Compilation of Language Analysis Feedback

[Daenerys Targaryen]

The infamous Mrs Elliot. VCAA 2012

In contrasting the negative aspects of ebooks and the positive aspects of hard copy books, Mrs Elliot attempts to advocate that a compromise between the two mediums is optimum. She anecdotally and passionately speaks to the teachers, librarians and senior students at a forum regarding literacy, contending that ebooks are not quite the same as books and could potentially threaten history and culture.

To her ‘fellow book-lovers’, Mrs Elliot exploits how ebooks are not like normal books, and hence should not completely replace them in the future. She claims that reading acts as ‘a doorway’ into a world ‘we actively create in our imagination’. As she is isolating the ‘fellow book-lovers’ who perhaps also share the same sorts of experience, she excites the audience about reading, so that when she sarcastically says that ‘some might say’ reading on an ebook is ‘experiencing’, they are positioned to feel that ebooks do not share the same kinds of enjoyment as books. Her sarcastic tone and pause when she says this emphasises the inaccuracy of the claim that he is ‘experiencing’, by looking a ‘dinosaur’ that did not‘spring life in his imagination’ and they are ‘as dead as… well dinosaurs’. Again, Mrs Elliot refers back to the joy of reading, being able to imagine and create, and because of her sarcasm, the audience of the forum are positioned to agree with her that ebooks are not quite the same. In effect, they are more likely to dismiss the notion to rely heavily on ebooks. Like the ability to imagine, she suggests another joy of reading is being able to keep or sell finished books. However, with ebooks they are only temporary and ‘might disappear in a puff of smoke’ so that we ‘couldn’t sell them’. As she speaks about this, the slide of the presentation shows a cartoon mocking this concept, that if we buy books they will have a ‘good six months before it vanishes’. Through the slide, and suggesting that on ebooks we cannot keep the book, it positions the audience to feel cheated and fear the expenses that might be require to continue buying books, especially if they cannot be reimbursed by selling their second hand books. This ultimately positions the listeners to become disheartened towards the ebook revolution.

In a more nostalgic tone, Mrs Elliot begins establish a connection between hard copy books and history and culture. Within the group of literacy fanatics, it would be known that history is written in books. Mrs Elliot uses this assumption to suggest that the ‘world is flooded with ebooks’ threatening the listeners to thing that we are losing ‘knowledge, history, even culture itself’, ideals that humans adore and especially the ones that book fanatics thrive for, in a ‘cyber global disaster’. This compels the audience to see the flaws that ebooks have and hence are currently inefficient by using emotively suggesting that such a loss would be ‘unthinkable’. Mrs Elliot also insinuates that ‘lending and sharing’ is what ‘goes on between people who loves books’; the listeners of her speech. Consequently she invites them to share books like herself, who ‘left the [Harry Potter] book in a red telephone box for anyone passing by who happened to want to read it’, something that is undoable with an ebook. The use of ‘Harry Potter’, a novel popular amongst the senior students in the audience, encourages these particular readers to continue sharing their books and enjoy this culture. By relating the use of ebooks as somewhat disadvantaging it compels the future generations, the senior students, and all of the other literacy fanatics to not rely too heavily on the use of ebooks.

Having portrayed ebooks as somewhat an unideal method of reading, Mrs Elliot goes on to highlight the benefits that could come from it, and hence a compromise between the two mediums should be adopted. Like the child in the earlier slides with the towering pile of textbooks and an ebook, Mrs Elliot suggests that ebooks allow students to go to ‘school without the terrible burden of their great big textbooks’. As a teacher-librarian, she is able to use her experience with children to stress her concern to the teachers and students of the audience, and hence having it in the one device we can, like the photograph, turn our backs on copious amounts of books, inviting the listeners to understand their worth in a school environment. However, as she says they do not provide the same sorts of imagination like a book which ‘allows us to see impossible or unreal things’, which again reminds the book savvy listeners the thrill of reading instead of watching, like on ebooks. This further emphasises the need to maintain a balance between reading books and utilising the applications on the ebook, as does the books ability to be available even if it ‘went off e-print’ and vice versa. Mrs Elliot concludes on an optimistic note that she does not ‘want to stop’ the ebook revolution, but she encourages the ‘young people as future leaders’ to ensure the ‘important things are not entirely swept away’. Consequently she targets the students and suggests that it is their responsibility to preserve the culture that is embedded into books and ebooks, as she earlier discussed. As the audience are literacy fanatics, ‘the important things’, for them, is book reading, which positions the listeners to consider the advantages and disadvantages discussed. The factors discussed by Mrs Elliot were presented so that there was enough to neutralise her stance so that the listeners are left to agree that a compromise between the two is the best option.

Mrs Elliot wavering between tones and praising each of the mediums, she is able to produce a non bias speech which allows the audiences to conclude that whilst the ebook revolution approaches they must do their duty to ensure hard copy books are not eradicated at the same time.

[e^1]

Holy crap. STUPID BACK BUTTON. RUINED ALL THE CORRECTIONS!

Anyway, here it is. Hopefully it helps. Criticisms are most welcome

In contrasting the negative aspects of ebooks and the positive aspects of hard copy books Could vary your vocabulry here. I'm being picky haha, Mrs Elliot attempts to advocate that a compromise between the two mediums is optimum. She anecdotally and passionately speaks to the teachers, librarians and senior students at a forum regarding literacy, contending that ebooks are not quite the same as books and could potentially threaten history and culture. The introduction is fairly short. Here, you could have mentioned the image, whether it supports or opposes Elliot's contention, and how it does this (briefly). It is also helpful to mention some sentence that introduces the context of the issue to demonstrate that you understand it (eg. The invention of e-books has become an increasingly popular alternative to hard copy books.

To her ‘fellow book-lovers’, Mrs Elliot exploits how ebooks are not like normal books This doesn't tell me much. Just because one thing is not the same as the other, does that mean we should preserve both of them? Here, I could have said that "she lists the disadvantages of e-books as to incline audiences not to completely abandon books.", and hence should not completely replace them in the future. She claims that reading acts as ‘a doorway’ into a world ‘we actively create in our imagination’. As she is isolating the ‘fellow book-lovers’ When you add a quote, you need to analyse it. Don't ADD IT FOR THE SAKE OF QUOTING. who perhaps also share the same sorts of experience, she excites the audience about reading How does she do this?, so that when she sarcastically says that ‘some might say’ reading on an ebook is ‘experiencing’, they are may  positioned to feel You see what I did there? Here, you have "definitively' stated that such effect will occur. You should avoid this, for we don't know how audiences react to such techniques/examples. Better to use "maybe" or "possibly" or words which imply a sense of possibility. that ebooks do not share the same kinds of enjoyment as books. How? Also, you could split this sentence up (too long). Her sarcastic tone and pause when she says this emphasises the inaccuracy of the claim that he is ‘experiencing’, by looking a ‘dinosaur’ that did not‘spring life in his imagination’ and they are ‘as dead as… well dinosaurs’. Again, HOW does it emphasise such? Analyse the language in the quotes to explain it, use them to bolster your analysis! Again, Mrs Elliot refers back to the joy of reading, being able to imagine and create, and because of her sarcasm, the audience of the forum are positioned to agree with her that ebooks are not quite the same. Effects are a possibility to the audience. REMEMBER THIS! I feel this sentence is just regurgitating what you said previously... In effect, they are more likely to dismiss the notion to rely heavily on ebooks. Like the ability to imagine, she suggests Another joy of reading she suggests is being able to keep or sell finished books. However, with ebooks they are only temporary and ‘might disappear in a puff of smoke’ so that we ‘couldn’t sell them’. What effect does it create? Why does it create such effect? As she speaks about this, the slide of the presentation shows a cartoon mocking this concept, that if we buy books they will have a ‘good six months before it vanishes’. Through the slide, and Suggesting that on ebooks we cannot keep the book e-books cannot be kept as long as hard copy books, it such possibly positions the audience to feel cheated and fear the expenses that might be require to continue buying books, especially if they cannot be reimbursed by selling their second hand books. How? This ultimately positions the listeners to become disheartened towards the ebook revolution.

This is the only part I've seen that has an image analysis. If you are going to integrate an image analysis into one of the body paragraphs, make SURE YOU ANALYSE IT DEEPLY. From your image analysis above, it is very shallow analysis.

For instance, analyse the art elements and principles involved (or particular parts in the image, whatever you would like to call it). What about the sense of balance between the music section and books section and what this implies? What about the emotions the man and woman are showing? I'll leave this to your own interpretation.

Alternatively, you can write a whole image analysis on a single body paragraph (same thing applies: analyse it deeply). This is however entirely your choice.


