Language analysis- analysing chronologically not the way to go?

[soccerboi]

Hi guys, ive been told by my English teacher that for my language analysis i shouldn't be analysing chronologically (i.e analysing from the beginning of the article to the end) because most students in the state will be doing this. Instead, i should do it differently to separate myself from the state. Also, i've been told that it is impossible to score very high in the exam (8+/10) if i do it chronologically, is this true?

[pi]

Also, i've been told that it is impossible to score very high in the exam (8+/10) if i do it chronologically, is this true?

Whilst the above statement isn't true, it is generally better to make paragraphs based on an "argument" or "point" (or something similar) rather than go through it chronologically.

[nubs]

Hi guys, ive been told by my English teacher that for my language analysis i shouldn't be analysing chronologically (i.e analysing from the beginning of the article to the end) because most students in the state will be doing this. Instead, i should do it differently to separate myself from the state. Also, i've been told that it is impossible to score very high in the exam (8+/10) if i do it chronologically, is this true?

I wrote a miserable language analysis in last years exam - like I seriously lost my shit, wrote a full introduction, crossed it out, wrote another one which turned out to be more or less the same thing. I also got the contention of the main article completely wrong.
Despite all this, I got a 9 and an 8 for it while doing it in chronological order, so what you have heard is completely wrong.

My teacher advised me to do it chronologically, but when I saw a similar appeal further on in the article, all I would do is say something like 'this is built on further later on in the article when the writer claims that... and this has the effect of...'

This saves a lot of time and it won't sound as repetitive


In the end, it is entirely subjective - each marker will have their own preferences

[dilks]

Chronologically is the way to go, imo (an obligatory rhyme). Simply because chronologically is the same way that the reader reads it, and the way the writer writes the piece is geared towards this. When writing an article one must ensure that each idea logically flows into, and builds upon, the ones preceding it, the author is developing his argument over the course of the whole piece in order to serve his larger strategy whereby he hopes to persuade the reader that his point of view is correct.

What you could do, however, is that you could take a device that occurs early on and jump further on in the piece to another device which builds on that idea, such an approach would be ideal for an article such as the one used in the exam last year where there was a lot of back-referencing to ideas brought up earlier in the article throughout the piece, as a form of ironic juxtaposition, which were difficult to address if the article was analysed wholly chronologically, but this is the exception not the rule.

Edit: A bit like what Nirbaan said.

Teacher28: Oh, so that's what his teacher is asking him to do. I guess that makes sense too, especially since it allows you to work more closely with the author's intent.

[teacher28]

I agree with your teacher and VegemitePi.

Structuring your analysis around the supporting arguments for the contention and the language used to persuade you to accept  these, and/or to take action on the issue, is more sophisticated.

Regardless of what you do in the final exam, you should do what your teacher wants for all other work.