50 in English, available for queries :)

[katiesaliba]

THANK YOU SO MUCH, LAUREN! 

Just a query: an assessor has recommended that I always aim to write four paragraphs instead of three for my essays. However, for context especially, I struggle to complete four because I simply just run out of time. How essential do you think it is to write four paragraphs instead of three? Do you have any tips for trying to write four within an hour? Thanks again!

[Blondie21]

“The male characters in Harwood’s poetry embody all the attributes that Harwood finds contemptible”

Gwen Harwood, one of Australia’s finest poets,This is probably not the best way to add an element of the author's historical background into the introduction. Instead, it may be more prudent to consider societal zeitgeists and whether the text acts as a social commentary. Consider if the poetry is a commentary about the subservience of woman. delves into a range of subjects as she experiments with voice and play of language which is often underpinned with satirical wit.It is good that you are providing information pertaining to the language style of the poetry. Harwood castigates both genders through her poetry as she believes they are both equally responsible for the deplorable aspects of modern day society You may want to be more specific and more concise. However, despite the strong feministic core of her poetry, Harwood recognises that men exemplify attributes that she herself advocates.It is good that you are challenging the topic and acknowledging that the author's view of society is multifaceted. Despite such intentions, it can be seen that Harwood collates a critical response in regard to the chasm that divides the worlds of men and women, with her sympathies resting with the female population.
I don't believe your thesis statement answers the question. The thesis is rather off-topic. To sum up. I recommend providing historical background in your first sentence. You should attempt to make the historical information augment your contention. Merely stating that the author is a fine poet is extraneous and does not add anything to your argument. Moreover, you may also want to 'step up' your vocabulary in order to acquire the higher marks. You may want to include text specific words like:chauvinism, patriarchal zeitgeist and libreto.  I think my biggest concern is the relevance to the prompt. While talking about the 'chasm that divides the worlds of men and woman' is interesting it is not pertinent to the prompt and your assessor will definitely take issue with it. Despite these shortcomings your introduction is well written and your acknowledgement of the text as a construct will heighten your marks.    
Disclaimer= I am not Lauren, so take everything I say with a grain of salt.

Thank you so much!! Are you also studying Harwood's poetry this year?

Here is my tweaked introduction. What do you think?

Gwen Harwood’s voluminous work was written in a time of female-under privilege and delves into a range of subjects as she experiments with voice and play of language which is often underpinned with satirical wit. Harwood castigates both genders through her poetry as she believes they are both equally responsible for the deplorable aspects of modern day society. Women often embodied the attribute that Harwood found most contemptible: being subservient to their male counterparts. In conjunction to this, it would be foolish to neglect the fact that this behaviour was catalysed by the patriarchal zeitgeist of the time. Nevertheless, despite the strong feministic core of her poetry, Harwood recognises that society is multifaceted as men exemplify attributes that she herself advocates.

[darklight]

Hey Lauren

How should we go about analysing tones? I tend to just state "X utilises a Y tone" but I'm unsure as to how to articulate the effect on the reader as such. Any tips?

[brenden]

THANK YOU SO MUCH, LAUREN! 

Just a query: an assessor has recommended that I always aim to write four paragraphs instead of three for my essays. However, for context especially, I struggle to complete four because I simply just run out of time. How essential do you think it is to write four paragraphs instead of three? Do you have any tips for trying to write four within an hour? Thanks again!

Unessential IMO (if not detrimental for students whose natural inclination isn't to write four paragraphs). I wrote there paragraphs in each of Section A and C for a total of 39/40, so don't let it stress you. At the end of the day there's no difference between three highly inpressuve paragraphs and four highly impressive paragraphs. How can there be? Both hit the criteria. I mean, one could argue that writing four makes it easier on yourself, but at the end of the day you can do the job with three.

[soNasty]

Hey Lauren! Right now, the only thing I'm slightly struggling with is Section C - ensuring that I identify how the author positions the reader. I'm fine with interpreting what they've said, identifying techniques and the lot... However my teacher has told me that I forget to consider how what the writer has written exactly positions the reader to feel/believe/think. Would it be possible for me to scan an essay to someone and send it through email? You'd be able to understand exactly where I'm coming from if I send one. Thanks!

