ABSTRACT
Rhetoricians have recently begun to use cultural/historical activity theory to
examine the way that groups of people coordinate their actions to achieve a
common object (Bazerman, 1997; Russell, 1997; Winsor, 1999). An activity
system’s object is the problem, space, or focus of activity upon which it acts.
For instance, a group of computer programmers might have as their object the
software that they are writing. The idea of a common object is important because
it is one of the means by which an activity system is defined. As Miettinen
(1998) points out, “In an activity system, the object of activity has constitutive
significance. The object of the activity ‘defines’ the activity” (p. 424). In
other words, an activity system exists only if people within it are acting upon a
common object. However, the theory also assumes that most activity systems are
heterogeneous, made of up of people with differing backgrounds and interests
(Engstrom, 1992). Thus, common objects would be achievements, not naturally
occurring situations. Computer programmers, for instance, can be divided in
how they define their task or can take up projects that their managers have not
assigned (Artemeva & Freedman, 2001).
