Post by: /0 on November 01, 2009, 09:52:19 pm
:)
_________________^ Here
English Language is my wildest subject. I could perhaps guess my mark to within
I feel like I could get >70 on a good day and 50-60 on a bad day and 60s on an average day
Post by: kenny17 on November 01, 2009, 10:20:07 pm
Post by: ngRISING on November 01, 2009, 10:26:38 pm
the notes are pretty much all you need to know for section 1 &2. 45marks right there.
essay topics, yeah they'll break all of us because we have no idea what will be on it :S .
as for your scale
:idiot2:
Post by: lynt.br on November 01, 2009, 10:27:33 pm
I can most topics at the moment but there are a few where my example bank is a little shallow.
Sections 1 and 2 I'm not too worried about.
Really my main concern is just exam day nerves. Having already learnt this from the English exam, no matter how many practice exams you do under exam conditions, your exam essay will likely be the worst one you've ever done.
Post by: hyperblade01 on November 01, 2009, 10:33:31 pm
I'd be happy with anything over 20 out of 30 to be honest...
Section 1&2 is becoming like the other subjects - questions tend to be recycled and there's always a somewhat generic response. :)
So I guess I'm : :-\
Post by: /0 on November 01, 2009, 10:42:46 pm
Oh well, maybe it's just a run of bad luck
Post by: arthurk on November 01, 2009, 10:47:07 pm
essays are a bitch for me
so much to say so little time
Post by: ngRISING on November 01, 2009, 10:50:29 pm
Post by: hyperblade01 on November 01, 2009, 10:51:44 pm
Hmm yeah even though Sections 1 & 2 are repetitive somehow I drop marks whenever I get the chance
Which is what happens with spesh, methods, chem etc :P
But yea, overall I'm happy I chose English language over English :)
Post by: appianway on November 01, 2009, 11:13:16 pm
Post by: ngRISING on November 01, 2009, 11:16:36 pm
what is the intended function of a parallelism in a advertisement. ?
Post by: lynt.br on November 01, 2009, 11:19:16 pm
Hmm yeah even though Sections 1 & 2 are repetitive somehow I drop marks whenever I get the chance... whether it be for line numbers, slightly-too-unacceptable explanations, slightly-too-unacceptable examples, or misinterpreting the text...
Oh well, maybe it's just a run of bad luck
Yeah I hate when your answers seem logical to you but the examiner thinks otherwise. In the 2009 Insight exam, one of the questions asked what was the text's register and identify and explain features that supported my opinion. I said the text was informal and listed the use of slang and expletives as supporting evidence. My slang example was completely different to my expletive example (which was the use of "bloody" as an intensifier), however I was told that "bloody" came under slang and hence I had given two of the same examples.
Another question in the same exam asked if the text was coherent, and again to give examples that supported my opinion. I stated that coherence in this text was dependant on the audience because of the frequent use of Australian colloquialisms, idioms and in-group slang. They gave me some generic answer saying it was coherent because of things like paragraphing, formatting, headings etc. While I accept that as a valid answer, I still think my answer was more correct because formatting isn't going to help you understand a text if the content itself is indecipherable....
Post by: appianway on November 01, 2009, 11:31:40 pm
Post by: Damo17 on November 01, 2009, 11:54:23 pm
I think the essay will be alright, I find there is always one topic similar over each exam in past years where you can use similar examples. Alot to write in such a short period of time.
The main thing I am worried about is my knowledge of metalanguage, and certain things they might ask us in section 1/2 that I don't know.
I guess stress is less for me because I came into EL this year only looking for a 33+ just to fill up my six but now am looking at 38+ and loving this subject.
Post by: ngRISING on November 02, 2009, 12:07:20 am
The main thing I am worried about is my knowledge of metalanguage, and certain things they might ask us in section 1/2 that I don't know.
