AC Feedback

[credvice]

Hey guys,

I have my AC SAC on the first day back of term, and would appreciate any feedback on this AC. Our teacher has said this text would be similar to what we get on our SAC, and I was unsure on how to approach the text. I have attached the original text, and placed the AC below.

Thanks 


The above text is a ‘First Dog on the Moon’ cartoon, published in The Guardian Australia on November 27, 2017, in response to the closing of services on the Manus Island Regional Processing Centre for asylum seekers. It is accompanied by comments from internet users, which were made in response to the cartoon. The register of the cartoon is generally formal, whereas an informal register is predominant throughout the comments, however the register is raised slightly through certain formal features. The social purpose of the cartoon is to deliver commentary on the controversial issue of the government policies surrounding asylum seekers, with a secondary social purpose of negotiating social taboos. On the other hand, the social purpose of the comments is to challenge face needs, both of other commenters and the author of the cartoon. The controversial context of the asylum seekers are evident in the cartoon, while the situational context of an online forum as well as the Australian cultural context are both evident in the comments responding to the cartoon.

The register of the cartoon is largely formal, reflected in the use of formal linguistic features. The use of elevated lexis such as ‘brutalise’ and ‘cascading’ (22, 24) increases the register of the cartoon, and comparatively obfuscates the message in the cartoon, which may serve as satire through paralleling the connotations of obfuscation in the phrase ‘great cascading lies’ (23-24). The conflict between the lack of standard grammatical conventions and the use of Standard Australian English reflects both the text type of the cartoon as well as the necessity for coherence to support the social purpose of delivering the social commentary on the asylum seekers, overall raising the register of the text slightly. The register of the comments is generally informal, however use of certain formal features somewhat raises the register. The widespread non-standard use of punctuation such as in ‘Worst. Analogy. Ever.’ (57) can provide emphasis and mirror the use of prosodic features in spoken language, thus decreasing the register of the text. The use of informal lexis by various commenters such as the use of the idiom ‘free-for-all’ (67), the phrase ‘beating up’ (51) and the initialism ‘PNG’ (91) additionally supports an informal register. Conversely, the use of parallelism through repeated interrogatives (95-101) increases the register of the text through allowing for both cohesion and coherence within the comment.

Various linguistic features present within the cartoon support social purposes of delivering commentary on the government policies in relation to the asylum seekers, as well as negotiating social taboos. The parallelism throughout the cartoon creates a sense of memorability, in order to support the social purpose of delivering commentary, as well as to suggest each issue presented has an equal level of importance. In addition, the use of listing (30-35) culminates in a sense of excess, and presents the ignorance of the government, further bolstering the commentary within the cartoon. The juxtaposition of the crudely hand-drawn imagery and the serious nature of the cartoon further contributes to the social commentary of the government policies, through strengthening the impact of the cartoon. Furthermore, the use of the collocation ‘how to’ in the title (1) often used in common contexts trivializes the serious issue of the cartoon, appearing to serve the social purpose of negotiating social taboos. On the other hand, the use of inference (105-107) by PilnTheSky serves to challenge the positive face needs of BeeHenry, by suggesting he is ‘[un]civilized and [un]compassionate’. The use of sarcasm ‘looking forward to the cartoon proposing the solution’ (48) also serves to challenge the positive face needs of the author, in suggesting that the cartoon is futile.

The cultural context of the cartoon is reflected through various linguistic features, such as the use of the deictic expression ‘these men’ (6, 10), requiring the reader to understand the contextual information of the nature of the government policies in relation to the asylum seekers on Manus Island. In addition, the lack of standard grammatical conventions such as the omission of full stops throughout the cartoon reflects the situational context of the cartoon, in which the nature of cartoons often does not require use of punctuation. Similarly, both the situational and cultural context of the comments are supported in the variety of linguistic features. This is evident in the use of the derogatory term ‘wog’ (69) to refer to European migrants, solely seen in Australian English and reflecting the Australian cultural context of the publication. The shift in register to formal as well as the shift in semantic fields to one of an online forum (73-74) additionally reflects the situational context of the online commenting section.

[MissSmiley]

Hey guys...

