VCE English Question Thread

[HopefulLawStudent]

Thanks guys!

[megt]

Quick Question -
I was wondering if it's considered okay in a Text Response to use inverted commas when it's not a quote? For example, if I want to discuss the author's handling of the construct of 'being' and how it's seen in many different forms, can I speak about the concept of the word and use the ''- or is this too likely to be mistaken for a poorly chosen quote?
Thanks

[Sine]

Does language analysis really need a conclusion? I was under the impression that you could just tie it all up and the end of your last paragraph is it isn't too long.

[literally lauren]

Quick Question -
I was wondering if it's considered okay in a Text Response to use inverted commas when it's not a quote? For example, if I want to discuss the author's handling of the construct of 'being' and how it's seen in many different forms, can I speak about the concept of the word and use the ''- or is this too likely to be mistaken for a poorly chosen quote?
Thanks

Hmm, this is a tricky one. Is there a better word you could use to side step the ambiguity? Like, 'the author's construction of the characters' sense of self' or 'the author's depiction of consciousness as a construct'?

Alternatively, ensure you're always using "double quotation marks" when actually quoting, and you should be fine to use 'single ones' for demarcating things like this

Does language analysis really need a conclusion? I was under the impression that you could just tie it all up and the end of your last paragraph is it isn't too long.

It's a "structural requirement," meaning that it's better to include one to be on the safe side. It's not as necessary as it is in a T.R. essay, but conclusions in L.A. only take about two or three sentences, and it means you'll win over the super fussy assessors, so if you do a cost-benefit analysis, the extra two minutes it takes you to whip a quick concl. together probably outweighs the potential for a marker to dock a point for a missing conclusion.

Though what's more likely is that if you were:
a) missing a conclusion
b) repeating some vocab
c) only doing the bare minimum of visual analysis
...then you'd lose a mark. If everything else was perfect, I highly doubt they'd give an L.A. piece a 9 instead of a 10 just because it didn't have a conclusion. But if there were other faults that they'd picked up on, a missing conclusion might be what bumps you down a point.

[HopefulLawStudent]

Hmm, this is a tricky one. Is there a better word you could use to side step the ambiguity? Like, 'the author's construction of the characters' sense of self' or 'the author's depiction of consciousness as a construct'?

Alternatively, ensure you're always using "double quotation marks" when actually quoting, and you should be fine to use 'single ones' for demarcating things like this
It's a "structural requirement," meaning that it's better to include one to be on the safe side. It's not as necessary as it is in a T.R. essay, but conclusions in L.A. only take about two or three sentences, and it means you'll win over the super fussy assessors, so if you do a cost-benefit analysis, the extra two minutes it takes you to whip a quick concl. together probably outweighs the potential for a marker to dock a point for a missing conclusion.

Though what's more likely is that if you were:
a) missing a conclusion
b) repeating some vocab
c) only doing the bare minimum of visual analysis
...then you'd lose a mark. If everything else was perfect, I highly doubt they'd give an L.A. piece a 9 instead of a 10 just because it didn't have a conclusion. But if there were other faults that they'd picked up on, a missing conclusion might be what bumps you down a point.

Should we be analysing stuff in our conclusions?

[literally lauren]

Should we be analysing stuff in our conclusions?

No need; a quick summation of the overarching contentions and intentions of the author(s) and the effect on readers or the consequences they're seeking to bring about would be sufficient. You can do a really brief 'By doing X, the author seeks to Y' sentence at the start, but even that's more summative than analytical

[HopefulLawStudent]

No need; a quick summation of the overarching contentions and intentions of the author(s) and the effect on readers or the consequences they're seeking to bring about would be sufficient. You can do a really brief 'By doing X, the author seeks to Y' sentence at the start, but even that's more summative than analytical

Cheers Lauren!

[scandin9]

Hi Lauren,

For a creative context piece what would typically distinguish an 8 from a 9 or 10 if your language is already very sophisticated?

[literally lauren]

Hi Lauren,

For a creative context piece what would typically distinguish an 8 from a 9 or 10 if your language is already very sophisticated?

Creative piece scoring in the 7-8 range are usually the ones that take the prompt (e.g. 'Our identity depends on where we choose to belong') and then construct a narrative or imaginary scenario around that idea (e.g. here's a short story about someone whose identity depends on where they choose to belong). And they'll do that pretty effectively, but they won't be saying anything about the prompt other than, yes and here's an example of that.

The 9s and 10s are the ones that actually explore the implications of a prompt (e.g. our identity can depend on where we choose to belong because we can consciously shape who we are through the power of our decisions, but only if we have the courage of our convictions and stick by those decisions, and the groups that we belong to can play a big role in this) and structure their story around an actual contention, not just the core of the prompt. Beyond that, language can sometimes be a separating factor, but that's a more minor one. The quality of ideas, and how 'multi-dimensional' your creative piece is will usually determine the mark. (i.e. are you only suggesting a single concept over the course of the whole narrative, or are you fleshing out a variety of ideas and questions?)

