Compilation of Language Analysis Feedback

[darvell]

The increasing awareness of the harms of smoking have introduced laws in an attempt to mitigate its effects on others in non-smokers throughout society. In The Daily Messenger’s editorial “Time for the Very Last Puff” (3rd of July, 2007), the editor asserts that smoking should be prohibited throughout the state, using a pejoratively tone to disparageing tobacco companies. intro seems very short, a couple more of the sub arguments that the author uses might be nice in here. Further supporting such sentimentOr even complementing? is an image from Andrew De La Rue, which depicts cigarettes placed disorderly in the sand, which possibly implies (sound too unsure of yourself here haha ) implying environment harm to readers. As a result of its generally unsophisticated language, the article may attract the general public and smokers, which may in turn incite further debate, including how to effectively reduce the incidence of smoking. Mention who the author targets - they've specifically tried to aim it towards a group!

Initially, the editor attempts to besmirch the smoking companies and smokers as inconsiderate. In one instance, the phrase “face of fury” has been added to belittle smokers as irate and unfriendly how? Also, connotations of words?  . In consequence, the readers – especially non-smokers –  avoid using dashes in this way, it forces the reader to pause when reading your essay and screws up your expression! could feel alienated towards them as it paints a picture of their angered visage how does this make them feel alienated though? . Augmenting such perception is the contrast between patients who “die inside hospitals”, compared to staff who “freely light up outside”. Such represents staff as uncaring and callous how?, as the audience may also envisage patients in agony due to smoking.what is the effect of this?? Consequently, readers could feel inclined to condemn smokers as selfish, because.... or concerned for the patients’ wellbeingagain, what is it that causes this?While in one aspect the editor reprimands the smokers for their insensitivity, smoking factories’ are also rebuked for being “futile” and “tricky” in their campaigns. Specifically, “tricky” suggests that they have been manipulative,how? why does the author do this? how does it make the reader \feel?? while “futile” hints their powerlessness against the government how? . Subsequently, such may elicit a sense of contempt as companies are seen as deceptive.

Further compounding smoking as of negative impactweird phrasing , the editor uses descriptive language unnecessary, quote what you're talking about! to encourage readers to visually see them in such a way. In one depiction, ashtrays are delineated as being filled “crazily” in the hospital. As the editor has previously made the connection between patients and smoking staff, the word “crazily” connotations? effect on reader? how is that effect created? why does author do this? implies that such a problem will only exacerbate how is this implied? . In consequence, readers could be most inclined to reject smoking in society mm, why/how? . Compounding such description, the editor particularly makes parallels between smoking and “strange flowers” and “poisonous mushrooms”.  Demonstrating that smoking is an illegal drug, for “strange flowers” and “poisonous mushrooms” are related to illegal drug use, audiences are potentially left fearful of the harmful effects it can have. is that the only effect it ha\s? associating something with something illegal is pretty dodgy, kind of incriminates it in a way. Elaborate a bit. Aggrandising such repulsion is that the human mouths are “sucking on those deadly things!” The exclamation mark, which underlines the smoking as “deadly”,what is the effect of deadly though? Exclamation marks - pretty shallow analysis. Connotations? Effect on reader of "deadly" ?? and yet is been being sucked on may also cajole readers to feel greatly distasteful about smoking how is this achieved specifically using the language? . Particularly, smokers could also feel ashamed and ridiculed that such harm placed on their bodies are similar to health damages caused by illicit drugs. On another aspect, furthermore/moreover the editor denigrates those who smoke near others as being of “assault”. While smokers may feel contrite for their actions, others could feel aggravated that harm is similar to “assault”, for the word implies harm to which they did not deserveAlmost implies a violation of rights. How would this make the reader feel? You need to analyse this word a bit deeper! . Similarly, the “war on the weed” made analogous to the communities plan to reduce smoking rates magnifies the gravity and impacts which may “ruin” the lives of young people. This may elicit inclusion and concern to the younger citizens of societyhow? prove it , who are also seen as the future generation. Consequently, the readership feel fear and are urged -- as a community -- pleeeeeeeeeeeease avoid using dashes in the future, reword your sentences so that they aren't necessary and your expression will come off way more beast! to take action in order to avoid harm towards them.why/how? After establishing the image of ash-trays as malevolent, the editor takes this to his advantage by finally stating that they “must fight bravely to consign smoking to the ashtray of history”. You need to make sure that if you're quoting it's because you're going to explain the effect of a word on a reader - that's the main purpose of your essay! This has been added by the editor to directly emphasise the importance of the issue?? audience against smoking. As such, the inclusion may encourage readers to act. I think the last bit is maybe unecessary, might be a nice ending sentence but it doesnt really add anything to your analysis - your job is to say how the reader will feel in response to what the author has intentionally done - but not necessarily how they will act in future. I  tend to avoid sentences like these personally, I think they're a bit irrelevant to the article analysis.

Accompanied with the article is an image, which visually aims to vitiate smoking as to elicit averseness among readers. Represented as cigarettes spontaneously placed in an area of sand, some cigarettes are shaped as crumbled or fragmented. Readers may hence feel repugnant and interpret cigarettes as only causing regression towards both society and the environmentwhy is this a problem, and how does this position readers to view cigarettes . Further underlining such notion are the surrounding black shades in its background, revealing its the malicious nature of "x" (this screwed up your sentence a bit hahaha reword it and compounded with the sand, could provoke an image of the present environment which is being gradually consumed by the multiplication of cigarettes to a state where it is both desolate and lifeless. Such provocation is caused by the connotations I like the analysis of the image here, but connotations are in relation to what  you think/feel ect when you hear a word only not an image. Maybe just mention something like it is implied? I like this tho good job! of the colour black, which relates to corruption and wickedness, and the surfeit amount of sand in the background, which may suggest a desert – an environment which is ostensibly incompatible with human life. Consequently, readers are possibly influenced to fear the future harms cigarettes could cause how? to what? effect? . Such sentiment may also be intensified by the black-and-white colour of the image, implying a lack of vibrancy for which the environment is attributed with. I want you to pick out language from the article that directly supports what you're saying here and analyse it with your analysis of the image, will make it a much stronger paragraph!!! (Also you want to be able to write a bit more than this on the image (but quoting lang. in here will help that) - the image is really important! 

Both the editorial from The Daily Messenger and the supplemented image from Andrew De La Rue support the idea that smoking should be arrantly banned. In a condemning tone towards  the The editor condemns smokers and cigarette companies, the editor makes making connections between smoking and those of greater magnitude to censure them as thoughtless. Moreover, the editor also encourages the readership to take action after such criticism. Similarly, the image portrays cigarettes as a polluting factor towards the environment and the society. Ultimately, non-smokers could feel irritated that their health and the health system are being debased by smokers and hence feel to take action. Conversely, smokers may experience a sense of remorse and uncomfortableness as they are attacked throughout the article. If this issue is not addressed soon enough, smoking could be left to further afflict the health of future generations.The sentences in here are all very short and choppy and start with words like "moreover" and "similarly" - it breaks the flow of it. Slightly longer sentences with a different starting structure will fix this problem!

[massachusetts8]

Hi there sorry to bother but could any please give me any feedback and a possible mark, i greatly appreciate it thanks!

