpret messages (105). Organizational and rhetorical situations guide
decision making (118). The culture and values, as well as ethics help formulate
writers’ ability to communicate within given situations. Yes, they can follow a
communication model and previous document designs to transmit information; however,
when writers do not have full knowledge of industry standards and organizational
beliefs, his ability to convey information may fail. Rules are constraints that
writers must find creative ways to conform to and overcome to limit personal
and organizational liability. They must contend with personal, social, and
situational authority, with each building on the other 124-125). Effective
writers employ such strategies in a rhetorical manner; thus, classical intellectuals’
ideas regarding the relationship between professional writing and rhetoric have
resurfaced, and still serve as models for industry application to this day.