In a more nostalgic tone, Mrs Elliot begins establish a connection between hard copy books and history and culture. Within the group of literacy fanatics word choice could be better?, it they would possibly know  would be known that history is written in books. Mrs Elliot uses this assumption to suggest that the ‘world is flooded with ebooks’, threatening the listeners to thing that we are losing ‘knowledge, history, even culture itself’, ideals that humans adore and especially the ones that book fanatics thrive for, in a ‘cyber global disaster’. Analyse quotes... This potentially compels the audience to see the flaws that ebooks have and hence are perceive them as currently inefficient by using emotively How does being emotional provoke the loss as catastrophic? suggesting that such a loss would be ‘unthinkable’. How does it elicit such a response from the audience? Analyse the language of the quotes. Mrs Elliot also insinuates that ‘lending and sharing’ is what ‘goes on between people who loves books’ Again...; the listeners of her speech. Consequently she invites them to share books like herself, who ‘left the [Harry Potter] book in a red telephone box for anyone passing by who happened to want to read it’, something that is undoable with an ebook. The use of ‘Harry Potter’, a novel popular amongst the senior students in the audience, Focus on analysing the language, not the popularity of books! encourages these particular readers to continue sharing their books and enjoy this culture. By relating the use of ebooks as somewhat disadvantaging it compels the future generations, the senior students, and all of the other literacy fanatics to not rely too heavily on the use of ebooks.

Having portrayed ebooks as somewhat an unideal method of reading, Mrs Elliot goes on to highlight the benefits that could come from it, and hence a compromise between the two mediums should be adopted. Like the child in the earlier slides with the towering pile of textbooks and an ebook reword this better, Mrs Elliot suggests that ebooks allow students to go to ‘school without the terrible burden of their great big textbooks’. Analyse it if you're going to use the quote. As a teacher-librarian, she is able to use her experience with children to stress her concern to the teachers and students of the audience, and hence having it in the one device we can, like the photograph, turn our backs on copious amounts of books, inviting the listeners to understand their worth in a school environment. Why does the audience feel this way? Does it evoke empathy towards the children carrying such burden? However, as she says they do not provide the same sorts of imagination like a book which ‘allows us to see impossible or unreal things’, which again may remind the book savvy listeners the thrill of reading instead of watching, like on ebooks. This further emphasises the need to maintain a balance between reading books and utilising the applications on the ebook, as does the books ability to be available even if it ‘went off e-print’ and vice versa. How? Mrs Elliot concludes on an optimistic note that she does not ‘want to stop’ the ebook revolution, but she encourages the ‘young people as future leaders’ to ensure the ‘important things are not entirely swept away’. Consequently she targets the students and suggests that it is their responsibility to preserve the culture that is embedded into books and ebooks, as she earlier discussed. Analyse quotes. What effect does it have?? Why has the author added this?As the audience are literacy fanatics this is a big assumption you're making..., ‘the important things’, for them, is book reading, which positions the listeners to consider the advantages and disadvantages discussed. The factors discussed by Mrs Elliot were presented so that there was enough to neutralise her stance so that the listeners are left to agree that a compromise between the two is the best option.

Mrs Elliot wavering between tones and praising each of the mediums, she is able to produce a non-biased speech which allows the audiences to conclude that whilst the ebook revolution approaches, they must do their duty to ensure hard copy books are not eradicated at the same time. Conclusion is short. You could add if the article & image support each others contention, how they do this (briefly), and how the audiences may perceive Elliot's overall use of written & visual language.


Main problems:

* Example -> Effect -> Reason why this incites effect. Optionally, you may also state what the writer/author has done and why he/she has done this (eg. to make the opposing stakeholder look bad?).
* Effect to the audience should not be definitive. However, if you state what the author has done/intended, then write in a definitive sense.
* Image analysis. Make sure to analyse it well, just as you analyse the text.
* Some sentences were too long. Try to split them up so it is easy to follow/read.

[lala1911]

This was my SAC that I did a while ago. I just want to see how you guys would mark it /10. Would like some feedback on it though.

ARTICLE: http://www.smh.com.au/sport/harsh-new-reality-achieving-the-ultimate-edge-is-pushing-us-over-it-20130413-2hsk5.html

Drugs in sport has become  an increasingly alarming issue over the past decade, not only affecting the spirit of the sport, but the physiological and psychological wellbeing of athletes. Tim Lane’s opinion piece “Harsh new reality: achieving the ultimate edge is pushing us over it” criticizes the use of illegal drugs in sport. The writer employs a disappointed tone in order to convey his concerns regarding the alarming amount of drugs used in sport and the seriousness of the issue.
The photograph accompanying the article portrays an unpleasant image of drugs. This intends to frighten the reader by stimulating negative fears. The inclusion of a pun in the headline: “Achieving the ultimate edge is pushing us over it” intends to be playful on the readers mind, acting to catch their attention whilst forcing them to slow down and read it once again.

The writers inclusion of the phrase “ultimately doomed” intends to point out the worst case scenario to the reader, which provokes concern that sporting may be on the brink of doom. Futhermore, the writer follows up with “could it be restored?” in order to manipulate the reader to question the current stability of sport and whether the spirit of the sport can be restored.

The inclusion of Irish sports writer David Walsh’s book “Seven Deadly Sins – my pursuit of lance Armstrong” acts to prove that the writer has completed his research on the issue by outsourcing. The remark that Walsh “refused to cover the Tour De France as a sprinting contest” creates a sense of disappointment for the reader, as our sports have now been disgraced by drug cheats. Furthermore, the statement that Walsh could “no longer bring himself to write about the bike race with joy and optimism” acts to show that we’re now unable to enjoy the sports that we previously thrived on, creating a sense of disappointment for the reader.

Language utlisised such as “crisis” intends to reveal the seriousness of the issue, forcing the reader to believe that the situation is much worse than what they may believe. In addition, the writer then contends that the AFL was an “honourable” sport, however this is followed up by “the possibility that has appeared before us was scarcely imaginable”. This is designed to create negative mental imagery for the reader in order to provoke unimaginable scenarios.

Lane’s appeal that the “young” are affected by the use of drugs intends to show that the issue is now branching out to youth in Australia. This position parents to feel worried and at unease about the overwhelming amount of drugs used. The writers attacking phrase  about essendon players that they have “mindless attitudes” intends to belittle the players, forcing the reader to feel as if their argument is flawed.

The writer then transitions to a more pessimistic tone in order to convey his concerns that “we’re all to blame”, which intends to make the reader feel a sense of guilt for uging and pressuring sports athletes to perform at such a high standard. This positions the reader to feel as if they should be more accepting fo athletes capabilities and to cease their criticism.

Language such as “what is far from obvious is whether anything can be done to stop the rot” acts to create a sense of fear that the issue may have escalated too far, which positions us to feel  a sense of urgency to take action before its too late.

The inclusion of Savulescu’s expert opinion acts to increase Lane’s credibility of his argument as he has now done his research and spent time gathering opinions. Lane then proceed to criticize the AFL CEO, Andrew Demetriou that he would be getting a “smaller budget” if he was to be born with a “whatever it takes motto”. This positions the reader to feel frustrated at the AFL, as money has becoming a huge factor and not the wellbeing of athletes.

The writer concludes his argument by criticisng Savalescu for suggesting to allow drug taking to become a “norm” by stating that he is “delusional”. This positions the reader to feel that if Savalescu’s argument is flawed, then his opinion must too be flawed, urging us to believe that drugs should not be the “norm” but should be prohibited.

Overall, Lane sustains a logical argument throughout the opinion piece. The including of expoert opinions helped increase his credibility and provided concern and guilt from the reader. Lane prompts us to believe that in order to revive the spirit of the sport, drugs in sport must be stopped.

[brenden]

lol sorry for the last piece, kinda was half dead when I did it and no Patches you weren't too scathing. Was expecting most of the comments coz I was too tired when I typed it up, thanks for marking it for me (if you post another one I'll mark it for you too, if darvell doesn't get to it first )

I have a few questions left (seen in blue):

2010 International Biodiversity Conference from the VCAA 2010 exam

Having been declared the year of International Biodiversity, 2010 poses a potential turning point to biodiversity activists. Given the commitment in 2002 to significantly reduce the loss of biodiversity attributing to poverty, many participants at the International Diversity Conference perceive this event as an opportunity for self-congratulations (is this explicit enough for identifying the audience?)Hm, it's pretty ok. I personally like a very strong reference to the audience throughout the piece, so I might even be a little bit more blatant/clear. However, the keynote speaker Professor Chris Lee opens the conference by imploring already biodiversity-minded listeners to not rest on their laurels (what is your opinion of using metaphors or proverbs in formal writing? My teacher discourages it)I absolutely discourage it. Professor Lee challenges listeners at the conference to frankly assess their efficacy and what “real action” they have done. Given the conference was held on the 25th to the 27th of October, Professor Lee is calling upon his fellow biodiversity compatriots to make real change and not be contented with simply talking about the issue. Darvell, is it a stylistic thing to include sub-arguments in the intro, or is it actually assessed? I've never done it before, try to keep my intros as brief as possibleYes, just to reiterate on what's been said, it's very stylistic.