I guess stress is less for me because I came into EL this year only looking for a 33+ just to fill up my six but now am looking at 38+ and loving this subject.
dw about the metal language in unit one and two, most of the metal language in units one and two have been covered in units 3&4, probaly not on teh IPA imo.
im stressing now lol. still got 4-5 eng lang exams to do. all tomorrow. 5x2hours = gg
Post by: kenny17 on November 02, 2009, 12:12:25 am
What are ur thoughts people? (this is sort of making me nervous)
Post by: Gloamglozer on November 02, 2009, 12:17:35 am
Post by: kenny17 on November 02, 2009, 12:30:29 am
Post by: panicky on November 02, 2009, 01:38:01 am
im confused with how to explain how it affects the coherence
Post by: appianway on November 02, 2009, 12:16:37 pm
Post by: ngRISING on November 02, 2009, 02:24:02 pm
Post by: ngRISING on November 02, 2009, 04:45:04 pm
as well as for VCAA 07 Exam. is this response correct. the question is. Q 7
Does this speech achieve its purpose? Discuss, using linguistic evidence to support your analysis.
Following is an example of a high-scoring student response.
The speech does achieve its purpose of convincing the audience present to buy more Australian goods. His speech is entertaining, with humour used to keep his speech memorable e.g. ‘So let’s keep it legal’ (line 32). Coherence is achieved through the continuing metaphor of the cup of coffee (Line 4). The use of personal pronouns e.g. ‘we’ and ‘our’ (line 2) refer to the speaker and audience directly in an inclusive sense. The repetition of the phrase ‘Buy Australian’ drives home the main contention.
My response.
This speech achieves its purpose in persuading the audience to buy Australian by the use of constant repetition of the term "Buy Australian" [Line 1,10,14] to put emphasis on the main purpose of this speech. The speaker also uses personal pronouns such as 'I'm' [line 33], 'We' [line 2] to indicate that the speaker and audience are on one side together. There is interrogative sentences to let the audience think about what they should do, for instance in line 38, "sixty five cents worth and half a cup, or Buy Australian and receive a full cup?" The buyer also use imperative sentences to guide what the audience should do in line 43, "Buy Australian".
its out of 5 marks, the sampled response is full marks, do you guys reckon mines at least 4? thanks!
Post by: appianway on November 02, 2009, 05:41:44 pm
What did people think of the 06 VCAA solutions? Personally, I'm wondering if there should be a bit more flexibility. I guess it's just that I thought that text 2 could also serve a persuasive function, as well as an informative one... the lexical choice (with lexemes such as dire) and fact that it was listed under a category called "why save water" seemed to suggest that it was persuading readers that water should be saved. The more recent VCAA exams seem to have less prescriptive answers though.
Post by: ngRISING on November 02, 2009, 06:37:05 pm
Also the imperative sentence in line 22 assists in the persuasive function or an order i guess. "It's time to be water efficient!"
hmmph, what is function of a capitalised noun in say a terms and conditions document?
Post by: hyperblade01 on November 02, 2009, 07:20:18 pm
The first case is saying that is THAT card and no other...
I think my example just came from one of the insight questions - is YOUR question based on that question lol
Post by: ngRISING on November 02, 2009, 07:25:32 pm
i personally dont like insights answers ^^
Post by: TheJosh on November 02, 2009, 08:41:40 pm
Post by: emiily on November 02, 2009, 09:50:51 pm
Post by: ngRISING on November 02, 2009, 10:42:56 pm
I got confused because i didn't know what reference is until i read the solutions. It meant cataphoric referencing, shouldn't it be more specific?
Post by: brenny on November 03, 2009, 12:25:36 pm
hmmph, in VATE 07 that i just did, it says How do reference and semantic field establish cohesion within the text.
I got confused because i didn't know what reference is until i read the solutions. It meant cataphoric referencing, shouldn't it be more specific?
referencing can refer to cataphoric anaphoric or any of the three deitic references (being personal, temporal or locational)
Post by: ngRISING on November 03, 2009, 01:56:39 pm
Post by: arthurk on November 03, 2009, 01:59:48 pm
Post by: hyperblade01 on November 03, 2009, 02:09:29 pm
what do you mean temporal?
To do with time.
Post by: ngRISING on November 03, 2009, 02:14:16 pm
Was just pondering the thought but could it not be said that jargon and subcultural languages such as teenspeak and netspeak discriminate by excluding others and separating groups?
there was a newspaper article how teenagers use netspeak/acronyms to exclude their parents from knowing what they're saying online if their parents were looking or nearby. its in my eng lang book. i'll have a look soon.