LANGUAGE ANALYSIS: VCAA 2008
Mobile phone usage has become very prevalent in educational institutions today. Principal John Black of Metro High School in his “Message from the principal” (Parent News, 12 May 2004) formally presents the recent ban of mobile phones in schools. This piece is intended to inform parents and students of the new regulations at Metro High School. In response to the new ban, Mary Brown, a disappointed parent, displays her concerns against the prohibition of mobile phones. She directly criticizes and addresses the principal and his board for imposing the ban.
Readers are immediately drawn to Black’s headline which is accompanied by a man in a suit with a graduate’s hat. This icon, used to represent the principal, attempts to encourage readers to carefully consider the words of the message as it is coming from a person of high authority. The image exemplifies the respect and reputation of the principal as a graduate and hence his “message” should be of vital importance. Readers are invited to read on and may feel respectful towards the principal due to his high position in the school. They may also feel curious about what Black has to say in regards to their children. The members of the audience are also drawn to the school’s emblem which demonstrates “MHS Excellence.” Readers understand the esteemed values of the school as they look at the wreath surrounding the words which symbolises honour. They may feel secure that their children are receiving an excellent education at a school that prides itself for its dignity and brilliance.
Black begins by presenting the main concerns of his message in regards to “students bringing mobile phones to school.” Adopting an authoritative tone he asserts in bold that “no student will be allowed to bring a mobile phone onto school property.” Readers may be compelled to feel cautious as they are warned about bringing technological gadgets to school. Black evokes feelings of fear into students of the audience as the consequence for bringing mobile phones to school is “an automatic detention.”
The writer taps into the fears of his primary audience of parents who are concerned about their children’s education and wellbeing. Through listing of the reasons of the ban which state “classes are being severely disrupted...obsessive text messaging...concerns about security in tests and examination,” Black sets the stage for readers to feel anxious and worried that the quality of their children’s education is deteriorating and is harmed by mobile phones. Examples of the damage whereby students “attempted to cheat using mobile phones” stimulate a sense of alarm into readers who realise threat their child could be in this situation. Furthermore statistics revealing “no fewer than 37 students have claimed that phones have been stolen” may shock parents as they may have invested money to buy the phone and theft has still occurred. This device may also undermine the “MHS Excellence” as parents may feel appalled that students are stealing phones but it also endeavours to portray the negative effects of mobile phones at school. Loaded language such as “unsavoury incidents [whereby] no fewer than three times this year phones have been left on ‘accidentally’ in changing rooms” may horrify members of the audience and sway them away from allowing their children to take their mobile phones to school.
Moreover, Black attacks those individuals with mobile phones. Through flattery of the audience when he says “every sensible person...will agree that the interests of the community must take precedence over selfish desires” Black crafts a negative picture of opponents or members of the audience who may be thinking of themselves rather than the benefit of the whole community. The writer concludes by reiterating the values of Metro High School of which “the focus...on education and responsibility must be preserved.” The assertive tone is likely to invite readers to encourage their children to prevent the detrimental consequences and leave their mobile phones at home.
On the other hand, May Brown begins by adopting a dejected tone as she says she “was very upset when [she read the letter and she is] still really upset.” The principal may feel disheartened that the parents are not supportive about the new regulations at Metro High School. Alliteration in “our lives [are] simpler and safer” belittles Black’s argument that states that mobile phone usage is detrimental. Brown shares her personal anecdote of her daughter’s mobile phone usage when she says “our daughter travels by public transport which...is notoriously unreliable...she has a medical condition which makes is important for her to be able contact us during the day.” As Brown addresses the concerns of many parents, the principal may feel sympathetic towards Brown as her daughter is unhealthy but still manages to travel by the untrustworthy public transport. Black may also feel further dejected as the recent ban has not been favoured by parents of students at Metro High School.
   Brown launches a scathing attack on Black’s pride in school values. The tonal shift from upset to assertive when she states” rules like this don’t help educate our children. It’s not good educational practice” positions Black to fear that the honour and reputation of the school will be undermined by the mobile phone ban. The writer appeals to the common values of adults such as herself and the principal who “as ... mature citizens, we’ve learned, perhaps through making mistakes, to act considerately.” This device is designed to make the principal understand that the ban may not necessarily be beneficial. Brown also proposes a solution when she asks “wouldn’t it be a good idea for students to play a role in setting the rules” which is calculated to appeal to the common sense of Black and sway him to remove the new regulations in regards to mobile phones. The writer reinforces his idea through the use of inclusive language in “our community as a hole may benefit in the long run.” Brown concludes by adopting a pleading tone to beg Black to “please reconsider your decision” thereby positioning the principal to take action to uphold the values of excellence in Metro High School and void banning mobile phones from school property.
   Both Black and Brown present a wide variety of arguments to display their concerns with mobile phones usage at school. The principal appeals to the common fears and concerns of his audience as well as portraying his pride of Metro High School. On the other hand, Brown directly addresses Black and employs attacks, arouses sympathy and provides solution to the issue. The principal is likely to reconsider his decision as he would not want his schools’ values to be undermined.

[Brytz]

Close to exam time.  Correction and feedback much appreciated. 

From: http://www.vcaa.vic.edu.au/Documents/exams/english/english-samp-w.pdf

The recent event of animal activists releasing animals from their cages illegally has sparked a fervour, passionate response in the form of an opinion piece from Jo Smith, a supporter of animal activists. Targeting animal activists and humans who care about animals, contends that the act of releasing the chickens was justified in the name of animal rights.
Passionately, Smith uses powerful words such as ‘dire’ and ‘oppressed animals’ in an attempt to instil a sense of desperation to the reader to help these weak animals from their plight. Smith seeks to exaggerate the situation to try and encourage more attention to animals is required. Nevertheless, Smith glorifies the activists’ action as ‘noble’ who ‘risked life and limb’. These send connotations that activists are heroic dedicating their lives to activism. The reader can likely see that Smith is trying to suggest these actions are important and these ’noble’ actions should be applauded. These words are powerful at glorifying the activists go through on a day to day basis. This is juxtaposed by Smith deliberately quoting belligerent language from a ‘talk-back radio presenter’ such as ‘idiotic clowns’, ‘anti-social hippies and bludgers’. These words have strong pejorative meaning which labels the activists with extreme vitriol and in a negative light. Smith’s juxtaposition of the way activists are described highlights the polar opposite reception that these activists hold. Smith rebuts the claims by highlighting that these ‘farm animals’ are treated in ‘abominably cruel ways’. The language here brings to light how humans have treated animals in the past for the sake of ‘cheap food’. The words manipulate the reader into thinking that humans are selfish and justifies why ‘compassionate people resort to extreme action.’ People that care about animals go out their way to try and help because of the way animals are treated in general.
Moreover, Smith desperately highlights the ‘inhumane conditions’ that chickens are caged being ’unable to move’ and being the ‘most abused animal’ on Earth. Smith seeks to highlight that the chickens are powerless to stop the cruelty that humans display treating these animals disgracefully. The reader is likely to react in a shocked manner at how chickens can be constantly trapped and caged in such an ‘inhumane’ manner. This is further reinforced by the accompanying photograph depicting three chickens squashed together in a tightly held cage. Smith uses this photograph to highlight the powerless nature the chickens are faced in being subjected to the constant cruelty of humans. This image is likely to manipulate the reader into thinking that more action needs to be taken into supporting these chickens into a better environment as ‘few would go on eating them’ if known for the real way they live.
Furthermore, continuing passionately, Smith demands that animals are ‘like us’ and ‘have rights that should be respected’. This highlights that animals are living beings such as humans and Smith stresses the importance of looking after animals as humans who are subjecting them into ‘inhumane conditions’ and if it is not fit for humans, why should animals undergo the same treatment. The reader is likely to see this and demand a better alternative to raising chickens in general.
Finally, Smith sums up the crux of her argument by establishing that despite ‘breaking the law’, ‘until a humane alternative’ exists, then the actions are ‘justified’, ‘no matter what damage’ is ‘caused’. These words that are grouped together highlight the desperate action justifies the desperate situation. The reader is likely to see that the situation has turned into a battle in Smith’s eyes and is important to help animals be removed from these ‘inhumane conditions’ otherwise, these actions could continually get worse in terms of continually breaking the law.
In conclusion, smith is determined to see animals treated fairly in the future with any means possible. The chickens need better practices and Smith passionately outlines this argument to the reader who are ultimately positioned in wanting the same.