As the keynote speaker, Professor Lee quickly establishes the main theme of the conference, (colon or comma?)colon all the way reflection and evaluation. His opening slide entitled “Taking Stock” is intended to bring images of shopping centres and food venders counting remaining goods in order to calculate their profits or otherwise in listeners’ minds. Thus, when coupled with fact Professor Lee is presenting at a biodiversity conference, there is little doubt that he is making reference to the state of the ecosystem, and that the ‘counting of stock’ is reference to the number of species left in the world with a ‘profit’ representing successful preservation. In conjunction, the image on the slide makes reference to the year, 2010 clearly seem in the outline, but the white cutaways are also indicative of a variety of species: fish, flamingos, humans and trees. Again, Professor Lee is aiming to draw on connotations in the picture, as the fish symbolise sea creatures, the flamingo representing land and air animals, the tree representing plants and the human child grasping the adults hand a symbol of the importance of the connection between all animals and humans. Thus, this opening slide establishes the subject of the presentation, but also alludes to the importance of biodiversity to human survival. (too long to spend on one slide given there is an entire speech and another closing slide?)I don't think so, no. Milk the image.

Professor Lee opens by reflecting on the significance of the year 2010 because it is “the International year of Biodiversity” signifying the wide-scale of this issue, but also referring to the opening slide and the combination of humans and animals in the lettering of the year “2010”. The speaker does not mince words because he knows his audience has come to the conference to hear about biodiversity, and openly questions the purpose of the year “2010”. (too much background info in the opening of this paragraph?) yeah, probably is a bitAs the speech was held in October, the majority of the year has already come to past and Professor Lee is attempting to guilt listeners who have perceived 2010 as a “year of celebration”. By making reference to the time span of the commitment that started “Eight years ago” he is further manipulating readers to question if they have committed themselves fully over the many years. Coupled with the strong use of the word “Honestly” in his question directed at his audience of how well they have done, Professor Lee is implying many have been self-deluded believing they have achieved their goals of reducing loss of biodiversity. Professor Lee reiterates his ‘wakeup call’, questioning again and again “how well” and “how far” have these activists come in their commitment. By repeating his question, he increases compounds uponthe guilt of somefacets sectors of the audience and positions (odd word choice. what would sound better)  didn't even think it was that bad :/the remainder to challenge their supposed “success” so far.

The speaker substantiates his case, quoting statistics of loss in biodiversity to break any final delusion in listeners that their commitment is working. Though the statistics are credible from the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) and shocking in that there are losses of up to 50%, Professor Lee is manipulating his audience through fear-mongering (this even a word? teacher sometimes comments "Neologism" on my work lol). uh, to the best of my knowledge it is a legit wordThe statistics he quotes are “over the last one hundred” years not the eight years since the commitment was made. Thus, the problem is presented as a greater one than it may actually be; a contradiction to Professor Lee’s call for “honesty” in his opening. For readers that pick up on this subtle deception, he has lost credibility in their minds and are less willing to accept Professor Lee's arguments. He moves on by making the comparison of actions by humans and the extinction of dinosaurs, claiming that “in truth” they are similar. Such an extreme analogy has humans being equivocal to a meteorite striking the Earth (the common reason for the dinosaurs’ disappearance), which is the professor’s intention, to strike fear into his listener’s minds about their actions. His continuation of the metaphor, that “we affluent hunters and gathers must hunt less, gather less [and] conserve more” is to present a solution in terms his audience can more likely understand and accept. Moreover, this simplifies the solution etc etc (I won't bore you with the rest but that's pretty much how the LA goes and most of my questions are in the first bit of my analysis anways)

You thoughts on it and any answers to my questions in blue would be much appreciated

I acutally didn't read the analysis, just answered the questions (pressed for time MY INBOX IS FLOODING)

[ahat]

Section B - Language Analysis: The Greatest Tragedy of All

Gile Whittaker’s article, The Greatest Tragedy of All (Melbourne quarterly art journal, 4th June 2012)   contends that the drastic decline in theatre production, appreciation as well as attendance ultimately reflects negatively on humanity as a whole. By metaphorically personifying theatre as an “art” that is becoming lost and its inevitable corruption through adaptation by film, Whittaker articulates that theatre, a precious art form, must be saved from an inexorably negative fate. Whilst Whitaker maintains an authoritative tone and unbigoted standpoint throughout his article, his rational and logical approach to iterating his message personifies him with an aura of sensibility. He presents a fervent point of view through a precise use of formal language and an expansive vocabulary, an appropriate choice given a readership consisting primarily of liberal and non-conformist adolescents. A deliberate choice of images concluding his article also serves to emphasise the comparison he wishes to make between film and theatre – the joviality and colour of the poster representing film compares much more favourably to the blander poster depicting film. This standpoint is subtly conveyed, and is only strengthened by Whittaker’s broad approach in addressing both sides of the issue.

Whittaker does not being his article by addressing the issue at hand, but rather makes use of a quote from a reputable and well known source. Given the articles demographic, Oscar Wilde is renowned as a master of literature and held in high esteem. As such, the quote is prominent in romanticising theatre and its innate ability in connecting humanity. Resultantly, the readership, already instilled with an appreciation of art and its beauty, is touched by this quote and values its message. The optimism of the quote leaves the reader questioning why it would have been used alongside the language in the title. The title itself metaphorically represents a play; the deliberate font face is resemblant of the text type seen in a Shakespearian or playwright’s work. Not only providing the article with an air of legitimacy, it draws in the reader and piques their interest. It does this overtly as well as subtly; the deliberate choice of ‘tragedy’, an emotionally loaded word bearing connotations of devastation and disaster, is a contrast to the main storyline of Hamlet, which has a major theme of global tragedy. By comparing the ‘tragedy’ of Hamlet to the article side-by-side, Whittaker creates an atmosphere of a pending disaster that must be averted. 

 The opening sentence of the article is quite provocative in the sense it is quite unexpected. Where they reader might have expected to read “few art forms have seen such a profound impact”, ‘profound impact’ is rather replaced by ‘profound decline’. Whittaker’s very deliberate language choice in this sentence creates a sense of dissonance. This is hyperbolised by Whittaker personifying theatre as an “art” and something that has the capacity to “die”. Whittaker’s very cool suggestion that some would allow theatre to “die naturally” is an abhorrent notion to the reader and ties in with the suggestion of “loss” and its grave consequences that have not yet been realised. This notion is furthered as Whittaker unflatteringly asserts that theatre is slowly being given less value than “school plays”. The audience is left to question their beliefs about theatre. More than likely enthralled in the arts themselves, they sympathise with Whittaker’s pain over the slow decline in appreciation of theatre. Whittaker’s very personal recollection of experience as an adolescent, employing emotionally evocative language such as “passion” and being “deeply moved”, a touching discovery for the reader, and his deliberate use of inclusive language, invite them to share in his experience. By allowing the reader to share in his wonderment as a teen, the reader feels, on a personal level, regret that the “younger generation” will not have the opportunity to discover the allure of theatre.

Whittaker devotes considerable space to his argument that the loss of theatre and increasing reliance on film coincides with an impoverishment in modern culture’s richness and a decline in human history. Asserting that “culture stems from traditional theatre” and history was shaped from a “lengthy relationship between humanity and theatre,” this loss is only exacerbated. Whittaker draws the reader’s attention to the damage that is already being caused to the present generation, describing “square-eyed” children whose imaginations are being “stolen” from them. A shockingly direct word, he presents modern day films as the ‘criminals’ who endorse depleting the younger generations of free thought. He goes on to say that this would eventuate in a loss of the “power of understanding”, a fate already resplendent in the performances of some actors, describing them as “snivelling, spoilt…students.” Such emotionally loaded language exemplifies Whittaker’s true antagonism for the film industry. Whilst prior in the article he makes clear that he does not “hate” film, his hasty transition from questioning the worth of film in a level headed manner, to a satirical and ardent defamation of film encapsulates his true animus for the industry. The reader, having mostly been able to relate to Whittaker’s up to this point, view him under a favourable light. As such, the sudden change in tone and pacing only serve to inflame their sense of injustice.

