Cover not available
Part of
Ethnographies of Academic Writing Research: Theory, methods, and interpretation
Edited by Ignacio Guillén-Galve and Ana Bocanegra-Valle
[Research Methods in Applied Linguistics 1] 2021
► pp. 39–60

Chapter 3
Textography

Narrowing the gap between text and context in ethnographic explorations of situated academic writing

| University of Portsmouth
This chapter draws upon work by John M. Swales (1998, 2018), which explored situated academic writing, utilising an approach he called textography. This chapter describes the variety of texts, contexts and practices which can be investigated using textographic methods through a combination of textual analysis and ethnography: textography. It argues textographic research provides scope to move beyond linguistic description and explore interpretations and practices of authors and audiences within the context providing rich data with thick description (Geertz, 1973). The chapter also argues that textography presents an opportunity for deep theorizing (Lillis, 2008) by bridging the gap between text and context. It also reflects on considerations when using textographic approaches including ethical considerations. Finally, the chapter suggests textography’s possibilities for academic writing research.
Keywords: textography, linguistic ethnography, ethnographic research methods, thick description, trustworthiness
Article outline
  • Introduction
  • Textography origins
  • Textography characteristics
    • Texts
    • Contexts
    • Practices
  • Textography as methods
    • Methods of textual analysis
    • Methods of ethnographic analysis: Interviews and observations
    • Textographic methodological approaches
  • Textography as methodological assumptions
    • Textography methodology: Deep theorizing through text and context
  • Textography methodology: Thick description
    • Thick description through thick participation
    • Thick description through contextualisation
    • Thick description through narrativisation
  • Reflections on textography for academic writing research
  • Reflections on ethics: Trustworthiness
    • Ethical reflections: Micro and macroethics
  • Textography’s possibilities for academic writing research
  • References
Published online: 26 October 2021
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/rmal.1.03siz
References (68)
References
Alafnan, M. A. (2016). Textography: A multi- dimensional applied genre analysis of business writing in an educational institute. Journal of Applied Linguistics and Language Research, 3(6), 264–294.Google Scholar
Anderson, L. (2006). Analytic autoethnography. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 35(4), 373–395. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Angermüller, J., Maingueneau, D., & Wodak, R. (2014). The discourse studies reader: An introduction. In R. Wodak, J. Angermüller, & D. Maingueneau. (Eds.), The Discourse Studies Reader: Main Currents in Theory and Analysis (pp. 1–14). John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Archer, A. (2006). A multimodal approach to academic “literacies”: Problematising the visual/verbal divide. Language and Education, 20(6), 449–462. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Back, L. (2016). Academic diary: Or why higher education still matters. Goldsmiths Press/The MIT PressGoogle Scholar
Bazerman, C. (1998). Editor’s introduction. In Other floors, other voices: A textography of a small university building (pp. ix–x). Lawrence Erlbaum Assocates.Google Scholar
Blommaert, J. (2007). On scope and depth in linguistic ethnography. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 11(5), 682–688. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Blommaert, J., & Jie, D. (2010). Ethnographic fieldwork: A beginner’s guide. Multilingual Matters. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brinkmann, S., & Kvale, S. (2005). Confronting the ethics of qualitative research. Journal of Constructivist Psychology, 18(2), 157–181. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brown, J. D. (2009). Open-response items in questionnaires. In J. Heigham & R. A. Croker. (Eds.), Qualitative research in applied linguistics: A practical introduction (pp. 200–219). Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Chang, H., Ngunjiri, F., & Hernandez, K. -A. C. (2016). Collaborative autoethnography. Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Chiseri-Strater, E. (1996). Turning in upon ourselves: Positionality, subjectivity, and reflexivity in case study and ethnographic research. In P. Mortensen & G. E. Kirsch. (Eds.), Ethics and representation in qualitative studies of literacy (pp. 115–132). National Council of Teachers of English.Google Scholar
Copland, F., & Creese, A. (2011). Linguistic ethnography. In L. Litosseliti. (Ed.), Research methods in linguistics (2nd ed., pp. 515–528). Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
(2016). Ethical issues in linguistic ethnography. In P. De-Costa. (Ed.), Ethics in applied linguistics research: Language researcher narratives (pp. 161–179). Routledge.Google Scholar
Croker, R. A. (2009). An introduction to qualitative research. In J. Heigham & R. A. Croker. (Eds.), Qualitative research in applied linguistics: A practical introduction (pp. 3–24). Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cronin, B., & Shaw, D. (2002). Identity-creators and image-makers: Using citation analysis and thick description to put authors in their place. Scientometrics, 54(1), 31–49. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Denzin, N. K. (2001). Interpretive interactionism. Sage. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ding, A., & Bruce, I. (2017). The English for academic purposes practitioner. Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Donnelly, H. (2015). Becoming an ESL teacher: An autoethnography (Unpublished dissertation). Lakehead University.