[24bauer12]

Hi Blondie21,
Gwen Harwood’s voluminous work was written in a time of female-under privilege and delves into a range of subjects It may be useful to be more specific. as she experiments with voice and play of language which is often underpinned with satirical wit.You may want to wait until the body paragraphs to examine the language style utilised in her poetry. Harwood castigates both genders through her poetry as she believes they are both equally responsible for the deplorable aspects of modern day society. Women often embodied the attribute that Harwood found most contemptible: being subservient to their male counterparts. In conjunction to this, it would be foolishTry to make this more formal. replace foolish with "reductive to a nuanced understanding of her work to neglect the fact that this behaviour was catalysed by the patriarchal zeitgeist of the time. Change this sentence to:In conjunction to this, it would be  reductive to a nuanced understanding of her work to neglect the patriarchal zeitgeist which permeated society.  Nevertheless, despite the strong feministic core of her poetry, Harwood recognises that society is multifaceted as men exemplify attributes that she herself advocates. This thesis statement is much improved and succinctly responds to the topic.
This introduction is definitely improved from  your first draft. Your language is also much more expressive and precise. However, ensure you stick to present tense throughout the essay. Also, I recommend revising your syntactical construction in some sentences as they sometimes feel clunky.If you keep up the vocabulary and the use of historical context to augment your writing this essay will receive higher marks. Additionally, throughout your body paragraphs I recommend the analysis of metalanguage specific to Harwood's poetry.     

[24bauer12]

Hey Lauren

How should we go about analysing tones? I tend to just state "X utilises a Y tone" but I'm unsure as to how to articulate the effect on the reader as such. Any tips?

Hi Darklight,
I recommend not using the word tone! For example, don't used: The article entitled “..” by ... published in The Herald Sun laments in a predominantly caustic tone. Instead use:The article entitled “..” by ... published in The Herald Sun caustically  laments. This forces analysis and eradicates simple retelling. If there is a tonal shift definitely mention it; however, ensure you have the appropriate vocabulary [see Lauren's table of tones ] Make sure you mention the effect on the reader. Does the writer violently criticise someone and then become more circumspect?Does this ameliorate attitudes of those who are offended by the intense criticism? Ask how does the tonal shift help the writer advance his contention.
P.S I am not Lauren but I hope this is helpful! 

[Rishi97]

Heyy Lauren

In Language analysis, is it necessary to talk about an image in the introduction?

Thank you

[24bauer12]

Heyy Lauren

In Language analysis, is it necessary to talk about an image in the introduction?

Thank you

Hi Rishi97,
No, it is not compulsory to mention the visual in the introduction. It is also not necessary to mention all the articles or visuals in the introduction. Similariy, it is not compulsory to sign post your arguments in a T.R introduction. However, these are the dominant approaches utilised in VCE english. Some assessors will be annoyed if you don't adopt the dominant structure; you should try to appease as many assessors as possible. All the introduction requires [in terms of discussion of the visuals] is a simple The article is poignantly augmented with X or the article was accompanied with x.    

[literally lauren]

Blondie21:

Rewritten version in much better, always prioritise answering the prompt directly over sounding impressive or cramming in vocab about the text. Thank you to 24bauer12 for your corrections

katiesaliba:

Definitely not necessary, you can score perfectly well with three paras provided they have enough in them. If the forth is of a lesser quality then you're better off strengthening your other arguments rather than stretching yourself to three.
However, it might be worth trying to write 4 for certain prompts because sometimes it's better to have more perspectives instead of longer analysis. Your teacher might be recommending this for another reason though (ie. trying to get you to expand your scope) so maybe give it a go when practicing, but don't feel obliged.

darklight:

My system was to use the word tone 2-3 times per piece (jsut for those lazy assessors who think you aren't mentioning it unless you're using a 'The author employs a ____ tone' format.) The rest is all done through adverbs, ie. 'The author emphatically condemns...' or 'The article vitriolically asserts...'
Don't overdo it though

soNasty:

what, how, why. These words are your new three best friends. At the moment you're fulfilling the 'what' stage of identifying techniques, explaining the effects, and providing evidence (quoting/paraphrasing.) What you need to do is remind yourself to cover the 'how' ie. how the readers/audience are affected, how these responses are elicited; and 'why' ie. why the author has done this for a given contention.
A link to a fuller explanation of this is on the first post, but just being aware of this issue should be enough to combat it. Trial this new approach and see how you go.

Rishi97:

Not compulsory, but recommended (again, for the fussy assessors.) What you don't have to do is discuss contention, tone, or audience of the visual, since usually they're not separate texts, but embedded. Take the 2011 exam for instance, you wouldn't deal with the core article, all four comments, and two visuals in a 'Author, contention, tone, audience' format. You'd just do this for the core text (after a contextualising/background info sentence) then say something like 'This article also prompted several responses from members of the public' or 'There were also two visual aids accompanying this posts of two different types of tattoos.' Keep the intros short and sweet, you don't want to spend too much time on them

[Yacoubb]

Hey lauren :-)

How many times (and this varies from one piece to another) would you mention tone fluctuations in a language analysis? Thanks

[DJA]

Hi Lauren

Would you suggest doing a conclusion for language analysis and if so how does one create one?

