ATAR Notes: Forum
VCE Stuff => VCE English Studies => VCE Subjects + Help => VCE English Language => Topic started by: hyperblade01 on August 22, 2009, 03:13:35 pm
-
Think I'll attempt to start a thread with exam topics and add more as they come
Was given these two questions which supposedly came from the VATE 09 exam (No i do not have it, i was only given the questions)
Somewhat lost on how to write the essay(s) so I'm looking for advice...
I've brainstormed some points for each, so I'm not completely lost :P Not too sure if they can be extended/are relevant
Any variety of Australian English can be valid depending on the context. Do you agree?
- Taken out of context, the variety may not be valid
- Using the 'correct' variety can increase efficiency and lessen social distance
- This may backfire - Kevin Rudd and 'fair shake of the sauce bottle'
- Specific varieties such as teenspeak, bureaucratese
- Standard Australian English can be used as a default (?)
Jargon, euphemism and doublespeak should be avoided at all times: they do not contribute to effective communication. To what extent do you agree?
- In a proper context, they are more effective
- They do contribute to effective communication
- creating belonging in the group as well, stregthen bonds
- They do not contribute to effective communication
- used outside of their domain, not good
- Example with Kevin Rudd and 'conceptual synthesis'
- They have roles to soften situations
- War and army - 'pink mist' to refer to result of people being killed by bombs
Thanks in advance :)
-
I just finished an essay on the second topic about an hour ago. I structured it like this:
Contention: Jargon and Euphemism (I went and classified doublespeak as a form of euphemism) both play an important role in facilitating effective communication when used in the correct context. However, when used out of context, they can detract from the effectiveness of social interaction by creating ambiguity, misleading an audience or concealing the truth. Thus the effectiveness of such language is dependant on the circumstances in which it is used.
P1
Jargon contributes to effective communication by allowing linguistic prevision/expediency when all interlocutors understand the jargon. (This addresses the "technical vocabulary or idiom of a special activity or group" part of the prompt.
Examples: I used some medical and legal jargon. Other examples could include linguistic jargon, computer jargon...
Explanation: The use of jargon between medical practitioners and legal personnel facilitates effective communication by allowing specific or complex diseases, conditions or concepts to be communicated efficiently and with a mutual understanding between both participants. Jargon in these domains also fulfils the communicative requirements of the profession, it is imperative that legal personnel recognise the difference between 'manslaughter' and 'murder' despite their similar semantic meaning.
P2
How Jargon detracts from conversation when it is not understood by all participants, or is used to impose upon an audience. (This addresses the "obscure and almost pretentious language marked by a roundabout way of expression and use of long words" part of the stimulus)
Examples: Continuing on from my examples in the last paragraph, talked about how a surgeon would avoid jargon when talking with a patient or lay person. Barristers may modify their language to explain legal jargon such as "mens rea" or "actus reus" to a jury in plain English to foster mutual understanding.
Explanation: Went on to explain how this can cause ambiguity in conversation, detracting from the effectiveness of communication. Furthermore, jargon and technical language can be abused to create an aura of authority. When an audience doesn't understand highly technical language, they tend to presume the user is an expert in that field, even if they are misusing the jargon. e.g., quack doctors.
P3
Euphemisms are appropriate as a form of hedging. Lessen the impact of possibly confronting or offensive statements. (This addresses the "linguistic dressing" part of the stimulus.)
Example: At a funeral, "passed away" instead of died. "Putting down" a pet over killing it. Euphemisms in school reports "Not performing to full potential".
Explanation: In these contexts, euphemisms are necessary to develop an empathic link with other participants. This is crucial to facilitate effective communication. If we didn't use euphemisms in these contexts, we may come across as rude or insensitive.
P4
Euphemisms inhibit effective communication when they conceal meaning or obfuscate the truth. (This addresses the "doublespeak" part of the stimulus.)
Example: All of Kevin Rudd's examples of doublespeak, Military doublespeak.
Explanation: Doublespeak causes ambiguity and is manipulative. This detracts from the effectiveness of communication as you are purposely making your language imprecise and unintelligible to conceal certain elements or truths.
There were a few things I didn't raise such as how Jargon can also encourage group solidarity by signally knowledge or expertise in a particular field. Just remember the VATE 2009 exam wants a direct referral to the stimulus material. I did this by just interspersing quote fragments from the stimulus into my topic sentences.
Anyway hope this helps.
-
Just remember the VATE 2009 exam wants a direct referral to the stimulus material.
Anyway hope this helps.
Yea, i saw that and was like 'That better not be tha case for the VCAA exam'...
Hope this helps? I think it definitely helped :P It's funny how by reading one or two words, so many more connections can be made!
-
Do EL essays, practically follow TEEL process aswell?
-
Do EL essays, practically follow TEEL process aswell?
