Advancing a Critical Framework for the Identification and Analysis of Visual Euphemism in Technical Communication Visuals by Kevin W. Van Winkle, B.A., M.A. A Dissertation In TECHNICAL COMMUNICATION AND RHETORIC Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of Texas Tech University in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Approved Dr. Sean Zdenek Chair of Committee Dr. Craig Baehr Dr. Joyce Carter Dr. Mark Sheridan Dean of the Graduate School May, 2016 Copyright 2016, Kevin W. Van Winkle Texas Tech University, Kevin Van Winkle, May 2016 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS To the chair of this dissertation, Dr. Sean Zdenek, thank you for your early interest in this project and continued support throughout it. Your feedback, questions, and critiques were invaluable, ultimately helping me to achieve a deeper understanding of the topics and issues discussed herein. To Dr. Craig Baehr, thank you, as well, for the insight you were able to provide me during this dissertation process. Also, thank you for helping me to ensure that this dissertation was a “tech comm” dissertation. It was very important to me that it be such, and having you as a committee member guaranteed that it would be. To Dr. Joyce Carter, thank you for sitting on my committee and your willingness to help me complete this dissertation. More than this, though, I want to thank you for your leadership over the TCR program. Upon listening to the “You-Are- Texas-Tech” speech on the first day of my first May seminar, I felt both fortunate and proud. Because of you and the entire TCR faculty and students I have had the opportunity to study and work with, I still feel the same way today. To Dr. Miles Kimball, thank you for your encouragement and guidance. Your mark on my research here and elsewhere is indelible. To my co-workers at the SDIN NMC, thank you for all of the support you provided me during my graduate studies. Specifically, I want to thank Steve King, my boss of 15 years, for his support and for never – not even once – denying me a day off from work, so that I could meet a homework deadline, attend a conference, or drive down to Lubbock, TX for two weeks. Additionally, I want to thank Maureen Fitzgerald, my friend and co-worker. Your genuine interest in my research and willingness to help will always be something I remember and value. Lastly, to my family – Jen, Vera, Shug, Sophie, Abbi, and Bodie – thank you for your unwavering confidence in me. You never said “if,” only “when.” ii Texas Tech University, Kevin Van Winkle, May 2016 TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT ............................................................................................................. v LIST OF TABLES .................................................................................................. vi LIST OF FIGURES ................................................................................................ vii CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION .......................................................................... 1 …...The Need for a Critical Framework for Visual Eupehmism .............................. 3 …Research Questions ............................................................................................ 7 …...Technical Communication and Technical Communication Visuals .................. 8 …...Artifacts .............................................................................................................. 13 …...Politeness Theory ............................................................................................... 18 …...Taboo and Technial Subjects ............................................................................. 20 …...Abstraction and Ideology ................................................................................... 21 …...Verbal and Visual Eupehmism Defined ............................................................. 22 …...Provisional Example of the Framework ............................................................. 23 …...Chapter Outline .................................................................................................. 26 …...The Value of this Study ...................................................................................... 27 CHAPTER II: LITERATURE REVIEW ............................................................. 29 …...Abstraction ......................................................................................................... 30 …...Ideology .............................................................................................................. 32 …...Abstraction and Ideology in Figurative Language ............................................. 37 …...Figures of Speech in Technical Communiation ................................................. 41 …...Visual Rhetoric in Technical Communication ................................................... 47 …...The Link between Visuals and Figurative Language ......................................... 53 …...Politeness Theory ............................................................................................... 57 …...Politeness Theory in Technical Communiation ................................................. 64 …...Politeness Theory Methodology in Techical Communication ........................... 73 …...Critiques of Politeness Theory ........................................................................... 75 …...Verbal and Visaul Euphemism Defined ............................................................. 78 …...Conclusion .......................................................................................................... 79 iii Texas Tech University, Kevin Van Winkle, May 2016 CHAPTER III: METHODOLOGY ...................................................................... 81 …...Artifacts .............................................................................................................. 82 …...The Technial Illustrations of Mariano Taccola .................................................. 83 …...Golden Age Graphics ......................................................................................... 88 …...Animated Ailments ............................................................................................ 91 …...Politeness Theory Changes and Additions ......................................................... 97 …...Deviation from Expected Usage ........................................................................ 105 …...Social Semiotics as Visual Analysis Tool Kit .................................................... 106 …...Methodology of the Critical Framework ............................................................ 109 …...Limitations of the Critical Framework ............................................................... 110 CHAPTER IV: CRITICAL FRAMEWORK APPLIED .................................... 115 …...The Technical Illustrations of Mariano Taccola ................................................ 117 …...Golden Age Graphics ......................................................................................... 150 …...Animated Ailments ............................................................................................ 180 CHAPTER V: CONCLUSION .............................................................................. 195 …...Research Questions Revisited ............................................................................ 196 …...Implications ........................................................................................................ 212 …...Limitations and Future Research ....................................................................... 221 …...Conclusion .......................................................................................................... 228 REFERENCES ........................................................................................................ 229 APPENDIX .............................................................................................................. 245 iv Texas Tech University, Kevin Van Winkle, May 2016 ABSTRACT This dissertation explores the concept of visual euphemism in technical communication visuals. Building upon Brown and Levinson’s (1987/2004) politeness theory, I create a critical framework that allows for the identification and analysis of visual euphemism. I then apply this framework to a wide-ranging corpus of technical communication visuals to show how the concept of visual euphemism can inform our understanding of effective visual design, as well as expose how ideology is articulated in the visual artifacts created in the field of technical communication. Ultimately, I show that, rather than avoid visual euphemism because it ostensibly contradicts common and conventional principles of design and technical communication, technical communicators should recognize and exploit the facilitative power of visual euphemism to achieve their rhetorical goals. v Texas Tech University, Kevin Van Winkle, May 2016 LIST OF TABLES 3.1: (W)eightiness-to-politeness-strategy correlation ............................................... 105 4.1: Interclass correlation for all artifacts analyzed .................................................. 116 4.2: (W)eightiness-to-politeness-strategy correlation ............................................... 117 vi Texas Tech University, Kevin Van Winkle, May 2016 LIST OF FIGURES 1.1: Gun Deaths in Florida (2014) by Chan ............................................................. 2 1.2: It was Never a Dress (2015) by Axosoft ...........................................................