| This study examines the evolution of two paradigms of American forestry discourse—designated “practical forestry discourse” and “forest science discourse—as represented in the research articles in the Society of American Foresters' (SAF's) Proceedings of the Society of American Foresters (1905–17) and its successor, the Journal of Forestry (1918–) over the period 1905–54. The study uses the research publications of American foresters as a barometer by which changes in the profession can be marked. Studying this period makes sense, in that is it bounded by the inception of SAF journals and the subsequent creation by SAF of the journal Forest Science, signaling a formal differentiation between practical forestry discourse and forest science discourse. The study provides insight into the interactions of scientific texts and sociopolitical contexts that have been of ongoing scholarly interest.; In this study, 379 research articles from SAF's journals were coded into 7 categories by research methodology: field observation, field measurement, manipulation in the field, manipulation in semi-natural conditions, laboratory studies, and models and theory; additionally, articles on matters of forestry policy were given a distinct category. The first three methodologies are representative of practical forestry discourse while the next three are representative of forest science discourse. The 379 coded articles were then subjected to rhetorical and textual analyses in order to elucidate the differentiation of practical forestry discourse and forest science discourse that led to the creation of Forest Science.; Results of the analyses show a close correlation between changing priorities in American forestry discourse and changes in its sociopolitical context. Of particular note are the influence of new technologies, the growth of allied scientific fields such as ecology and genetics, and the political demands of Congress and the USDA-Forest Service. While these contextual changes can be seen to enable the development of subspecialties in American forestry and in American forestry discourse, textual analyses reveal differences between practical forestry discourse and forest science discourse evident as early as 1905. Consideration of the results allows several conclusions to be drawn about the history of scientific and technical communication as well as the rhetoric of science. |