As Whittaker begins to conclude his article, his true contention becomes clear. Whilst the issue of a diminishing theatre may not have been major to the general public, Whittaker aims to highlight its importance and polarise the reader to agree with his point of view. Whittaker admits that “many of these adaptations [of theatre] have worked” and thus reflects his ability to appreciate both sides of the issue. Nevertheless, he is relentless in representing the film industry as malicious and damaging. Describing it as “mock[ing]” an “already wounded art form”, the reader is left with imagery of immorality. That something would attack something in a vulnerable state is almost sacrilegious and unholy. Further, Whittaker strengthens this point of view by implying that film adaptations are merely done as a source of popularity and money. Making a point of the “Almereyda adaption of Hamlet” he describes Ethan Hawke as “heart throb”. A ‘heart throb’ is typically a male celebrity whose good looks excite romantic feelings in women. This shameful and despicable exploitation of females contrasts with Whittaker’s use of imagery ending the article, where Ethan Hawke seems almost sorrowful and regretful for partaking in this malicious scheme.

Whittaker culminates his article with a sense of optimism. Relaying his belief that there is a future where the two industries can exist, he paradoxically states that the way forward, is ironically, to go backwards. Once again subtly implying the film industry as anti-revolutionary, he effectively summarises his main point into this one sentence.

[rohanj]

Hey guys, could anyone provide me feedback on my Lang Analysis essay below in preparation for tomorrow's exam. It was on the 2010 english exam section C on biodiversity. http://www.vcaa.vic.edu.au/Documents/exams/english/2010english-w.pdf

Biodiversity, a crucial part of our existence in the world today is an ever growing issue that has been up for debate. During the International Biodiversity Conference 2010 in Nagoya Japan on the 25th to the 27th of October, Professor Chris Lee delivered a speech “Taking Stock” regarding the issue of Governmental action regarding the issue of biodiversity loss. The speech was delivered to the public consisting of many scientists, government officials and others witnessing Lee’s presentation as he expressed his view in a distressed, enthusiastic, formal and frank manner. Lee wished to review the progress made towards achieving the target to reduce biodiversity loss and took beyond 2010.

Throughout his speech, Lee makes the use of many rhetorical questions with a goal of creating a worry and to get the public thinking about the issue. He asks the audience “What have WE – what have YOU and YOUR country actually done since 2002?” and this gets the desired response. The use of the inclusive terms such as ‘we’, ‘you’, and ‘your’ make the audience engaged as these terms personalize the issue due to the fact these words refer to us as individuals. The fact that this was an International level conference means that many professionals in the field of biodiversity would have been present and by using inclusive terms in his rhetorical questions, he makes an appeal to the responsibility people of such stature feel. By asking what we have “actually done” he is able to create a sense of guilt that the public feel as by saying “actually” it magnifies the fact that our behaviour was not enough to create any positives. The fact that many professionals in the field of biodiversity and science were present at such a conference, these audience members in particular feel guilty. Lee uses an attack on the opposition in a concerned way via the use of rhetorical questions.

Emotions create the basis of us to respond to a situation, it gives us the motivation to change a situation. In his speech, Lee uses many emotive terms to further enhance the engagement of the audience. He states the situations that the poorer people in the world have to face and the rates of poverty to make the public feel the effects the issue has on the less fortunate people of our world. He says an emotive statement “the poor are particularly vulnerable because they are directly dependent on biodiversity for their survival”. This touches a nerve in the audience as most people like to believe they have a sense of care for others in despair. It makes them feel a touch of sympathy due to their sufferings as well as make the audience of those in power feel guilty about their lack of action regarding biodiversity loss. The use of the word “poor” has a strong sympathetic and negative connation attached as they refer to people who don’t have the honor to live life like the majority of Lee’s speech’s audience do. By using the word “vulnerable”, which has strong helpless and pitiful connotations attached, Lee is able to touch the hearts of people that care about the issues the loss of biodiversity has on the less fortunate people our Governments claim to care for. Finally, by stating they are “dependent of biodiversity” Lee is able to make a strong link back to the major issue as it means biodiversity loss is making the lives of poor people even more complicated than it already is. It makes his audience feel emotionally connected to his concerns and those of the poor.

Lee makes the use of slides with images that go with his speech to add another dimension and an extra effect to further enhance his point of view. The use of the logo of the Conference, Lee is able to make sure everyone knows the main topic of debate. The logo that has “2010” on it, has photos of carefully constructed photos of elements of biodiversity. The involvement of water animals such as fishes, land animals such as birds, humans as well as aspects of nature like the tree, clearly states the harmony that biodiversity brings to the world. It creates an overall balanced feel of the logo which stays relevant to the issue. The contrasting nature of a white background that has colored numbers in the foreground creates a clarity in which the focal point of the image, biodiversity in 2010, remains in the audience’s minds. The creation of the logo has the numbers overlapping and joined together, similar to the way biodiversity joins all aspects of the Earth together. This creates a strong sense of likeness to the issue of biodiversity as well as ensuring the logo is relevant to the main topic of debate.

Hands joining together in unity are an aspect that is required to change an issue such as biodiversity. The image on the closing slide of Lee’s slide shows exactly that as a globe is placed on joining hands to state the fact the unity is required to create a positive effect on biodiversity loss. By placing the globe and hands in the foreground, the emphasis remains on the main issue as the hierarchy of image placement ensure the eyes focus on the focal point first and foremost. The accompanying text that states the words of ecologist “Thomas Eisner” say “Biodiversity is the greatest treasure we have. Its diminishment is to be preserved at all costs”. This remains very much relevant to the issue that Lee is discussing in his speech and the use of an expert opinion make his speech that much stronger. The words “greatest treasure” have connotations that regard to great things in life that are precious to lose as by saying “greatest” the audience think of grand positives. The use of “treasure” states that the gained benefits of biodiversity are precious and something that is priceless.

Biodiversity is the “greatest treasure we have” and this is the concerned emotion that Lee expresses in his speech with a means to review progress and form the building blocks for further improvements. By using rhetorical questions his audience which includes many professionals, they are made to think about the inaction regarding biodiversity. It allows Lee to form the basis for creating a sense of urgency regarding the matter. Together with the use of emotive language and inclusive terms, Lee is successfully able to persuade his intended audience of professionals in the field of science and Government to reduce biodiversity loss. The added use of images on his slides enhances the potential as it ensures visual learners are also persuaded to the full extent.

[Stevensmay]

Spoiler

Hey guys, could you guys criticise where I've gone wrong on my lang analysis esasy and at what level (A,B,C,D) my work is at so far? Any help will be appreciated!
I wrote it on the English exam of 2010, section C regarding biodiversity http://www.vcaa.vic.edu.au/Documents/exams/english/2010english-w.pdf
Any feedback will be appreciated!
Here's my essay:

Biodiversity, a crucial part of our existence in the world today is an ever growing issue that has been up for debate. During the International Biodiversity Conference 2010 in Nagoya Japan on the 25th to the 27th of October, Professor Chris Lee delivered a speech “Taking Stock” regarding the issue of Governmental action regarding the issue of biodiversity loss. The speech was delivered to the public consisting of many scientists, government officials and others witnessing Lee’s presentation as he expressed his view in a distressed, enthusiastic, formal and frank manner.Maybe write these as a progression, showing the tone shift as the speech progresses rather than in a list. Lee wished to review the progress made towards achieving the target to reduce biodiversity loss and took beyond 2010.

Throughout his speech, Lee makes the use of many rhetorical questions with a goal of creating a worry in this piece I believe it was more to get the audience thinking 'have I played my part'and to get the public thinking about the issue. He asks the audience “What have WE – what have YOU and YOUR country actually done since 2002?” and this gets the desired responseWe do not know what response it gets. This is subjective when LA is meant to be objective. The use of the inclusive terms such as ‘we’, ‘you’, and ‘your’ make the audience engaged as these terms personalize the issue due to the fact these words refer to us as individualssentence feels a bit clumsy, try to be more concise.. The fact that this was an International level conference means that many professionals in the field of biodiversity would have been present and by using inclusive terms in his rhetorical questions, he makes an appeal to the responsibility people of such stature not sure what this word means in this contextfeel. By asking what we have “actually done” he is able to create a sense of guilt that the public feel as by saying “actually” it magnifies the fact that our behaviour was not enough to create any positives. The fact that many professionals in the field of biodiversity and science were present at such a conference, these audience members in particular feel guilty. That sentence probably wasn't needed. Lee uses an attackis it really an attack? on the opposition in a concerned way via the use of rhetorical questions.

