Login

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

March 29, 2024, 10:26:50 pm

Author Topic: [English] "Don’t blame me, blame Julia Gillard" language analysis  (Read 7327 times)  Share 

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

pi

  • Honorary Moderator
  • Great Wonder of ATAR Notes
  • *******
  • Posts: 14348
  • Doctor.
  • Respect: +2376
Rohitpi's Essay Submission Thread

BLURB
Texts: Ransom (David Malouf) and Richard III (William Shakespeare)
Context: Whose Reality? Texts: A Street Car Named Desire (Tennessee Williams) and Spies (Michael Frayn)
Aim (SS): 40+, although dream would be 45+  :D

Random statement: 'Inception' should be on the 'Whose Reality?' film texts for next year.


LINKS
January Week 3 Language Analysis
January Week 4 Language Analysis (sorry about it being so late)


THANKS
To the following for making/critiquing/giving hints to my work so far: (list will be updated!)
• Water
• werdna
• vea
• Burberry



btw, I really fail at English. Hopefully, I improve through this system!  ;D

Year 8 English Teacher: "English is where shit gets real"  (she actually said that, and I tend to agree)
« Last Edit: March 31, 2011, 10:46:45 pm by ninwa »

pi

  • Honorary Moderator
  • Great Wonder of ATAR Notes
  • *******
  • Posts: 14348
  • Doctor.
  • Respect: +2376
Re: Rohitpi's Thread - Week 3 Language Analysis
« Reply #1 on: January 27, 2011, 07:04:48 pm »
0
Here it goes:



Andrew Bolt’s condemnatory opinion piece “Don’t blame me, blame Julia Gillard” (17/12/2010) in The Herald Sun, presents an opinion around the issue of the then incumbent Prime Minister, Julia Gillard, and her relaxed policy making and handling of the problem of illegal immigration, which has since become a contentious issue amongst the Australian public. Bolt virulently condemns the Labour Government’s policy handling of asylum boat arrivals that he believes, has resulted in numerous tragic fatalities. His tone is established from the very outset of the piece, with the title ‘Don’t blame me, blame Julia Gillard’ immediately enforcing an accusatory and cynical tone. His repetition of the word ‘blame’ in the sub-heading further asserts this tone for the reader.

      Bolt begins his article with repeated rhetorical questions ‘But why?’ and ‘Before the next boat sinks, or after?’ followed by a string of words with pejorative connotations ‘drown’, ‘lured’, ‘deaths’, ‘warnings’ and ‘tragedy’. The combined effect of the repeated rhetorics and the heavy use of pejorative language not only instantly draws the reader’s attention to the severity of the issue, but also instils doubt in the minds of the primary audience, the voters of the Australian public, as to what the Gillard Government has been doing during this time of ‘tragedy’.

     Bolt’s use of inclusive language such as ‘...deaths, we’re told’, ‘...can we point out’ and ‘...you read that rightly’ is used throughout his opinion piece. Such language is used by Bolt to include his audience in a group that can bring an end to the ‘tragic deaths’ of asylum seeking boat arrivals. This, when coupled with Bolt’s use of first person, causes readers to think that Bolt himself is involved and emotionally concerned about the issue, positioning his target audience of voters to feel that it is this involvement that that make a difference and can prevent any further deaths from occurring.

     The use of repetition of certain phrases is consistent throughout Bolt’s article. From the early anaphora ‘It’s never been the right time...’ to repeated phrases such as ‘too soon’, ‘they lie’ and ‘to blame’, Bolt aims to repeatedly place emphasises on his contention, that the Gillard-led Labour Government is responsible for the tragic deaths of asylum seeking boat arrivals. This implementation of reiteration, is made more clear through the overall structure of his opinion piece, which uses pejorative language in between lines of political quotations such as ‘...tried to make politics in an incident like this’ and raw data and various anecdotes. Anecdotes, such of those of ‘Afghan Norooz Ali Iqbal and his nine-year-old son, Mounir’, are given by Bolt to add a sense reality to the otherwise more mundane political excuses of the Gillard Government. These anecdotes, when coupled with the strong emotive language used throughout the article such as ‘disgraceful’, ‘deaths’ and ‘scum’, and the various statistics provided, aim to create sympathy and compassion for the ‘victims’ of the tragedy. This positions his audience against the Gillard Governments actions, by showing them that real people such as Norooz Ali Iqbal may still be alive had it not been for the Government’s poor handling of the situation.

