back to syllabus


Selected bibliography ENGL 555: Rhetoric of Science Spring 1998
(See also bibliographies in Bazerman (1988), Dear (1991), Selzer (1993), and Harris (1997).)
 
  • Agar, Michael. (1985). Institutional discourse. Text, 5(3):147-168.
  • Amann, K., & Knorr-Cetina, K. (1990). The (visual) fixation of belief. In M. Lynch & S. Woolgar (Eds.), Representation in scientific practice, 85-121. Cambridge, MA: MIT P.
  • Barnes, B., & Bloor, D. (1982). Relativism, rationalism and the sociology of knowledge. In M. Hollis & S. Lukes (Eds.), Rationality and relativism, 21-47. Cambridge: MIT P.
  • Bazerman, C. (1988). Shaping written knowledge: The genre and activity of the experimental article in science. Madison: U of Wisconsin P.
  • Becher, Tony. (1987). Disciplinary discourse. Studies in Higher Education 12: 261-74.
  • Bernstein, R. J. (1983). Beyond objectivism and relativism: Science, hermeneutics, and praxis. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
  • Bledstein, Burton J. (1976). The culture of professionalism: The middle class and the development of higher education in America. New York: Norton.
  • Bloor, David. (1976). Knowledge and social imagery. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
  • Brannigan, A. (1981). The social basis of scientific discoveries. Cambridge: Cambridge UP.
  • Brown, JoAnne. (1986). Professional language: Words that succeed. Radical History Review, 34: 33-51.
  • Brown, J. S., & Duguid, P. (1994). Borderline issues: Social and material aspects of design. Human-Computer Interaction, 9(1): 3-36.
  • Brown, Richard Harvey. (1989). Social science as civic discourse: Essays on the invention, legitimation, and uses of social theory.  Chicago: U of Chicago P.
  • Buchanan, R. (1989). Declaration by design: Rhetoric, argument, and demonstration in design practice. In V. Margolin (Ed.). Design discourse: History, theory, criticism, 91-109. Chicago: U of Chicago P.
  • Butler, Chris S. (1990). Qualification in science: Modal meanings in scientific texts. In Walter Nash (Ed.), The writing scholar: Studies in academic discourse, 137-170. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
  • Campbell, J. A. (1970). Darwin and The Origin of Species. Speech Monographs 37: 1-14.
  • Campbell, J. A. (1990). Scientific discovery and rhetorical invention: The path to Darwin’s Origin. In H W. Simons (Ed.), The rhetorical turn: Invention and persuasion in the conduct of inquiry, 58-91. London: Sage.
  • Cheney, G. (1991). Rhetoric in an organizational society: Managing multiple identities. Columbia: U of South Carolina P.
  • Collins, H. (1983). The sociology of scientific knowledge: Studies of contemporary science. Annual Review of Sociology, 1983: 265-85.
  • Coulthard, M., & Ashby, M. C. (1975). Talking with the doctor. Journal of Communication, 25 (3), 240-247.
  • Crane, D. (1972). Invisible colleges. Chicago: U of Chicago P.
  • Crismore, Avon, & Farnsworth, Rodney. (1990). Metadiscourse in popular and professional science discourse. In Walter Nash (Ed.), The writing scholar: Studies in academic discourse, 118-136. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
  • Dear, P. (June, 1985). Totius in verba: Rhetoric and authority in the early Royal Society. Isis, 76 (282), 145-161.
  • Dear, P. (Ed.) (1991). The literary structure of scientific argument.  Philadelphia: U of Pennsylvania P.
  • Doheny-Farina, S. (1992). Rhetoric, innovation, technology: Case studies of technical communication in technology transfers. Cambridge, MA: MIT P.
  • Drew, P., & Heritage, J. (Eds.) (1992). Talk at work: Interaction in institutional settings. Cambridge: Cambridge UP.
  • Eisenstein, Elizabeth L. (1979). The printing press as an agent of change: Communications and cultural transformations in early modern Europe. Cambridge: Cambridge UP.
  • Fahnestock, Jeanne. (1986). Accomodating science: The rhetorical life of scientific facts. Written Communication, 3(3): 275-296.
  • Fischer, Frank, & Forester, John. (Eds.) (1993). The argumentative turn in policy analysis and planning. Durham, NC: Duke UP.
  • Forsythe, D. E. (1993). Engineering knowledge: The construction of knowledge in artificial intelligence. Social Studies of Science, 23(3): 445-477
  • Foucault, M. (1970). The order of things: An archaeology of the human sciences. Translation of Les mots et les choses. New York: Vintage.
