I like the distinction between *what writers do* and *what writing readers do*, Mike. Particularly in first-year writing, I find it useful to turn from what writers do to what readers do when they write, are read, when they are re-written and write back. Not really an elegant way to put it, but I like to think it complicates hermeneutics with what Ulmer calls heuretics; more than interpreting, invention is the thing we’re after, and rhetorical invention is active and selective, finding more robust germination in certain picadas/tracks/traces (thanks for this helpful, orienting etymology, btw). I wasn’t very careful in distinguishing between paths and trails, and I actually felt some reluctance about using those interchangably. You’ve put me on to several useful ideas and supplemental readings as I try to refine this project, develop it with richer support, etc.