Language Analysis

[derivativex]

You made a thread praising the vcaa. what the fuck?

I sure did.  I loved the piece.

[kurrymuncher]

sigh

[tomygun_123]

I don't know what everyone is talking about, I found section C to be very simple, I could have gone on for far longer than what I wrote if I had time. And there was a clear contention...

The contention was definitely not clear, this was evident since there was NO contention, he had many opinions, it was just a matter of choosing which one sounded least rudimentary... you cannot argue, and i think 99% of the state would agree that the article was junk compared to other years, it was not an interesting topic and was also nothing prominent, they should have done something written in a newspaper or a letter and not a blog/webpage/online journal/magazine...

lol he was clearly contending that we should vouch for technological advancement and not be afraid of change

go back and read the article, he poses 3 or 4 minor contentions of his own that do not relate to his general contention... trust me, go back and read, think clearly and you will understand what im saying, it was a crap article, simple as that. 

[d0minicz]

i agree with the slab of shit analogy

[EvangelionZeta]

I agree with the topic creator.  Whilst I didn't sit the exam myself, after reading the article I believe it was fairly cohesive and straightforward; people are just whining because it isn't the same clear-cut formulaic piece as generic newspaper social issue article #4654.  The contention was definitely not ambiguous (just say something along the lines "Voxi praises the virtues of the digital age" or "Voxi contends that rather than something to be feared, the digital age is to be welcomed with excitement"), and his "minor contentions" are just subpoints of his main topic.  The one thing I will grant is that the image was VERY open in regards to what you could say about it, but instead of being impossible to analyse it's more of a question of choosing what to say in particular.

[lilyrose]

i thought the audience was mainly aimed at the older generation? oh crap...

[simpak]

i thought the audience was mainly aimed at the older generation? oh crap...

The audience were users of the internet; the audience changed halfway through, there was a turn.
At first, it was the general internet user.  Later, he begins talking to the younger generation and praising them for what he claims the older find difficult to understand.
It could have been identified as a technique.

[bleh]

I actually thought it was a decent article to analyse. The fact 'Voxi' contradicted themselves so much made it easier to write about i thought. It meant you could talk about the persuasiveness off the piece being...well not so persuasive..

Not sure if anyone took this spin on the picture, but the quote on the page before was talking about how technology diminishes cognitive abilities, the next thing we see a head with no brain? Instead chips and such.. Perhaps persuades the reader to think technology really does take over our brain & therefore not agree with Voxi..

[simpak]

Not sure if anyone took this spin on the picture, but the quote on the page before was talking about how technology diminishes cognitive abilities, the next thing we see a head with no brain? Instead chips and such.. Perhaps persuades the reader to think technology really does take over our brain & therefore not agree with Voxi..

The image was relatively incongruous.
I thought it was just sarcastic, really.