Thanks for reading

[Smiley_]

thanks for editing my other piece

http://www.theage.com.au/comment/too-many-smartphone-photos-too-few-memories-20131021-2vx00.html


With the rise in smart phones and their ever-expanding capabilities, discussion has arisen over  “our obsession with digital images”. In his opinion piece entitled “Too many smart phones, too few memories”, Bernard Toutouji, freelance speaker and writers contends that Australians should be more focused on living their life to the fullest and be less focused on capturing these moments. The piece is aimed at readers of “The age especially those who have a smart phone, as the purpose of the piece is, to encourage people to spend more time living their lives. An accompanying image presents a large crowd of people with their smart phones anticipating Pope Francis’s arrival.

In a passionate tone Toutounji explains how widespread the use of technology is. The headline of the piece “too many smart phones, too few memories” captures the enormity of the situation. The repetition of the words “too many” followed by “too few” position the reader to acknowledge that perhaps they do not have their priorities right in regard to the way they live their lives. Through utilising the statistics that “in 2014” approximately “1.5 billion Smartphone cameras will take nearly I trillion photos”, the writer is presented as well-researched and educated on the issue. This encourages the reader to feel that Toutouji’s contention is justified. By employing some light humour, listing the events that many people take photos of such as every “funny, strange” moment and everything from “our latest meal to the TV shows” that we are watching. This adds light to the issue as well as positioning the reader to consider whether they are guilty of this excessive photo taking. The magnitude of this issue is presented when Toutounji explains that know “every person with a phone” is a photographer and “every location” is now a “backdrop”. Through this the readers common sense is appealed to, as the issue may continue to get worse is action is not taken.

In a passionate yet rational tone Toutounji explains that by spending so much time capturing photos people are not living their lives to the fullest. By utilising the phrase “losing perspective” when referring to our photo taking, the audience is positioned to question whether they, themselves are focusing more on capturing rather than living. This also appeals to the reader’s sense of fear because the issue will only continue for future generations who may spend their lives capturing even more and living in the moment even less. By employing the analogy of a music concert where Beyonce “scolded a fan” by telling him to put his camera down and “seize this moment”. This adds interests to the piece and allows the reader to identify with the piece, as it is likely that they would have been to an event and spent time capturing it, instead of seizing “this moment”. The accompanying image, again presents the magnitude of the issue as almost every person has some sort of electronic device. As Toutounji describes the event as a “sea” this gives the audience a real picture of how many people are living this life and whether it should continue.  In the image many people are adjusting their phones or ipads, demonstrating that they are more focused on capturing the moment, instead of living it. The piece also claims that our lives are “meant to be lived and “not tied down to eight mega pixels”. This aims to alienate those who spend more time focused on having a perfect picture by critising them and their end product because it is only “eight mega pixels” instead of a memory. Through utilising the metaphor that life is a symphony, the reader is positioned to acknowledge that life should “be seen with our eyes” and “smelt, heard, tasted and touched” instead of captured in a “two-dimensional” shape for a “later stage”. Through the repetition of “obsession” and “obese” these negative connation’s create an unflattering image of these people by presenting them as selfish, therefore reader are unlikely to be to be identified as one of these people. 

Toutounji continues his piece by criticising those who “insist on preserving every” moment. In a cynical tone the writer discusses “how tragic” it would be if a newly born  “baby missed out on looking into its parent’s eyes” because they were too focused on capturing these “flat” photos of their baby. This again, aims to alienate readers who do this; therefore positioning the reader to feel as if only taking photo’s is an injustice to the baby. Through employing rhetorical questions such as who “takes pics of the dying, the elderly or the incarcerated the reader is positioned to question whether people’s photo taking is justified. It also allows the reader to acknowledge their part in the issue and that they can be a part of the solution. Through using the reason and logic that if humans want to truly “live a life that is full and rewarding” it is unlikely that this will be done through a “Samdung Galaxy” this writers credibility is extended. This positions the reader to be more likely to agree that living life is more important that capturing it. To conclude his piece he states that living our lives to the fullest will create memories that are “deep within our hearts and minds” this firm statement is the last piece the audience readers and appeals to their sense of compassion. Through this appeal the reader is positioned to view a life focusing on taking pictures and unrewarding and unfulfilling.

In Bernard Toutounji’s opinion piece he employs tactics such as appeals, attacks and rhetorical questions to appeal to his intended audience. By explaining he enormity of the situation and describing the negative consequences of not taking in our lives without a camera, combined with the aim to position the reader on his point of view. As shown by the points made and the increasing prevalence of technology, the issue is likely to provoke further discussion in the future.

[darvell]

I wasn't sure what the deal was with the paragraphing - where they were meant to begin and end, so I just split it where you'd left gaps, but now obviously they are very small paragraphs - so make sure you paragraph your essay properly, otherwise it's confusing and whoever's reading it will be like .. what son?

Mobile phone usage has become very prevalent in educational institutions todayThis is a very short, choppy first sentence. Maybe even mention that their use has caused controversy? That's how I roll with contextualising sentences anyway.. Principal John Black of Metro High School in his “Message from the principal” (Parent News, 12 May 2004) formally presents presents sounds very neutral. Is he endorsing or demeaning? Also, pragmatic might be a better word choice haha the recent ban of mobile phones in schools. This piece is intended to inform parents and students of the new regulations at Metro High School. In response to the new ban, Mary Brown, a disappointed parent, displays her concerns against the prohibition of mobile phones. She directly criticizes and addresses the principal and his board for imposing the ban stating that "(two or so of her sub arguments)" Also at the end here (if there is an image) we want to give a brief description of the image and mention how it introduces/relates to the issue. Try and keep this to one sentence if you can. .

Readers are immediately drawn to Black’s headlineBe careful with this. I could say for any article that the reader is "immediately drawn to the headline" - if you are going to mention this, make sure you are saying WHY, otherwise its very shallow analysis. Also, I would avoid doing this unless there is something really strong and very important in the headline - try to avoid doing it in every LA essay you write. which is accompanied by a man in a suit with a graduate’s hat. This icon, used to represent the principal, attempts to encourage readers to carefully consider the words of the message as it is coming from a person of high authority. The image exemplifies the respect and reputation of the principal as a graduate and hence his “message” should bea bit casual. He aims to build his own credibility? of vital importance. Readers are invited to read on and may feel respectful towards the principal due to his high position in the school. I dont think readers are ever not encouraged to read on - seems like a bit of a weird analysis. Make sure you're analysing his use of language as well as these things - I see you've quoted twice in the image paragraph, we want to see more of that. (This paragraph is pretty short.) Pick out the lang. from the article which most directly relates. They may also feel curious about what Black has to say in regards to their children. Shallow analysis. You could pretty much say that for any image and article - try to avoid generic things like that, you won't stand out! The members of the audience are also drawn to the school’s emblem which demonstrates “MHS Excellence.” how? Readers understand the esteemed values of the school as they look at the wreath surrounding the words which symbolises honour. They may feel secure that their children are receiving an excellent education at a school that prides itself for its dignity and brilliance.Mmm, this is getting there. Try to have more of a focus on the reader here.

