ATAR Notes: Forum
VCE Stuff => VCE English Studies => VCE Subjects + Help => VCE English Language => Topic started by: stonecold on September 26, 2010, 08:22:57 pm
-
Meh. Exam is coming up. Gonna have some q's which need answering.
Feel free to add you own.
How would you describe the voiced 'h' phoneme which is typical of middle eastern accents?
And it is kind of evident in ethnic broad english.
-
More importantly, what is the difference between slang and colloquial language?
-
More importantly, what is the difference between slang and colloquial language?
slang is colloquial language, they are just informal languages.
slang is more between a group for example teenagers using slang to their friends 'sup brah' differs from for example 'crocs' being a colloquialism which is just a non-standard lexeme.
that's how i think of it anyways.
-
What are peoples thoughts on this sentence?
'If a warm dish or a warm bottle of wine is placed in the fridge, the Active Smart system senses the change in temperature and directs the cold air accordingly.'
It is from the Kirsten Fox Book.
Complex or compound-complex sentence?
Answers say the former, but I think it is the latter...
-
Also, is 'will' a modal or not?
-
yea 'will' is a modal verb.
-
oh does any1 know if there is any chance there will be MC questions??
-
there could be. there are the same amount of questions as last year.
so they can, if they make it into a 1 a. b. c. format
-
can we pretend that airplanes in the nightskies are like shooting stars?
-
can we pretend that airplanes in the nightskies are like shooting stars?
Frankly....no
-
When an essay topic wants you to discuss 'public language', wat should we mention???
-
When an essay topic wants you to discuss 'public language', wat should we mention???
this may help you chocolate
How is language used to confuse, mislead or obfuscate in the twenty-first century? Discuss in relation to public language. Refer to at least two subsystems of language in your response.
We consciously know how to use language, while generally being guided by the principals of appropriateness. However in the public domain, language can be used to deliberately understate, or overstate. Semantically, doublespeak misleads, euphemisms soften while lexically neologisms and bureaucratic jargon can be the root of confusion. Add to that, the use of clever syntactic structures, one realizes that, indeed, the public is obfuscated.
Semantically, doublespeak and euphemisms can be misleading. Doublespeak is language deliberately constructed to disguise or distort its actual meaning. The recent financial crises bought with it “Rightsize”, “layoff” or “headcount adjustment” all double speak for the mass sacking of employees and used by large corporations such as Myers and Ford. The Wars in both Afghanistan and Iraq have Coined euphemisms such as “Area Denial munitions”, “service” and “wet work” which represent; landmine, disable a target and assassination respectively. Politically being in an election year Leaders have ramped up their misleading doublespeak. Prime Minister Kevin Rudd periodically reference of the Christmas island detention facility as an “internment facility” instead of prison as coined by its detainees. In Opposition Leader Tony Abbott’s new book “battlelines” he calls Kevin Rudd’s own doublespeak “systematic explanation” which is doublespeak itself. This use of doublespeak and euphemisms in the public domain is a clear representation of how language is used to mislead.
Some of the Intellectual lexical inventions designed, serve purely to confuse the public. The inventiveness of Australian’s shows with their creative neologisms. Tony Abbott once called Australia a “Pollination”, meaning a country of politicians. The Greens have been known to call liberals “Libtards”. In the recent health debate at the press club, neologisms such as “Block funding” and “shovel ready” were thrown around. These neologisms only serve to confuse their captive audiences who are too afraid to admit their intellectual shortcomings and hence remain confused. Elections are notorious for their perplexing jargon. It hasn’t been since 1974 that Britain has had a “hung parliament”, the need for an “absolute majority” and the winner is the “first-past-the-post” are all jargon terms that really fail to register any solid connotations. Obviously neologisms and election jargon are clear examples of confusing language that is used in the public realm.
The distinctive syntactic structures that are employed in the public field are indeed only measures used to obfuscate. Modal auxiliaries are commonplace in the public theater and bring with them a positive connotation. In last months health debate Liberal leader Tony Abott said “we can fix the situation with hospital beds”, while Prime Minister Rudd said “the labor government can fix this problem” the modal auxiliary of can does not mean they will follow this through but rather tricks the public into thinking that they will. The use of a passive voice……………..
The register we use in the public domain often contravenes the principals of appropriateness. Semantically, lexically and syntactically the choices we make in the public realm supply no more than to mislead, confuse and obfuscate the audience.
And here is another one :)
Prompt: ‘Our language use changes every time we speak or write; we are proficient at choosing the “right” language for the occasion.’ Discuss the factors which influence our choice of language and explain why we must adjust our language accordingly.
response:
Whether consciously or subconsciously it seems evident that the principals of appropriateness are upheld. Politicians and public servants have mastered the use of “right” language. Changing societal expectations and group membership are key dynamics that must also be considered.
