Royster

Royster set up her arguments into three scenes and to me it seemed as though her main issues are with participants within a discourse community who take the authoritarian role a little farther than it needs to go, ultimately offending the listeners. I will put myself into an example: I work with children of all ages, mostly the infants and two year olds. Other than working with them for 30 hours a week, I have no outside experiences that would make me credible enough to tell the parents how to raise their child. When the parent comes to pick their kid up at the end of a day, I have no room to lecture them and tell them what kind of food they should feed them for dinner, when to put them to bed, and so on. Although I have had learned enough knowledge about children to know well enough how to take care of them, it would be offensive and completely uncalled for. Royster believes it does not matter how much knowledge you have aquired or how much education you have had; if you have no personal life experiences with a topic, you are in no position to take the authoritative role.
Royster also touches on academic discourse, communication styles and how we need to change our methods so taht we can expose ourselves to a wider range of dicourse communities. This in turn will help us gain experience and knowledge within a broader contexts and societies.