Emotions create the basis of us to respond to a situation, it gives us the motivation to change a situation. Consider rewriting the conjunction phase.In his speech, Lee uses many emotive terms to further enhance the engagement of the audience. He states the situations that the poorer people in the world have to face and the rates of poverty to make the public feel the effects the issue has on the less fortunate people of our world. He says an emotive statement “the poor are particularly vulnerable because they are directly dependent on biodiversity for their survival”. This touches a nerve in the audience as most people like to believe they have a sense of care for others in despair. It makes them feel a touch of sympathy due to their sufferings as well as make the audience of those in power feel guilty about their lack of action regarding biodiversity loss. The use of the word “poor” has a strong sympathetic and negative connotation attached as they refer to people who don’t have the honor This is getting a bit off topic and becoming subjective. Honour is not appropiate.to live life like the majority of Lee’s speech’s audience do. By using the word “vulnerable”, which has strong helpless and pitiful connotations attached, Lee is able to touch the hearts of people that care about the issues the loss of biodiversity has on the less fortunate people our Governments claim to care for. Finally, by stating they are “dependent of biodiversity” Lee is able to make a strong link back to the major issue as it means biodiversity loss is making the lives of poor people even more complicated than it already is. It makes his audience feel emotionally connected to his concerns and those of the poor.

Lee makes the use of slides with images that go with his speech to add another dimension and an extra effect to further enhance his point of view. The use of the logo of the Conference, Lee is able to make sure everyone knows the main topic of debate. The logo that has “2010” on it, has photos of carefully constructed photos of elements of biodiversity. The involvement of water animals such as fishes, land animals such as birds, humans as well as aspects of nature like the tree, clearly states the harmony that biodiversity brings to the world. It creates an overall balanced feel of the logo which stays relevant to the issue. The contrasting nature of a white background that has colored numbers in the foreground creates a clarity in which the focal point of the image, biodiversity in 2010, remains in the audience’s minds. The creation of the logo has the numbers overlapping and joined together, similar to the way biodiversity joins all aspects of the Earth together. This creates a strong sense of likeness to the issue of biodiversity as well as ensuring the logo is relevant to the main topic of debate.
You didn't really analyse the techniques employed to persuade the audience here, rather just described the logo and its relevance to biodiversity.
Hands joining together in unity are an aspect that is required to change an issue such as biodiversity. The image on the closing slide of Lee’s slide shows exactly that as a globe is placed on joining hands to state the fact the unity is required to create a positive effect on biodiversity loss. By placing the globe and hands in the foreground, the emphasis remains on the main issue as the hierarchy of image placement ensure the eyes focus on the focal point first and foremost. The accompanying text that states the words of ecologist “Thomas Eisner” say “Biodiversity is the greatest treasure we have. Its diminishment is to be preserved at all costs”.Don't really need to use the quote. This remains very much relevant to the issue that Lee is discussing in his speech and the use of an expert opinion make his speech that much stronger. The words “greatest treasure” have connotations that regard to great things in life that are precious to lose as by saying “greatest” the audience think of grand positives. The use of “treasure” states that the gained benefits of biodiversity are precious and something that is priceless.

Biodiversity is the “greatest treasure we have” and this is the concerned emotion that Lee expresses in his speech with a means to review progress and form the building blocks for further improvements. By using rhetorical questions his audience which includes many professionals, they are made to think about the inaction regarding biodiversity. It allows Lee to form the basis for creating a sense of urgency regarding the matter. Together with the use of emotive language and inclusive terms, Lee is successfully able to persuade his intended audience of professionals in the field of science and Government to reduce biodiversity loss. The added use of images on his slides enhances the potential as it ensures visual learners are also persuaded to the full extent.

Thanks for any help, appreciate it!

Had to go over it quickly sorry.
In general try and be more concise with your sentences. Often what could be said in one was said in two or three.
The length of your piece may also not be re creatable in the exam, back to conciseness.
The two paragraphs talking about the images could probably have been made into one.
Make sure you proof read your work, there were a few sentences that did not make sense or were missing punctuation.

5/10

Keep in mind I'm not an assessor etcetera etcetera.

[Alwin]

I acutally didn't read the analysis, just answered the questions (pressed for time MY INBOX IS FLOODING)

Cheers brendie =] much appreciated.

I'll help with marking essays on this board too btw some time after 6pm, so if you're one of the people that posted here bear with me or until someone comes along and marks it before I get to it

[Alwin]

@Lala1911


This was my SAC that I did a while ago. I just want to see how you guys would mark it /10. Would like some feedback on it though.

ARTICLE: http://www.smh.com.au/sport/harsh-new-reality-achieving-the-ultimate-edge-is-pushing-us-over-it-20130413-2hsk5.html
tl;dr sorry!

Drugs in sport has become  an increasingly alarming issue over the past decade, not only affecting the spirit of the sport, but the physiological and psychological wellbeing of athletes. good contextualising Tim Lane’s opinion piece “Harsh new reality: achieving the ultimate edge is pushing us over it” criticizes the use of illegal drugs in sport. The writer employs bit of an odd word choice a disappointed tone in order to convey his concerns regarding the alarming amount of drugs used in sport and the seriousness of the issue. Audience??
The photograph accompanying the article portrays an unpleasant image of drugs. This intends to frighten the reader by stimulating negative fears. how? what do connotations does the image have? The inclusion of a pun in the headline: “Achieving the ultimate edge is pushing us over it” intends to be playful on the readers mind, acting to catch their attention whilst forcing them to slow down and read it once again. why is this a pun? this kind of identification is around 5/10, if you put in one or two more lines explaining why it is a pun and the effect then 8+ analysis =]

The writers inclusion of the phrase “ultimately doomed” intends to point out the worst case scenario to the reader, which provokes concern that sporting may be on the brink of doom. Futhermore, the writer follows up with “could it be restored?” in order to manipulate how? the reader to question the current stability of sport and whether the spirit of the sport can be restored.

The inclusion of Irish sports writer David Walsh’s book “Seven Deadly Sins – my pursuit of lance Armstrong” acts to prove that the writer has completed his research on the issue by outsourcing. and adds credibility? The remark that Walsh “refused to cover the Tour De France as a sprinting contest” creates maybe not such a definite word a sense of disappointment for the reader, as our sports have now been disgraced by drug cheats. Furthermore, the statement that Walsh could “no longer bring himself to write about the bike race with joy and optimism” acts to show that we’re now unable to enjoy the sports that we previously thrived on, creating a sense of disappointment for the reader. how?? sounds like your just translating the piece, you haven't really analysed the use of the anecdote and the phrase "no longer". what does it imply?

Language utlisised such as “crisis” intends to reveal the seriousness of the issuewhy? what sort of language is this? colloquial language? formal language? jargon?, forcing the reader to believe that the situation is much worse than what they may believe again, you're very definite in your analysis. In addition, the writer then contends that the AFL was an “honourable” sport, however this is followed up by “the possibility that has appeared before us was scarcely imaginable”. This is designed to create negative mental imagery for the reader in order to provoke unimaginable scenarios. how? comparison? juxtaposition?

Lane’' apostrophes appeal that the “young” are affected by the use of drugs intends to show that the issue is now branching out to youth in Australia. This position parents to feel worried and at unease about the overwhelming amount of drugs used. The writer' apostrophes attacking phrase  about essendon players that they have “mindless attitudes” intends to belittle the players, forcing the reader to feel as if their argument is flawed.

The writer then transitions to a more pessimistic tone good in order to convey his concerns that “we’re all to blame”, which intends to make the reader feel a sense of guilt for uging and pressuring sports athletes to perform at such a high standard. and? This positions the reader to feel as if they should be more accepting fo athletes capabilities and to cease their criticism.

Language such as “what is far from obvious is whether anything can be done to stop the rot” acts to create a sense of fear that the issue may have escalated too far, which positions us to feel  a sense of urgency to take action before its too late. why? tell me connotations and in-depth analysis

The inclusion of Savulescu’s expert opinion acts to increase Lane’s credibility of his argument as he has now done his research and spent time gathering opinions.sounds weird Lane then proceed to criticize the AFL CEO, Andrew Demetriou that he would be getting a “smaller budget” if he was to be born with a “whatever it takes motto”. This positions the reader to feel frustrated at the AFL, as money has becoming a huge factor and not the wellbeing of athletes. why why why? connotations of these words? imagery? figurative language?

The writer concludes his argument by criticisng Savalescu for suggesting to allow drug taking to become a “norm” by stating that he is “delusional”. This positions the reader to feel that if Savalescu’s argument is flawed, then his opinion must too be flawed, urging us to believe that drugs should not be the “norm” but should be prohibited.