Edwards, R. (2012). Theory matters: Representation and experimentation in education. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 44(5), 522–534. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Erickson, F. (1984). What makes school ethnography ‘ethnographic’? Anthropology & Education Quarterly, 15(1), 51–66. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Geertz, C. (1973). The interpretation of cultures. Basic Books.Google Scholar
(1988). Works and lives: The anthropoogist as author. Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Green, J., & Bloome, D. (2014). Ethnography and ethnographers of and in education: A situated perspective. In J. Flood, S. B. Heath, & D. Lapp. (Eds.), Handbook of research on teaching literacy through the communicative and visual arts (pp. 181–202). Macmillan Publishers.Google Scholar
Guba, E. G. (1981). ERIC/ECTJ annual review paper: Criteria for assessing the trustworthiness of naturalistic inquiries. Educational Communication and Technology, 29(2), 75–91. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hammersley, M. (1994). Introducing ethnography. In D. Graddol, J. Maybin, & B. Stierer. (Eds.), Researching language and literacy in social context: A reader (pp. 1–17). Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Hammersley, M., & Atkins, P. (1983). Ethnography: Principles in practice. Tavistock Publications.Google Scholar
Heigham, J., & Sakui, K. (2009). Ethnography. In J. Heigham & R. A. Croker. (Eds.), Qualitative research in applied linguistics: A practical introduction (pp. 91–112). Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hyland, K. (2018). Genre and discourse analysis in language for specific purposes. In C. A. Chapelle. (Ed.), The encyclopedia of applied linguistics (pp. 1–8). Wiley. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Januin, J., & Stephen, J. (2015). Exploring discourse competence elements in EAP class presentations through document and ethnographic analyses. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 208, 157–166. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kubanyiova, M. (2015). Ethics in research. In J. D. Brown & C. Coombe. (Eds.), The Cambridge guide to research in language teaching and learning (pp. 176–182). Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Labov, W. (1972). Some principles of linguistic methodology. Language in Society, 1(1), 97–120. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lillis, T. (2008). Ethnography as method, methodology, and “deep theorizing”: Closing the gap between text and context in academic writing research. Written Communication, 25(3), 353–388. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lillis, T., & Scott, M. (2015). Defining academic literacies research: Issues of epistemology, ideology and strategy. Journal of Applied Linguistics and Professional Practice, 4(1), 5–32. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lillis, T., & Tuck, J. (2016). Academic literacies: A critical lens on writing and reading in the academy. In K. Hyland & P. Shaw. (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of English for academic purposes (pp. 30–43). Routledge.Google Scholar
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1986). But is it rigorous? Trustworthiness and naturalistic evaluation. New Directions for Program Evaluation, 30, 73–84. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lontoc, G. (2014). Transcribing, translating, and (re) constructing identities: The great cultural divide between us and them. CARE Working Paper UEA, 1, 35–46.Google Scholar
Paltridge, B. (2004). The exegesis as a genre: An ethnographic examination. In L. Ravelli & R. A. Ellis. (Eds.), Analysing academic writing (pp. 84–104). Continuum.Google Scholar
(2006). Beyond the text: A textography of Chinese College English writing. University of Sydney Papers in TESOL, 2(2), 149–165.Google Scholar
(2008). Textographies and the researching and teaching of writing. Ibérica, 15, 9–24.Google Scholar
Paltridge, B., Starfield, S., Ravelli, L. J., & Tuckwell, K. (2012). Change and stability: Examining the macrostructures of doctoral theses in the visual and performing arts. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 11(4), 332–344. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pederson, R. (2007). Epistemologies and research paradigms in applied linguistics: 10 years of published research, I: Introduction. English Teaching, 62(1), 171–197. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pérez-Penup, L. (2019). Potentialities of textography to research the construction of authorial identity by professional academic non-native writers of English in the soft sciences. In C. Calle Martínez & S. Madarova. (Eds.), Focus on learning: Contribution to the field of ESP (pp. 77–84). Universidad Camilo José Cela.Google Scholar
