Section C: Language Analysis - structure

[sjayne]

Reading through past examiners reports it appears that all of the high scoring responses follow different structures.
 I've been taught to analyse by argument, but I just attempted a piece by analysing chronologically and found it so much easier.

 Hence my question is; does it matter how we structure our body?? Arguments or chronologically?
 Do I have to write 3/4 main body paragraphs or can I possibly do more? Eg one for the title or shooting down opposing arguments (going off last years)

[AmericanBeauty]

I personally analyse chronologically, meaning i start from the start, then I find different links throughout the piece when I'm writing and jump ship to other parts of the article or whatever the form is. I find it easier to write like this. If you are doing it 100% chronologically, you might find yourself analysing the same things over and over again, which would be better to do if linked into one paragraph.

[anna.xo]

What do you people write in your conclusions ? I find myself just writing something like "[author] attempts to change reader's views from ____ to ____" and then I get stuck. Tips ?

[walkec]

What do you people write in your conclusions ? I find myself just writing something like "[author] attempts to change reader's views from ____ to ____" and then I get stuck. Tips ?

I like to save the last paragraph of the article for a conclusion. So I finish by discussing any final shifts in language and tone and the overall effect this has on the audience.

[speedy]

I like to save the last paragraph of the article for a conclusion. So I finish by discussing any final shifts in language and tone and the overall effect this has on the audience.

Damn that's really cool, I might give it a go

[AmericanBeauty]

I like to save the last paragraph of the article for a conclusion. So I finish by discussing any final shifts in language and tone and the overall effect this has on the audience.

You're not meant to be introducing anything new in your conclusion. The conclusion often has a call to arms or something empowering that can be the whole build up of an article/speech or whatever, which sees a change in tone and effect. So you wouldn't really be summarising it effectively I don't think?

[walkec]

You're not meant to be introducing anything new in your conclusion. The conclusion often has a call to arms or something empowering that can be the whole build up of an article/speech or whatever, which sees a change in tone and effect. So you wouldn't really be summarising it effectively I don't think?

You've not really ever meant to summarise in an english essay. Examiners want insight and thoughtful analysis, not restating or retelling.

That's not meant to be a critique on your approach, AmericanBeauty. But it's just for me to point out that English is a subject where there is not necessarily one "right" approach because it is so subject.

[sjayne]

I usually analyse the last paragraph in my conclusion too

[Yacoubb]

I like to save the last paragraph of the article for a conclusion. So I finish by discussing any final shifts in language and tone and the overall effect this has on the audience.

I find a way of doing that + mentioning how the writer entertains the notion that forms the crux of their argument. I feel like it's so pointless having a conclusion, and quite frankly I'm only putting it there to appease the 60-year old, menopausal assessors who hate young people don't cry in agony, 'WHY OH WHY IS THERE NO CONCLUSION - HUMANITY IS DECLINING NOOO!'.

^ true story.

[Yacoubb]

Reading through past examiners reports it appears that all of the high scoring responses follow different structures.
 I've been taught to analyse by argument, but I just attempted a piece by analysing chronologically and found it so much easier.

 Hence my question is; does it matter how we structure our body?? Arguments or chronologically?
 Do I have to write 3/4 main body paragraphs or can I possibly do more? Eg one for the title or shooting down opposing arguments (going off last years)

I always go with chronology, because I think that is worthy of analysis. But I find a way to make it all work by looking at the structure of the piece in its entirety. So, the writer has X first. Why? TO position readers to believe in Y. Given that they're likely to have accepted Y, they're more likely to be open to Z. Then analyse how all that works together to get the readership to affirm the contention (which the writer ultimately endeavours to achieve). 

I also try to link things by mentioning how one thing further compounds something aforementioned, etc. I know there is no real rule, but I generally pick 6 bits of analysis and hope to write ~100 words on each, plus my intro + conclusion gives me around 700-800 words. Of course you'll discuss things like tone shifts, the visual, etc.

[swagsxcboi]

I like to save the last paragraph of the article for a conclusion. So I finish by discussing any final shifts in language and tone and the overall effect this has on the audience.

could you please provide an example of this?
I struggle to write my conclusions for LA

[walkec]

could you please provide an example of this?
I struggle to write my conclusions for LA

If you PM an email address I can send you one because the PDF file is too large to attach on the forum