In this article Swales is trying to set up a true definition about discourse community, for this he provides six characteristics defining how to be a discourse community. Through the text Swale mentions the Six characteristics about discourse community, but he also sets up that there is a difference between discourse community and a speech community. For the speech community Swales says that is a group that shares similar linguistic goals, same languafe even both.Swales also notes that there are sociolinguistic and sociorhetoric speech communities. The main difference between speech and discourse communities lies in the fact that speech communities inherit members, while discourse communities recruit its members by persuasion, training or relevant qualification. After describing the six characteristics Swales conclude at some point different things like; goals may be published in written form just like documents, they could be either implicit, high level or abstract, communication can br through text or confrontation. I really liked and I agree with this article because Swales talks about how the discourse community term is not only the change of its members point of view, members can think different and be opposed to a speech community who ar most likely to be close, and that academic classes are not particularly discourse communities at start but the goal is to become one by end. He also notes that some discourse communities are well established, while others are new and shifting. I feel identified with a lot discourse communities just like my clasroom that everyone is there for a reason, doing the same work for the same purpose. My job everyone has to be in the same channel, we develop our own language sometimes, and we share the same goals too. Also my basketball team can be considered as a discourse community. My own definition for discourse community would be share same goals oral and writing. Manuel Lucero