  • Friedson, E. (1984). Are professions necessary? In T. L. Haskell (Ed.), The authority of experts: Studies in history and theory, 3-27. Bloomington, IN: Indiana UP.
  • Fuller, S. (1993). Philosophy, rhetoric, and the end of knowledge: The coming of science and technology studies. Madison, WI: The U of Wisconsin P.
  • Geisler, C. (1994). Academic literacy and the nature of expertise: Reading, writing, and knowing in academic philosophy. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  • Gilbert, G. N., & Mulkay, M. (1984). Opening Pandora’s box: A sociological analysis of scientists’ discourse. Cambridge: Cambridge UP.
  • Gross, Alan G., & Keith, William M. (Eds.) (1997). Rhetorical hermeneutics: Invention and interpretation in the age of science. Albany, NY: State U of New York P.
  • Gross, Alan G. (1991). “Rhetoric of Science without Constraints.”  Rhetorica 9(4): 283-299.
  • Gross, Alan G. (1989). The rhetoric of science. Cambridge, MA: Harvard UP.
  • Hacking, I. (1975). The emergence of probability. Cambridge: Cambridge UP.
  • Hacking, I. (1983). Representing and intervening: Introductory topics in the philosophy of natural science. Cambridge: Cambridge UP.
  • Harding, Sandra. (1993). Rethinking standpoint epistemology: “What is strong objectivity?” In L. Alcoff & E. Potter (Eds.), Feminist epistemologies, 49-82. New York: Routledge.
  • Harris, Randy Allen (Ed.). (1997).  Landmark Essays on Rhetoric of Science: Case Studies.  Mahway, NJ: Hermagoras Press of Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  • Harris, Randy Allen. (1991). Rhetoric of science. College English 53: 282-307.
  • Henderson, K. (1991). Flexible sketches and inflexible data bases: Visual communication, conscription devices, and boundary objects in design engineering. Science, Technology, and Human Values, 16(4): 448-473.
  • Herndl, C. G., B. A. Fennell, & C. R. Miller (1991). Understanding failures in organizational discourse: The accident at Three Mile Island and the Shuttle Challenger Disaster. In C. Bazerman & J. Paradis (Eds.), Textual dynamics of the professions, 279-305. Madison, WI: U of Wisconsin P.
  • Herrington, A., & Moran, C. (Eds.) (1992). Writing, teaching, and learning in the disciplines. New York: MLA.
  • Howell, W. S. (1956). Logic and rhetoric in England, 1500-1700. Princeton, NJ: Princeton UP.
  • Kalmbach, J. (1986). The laboratory reports of engineering students: A case study. In A. Young & T. Fulwiler (Eds.), Writing across the disciplines: Research into practice, 176-183. Upper Montclair, NJ: Boynton/Cook.
  • Katz, Steven B. (1992). The ethic of expediency: Classical rhetoric, technology, and the holocaust. College English, 54(3): 255-275.
  • Kaufer, D. S., & Geisler, C. (1989). Novelty in academic writing. Written Communication, 6(3): 286-311.
  • Kaufer, D., & Young, R. E. (1993). Writing in the content areas: Some theoretical complexities. In L. Odell (Ed.), Theory and practice in the teaching of writing: Rethinking the discipline.  pp. 71-104. Carbondale, IL: SIUP.
  • Kaufer, D. S.,  & Carley, K. M. (1993). Communication at a distance: The influence of print on sociocultural organization and change. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
  • Kaufer, D. S., & Butler, B. (1996). Rhetoric and the arts of design. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
  • Knorr-Cetina, K. (1981). The manufacture of knowledge: An essay on the constructivst and contextual nature of science. New York: Oxford.
  • Kraut, R. E., Egido, C., & Galegher, J. (1990). Patterns of communication and contact in scientific collaboration. In J. Galegher, R. E. Kraut, & C. Egido (Eds.), Intellectual teamwork: The social and technological bases of cooperative work, 149-172. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
  • Kraut, R. E., Galegher, J., Fish, R., & Chalfonte, B. (1992). Task requirements and media choice in collaborative writing. Human-Computer Interaction, 7(4): 375-407.
  • Kuhn, T. S. (1996). The structure of scientific revolutions, 3rd ed. Chicago: U of Chicago P.
  • Lakatos, I. (1978).The methodology of scientific research programs. Cambridge UP.