Also if you don't do a conclusion would the scary mean markers VCAA take off marks? Look down on it?

thanks in advance

[literally lauren]

How many times (and this varies from one piece to another) would you mention tone fluctuations in a language analysis? Thanks

No more than twice I should think, unless it's a piece with quote a few key shifts. So long as you aren't making a big deal out of it every time (ie. two or three lines devoted to tone) you don't have to do it often. On the other hand, you don't want to just be superficially cramming it into every sentence, so do so in moderation. Generally when the tone and the techniques align (ie. vitriolic tone coupled with an attack on poor role models) then you can comment on the combined effect, and that should be sufficient.
The occasional adverb here and there can't hurt though

Would you suggest doing a conclusion for language analysis and if so how does one create one?

Also if you don't do a conclusion would the scary mean markers VCAA take off marks? Look down on it?

It's a structural requirement, which means you could potentially score well without one, but it does piss of the scary mean markers annoy VCAA's sensibilities. Yo ucan tack this onto your analysis if you need, just so long as you're wrapping up your points and not cutting things short mid-analysis you should be alright.

My conclusions were generally just vague summations of a key appeal throughout the text. Dichotommies are good to discuss here, provided you've dealt with them and analysed them properly beforehand. (eg. for the 2012 exam: Through Mrs Eliot's glorification of books and the idea of reading, she essentially dichotomises the issue between the "beautiful pretty books" and the "nasty smelly ebooks." (paraphrasing)) Then maybe one or two sentences more on general audience responses, or even tone if it's really central to the piece.
The most important thing about a conclusion is that you do one, and you don't screw it up and make your analysis seem worse retroactively. That's about all

[w3dragon25]

Hi lauren, could you have a quick look at this paragraph on Voxi's article? Thank you in advance!

From the outset, Voxi philosophically undermines those who do not accept digital technology and are “dislodged” from their comfort zone. Here, Voxi establishes a “polarise[d]” dichotomy in his readers, separating the “gritty people” from the “losers”. Making this juxtaposition, Voxi praises the “grits” as ambitious and successful individuals who are able to “produce pearls”, as opposed to “afraid” and unexciting people. Consequently, Voxi depicts such generic individuals as stone-age “homo habilis” who “huddl[e] in caves”, not accepting revolutionary improvements. This notion, employed by Voxi, is apt to draw younger readers onside as they would abstain from such negative connotations of “old” and unintelligent behaviour associated with humans’ predecessors. Subsequently, Voxi inclines his readers to embrace the potential of the digital age to “become…more intelligent, faster than evolution alone allows”. To downplay insecurities and revoke fear in his readers, Voxi incorporates a rhetorical question “What’s to be afraid of?” Grounded on previous positive beliefs that technology “enhances our lives” with the “potential it offers”, the rhetorical question is intended to remove apprehension, and instead, prompts young readers to reap its benefits to further evolve as “human beings”. Proposing such evolution will lead to “end[] [of] war and violence” and achieving “happy,…fulfilling lives”, Voxi illustrates a utopian future favourable for man-kind, which is likely to resonate with ambitious, peace-seeking individuals. Thus, young readers would feel inclined to accept digital technology as its world-changing advantages are in their own hands.

[24bauer12]

Hi w3dragon24,

From the outset, Voxi philosophically undermines those who do not accept digital technology and are “dislodged” from their comfort zone. Here, Voxi establishes a “polarise[d]”I recommend omitting polorised as dichotomy is sufficient dichotomy in his readers, separating the “gritty people” from the “losers”.You can mention the connotations associated with these quotes.  Making this juxtaposition, Voxi praises the “grits” as ambitious and successful individuals who are able to “produce pearls”, as opposed to “afraid” and unexciting people. Consequently, Voxi depicts such generic individuals as stone-age “homo habilis” who “huddl[e] in caves”, not accepting revolutionary improvements.Consider the notion of Voxi depicting thses individuals as anachronistic. This notion, employed by Voxi, is apt to draw younger readers onside as they would abstain from such negative connotations of “old” and unintelligent behaviour associated with humans’ predecessors.This is slightly awkward expression. Subsequently, Voxi inclines his readers to embrace the potential of the digital age to “become…more intelligent, faster than evolution alone allows”. To downplay insecurities and revoke fear in his readers, Voxi incorporates a rhetorical question “What’s to be afraid of?” Grounded on previous positive beliefs that technology “enhances our lives” with the “potential it offers”, the rhetorical questionI recommend incorporating techniques as  adjectives is intended to remove apprehension, and instead, prompts young readers to reap its benefits to further evolve as “human beings”. Proposing such evolution will lead to “end[] [of] war and violence” and achieving “happy,…fulfilling lives”, Voxi illustrates a utopianreplace with idyllic future favourable for man-kind, which is likely to resonate with ambitious, peace-seeking individuals. Thus, young readers would feel inclined to accept digital technology as its world-changing advantages are in their own hands.
Your use of vocabulary is impressive and you analyse the effect on the reader in a most impressive way. However, you could expand on the child-adult dichotomy mentioned by the writer.It is also refreshing to see that you don't depend on formulaic responses.