[michael leahcim]

For starters, never limit a paragraph to a single poem if you can avoid it. The big challenge with poetry and story stories is to unite/consolidate the text and talk about how things connect together; conducting three or four separate analyses of three or four poems/stories is more typical of mid-range responses.

Thematic connections are awesome, and if the prompt allows, I'd recommend breaking down the topic into three or four core concepts that you can explore using a variety of poems in each para. As for the author's life and times... try to minimise that stuff. If it's relevant, you can include it, but harking on and on about historical background info kind of just distracts from your focus on the text. But if it is actually aiding your analysis AND you can integrate it with textual analysis, then go for it! (Use the half sentence rule - e.g. 'Donne's preoccupation with metaphysical conceits can be seen in the imagery of 'Valediction' where...' as opposed to: 'Donne was preoccupied with metaphysical conceits. This can be seen in the imagery of 'Valediction' where...' - so your use of background info is visibly connected to some other part of your discussion, rather than having a whole sentence like the underlined one which isn't as relevant to the task).
You can stretch it out over two, and it can be good to explore your key idea before launching into evidence, though it may also be worth practising your conciseness just so you have the option of quicker, sharper T.S.s if you need them

Hi Lauren! Thanks for getting back to me I have one more question concerning poems, I have a little trouble with discerning between ideas and splitting them into mini-contentions for my body paragraphs. For example in the prompt 'How does Donne convey an appreciation of what love can do in his Selected Poems?', my intro would look something like this:

In his collection Selected Poems, John Donne conveys the concept of love with an extraordinary sensitivity that breathes life into it, exploring its "infinite" dimensions. In his world, Donne views love as a transformative and powerful force that overcomes all physical and rational boundaries. He displays love as a liberating force as well as a transcending kind of power. However, he also shows love as a source of pain, restriction and sorrow. But it is in Donne’s world of love, a world so interconnected, that his powerful descriptions of love seem to capture an essence of life, brimming so full of substance, mystery and beauty.

I've come up with some topic sentences but they seem to be like a lit essay and I'm not sure how to recify it :S i.e.

BP1: Through showing love as a transformative force, Donne conveys love's ever-changing state. --> eg. love connects you and therefore liberates
BP2: Donne's vision of love as an anomaly highlights his preoccupation with love's many dimensions and realities. --> eg. love is mysterious; it is fleeting and opens up a world of infinite possibilities.
BP3: Throughout his poems, Donne shows love as a force which brings together many of the facets of life's uncertainties, and propounds an interconnected cosmos brimming with beauty and profound meaning. ---> eg. life is unpredictable and love is unrehearsed -- he paints this with extraordinary vision/imagery.

But they kinda all blend together and it makes it hard for me to split them up without repeating myself. How would you recommend splitting it up so that I would have some straight-forward topic sentences? Sorry if this is a long question, but my school is terrible (cry) and I'm so stressed and have nobody

Thanks in advance. You're the best!

[NerdyPi]

Hi guys, this is a very text specific question, as I'm trying to prepare for all possible Medea prompt.

I'm not completely sure why Jason is described as weak. My best ideas are

-He's desperate for power and social status
-He cannot/does not protect his family as a father/husband should

Any other ideas would be appreciated, thanks

[Swagadaktal]

Hi guys, this is a very text specific question, as I'm trying to prepare for all possible Medea prompt.

I'm not completely sure why Jason is described as weak. My best ideas are

-He's desperate for power and social status
-He cannot/does not protect his family as a father/husband should

Any other ideas would be appreciated, thanks

He becomes a little bitch is emasculated at the end of the play because of his desire to bury and weep over his children - this was considered extremely unmanly  and weak coz men were not supposed to feel that attached to them (they viewed children as a way to pass on their legacy and not  actual love)

He can also be considered weak because he can't even use sophistry right to persuade others. He failed utterly and he's a complete moron (mostly in the eyes of Medea but this sentiment is shared to an extent)

[MandhreeE]

Hi guys,

I just really need some clarification on Language analysis. i have some teachers telling me to use labels for specific technique in LA and then i have other teacher telling me to avoid them completely and instead use phrases that refer to the technique without explicitly saying it. I'm really confused and i thought the examiner's  report said that students who do not rely on labels generally do better.
So for example one teacher says that in the analysis if there is an appeal to a sense of justice i have to say "the writer appeals to readers sense of justice to encourage them to feel...." and another teacher tells me to say "the writer uses readers desire for people to be treated equally and fairly to encourage them to feel...". Which one should i do?
thank you!!!

