VCE Stuff > VCE English Language

English Language essay submission and marking

<< < (5/64) > >>

lzxnl:
Just a few points of mine as well

Australian English (AE) is a major variety of the English language used in contemporary Australian society, and as a result it has an important role in representing the country on the global stage. I personally don't mind long introductory sentencesConsequently, there has been scrutiny directed toward what AE has become and it has been suggested that AE is losing its identity due to some of the changes it has undergone. Might be better to list the changes here instead of later on; slightly more cohesiveOn the contrary, AE is merely evolving to fit into a society that is becoming increasingly global, while still retaining Australian values embodied in the language. There has been a distinct shift toward General AE, an increasing influence of American culture, and an influx of first generation Australians along with their respective ethnolects. Despite these changes, the values ingrained in the Australian identity have certainly not been lost.

There is a clear trend where Australians are moving toward a more General AE in an effort to become more intelligible in an increasingly globalised world. Conversely, there has been an decline in the Broad and Cultivated varieties of AE. Speakers of the Broad AE accent are known for a usage of slang such as “strewth”, “crikey”, “stone the crow” and “dinky-di”. These non-standard lexemes are expressions which convey surprise or shock while the latter translates to ‘speaking the truth’. However, to a non-Australian these may sound nonsensical. Firstly, they may not sound nonsensical to just non-Australians. Secondly, you're saying such slang isn't used by General speakers? Thirdly...mention how Broad varieties create Australian cultural identity; I feel your point that non-Australians may not understand this language is a bit weak and may not hold water.Because globalisation is becoming more and more significant in contemporary society, the language of choice needs to accommodate a larger audience, and as such, a move away from Broad AE aids this purpose.elaborate perhaps? While non-standard lexis such as this does depict culture well, that does not mean that the decline of this often unintelligible Broad variety indicates a loss of identity. In fact, these vernacular expressions are instead being replaced by alternative, more contemporary phrases such as “no worries”, “take it easy” and “fair enough”, which not only convey Australia’s egalitarian and friendly nature, but is also easier to understand. On the opposite end of the spectrum sits the Cultivated AE, which has slowly diminished as ties with the British Empire waned in the past century. And...clarify the importance of this?This dissociation portrays a stronger sense of national identity independent of the British influence, and so the overall shift toward the General middle ground variety of AE has refined the identity of Australia.You have contradicted yourself here slightly I think; overall shift towards the middle ground also affects the usage of the Broad, which you've hinted at is linked to Australian identity. Has this refined Australian identity? Possibly, but it's a bit unclear

The influence of American culture is becoming more apparent and it is contended by some that the process of ‘Americanisation’ is diluting the identity of AE. While AE has certainly adopted some American terms and phrases, these are all selectively accepted as more appropriate and effective options to any out-dated phrases of Australian English.Be careful about making sweeping generalisations. Are you saying that "g'day" is out-dated? That "mate" is out-dated? Also, some Americanisms don't replace 'Australian' terms, like the stereotypical usage of "totally" This fussy nature of choosing evidences that Australians remain aware and proud of the colourful expressions of Australian English, but are self-conscious about the image they want to convey to the rest of the world.elaborate on image Some lexical items adopted into the AE lexicon include ‘dude’, ‘gotten’ and ‘wicked’, yet these additions do not necessarily indicate a step-down of the Australian identity. In fact, as they become more and more popular in society, these terms often culminate into something with an Australian twist. Australian bodybuilder and Internet celebrity, Aziz “Zyzz” Shavershian, popularised ‘brah’, an Australianised construction of the lexeme, ‘bro’. This diphthong sound, /oʊ/, in the latter is reduced to the weaker monophthong, /a/. This phonological reduction reflects the informal and casual nature of the Australian identity. I don't quite see the point; we already had a shortening, which also reflects the informal and casual nature of Australian identityIts prevalence in the vocabulary of the youth is so great, that it has been seen as a contemporary replacement of the typically Australian lexeme, ‘mate’. However, there has been public opposition to this shift away from 'mate' in AustraliaDespite having a different appearance, this substitute carries the same underlying semantics as ‘mate’, and that is mateship, really? The two words carry different connotations in my mind at leasta core ingredient in the Australian national identity. New words and phrases will always be implemented to express the views of Australia and so there is no reason to believe that AE of today is losing its identity.but borrowing from America is the best way to do this?