Overall, Lane sustains a logical argument throughout the opinion piece. The including of expert opinions helped increase his credibility and provided concern and guilt from the reader. Lane prompts us to believe that in order to revive the spirit of the sport, drugs in sport must be stopped.

Okay, you have a very formulaic approach, and nothing's too wrong with that as everyone has their own writing style.
However, I felt that you missed a few things such as the intended audience and connotations of words
You make a lot of points tho hm

GOOD LUCK FOR TOMORROW =D

[Alwin]

@ahat
Section B C perhaps? =P - Language Analysis: The Greatest Tragedy of All

Gile Whittaker’s article, The Greatest Tragedy of All (Melbourne quarterly art journal, 4th June 2012) why the brackets? you could just say published on ___ in the _____  contends stylist, but I personally wouldn't use this word. sounds like you're making a check listthat the drastic decline in theatre production, appreciation, comm as well as attendance ultimately reflects negatively on humanity as a whole. By metaphorically personifying theatre as an “art” that is becoming lost and its inevitable corruption through adaptation by film, Whittaker articulates that theatre, a precious art form, must be saved from an inexorably negative fate. Whilst Whitaker maintains an authoritative tone and unbigoted standpoint throughout his article, his rational and logical approach to iterating his message personifies him with an aura of sensibility. good He presents a fervent point of view you just said he was rational and logical??through a precise use of formal language and an expansive vocabulary, an appropriate choice given a readership consisting primarily of liberal and non-conformist adolescents. A deliberate choice of images concluding his article also serves to emphasise the comparison he wishes to make between film and theatre – dashes break up the nice lovely fluency... I'd try avoid them in LAthe joviality and colour of the poster representing film compares much more favourably to the blander poster depicting film. This standpoint is subtly conveyed, and is only strengthened by Whittaker’s broad approach in addressing both sides of the issue.

Whittaker does not being his article by addressing the issue at hand, but rather makes use of a quote from a reputable and well known source. Given the articles demographic,<-- why this phrase? isn't he held in high esteem anywayws irrespective of audience? Oscar Wilde is renowned as a master of literature and held in high esteem. As such, the quote is prominent in romanticising theatre and its innate ability in connecting humanity. Resultantly, the readership, already instilled with an appreciation of art and its beauty, is touched by this quote and values its message. The optimism of the quote leaves the reader questioning why it would have been used alongside the language in the title. good. but it's a bit long to spend on the one quoteThe title itself metaphorically represents a play; the deliberate font face is resemblant of the text type seen in a Shakespearian or playwright’s work. Not only providing the article with an air of legitimacy, it draws in the reader and piques their interest. It does this overtly as well as subtly; the deliberate choice of ‘tragedy’, an emotionally loaded word bearing connotations of devastation and disaster, is a contrast to the main storyline of Hamlet, which has a major theme of global tragedy. By comparing the ‘tragedy’ of Hamlet to the article side-by-side, Whittaker creates an atmosphere of a pending disaster that must be averted. Okay, good

 The opening sentence of the article is quite provocative in the sense it is quite unexpected. Where they reader might have expected to read “few art forms have seen such a profound impact”, ‘profound impact’ is rather replaced by ‘profound decline’. Whittaker’s very deliberate language choice in this sentence creates a sense of dissonance.good This is hyperbolised by Whittaker personifying theatre as an “art” and something that has the capacity to “die”. Whittaker’s very cool suggestion that some would allow theatre to “die naturally” is an abhorrent notion to the reader and ties in with the suggestion of “loss” and its grave consequences that have not yet been realised. ✓This notion is furthered as Whittaker unflatteringly asserts that theatre is slowly being given less value than “school plays”. The audience is left to question their beliefs about theatre. More than likely enthralled in the arts themselves, they sympathise with Whittaker’s pain good over the slow decline in appreciation of theatre. Whittaker’s very personal recollection of experience as an adolescent, employing emotionally evocative language such as “passion” and being “deeply moved”, a touching discovery for the reader, and his deliberate use of inclusive language, invite them to share in his experience. By allowing the reader to share in his wonderment as a teen, the reader feels, on a personal level, regret that the “younger generation” will not have the opportunity to discover the allure of theatre. ✓

Whittaker devotes considerable space to his argument that the loss of theatre and increasing reliance on film coincides with an impoverishment in modern culture’s richness and a decline in human history. Asserting that “culture stems from traditional theatre” and history was shaped from a “lengthy relationship between humanity and theatre,” this loss is only exacerbated.✓ Whittaker draws the reader’s attention to the damage that is already being caused to the present generation, describing “square-eyed” children whose imaginations are being “stolen” from them. A shockingly direct word,good he presents modern day films as the ‘criminals’ who endorse depleting the younger generations of free thought. He goes on to say that this would eventuate in a loss of the “power of understanding”, a fate already resplendent in the performances of some actors, describing them as “snivelling, spoilt…students.” Such emotionally loaded language exemplifies Whittaker’s true antagonism for the film industry. ✓Whilst prior in the article he makes clear that he does not “hate” film, his hasty transition from questioning the worth of film in a level headed manner, to a satirical and ardent defamation of film encapsulates his true animus for the industry. The reader, having mostly been able to relate to Whittaker’s up to this point, view him under a favourable light.excellent As such, the sudden change in tone and pacing only serve to inflame their sense of injustice. ✓

As Whittaker begins to conclude his article, his true contention becomes clear. Whilst the issue of a diminishing theatre may not have been major to the general public, Whittaker aims to highlight its importance and polarise the reader to agree with his point of view. Whittaker admits that “many of these adaptations [of theatre] have worked” and thus reflects his ability to appreciate both sides of the issue.✓ Nevertheless, he is relentless in representing the film industry as malicious and damaging. Describing it as “mock[ing]” an “already wounded art form”, the reader is left with imagery of immorality.which furthers their.. etc etc That something would attack something in a vulnerable state is almost sacrilegious and unholy. Further, Whittaker strengthens this point of view by implying that film adaptations are merely done as a source of popularity and money. Making a point of the “Almereyda adaption of Hamlet” he describes Ethan Hawke as “heart throb”. A ‘heart throb’ is typically a male celebrity whose good looks excite romantic feelings in women.✓ This shameful and despicable exploitation of females contrasts with Whittaker’s use of imagery ending the article, where Ethan Hawke seems almost sorrowful and regretful for partaking in this malicious scheme. good

Whittaker culminates his article with a sense of optimism. Relaying his belief that there is a future where the two industries can exist, he paradoxically states that the way forward, is ironically, to go backwards. Once again subtly implying the film industry as anti-revolutionary, he effectively summarises his main point into this one sentence.✓

wow. This would definitely be a high scoring response imho
very good vocab, out to impress from the into
not overtly labelling techniques all of them are analysed with complexity in relevant context

Good luck for tomorrow =D not that, having read this piece, you need it =P

EDID: had to go back and put all the ticks in, you did a truly marvellous job imho

[lala1911]

@Lala1911


This was my SAC that I did a while ago. I just want to see how you guys would mark it /10. Would like some feedback on it though.

ARTICLE: http://www.smh.com.au/sport/harsh-new-reality-achieving-the-ultimate-edge-is-pushing-us-over-it-20130413-2hsk5.html
tl;dr sorry!

Drugs in sport has become  an increasingly alarming issue over the past decade, not only affecting the spirit of the sport, but the physiological and psychological wellbeing of athletes. good contextualising Tim Lane’s opinion piece “Harsh new reality: achieving the ultimate edge is pushing us over it” criticizes the use of illegal drugs in sport. The writer employs bit of an odd word choice a disappointed tone in order to convey his concerns regarding the alarming amount of drugs used in sport and the seriousness of the issue. Audience??
The photograph accompanying the article portrays an unpleasant image of drugs. This intends to frighten the reader by stimulating negative fears. how? what do connotations does the image have? The inclusion of a pun in the headline: “Achieving the ultimate edge is pushing us over it” intends to be playful on the readers mind, acting to catch their attention whilst forcing them to slow down and read it once again. why is this a pun? this kind of identification is around 5/10, if you put in one or two more lines explaining why it is a pun and the effect then 8+ analysis =]

The writers inclusion of the phrase “ultimately doomed” intends to point out the worst case scenario to the reader, which provokes concern that sporting may be on the brink of doom. Futhermore, the writer follows up with “could it be restored?” in order to manipulate how? the reader to question the current stability of sport and whether the spirit of the sport can be restored.