Post by: arthurk on November 03, 2009, 02:16:39 pm
Post by: BiG DaN on November 03, 2009, 02:22:25 pm
Was just pondering the thought but could it not be said that jargon and subcultural languages such as teenspeak and netspeak discriminate by excluding others and separating groups?
yeah thats to do with creating group solidarity and constructing power structures – who belongs to our mob and who doesn’t – in a process of inclusion and exclusion. Outsiders will sometimes be put off by the lexicon of a jargon that is not readily comprehensible to a novice
Post by: hyperblade01 on November 03, 2009, 02:35:51 pm
Was just pondering the thought but could it not be said that jargon and subcultural languages such as teenspeak and netspeak discriminate by excluding others and separating groups?
there was a newspaper article how teenagers use netspeak/acronyms to exclude their parents from knowing what they're saying online if their parents were looking or nearby. its in my eng lang book. i'll have a look soon.
I remember reading some ages ago:
GIMP - Get in my pants <<< seriously, wtf?
PAW - Parents are Watching
Post by: /0 on November 03, 2009, 02:37:13 pm
There had better be an essay on political language/euphemisms/doublespeak I need an essay topic on those
Post by: TheJosh on November 03, 2009, 02:46:46 pm
is the mode the means by which language is communicated across?
so an email is a mode of language?
Post by: arthurk on November 03, 2009, 02:54:46 pm
LOLNEINNN!!!!
There had better be an essay on political language/euphemisms/doublespeak I need an essay topic on those
Language change over time for the win
as Broad as possible please:P
Post by: ngRISING on November 03, 2009, 03:25:29 pm
thats something that you could use. not the article i was referring to earlier though. ah well. time to do VCAA08 & INSIGHT 08. my last few hours of english language. mfker =='. havn't looked at these yet. heres my chance.
Post by: hyperblade01 on November 03, 2009, 03:31:08 pm
There has to be something on PC this year....
Post by: ngRISING on November 03, 2009, 03:34:09 pm
stolen generation?
change of name positions in organisations . eg chairman is now chair person.
change of immigration deparment.
Post by: BiG DaN on November 03, 2009, 03:36:09 pm
Post by: arthurk on November 03, 2009, 03:36:23 pm
Any examples other than political stuff, i don't see how i can go on about this stuff for 3 paragraphs
Post by: BiG DaN on November 03, 2009, 03:37:27 pm
hmmph something related to PC. examples?
stolen generation?
change of name positions in organisations . eg chairman is now chair person.
change of immigration deparment.
asylum seekers instead of refugees or illegal immigrants?
Post by: BiG DaN on November 03, 2009, 03:38:55 pm
Language used to obscure the truth?
Any examples other than political stuff, i don't see how i can go on about this stuff for 3 paragraphs
doublespeak, euphemisms, jargon, passive voice come to mind
Post by: ngRISING on November 03, 2009, 03:40:02 pm
Post by: arthurk on November 03, 2009, 03:40:10 pm
Post by: BiG DaN on November 03, 2009, 03:41:14 pm
why dont someone up with a essay topic and a stimulus material and we write one essay on it each and post it up :D . on PC
lol i would but today is my first day studying and i gotta do vcaa06-08 still haha
Post by: ngRISING on November 03, 2009, 03:42:52 pm
can u give me some examples outside of politics for those mentioned?
euphemisms used for terrorist attacks such as the most recent one today?
Frankfurt airport terror plan 'massive' is a euphemism for Frankfurt Terrorist Attack Plot would have been deadly?
this article is the most recent as it gets LOL . today ^^
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/world/german-attack-plan-massive/story-e6frf7m6-1111114349493
Post by: BiG DaN on November 03, 2009, 03:45:47 pm
can u give me some examples outside of politics for those mentioned?
euphemisms used for terrorist attacks such as the most recent one today?
Frankfurt airport terror plan 'massive' is a euphemism for Frankfurt Terrorist Attack Plan would have been deadly?
this article is the most recent as it gets LOL . today ^^
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/world/german-attack-plan-massive/story-e6frf7m6-1111114349493
isnt that hyperbole to create emphasis on just how much destruction would be caused by 550kg TNT?