Black begins by presenting the main concerns of his message in regards to “students bringing mobile phones to school.” Mm, this is the kind of quoting we want to avoid. Only ever quote if the quote has some sort of effect on the audience. Instead of quoting like this to explain his points, reword what he's saying, this will also show a deeper understanding. Adopting an authoritative toneI personally will avoid explicitly saying the word tone. You can get the author's tone across by saying that he "authoritatively asserts" ect ect .. he asserts in boldnot sure if I would mention the bold personally could just be a preference that “no student will be allowed to bring a mobile phone onto school property.” Readers may be compelled to feel cautious as they are warned about bringing technological gadgets to school. Black evokes feelings of fear into students of the audience as the consequence for bringing mobile phones to school is “an automatic detention.”why does he want them to be fearful? Also, pick your quotes carefully. The words that have the strongest connotations or effects on the reader are obviously the best to pick to analyse. Don't forget to mention the connotations of EACH WORD - what do you think of when you hear it?

The writer taps into the fears of his primary audience of parents who are concerned about their children’s education and wellbeing. Through listing of the reasons of the ban which state “classes are being severely disrupted...obsessive text messaging...concerns about security in tests and examination,” Black sets the stage for readers to feel anxious and worried that the quality of their children’s education is deteriorating and is harmed by mobile phones.how does the listing effect create this though? Make sure you're explaining exactly what you mean! Examples of the damage whereby students “attempted to cheat using mobile phones” stimulate a sense of alarm into readers who realise threat their child could be in this situationor even incriminate the phones by sort of presenting them as something which assists cheating? Just something to ponder. . Furthermore statistics we don't ever want to identify the technique in this way, it won't get you any extra marks and screws up your expression by making your essay sound like a checklist. Instead, we want to quote and explain the effects of the language. revealing “no fewer than 37 students have claimed that phones have been stolen” may shock parents as they may have invested money to buy the phone and theft has still occurred. how does what you just quoted create this effect, though? This device may also undermine the “MHS Excellence” as parents may feel appalled that students are stealing phones but it also endeavours to portray the negative effects of mobile phones at school.why does the author do this, though? Loaded language such as bit casual, be careful of your word choices “unsavoury incidents [whereby] no fewer than three times this year phones have been left on ‘accidentally’ in changing rooms” may horrify members of the audience how? why? and sway them away from allowing their children to take their mobile phones to school. we want to know what they will think/feel not how they will proceed following the reading of the article. I think it's okay to mention this if you're analysing properly but this sentence doesn't work as you haven't explained HOW the author creates the effect

Moreover, Black attacks those individuals with mobile phones verrry short sentence, breaks your flow! be careful of this. We want the essay to sound beautiful to the reader! . Through flattery of the audience when he says “every sensible person...will agree that the interests of the community must take precedence over selfish desires” is it flattery, though? kind of seems like he is inferring that it is common sense to me haha Black crafts a negative picture of opponents or members of the audience weird phrasing. Demeans? condemns? who may be thinking of themselves rather than the benefit of the whole communityby doing what? why does he do this? pleeeease remember the focus is how the LANGUAGE used by the AUTHOR effects the READER . The writer concludes by reiterating the values of Metro High School of which “the focus...on education and responsibility must be preserved.” make sure you're explaining when you quote - unnecessary quoting is a really bad habit. The assertive tone is likely to invite readers to encourage their children to prevent the detrimental consequences and leave their mobile phones at home.

On the other hand, May Brown begins by adopting a dejected tone personally will avoid this, some people do use it though, up to you as she says she “was very upset when [she read the letter and she is] still really upset.” The principal may feel disheartened that the parents are not supportive about the new regulations at Metro High School why? . Alliteration same deal here, quote and explain yourself, don't identify :p in “our lives [are] simpler and safer” belittles Black’s argument that states that mobile phone usage is detrimental how? . Brown shares her personal anecdote of her daughter’s mobile phone usage when she says states ( not identifying the technique will also save you from being waffley and using extra words that aren't needed, we want to be as concise as possible here! ]“our daughter travels by public transport which...is notoriously unreliable...she has a medical condition which makes is important for her to be able contact us during the day.” As Brown addresses the concerns of many parents, the principal may feel sympathetic towards Brown as her daughter is unhealthy but still manages to travel by the untrustworthy public transport.what about the readers though??they are always your main focus ! Black may also feel further dejected as the recent ban has not been favoured by parents of students at Metro High School.how will that cuase her to feel this way? this end sentence seems like the beginning of a new idea that gets cut short - bit odd to introduce a new idea for one sentence and cut it short.

   Brown launches a scathing attack on Black’s pride in school values. The tonal shift from upset mm, is upset really a tone though? be careful with your word choices to assertive when she states” rules like this don’t help educate our children. It’s not good educational practice” positions Black to fear that the honour and reputation of the school will be undermined by the mobile phone ban how?. The writer appeals  I personally avoid appeals always but some people do use it to the common values of adults such as herself and the principal who “as ... mature citizens, we’ve learned, perhaps through making mistakes, to act considerately.” This device weird phrasing, I'd change that is designed to make the principal understand that the ban may not necessarily be beneficial. Although the principal is the audience for the response you need to mention the effect on readers (which includes the principal) Brown also proposes a solution when she asks “wouldn’t it be a good idea for students to play a role in setting the rules” which is calculated to appeal to the common sense of Black and sway him to remove the new regulations in regards to mobile phones how does he sway him, though? . The writer reinforces his idea quote and explain! through the use of inclusive language in “our community as a hole may benefit in the long run.”you dont explain how this reinforces the idea Brown concludes by adopting a pleading tone  I would just say "pleads" but some people do it the same as you, up to you to beg pleading to beg - bit odd Black to “please reconsider your decision” thereby positioning the principal to take actionhow??? to uphold the values of excellence in Metro High School and void banning mobile phones from school property.

   Both Black and Brown present a wide variety of arguments to display their concerns with mobile phones usage at school. The principal appeals to the common fears and concerns of his audience as well as portraying his pride of Metro High School. On the other hand, Brown directly addresses Black and employs attacks, arouses sympathy and provides solution to the issue. The principal is likely to reconsider his decision as he would not want his schools’ values to be undermined.

Goodluck with it

[darvell]

The recent event of animal activists releasing animals from their cages illegally has sparked a fervour,or even just debate? passionate response in the form of an opinion piece from Jo Smith, a supporter of animal activists. Targeting animal activists and humans who care about animals, contends asserts that the act of releasing the chickens was justified in the name of animal rights. give me maybe a couple more of her sub-arguments that she uses to get her point across, this is very very short. Also at the end here if there is an image we want a brief description of the image and how it relates to the issue.

Passionately, (made the sentence sound a bit strange)Smith uses powerful words such as ‘dire’ and ‘oppressed animals’ in an attempt to instil a sense of desperation how? connotations of the words, also? Make sure you examine each individual word! to the reader to help these weak its his argument that they're weak ect make sure you're not agreeing with the author directly like this) animals from their plight. Smith seeks to exaggerate the situation to try and encourage more attention to animals is required how?. Nevertheless, Smith glorifies the activists’ action as ‘noble’ who ‘risked life and limb’. These send connotationsanalyse the words individually - every word will have seperate connotations even if they're pretty similar, you'll get better analysis if you split it up. that activists are heroic dedicating their lives to activism. The reader can likely seeI avoid wording it like this - Maybe instead just go straight on to talking about what he's trying to do to the audience that Smith is trying to suggest these actions are important and these ’noble’ actions should be applaudedbut how does he create this effect? Make sure you're analysing properly . These words are powerful at glorifying the activists why/how?? go through on a day to day basis. This is juxtaposed by Smith deliberately quoting belligerent language from a ‘talk-back radio presenter’ such as ‘idiotic clowns’, ‘anti-social hippies and bludgers’. These words don't group them together like this, it sets you up for shallow analysis have strong pejorative meaning which labels the activists with extreme vitriol and in a negative light by doing what? associating the activists with them? Elaborate . Smith’s juxtaposition of the way activists are described highlights the polar opposite reception this is a bit strange. I think the juxtaposition being mentioned was enough. Make sure you focus on WHY. that these activists hold. Smith rebuts the claims by highlighting that these ‘farm animals’ are treated in ‘abominably cruel ways’. The languageanalyse individual words instead here brings to light how humans have treated animals in the past for the sake of ‘cheap food’.  cheap? connotations? effect on the reader? how is that effect created? why does the author do this? The words manipulate the reader into thinking that humans are selfish and justifies why ‘compassionate people resort to extreme action.’mm, don't quote unless it's necessary and you're going to explain the effect on the reader. Unnecessary quoting will make you look bad People that care about animals go out their way to try and help because of the way animals are treated in general.why is this mentioned/referenced though, what is the intended effect?

