> Also interesting that there's a push to understand their meaning
> more than a push to understand Annie's question -- which in my read was
> equally originating of the current discussion. Just trying to add
> dimensions to what is for me a rich topic area -- namely, textuality.
I hadn't really conceived of the invitation as a push to understand the
text's meaning (and Nick did a nice job of posting that invitation, btw).
I think some of us are interested in a corporate reflection on the text,
including the writer's in the corporate body.
It is interesting to note a glaring absence, though. We've not heard
another thing from Annie herself (unless I missed something). Could
we pursue the meaning of this? How do readers respond to this particular
gap? If we went off on this tangent, would we soon be extending to
Annie a formal invitation to join our discussion even though we can
assume she's a member of the list and has chosen silence?
This rich tapestry we weave as a group is what makes textual conversation
so compelling a source to me for the teaching of rhetoric and
communication.
Beth
********************************************
Beth Baldwin, Ph.D. *
Office of Continuing Education *
University of North Carolina at Greensboro *
Greensboro, NC 27412-5001 *
910-334-5301, ext. 44 *
bobaldwi@hamlet.uncg.edu *
********************************************