The inclusion of Irish sports writer David Walsh’s book “Seven Deadly Sins – my pursuit of lance Armstrong” acts to prove that the writer has completed his research on the issue by outsourcing. and adds credibility? The remark that Walsh “refused to cover the Tour De France as a sprinting contest” creates maybe not such a definite word a sense of disappointment for the reader, as our sports have now been disgraced by drug cheats. Furthermore, the statement that Walsh could “no longer bring himself to write about the bike race with joy and optimism” acts to show that we’re now unable to enjoy the sports that we previously thrived on, creating a sense of disappointment for the reader. how?? sounds like your just translating the piece, you haven't really analysed the use of the anecdote and the phrase "no longer". what does it imply?

Language utlisised such as “crisis” intends to reveal the seriousness of the issuewhy? what sort of language is this? colloquial language? formal language? jargon?, forcing the reader to believe that the situation is much worse than what they may believe again, you're very definite in your analysis. In addition, the writer then contends that the AFL was an “honourable” sport, however this is followed up by “the possibility that has appeared before us was scarcely imaginable”. This is designed to create negative mental imagery for the reader in order to provoke unimaginable scenarios. how? comparison? juxtaposition?

Lane’' apostrophes appeal that the “young” are affected by the use of drugs intends to show that the issue is now branching out to youth in Australia. This position parents to feel worried and at unease about the overwhelming amount of drugs used. The writer' apostrophes attacking phrase  about essendon players that they have “mindless attitudes” intends to belittle the players, forcing the reader to feel as if their argument is flawed.

The writer then transitions to a more pessimistic tone good in order to convey his concerns that “we’re all to blame”, which intends to make the reader feel a sense of guilt for uging and pressuring sports athletes to perform at such a high standard. and? This positions the reader to feel as if they should be more accepting fo athletes capabilities and to cease their criticism.

Language such as “what is far from obvious is whether anything can be done to stop the rot” acts to create a sense of fear that the issue may have escalated too far, which positions us to feel  a sense of urgency to take action before its too late. why? tell me connotations and in-depth analysis

The inclusion of Savulescu’s expert opinion acts to increase Lane’s credibility of his argument as he has now done his research and spent time gathering opinions.sounds weird Lane then proceed to criticize the AFL CEO, Andrew Demetriou that he would be getting a “smaller budget” if he was to be born with a “whatever it takes motto”. This positions the reader to feel frustrated at the AFL, as money has becoming a huge factor and not the wellbeing of athletes. why why why? connotations of these words? imagery? figurative language?

The writer concludes his argument by criticisng Savalescu for suggesting to allow drug taking to become a “norm” by stating that he is “delusional”. This positions the reader to feel that if Savalescu’s argument is flawed, then his opinion must too be flawed, urging us to believe that drugs should not be the “norm” but should be prohibited.

Overall, Lane sustains a logical argument throughout the opinion piece. The including of expert opinions helped increase his credibility and provided concern and guilt from the reader. Lane prompts us to believe that in order to revive the spirit of the sport, drugs in sport must be stopped.

Okay, you have a very formulaic approach, and nothing's too wrong with that as everyone has their own writing style.
However, I felt that you missed a few things such as the intended audience and connotations of words
You make a lot of points tho hm

GOOD LUCK FOR TOMORROW =D

Thanks. Its been an issue of mine to just state the effect and not really explain it better. Something to keep in mind for tomorrow.

[Tyleralp1]

I am a Year 10 student, with Language Analysis as part of my examination in two weeks. I don't ask for a high end Year 12 correction, but simply a general review, and possible areas for improvement

Just a general query, our teacher has said to "chunk" our paragraphs up into a type of technique for each paragraph, providing a few examples+explanations. However, is it recommended to move in a chronological order and analyse key statements as a paragraph?

ARTICLE IMAGE LINK: http://puu.sh/5f1Ho.jpg

A recent report in the Herald Sun regarding the death of a boy suffering a brain tumour has sparked much debate regarding health system. In the Editorial from the Herald Sun, January 16, 1998, titled “How the system failed Chris”, the editor addresses the issue of supporting the terminally ill. The author argues in a tone of frustration that it isn’t fair for people who wish to die at home need to pay additional costs, compared to dying in hospital. The writer specifically targets fellow parents who would undeniably wouldn’t want unjust treatment via the government health care system. The issue is briefly introduced by the bold heading. This is most likely to position the reader to emit a sense of compassion, of how something which a family relied most on didn’t meet their expectations. Additionally, it immediately gets the audience to think of the health care system in a negative manner by the use of the word “failed”.

The editor uses a variety of appeals to elicit a sense of compassion and outrage towards the system in his article. One prominent technique used throughout the text is appeals to fairness. This further highlights the injustice of the failing health care system. The author mentions “if Chris was in hospital, the drugs would be free” to appeal to the reader’s sense of justice and compassion. The writer is trying to allude to the fact the added financial burden isn’t fair to those wishing to stay at home to die. This is due to the fact that if the government subsidises costs in a hospital, it should only be right to have the same treatment at home. This is further reiterated with the point how staying at home “saves the governments money by not being in hospital”. This creates a feeling of double standards amongst the health care system, creating a sense of injustice. It simply doesn’t make sense for governments to further reduce spending, when they are in fact saving money when people stay at home to die. In addition to this, the author also makes use of appeals to family values. “Tony left his job…to help his wife care for Chris”, is used to evoke a sense of compassion towards the extent to which people must go to support a child dying at home. The author is attempting to make the audience see Tony’s family loyalty as a positive thing. This is done to show how taking care of the ill, especially family, is a highly important task and must be done. It shows how financial costs may be even further increased due the naturally conscience to stay at home to look after a family member.

The Editor also uses strong emotive language and the tragic case study of Tony and his son, Chris, to further drive home that the system is failing for its citizens. The writer promotes a negative connotation on the health care system by the use of “the gross failings of the system”. The word “gross” has a strong negative perception which invites the reader to believe that the failings of the “system” are simply not acceptable in society. This Is because “gross” is a word which signifies disgust, which in this case refers to the unacceptable treatment by the healthcare system. The used of the word “failing” positions the reader to think that the health care system is not doing its job – to look after those in distress. It doesn’t meet the expectations of providing peace of mind for families, as it only adds to their worries with additional fees. In addition to this, the author mentions “the battling couple” to promote a sense of compassion to the family. It’s intended effect would be to make get the reader to see eye to eye with the other hardships of daily life, by which this “failing” health care system is only adding to. In essence, the couple are struggling to make ends meat, and to be hit with excess costs to cater for their son in the comfort of their own home further adds to the distress.

As you can see, the Editorial, “How the system failed Chris” makes a worthwhile addition to the debate on the inadequacies of the Victorian Health System. The Editor’s heart-felt appeal, using Chris’ pitiful plight at the hands of senseless bureaucracy is very likely to strike a cord with many concerned citizens.  It is clearly evident that the author has effectively used language to persuade the reader that the health care system is in need of attention. This was done through various appeals and the use of emotive language.

[Stevensmay]

Spoiler

I am a Year 10 student, with Language Analysis as part of my examination in two weeks. I don't ask for a high end Year 12 correction, but simply a general review, and possible areas for improvement

Just a general query, our teacher has said to "chunk" our paragraphs up into a type of technique for each paragraph, providing a few examples+explanations. However, is it recommended to move in a chronological order and analyse key statements as a paragraph?

ARTICLE IMAGE LINK: http://puu.sh/5f1Ho.jpg

A recent report in the Herald Sun regarding the death of a boy suffering a brain tumour has sparked much debate regarding thehealth system. In the Herald Sun editorial from, January 16, 1998, titled “How the system failed Chris”, the editor addresses the issue of supporting the terminally ill. The author argues in a frustrated tone that it isn’t fair for people who wish to die at home need to pay additional costs, compared to dying in hospital. The writer specifically targets fellow(Didnt see where editor was a parent, may have missed it) parents who would undeniably wouldn’t want fair unjust(few too many negatives) treatment via the government health care system. The issue is briefly introduced by the bold heading. This is most likely to position the reader to emit a sense of compassion, of how something which a family relied most on didn’t meet their expectations. Additionally, it immediately gets the audience to think of the health care system in a negative manner by the use of the word “failed”.

The editor uses a variety of appeals to elicit a sense of compassion and outrage towards the system in his article. One prominent technique used throughout the text is appeals to an appeal to fairness. See if you can get an example here.This further highlights the injustice of the failing health care system. The author mentions “if Chris was in hospital, the drugs would be free” to appeal to the reader’s sense of justice and compassion. The writer is trying to allude to the fact the added financial burden isn’t fair to those wishing to stay at home to die. This is due to the fact that if the government subsidises costs in a hospital, it should only be right to have the same treatment at home. This is further reiterated with the point how staying at home “saves the governments money by not being in hospital”. This creates a feeling of double standards amongst the health care system, creating a sense of injustice. It simply doesn’t make sense for governments to further reduce spending, when they are in fact saving money when people stay at home to die. This was subjective not objective. In addition to this, the author also makes use of appeals to family values. “Tony left his job…to help his wife care for Chris”, is used to evoke a sense of compassion towards the extent to which people must go to support a child dying at home. The author is attempting to make the audience see Tony’s family loyalty as a positive thing. This is done to show how taking care of the ill, especially family, is a highly important task and must be done. It shows how financial costs may be even further increased due the naturally conscience to stay at home to look after a family member.