The above text is a ‘First Dog on the Moon’ cartoon, published in The Guardian Australia on November 27, 2017, in response to the closing of services on the Manus Island Regional Processing Centre for asylum seekers. It is accompanied by comments from internet users, which were made in response to the cartoon. The register of the cartoon is generally formal, whereas an informal register is predominant throughout the comments, however some commentators slightly raise the register is raised slightly through certain formal features. The social purpose of the cartoon is to deliver commentary on the controversial issue of the government policies surrounding asylum seekers, with a secondary social purpose of negotiating social taboos. On the other hand, this comparative can't be used here. one because you haven't said 'on one hand' earlier and second because you're comparing the social purps for two different things. The cartoon and the comments. On the other hand can only be used when you're dealing with the same thing. the social purpose of the commentators is to challenge face needs, both of other commenters and the author of the cartoon. The controversial context of the asylum seekers are is evident in the cartoon, while the situational context of an online forum as well as the Australian cultural context are both evident in the comments responding to the cartoon. I like how you start your sentences with like 'the social purpose is...' and you've signposted your situational (sit) + cultural context, but obviously you'd agree that this intro's too long yeah? For context, you don't even need to mention this much just a line will do. Also, I don't see a reference to the audience in this intro. That's where you can speed things up, and link audience to sit context. So I feel like most of this can in fact go in your paras, so don't stop the suspense by explaining everything in your intro Also, it intro's too long, things can get repetitive in your paras (I know you understand all of this, but just warning you in terms of time as well)

The register of the cartoon is largely formal, reflected in the use of through formal linguistic features. The use of elevated lexis such as ‘brutalise’ and ‘cascading’ (22, 24) increases the register of the cartoon, and comparatively obfuscates don't think this is the right word choice. I know you want to get some snazzy metalang in there for formal lang but there's no ambiguity that these adjectives imply, hence obfuscate isn't the right word. the message in the cartoon, which may serve as satire through paralleling the connotations of obfuscation in the phrase ‘great cascading lies’ (23-24). Woah  There is a LOT going on here. Because you're trying to include so much metalang, I don't really understand your very impressive analysis. Why not just focus on 'satire' for the moment, I really like it! and explain what is satirical i.e. the government's full trust in themselves despite everything's a 'cascading lie' Just don't over-complicate your sentences. The conflict between the lack of standard grammatical conventions and the use of Standard Australian English reflects both the text type of the cartoon this feels like you're saying there's some sort of 'conflict' - also could you be more clear about what you mean for conflict? - in every cartoon. This isn't the case! So you can't really say 'reflects the text type of the cartoon' also, just being really picky, but the cartoon is the text type itself. as well as the necessity for coherence to support the social purpose of delivering the social commentary on the asylum seekers, overall raising the register of the text slightly. Ok. so in this one sentence, you've talked about like a million examples of metalang  sorry that was a hyperbole, but let's at this: standard grammar conventions, SAE, coherence, social purpose, register. To me, this is absolutely too much a pressure for one sentence! Just focus on one bit of metalang or two per sentence.The register of the comments is generally informal, however use of certain formal features somewhat raises the register. The widespread non-standard use of punctuation such as in ‘Worst. Analogy. Ever.’ (57) can provide emphasis and mirror the use of prosodic features in spoken language, thus decreasing the register reflecting the informality of the text. The use of informal lexis by various commenters such as the use of the idiom ‘free-for-all’ (67), the phrase ‘beating up’ (51) and the initialism initialisms are used in formal lang too, so can't really say 'supports an informal register' ‘PNG’ (91) additionally supports an informal register. Conversely, the use of parallelism through repeated interrogatives (95-101) I guess you could say parallel structure through interrogatives, but I also think the conditionals can work better. especially when you have the first part of the conditional being opposite to the second part. this reflects the informality, as it creates ambiguity. but this is just a suggestion increases the register of the text through allowing for both cohesion and coherence within the comment.
Again, don't try and include too much metalang. if you do, you've gotta explain HOW it creates coherence + cohesion. which would be irrelevant to your topic sent about register. So why include more things?
Various linguistic features present within the cartoon support social purposes of delivering commentary on the government policies in relation to the asylum seekers, as well as negotiating social taboos. The parallelism throughout the cartoon creates a sense of memorability, in order to support the social purpose of delivering commentary, as well as to suggest each issue presented has an equal level of importance I'd really like to challenge this! firstly you've got to be clear 'each issue in the cartoon boxes'? and secondly, I never felt they're in equity. Clearly the purpose is to condemn the policies so you need to mention the satire here. Some boxes and the criticisms behind them are emphasised more than other boxes. In addition, the use of listing (30-35) yes, but listing isn't a coherence strategy.culminates in a sense of excess, and presents the ignorance of the government, further bolstering the commentary within the cartoon. The juxtaposition of the crudely hand-drawn imagery and the serious nature of the cartoon further contributes to the social commentary of the government policies, through strengthening the impact of the cartoon is this how coherence is achieved? then you have to really closely link it to HOW it makes it coherent. Furthermore, the use of the collocation ‘how to’ don't think this is a collocation in the title (1) often used in common contexts unclear trivializes the serious issue of the cartoon, appearing to serve the social purpose don't include social purpose in coherence para of negotiating social taboos. On the other hand, the use of inference (105-107) by PilnTheSky serves to challenge the positive face needs of BeeHenry once again, you're bringing in social purpose, by suggesting he is ‘[un]civilized and [un]compassionate’. The use of sarcasm ‘looking forward to the cartoon proposing the solution’ (48) also serves to challenge the positive face needs of the author, in suggesting that the cartoon is futile. make sure you only discuss metalang about coherence and how that squarely aims to achieve coherence.