Post by: arthurk on November 03, 2009, 03:51:46 pm
Post by: ngRISING on November 03, 2009, 03:53:43 pm
Stimulus Material 1- The Prime Minister was "desperately" trying to connect with the Australian people by using phrases such as "fair shake of the sauce bottle", the Liberal MP said. [Herald Sun 9/6/09]
Stimulus Material 2-I was entralled,I suppose nearly describes my feeling as I watched, why when the law require the use of plain English are we burdened with this evasive use of the language??
Why don't organisations such as the A B C do their bit and revert to plain English,instead of this politically correct nonsense that seems to be slavelisy followed, I apoligise for the ramble. [7.30 Report - John Spiers]
Stimulus Material 3 -"Anybody else around here?... Ah, our little Paki friend, Ahmed." - Prince Harry [Herald Sun 21.08.09]
Post by: ngRISING on November 03, 2009, 03:55:13 pm
Post by: meepcat on November 03, 2009, 03:57:57 pm
“Political language … is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable, and to give an appearance of solidity to pure wind.” – George Orwell, Politics and the English Language (1946)
What is the role of PC Language in the 21st Century? Does Orwell’s perception of PC language still hold true today? Discuss with reference to Australian society.
Introduction:
- Reword the topic: PC language is a disgrace to the English language, it “makes us stupid”.
- It makes us gullible and we believe anything we’re told
- Orwell thinks it makes us accept horrific things as normal and acceptable
- In the 21st Century, though, PC language does have a time and a place – but only if carefully implemented
Body:
- For each, when are they appropriate? When is it overkill? Examples of ‘appropriate’ use vs. ‘gone too far’ – all examples should be Australian-specific if possible
o Paragraph 1: Gender terms
Appropriate: Chairperson
Too far: “hir” for “his/her” (gender-neutral pronouns considered ‘ridiculous’), history / herstory
o Paragraph 2: Age terms
Appropriate: ‘elderly’ instead of ‘old’
Too far: … are there any?
o Paragraph 3: Race terms
Appropriate: ‘Indigenous Australian’ instead of ‘Blackfella’ or ‘Abo’
Too far: The plant ‘black boy’ being renamed ‘grass tree’?
o Other paragraphs if necessary:
Mental Proficiency
• Too far? Idiots are defined as those “incapable of gaining reason” and lunatics as people only “capable of periods of lucidity”
Perceptions of beauty (height, weight, body shape, etc)
Stature? The little people race this year that got everyone upset (dwarves)
Religion? “Fundamentalist” or “extremist” instead of “sociopath” etc
- Also:
o Comedic use:
Parody: PC version of Little Red Riding Hood, Baa Baa ‘Rainbow’ Sheep, etc.
Not-so-Parody: BBC states no more “offensive humour” -> would Fawlty Towers or Allo Allo be made in the current day/age? Can we really only now make fun of middle aged white men lest we offend?
Does comedic use indicate the views of society on PC language? Can we hypothesize that PC language is by and large outdated and rejected in our modern world?
- Contrasting views: when is PC language a positive influence? When is it necessary? How does it create a ‘polite’ society? What level of social distance necessitates PC language?
Conclusion:
- Restatement of argument – PC language has deteriorated, but it is still necessary
- Support with comments regarding social distance, politeness, formal situations, etc
- Orwell may be right, but with proper use PC language has its place
-------
Intro:
Politically correct (PC) language is a 20th Century construct that arose out of a need to minimize the impact and effect of potentially offensive or discriminatory language. As with the intent behind the use of euphemism, PC language was initially utilised to ‘soften’ taboo or culturally offensive language in order to make it as non-offensive to the widest variety of audiences possible. The Sapir-Whorf hypothesis of how language affects the way people understand the world and behave within it contributed to the initial positive attitudes toward PC language, in that it was believed that if we refined what was ‘offensive’ to others, we would by default refine ourselves; thus creating a society with members of a higher prestige. By the late 20th Century and early 21st Century, however, PC language was viewed almost exclusively in a pejorative sense. Making ‘lies sound truthful and murder respectable’, PC language has increasingly been viewed as giving ‘an appearance of solidity to pure wind’; making the ridiculous or the extreme seem acceptable and normal. Orwell’s mid-20th Century denouement of PC language has never been more apt in Australia today; rather than being a positive contributor to communication, PC language is decried as a ‘watering down’ of the English language, cementing the deterioration of the quality of meaning contained within the semantics of the English lexis.
