Notes

Notes

  1. Jack Goody, The Domestication of the Savage Mind (Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press, 1977), p. 81.
  2. Walter J. Ong, S. J., Rhetoric, Romance, and Technology (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1971), p. 167.
  3. 163
    See Anne Ruggles Gere, “A Cultural Perspective on Talking and Writing,” in Exploring Speaking-Writing Relationships: Connections and Contrasts, ed. Barry M. Kroll and Roberta J. Vann (Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English, 1981), pp. 111–123.
  4. See especially John W. Cataldo, Graphic Design and Visual Communication (Scranton: International Textbook Company, 1966); Arthur T. Turnbull and Russell N. Baird, The Graphics of Communication (New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston, 1975).
  5. David Crystal and Derek Davy, Investigating English Style (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1969), p. 198. See also David Mellinkoff, The Language of the Law (Boston: Little, Brown and Company, 1963).
  6. Richard Young, “Paradigms and Problems: Needed Research in Rhetorical Invention,” in Research on Composing: Points of Departure, ed. Charles R. Cooper and Lee Odell (Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English, 1978), pp. 29–47.
  7. A commission which has, unfortunately but like so many other environmental advocacy groups, been eliminated by Federal budget cuts.
  8. Roland Harweg draws a nice distinction between texts which must seek out an audience vs. those which have an assured audience, outlining characteristic ways of beginning for each: “Beginning a Text,” in Discourse Processes, 3 (October-December, 1980), 313–326.
  9. It is unfortunate that the attractive qualities of the sheet cannot be appreciated in the reduced, black and white version printed here. Standard print journalism, with its homogenization of the text’s surface and reduction of the physicality of the text, levels qualities active in more graphic media. For examples of how print journalism can extend the possibilities of the printed page, see any issue of Visible Language: The Research Journal Concerned with All That Is Involved in Our Being Literate.
  10. Cataldo, Chapters 2, 3, 4, and 5.
  11. Donis Dondis, A Primer of Visual Literacy (Cambridge: MIT Press, 1973), pp. 28–29.
  12. Paul V. Anderson, “Organizing Is Not Enough,” in Courses, Components, and Exercises in Technical Communication (Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English, 1981), pp. 163–184.
  13. Roger Fowler, “Cohesive, Progressive, and Localizing Aspects of Text Structure,” in Grammars and Descriptions, ed. Teun A. Van Dijk and János Petöfi (Berlin: de Gruyter, 1977), pp. 64–84.
  14. Reported by Robin Battison and Joanne Landesman in “The Cost Effectiveness of Designing Simpler Documents,” Simply Stated, 16 (April, 1981), pp. 1, 3.
  15. L. T. Frase and B. J. Schwartz, “Typographical Cues that Facilitate Comprehension,” Journal of Educational Psychology, 71 (April, 1979), p. 205.
  16. James Hartley, “Spatial Cues in Text,” Visible Language, 14 (1980), 62–79.
  17. Experimental studies on text design are reported in P. A. Kolers, M. E. Wrolstad, and H. Bouman, ed., Processing of Visible Language, 1, 2 (New York: Plenum, 1979, 1980); D. Wright reviews the research and concludes “there is no ubiquitously good way of presenting technical information” in “Presenting Technical Information: A Survey of Research Findings,” Instructional Science, 6 (April, 1977), 93–134. For an overview of writings on visual literacy, see Dennis W. Pett, “Visual Literacy,” in Classroom Relevant Research in the Language Arts, ed. Harold G. Shane and James Walden (Washington, DC: Association for Curriculum Development, 1978), pp. 8–17.