The inflow of ethnolects in contemporary Australian society is another concern for prescriptivists who believe AE is losing its identity. However, the use of non-standard lexemes in these ethnolects actually reflects the cultural diversity that is valued by Australians. As the migrant population has increased substantially in the past decade, it has become more common for first generation Australians to speak in their respective ethno-cultural variety of English. Among many of the youth of Samoan background, there is the popular use of “sole” (“sɒ-lɛ”) which is the Samoan equivalent of ‘mate’. Arab teenagers are often seen using the phrase ‘Wallah’, which translates to ‘swear to God’ or literally “promise by God”. The semantic field of ‘food’ also offers some lexical items such as ‘enchilada’ (Mexican), ‘laksa’ (Malaysian) and ‘ramen’ (Japanese). These borrowings have become a norm in AE today, and one might argue that it is therefore losing its identity due to the influence of foreign lexemes slipping into the lexicon. On the contrary, one of the qualities Australians bear is the willingness to accept other cultures. According to the Department of Immigration, “Australia’s multicultural policy embraces our shared values and cultural traditions.” The song “We are Australian” is a perfect portrayal of this sentiment. The line “We are one, but we are many” refers to Australia being made up of various different cultures united as one. Even with borrowings and influences from other cultures, AE has not lost its identity.Interesting point. I think it would be better if you strengthened your point that ethnolect usage reflects aligning oneself with a particular culture This diverse society only highlights Australia’s shift to a more global-centric community.I really fail to see the relevance here. Forgive me

AE will continually grow and develop in different ways to accommodate for the constantly-changing society. Despite evolving to appear as if old Australian traditions have been lost, the values of the Australian identity including egalitarianism, friendliness, informality, mateship and multiculturalism remain perpetuated through contemporary lexemes, typically Australian phonetic reductions and borrowing. Even by adapting and bending, Susan Butler notes that “the end result is still a unique Australian blend”.yay it's a quote (: In other words, in spite of the changes it has undergone, to assert that AE is currently losing its identity could not be further from the truth.

Your essay had a lot of relevant content, which was good. Sometimes, I felt that your commentary got a bit lost. Make it clearer for people like us who unfortunately don't have access to what's going on in your mind (:
I sound really negative, but that's my character; I naturally comment on anything I feel uncomfortable with, and I'm horrible at praising people, so bear with me. Please xD

You certainly know what you're doing, so keep practising, and good luck!

lzxnl:
I'm really lost on the topic of informal language in general; I have to rote learn all of these concepts like reducing social distance and creating rapport as well as all of these slang expressions because I don't use them much, and then I run into the problem of not having good examples. I'll fail if I have to write on informal language in the exam )':