Conclusion:
While PC language has deteriorated to become almost a phenomenon of ridicule, it is without a doubt still a necessary part of 21st Century communicative practice. Despite Orwell’s perception that PC language, as far back in the 20th Century as 1946, fostered a degradation of meaning and thus also of society, social distance still requires a level of politeness that extends beyond euphemistic terms; the ‘softening’ of racism, ageism and sexism via lexis choice is still critical in formal situations. PC language, however, should not be used excessively, lest it cement itself in the realm of parody and satire. Through more appropriate selection of setting when using PC language, the stigma associated with it should lessen. Eventually, this should result in a decline of its pejorative sense, thus elevating its status in Australian society and cementing its role as a communicative device employed to reduce discriminatory and offensive use of language.
Post by: BiG DaN on November 03, 2009, 04:04:43 pm
is it ok to use stimulus material from practice essays in the real thing?
any1 gonna answer this? lol
Post by: ngRISING on November 03, 2009, 04:05:30 pm
Post by: ngRISING on November 03, 2009, 04:06:06 pm
is it ok to use stimulus material from practice essays in the real thing?
any1 gonna answer this? lol
if they're real examples. like legit lol. look up the stimulus material to see if they exist.
Post by: ngRISING on November 03, 2009, 04:15:03 pm
Quote
o Paragraph 2: Age terms
Appropriate: ‘elderly’ instead of ‘old’
Too far: … are there any?
Chronologically challenged.
Post by: /0 on November 03, 2009, 04:18:37 pm
The new bushfire warning system uses "relocate" instead of "evacuate".
This is ironic considering the bushfire report stated that
"all bushfire warnings issued in Victoria must use clear language, avoid euphemisms, and contain explicit information"
Post by: ngRISING on November 03, 2009, 04:23:18 pm
nvm found one
the age - 10/09/2009
http://news.theage.com.au/breaking-news-national/new-bushfire-warning-system-unveiled-20090910-fj0m.html
Post by: lynt.br on November 03, 2009, 04:35:24 pm
But with three topics there should be something that most people can write about. VCAA topics are usually pretty broad and rarely focus on one area in particular, with exception to that horrible 2007 topic about speech making.
For example, rather than have a question specifically about PC language, they would phrase the question like in 2007: "Language has the power to shock, offend and incite emotion". While PC would be a central issue to discuss in that topic, its broad enough that you can flesh out your essay with euphemisms, dysphemisms etc.
Post by: arthurk on November 03, 2009, 05:33:17 pm
and i think they did focus solely on PC stuff one year as well
Usually that sort of stuff fits into one paragraph but vcaa makes it an essay
Post by: vce_09_nearly_over on November 03, 2009, 05:42:11 pm
Post by: Harbourmastah on November 03, 2009, 05:42:31 pm
What about when they focused on jargon in particular in some year
and i think they did focus solely on PC stuff one year as well
Usually that sort of stuff fits into one paragraph but vcaa makes it an essay
yeah and specifically 'speech making' for 2007
Post by: vce_09_nearly_over on November 03, 2009, 05:47:21 pm
Thanxs in advance :)
Post by: lynt.br on November 03, 2009, 05:55:46 pm
What about when they focused on jargon in particular in some year
and i think they did focus solely on PC stuff one year as well
Usually that sort of stuff fits into one paragraph but vcaa makes it an essay
Jargon is a pretty big topic in itself. Remember that a lot of slang can be classifiable under jargon as well. You can look at the uses for jargon (linguistic precision, expediency, educational marker, social group marker) and misuse of jargon (To obscure, conceal, cause prolixity, create false authority, exclude).
You have areas such as profession specific jargon (medical, legal, computing, linguistic), group specific jargon (Teenspeak, surfie speak, skating speak etc) and the jargon of business and government institutions (to obscure, mislead, Jargon being used as doublespeak etc).
There should easily be enough in there to flesh out 800-1000 words of discussion with examples.