The cultural context of the cartoon is reflected through various linguistic features, such as the use of the deictic expression ‘these men’ (6, 10), requiring the reader to understand the contextual information of the nature of the government policies in relation to the asylum seekers on Manus Island. this is complicated. The deictic just refers to asylums, therefore linking it to the topic about humanitarian issues In addition, the lack of standard grammatical conventions such as the omission of full stops throughout the cartoon reflects the situational context of the cartoon your topic sent says cultural. so just add in there situational since you're talking about it in your para in which the nature of cartoons often does not require use of punctuation. nice! Similarly, both the situational and cultural context of the comments are supported in t by the he variety of linguistic features. This is evident in the use of the derogatory term ‘wog’ (69) to refer to European migrants, solely seen in Australian English and reflecting the Australian cultural context of the publication. The shift in register to formal as well as the shift in semantic fields to one of an online forum (73-74) this isn't a semantic field. it's the sit context additionally reflects the situational context of the online commenting section.

Good job, credvice!
Most of my comments are just about keeping it simple, using the metalang that's only related to your topic sentence (e.g. coherence, social purpose, etc). Also, at times I do think you tend to summarise the thing. This can easily be avoided by using fewer ling examples than cramming these in one sentence, and instead expanding a bit more on each eg to really link it to the satire and the reference to audience!! I think you're missing audience in the piece too. You know the last box where it says "you" (the interrogative), I interpreted that as the government's voice speaking to us and saying that we too are equally responsible for this crisis, because of our silence and our unconditional trust in the government's policies. In fact, the more we stay silent, the worser it gets. Obviously you could go on the audience point forever, but perhaps you could mention something about this next time!

Please please please don't take my comments as the be all end all thing!! Just giving my interpretations

Thank you!
And all the very best for your SAC !

[MathsQuestIsBad]

Here's mine, I got a 32/50 for FDOTM.

