Language Analysis Excerpt Feedback Thread

[liamh96]

Hi all,
Feel free to post short excerpts from your Language Analyses and ask for feedback.
The structure of one's feedback should follow the template:
Rating:_/10
Area's for improvement:
 
To begin:
Article: http://www.theage.com.au/comment/samesex-marriage-debate-closer-to-tipping-point-20131202-2ylug.html

In order to address the Government's continuously developing position towards the laws on same-sex marriage, Christine Forster, sister of Tony Abbott, published an opinion piece in 'The Age' entitled "Same-sex marriage debate closer to tipping point". Empowering Australia's voting demographic with her subtle, self-assured active voice, Forster endorses the view that the current laws on same-sex marriage are soon to change, advocating the importance of parliamentary influence and it's impact on the same-sex reform to pass in the high court.


Thanks in advance.

[brenden]

Hi all,
Feel free to post short excerpts from your Language Analyses and ask for feedback.
The structure of one's feedback should follow the template:
Rating:_/10
Area's for improvement:
 
To begin:
Article: http://www.theage.com.au/comment/samesex-marriage-debate-closer-to-tipping-point-20131202-2ylug.html

In order to address the Government's continuously developing position towards the laws on same-sex marriage, Christine Forster, sister of Tony Abbott, published an opinion piece in 'The Age' entitled "Same-sex marriage debate closer to tipping point". Empowering Australia's voting demographic with her subtle, self-assured active voice, Forster endorses the view that the current laws on same-sex marriage are soon to change, advocating the importance of parliamentary influence and it's impact on the same-sex reform to pass in the high court.


Thanks in advance.

This isn't the type of excerpt you can ascribe a mark to, because it hasn't really begun to approach the task. As in, it's very well-written; however, it hasn't approached actually analysing language or demonstrating any skill other than writing. So... What you posted is very nice, but ungradable, because the rest of the essay could consist of horrible analysis or really good analysis.

[liamh96]

I understand exactly what you mean. However, I suppose by "rating out of 10" I was looking for a general opinion of what level essay this would be in. For example, if I were to rate my introduction 7/10, then that would indicate that essays that score 7/10 generally have an introduction at this standard.
Then by "areas of improvement", one may suggest how I can push this standard of introduction up to the quality of 8/10. I.e: by suggesting features that typical 8/10 essays would encompass in their introductions.

The reason I chose this approach for feedback is because it is more meticulous and saves time for the markers of AN. Imo, it is more effective to improve the smaller components of your essay and put it all together, than trying to improve it all at once.

Liam

[literally lauren]

I think the trouble might be that L.A. intros aren't really much of an indicator of overall performance in the same way that a T.R. or Context intro might be. Since you're not meant to analyse in the intro, all we can mark you on is your general writing ability, and in that sense you've done quite well here. But there are plenty of people in the state who can write really fluently, but have no idea what they're doing in a language analysis.
The intro is basically just ticking off the author's name, the title, the context, the contention, some background info, and maybe the audience or tone where relevant. It's kinda tricky to separate a 7 from a 10 in that instance, because there's really not a whole lot an intro can do right or wrong aside from fulfill those criteria, and even they're flexible.
If you were planning on posting body paragraphs or little chinks of analysis, that might work. Even then, a part is often not representative of a whole, just like one essay isn't a perfect indicator of your capabilities and potential. I can understand the appeal of building up your essay piece by piece, but I'd say you're better off starting with some actual analysis, since that's where the marks in L.A. come from

[brenden]

I think the trouble might be that L.A. intros aren't really much of an indicator of overall performance in the same way that a T.R. or Context intro might be. Since you're not meant to analyse in the intro, all we can mark you on is your general writing ability, and in that sense you've done quite well here. But there are plenty of people in the state who can write really fluently, but have no idea what they're doing in a language analysis.
The intro is basically just ticking off the author's name, the title, the context, the contention, some background info, and maybe the audience or tone where relevant. It's kinda tricky to separate a 7 from a 10 in that instance, because there's really not a whole lot an intro can do right or wrong aside from fulfill those criteria, and even they're flexible.
If you were planning on posting body paragraphs or little chinks of analysis, that might work. Even then, a part is often not representative of a whole, just like one essay isn't a perfect indicator of your capabilities and potential. I can understand the appeal of building up your essay piece by piece, but I'd say you're better off starting with some actual analysis, since that's where the marks in L.A. come from

This is eerily similar to what I wrote earlier before clicking 'post' and having my internet cut out/losing the post/crying/deciding to come back later.

[literally lauren]

I stole your internet for the upvotes, Brenden