Linguistic Version What happens when from inception our compositions honor reader diversity specifically in terms of abilities? What happens when we reject the notion of transliteration, fashioning translation as foundational to our invention and delivery processes? What happens when we craft “text experiences,” not just “texts,” experiences that invite readers to determine ultimate meanings? What happens when we release some control of the message itself in favor of greater accessibility (a truly “participatory design”?)? Sean Zdenek, in User Experience, describes the often “noisy” experience of multimodal, multi media texts. He writes that “…sounds accumulate, overlap, and compete with one another:…
Recent Posts
- The Sweetland Digital Rhetoric Collaborative Interviews the editors of Computers and Composition
- [Utopia]-in-the-loop in an Emergent Age of Full Automation
- Ghosts-in-the-Loop: Bormann’s Ghost v. AI
- Relational-in-the-Loop Writing: Reframing Rhetorical Load Sharing as a Rhetorical Assemblage
- Accessibility-in-the-Loop: Rhetorics of Resistance, Freedom, and Care
- Operational-Infrastructure-in-the-Loop
- Surveillance-in-the-Loop Writing
- Refusal-in-the-Loop Writing—or, what happened to the field that stood up to TurnItIn, Course Hero, Chegg, and paper mills?