     The figurative language implemented by Bolt is also consistent through the opinion piece. Phrases such as ‘...the Government's harvest of bodies in April last year, when five Afghans died in blowing up their boat near Ashmore Reef’ and ‘this latest boat smashed into the rocks of Christmas Island’ conjure strong and horrifying images in the readers’ minds. These visuals are soon made into reality when the audience is confronted by the photograph of the boat that is stranded in treacherous waters. This image, and the accompanying figurative language, brings a further sense of reality to the issue and furthermore, instil a sense of fear and in the audience of what the asylum seekers are confronted with on the shores of a country led by the Gillard Government. This overall effect is used as further evidence to why the Gillard Government is to blame for the tragic deaths of these boat arrivals.

     In his opinion article, Bolt utilises a challenging and scathing tone to provide a case against the relaxed and inadequate actions of the Labour Gillard Government in regard to immigration policy. He implements a structure that is riddled with various repetitions of phrases and pejorative language. Bolt provides his target audience of Australian voters with statistics, anecdotes and a powerful visual image in order to show them that the policies currently being implemented by the Government, are still not sufficient to remedy the controversial issue of boat arriving asylum seekers.



Word count: 760
« Last Edit: January 27, 2011, 08:38:54 pm by Rohitpi »

Water

  • Victorian
  • Part of the furniture
  • *****
  • Posts: 1136
  • Respect: +116
Re: Rohitpi's Thread - January Week 3 Language Analysis
« Reply #2 on: January 27, 2011, 07:54:50 pm »
0
Andrew Bolt’s condemnatory opinion piece “Don’t blame me, blame Julia Gillard” (17/12/2010) in The Herald Sun, presents an opinion around the issue of the then incumbent Prime Minister She is still in office "Then" would therefore be unnecessary. Just minor., Julia Gillard, and her relaxed policy making and handling of the problem of illegal immigration, which has since become a contentious issue amongst the Australian public You have presents the issue excellently. Good Job!. Bolt virulently condemns the Labour Government’s policy handling of asylum boat arrivals that he believes, has resulted in numerous tragic fatalities. His tone is established from the very outset of the piece, with the title ‘Don’t blame me, blame Julia Gillard’ immediately enforcing an accusatory and cynical tone. Make it more general. This statement "His repetition" ,appears out of place with your introduction. His repetition of the word ‘blame’ in the sub-heading further asserts this tone for the reader.

      Bolt begins his article with repeated rhetorical questions ‘But why?’ and ‘Before the next boat sinks, or after?’ followed by a string of words with pejorative connotations ‘drown’, ‘lured’, ‘deaths’, ‘warnings’ and ‘tragedy’.  Excellent topic sentence. Concise, to the point The combined effect of the repeated rhetorics and the heavy Better word than heavy? use of pejorative language not only instantly draws the reader’s attention to the severity of the issue, but also instils doubt in the minds of the primary audience, the voters of the Australian public, as to what the Gillard Government has been doing during this time of ‘tragedy’. Excellent illustration of the effect. Great Stuff so far.

     Bolt’s use of inclusive language such as ‘...deaths, we’re told’, ‘...can we point out’ and ‘...you read that rightly’ is used Better word than used? You already said Bolt's use throughout his opinion piece. Such language is used Again... by Bolt to include his audience in a group that can bring an end to the ‘tragic deaths’ of asylum seeking boat arrivals. This, when coupled with Bolt’s use Again..Again.. of first person, causes readers to think that Bolt himself is involved and emotionally concerned about the issue, positioning his target audience of voters to feel that it is this involvement that that make a difference and can prevent any further deaths from occurring.