I haven't been taught any other way, so I suppose so. I could be wrong though :P
What other way could there be?
-
Do EL essays, practically follow TEEL process aswell?
I haven't been taught any other way, so I suppose so. I could be wrong though :P
What other way could there be?
I've been taught to use the "TEEL" process just like in normal English.
-
okay thanks everyone ! :)
-
"...every day we vandalise the language, which is the foundation, the frame, and the joinery of culture, if not its greatest glory, and there is no penalty and no way to impose one (Don Watson, Death Sentence)
Refering to current language trends, examine the issue of 'language decay' and discuss some common attitudes towards the decline of the English Language.
Don't know the best way to organise my ideas, also looking to see if anyone has anything else they could add:
Language decay - when it becomes vague, ambigious, no longer precise or exact
It is not declining:
- it is changing and evolving
- We must allow it to change otherwise we would still be speaking Shakespearean
- People see it as declining now as they are fearful, anything new is often resisted
Trends people dislike:
Americanisation
- We have been in contact for a while, but we have not changed
Teenspeak
- Informal and sloppy
- Possibily a sublanguage
NetSpeak / TextSpeak
- Not causing decline, it is just another form of the language
- We still know when to use it and when not to
New words
- such as 'gay' 'wicked' 'like' 'but' 'whatever'
Trends that are contributing to the decay:
- PC language, it makes things 'fuzzy' and unclear
Thanks in advance
-
Haha sounds like the essay you just helped me on except mine has to be solely based on American influence
-
Age, race/ethnicity and gender are the three key determinants of language use. Do you agree?
I wrote an essay for this at the start of the year, something like the 4th week of Term 1. Wanting to see if anyone has better ideas.
Don't judge too harshly, it aint my best work :P
EDIT:
Haha sounds like the essay you just helped me on except mine has to be solely based on American influence
Yea, this one's a bit more broad :S After a while, you use the same information for different topics as they all interelate.
-
"...every day we vandalise the language, which is the foundation, the frame, and the joinery of culture, if not its greatest glory, and there is no penalty and no way to impose one (Don Watson, Death Sentence)
Refering to current language trends, examine the issue of 'language decay' and discuss some common attitudes towards the decline of the English Language.
Don't know the best way to organise my ideas, also looking to see if anyone has anything else they could add:
Language decay - when it becomes vague, ambigious, no longer precise or exact
It is not declining:
- it is changing and evolving
- We must allow it to change otherwise we would still be speaking Shakespearean
- People see it as declining now as they are fearful, anything new is often resisted
Trends people dislike:
Americanisation
- We have been in contact for a while, but we have not changed
Teenspeak
- Informal and sloppy
- Possibily a sublanguage
NetSpeak / TextSpeak
- Not causing decline, it is just another form of the language
- We still know when to use it and when not to
New words
- such as 'gay' 'wicked' 'like' 'but' 'whatever'
Trends that are contributing to the decay:
- PC language, it makes things 'fuzzy' and unclear
Thanks in advance
Well evidently we both go to the same EL tuition :P
I'll probably be writing an essay on this topic over the weekend. Two possible ways I can see this being structured are:
- Based around the subsystems
- Based around specific examples
For the first method I'd base the paragraphs of how language change/decay (depending on what you are arguing) has affected the various subsystems.
For example:
Lexis: - Words dropping out of use.
- Codification of new lexis.
- Adoption of new lexis from extraneous sources (Americanisation etc.)
Morphology:
- The development of new morphological compounds and constructions (netspeak, sms talk)
- American vs British spelling
Syntax:
- The decline in grammar standards.
- Changing perceptions on correct grammar (splitting infinitives etc.)
Semantics:
- Word definitions narrowing
- Word definitions expanding
- Semantic shifts (eg. Semantic shift on the word 'gay' from meaning 'happy' to 'homosexual' and now also used to describe something as 'bad' or 'stupid')
This structure guarantees mention of the subsystems and done well should have clearly distinctive paragraphs, however it's somewhat more cumbersome to work examples in as it's tempting to want to expand outside the one subsystem for a specific example (Americanisation has a lot of discussion points in regards to both lexis and morphology).
The other method is simply an example based approach.
Devote a paragraph to a specific trend or influence on language change/decay and discuss that in regards to the subsystems.
If going by this method I'd be structuring my essay similar to how you've set out your points:
Americanisation
Teenspeak
NetSpeak / TextSpeak
New words
Trends that are contributing to the decay
Just from looking at these points I'm starting to also draw links between each example. Americanisation has heavily influenced Australian teenspeak. The teen generation has been at the forefront of developing NetSpeak/Text Speak. These new developments have begun to be codified due to their habitual use creating new words. However some argue that the acceptance of such developments has had an adverse effect on today's grammar standards.
