Parker, Frank and Kim Sydow Campbell

Parker, Frank and Kim Sydow Campbell. “Linguistics and Writing: A Reassessment.” College

Composition and Communication 44.3 (1993): 295-314. JSTOR. 6 Nov. 2007

Parker and Campbell take a detailed look at Sharon Crowley’s article “Linguistics and Compostion Instruction: 1950-1980.” According to Crowley, “linguistics has been used in composition in an effort to improve grammar and style and to aid invention” (295). Parker and Campbell, while generally agreeing with Crowley, feel that she is being to pessimistic in her analysis of the relationship between composition and linguistics. They point out that Crowley’s article is based mostly on pre-1965 linguistics, and they claim that “post-1965 linguistics has made significant advances in analyzing language and its discourse context” (295). Through a thorough analysis of a number of number of previous articles and studies including Crowley’s, Pratt’s discussion of the ideology of Speech-Act theory, and Searle’s theory of indirect speech acts, Parker and Campbell paint a picture that shows a lack of coherence in the study of linguistics as applied to composition. They set up a dichotomy between theory, which is concerned with the universal, and application and practice, which are specific to a population. They conclude that “linguistics and composition can be seen as symbiotic: linguistics provides part of the theoretical foundation for composition, and composition provides a practical application and testing ground for linguistic theory” (310).

This article discusses a number of different types of linguistic strategies that can be applied to composition, including a section solely dealing with Speech-Act theory as it pertains to Searle’s ideas of direct and indirect speech acts. As I hadn’t had a chance to read all of Searle’s book, this article was an enlightening look at how Searle’s ideas branched off from Austin’s and how Searle took Austin’s ideas and propelled them a step further into a slightly less theoretical realm. Overall, the article was another step indicating the general shift in academia towards interdisciplinary studies, which in turn imply that more work should be done with linguistic theories in relation to practical applications in composition. Published in 1993, it gives an interesting glimpse into the general trends of the field at the time. It seems that compostion was really starting to come into its own as a field at this time and trying to define itself. And while I found the discussion of pedagogical implications of speech-act theory, I remain a bit skeptical about its application in the classroom other than as a framework on which a teacher could structure ideas. The ability to actually do things with words remains elusive.