Moreover, Smith desperately highlights the ‘inhumane conditions’ that chickens are caged being ’unable to move’ and being the ‘most abused animal’you can get a lot more analysis out of these quotes - they are quite strong. on Earth. Smith seeks to highlight that the chickens are powerless to stop the cruelty that humans display treating these animals disgracefully. The reader is likely to react in a shocked manner at how chickens can be constantly trapped and caged in such an ‘inhumane’  connotations? why are they shocked? manner. This is further reinforced by the accompanying photograph depicting three chickens squashed together in a tightly held cage. Smith uses this photograph to highlight the powerless nature the chickens are faced in being subjected to the constant cruelty of humans. This image is likely to manipulate the reader into thinking that more action needs to be taken into supporting these chickens into a better environment as ‘few would go on eating them’ if known for the real way they live. You want to be able to write a whole paragraph on the image, it is really important. Also, you want to analyse the image while picking out language that directly complements what you're saying the effect of the image is, this will make you look really beast!

Furthermore, continuing passionately,double pause breaks the flow Smith demands that animals are ‘like us’ and ‘have rights that should be respected’. This highlights that animals are living beings such as humans and Smith stresses the importance of looking after animals as humans who are subjecting them into ‘inhumane conditions’ and if it is not fit for humans, why should animals undergo the same treatment. The reader is likely to see this and demand a better alternative to raising chickens in general. why? how would it specifically make them feel???
Finally, Smith sums up the crux of her argument by establishes  that despite ‘breaking the law’, ‘until a humane alternative’ exists, then the actions are ‘justified’, ‘no matter what damage’ is ‘caused’. pleeeeease make sure you're analysing each word individually, you will come across way more stronglt. Grouping them together so densely makes it very difficult. These words that are grouped together highlight the desperate action justifies the desperate repeating word situation. The reader is likely to see that the situation has turned into a battle in Smith’s eyeswhy? and is important to help animals be removed from these ‘inhumane conditions’ otherwise, these actions could continually get worse why is that a problem? in terms of continually breaking the law.

In conclusion, smith is determined to see animals treated fairly in the future with any means possible. The chickens need better practices and Smith passionately outlines this argument to the reader who are ultimately positioned in wanting the same. very short conclusion. Very much like the intro, we want to see a couple of the authors "sub arguments" here.

General things:
-This essay is really really short, you definitely need to work on your timing (but don't stress, there's still time!!)
- Shortening quotes and explaining each individual word, the connotations of it, the intended effect on the reader and how the word creates this effect will make your analysis much much better
- Make sure youre paragraphing properly also hahaha

Goodluck with it  

[Damoz.G]

darvell, I haven't posted any essays for submission in this sub-forum category, but I do admire the amount of time that you spent marking these essays. Especially with you still doing year 12 at the moment and an English exam in less than one week, I really appreciate the hard work you put into marking these essays.

Very well done!

[Alwin]

darvell, I haven't posted any essays for submission in this sub-forum category, but I do admire the amount of time that you spent marking these essays. Especially with you still doing year 12 at the moment and an English exam in less than one week, I really appreciate the hard work you put into marking these essays.

Very well done!

I wholeheartedly agree. Everyone join me in giving all of darvells's posts +1's
She deserves it!

PS just some food for thought

Edit: this is Brenden. Fuck. just realised I was logged into my sister's account instead of mine. Woops.

IKR THE SHOCK =O no wonder she's good at English and willing to help people out

[darvell]

I wholeheartedly agree. Everyone join me in giving all of darvells's posts +1's
She deserves it!

darvell, I haven't posted any essays for submission in this sub-forum category, but I do admire the amount of time that you spent marking these essays. Especially with you still doing year 12 at the moment and an English exam in less than one week, I really appreciate the hard work you put into marking these essays.

Very well done!

*Blushes YOU GUYS ARE ANGELS THANKS :')

PS just some food for thought

IKR THE SHOCK =O no wonder she's good at English and willing to help people out

(Totally didn't see the spoiler lmao)
Hahahaha Yes I was taught by the master, thought I mays well try and help some people out
P.s Alwin cheers for helping out as well there's been so many posts last couple of days LOL  [/b]

[Damoz.G]

I wholeheartedly agree. Everyone join me in giving all of darvells's posts +1's
She deserves it!

PS just some food for thought

IKR THE SHOCK =O no wonder she's good at English and willing to help people out

Absolutely! All of her posts deserve a +1.

:O That is a shock, Alwin. darvell gets the love of marking English essays from her brother, Brenden. The love for English runs in the family. HAHA!

[darvell]

Absolutely! All of her posts deserve a +1.

:O That is a shock, Alwin. darvell gets the love of marking English essays from her brother, Brenden. The love for English runs in the family. HAHA!

Oh,
guys guys guyssssssssss
We aren't like blood brother and sister

He's dating my sister
So we're like sibling in laws

idk its weird hahhaa
HE'S A GUN THOUGH.

[darvell]

With the rise in smart phones and their ever-expanding capabilities, discussion is it just discussion though? debate? controversy? has arisen over  “our obsession with digital images”. In his opinion piece entitled “Too many smart phones, too few memories” (Newspaper, date), Bernard Toutouji, freelance speaker and writers contendswe don't want to explicitly say contends - sounds too much like a checklist. Asserts? Highlights? Google "verbs showing authorial intent" and a list of them should come up for you. that Australians should be more focused on living their life to the fullest and be less focused on capturing these moments. The piece is aimed at readers of “The age especially those who have a smart phone,  not sure where this quote is meant to end but be careful about using quotes to explain the author's main arguments - reword them so that it is clear that you have an understanding. as the purpose of the piece is, to encourage people to spend more time living their lives. An accompanying image presents a large crowd of people with their smart phones anticipating Pope Francis’s arrivalimmediately outlining the prevalence of phones throughout society? - sentence seemed a bit short .

In a passionate tone Toutounji passionatelyexplains how widespread the use of technology isthis sentence ends very suddenly and screws up your expression . The headline of the piece “too many smart phones, too few memories” captures the enormity of the situation how? explain further. The repetition be careful with this. We want to analyse the way the language effects the reader - and although it's the technique that does that, we want to avoid sounding like our essay is a checklist. Instead - quote what you're talking about and explain the direct effect on the audience (identifying techniques also forces you to use unnecessary words and won't get you any extra marksof the words “too many” followed by “too few” position the reader to acknowledge that perhaps they do not have their priorities right in regard to the way they live their lives how? . Through utilising the statistics  again same deal as earlier. Quote the statistics, we don't need to mention that they are statistics before doing so. that “in 2014” approximately “1.5 billion Smartphone cameras will take nearly I trillion photos”, the writer is presented as well-researched and educated on the issue. mm, this is true - but what is the effect on the reader of the figure you've quoted? why has the author included it? This encourages the reader to feel that Toutouji’s contention  we don't want to explicitly say "contention" - as I mentioned in the intro. Also, this sentence is very short compared the the rest of them and screws up your expression a bit, watch that. is justified. By employing some light humour, weird phrasing, these two things at the start of the sentence sound like different things. Reword the start of it so that this makes more sense listing the events that many people take photos of such as every “funny, strange” moment and everything from “our latest meal to the TV shows” that we are watching. This adds light to the issue as well as positioning the reader to consider whether they are guilty of this excessive photo taking. but what is the effect of them being listed in such a way? Why has the author done it? How is the effect created? The magnitude of this issue this is more like what I want to see, good1 is presented when Toutounji explains that know “every person with a phone” is a photographer and “every location” is now a “backdrop”. Through this the readers common sense is appealed to, iis that all that the author does though? He's making it out to be this HUGE issue. What would that make the reader think, feel?? as the issue may continue to get worse is action is not taken.

