The Basic Aims of Discourse

James L. Kinneavy discusses "affective fallacy" under the section of reading called "The Determination of the Aims of Discourse" (Kinneavy 130). I couldn't agree more with the idea that we must avoid making the assumption that "what the author says he is trying to do is actually what the work really accomplishes" (130). Certainly as readers, we all process information differently when we attempt to make sense of it through the use of our own prior knowledge. Our reactions might vary to the point that one reader's understanding of the basic aims of a particular discourse might completely disagree with what the author is trying to accomplish. Still, while we must consider the importance and relevance of the readers' reactions, we also need to keep in mind that they should not be the only focus of analysis when determining the basic aims of discourse. Instead, we should use the readers' reactions as "markers that can point to significant evidence in the discourse" (131).