Comment on my language analysis

[Brie Way]

Please let me know where I can improve!! I am totally confused as to how to write language analysis'!!!

Language Analysis- All dogs microchipped by 2015 under new laws

The issue of ‘dangerous dogs’ has gained increasing prominence after the increasing number of dog attacks. (Have to add in name, author, date) The image used reiterates that dogs are a serious threat to society and action must be taken. The article lays emphasis on the new laws Western Australia are making to minimise attacks from dangerous dogs. The third piece are internet comments, expressing opinion from people in the wider community who have had experience with dangerous or non-dangerous dogs.
The photograph, with the grotesque and threatening dog with its bared teeth straight away has an emotional effect on the reader. The forceful image sends a clear message that these dogs are extremely dangerous. Furthermore, the words in the headline such as, ‘aggressive’ and ‘dangerous’ is visually juxtaposed in the picture of the dog. This indirect repetition makes the author’s introduction of dogs as a threat stronger. The image states the context by introducing visually the idea of dangerous dogs. Conversely, the caption clearly states the dominant discourse of the wider community, introducing the idea, ‘Should some breeds be banned altogether?’, drawing attention to the contention of the article. The overall purpose of the image is an emotional appeal of self-preservation. The domineering and unpleasant picture of the dog’s bared teeth makes the audience feel a mood of threat.
The article, ‘TOUGHER penalties will apply for offences involving dangerous dogs under proposed new laws in Western Australia’, is a formal and rational piece. The message of the article is delivered in a forthright manner and outline exactly what action are been taken so the government has more power over the dangerous dogs. On the other hand, the third persuasive piece consists of posts from people in the general community and they are very opinionated. By addressing us informally the two authors are establishing a sense of intimacy with the audience. This allows their opinions to have more impact on the reader. The article is written formally with correct punctuation and it complies with the writing guidelines; conversely the posts are written informally with many spelling errors, missing punctuation and incorrect use of English. They are also written using the first person narrative, whereas the article is written in third person. Both the posts state that not all dogs are dangerous and they are only threating if they are brought up wrong. The article has an appeal of logic and nationality, whilst the posts appeal to emotion and empathy.
The article uses dog terminology such as ‘microchipped’ and ‘dangerous dogs’ combined with Legal terms such as ‘legislation’ and ‘The Dog Amendment Bill’ to make the article more formal and authentic. By doing this the author is conveying to the audience that they are an expert in the topic they are discussing. Expertise are widely more recognised and believed as they hold a certain respect from the rest of society.  The author sets a forceful tone by the words of aggression such as, ‘attacked’ and ‘aggressive’. However, the tone of the article provides an answer to this, by the author combining words that bring assurance to the audience that they will be safe such as, ‘controls’ and ‘protect’. The writer also uses fact in the article to make their argument stronger. By introducing the truthful fact that microchips cost, “between $45 and $70,” makes the readers believe that the whole article is fact, therefore they are easily persuaded.
On the other hand, the opinion pieces use more aggressive and upfront persuasive techniques to get their point across. The used of the anecdote by, ‘Chris of Perth’ makes his post more persuasive. The anecdote make the writer’s evidence more real to the reader because since this is an actual event that has occurred, it gives more legitimacy to the post.  Furthermore, the words such as, ‘threatened’ creates an emotional effect on the reader. By saying the dogs attack when they feel threatened the writer turns the idea that they are dangerous and are around places blame on owners, not dogs.
The first two persuasive pieces, whilst the image is emotional and the article is rational, introduce the idea that there needs to be tougher penalties on the ‘dangerous dogs’. On the other hand, the opinionative pieces bring in the idea that if the dogs are nurtured correctly they won’t attack.

[Flor]

Please let me know where I can improve!! I am totally confused as to how to write language analysis'!!!

Language Analysis- All dogs microchipped by 2015 under new laws

The issue of ‘dangerous dogs’ has gained increasing prominence after the increasing number of dog attacks. (Have to add in name, author, date) The image used reiterates that dogs are a serious threat to society and action must be taken. The article Not the article, the author. Remember, the article doesn't write itself. lays places an emphasis on the recent implementation of the "title of the law" (WA) aimed new laws Western Australia are making to minimise attacks from dangerous dogs. The third piece are internet Attached with a series ofcomments, expressing detailing the opinions from peopledo you reckon you could be more specific with this? in the wider community who have had experience with dangerous or non-dangerous dogs.Is this the end of your intro? Where is your target audience? tone? Form? (I'm going to assume you're going to add that in once you've included the author etc etc)

lol, I'm so lazy. I'll come back to this if someone else doesn't mark it by Tuesday.

The photograph, with the grotesque and threatening dog with its bared teeth straight away has an emotional effect on the reader. The forceful image sends a clear message that these dogs are extremely dangerous. Furthermore, the words in the headline such as, ‘aggressive’ and ‘dangerous’ is visually juxtaposed in the picture of the dog. This indirect repetition makes the author’s introduction of dogs as a threat stronger. The image states the context by introducing visually the idea of dangerous dogs. Conversely, the caption clearly states the dominant discourse of the wider community, introducing the idea, ‘Should some breeds be banned altogether?’, drawing attention to the contention of the article. The overall purpose of the image is an emotional appeal of self-preservation. The domineering and unpleasant picture of the dog’s bared teeth makes the audience feel a mood of threat.

The article, ‘TOUGHER penalties will apply for offences involving dangerous dogs under proposed new laws in Western Australia’, is a formal and rational piece. The message of the article is delivered in a forthright manner and outline exactly what action are been taken so the government has more power over the dangerous dogs. On the other hand, the third persuasive piece consists of posts from people in the general community and they are very opinionated. By addressing us informally the two authors are establishing a sense of intimacy with the audience. This allows their opinions to have more impact on the reader. The article is written formally with correct punctuation and it complies with the writing guidelines; conversely the posts are written informally with many spelling errors, missing punctuation and incorrect use of English. They are also written using the first person narrative, whereas the article is written in third person. Both the posts state that not all dogs are dangerous and they are only threating if they are brought up wrong. The article has an appeal of logic and nationality, whilst the posts appeal to emotion and empathy.
The article uses dog terminology such as ‘microchipped’ and ‘dangerous dogs’ combined with Legal terms such as ‘legislation’ and ‘The Dog Amendment Bill’ to make the article more formal and authentic. By doing this the author is conveying to the audience that they are an expert in the topic they are discussing. Expertise are widely more recognised and believed as they hold a certain respect from the rest of society.  The author sets a forceful tone by the words of aggression such as, ‘attacked’ and ‘aggressive’. However, the tone of the article provides an answer to this, by the author combining words that bring assurance to the audience that they will be safe such as, ‘controls’ and ‘protect’. The writer also uses fact in the article to make their argument stronger. By introducing the truthful fact that microchips cost, “between $45 and $70,” makes the readers believe that the whole article is fact, therefore they are easily persuaded.
On the other hand, the opinion pieces use more aggressive and upfront persuasive techniques to get their point across. The used of the anecdote by, ‘Chris of Perth’ makes his post more persuasive. The anecdote make the writer’s evidence more real to the reader because since this is an actual event that has occurred, it gives more legitimacy to the post.  Furthermore, the words such as, ‘threatened’ creates an emotional effect on the reader. By saying the dogs attack when they feel threatened the writer turns the idea that they are dangerous and are around places blame on owners, not dogs.
The first two persuasive pieces, whilst the image is emotional and the article is rational, introduce the idea that there needs to be tougher penalties on the ‘dangerous dogs’. On the other hand, the opinionative pieces bring in the idea that if the dogs are nurtured correctly they won’t attack.