Intertextuality's Effect On A Discourse Community

You belong to a discourse community! Whether you know it or not almost everyone belongs to some type of discourse community, but how does it affect you as an individual? From the studies of multiple authors, it has been established what defines a discourse community, what effects intertextuality have on a discourse community and even the overall dynamics, but even with all this research there is still something missing. Elizabeth Wardle, John Swales, and James Porter all make very good discussion points and arguments in their research, but none of these writers stop to examine the effects that these communities could possibly have on the individuals that make the community what it is. Just as it’s the simple stone block that when combined become

the Great Pyramid, it’s the individuals of a community that when they come together form a discourse community. The effects of a community can affect members in both good and bad ways and with such a widespread level of knowledge and experience this can cause either rapid growth between the members or a rift between members. This is just one example of the effects a community can have on an individual that I will explore. I will examine the writings of Wardle, Swales, and Porter to examine some of their discussion points and the effects on individuals within the community. With everything from authority to intertextuality each has a potential to raise a member up or strike them down.
Let us first take a look at the effects that authority and power can have on a person in a community.

As a discourse community progresses there is always a dynamic of power in the community. The authority between the head of the community to everyone else or even just the difference between older more experienced members and the new members. As Swales states “Discourse communities have changing memberships…. Survival of the community depends on a reasonable ratio between novices and experts (Swales 222).” Understanding the changing memberships allow one to see that for every newcomer that is introduced into a community and for every experienced member who leaves there is a shift of power or authority. “While newcomers to a community experience a “grace period” for adopting community practices, it does not last forever and soon they must express their authority in the new community (Wardle 290).” Once these members have to start demonstrating their authority it might take some authority from someone else in the community or even clash with someone else’s authority. When this happens it is easy to cause an effect on a person. When faced with opposition some people might fold to the pressure essentially giving up their authority. Others might fight the opposition, which with any discord, can cause a virus like effect through the community. To understand the effects this kind of discord can have I believe Porter said it best, “The expectations, conventions, and attitudes of a discourse community will influence and shape not only how they write but also their character within that discourse community (Porter 401).” Effectively the attitude that can arise from a shift of power can cause an effect to the community as a whole but also the individual within the community. This does not necessarily mean in only a bad way though. When members have someone in authority whom they tend to get along with and can look up to it can be a catalyst for growth within the community.

When an individual has a mentor to teach them and guide them it can lead to a quicker adaptation of the guidelines of the customs and courtesies of a group. If this happens it will have the opposite effect as mentioned earlier with discord. When all pieces of a community work together and agree it will cause any new idea or discoveries to be explored easier causing a potential for a long lasting thriving community, while the individual can not only succeed within the community but grow to be a leader themselves. This allows the individual to strengthen themselves as a person instead of crumble under the pressure of discord where one could lose themselves in the struggle.
The idea of intertextuality can be a controversial issue due to the implications made by Porter. Porter states that “Not infrequently and perhaps ever and always, text refer to other text and in fact rely on them for their meaning (Porter 396).” This has caused some discussion as to, if this is true, can anything a writer composes ever truly be original. On one side of the argument we have the negative effects this could mean for an individual, if nothing we write is original what happens to the identity of the writer. On the other side we have the argument of the ability to connect our writings to previous examples and can cause a writer to be connected to the greatness of a previous author allowing the writer to transcend themselves to become a part of something greater. As Swales remarks in The Concept of a Discourse Community “[Discourse communities] may involve using lexical items known to the wider speech communities in special and technical ways (Swales 222).” This would demonstrate that not only is there a use of presupposition intertextuality but it is one of the factors that define a discourse community. It is then not possible to be affected by intertextuality, the effects that this will cause is ultimately up to the individual. Presupposition of intertextuality is necessary since there is already a common knowledge base for the community, but iterability is the ability to repeat other authors without plagiarizing their writing. If an individual can successfully do this, they have connected their writing to other authors and used that to create something new. When this happens it can help raise the individual status in the community showing they can synthesize new ideas from already established writings.
The last major factor I will discuss that will have an effect on the individual is the overall definition of a discourse community. I pose the same question as Swales, “However, even if this sharing of discursive practice occurs, it does not resolve the logical problem of assigning membership of a community to individuals who neither admit nor recognize that such a community exist (Swales 221).” How does being a member of a discourse community affect individuals who don’t even realize they are part of a community? When an individual is part of a discourse community when the community is not formally established, it can cause a sense of isolation. If individuals fit the definitions to become a discourse community as defined by Swales yet do not come together as a community, the individual might not able to perform to full potential or come to their true identity of the community as if they worked together. “The understanding of identity suggests that people enact and negotiate identities in the world over time (Wardle 289).” This quote by Wardle explains that without the interaction within the world that one cannot fully reach their identity due to the fact identity is established over time. If an individual cannot reach their true identity, then they can never fully reach their full potential as a member and expert within the field that the community covers. Therefore as an individual and not being able to identify a discourse community will impact their entire life by not allowing the growth to be the best they could be.
The total effects that a community can have on a member are essentially too numerous to count. With each action it can cause a form of harm or growth for a member. As seen through the multiple examples given here there is a wide range of effects both good and bad that will impact and affect the individual of a community. This change can form and mold an individual to become worse than before the community or help them reach new heights. But more importantly when influenced by a community one can lose their sense of self. To where they will stop thinking about themselves as an individual, only as part of the group. Whether through intertextuality, the dynamics of authority, or simply not understanding your community each aspect of the individual in a discourse community will be affected. Since the majority of people belong to a discourse community, do you know what community you belong too? Are you growing in the community, or are you losing yourself with the community? How are you allowing the community to affect your individuality?