The Editor also uses strong emotive language and the tragic case study of Tony and his son, Chris, to further drive home that the system is failing for its citizens. The writer promotes a negative connotation on the health care system by the use of phrases such as 'gross failings' and 'outrageous' “the gross failings of the system”. The word “gross” has a strong negative perception which invites the reader to believe that the failings of the “system” are simply not acceptable in society. This Is because “gross” is a word which signifies disgust, which in this case refers to the unacceptable treatment by the healthcare system. The used of the word “failing” positions the reader to think that the health care system is not doing its job – to look after those in distress. It doesn’t meet the expectations of providing peace of mind for families, as it only adds to their worries with additional fees. In addition to this, the author mentions “the battling couple” to promote a sense of compassion to the family. It’s intended effect would be to make get the reader to see eye to eye with the other hardships of daily life, by which this “failing” health care system is only adding to. In essence, the couple are struggling to make ends meat, and to be hit with excess costs to cater for their son in the comfort of their own home further adds to the distress.

As you can see, the Editorial, “How the system failed Chris” makes a worthwhile addition to the debate on the inadequacies of the Victorian Health System. The Editor’s heart-felt appeal, using Chris’ pitiful plight at the hands of senseless bureaucracy is very likely to strike a cord with many concerned citizens.  The authors arguments are likely to be ill-perceived by those who see the right to choose where to die as a privilege and not a right. It is clearly evident that the author has effectively used language to persuade the reader that the health care system is in need of attention. This was done through various appeals and the use of emotive language.

This was quite good overall.
Make sure you remain objective throughout, not offering your personal opinion on certain techniques or things that aren't said in the article. Try and be more concise if you can, especially when explaining some of the techniques.

You also might need to check the definition of gross, I'm not sure if that was the one the author intended it to be interpreted as.

[Tyleralp1]

I am a Year 10 student, with Language Analysis as part of my examination in two weeks. I don't ask for a high end Year 12 correction, but simply a general review, and possible areas for improvement

Just a general query, our teacher has said to "chunk" our paragraphs up into a type of technique for each paragraph, providing a few examples+explanations. However, is it recommended to move in a chronological order and analyse key statements as a paragraph?

ARTICLE IMAGE LINK: http://puu.sh/5jSj8.jpg


The implementation of sniffer dogs in schools to catch drugs has given rise to much debate regarding if this practice is acceptable. In the Herald Sun editorial form July 3, 1998, titled "Dogs at the end of the drugs trail", the editors contends that there is no logical explanation to stop the use of sniffer dogs. The argument is presented in a tone of discontent and targets the parents of school children.

The Editor uses a variety of strong emotive language to elicit a sense of negativity towards the use of drugs. When he uses words such as "illegal" and "frightening", it promotes a negative connection on drugs. The use of these words have a strong negative perception which is to invites the reader to believe that drugs are nasty substances and shouldn't be lurking around schools of innocent children.  "Illegal" is used by the writer to indicate that such unlawful practices shouldn't be associated with children at all. In addition to this, the Editor make use of such adverse words to highlight the detrimental effects drugs. Phrases such as "a you child being brain squashed for like" and "loosing a life" position the reader to feel a sense of fear in regards to drugs. Here, the editor uses emotive language as an appeal to fear in an attempt to make the audience see how sniffer dogs can protect children from such possibilities.

As well as using emotive language, the Editor also uses techniques such as authority and "cause and effect" to position to the reader to agree with their stance on the issue. A quote from Premier Jeff Kennet which "reflects parents' feelings" is used to add further credibility to his argument. It's intended effect would be to position those who are against the idea of sniffer dogs to realise that many parents feel the need for it- to protect their children. Techniques such as inclusive language are also evident here which may promote agreement amongst those who don't in order to fit in with other parents are government officials. To add to this, "cause and effect" is used to establish the point that sniffer dogs are a method to disassociate drugs and students. The editor mentions how sniffer dogs will "frighten drug users" so innocent children don't have to put up with it. It is to also further highlight that sniffer dogs are an addition to government's fight against drugs- which should only be done in "extreme cases". A sense of justification is created here, to position the reader to see how these sniffer dogs would not overtake the schooling environment.

As you can see, the Editorial, “Dogs at the end of the drug trail” makes a worthwhile addition to the debate on the usage of sniffer dogs at schools. The Editor’s heart-felt appeal, using the illicitness of drugs is very likely to strike a cord with many concerned citizens.  The authors arguments are likely to be ill-perceived by those who regard sniffer dogs to be too severe for school use. It is clearly evident that the author has effectively used language to persuade the reader that sniffer dogs would prove to be a positive impact in society. This was done through various persuasive language techniques.

[Smiley_]

I am a Year 10 student, with Language Analysis as part of my examination in two weeks. I don't ask for a high end Year 12 correction, but simply a general review, and possible areas for improvement

Just a general query, our teacher has said to "chunk" our paragraphs up into a type of technique for each paragraph, providing a few examples+explanations. However, is it recommended to move in a chronological order and analyse key statements as a paragraph?

ARTICLE IMAGE LINK: http://puu.sh/5jSj8.jpg


The implementation of sniffer dogs in schools to catch drugs has given rise to much debate regarding if this practice is acceptable. Contextualising sentence pretty good !In the Herald Sun editorial form July 3, 1998, titled "Dogs at the end of the drugs trail", the editors contends that there is no logical explanation to stop the use of sniffer dogs. The argument is presented in a tone of discontent and targets the parents of school children. Some people like to say the purpose, it also helps to really focus on how it positions the reader, which you could improve on

The Editor uses a variety of strong emotive language to elicit a sense of negativity towards the use of drugs.This sentence just sounds a bit odd you could include another Contextualising sentence then use this topic sentence with and example When he uses words such as "illegal" and "frightening", it promotes a negative connection on drugs. The use of these words have a strong negative perception which is tojust say "which invites the reader to...." invites the reader to believe that drugs are nasty substances and shouldn't be lurking around schools of innocent children. By utilising the word illegal the writer.... "Illegal" is used by the writer to indicate that such unlawful practices shouldn't be associated with children at all. In addition to this, the Editor make use of such adverse words to highlight the detrimental effects drugs. By employing Phrases such as "a you child being brain squashed for like" and "loosing a life" position the reader to feel a sense of fear in regards to drugs. Here, the editor uses emotive language as an appeal to fear in an attempt to make the audience see how sniffer dogs can protect children from such possibilities. Which leads to...

As well as using emotive language, the Editor also uses techniques such as authority and "cause and effect" to position to the reader to agree with their stance on the issue.Nice ! A quote from Premier Jeff Kennet which "reflects parents' feelings" is used to add further credibility to his argument. It's intended effect would be to position those who are against the idea of sniffer dogs to realise that many parents feel the need for it- to protect their children. Techniques such as inclusive language are also evident here which may promote agreement amongst those who don't in order to fit in with other parents are government officials. To add to this, "cause and effect" is used to establish the point that sniffer dogs are a method to disassociate drugs and students. Could do with a little more explanation The editor mentions how sniffer dogs will "frighten drug users" so innocent children don't have to put up with it. It is to also further highlight that sniffer dogs are an addition to government's fight against drugs- which should only be done in "extreme cases". A sense of justification is created here, to position the reader to see how these sniffer dogs would not overtake the schooling environment.

As you can see, Dont say this !the Editorial, “Dogs at the end of the drug trail” makes a worthwhile addition to the debate on the usage of sniffer dogs at schools. The Editor’s heart-felt appeal, using the illicitness of drugs is very likely to strike a cord with many concerned citizens.  The authors arguments are likely to be ill-perceived by those who regard sniffer dogs to be too severe for school use. It is clearly evident that the author has effectively used language to persuade the reader that sniffer dogs would prove to be a positive impact in society. This was done through various persuasive language techniques.

I know your in year 10, but you can always look at the other examples to add and change your conclusion


This was a fantastic effort,
The way in which you write your piece doed not matter as long as you analyse the piece, you could always try and do a piece a different way to see if that flows best for you..

Again well done. I'm not the best for feedback but I have been asked to help a year 9 so I thought I should get into practice!