  • Latour, B. (1990). Drawing things together. In M. Lynch & S. Woolgar (Eds.), Representation in scientific practice, 19-68. Cambridge, MA: MIT P.
  • Latour, B., & Woolgar, S. (1986). Laboratory life: The construction of scientific facts. Princeton: Princeton UP.
  • Leff, M. C. (1987). Modern sophistic and the unity of rhetoric. In J. S. Nelson, A. Megill, & D. N. McCloskey (Eds.), The rhetoric of the human sciences: Language and argument in scholarship and public affairs, 19-37. Madison: U of Wisconsin P.
  • Lynch, M. (1985). Art and artifact in laboratory science: A study of shop work and shop talk in a research laboratory. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
  • Lynch, M., & Woolgar, S. (Eds.) (1988). Representation in scientific practice. Cambridge, MA: MIT P.
  • MacDonald, Susan Peck. (1994). Professional academic writing in the humanities and social sciences. Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois UP.
  • McCarthy, L. P., & Gerring, J. P. (1994). Revising psychiatry’s charter document: DSM-IV. Written Communication, 11(2): 147-192.
  • McCloskey, D. N. (1985). The rhetoric of economics. Madison, WI: U of Wisconsin P.
  • McCloskey, D. N. (1994). Knowledge and Persuasion in Economics.  Cambridge UP.
  • Medway, Peter. (1996). Virtual and material buildings: Construction and constructivism in architecture and writing.  Written Communication, 13(4): 473-514.
  • Megill, Alan. (Ed.) (1994). Rethinking objectivity. Durham: Duke UP.
  • Merton, Robert. (1968). The Matthew effect in science. Science 159: 56-63.
  • Miller, C. R., & Selzer, J. (1985). Special topics of argument in engineering reports. In L. Odell & D. Goswami (Eds.), Writing in nonacademic settings, 309-341. New York: Guilford P.
  • Miller, C. R. (1979). A humanistic rationale for technical writing. College English, 40(6): 610-617.
  • Miller, C. R. (1990). The rhetoric of decision science, or Herbert A. Simon says. In H. W. Simons (Ed.), The rhetorical turn: Invention and persuasion in the conduct of inquiry, 162-184. Chicago: U of Chicago P.
  • Miller, Thomas P. (1991). Treating professional writing as social praxis. Journal of Advanced Composition, 11(1): 57-72.
  • Mitcham, C. (1979). Philosophy and the history of technology. In G. Bugliarello & D. B. Doner (Eds.), The history and philosophy of technology, 163-201. Urbana: U of Illinois P.
  • Moss, Jean Dietz. (1993). Novelties in the Heavans: Rhetoric and Science in the Copernican Controvesy.  Chicago: U of Chicago P.
  • Mumford, Lewis. (Winter, 1964). Authoritarian and democratic technics. Technology and Culture, 5 (1): 1-8.
  • Myers, G. (1985). The social construction of two biologists’ proposals. Written Communication 7: 419-55.
  • Myers, G. (1990). Writing biology: Texts in the social construction of scientific knowledge. Madison, WI: U of Wisconsin P.
  • Nagel, Thomas. (1997). The last word. NY: Oxford UP.
  • Nelson, J. S., Megill, A., & McCloskey, D. N. (Eds.) (1987). The rhetoric of the human sciences: Language and argument in scholarship and public affairs. U of Wisconsin P.
  • Norman, D. A. (1988). The design of everyday things. New York: Doubleday.
  • Novick, Peter. (1988). That noble dream: The ‘“Objectivity question’”and the American hsitorical profession. Cambridge: Cambridge UP.
  • Odell, L., & Goswami, D. (Eds.) (1985). Writing in nonacademic settings. New York: Guilford P.
  • Paradis, J. (1991). Text and action: The operator’s manual in context and in court. In C. Bazerman & J. Paradis (Eds.), Textual dynamics of the professions: Historical and contemporary studies of writing in professional communities, 256-278. Madison, WI: U of Wisconsin P.
  • Peirce, C. S. (1955). The fixation of belief. Philosophical writings of Peirce, 5-22. Ed. J. Buchler. New York: Dover. [first published, 1877.]
  • Penrose, Ann M., & Steven B. Katz.  (1998). Writing in the Sciences: Exploring Conventions of Scientific Discourse.  New York: St. Martin’s Press.
  • Pinch, Trevor J., & Bijker, Wiebe E. (1987). The social construction of facts and artifacts: Or how the sociology of science and the sociology of technology might benefit each other. In W. E. Bijker, T. P. Hughes, & T. J. Pinch (Eds.), The social construction of technological systems, 17-50. Cambridge, MA: MIT P.