     The use of repetition of certain phrases is consistent throughout Bolt’s articleGood!. From the early anaphora ‘It’s never been the right time...’ to repeated phrases such as ‘too soon’, ‘they lie’ and ‘to blame’, Bolt aims to repeatedly place emphasises on his contention, that the Gillard-led Labour Government is responsible for the tragic deaths of asylum seeking boat arrivalsI understand what your trying to say, however it could be made clearer (My opinion) Might be in conflict with other reviewers here.. This implementation of reiteration, is made more clear through the overall structure of his opinion piece, which uses pejorative language in between lines of political quotations such as ‘...tried to make politics in an incident like this’ and raw data and various anecdotesWhere's the effect on the reader? I know its at the end however, your bottling too much in one paragraph. And to the reader of your essay, it might not appear that way. So you could split your paragraph in two, or add another effect on the reader.. Anecdotes, such of those of ‘Afghan Norooz Ali Iqbal and his nine-year-old son, Mounir’, are given by Bolt to add a sense reality to the otherwise more mundane political excuses of the Gillard Government. These anecdotes, when coupled with the strong emotive language used throughout the article such as ‘disgraceful’, ‘deaths’ and ‘scum’, and the various statistics provided, aim to create sympathy and compassion for the ‘victims’ of the tragedy. This positions his audience against the Gillard Governments actions, by showing them that real people such as Norooz Ali Iqbal may still be alive had it not been for the Government’s poor handling of the situation.

     The figurative language implemented by Bolt is also consistent through the opinion piece. Phrases such as ‘...the Government's harvest of bodies in April last year, when five Afghans died in blowing up their boat near Ashmore Reef’ and ‘this latest boat smashed into the rocks of Christmas Island’ conjure strong and horrifying images in the readers’ minds. These visuals are soon made into reality when the audience is confronted by the photograph of the boat that is stranded in treacherous waters. This image, and the accompanying figurative language, brings a further sense of reality to the issue Cut your sentence into two. It'd more fluent, anyways, because you have "Furthermore"and furthermore, instil a sense of fear  in the audience of what the asylum seekers are confronted with on the shores of a country led by the Gillard Government. This overall effect is used as further evidence to why the Gillard Government is to blame for the tragic deaths of these boat arrivals.

     In his opinion article, Bolt utilises a challenging and scathing tone to provide a case against the relaxed and inadequate actions of the Labour Gillard Government in regard to immigration policy. He implements a structure that is riddled with various repetitions of phrases and pejorative language. Bolt provides his target audience of Australian voters with statistics, anecdotes and a powerful visual image in order to show them that the policies currently being implemented by the Government, are still not sufficient to remedy the controversial issue of boat arriving asylum seekers.




Overall Score: 8.2 - 8.3

I found this essay to be a solid and strong. Ocassionally, Rohipiti will use poor choices of words. However, as an essay as a whole, he illustrates that he is a capable analyst and is able to express the author's techniques in an sophisticated and analytical way. The essay was well structured, and was successful in contextualizing his essay in his introduction whilst interweaving his issue. I enjoyed his essay, and will be happy to read more of his in the future. GOOD JOB!



PS: I watched Inception, Lol, I found the action parts boring though ):!!! I wanted more explanation of the theory of Inception or some more kind of cool effects T_T!
« Last Edit: January 27, 2011, 07:58:30 pm by Water »
About Philosophy

When I see a youth thus engaged,—the study appears to me to be in character, and becoming a man of liberal education, and him who neglects philosophy I regard as an inferior man, who will never aspire to anything great or noble. But if I see him continuing the study in later life, and not leaving off, I should like to beat him - Callicle

pi

  • Honorary Moderator
  • Great Wonder of ATAR Notes
  • *******
  • Posts: 14348
  • Doctor.
  • Respect: +2376
Re: Rohitpi's Thread - January Week 3 Language Analysis
« Reply #3 on: January 27, 2011, 08:20:43 pm »
0
I definitely need a better word than 'use' and I'll need to work on effects on reader and fluency for the next one!

Thanks a lot!

werdna

  • Victorian
  • ATAR Notes Superstar
  • ******
  • Posts: 2857
  • Respect: +287
Re: Rohitpi's Thread - January Week 3 Language Analysis
« Reply #4 on: January 27, 2011, 09:35:53 pm »
0
I'll underline key sections and discuss these in red. Rewording, if any, will be in green.

