Comparing in Language Analysis

[Willba99]

Hey guys,
I've seen this a fair few times in the last few weeks so to clarify: there's nothing at all on the LA marking criteria about comparisons. That means that, unless two or more pieces are explicitly linked (eg. Author B refers to Author A's argument that ... so that Author B's audience feels...), there's no benefit from, say, incorporating two or more pieces into the same paragraph (eg. one para that talks about the tone of all the pieces, one that talks about their inclusive language, etc.). Just thought I'd post this because I've seen a few people wondering how to compare properly in their LA; you don't need to do it. I won't go as far as saying not to compare, because if your English teacher has taught you to compare in LA then he's probably right, but don't stress out if you're thinking your comparisons aren't up to scratch.

NB I'm a Year 12 so at the end of the day I might be wrong lol

[First Aid]

I'd actually love to know what others opinions are on this since my school has placed a heavy emphasis on comparison but my tutor has said otherwise. I also know that some of my friends from other schools have been told no comparison is needed.

[plsbegentle]

I personally like to integrate the main piece and the sub-arguments in one paragraph, instead of separating them into individual paragraphs. I try to find a point of difference between the pieces and say something like "In stark contrast, this author however coaxes that...". This way, i find that it adds flow to my essay and an easy transition, which I'd much prefer than starting another paragraph.

[gnaf]

I personally like to integrate the main piece and the sub-arguments in one paragraph, instead of separating them into individual paragraphs. I try to find a point of difference between the pieces and say something like "In stark contrast, this author however coaxes that...". This way, i find that it adds flow to my essay and an easy transition, which I'd much prefer than starting another paragraph.

what do you mean by main piece + sub arguments? as 1 para per argument found in both pieces?

[plsbegentle]

what do you mean by main piece + sub arguments? as 1 para per argument found in both pieces?

yeah

[Willba99]

I personally like to integrate the main piece and the sub-arguments in one paragraph, instead of separating them into individual paragraphs. I try to find a point of difference between the pieces and say something like "In stark contrast, this author however coaxes that...". This way, i find that it adds flow to my essay and an easy transition, which I'd much prefer than starting another paragraph.

I agree to some extent. I can see the appeal, but it’s not something that I like as I think it blows my paras out if I want to write about in detail. Anyway, if it works for you, great!

[shiba woof woof]

I personally like to integrate the main piece and the sub-arguments in one paragraph, instead of separating them into individual paragraphs. I try to find a point of difference between the pieces and say something like "In stark contrast, this author however coaxes that...". This way, i find that it adds flow to my essay and an easy transition, which I'd much prefer than starting another paragraph.

but what if you're unable to find a comparison between two arguments in the two texts. Would you not analyse pieces of information until there is something worthy of comparison?
Also, what if the two texts are an article and a small comment/reply. I can't think of a way you could continuously make comparisons considering the lengths of the two texts differ greatly.

[Willba99]

but what if you're unable to find a comparison between two arguments in the two texts. Would you not analyse pieces of information until there is something worthy of comparison?
Also, what if the two texts are an article and a small comment/reply. I can't think of a way you could continuously make comparisons considering the lengths of the two texts differ greatly.

For clarification, I think plsbegentle is specifically referring to times when there are two beefy texts or one longer one with multiple comments.

[plsbegentle]

but what if you're unable to find a comparison between two arguments in the two texts. Would you not analyse pieces of information until there is something worthy of comparison?
Also, what if the two texts are an article and a small comment/reply. I can't think of a way you could continuously make comparisons considering the lengths of the two texts differ greatly.

No, then i would just analyse separately, but usually majority of essays i've written usually have a main article + a comment/reply that contradicts the main authors contention, which i find extremely easy for comparison.

If the main articles take up a full page and a comment/reply takes up 1/4, majority of my analysis will be focused on the main article with a small proportion of it going into the comment/reply in that one paragraph. In doing this, for 3 body paragraphs, the sum of the analysis on the comment/reply usually adds up to basically a full paragraph as when you do it separately. And its only recently, I've started doing this, the reading and comparison section of the course actually made me quite efficient at identifying points of differences/similarities quite quickly.

EDIT: Willba, i think it can work for both, i did it for the 2015 English exam (two beefy text) and the 2016 exam ( one big main piece and a comment).

[michaelcoward]

So therefore including anything past just minimal comparison would be a waste of writing time right? And how would you go about structuring a page long piece + quarter page piece + image with no real emphasis on comparison?

[shiba woof woof]

So therefore including anything past just minimal comparison would be a waste of writing time right? And how would you go about structuring a page long piece + quarter page piece + image with no real emphasis on comparison?

Take for example the 2016 LA which includes a page long piece, quarter page article and a cartoon.

I would write about 2-3 body paragraphs analysing the first article, and then talk about the 2nd article for one paragraph, and the image in 1 paragraph.
When i start to analyse the 2nd article and cartoon, I would begin with a comparison word like similarly or conversely. I would reference the 1st article during my analyse of the 2nd article and image but i wouldn't focus on comparing.

In fact, in the examination report VCAA states
"There was no expressed expectation that students compared the language used by each of the
writers, but many offered astute insights by exploring Wiley’s language against Warwick’s."

[meganrobyn]

The problem is that the published marking criteria doesn't say much about *anything*, and 2017 is a new 3/4 Study Design so there's no Chief Assessor elaboration to go off. The marking criteria say that you need to show a sophisticated understanding of the arguments, the positioning of the audience and the way in which the author(s) do(es) that. But what makes an understanding sophisticated? Perhaps relevant comparisons. The assessment panel will decide the specifics this Friday. Until then, we're all just speculating.

My own personal view is that there is no point giving you multiple texts if there are no connections between them, in terms of arguments OR strategies. The reason a comparative TR has been added to the course is because looking at two things side-by-side helps you see more in both of them; that's the only reason to give you more than one text in LA, too. There are a range of ways you can do it, but that's why I'm in favour of making the connections between pieces in your analysis where those connections are interesting and meaningful.