  • Popper, Karl R. (1968). Science: Conjectures and refutations. In Conjectures and refutations: The growth of scientific knowledge, 33-65. New York: Harper & Row.
  • Prelli, Lawrence. (1989). A rhetoric of science: Inventing scientific discourse. Columbia, SC: U of South Carolina P.
  • Price, Derek de Solla. (1963). Little science, big science. New York: Columbia UP.
  • Reder, S., & Schwab, R. G. (1989b). The communicative economy of the work group: Multi-channel genres of communication. Office: Technology & People, 4(3): 177-195.
  • Roberts, R. H., & Good, J. M. M. (Eds.) (1993). The recovery of rhetoric: Persuasive discourse and disciplinarity in the human sciences. Charlottesville, VA: UP of Virginia.
  • Rorty, Richard. (1987). Science as solidarity. In J. S. Nelson, A. Megill, & D. N. McCloskey (Eds.), The rhetoric of the human sciences: Language and argument in scholarship and public affairs, 38-52. Madison, WI: U of Wisconsin P.
  • Ross, Andrew. (Ed.). (1996).  Science Wars.  Durham, NC: Duke UP.
  • Sauer, Beverly. (1993). Sense and sensibility in technical documentation. Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 7(1): 63-83.
  • Schön, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. New York: Basic Books.
  • Segal, J. (1994). Patient compliance, the rhetoric of rhetoric, and the rhetoric of persuasion, Rhetoric Society Quarterly, 23 (3/4), 90-102.
  • Selzer, J. (1983). The composing process of an engineer. College Composition and Communication, 34: 178-187.
  • Selzer, J. (Ed.) (1993). Understanding scientific prose. Madison: U of Wisconsin P.
  • Shapin, Steven, & Simon Schaffer. (1985). The leviathan and the air-pump: Hobbes, Boyle, and the experimental life. Princeton: Princeton UP.
  • Shapin, Steven. (1994). A social history of truth: Civility and science in Seventeenth-Century England. Chicago: U of Chicago P.
  • Shapin, Steven. (1996). The Scientific Revolution.  Chicago: U of Chicago P.
  • Simons, Herbert W. (Ed.) (1989). Rhetoric in the human sciences. London: Sage.
  • Simons, Herbert W. (Ed.) (1990). The rhetorical turn: Invention and persuasion in the conduct of inquiry. Chicago: U of Chicago P.
  • Smith, Dorothy E. (1978). ‘K is menally ill’: The anatomy of a factual account. Sociology, 12 (1): 23-53.
  • Suchman, L.A. (1987). Plans and situated actions: The problem of human-machine communication. Cambridge: Cambridge UP.
  • Sullivan, D. L. (1991). The epideictic rhetoric of science. Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 5(3): 229-245.
  • Swales, John, & Hazem Najjar (1987). The writing of research article introductions. Written Communication, 4(2): 175-191.
  • Tannen, D., & Wallat, C. (1986). Medical professionals and patients: A linguistic analysis of communication across contexts. Language in Society, 15 (3), 295-312.
  • Throgmorton, James A. (1996). Planning as persuasive storytelling: The rhetorical construction of Chicago’s electric future. Chicago: U of Chicago P.
  • Toulmin, S. (1972). Human understanding. Princeton: Princeton UP.
  • Traweek, S. (1988). Beamtimes and lifetimes: The world of high energy physicists. Cambridge, MA: Harvard UP.
  • Weber, R. J., & Perkins, D. N. (1989). How to invent artifacts and ideas. New Ideas in Psychology, 7(1): 49-72.
  • White, Hayden (1978). Tropics of discourse: Essays in cultural criticism. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins UP.
  • Winner, Langdon. (Winter, 1980). Do artifacts have politics? Daedalus, 109 (1): 121-136.
  • Winsor, D. A. (1996). Writing like an engineer: A rhetorical education. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
  • Woolgar, S. (1988). Science: The very idea. Chichester, England: Ellis Horwood Limited.
  • Yearley, Steven. (1981). Textual persuasion: The role of social accounting in the construction of scientific arguments. Philosophy of the social sciences, 11: 409-435.
  • Zappen, J. P. (1983). A rhetoric for research in science and technology. In P. V. Anderson, R. J. Brockmann, & C. R. Miller (Eds.), New essays in technical and scientific communication: Research, theory, practice, 123-138. Farmingdale, NY: Baywood.

  •