A Thread for Questions

[ngRISING]

hey guys, decided to make a thread dedicated to eng lang questions cause i need help

anyways. im doing the insight o6 exam and kind of have a mental blank.

Heres the Q;
Consider the two sentences 'what time do you call this' [line 1] and 'How did you get out of there[line 5-6]. identify the setence type of these two examples. Explain the difference between the connotative meaning of each of these sentences.

Okay the sentence type is Interrogative, however idk about the second part of that question. don't want to look at solutions just yet ..

and i've updated it for a few more examples.

[appianway]

Is that from Insight 06?

The first sentence functions to inform the listener that he's disturbed the speaker and doesn't require a direct response detailing the time. It can also also represent an attempt to get him to consider his actions. The other sentence functions to elict information from the listener as to 'how' he managed to escape and demonstrates a degree of amazement that he managed to do so.

[ngRISING]

ty ty ty. might as welll present my essay for this paper.

heres my plan, quite messy due to the limited space :S .

i've noticed not alot of people upload their essays due to fear of criticism or possibly selfishness. but meh w.e. sharings caring ^^ so i'll put 2 or 3 up a day. My first one for today, not the best essay out their.

Heres the essay; feel free to bag[do w.e] it, not a big fan or pro on essays.

edit; removed the plan. too big

Plan; 45secs
Essay; 25minutes 46secs [as i said, not the best essay ever] i did add in a contention sentence at the end of my introduction
words: 383

Technology and language are two separate things however communicating via technology requires language. Communication via technology can be seen from some forms such as Special messaging services [SMS, also known as texting], social network groups such as Facebook, Twitter and myspace As these factors are constantly influencing Australian English, the syntax, lexical choices and the use depending on context may change as well. Ultimately, modern technology does effect written and spoken modes of Australian English.


Gilbert Highett stated that 'Language... New pieces bud out, spread into leaves and become big branches, proliferating." This is evidently seen when modern technology is used as a form of communication, new words are formed or changed and used in various contexts even when they're not suppose to be.
SMS has existed for over a decade, the language however used via SMS is different to Standard Written Australian English. The language used via SMS often include reductions(often referred to as slang) and lexical choices that are not in Standard Australian English. Emily Power (17/09/09 Herald Sun) identified various lexical choices extracted from SMS's, some of them are 'rents' (for parents), 'meh' (for whatever) and many more. The purpose of reduction is to communicate efficiently, not only have these reductions been used in written contexts, but they have also made their way into Spoken Language. Georgina Dimonpoulus (The Age 3/08/08) conducted a research and found that reductions such as 'LOL (laugh out lod), 'dw' (don't worry) are used by teenagers in their daily speech.

These reductions effect written language by incorporating them into written syntax. This is seen by the use of reductions in sentances on Social networks such as Facebook, Twitter, MySpace and many more. Interestingly Harriet Alexander (The Age 19/08/08) found that graduate university students often use slang from modern technology in job letters to employees. For instance the use of '3' to replace 'E' in a letter. This is deemed as inappropriate due to the context, the format of job letters are meant to be formal, thus the use of slang turns that letter into a informal letter. By using slang, it exceeds Grice's Maxim of manner due to the context of the situation and the principle of appropriateness.


Thus, Social Networking Groups and texting some factors that influence written and spoken modes of Australian English.


grade? e+ . rushed essay, i corrected it whilst typing it . LOL

[appianway]

Just a few things:

+ Structure: You probably need more paragraphs, and you need to divide them up a little better. You cover similar material in both of them... think about the reasons why social networking sites influence language, and base the essay around that
+ Length: Needs to be a bit longer
+ Explain: Elaborate on what things mean. Tell us WHY people are using reductions. Tell us the effect on the language.
+ Stimulus: Don't rely on the quotes given. Even if you use them, make sure that you connect them clearly to the topic
+Conclusion: Longer
+ Elaborate on any points you make... don't just chuck in Grice's Maxims

Anyway, good work on posting up an essay... you're one of the first!

[ngRISING]

thanks. i'll try another one tonight.

[ngRISING]

heres another one, extracted from VCAA 07 . Q18

here is the scanned essay . it shows my thoughts as well as errors & my plan. i will add a few more that i did at school later.
 i referred to 2 stimulus materials and about 3 examples of my own.

planning time. 5mins.
writing time. 49minutes or so

edit; add the links
http://img237.imageshack.us/img237/9328/img0001nv.jpg
http://img237.imageshack.us/img237/1797/img0002sg.jpg
http://img269.imageshack.us/img269/5482/img0003kk.jpg


heres the essay, your probaly sick of my whacko hand writing. hope i did okay lol.

Language has the power to shock, offend and incite emotion, for language to avoid in doing so it requires the use of euphemistic terms to hide the actual meaning. The intention to shock, offend or incite emotion will depend on the lexical choice by the speaker, as well as how they want their identity to be perceived as from their syntatical choice and the use of colloquial language inappropriately. In recent times Kevin Rudd's language has successfully shocked Australians as well as Australian methods of advertising.Whether it shocks, offend or incite emotion, these are just some of the things that language has the potential to do. (crossed out that line before because i didn't actually use the second half, if i did then i would have referred to Australia's ad campaign in 2006).