As for something solely on PC, remember you can branch out and look at euphemisms here. Look at how PC has facilitated social harmony or dulled our language. Changing attitudes towards what is considered PC.and the recent changes to promote equality. Basically if you measure up both sides of the issue, you can quite easily fill a whole essay on this topic.
2007's speech making topic was probably one of the worst I've ever seen. There's pretty much no chance that all three topics will be something like that anyway so it shouldn't be a concern. If you get a topic like this, just avoid it and go for the easier one.
Post by: TheJosh on November 03, 2009, 05:56:08 pm
do people hav prac exams, they could share?? wanna do some tonight to get me in the mind set and ive done partically all the past exam papers
Thanxs in advance :)
here you go
Post by: arthurk on November 03, 2009, 06:00:32 pm
Going on examiners report people were marked down for referring to anything about PC or slang in the jargon essayWhat about when they focused on jargon in particular in some year
and i think they did focus solely on PC stuff one year as well
Usually that sort of stuff fits into one paragraph but vcaa makes it an essay
Jargon is a pretty big topic in itself. Remember that a lot of slang can be classifiable under jargon as well. You can look at the uses for jargon (linguistic precision, expediency, educational marker, social group marker) and misuse of jargon (To obscure, conceal, cause prolixity, create false authority, exclude).
You have areas such as profession specific jargon (medical, legal, computing, linguistic), group specific jargon (Teenspeak, surfie speak, skating speak etc) and the jargon of business and government institutions (to obscure, mislead, Jargon being used as doublespeak etc).
There should easily be enough in there to flesh out 800-1000 words of discussion with examples.
As for something solely on PC, remember you can branch out and look at euphemisms here. Look at how PC has facilitated social harmony or dulled our language. Changing attitudes towards what is considered PC.and the recent changes to promote equality. Basically if you measure up both sides of the issue, you can quite easily fill a whole essay on this topic.
2007's speech making topic was probably one of the worst I've ever seen. There's pretty much no chance that all three topics will be something like that anyway so it shouldn't be a concern. If you get a topic like this, just avoid it and go for the easier one.
Post by: vcestudy123 on November 03, 2009, 06:12:04 pm
thanks
Post by: lynt.br on November 03, 2009, 06:15:20 pm
Going on examiners report people were marked down for referring to anything about PC or slang in the jargon essayWhat about when they focused on jargon in particular in some year
and i think they did focus solely on PC stuff one year as well
Usually that sort of stuff fits into one paragraph but vcaa makes it an essay
Jargon is a pretty big topic in itself. Remember that a lot of slang can be classifiable under jargon as well. You can look at the uses for jargon (linguistic precision, expediency, educational marker, social group marker) and misuse of jargon (To obscure, conceal, cause prolixity, create false authority, exclude).
You have areas such as profession specific jargon (medical, legal, computing, linguistic), group specific jargon (Teenspeak, surfie speak, skating speak etc) and the jargon of business and government institutions (to obscure, mislead, Jargon being used as doublespeak etc).
There should easily be enough in there to flesh out 800-1000 words of discussion with examples.
As for something solely on PC, remember you can branch out and look at euphemisms here. Look at how PC has facilitated social harmony or dulled our language. Changing attitudes towards what is considered PC.and the recent changes to promote equality. Basically if you measure up both sides of the issue, you can quite easily fill a whole essay on this topic.
2007's speech making topic was probably one of the worst I've ever seen. There's pretty much no chance that all three topics will be something like that anyway so it shouldn't be a concern. If you get a topic like this, just avoid it and go for the easier one.
The examiners report states that people were marked down only if they deviated too far away from the topic. Slang is relevant, but it should not be the only thing you discuss, the report even brings it up as a valid discussion point:
Quote from: vcaa 2004 report
jargon marks group boundaries by defining group membership through the use of language unique to the group, such as slang and technical language
The sample high scoring essay also brought up teenspeak slang/jargon:
Quote
The jargon that we use can also promote in-group solidarity, which ensures cohesiveness because the members of the group are made aware by language where they belong. When a group is freely conversing about ‘volleys’ and ‘backhands’ they are aware that they belong to the same interest group of tennis. This knowledge can increase the closeness and familiarity within a group because the use of jargon helps the members of the group relate to each other. If a new member joins a group, they will try to immediately pick up on the jargon, so that they feel part of the group. This happens often with teenagers who want nothing more than to be included, and their lexicon will alter to ‘teen jargon’ or ‘teenspeak’ to add lexical terms such as ‘mad’ (good) or ‘wak’ (bizarre but good). Jargon creates cohesiveness because the members of an in-group will know through the use of language who belongs together
and by sharing the use of jargon a stronger social rapport is built.