I'll post another reply once I've finished my essay to see if there's anything else to bring up.
Just a quick run through of your essay in my extremely unqualified opinion:
Age, race/ethnicity and gender are the three key determinants of language use. Do you agree?
The way people use language is determined and influenced by various factors. Although age and race/ethnicity play a vital role in language use, they are also accompanied by other crucial elements such as social class and level of education.
It's good that you jump straight into the question and immediately set out your contention that age, race/ethnicity and gender are key determiners of language use. I would be very cautious about bringing up education because it is extremely tempting to make value judgements with such a point. Other influences could include geographic location (compare the language of rural Australians to those living in an urban environment).
Unlike other determinants, gender varies in its level of influence depending on other factors such as differences in lifestyle. Though there are countless factors, it is these few that have the largest impact on how people interpret and speak the language.
Reaffirming contention in the last sentence of your introductory paragraph is good.
Age is one of the main causes of language differences amongst people. An individual who is older would have been exposed to a larger variety of Englishes compared to someone of younger age. This is a general statement though, as there will always be certain people that may have not been exposed to a range of dialects; however, the fact that only one or two varieties are influencing a person’s speech still affects language use. There is a clear distinction that an individual in their sixties speaks differently to a seventeen year old teenager. This is due to their age differences; the society the sixty year old grew up in is alien compared to the society today. Age plays an even bigger role in language usage during the earlier years of life. A four year old who is still only just consolidating information regarding language will definitely choose words and structure sentences differently to an eight year old. Age and language ability can almost be paired together, one increases alongside the other and therefore age is a key factor of language use.
This paragraph is missing two crucial elements to any English Language essay: Examples and Metalanguage.
You make a number of claims but don't provide any examples to back them up. Expand on language variations between teenagers and older generations by discussing how idiomatic phrases such as "to shoot through like a Bondi tram", "beyond the black stump", "full up to dolly's wax" and "I heard it from the man outside Hoyts" have slowly been phased out of the current generation of teens as they referred to things that have changed since their creation.
Similarly, its interesting you talk about teenagers but make no reference of teenspeak. Teenspeak is ephemeral - the teenspeak of someone from the 80s is different to current teenspeak. Consider how phrases like "cowabunga" and "grouse" reflect generational differences when compared to "sup" and "sick".
I'd also throw some metalanguage terms in there. Examiners will notice if you don't make any mention of the subsystems (their should be a reference to at least one subsystem in every paragraph). Using metalanguage is what is going to differentiate your essay from someone who has not studied English Language.
Race/ethnicity is also attributed to the usage of language. A person’s ethnic background can alter the sound and grammatical structure of sentences, as well as adding words to the individual’s lexicon which have originated from the original culture. For example, someone with an Italian background may pronounce words ending in a consonant with a vowel sound.
I would probably explain why this first-language interference occurs by looking at the Italian language and how many of their words end in a vowel sound.
‘Mushroom’ could become ‘mushroomo’ and ‘football’ as ‘footaballa’.
Try to use IPA over trying to replicate the sound. Using the IPA makes your essay appear more sophisticated and researched.
In this particular case, the first language, which is Italian, is affecting language use in a phonological sense; the pronunciation of words is altered to make it easier for articulation. A different scenario is a person of Chinese ethnicity, where it is a combination of both syntactical and phonological features that are influenced by Chinese.
If your going to bring up Chinese first language interference you need to provide examples of how that will affect language use. Consider the ubiquitous "lah" ending in many Chinese dialects and how this has been imported into Chinese-Australian English by Chinese migrants. Also consider syntactic differences between the two languages and how this has influences these 'ethnolects'.
In short, for race/ethnicity to produce obvious differences in people’s language means it is undoubtedly a fundamental factor of language use.
I don't think you have really provided enough evidence to show you have proven this. (That race/ethnicity produces obvious differences in language)
Gender may be deemed as a key determinant of language use but its impact can vary - other factors also need to be considered. The distinction between a male and female speaker can be obvious at times, but this is due to context differences. For instance, females have a higher tendency to shop for clothing and hence, use more terms relating specific to clothes. In areas where these activities are absent, such as rural parts of Australia, the differences are little. The culture and lifestyle an individual goes through determines how significant their gender is in terms of language.
Again lack of specific examples. Contrast the different semantic fields commonly associated with the genders. You briefly talk about fashion for females but you need to bring up specific examples. You also could contrast this with semantic fields commonly associated with males, such as certain sports. Just ensure you don't talk in absolutes here as a 'fashion' jargon may find itself in the discourse of a male and 'sports' in that of a females.