In a passionate yet rational tone I'd avoid using two tone words. I also avoid using the word tone itself but some people do use it, up to you Toutounji explains that by spending so much time capturing photos people are not living their lives to the fullest.alright, cool. By utilising the phrase “losing perspective” when referring to our be really careful with this - it's not OUR photo taking, the AUTHOR is directing this at the READER haha not you photo taking, the audience is positioned to question whether they, themselves are focusing more on capturing rather than living. what further implicatiosn does this have, though? How does it make them feel? This also appeals to the reader’s sense of fear because the issue will only continue for future generations who may spend their lives capturing even more and living in the moment even less. so it's going to screw up future generations? Man the whole world is ending here! (or so he says) Analyse it !! By employing the analogy of a music concert where Beyonce “scolded a fan” by telling him to put his camera down and “seize this moment”. This adds interests to the piece and allows the reader to identify with the piece, as it is likely that they would have been to an event and spent time capturing it, instead of seizing “this moment”. ok, this is true. What about the language being used though, how does it manipulate the reader? analyse each word - it has been put there for a reason! The accompanying image, or even complementing? Also I'd split this into a seperate paragraph - and give a description of the image before going on to talking about what it means! again presents the magnitude of the issue as almost every person has some sort of electronic device. As Toutounji describes the event as a “sea” what does "sea" make you think of though? the sea is MASSIVE! he's trying to make the issue seem HUGE! make sure you're analysing as much as you can! this gives the audience a real picture of how many people are living this life and whether it should continue.  In the image many people are adjusting their phones or ipads, demonstrating that they are more focused on capturing the moment, instead of living it. The piece also claims that our lives are “meant to be lived and “not tied down to eight mega pixels”. This aims to alienate those who spend more time focused on having a perfect picture by critising them and their end product because it is only “eight mega pixels” instead of a memory. it almost makes the camera/phone seem like a burden or like something that's controlling them. Just food for thought Through utilising the metaphor that life is a symphony, the reader is positioned to acknowledge that life should “be seen with our eyes” and “smelt, heard, tasted and touched”  how? instead of captured in a “two-dimensional” shape for a “later stage”. Make sure you're not excessively quoting, for each quote you want to make sure you've picked strong language and thoroughly explained the effect on the audience. Through the repetition  quote and explain, don't identify of “obsession” and “obese”obsess? these negative connation’s  what are the negative connotations though? What do you think of when you hear that word? What is the effect of associating recording real life with such athing? You've got the jist of it you just need to elaborate a bit and make sure you're analysing each word! create an unflattering image of these people by presenting them as selfish, but how? therefore reader are unlikely to be to be identified as one of these people. 

Toutounji continues his piece by criticising those who “insist on preserving every” moment. don't quote unless you're going to explain the effect on the reader. It's a really bad habit to get into! In a cynical tone the writer discusses “how tragic” it would be if a newly born  “baby missed out on looking into its parent’s eyes” because they were too focused on capturing these “flat” photos of their baby.connotations of the words? how do the words effect the reader? why has the author done this? This again, aims to alienate readers who do this; how? therefore positioning the reader to feel as if only taking photo’s is an injustice to the baby. why is that a problem, how does this make readers feel? Through employing rhetorical questions  I personally will never analyse a rhetorical question - you can pretty much always write the exact same thing for it every time. If you are set on it though, don't identify the technique, just quote and explain the effect - we want to be as concise and nice sounding as we can! such as who “takes pics of the dying, the elderly or the incarcerated" connotations of words? effect on reader? how is that effect creating using those words? why? the reader is positioned to question whether people’s photo taking is justified.  how? It also allows the reader to acknowledge their part in the issue and that they can be a part of the solution. do you think this would make them feel guilty? Maybe just elaborate a little bit here. Through using the reason and logic that if humans want to truly “live a life that is full and rewarding” it is unlikely that this will be done through a “Samdung Galaxy” this writers credibility is extended. how is it extended. Justify yourself, I don't believe you! This positions the reader to be more likely to agree that living life is more important that capturing it. yeah ok, good point,. But how does it create that effect? Your main focus should be the language, and always always back to the reader! To conclude his piece he states that living our lives to the fullest will create memories that are “deep within our hearts and minds” this firm statement is the last piece the audience readers and appeals to their sense of compassion. or even makes it seem like anything digitally recorded isn't meaningful? Kind of makes it seem like a gimick in a way? Through this appeal the reader is positioned to view a life focusing on taking pictures and unrewarding and unfulfilling.

In Bernard Toutounji’s opinion piece he employs tactics such as appeals, attacks and rhetorical questions to appeal to his intended audience. instead of doing this, much like in the intro we want to mention a couple of the authors "sub arguments" that they use to get their point across. By explaining he enormity of the situation and describing the negative consequences of not taking in our lives without a camera, combined with the aim to position the reader on his point of view. As shown by the points made and the increasing prevalence of technology, the issue is likely to provoke further discussion in the future.
Goodluck with it!

[KingofDerp]

man typing out essays takes forever xD anyway heres one I did in an hour that was for a guy writing a letter to his teacher asking for help with a supporting statement. It was gagworthy and I found it quite difficult to write about as it wasnt something Id done before so hopefully its not as bad as I think. Really hoping we get a really good "issue" lang anal and not some dopey suckup letter like this one xD my language analyses have been around the 9-10 mark but I feel this one may be around a 7 for some reason. If someone has time let me know what you think. I also think my tense changed throughout the piece as my teacher said used past tense but it sounded weird for some sentencs so yeah :'D


2013 Boobook Education Eng Prac Exam – Lang analysis

The financial distress caused by increasingly high tuition fees has sparked action within university students. Whilst some have sought alternative methods of generating funds, the typical university student ventures into the world of part time employment. In this context, Dan Olsen (a current student), sent a letter with an attached photograph to his trusted teacher Mrs Tran in hope of gaining assistance in securing a position at Simm’s Automotive as a bookkeeper. The letter, sent on May 16th, attempts to garner support in applying for the work through highlighting his interpersonal and academic skills. In doing so, Olsen emphasizes the main factors that not only make him suitable for a position, but deserving of Mrs Tran’s assistance also.

Ostensibly, Olsen contended that “if {he} were to get this job it would make a great difference” and that through Mrs Tran providing him with such assistance, “costs would decrease.” In doing so, he emphasized his financial concerns and a sense of benefits her aid would provide. In this context, Olsen developed an endearing tone to arouse sympathy within the reader. Such a mood to the piece was achieved in the initial apology, “I’m sorry I was unable to talk to you on the phone…” reflecting a level of courteousness in Olsen’s character, immediately appealing to the reader. Similarly, through illustrating her “kind” nature and abilities as a respectable teacher, Olsen aimed to invoke a heightened sense of purpose and vocation alongside emotions of self-admiration within Mrs Tran. In a similar way, Olsen’s opening and closing statements “Dear Mrs Tran” and “Yours sincerely, Dan Olsen” not only serve to establish a level of formality but a sense of respect and endearment toward his teacher. From the outset of the letter, it is apparent that through illustrating his family hardships, consequently, a level of pity is evoked in the reader. Particularly, through the short retrospective glimpse into a time “when {his} mother was so ill three years ago.” Olsen employs such a technique to garner a sense of pathos through his letter, thus enhancing his chances at acquiring her assistance. The accompanying image also supports this notion, through creating a sense of family unity, apparent in their cheerful expressions. Additionally, the photograph exemplified the positive effect of Mrs Tran’s support in the past, increasing the likelihood of her volunteering to help again in another difficult phase of Olsen’s life.