The question asks to discuss the functions of both professional and popular jargon. The latter implies that jargon created within social groups to facilitate effective and efficient communication, such as slang, is a relevant discussion point.
When I was talking about PC language, that was in reference to if there was a question that focussed entirely on PC language. In a question on jargon, there should be no reason to bring up any discussion on PC language.
Also, 2004 was the old study design. From 2006 onwards, essay topics have generally been broader and less specialised or focussed on one particular topic. This is most likely going to be the case with the inclusion of stimulus material which usually encompass a range of discussion points pertinent to the topic.
what happens if we run out of lines in the essay? can we get a second booklet or something??Yes.
thanks
Post by: ngRISING on November 03, 2009, 06:19:17 pm
lexical choice to include/exclude or use jargon.
syntax mainly contained jargon then it would mean that they're fairly familiar and a regular use of the jargon?
semantics?
morphology?
Post by: arthurk on November 03, 2009, 06:20:46 pm
Post by: lynt.br on November 03, 2009, 06:23:08 pm
hmmph. 800-1000 words on jargon. seems reasonable but which subsystems can i relate it to.
lexical choice to include/exclude or use jargon.
syntax mainly contained jargon then it would mean that they're fairly familiar and a regular use of the jargon?
semantics?
morphology?
It's a poor type of question because you really can't expand that much from beyond lexicon. Jargon is essentially a subset of lexicon. If you really wanted to, you might be able to bring in semantics and discourse (topic matter) or morphology (abbreviations, acronyms).
Post by: lynt.br on November 03, 2009, 06:24:54 pm
So are we considering slang as a subset of jargon
Not a subset, but they are similar in function. It is the jargon of a specific group. Look at surfie slang "hang 10" etc (yeah I know nothing about surfing...), this also functions as surfing jargon.
Post by: /0 on November 03, 2009, 06:29:03 pm
Jargon on the other hand is a highly technical language whose purpose is to aid communication of information. It doesn't have to be informal and while it can include/exclude, this is not its main purpose.
Post by: TheJosh on November 03, 2009, 06:33:27 pm
Post by: arthurk on November 03, 2009, 06:35:14 pm
Post by: lynt.br on November 03, 2009, 06:35:56 pm
I would say slang is separate from jargon. Slang is more informal, and is usually more based around group inclusion and group identity.
Jargon on the other hand is a highly technical language whose purpose is to aid communication of information. It doesn't have to be informal and while it can include/exclude, this is not its main purpose.
I believe they can have a very similar function. Let me give you a terrible example:
Say a group of teenagers decide to create the phrase "dagster" which refers to someone who has poor taste in clothing. To the people within the in-group, this slang would also serve the function of aiding communication because it connotes a very clear and specific concept to that group of teenagers. This is a very similar function to jargon, which does not necessarily have to be professional (the question stated that you should explore both professional and popular jargon). The difference is that slang is generally quite informal in comparison to jargon.
Post by: lynt.br on November 03, 2009, 06:40:15 pm
For the writer of the essay in the jargon response he referred to teenspeak as teenjargon...okay???
But surely the examples he gave "‘mad’ (good) or ‘wak’ (bizarre but good)" would be examples of teenage slang as well?
While slang and jargon are not exactly the same thing, they can serve very similar functions. A question that asks for discussion on 'popular jargon' would to me imply discussion on how slang can be used for the same function as jargon.
Post by: vcestudy123 on November 03, 2009, 07:01:47 pm
what happens if we run out of lines in the essay? can we get a second booklet or something??Yes.
thanks
thank you
Post by: ngRISING on November 04, 2009, 02:16:55 am
Post by: eccentric on November 04, 2009, 06:37:34 am
Post by: ngRISING on November 04, 2009, 08:05:31 am
Post by: techhatesme on November 04, 2009, 09:34:38 am
FM + Lang will be the death of me.