Politicians and public servant are the masters language that’s misleading, confusing or appeasing. With the use of modal verbs politicians are promising nothing, Liberal leader Tony Abott “We can fix the situation with hospital beds”, Prime minister Kevin Rudd “We can stop the deluge of refugees”. Saying “We can” does not me “We will” leaving there election promises with no base. Neologisms such as “threw the roof”, “block funding” and “lay the foundations” were all used in the recent health debate and serve to confuse the audience as they fail to register something meaningful. Non-discriminatory language has even started to infiltrate our police force, which is now restricted when identifying criminals to using the lexemes of “Caucasian”, “Asian”, “Aboriginal” and “Other” even though it significantly hampers their ability to apprehend the offenders. This is not restricted to Australia, the Obama administration has gone from “global war on terror” to calling it an “overseas contingency mission”. Politicians and public servants use this mastery of “right” language for their own purposes and obviously they achieve them.
Societal values are forever changing. Lexical gambits that were once considered euphemisms such as “African-American”, “Shell Shock”, “Disabled” are no longer accepted and have been replaced with “People of colour”, “Post Traumatic stress disorder” and “differently-abled”. Bureaucracies and the Military have adapted to these changing societal values and have coined euphemisms such as “sunshine unit” for a leaking nuclear power plant. McDonald’s no longer refer to putting food into a microwave but are “putting it in the queue”. This extends to the military who have been using the term for their hit list, “deck of cards”, by calling the known terrorist an inanimate object such as the “jack of clubs” or “queen of diamond” it dehumanises the targets and makes them sound more sinister. These changing values also after the way we talk about taboo topics. Death for instance is the hallmark of taboo. This stems from the ancient thoughts that to speak of death was to invite death. “Death”, “croaked” and “died” are not acceptable ways to talk about this taboo topic instead “passed away”, “passed on” or “cashed in their chips” are only accepted. As society changes so does what is the “right” language.
The different group we belong to is a vital dynamic in our choice of language. A trade mark of what groups one belongs to are jargon lexemes, can serve to exclude. “Productivity”, “arbitrage” and “Amortization” are lexical items that would probably not be understood by the average Joe Blow and hence if it were used when he was present in the discourse he would be excluded by the interlocutors. Metaphors such as “blue chip”, “flame out” and “goodwill” also show this. Slang can be an inclusive language. “LOL”, “GTG” and “CBF” are slang terms that teens use due to their need to be included. Advertisers target specific groups by using specific lexemes, for instance one of the latest nestle ad’s says “It’s better to lol in person,” which is instantly identifiable with the teenspeak sociolect and builds a social rapport with them. The “right “language and identifying what is right is affect greatly by group membership.
What dictates what is “right” language extends far and wide and these examples show how important this choice is. Politicians and public servants lead the way in there use of language also. Groups and societal values differ from context to context and hence so does the language used. Choosing this “right” language is both important but natural.
-
What are peoples thoughts on this sentence?
'If a warm dish or a warm bottle of wine is placed in the fridge, the Active Smart system senses the change in temperature and directs the cold air accordingly.'
It is from the Kirsten Fox Book.
Complex or compound-complex sentence?
Answers say the former, but I think it is the latter...
Im going to go with compound-complex due to the structure of both the clauses together and the fact that a complex is joined :)
-
Also, is 'will' a modal or not?
Is a modal auxiliary as it denotes the possibility of the action occurring, its just that instead of the action maybe occurring such as with modals like "may", it definitely will occur
-
oh thnx mumakai, i've done these topics b4, but i was wondering, when asked to talk about public language, do we onli haf to menion doublespeak, or is there more to it?
-
It really depends on the exact topic. Doublespeak is often used in the public domain, so it could definitely be mentioned
-
I know I probably sound really stupid so close to the exam, but I'm really struggling with the difference between Coherence and Cohesion? Does anyone have any good definition for that could help?
-
Living Lingo:
Coherence: The semantic connections that exist within a text to make it meaningful; ie, if a text is coherent it makes sense.
Cohesion: The linguistic connections and ties that exist between the words and sentences to give structure to a text.
Heinemann EL:
Coherence: refers to how well a text is understood. Factors influencing coherence include the users' knowledge of the world, the inferences they make based on the text and the assumptions they make about what is being communicated.
Cohesion: refers to text that holds together sensibly for the reader - text that flows logically from one point to the next. Cohesion is achieved through the skilled use of cohesive ties - devices used to signpost for the reader the way through the text.
-
I know I probably sound really stupid so close to the exam, but I'm really struggling with the difference between Coherence and Cohesion? Does anyone have any good definition for that could help?
yeah im the same. Can hardly differentiate. Even knowing the definitions doesnt make anything in my head click.
