English Language essay submission and marking

[Cookies1738]

Hey guys, I'm still relatively new to writing ACs so any feedback and advice is greatly appreciated. I took the holistic approach to structuring my ac. also, I attached the text im analyzing below. Thanks 

The text is a transcript of the interview between Karl Stefanovic and Nick Kyrgios which was broadcast on the 9 March 2022 on Channel 9 aimed at mainly those interested in sports, specifically tennis. The function of the text is to inform and to entertain the viewers, and on a deeper level, the social purpose is to promote Nick Kyrgios’ achievements and put him in positive light. The two interlocutors adhere to a casual informal register to build rapport and appeal to face needs; however, due to the situational context of being a broadcast interview, they still maintain a modality of professionalism through their language choices. The cultural context is based around the competitive nature of Australian’s value in their sport.
The interlocutors reflect the social purpose of building rapport through the informal register. The elision of phonemes in “y’know” (68), “d’y’reckon” (45), “hafta” (52) and “comin’”(12) show that the interlocutors are speaking in a laid-back manner, which implies that they have a close social proximity. Non-fluency features such as filled pauses “um” (7,18,25,30,46), repetiton “I’m good Karl I’m good I’m good” and repairs “e- all” (72) show that the interview is spontaneous and unscripted which is informal in nature and shows that Nick is giving his own thoughts in the spur of the moment. This allows him to build rapport with the audience as it shows his audience that he is speaking on his own accord and not for his own benefit.
Many linguistic features were employed to reflect the social purpose. Kyrgios’ anecdote in lines 35-44 about his “dark moments” (37) and “tough times” (40) describe the struggle that he has been through. This reflects the social purpose of in-group membership as he creates common ground between audience and himself through a relatable anecdote, which lessens the social distance as it makes the audience feel like he is as normal a person as they are. Karl appeals to Nick’s face needs by using the superlative phrase “most misunderstand” in the interrogative “What is the thing people most misunderstand about you, d’y’reckon” (45). Given that Nick is also known for his “fulltime mental and crazy” (46) on the court, Karl avoids mentioning directly to the topic, and instead euphemises it to “most misunderstands” (45). This allows Nick to have full autonomy on whether he wants to discuss the topic or not in the interview, which appeals to his negative face needs.
The main topic manager of the interview is Karl, given that he is the host of the show. Karl manages the topic of the interview through the formulaic introduction “How ya doing slam champion” (1) and by posing interrogatives  “How do you even come back…” (3), “Does it take a while…” (14), “What is the…” (45) throughout the interview. Nick then responds to the questions in an adjacency pair style reflects the function of informing as the ideas interview follows a structure of question then answer. Furthermore, Nick uses filled pauses “Um” (4,7,25,30,46) to indicate to Karl that he is thinking but wants to maintain the floor, which prevents overlap and reflects the function of interview; to entertain as the conversation is fluent which is more enjoyable and entertaining to listen to. Back- channelling is seen in “Yeah” (6,17,69,75) which indicates that Karl is actively listening and following along with what Nick is saying. Back channelling appeals to Nick’s positive face needs of inclusion as it makes his opinion feel valued, which allows Karl to build rapport with Nick, reflecting the social purpose .

[AshPotatoZero]

Hi, i'm having a lot of trouble with analysing these articles for language analysis, been struggling for weeks and my english exam is coming up, could someone please help me analyse and interpret these articles? please?




The government has released its coronavirus tracking app, and people are worried about privacy. The concern is that "COVIDSafe" marks a descent into an Orwellian fever-dream that features actual fever.
I know this, because many people have said so on social media.  And I know that after they hit send on those Facebook posts, the site automatically ticked the "worried about privacy" box on their profiles, so they can be offered gold bullion and VPNs.
A new app released by the government aims to help trace the spread of coronavirus, but how well does it work and what data does it store?
Our privacy is constantly being eroded, whether by CCTV, scammers or our beloved smartphones – search for “Google Timeline” or “iPhone significant locations” if you’d like to experience acute paranoia.
But the COVIDSafe app might just be the first privacy incursion that benefits us, instead of advertisers or the state. We’re a little short on rights just now – freedom of movement and association, for starters. I have to pretend to exercise just to leave the house. We can’t even enter Queensland – so there is some upside. But we need to be able to relax these restrictions while controlling new infections.
Of course, we shouldn’t have unqualified faith in a government that gave us robodebt and Home Affairs Minister Peter Dutton – although I still trust it more than Mark Zuckerberg.
Members of groups that the government frequently targets, like minorities and journalists, understandably won’t be convinced. Fortunately, they don’t have to be. We only need 40 per cent uptake of the app – call it nerd immunity.
 