Pink, S. (2013). Doing visual ethnography (3rd ed.). Sage.Google Scholar
(2015). Doing sensory ethnography (2nd ed.). Sage. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ponterotto, J. G., & Grieger, I. (2007). Effectively communicating qualitative research. The Counselling Psychologist, 35(3), 404–430. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rallis, S. F., & Rossman, G. B. (2009). Ethics and trustworthiness. In J. Heigham & R. A. Croker. (Eds.), Qualitative research in applied linguistics: A practical introduction (pp. 263–287). Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rampton, B., Maybin, J., & Roberts, C. (2015). Theory and method in linguistic ethnography. In S. Shaw, F. Copland, & J. Snell. (Eds.), Linguistic ethnography (pp. 14–50). Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ravelli, L., Paltridge, B., Starfield, S., & Tuckwell, K. (2013). Extending the notion of ‘text’: The visual and performing arts doctoral thesis. Visual Communication, 12(4), 395–422. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rock, F. (2015). Bursting the bonds: Policing linguistic ethnography. In J. Snell, S. Shaw, & F. Copland. (Eds.), Linguistic ethnography (pp. 147–165). Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rossman, G. B., & Rallis, S. F. (2003). Learning in the field: An introduction to qualitative research. Sage.Google Scholar
Sarangi, S. (2005). The conditions and consequences of professional discourse studies. Journal of Applied Linguistics, 2(3), 371–394. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Seloni, L. (2014). ‘I’m an artist and a scholar who is trying to find a middle point’: A textographic analysis of a Colombian art historian’s thesis writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 25, 79–99. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Shaw, S., Copland, F., & Snell, J. (2015). An introduction to linguistic ethnography: Interdisciplinary explorations. In F. Copland, S. Shaw, & J. Snell. (Eds.), Linguistic ethnography (pp. 1–13). Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sizer, J. (2019a). Textography as a needs analysis and research tool for English for academic purposes and learning development practitioners. Journal of Learning Development in Higher Education, 15. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2019b). Unobtrusive textography of a university building as an innovative research method. BALEAP 2019 Conference: Innovation, Exploration and Transformation. Leeds, April 12–14.Google Scholar
Souza, V. V. S. (2012). A textography of the complex process of learning and teaching online. Estudos Anglo-Americanos, 37, 10–30.Google Scholar
Starfield, S., & Ravelli, L. J. (2006). “The writing of this thesis was a process that I could not explore with the positivistic detachment of the classical sociologist”: Self and structure in new humanities research theses. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 5(3), 222–243. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Starfield, S., Paltridge, B., & Ravelli, L. (2012). ‘Why do we have to write?’: Practice-based theses in the visual and performing arts and the place of writing. Linguistic Insights, 160, 169–191.Google Scholar
(2014). Researching academic writing: What textography affords. In J. Huisman & M. Tight. (Eds.), Theory and method in higher education research (Vol. II, pp. 103–120). Emerald. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Swales, J. M. (1998). Textography: Toward a contextualization of written academic discourse. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 31(1), 109–121. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2018). Other floors, other voices: A textography of a small university building. 20th anniversary edition. University of Michigan Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Swales, J. M., & Luebs, M. (1995). Toward textography. In B. -L. Gunnarson & I. Backlund. (Eds.), Writing in academic contexts (pp. 12–29).FUMS.Google Scholar
Tardy, C. M., & Swales, J. M. (2014). Genre analysis. In K. P. Schneider & A. Barron. (Eds.), Pragmatics of discourse (pp. 165–188). Walter de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Traweek, S. (1988). Beamtimes and lifetimes: The world of high energy physicists. Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Wahyudi, R. (2014). Textbook evaluation and ethnography as method. English for Specific Purposes World, 44(15).Google Scholar
Wolcott, H. F. (1999). Ethnography: A way of seeing. AltaMira Press.Google Scholar
Zhu, H., Ren, W., & Han, Z. (2016). The impact of marketization on the communication of Chinese academicians: A genre analytical perspective. Critical Discourse Studies, 13(5), 467–484. DOI logoGoogle Scholar