Andrew Bolt’s condemnatory opinion piece “Don’t blame me, blame Julia Gillard” (17/12/2010) in The Herald Sun, presents an opinion Isn't this why it's called an opinion piece? Unnecessary; cut it out. around the issue of the then incumbent Prime Minister, Julia Gillard, and her relaxed lenient policy making and handling of the problem of illegal immigration, which has since become a contentious issue amongst the Australian public. This whole opening sentence is slightly tautological in my opinion, you state nearly the same thing in different words and go around in a round-about. Be more brief with the context you provide. Bolt virulently Excellent vocabulary! condemns the Labour Government’s policy handling of asylum boat arrivals that he believes, has resulted in numerous tragic fatalities. His tone is established from the very outset of the piece, with the title ‘Don’t blame me, blame Julia Gillard’ immediately enforcing an accusatory and cynical tone. His repetition of the word ‘blame’ in the sub-heading further asserts this tone for the reader. What about the significance of the 'don't blame me' part? Why is Bolt considering that he may or is a part of the debate?

Bolt begins his article with repeated rhetorical questions ‘But why?’ and ‘Before the next boat sinks, or after?’ You've made the same mistake that the others have made. You need to be specific with every single piece of evidence you provide. You cannot analyse the 'But why?' rhetorical question if you haven't outlined what Bolt is referring to. followed by a string of words with pejorative connotations ‘drown’, ‘lured’, ‘deaths’, ‘warnings’ and ‘tragedy’. You've only just touched on the connotations behind these words; delve deeper. The combined effect Try not to make your structure of T.E.E or other too obvious. of the repeated rhetorics and the heavy use of pejorative language not only instantly draws the reader’s attention to the severity of the issue Generic. , but also instils doubt in the minds of the primary audience This intended effect is better, but you should try to be more specific, and maybe relate the effect to a particular part of the target audience. , the voters of the Australian public, as to what the Gillard Government has been doing during this time of ‘tragedy’.

Bolt’s use of inclusive language such as ‘...deaths, we’re told’, ‘...can we point out’ and ‘...you read that rightly’ Bad. Avoid just listing slabs of quotes and evidence, and try to analyse single words or shorter phrases; as you'd be able to discuss specific impact on the audience, rather than falling into the trap of adding a generic effect on the end of a listing of 3 or 4 quotes. You should analyse the impact of quotes as they work individually, and then as they work cumulatively as a group of techniques in one paragraph/section. is used throughout his opinion piece. Such language is used by Bolt Avoid passive voice in any essay writing. to include his audience in a group that can bring an end to the ‘tragic deaths’ of asylum seeking boat arrivals. This, when coupled with Bolt’s use of first person, causes readers to think that Bolt himself is involved and emotionally concerned about the issue, positioning his target audience of voters to feel that it is this involvement that that make a difference and can prevent any further deaths from occurring.

The use of repetition of certain phrases is consistent throughout Bolt’s article. From the early anaphora ‘It’s never been the right time...’ You state a quote but you don't explain how it has been used by Bolt, and in what context he's used it in. It's never been the right time to what? to repeated phrases such as ‘too soon’, ‘they lie’ and ‘to blame’, Bolt aims to repeatedly place emphasises emphasis on his contention, that the Gillard-led Labour Government is responsible for the tragic deaths of asylum seeking boat arrivals. This implementation of reiteration Weak expression. , is made more clear through the overall structure of his opinion piece, which uses pejorative language in between lines of political quotations such as ‘...tried to make politics in an incident like this’ and raw data and various anecdotes. Anecdotes, such of those of ‘Afghan Norooz Ali Iqbal and his nine-year-old son, Mounir’, are given by Bolt to add a sense reality to the otherwise more mundane political excuses of the Gillard Government. These anecdotes, when coupled They are coupled. Your tense here is strange; you need to write in present tense! with the strong emotive language used throughout the article such as ‘disgraceful’, ‘deaths’ and ‘scum’, and the various statistics provided See what you've done here? You've grouped a slab of words and a reference to statistics together, and fail to discuss how each of these words/techniques impacts the reader. Instead, you've fallen into the trap of grouping seemingly similar techniques and have therefore popped a general, generic intended effect at the end. , aim to create sympathy and compassion for the ‘victims’ of the tragedy. This positions his audience against the Gillard Governments actions This is a given. , by showing them that real people such as Norooz Ali Iqbal may still be alive had it not been for the Government’s poor handling of the situation.