Mark Zuckerberg is harder to trust than the government, despite it poor record with robodebt.CREDIT:AP
Besides, is COVIDSafe really the app to usher in a scary digital panopticon (prison)? Every day, the app begs me to open it, because apparently it needs this for the Bluetooth connection to work properly on my iPhone. If it has to be full screen to reliably function, as some have suggested, my main concern isn’t privacy, but that COVIDSafe is a lemon.
If the government’s app strategy doesn’t work, the alternative is a more laborious, imperfect form of contact tracing – where the government also gets to find out our movements. Living in a society always means giving up freedoms for the collective good – and this seems a reasonable trade-off.
Advertisement
In future, infection control apps could become invaluable in flu season, or to control STIs. I’d also love an app that warned me of approaching anti-vaxxers – not because I’m worried about contracting their measles, but because I really don’t want to hear their views on vaccines.
That said, if the government introduces a more intrusive app, I will gladly take to the streets. But only with an app to tell me whether the people next to me in the barricades have COVID-19.
Dominic Knight is co-host of The Chaser Report podcast.










As a privacy professional, I would normally be among the first to join the barricades opposing the new COVIDSafe app, which helps alert people who have come into contact with a COVID-19 case. But we’re in a genuine emergency. And the norms are out the window.
 
The PM says the government's contact tracing app is crucial to creating a 'COVID-safe economy'. CREDIT:ALEX ELLINGHAUSEN
Our government has long tended to put national security ahead of privacy and has a poor track record of technology deployments. Some fear the app could be tracking us and they reject assurances from Canberra that surveillance is not the intent. Critics claim the very idea of the app is unproven and its software not properly tested.
The loudest objection is also the simplest: “I do not trust the government and I will not trust their app.”
All these criticisms are valid. But it saddens me to see respected privacy advocates rehashing (reusing old) entrenched (firmly established attitudes) positions at a time like this. There’s very little wrong with the app itself, but people resent it because they resent the government. Yet I don’t see how we can afford that luxury right now.
As the day unfolded: Australians download COVIDSafe app more than 4.5 million times, global COVID-19 cases climb past 3.5 million as nation's death toll stands at 96
Do I wish that the COVIDSafe software had been commissioned in a better way? Of course I do. I wish the Department of Home Affairs had not been involved in the tender process and I wish that a certified Australian data centre had been selected to run the database instead of an American business. But given the circumstances, I am willing to climb off my moral high horse.
For all the talk of “lost trust”, the Morrison government has done something big to earn my co-operation: it abandoned its fiscal ideology and without much fanfare went into enormous debt to safeguard Australians’ health and jobs.
Now I am prepared to show comparable pragmatism around privacy and the contact tracing app. I am going to suspend my cynicism and give the Prime Minister a break.
COVIDSafe is pretty innocuous. It works by anonymously logging each time another COVIDSafe user comes into range for a few minutes. The log is kept securely in the smartphone and rolls over every couple of weeks, with old records continually purged. If and when a user tests positive to coronavirus, they can upload the log to their state health department, which will then reach out to the logged contacts and arrange for them to quarantine and get tested.
Advertisement
The app doesn’t track anyone but merely records when pairs of users have come close. By notifying people that they’ve been exposed before they show symptoms, community infection is reduced.
 
Prime Minister Scott Morrison says Australians should download the COVIDSafe app.CREDIT:MICK TSIKAS
Epidemiologists say COVIDSafe will be a useful addition to their existing disease management. The app won’t dramatically change contact tracing. Critics need to remember that COVID-19 is a notifiable disease and anyone who tests positive is already required by law to undergo an interview process with public health officials and account for their movements.
Frankly, academic reference to “privacy risks” right now makes me a bit sick. Where is the proportionality? With people dying in unfathomable numbers elsewhere, we have a good chance to contain community transmission and save lives with better informed contact tracing.
I am a privileged, relatively wealthy white male who has never really had a privacy problem. No software like COVIDSafe is ever going to harm me. I get how lucky I am and I understand that other sectors of the community have different risk profiles.
Why a 'dyed-in-the-wool libertarian' decided to download COVIDSafe app
By the same token, I admit my privacy advocacy is almost entirely ideological. Like most of my fellow professionals, I have the good fortune of being able to indulge in barbecue-stopping arguments about privacy at a time when tens of thousands are dying in countries just like Australia.
It strikes me as self-indulgent to put one’s privacy principles first when, if we just chilled a little, we might deploy an innocent temporary smartphone app to help our public health system.
So I’ve quit the highfalutin debates, and happily, even optimistically, installed COVIDSafe.
Stephen Wilson is an independent privacy adviser.