For language to shock, offend or incite emotion, it requires an individual to intentionally or unintentionally use language in a way that is deemed as in appropriate to the audience. However avoiding to offend is achievable by the euphemistic terms as well as avoiding jargon when unnecessarily. (should of taken out that part on jargon as i didn't use it either). Politicians now use the euphemistic term "Displaced Aboriginies" in order to refer to the 'stolen generation'. Interestingly, the term 'stolen generation' was once politically correct as seen by John Howard using it in his speech on Australia Day in 2000. The function of euphemistic terms is to avoid any conflicts that may shock, offend or incite emotion. In recent times, in a letter to the editor[The Age 23/01/07] a writer complained about the term 'recycled sewage' being used by the media as a euphemism that is quite misleading. The function of that word 'recycled sewage' is to avoid an outrage in the public regarding the fact that 'recycled sewage' is actually water purified from the raw sewage. From these instances, the lexical choice of euphemistic terms avoids causing conflicts, shocking and offending the audience. IF these terms are not used in such instances, it will shock, offend or incite emotion, if Mr John Howard said "Abo's" then it would shock or offend the Aboriginal community. Ultimately, the lexical choice of euphemisms assist in avoiding offending or shocking people,however if failing to do so to use terms from this lexicon will do so.(cross this out as well due to repetition, if i kept it, it's not a cohesive text, probaly isn't already.)
A person syntatical choice also plays a vital role to shock, offend or incite emotion, it also reflects a person's identity. How a person wants to be perceived may depend on their syntatical choice, either verbally or other forms. For instance, Editorial in the Age [23/07/07] reported a man wearing a t-shirt that displayed "World's Number 1 terrorist". His shirt which contained inappropriate syntax had the potential to offend customers or threaten the security of Qantas. His identity was perceived as a threat and dangerous from his shirt with inappropriate syntax. Ones syntax has the power to shock, offend or incite emotion.
The use of colloquial language can offend people if it excludes certain individuals or groups, or it is being used inappropriately. In recent months, Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd used colloquial language from Broad Australian English on Sky News (television Program). The colloquial phrase was "Fair Shake of the sauce bottle mate" was used three times. It created an uproar amongst certain audience members of the public because they view it was unnecessary for him to use it as well as the fact that he does not speak Broad Australian English. [Herald Sun, online, 10/06/09]

Thus, the use of colloquial language, syntax and lexical choice may offend, shock or incite emotion, however these are only some of many factors that language has the potential to do.

585 words.

Not word for word as i was proof reading this essay while typing it. Please correct it further as necessary as my essay skills are pretty crap.

not sure if colloquial language was the write term. would it be jargon?

thanks

time for some maths methods lol

[hyperblade01]

Feel free to correct me as I'm noooo expert in english but with your conclusion youve said:

however these are only some of many factors that language has the potential to do.

I can see how it's left the reading thinking but it sounds like the essay hasn't finished yet - I could picture my teacher circling that in red and saying "such as...? ...should have been in intro and discussed"


With the 'fair shake of the sauce bottle' I woulda said it was a failed attempt at using an idiom to connect. It was necessary (in some sense) as he was trying to lessen social distance with the general public


One question: I noticed you capatalised "IF" about half way through...if it was intentional, is it acceptable to do that to emphasise?

[ngRISING]

Feel free to correct me as I'm noooo expert in english but with your conclusion youve said:

however these are only some of many factors that language has the potential to do.

I can see how it's left the reading thinking but it sounds like the essay hasn't finished yet - I could picture my teacher circling that in red and saying "such as...? ...should have been in intro and discussed"


With the 'fair shake of the sauce bottle' I woulda said it was a failed attempt at using an idiom to connect. It was necessary (in some sense) as he was trying to lessen social distance with the general public


One question: I noticed you capatalised "IF" about half way through...if it was intentional, is it acceptable to do that to emphasise?

first response- mm good idea. thanks.

second response, yeah i should have extended my point. good point again

third response. typo LOL! in my written thingo it doesn't have that i think lol!

[hyperblade01]

Ahh i didn't see you had edited your post to include the links...when i saw this earlier today (like at 12:30 lol) I was too tired to read it and so when I did just before i went straight to the essay

[Gloamglozer]

Split infinitives is when an adverb splits a verb, right?  For example, the most famous one being, "To boldly go..."

But is that syntactically correct?

[hyperblade01]

Originally incorrect and it's under debate I think... prescriptivists would say it's wrong

[Gloamglozer]

Originally incorrect and it's under debate I think... prescriptivists would say it's wrong

Oh ok.  Prescriptivists say everything is wrong unless it is Standard English.  However, descriptivists wouldn't say it is incorrect but they believe that the language is always evolving and hence nothing is 100% correct.

[hyperblade01]

Could you say it shows 'creativity'? To split infinitives that is..

Another thing I think that's undergoing change is the whole me/I thing:

"Who's going tonight?"

"My friend and I" vs "Me and my friend"

Not too sure on what the metalanguage term is for that one...