Where people are situated on the social ladder and how educated they are can dramatically alter how they use language. Both are associated with one another as higher qualifications can lead to a higher salary, and therefore increase exposure to other individuals ‘at the top’. Someone that has completed school to a year 10 level will only have a basic level of competency of the language compared to a university student studying linguistics. A person exposed to educated individuals higher up in society on a constant basis will become aware of subtleties in sentence structure, grammar and also use more sophisticated words. This in turn will mean how they speak will be affected as they are able to adapt these concepts into their own language. Change a person’s social and educational background, and change how they perceive and interpret language.
Be very careful with this argument. Just because someone has had a poor educational background does not necessitate their language will be any worse than someone who has completed secondary education. Make it clear that these are social perceptions and not necessarily correct.
Overall the structure and fluency is fine. It just needs more depth which would have understandably been difficult to demonstrate so early in the year.
-
It's a small world :O - You could probably guess who I am then (well, at least it's narrowed it down to 10 or so possibilities)
Honestly, from the sounds of it you don't need tution :P
Thanks! I gotta go to work now, but I'll be writing my essay later
-
It's a small world :O - You could probably guess who I am then (well, at least it's narrowed it down to 10 or so possibilities)
Honestly, from the sounds of it you don't need tution :P
Thanks! I gotta go to work now, but I'll be writing my essay later
Well I'm the guy who usually sits near the front left corner of the room next to the wall.
I like Tye's tuition because unlike all the other tutors I've seen that just focus on basic structure which I feel I already understand, he focuses more on examples and evidence which can be used to augment your essay. All the stuff he gives us is extremely useful because they are examples which other students are unlikely to use, meaning including them in an essay makes a piece stand out from the rest of the state. Considering I was too lazy to compile a scrapbook at the start of the year (note to next year EL students, DO NOT PASS THIS OFF), the resources he gives us are extremely helpful and allow a lot more depth in essays.
-
there is EL tuition?
would it be too late to join for the last month until exams? :buck2:
-
Tye was pretty boring
-
can somebody help me outh with this one?
How is the language of young australians changing to reflect our evolving identity as a society?
-
u have vate 09 omg epic
-
I admit I am scared of critique (read this off another thread) but ill post this up:
“Speakers adjust the features of the language they use to suit the interpersonal relationship of those involved in the exchange” Discuss the ways that effective speakers change their ways of speaking to suit the context they are in.
Everybody has the ability to change the way they use language. This ability is a necessity to effective communication as there will be times when a feature may not be appropriate for use. Speakers can change their lexical choice, phonology and syntax as well as their pitch, speed and body language all to suit the context that they are in.
Choosing the correct wording is important if people are to maintain they relationship with other participants. The same word cannot be used in the same way in different contexts. Some instances, such as a business meeting, call for more sophisticated and precise words. An example is describing the profitability of a business over a known time period. By saying that ‘there were some profits and some losses but overall we made a loss’, not only does it seem long-winded but it also gives the effect of unprofessionalism and lack of knowledge. The same message can be delivered in two words – “net loss”. Given a casual situation though, this type of language may cause awkwardness or offense as it can be seen as condescending. Teenagers will speak mainly with slang terms such as ‘yo’, ‘whatever’ and ‘cool’. The wording one chooses allows for the most effective communication to take place.
How sounds are articulated may also depend on who the participants are. An accent may be put on, for example the broad Australian accent to portray a certain identity. This accent can be used to show friendliness, honesty and an impression that the individual understands the ‘real’ world. Another example of changing phonetics is when dealing with migrants. Features such as elision, assimilation and reduction would be minimised as migrants (who are not familiar with the language) would have difficultly differentiating sounds. People accommodate their speech according to those involved in the exchange.
The syntax one uses will vary with the situation they are in. Sentences may be cut short if appropriate. Times where there can be an overall reduction in what is being said include a phone or personal conversation. As time speaking to individuals on the phone is not free, ellipsis can occur. A mobile phone conversation can be as short as ‘Dinner. My house at 7.” where parts have been cut out such as “(There will be a) dinner (at) my house at 7 (o’clock) tonight”. Sentences fragments may be acceptable if the situation is informal however, may be unacceptable if the context was a public political speech. As a result, how much or how little an individual speaks is dependant on their audience and their context.
Prosodics and paralinguistics features can add additional meaning to a conversation. If the speed at which an utterance is said is increased, it can indicate excitement, frustration or impatience without any of the emotions being explained verbally. Body language can also indicate the degree of social distance between those in a conversation. A lack of eye contact may be allowed between friends but may be disrespectful when dealing with an employer or a stranger. The features of the language other than the words themselves also are determined by who the speakers are and what context is.
People that are able to change their wording, their articulation, their syntax and their non-verbal features of the language based on the scenario they are dealing with. By doing so they are able to speak appropriately and effectively.
Words: 563
Time: About 55 mins :S
Notes: Unedited and this question came with no stimulus material so I don't think it is a "true" practice question