First Dog on the Moon Text
The cartoon ‘how to stop people drowning at sea’ by The Guardian Australia was published on November 27, 2017 involves two text types. , One one comprising the cartoon itself and the other, an online forum discussion following the cartoon., tThe intended audience are Australians who are of adolescent or adult age  with some knowledge of the Australian refugee crisis. There are varying social purposes in the cartoon and in the online discussion. The cartoon’s social purpose is to be satirical and criticise the government’s aggressive behaviour towards refugees, and gain the sympathy support  of the audience. The contributors in the online discussion aim to show sympathy and/or hostility towards the Liberal government and purposely cause offencecriticise  to one another’s views  on the forums. The register of both text types are highly   informal in the cartoon’s satire and the informal discussion between the contributors. The cartoon and discussion revolve around Australia’s current refugee crisis on Manus and Nauru Island that currently house scores of illegal refugees arriving by boat.
The social purposes of the two texts vary significantly, . Tthe cartoon intends to satirise the government’s anti-refugee policies and gain sympathy from viewers, whilst the online discussion involves differing social purposes. The title of the cartoon ‘how to stop people drowning at sea’ (1-2) involves a comic sans like font that is not capitalised; the social purpose of this is to show the audience the seemingly seeming  stupidity and immaturity of their social policies towards refugees. The comic sans font and the non-standard capitalisation allows allow  the audience to sympathise with the childlike behaviour and link it with Liberal’s inability to treat the refugee crisis in a humane way. The conditional sentences ‘if’ (3, 6, 9 etc.) all satirise the seemingly stubborn Turnbull government, that any beneficial solution directed towards the refugees would result in the unrealistic situation that refugees would 'drown at sea’ (5, 8, 11 etc.). This allows the Australian audience to see the cartoonist view that the government has failed failures of the right-wing and sympathise fully with the cartoon.
Within the discussion, individuals have varying social purposes, user BeguiledCrumb shares his discontent towards the cartoon as the cartoon seems to lack a solution for the refugee crisis “Looking forward to the cartoon proposing the solution.” (48) Another user by the name of Nick Thiwerspoon shows his sympathy towards the cartoon and purposely shows frustration by another user’s lack of sympathy through the repetitious rhetoric “So it’s OK (sic) to deny them medical attention? It’s OK to break their spirit?” (95).
The register of the cartoon and the following online discussion are both informal. In the cartoon, the contractions ‘don’t’ (6, 9, 13 etc.) are all instances of informality that is considered non-standard in formal texts. The contractions aim to economise the text whilst also decreasing the social distance between the author and the audience by sounding more humorous and childish. The discussion is also informal and this is most evident in BeguiledCrumb’s response to Jeffrey’s misogyny analogy “Worst. Analogy. Ever.” (57) The non-standard syntax includes a dummy subject as an anaphoric reference to Jeffrey’s analogy while also employing a full-stop at every lexeme. Whilst it is informal, it should not be confused with decreasing social distance, as the language used by the contributor is to offend.
The sarcasm of the cartoon is consistent with the situational and cultural context. The cartoon takes a more political point of view by mocking Liberal members and shaming them for their supposed stupidity “the minister said there were no children in detention…” (26-29), this reflects to the situational context of the political discourse in regard to the refugee crisis where hundreds were left on Manus Island without bare necessities. Furthermore, because the cartoon is aimed towards conservative politicians, the author’s tone is quite politically correct. This is reflected in the title “…drowning at sea” (2) which requires the inference of the popular political deixis and thus, narrows the satire towards politicians only. It then narrows down conservative members by using strong satire and irony “If we give these men medicine people will drown at sea” (3-6). This echoes the cultural context of the Australian left-wing media slamming the right-wing; furthermore, as the media is often backed up by corporations” of we listen to the… ABC, SBS and even the Murdoch Press people will drown at sea”, they have a culture of not just informing the public but also having a particular bias to gain sympathy from the audience. This is again achieved through the author’s accusations of right-wing politicians but the author does not target their followers as it allows for them to sympathise with him without causing offence.
The discussion reflects the situational context of the refugee crisis and also the cultural context of the Australian internet. TangoTwoTwo shares his doubt about the refugees being economic immigrants instead, this is met by Simon’s comment which attacks Tango’s comment “Do you have any evidence to support that “thought”, or was it just a few random neurons firing?” (78-79) Simon’s metaphor “a few random neurons firing” is typical of the Australian culture of being blunt but also reflects the internet where public appearance is not required and hence, comments that are a threat to face are rampant. Maintaining each other’s negative face is almost non-existent, again apparent in BeguiledCrumb’s aforementioned comment (57) and Rotsock’s comment “We need a solution before we can stop being stupid and cruel?” (60) Which is directed towards BeguiledCrumb’s offensive comment. However, the debate in the comments section is mainly about the situational context regarding the mistreatment of refugees. BeeHenry debunks the author in saying that the mistreatment is a just action “… strong deterrent to them attempting to come here and that’s actually fair enough.” Aussiejed then rebuts BeeHenry in that there is no deterrent “yet boats still arrive on the east and north east coasts from PNG with Asian descent refugees. In those magical words: “Please explain”.” (91-92) the final deixis’ required inference of Paulin Hanson’s comment in 1997 is made clear through the cataphoric reference of “those magical words”.

Messed this one real bad, ultimately because of misuse of the new metalang we've been learning.