Engineers and public relations writers must cooperate to write public relations releases in a manufacturing firm. These releases represent the firm rather than any individual writer. An ethnographic study shows, however, that both engineers and public relations writers see at least some aspects of the releases as representing themselves personally. They therefore try to control content, wording, and authorship of the documents. Despite the difficulties they have in achieving such control, writers invest in corporate texts just as they do in personal ones.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Allen, Thomas J.Managing the Flow of Technology: Technology Transfer and the Dissemination of Technological Information in an R&D Organization. Cambridge: MIT Press, 1977.
2.
Brunner, Diane D.“Who Owns This Work? The Question of Authorship in Professional/Academic Writing.”JBTC5.4 (1991): 393-411.
3.
Clark, Gregory
, and Stephen Doheny-Farina. “Public Discourse and Personal Expression: A Case Study in Theory-Building.”Written Communication7 (1990): 456-481.
4.
Coles, William E., Jr.Composing: Writing as a Self-Creating Process. Rochelle Park, NJ: Hayden, 1974.
5.
Debs, Mary Beth
. “Corporate Authority: Sponsoring Rhetorical Practice.”Writing in the Workplace: New Research Perspectives. Ed. Rachel Spilka. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press. Forthcoming.
6.
Dragga, Sam
. “Responding to Technical Writing.”The Technical Writing Teacher18 (1991): 202-221.
7.
Ede, Lisa
, and Andrea Lunsford. Singular Texts/Plural Authors: Perspectives on Collaborative Writing. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press, 1990.
8.
Elbow, Peter
. Writing with Power: Techniques for Mastering the Writing Process. New York: Oxford, 1981.
Foucault, Michel
. “What Is an Author?”Textual Strategies: Perspectives in Post-Structuralist Criticism. Ed. Josue V. Harari. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1979. 141-160.
11.
Gergen, Kenneth J.
, and K. Davis, eds. The Social Construction of the Person. New York: Springer, 1985.
12.
Harris, Joseph
. “The Plural Text/the Plural Self: Roland Barthes and William Coles.”College English49 (1987): 158-169.
13.
Jorgensen, Danny L.Participant Observation: A Methodology for Human Studies. Newbury Park, CA: Sage, 1989.
14.
Latour, Bruno
, and Steve Woolgar. Laboratory Life: The Construction of Scientific Facts. 1979. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1986.
15.
LeFevre, Karen Burke
. Invention as a Social Act. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press, 1987.
16.
Macrorie, Ken
. Searching Writing: A Contextbook. Rochelle Park, NJ: Hayden, 1980.
17.
Michaelson, Herbert
. “How an Author Can Avoid the Pitfalls of Practical Ethics.”IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication 33 (1990): 58-61.
18.
Paradis, James
. “Text and Action: The Operator's Manual in Context and in Court.”Textual Dynamics of the Professions: Historical and Contemporary Studies of Writing in Professional Communities. Ed. Charles Bazerman and James Paradis. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1991. 256-278.
19.
Parayil, Govindan
. “Technology as Knowledge: An Empirical Affirmation.”Knowledge: Creation, Diffusion, Utilization13 (1991): 36-48.
20.
Satterfield, Leon
. “ `Myself Must I Remake': An Existentialist Philosophy of Composition.”Journal of Advanced Composition8 (1988): 82-87.
21.
Shotter, John
, and Kenneth J. Gergen, eds. Texts of Identity. London: Sage, 1989.
22.
Stewart, Donald C.The Versatile Writer. Lexington, MA: Heath, 1986.
23.
Winsor, Dorothy A.“An Engineer's Writing and the Corporate Construction of Knowledge.”Written Communication6 (1989): 270-285.
