Language analysis structure

[SocialRhubarb]

Hey guys, what is it important to mention in the introduction and conclusion of language analysis?

Also, is it better to just write on an article from start to finish, addressing the author's points in the order they appear, or to pick out several major strategies which the author employs and write on those in separate body paragraphs?

[Stick]

This is what I usually try to include in my introduction:
- Contextualising statement addressing the issue and providing a bit of background information
- Author (this might not always be applicable; eg: editorial)
- Text type
- Title
- Tone (optional - if it's rather crucial to the author's argument, or if it changes during the piece, then it may be better to leave it to your actual analysis so that you can show the assessor that you've understood the voice and why it was used, how it was achieved and its intended effect)
- Audience
- Contention
- Key arguments (optional - you generally include this if the author makes any side points in addition to the main argument)
- Date
- Publication

The acronym is ATTTACKDP (+ contextualising statement) if you need help remembering it.

Some people say that you don't need to write a conclusion for a language analysis, but I always think that you should put one in. The requirement is to write a coherent piece of prose, and a convention of an essay is that it has a conclusion. What you put in it ultimately depends on what you're given. It's relatively safe to conclude with another contextualising statement. However, I once did a practice language analysis and the feature article provided was written rather poorly as the examiners deliberately wanted students to identify that the author's intentions may not be realised. If you feel you can carefully address the author's degree of success, without providing an opinion-based evaluation of the text, then do this. It's something that I've only really done that one time because it was obvious; I haven't come across a similar piece ever since.

The way you go about structuring the body is again up to you. I used to try and pick three major ideas that the author raises and base my body paragraphs around them, and this can work, but the issue is that you can lose the ability to discuss how multiple persuasive techniques work together to bring about some effect. I still do three body paragraphs, but it's broken up into 'beginning of piece', 'middle of piece' and 'end of piece'. It addresses the aforementioned issue, it's generally easier to write since you don't have to piece together phrases from the entire text, and you don't have to search for three major ideas (I did one where there was only two and it was very difficult for me to write a complete paragraph on something else).

I hope this helps.

[Limista]

Hey guys, what is it important to mention in the introduction and conclusion of language analysis?

Also, is it better to just write on an article from start to finish, addressing the author's points in the order they appear, or to pick out several major strategies which the author employs and write on those in separate body paragraphs?

It's better to do what's bolded, I think.

There should be some type of relationship between your 3/4 body paragraphs - like a holistic idea that is being drawn into 3/4 separate threads. For example, you might write about how we are positioned to view the writer, victims, the accused in each paragraph. There is a similar notion between these three paragraphs here; that is, each para has to do with a person.