The figurative language implemented by Bolt Again, avoid writing in the passive voice. Active voice will make your essay seem more in control. is also consistent through the opinion piece. Phrases such as ‘...the Government's harvest of bodies in April last year, when five Afghans died in blowing up their boat near Ashmore Reef’ and ‘this latest boat smashed into the rocks of Christmas Island’ conjure strong and horrifying images in the readers’ minds. These visuals are soon made into reality when the audience is confronted by the photograph of the boat that is stranded in treacherous waters. This image, and the accompanying figurative language Good coupling of techniques here. , brings a further sense of reality to the issue and furthermore, instil instills a sense of fear and in the audience of what the asylum seekers are confronted with on the shores of a country led by the Gillard Government. This overall effect Again, try to avoid making your structure seem too glaringly obvious. is used as further evidence to why the Gillard Government is to blame for the tragic deaths of these boat arrivals.

In his opinion article piece , Bolt utilises There has been a change in tense in your writing. a challenging and scathing tone to provide a case against the relaxed Not the right word to describe something like a Govt or its actions. and inadequate actions of the Labour Gillard Government in regard to immigration policy. He implements a structure that is riddled permeated with various repetitions the repetition of phrases and pejorative language. Bolt provides his target audience of Australian voters with statistics, anecdotes and a powerful visual image in order to show them that the policies currently being implemented by the Government, are still not sufficient to remedy the controversial issue of boat arriving asylum seekers.

I've been a bit harsh with the marking, but overall, this is a good analysis of the article. Remember that whenever you want to introduce two or more techniques in one sentence, analyse the impact on the audience as individual techniques first, and then analyse how these techniques work together to produce a combined impact. Also try and be more specific with your examples and evidence. Analysing the 'But why?' rhetorical question, without explaining the reference/context/implications, but then going on to attempt to discuss the intended effect will only result in another generic statement about the impact on the audience.

Other than that, this statement:

Quote
I really fail at English

Is nonsense, because clearly, you know how to write very well! I don't think there's anyone at MHS who isn't good at English.. :P

Final score: 7.5/10

vea

  • Victorian
  • Part of the furniture
  • *****
  • Posts: 1099
  • Respect: +29
  • School Grad Year: 2011
Re: Rohitpi's Thread - January Week 3 Language Analysis
« Reply #5 on: January 27, 2011, 09:39:07 pm »
+1
Just 'use' a thesaurus. :P

embraces (tone)
employs
utilises

etc.
2011: ATAR 99.50
2012: Bachelor of Biomedicine, UoM
2015: Doctor of Dental Surgery, UoM

pi

  • Honorary Moderator
  • Great Wonder of ATAR Notes
  • *******
  • Posts: 14348
  • Doctor.
  • Respect: +2376
Re: Rohitpi's Thread - January Week 3 Language Analysis
« Reply #6 on: January 28, 2011, 05:28:42 pm »
0
Just 'use' a thesaurus. :P

^ Good idea!

werdna, thanks for the advice too!

Could you (or someone else) just explain passive voice and T.E.E.? I don't really understand those terms...

pi

  • Honorary Moderator
  • Great Wonder of ATAR Notes
  • *******
  • Posts: 14348
  • Doctor.
  • Respect: +2376
Re: Rohitpi's Thread - January Week 3 Language Analysis
« Reply #7 on: January 28, 2011, 06:12:47 pm »
0
Ah thanks!

So where I wrote in the passive:
Quote
The figurative language implemented by Bolt...

Should be (in the active):
Quote
Bolt's implementation of figurative language...
(^or something like that with 'Bolt' at the front)

Thanks! Finally understand the 'green squiggly line' in MS Word too!

werdna

  • Victorian
  • ATAR Notes Superstar
  • ******
  • Posts: 2857
  • Respect: +287
Re: Rohitpi's Thread - January Week 3 Language Analysis
« Reply #8 on: January 28, 2011, 06:21:41 pm »
0
Rohitpi, when I referred to you making your use of T.E.E too explicit and obvious, I meant what Water said - the technique/evidence/effect kind of structure. Try not to make this too glaringly obvious, and sort of 'hide' your structure by using different sentence structures/starters. For example, your sentence starter "The combined effect.." should be avoided next time. Don't make the basics of language analysis too noticeable. Same thing goes for explicitly stating things like "This techniques helps to.." and "Evidence of this.." - it seems like you're following a formula too much.. not that following a formula is a bad thing; just hide it, if that makes sense.

Water, you've touched on the passive/active voice but haven't got it exactly right. ;)

An example of a passive sentence:

Quote
Derogatory language is employed by the editor to..

Now, I'll turn the above into an active sentence:

Quote
The editor employs derogatory language to..