Furthermore, Olsen further develops his contention through alluding to the positive opinions of others, such as that of Mr Vukotic. In this way, Olsen reinforces how adults view him to substantiate Mrs Tran’s already positive perspective of him. This is particularly apparent in Olsen’s allusions to the fact that Mr Vukotic “is confident” with his capabilities, thus, strengthening the notion that Olsen indeed deserves such an opportunity. Similarly, the reference to Mr Rowe feeling “pretty pleased” with Olsen’s co-curricular activities highlights his involvements beyond that of academics and an endearing nature. Whilst Olsen maintains a highly enthusiastic and professional profile throughout the letter, conversational advances were often made as a means of establishing a friendship between student and teacher. Such a technique is particularly resonant in the use of rhetoric, inquiring as to whether “Mr Rose {is} still Head of Theatres?” In a similar nature, {the job} would probably be more interesting than stacking shelves!” aims not only to divulge opinion but to prompt an exchange between ‘friends’ whilst still maintaining a sense of formality.

The accompanying photograph depicting Olsen and his mother is employed as a symbol of survival, yet also acts as a reminder of the social support provided by Mrs Tran. In this context, the photograph directly links to one of Olsen’s evocations of the “awful stuff” that occurred in his high school years. The imagery promotes a sense of overcoming struggle and illustrates their relationship one to have endured hardship. Thus, it acts as a tool to arouse pity for his clearly troublesome situation. Yet despite such struggles, Olsen is seen to have succeeded in his academic endeavours, particularly evident in the focus on his prizes won for “top in Business Studies and Account” along with English scores he emphasized Mrs Tran as partly responsible for. Through such references, Olsen not only reflects on the resilience he displayed towards his studies, but his ability to simultaneously exceed whilst faced with tremendous family concerns. Thus, he is reinforces his capacity to display motivation, likely increasing Mrs Tran’s interested in writing an engaging piece for Olsen’s desire workplace.

Dan Olsen aimed to persuade hi teacher Mrs Tran, to write a professional piece augmenting his chances of securing part time employment. In doing so, he contended that despite all the hardships that have beset him, he holds the capability of maintaining resilience and a positive ”work ethic.” Such a concept was encompassed in the attached photograph, reflecting his strength and endurance manifest. In this way, Olsen provides undeniable appeal that aim to garner Mrs Tran’s full support in developing an engaging supporting statement as his referee for the prospective employer.

[Alwin]

Hahahaha Yes I was taught by the master, thought I mays well try and help some people out
P.s Alwin cheers for helping out as well there's been so many posts last couple of days LOL

No worries Darvell, but erm this is mine up for marking too

I SHOULD WARN YOU THOUGH IT IS PRETTY RAMBLING AND I DID IT AFTER A PRACTICE ENGLISH EXAM SO IT AIN'T TOO FLASH

Chickens Range Free
http://www.vcaa.vic.edu.au/Documents/exams/english/english-samp-w.pdf

In the wake of the illegal release of hundreds of chickens from a truck, many media outlets have been quick to slam these actions and protestors. However, one opinion piece by Jo Smith entitled “Chickens Range Free” calls upon all Australians to see the ‘other side’ of the issue – that animals should be given the same right as humans. For some of the readers of the Melbourne newspaper, this view is too extreme and Smith endeavours to sway these individuals by exploiting her position as publicity officer for Australians for the Animal Rights (AAR); often pleading to readers especially those interested in animal welfare to take action.

As with many opinion pieces, Smith opens with an ironic headline, “Chickens Range Free”, and heavy emotive language many tabloids are famous for. The pun, however, is a double edged sword. Not only do animal rights supporters recognise “free range” as symbolic of chickens running free in “fresh, clean air” or open farm land, but also do many adult consumers familiar with the option of ‘free range’ or ‘caged’ eggs in supermarkets. However, for some truly passionate advocates for animal rights may condemn her use of a pun as it gives the impression Smith is being flippant and not treating the problem with enough respect. Moreover, the pun in the headline is too similar to the quotation “Fancy a free range chicken?” which Smith slams the talk-back radio presenter for. Indeed, the headline is witty and establishes the issue of chicken living conditions, but is rather inappropriate given part of Smith’s audience are animal rights activists.

Immediately, Smith seeks to position herself as a supporter for animal rights, condoning and even rejoicing at the actions of the two people that freed the chickens. Not only does she make her views clear, “I understand…”, “I think…” and other such phrases, but also explains she is the publicity officer for AAR. By describing the living conditions of chickens as the “dire plight of oppressed animals on this planet”, Smith is trying to position readers to see this as a global issue not limited to one incident involving a few hundred chickens. Moreover, having positioned readers to see the ‘big picture’ not just the two activists, she states that it is “…important for someone to stand up for the rights of animals.” Though the use of italics is unconventional in a formal piece, it emphasis the stress on the word “someone” placing responsibility on the reader. Combined with Smith’s notion “direct action is the only way to bring public attention” it is a call for readers to take action. Furthermore, Smith attempts to create an opposition for readers willing to take action by attacking local media for “… [giving] air time to critics of the action…” By including quotes from these ‘critics’ such as “idiotic…clowns…anti-social hippies and bludgers” Smith entices readers to disagree positioning them on Smith’s side of the argument. However, it should be noticed that critics of the animal rights actions would agree with the quotations and be alienated from the rest of the opinion piece.

Having created a divide of sorts between supports and critics, Smith generalises her arguments moving away from the personal pronoun “I “ and using “we” to make readers feel the problem of animal rights is also their problem too . Initially, Smith state that “…we Australians for the Animal Rights believe that all animals deserve to be free…: stating the view of the organisation she represents. But, she drops the AAR reference for the remainder of the paragraph inviting readers to agree that “we believe” and “we mistreat them” and “we have over populated” rather than making the clear distinction that this is AAR’s view. Thus, any reader who agrees with any point Smith makes is in fact aligning themselves with the AAR because of Smith’s subtle change of address. That is why Smith has so many sentences describing ARR’s beliefs, in order for the reader to identify with one and hence the holistic argument

Continuing, Smith continues to plead to reader’s sympathy and intellectual side. By claiming “too many people have a simplistic human-centred view of the world”, Smith challenges readers to oppose this stereotype. Many readers will because of the negative connotations, again positioning them on the side of Smith and AAR. Smith also makes reference to her caption-less image, that chickens are “…trapped in cages only 450 square centimetres in size…” a clear description of the chickens in the image. The fact that they are three chickens “trapped” in this particular cage is to further extract sympathy from readers for AAR’s cause. However, as many readers would be unfamiliar with what “450 square centimetres looks like, the lack of a visible back wall of the cage does not support Smith’s argument. However, neither does it detract from it because she is seeing the image and imagery in her writing to juxtapose the ‘awful’ living conditions with the ‘joyful’ free range conditions she alludes to in her headline. However what does retract from Smith’s argument in that she claims “…if the public knew the details of how they lived and died, few would go on eating the,…” Her omission of specific details makes readers, even ones who have agreed with Smith to that point, speculate what is so ‘bad’ about these conditions and why hasn’t Smith expanded them or if Smith is hiding something.