[BLTCC]

Hi, I hope I'm asking this question in the right place and if I am not sorry in advance and sorry if this question has already been asked. With text response, is it okay to write character based paragraphs, for example, with Medea, one paragraph be on Medea herself then Jason, or does this limit the sophistication of the piece?? Thank you 

[literally lauren]

Hi Lauren! Thanks for getting back to me I have one more question concerning poems, I have a little trouble with discerning between ideas and splitting them into mini-contentions for my body paragraphs. For example in the prompt 'How does Donne convey an appreciation of what love can do in his Selected Poems?', my intro would look something like this:

In his collection Selected Poems, John Donne conveys the concept of love with an extraordinary sensitivity that breathes life into it, exploring its "infinite" dimensions. In his world, Donne views love as a transformative and powerful force that overcomes all physical and rational boundaries. He displays love as a liberating force as well as a transcending kind of power. However, he also shows love as a source of pain, restriction and sorrow. But it is in Donne’s world of love, a world so interconnected, that his powerful descriptions of love seem to capture an essence of life, brimming so full of substance, mystery and beauty.

I've come up with some topic sentences but they seem to be like a lit essay and I'm not sure how to recify it :S i.e.

BP1: Through showing love as a transformative force, Donne conveys love's ever-changing state. --> eg. love connects you and therefore liberates
BP2: Donne's vision of love as an anomaly highlights his preoccupation with love's many dimensions and realities. --> eg. love is mysterious; it is fleeting and opens up a world of infinite possibilities.
BP3: Throughout his poems, Donne shows love as a force which brings together many of the facets of life's uncertainties, and propounds an interconnected cosmos brimming with beauty and profound meaning. ---> eg. life is unpredictable and love is unrehearsed -- he paints this with extraordinary vision/imagery.

But they kinda all blend together and it makes it hard for me to split them up without repeating myself. How would you recommend splitting it up so that I would have some straight-forward topic sentences? Sorry if this is a long question, but my school is terrible (cry) and I'm so stressed and have nobody

Thanks in advance. You're the best!

Those topic sentences seem excellent to me - is your concern that you'll end up repeating yourself within your body paragraphs, or that the topic sentences themselves are too repetitious? Because I certainly don't think the latter is the case (-when a prompt is as broad as 'Discuss love,' it can be kind of hard to move away from that central concern-) and the former could easily be avoided by ensuring you're delving into a wide variety of different poems in each para.

In general, so long as each paragraph has a self-contained point, as well as linking together and forming an overarching contention, you should be all good

Hi guys,

I just really need some clarification on Language analysis. i have some teachers telling me to use labels for specific technique in LA and then i have other teacher telling me to avoid them completely and instead use phrases that refer to the technique without explicitly saying it. I'm really confused and i thought the examiner's  report said that students who do not rely on labels generally do better.
So for example one teacher says that in the analysis if there is an appeal to a sense of justice i have to say "the writer appeals to readers sense of justice to encourage them to feel...." and another teacher tells me to say "the writer uses readers desire for people to be treated equally and fairly to encourage them to feel...". Which one should i do?
thank you!!!

This is kind of tricky, but I'd say you should endeavour to use those labels and then explain their meaning/significance e.g. 'the writer's appeal to justice is evident in his use of the phrase "everyone deserves a second chance," suggesting that people should be treated equally and fairly in order to encourage readers to feel...'

The 'don't use labels' rule stems from the fact that so many low/mid-range essays will simply start and end their analysis by pointing out a device (e.g. the author uses a rhetorical question "how can they do this?" He also uses inclusive language like "we" and emotive language to persuade readers of his contention) <-- stuff like that is waaaay too generic. If you can zoom in on particular language features and comment on how they're being used to persuade, then the technique labelling is a secondary concern. If it helps, think of it like a stepping stone for your analysis - it's often a good place to start, but it's only ever a starting point.

But there's also no reason why you'd have to do the exact same things every time. Rather, you could mention three or four official 'techniques' in a paragraph but intersperse these with other points of analysis where you're just unpacking connotations or talking about the general persuasiveness of certain words/phrases

Hi, I hope I'm asking this question in the right place and if I am not sorry in advance and sorry if this question has already been asked. With text response, is it okay to write character based paragraphs, for example, with Medea, one paragraph be on Medea herself then Jason, or does this limit the sophistication of the piece?? Thank you 

You're absolutely in the right place!

Character-based paragraphs are permissible, and it's what I tend to recommend as a last-resort/back-up option for really difficult prompts or if you're short on time and feeling stuck. But yes, imo it does limit sophistication because the whole piece invariably turns into 'here's how the prompt relates to Character X. And Y. And Z. The end.'

Instead, aim for a thematic breakdown

For example, if your prompt was 'Medea shows the dangers of desire.'

A bad essay would just be like:
- Jason desires power.
- Medea desires revenge
- The chorus desire justice (~debatable, but w/e)

A good essay might look like:
- the characters become blinded by their own desires and lose sight of potential ramifications
- obsessing over desires can obfuscate the intentions of others and open characters up to exploitation
- even desires that are unfulfilled can corrupt characters' minds

^that's by no means the only breakdown here - any kind of separation of core concepts would do!

Hope that helps