This isn't exactly a good example of passive/active voice, but you get the idea - active sentences will generally sound far more controlled and to-the-point, and will also have far more impact than a passive sentence as it's a more straightforward and powerful form of expression. In a passive sentence, the subject of the sentence is acted upon rather than performing the action.

To avoid writing in the passive voice, look out for the word "by" and also different verb forms of the word "be" - was, were, etc.. You'll notice that active sentences will be able to convey the same thing, only better, with fewer words.

werdna

  • Victorian
  • ATAR Notes Superstar
  • ******
  • Posts: 2857
  • Respect: +287
Re: Rohitpi's Thread - January Week 3 Language Analysis
« Reply #9 on: January 28, 2011, 06:24:03 pm »
0
Ah thanks!

So where I wrote in the passive:
Quote
The figurative language implemented by Bolt...

Should be (in the active):
Quote
Bolt's implementation of figurative language...
(^or something like that with 'Bolt' at the front)

This is still wrong - you need to make just Bolt the subject. Here, you've got 'Bolt's implementation' as the subject of the sentence, and therefore the sentence isn't as succinct or concise or as straightforward as it could be.

The active form of that sentence would be:

Quote
Bolt implements figurative language..


See how the change in verb form really improves the pace and readability of that sentence?

brightsky

  • Victorian
  • ATAR Notes Legend
  • *******
  • Posts: 3136
  • Respect: +200
Re: Rohitpi's Thread - January Week 3 Language Analysis
« Reply #10 on: January 28, 2011, 06:31:35 pm »
0
I wouldn't say using passive is something taboo. Just apply it in the right context, and don't paint your whole essay with it.
2020 - 2021: Master of Public Health, The University of Sydney
2017 - 2020: Doctor of Medicine, The University of Melbourne
2014 - 2016: Bachelor of Biomedicine, The University of Melbourne
2013 ATAR: 99.95

Currently selling copies of the VCE Chinese Exam Revision Book and UMEP Maths Exam Revision Book, and accepting students for Maths Methods and Specialist Maths Tutoring in 2020!

werdna

  • Victorian
  • ATAR Notes Superstar
  • ******
  • Posts: 2857
  • Respect: +287
Re: Rohitpi's Thread - January Week 3 Language Analysis
« Reply #11 on: January 28, 2011, 06:37:02 pm »
0
I wouldn't say using passive is something taboo. Just apply it in the right context, and don't paint your whole essay with it.

True; there are some instances where passive voice actually works better than active voice.

HERculina

  • Victorian
  • Part of the furniture
  • *****
  • Posts: 1209
  • To ∞ and beyond
  • Respect: +11
  • School: St. Trinians
  • School Grad Year: 2012
Re: Rohitpi's Thread - January Week 3 Language Analysis
« Reply #12 on: January 28, 2011, 10:53:17 pm »
0
i thought it was T.E.E.L, why is the L missing in T.E.E? :O
did they change it or something
------------------------------------------------------> :D <-----------------------------------------------------

werdna

  • Victorian
  • ATAR Notes Superstar
  • ******
  • Posts: 2857
  • Respect: +287
Re: Rohitpi's Thread - January Week 3 Language Analysis
« Reply #13 on: January 28, 2011, 10:55:15 pm »
0
T.E.E is for within a language analysis body paragraph - technique, evidence, effect. T.E.E.L is for overall structure of an essay. You don't have to stick to these kinds of structures though.

pi

  • Honorary Moderator
  • Great Wonder of ATAR Notes
  • *******
  • Posts: 14348
  • Doctor.
  • Respect: +2376
Re: Rohitpi's Thread - January Week 3 Language Analysis
« Reply #14 on: January 28, 2011, 10:58:44 pm »
0
i thought it was T.E.E.L, why is the L missing in T.E.E? :O
did they change it or something

That first made me think TEE was something new...

T.E.E is for within a language analysis body paragraph - technique, evidence, effect. T.E.E.L is for overall structure of an essay. You don't have to stick to these kinds of structures though.

+1 In text responses you may need a 'link' in each paragraph, but you don't need a 'link' in a language analysis, because it is an analysis and not an essay (ie text response). It needs to be more to the point, a 'linking sentence' would be totally out of place and structure. The 'link' in a language analysis is the conclusion.