And only in the penultimate paragraph does Smith seek to sway readers who don’t believe animals should have the same rights as humans. Smith quotes Jeremy Bentham a philosopher that “The question is…can they suffer?” forcing readers to ask themselves this question about chickens too. Smith does not explicitly answer this question, but her conclusion that humane methods should be found to keep hens alludes to the answer: yes, chickens can suffer. This is a much more reasoned argument that her initial half lacks, and as such more readers will be able to follow her arguments and not be alienated by her initial use of emotive language. To close off her piece, Smith returns to the initial release and re-justifies their actions

As a whole, the piece operates in many levels, both emotionally and intellectually. However, Smith’s chosen structure of alienating opposition first then attempting to persuade them at the close is dubious. But her use of symbolising the release of chickens is effective especially since she doesn’t mention some chickens were run over by passing cars.

[Patches]

Chickens Range Free
http://www.vcaa.vic.edu.au/Documents/exams/english/english-samp-w.pdf

In the wake of the illegal release of hundreds of chickens from a truck, many media outlets have been quick to slam these actions and protestors. However, one opinion piece by Jo Smith entitled “Chickens Range Free” calls upon all Australians to see the ‘other side’ of the issue – that animals should be given the same right as humans. For some of the readers of the Melbourne newspaper, this view is too extreme and Smith endeavours to sway these individuals by exploiting her position as publicity officer for Australians for the Animal Rights (AAR); often pleading to readers especially those interested in animal welfare to take action.Nothing wrong with your intro - could tighten up the wording a bit especially the last sentence.

As with many opinion pieces, Smith opens with an ironic headline, “Chickens Range Free”, and heavy emotive language many tabloids are famous forSo? The examiner knows what the piece is called - never understood the point of simply restating it.. The pun, however, is a double edged swordyup - so what? Isn't that what all puns do?. Not only do animal rights supporters recognise “free range” as symbolic of chickens running free in “fresh, clean air” or open farm land, but also do many adult consumers familiar with the option of ‘free range’ or ‘caged’ eggs in supermarketsYeah, but take it further. Why is her comparison of the released chickens being 'free range' making a point re 'free range' eggs? All this sentence does is define free range and say that free range eggs exist - how is the phrase being used to persuade/make a point?. However, for some truly passionate advocates for animal rights may condemn her use of a pun as it gives the impression Smith is being flippant and not treating the problem with enough respectwhy would they think this? You need to explain, not just regurgitate the article.. Moreover, the pun in the headline is too similar to the quotation “Fancy a free range chicken?” which Smith slams the talk-back radio presenter forbut whyyyyyyyy. Indeed, the headline is witty and establishes the issue of chicken living conditions, but is rather inappropriate given part of Smith’s audience are animal rights activists.you definitely don't want to make judgements on the success of the argument

Immediately, Smith seeks to position herself as a supporter for animal rights, condoning and even rejoicing at the actions of the two people that freed the chickens. Not only does she make her views clear, “I understand…”, “I think…” and other such phrases, but also explains she is the publicity officer for AARbut why does she do this? What makes her opinion as a member of the AAR different from the opinion of some bum on the street?. By describing the living conditions of chickens as the “dire plight of oppressed animals on this planet”, Smith is trying to position readers to see this as a global issue not limited to one incident involving a few hundred chickens. Moreover, having positioned readers to see the ‘big picture’ not just the two activists, she states that it is “…important for someone to stand up for the rights of animals.” Though the use of italics is unconventional in a formal pieceI guesss... there are much more interesting things to talk about. What are the connotations of 'planet' re environmentalists?, it emphasis the stress on the word “someone” placing responsibility on the readerplacing responsibility on the reader to what?. Combined with Smith’s notion “direct action is the only way to bring public attention” it is a call for readers to take actionyep, that's what she said, so what?. Furthermore, Smith attempts to create an opposition for readers willing to take action by attacking local media for “… [giving] air time to critics of the action…” but why oh why oh why does she do that? What purpose does it serve?By including quotes from these ‘critics’ such as “idiotic…clowns…anti-social hippies and bludgers” Smith entices readers to disagreehow do those specific words achieve this? positioning them on Smith’s side of the argument. However, it should be noticed that critics of the animal rights actions would agree with the quotations and be alienated from the rest of the opinion piece.again, no need to judge the effectiveness of her argument

Having created a divide of sorts between supports and critics, Smith generalises her arguments moving away from the personal pronoun “I “ and using “we” to make readers feel the problem of animal rights is also their problem toonot bad . Initially, Smith state that “…we Australians for the Animal Rights believe that all animals deserve to be free…: stating the view of the organisation she representsyep, so what?. But, she drops the AAR reference for the remainder of the paragraph inviting readers to agree that “we believe” and “we mistreat them” and “we have over populated” rather than making the clear distinction that this is AAR’s view. Thus, any reader who agrees with any point Smith makes is in fact aligning themselves with the AAR because of Smith’s subtle change of addressgood idea. That is why Smith has so many sentences describing ARR’s beliefs, in order for the reader to identify with one and hence the holistic argument

Continuing, Smith continues to plead to reader’s sympathy and intellectual side. By claiming “too many people have a simplistic human-centred view of the world”, Smith challenges readers to oppose this stereotypewhat's the stereotype? how does it square with the shock jock she quotes earlier? You need to add some value to the quotes you use rather than restate everything she says. Many readers will because of the negative connotations, again positioning them on the side of Smith and AAR. Smith also makes reference to her caption-less image, that chickens are “…trapped in cages only 450 square centimetres in size…” a clear description of the chickens in the image. The fact that they are three chickens “trapped” in this particular cage is to further extract sympathy from readers for AAR’s causeyou're a much better writer than this - how does she 'extract sympathy'?. However, as many readers would be unfamiliar with what “450 square centimetres looks like, the lack of a visible back wall of the cage does not support Smith’s argumentonce more, no need to evaluate the quality of her argument. However, neither does it detract from it because she is seeing the image and imagery in her writing to juxtapose the ‘awful’ living conditions with the ‘joyful’ free range conditions she alludes to in her headline. However what does retract from Smith’s argument in that she claims “…if the public knew the details of how they lived and died, few would go on eating the,…” Her omission of specific details makes readers, even ones who have agreed with Smith to that point, speculate what is so ‘bad’ about these conditions and why hasn’t Smith expanded them or if Smith is hiding something.definitely definitely definitely stop doing this

And only in the penultimate paragraph does Smith seek to sway readers who don’t believe animals should have the same rights as humans. Smith quotes Jeremy Bentham a philosopher that “The question is…can they suffer?” forcing readers to ask themselves this question about chickens toothat's like 2/10 quality. Why does she quote a philosopher rather than a baker or a carpenter?. Smith does not explicitly answer this question, but her conclusion that humane methods should be found to keep hens alludes to the answer: yes, chickens can suffer. This is a much more reasoned argument that her initial half lacks, and as such more readers will be able to follow her arguments and not be alienated by her initial use of emotive language. To close off her piece, Smith returns to the initial release and re-justifies their actions

As a whole, the piece operates in many levels, both emotionally and intellectually. However, Smith’s chosen structure of alienating opposition first then attempting to persuade them at the close is dubious. But her use of symbolising the release of chickens is effective especially since she doesn’t mention some chickens were run over by passing cars.

You are not judging the quality of her argument!
You are not judging the quality of her argument!
You are not judging the quality of her argument!
You are not judging the quality of her argument!


You write really fluently, but you pretty much miss the analysis part of the task. Slow down and think about what she's saying - why does she use specific images, what are the connotations of stereotypes?

Almost every time your conclusion was something like 'smith uses persuasive technique x in order to persuade the reader.' Well, yeah, but how? Why that technique?
I hope that wasn't too scathing - obviously I've focused the comments on the bits you could improve rather than the good parts.