-
Just me, or are VCAA playing scare tactics with all these lines in the new exams?
Look at the examiners report, and you could write what they've got there in like half the space...
bastards with their mind games...
-
My teacher is going to assess this year, and they had some "Training" for assessing.
They cannot disclose to anyone what they learnt, but I sort of understood through
the 'lexical ambiguity', double speak, and stylistic features such as synonyms, that
they prefer direct responses.
It doesn't have to be at length. As long as it is clear, and has answered the question
adequately, then there is no issue at all. (sort of like dotpoints, but slightly more expanded
version)
-
What would you gyz talk about for this topic?
How are the linguistic features of public language used to exercise power and authority in contemporary
Australian society?
-
How is 'Hosing down driveways, paths, concrete and paved areas is not permitted.' an example of passive voice? (VCAA 2006)
-
What would you gyz talk about for this topic?
How are the linguistic features of public language used to exercise power and authority in contemporary
Australian society?
Sounds like a thinly veiled question about political language, discuss in the same way as you would political language
I guess you could also talk about power in other forms like advertising or police but i'd go down the political language road
This essentially talks about language in the public (Eg. Lots of people hear it, politicians speaking, newspapers, TV advertisements) and how it is used to exercise power and authority, just intuitively for me this sounds like its kind of talking about the power of law and politics and the rule of law. So, i'd go down the path of talking about political language and political speech, just tie it into how it gives them power.
-
How is 'Hosing down driveways, paths, concrete and paved areas is not permitted.' an example of passive voice? (VCAA 2006)
Passive and Active voice pretty much are determined by the order of the subject and object in the sentence.
The subject is the thing doing the action or performing something
The object is getting done (semantical pun?), it's getting something done to it
The object in this case is the driveway, path, concrete and paved areas.
In cases it is fine and acceptable to eliminate the subject (Ie. You using the hose) and i think that is what happened here...
The active voice version of this would be....
Yeah i see your problem..
-
How is 'Hosing down driveways, paths, concrete and paved areas is not permitted.' an example of passive voice? (VCAA 2006)
Passive and Active voice pretty much are determined by the order of the subject and object in the sentence.
The subject is the thing doing the action or performing something
The object is getting done (semantical pun?), it's getting something done to it
The object in this case is the driveway, path, concrete and paved areas.
In cases it is fine and acceptable to eliminate the subject (Ie. You using the hose) and i think that is what happened here...
The active voice version of this would be....
Yeah i see your problem..
Yeah they have eliminated the agent, as it is implied, and detracts from the authoritative nature of the piece if included.
-
if that's the passive, then wouldnt the active be:
You are not permitted to hose down the driveway etc..
this sounds much more authoritative, but who knows, there could be another active version that I'm not thinking of atm.
-
What would that sentence been in active voice just out of interest... i couldn't think of a very coherent transformation of it into active..
Maybe something like: "It is prohibited for you to hose down driveways, paths, concrete and paved areas."
Yeah, it also sounds more authoritative to me...
I thought active was generally more authoritative and direct where as passive is used to be more polite in some instances or hide some information (i don't have a very good example but you could delete the subject and make the blame for a particular act seem more collective)
I was wrong about finding weapons in iraq (Active)
Weapons of mass destruction were not found in iraq [by me... my bad guys] (Passive)
You can kind of see what im trying to illustrate right guys
-
No it is less authoritative to use pronouns as they personalise the text, whearas by using nominalisation and by excluding the people who the measures affect, it creates distance and comes across as more powerful and authoritative.
-
I'll mentally note that down, cheers mate
We need some kind of thread where we list out the key concepts or try write an essay each or something.. i think that would be helpful
----------------------------------------------
Question:
How much metalanguage should a "good" essay have? (Eg. Essay 4 here )
I've been reading "good" english language essays and they don't have all that much metalanguage....
They don't really seem to target at least 2 subsystems either
I pepper my essays here and there with metalanguage quiet a decent bit so the difference rings some bells...
(This is english language though... if we dont have metalanguage what do we have..)
-
i was just wondering do examiners go on this forum and read essays or look at what with been discussing?? because l've used many examples of the english language resources in here..
-
is intake of breath a prosodic feature?
vcaa examiners reports seem to think so...
i always though they were paralinguistic, like laughter...or is that wrong?
-
I think paralinguistic features have affect on the utterance (such as laughter and body language, swaying hands) but intake of breath would be an utterance itself would it not? idk lol
-
just a question..
wats it called when the word "them" changes to "em"
elision?>
-
laughter is prosodic.
phonologically em is elision yes.
-
what's the function of parallelism?