[/0]

From David Crystal:

"Well people have split infinitives in English since the 12th century. The reason why they do so, to take the famous Star Trek example, “to boldly go”, is that they sense that this phrase has a natural rhythm for English – “te-tum-te-tum”. If you do it some other way, such as “to go boldly” (te-tum-tum-te) or “boldly to go” (tum-te-te-tum), these are no natural rhythms for English. The only reason why people didn’t like breaking an infinitive in that way was that it went against the Latin norms which the grammarians thought ought to be imposed on English. The Latin infinitive has only one word, of course, so it cannot be split! But the view that Latin is the language that controls another language has really now gone out of fashion. Or to take another example, the argument that you should never end a sentence on a preposition can be traced back to the 1700s. Shakespeare did it, of course – for example, in Hamlet’s famous “to be or not to be” speech – but grammarians react to this by saying. “There you are. You see, even Shakespeare can get it wrong. Even the best authors can make mistakes.” The mindset of somebody who thinks in this way is fundamentally different from what I feel is the natural way of looking at language."

Not too sure about the me/I thing, I think it's just carelessness, but one I think is interesting is ending the spoken sentence with the interrogative tag "aren't I?". There exists no contraction for "am I not", and virtually everyone is now using "aren't I", despite it being non-standard.

I think the prescriptivist/descriptivist debates are really well reflected in the arguments of Lynne Truss and David Crystal. Check out David Crystal's blog, it's pretty good.

[ngRISING]

Okay, did the VCAA 06 Exam today. heres my essay.

plan took 3minutes
essay took 57minutes

http://img25.imageshack.us/img25/8260/img0004ra.jpg <- plan and intro
http://img17.imageshack.us/img17/5286/img0005co.jpg
http://img291.imageshack.us/img291/4111/imgna.jpg
http://img137.imageshack.us/img137/918/img0007p.jpg

stimulus material used. 1
examples used. 3 or 4 . cbb counting


Question 21

Appropriate language is the acceptable language that can depend on context and audience. Language can be used appropriately or inappropriately depending on the lexical choice, syntax or context of language used by an individual. Inappropriate language can be avoided by using euphemisms or adjusting ones language. Ultimately, there are many instances of appropriate or inappropriate language use throughout Australia.

Language can be used appropriately or inappropriately depending on the individual using the language. An individual can choose various lexical items that is appropriate for a situation as well as choosing appropriate lexical items. Appropriate choice of lexical items is important in maintaining social relationships. This is seen when Kevin Rudd used the term "displaced Aborigines" in his apology in order to refer to the "Stolen Generation" [The Age 13/020/08]. He used the therm "displaced Aborigines" instead of "Stolen Generation" because it is deemed as inappropriate and politically incorrect. Interestingly, the term "Stolen Generation" was once politically correct when John Howard referred to the ' displaced Aborigines ' in 2000. The appropriateness of language may depend on the lexical choice of an individual.
The syntax of one may also decide whether the language is appropriate or not. Ones syntax determines this by the impact of the syntax on the audience, if the audience accepts it then it is appropriate, if not then it is inappropriate. For instance when Kevin Rudd use a Australian idiom "Fair shake of the sauce bottle mate" on Sky News. It caused some offence and created some form of social distance amongs certain audiences as reported by the Australian [1/07/09]. However Kevin Rudd's intention was to connect to certain Australian groups. However as it was used inappropriately, it created a social distance amongst certain audience members. The syntatical choice of an individual can be viewed as either appropriate or inappropriate depending on the audience.
The context of the language is also important in determining whether language is appropriate or not. Context is important because each individual, group or culture will have a different view on the language used. During Australia's 2006 ad campaign promoting tourism, a phrase was used that is deemed as inappropriate in various contexts. "Where the bloody hell are you?" was considered inappropriate in Singapore and it is censored because of the strict Singaporean censorship laws. The context of language plays a vital role in determining the appropriateness of the language, as seen from Australia's Global ad campaign.
Inappropriate language however can be avoided in many ways such as using euphemistic lexical items, adjusting the language depending on context and many more. Take for instance when Kevin Rudd used the term "Displaced Aborigines" rather than "Stolen generation" which is now viewed as politically incorrect. This has assisted in minimizing any potential controversy in various audience members. Adjusting ones language depending on context also avoids the view of inappropriate language. For instance, when the media reports on sex scandals [such as; Womans Weekly 11/10/09 -> Ophra's Employee Sex Scandal], the Australian audience views, reads and hears about it but are not offended on the fact that the media has reported on this. However take the same situation to a Indian Culture will cause an outrage amongst almost every group that forms that Indian culture because sex is considered as a taboo in Indian Cultures. Euphemisms and adjusting ones language depending on context are only few of many possible ways to avoid inappropriate language.

Thus an individual may choose how they want their language to be perceived, either appropriate or inappropriate by their choice of syntax, lexical choices or the context in which they use the language in.

Words 601. Hopefully this essay is C standard and better/more cohesive then my previous ones. need that 25 for english language lol.

fixed up some sentances and errors

i will write another essay from another random paper tonight