SpoilerInformal language has a variety of functions in Australian society. What do you see as some of the crucial roles of informal language in contemporary Australia?
   In Australian society, informal language is a very important language variety that serves a diversity of useful social roles. Colloquial Australian English exhibits various aspects of Australian culture, promoting national identity, while informal language can also promote group identities and enhance expression. Therefore, the variety of functions displayed by informal Australian English makes it an indispensable tool of communication.
   Colloquial Australian English promotes national identity through its close adherence to Australian cultural values. Diminutives, for example, reduce social distance and exhibit the nationally recognised Australian value of being laid-back. This is seen in the difference between “I’m having a barbeque at my house this afternoon” and “I’m havin’ a barbie at my house this arvo” in register and formality; the latter sounds distinctly friendlier and more relaxed, reduces social distance and creates covert prestige amongst the speakers, common features of informal language in general. Likewise, affectionate nicknames like “Richo” for football player Matthew Richardson, “Warnie” for Shane Warne in the media and names like “Jonno”, “Gordo” and “Stevo” between friends also help to reduce social distance and exemplify the laid-back character of Australian culture. Equally, Australian English has various lexical items that reflect Australian identity. Terms like “g’day” and “mate” have been ingrained in Australian as representing mateship, a cornerstone of Australian culture to the point that outrage has erupted over the replacement of these with the American “hey” and “buddy”. This is also reflected by Richard Castle’s comment that “through its culturally ingrained connotations of egalitarianism and mutual respect, ‘mate’ suggests an openness, at least a relationship of equal”, explaining the intrinsic importance of this lexeme. Another feature is swearing. According to Kate Burridge, the “Great Australian adjective” ‘bloody’ has “now become an important indicator of Australianness and of cultural values” like “friendliness, informality, laid-backness and mateship”. Evidently, swearing in Australia is not as strongly taboo as in other countries, reflected by the positive reception of the TAC “bloody idiot” and “don’t be a dickhead” campaigns and the Toyota “bugger” ad campaign. Such positive public reception demonstrates that Australians have accepted swearing as characterising Australian culture, showing how Australian informal English reflects national identity.
   Informal language can also promote group identities. Slang, as an ephemeral, informal variety of language, allows the younger generation to separate themselves from the old by outdating older slang terms like “ace”, “rad” and “blood” with “sick”, “boss” and “bro”, immediately allowing the younger generation to create their own identity. It can also allow individual groups to separate themselves from each other. There are a vast number of slang synonyms for “good”, like “amaze-balls”, “sick”, “rock” and “boss” and numerous ones for “bad”, like “cruddy”, “crap”, “bogus” and “skank”. A group can signal its identity by the common adoption of particular slang expressions for good and bad, which strengthens the cohesive ties within that group. This is also seen on a professional level. In Australian hospitals, hospital staff have been known to speak of “FLK” for “funny looking kid”, “cactus” for “death”, “vegetable” for “comatose patients” and “crumbles” for the frail and elderly. Such irreverence for human life allows the staff to cope with the reality of their jobs, identifies dealing with these patients on a daily basis as routine and identifies shared experiences and jobs, which strengthens group identity, reduces social distance and improves the friendliness of the work environment. Thus, informal language is important for signalling group identity.
   Furthermore, informal language has an additional function in enhancing expression. It allows people to communicate concepts and ideas much more concisely than in Standard English. This is done by the various creative word formation processes available to slang. Blends and compounding allow the resulting concoctions to possess semantic properties of the words used to create them. For instance, “bootylicious”, a combination of “booty” and “delicious” to suggest physical attractiveness; “vomatose” as a blend of comatose” and “vomit” to mean disgusting; “tree hugger” as a compound to describe environmentalists and “couch potato” as a compound to pejoratively describe a physically lazy person, all increase the expressive capability of the English language by creating new phrases with different semantic properties. Also, swearing can provide a large variety of meanings as well. The word “f***” can be used as an expletive of frustration; as a verb describing coitus; to describe ruining like “f up”; to describe indifference like in “f that shit”; in the form “f-ing” as an intensifier like “f-ing awesome” or as a dysphemistic insult like “f-ing idiot”’; the actual meaning of f*** depends on context. Clearly, informal language broadens the available linguistic resources to speakers, allowing more complex situations to be described concisely.
   Informal language has many uses, from creating national identity to acting as the “masonic mortar to stick members together” according to Burridge and broadening the language’s expressive capability. Thus, its varied uses make informal language a ubiquitous and essential tool of communication to maintain social harmony.

Please be as negative as possible when reading this. I would LOVE to see people tear it apart constructively (:

lala1911:
If that's a poor essay my essays must be bankrupt, or in debt.

lzxnl:
No I'm serious...I don't have much of a clue when writing stuff about informal language and most of what I write is pretty much rote-learned...it's not like I really understand much of what I write...

lzxnl:
While we're on the topic of discussing my rather uncertain essays...would someone look at this one too? I never used much online language so I don't have much knowledge on that.

SpoilerShould the community be concerned that technology is replacing traditional forms of oral communication, such as face-to-face communication?
   With society’s increasing reliance on newer technologies, people are worried that technological forms of communication such as blogging, social media and instant messaging will replace traditional forms of oral communication. It is true that technological communication is often more convenient than face-to-face communication and promotes linguistic creativity more so than oral communication. However, face-to-face communication is renowned for its emotive quality evident from the inherently personal nature of the spoken mode as well as the array of prosodic features at its disposal. Therefore, while technological communication usage is on the rise, face-to-face communication will not be completely replaced; the two modes of communication can coexist.
   The rise of technological communication is partly due to its advantage in convenience over speech. Face-to-face communication, by its very name, requires the interlocutors to be at a similar physical location at the same time, which in today’s fast-paced and busy society can be quite difficult to organise. Technological communication, however, can mirror speech’s speed and spontaneity through instant messaging like Facebook, Messenger and texting without the restriction that the interlocutors be physically close to each other, allowing people to communicate with each other on the go. This is especially useful with social media such as Twitter in keeping people up-to-date with the latest news about their favourite celebrities. The growing popularity of chat rooms and online dating demonstrates how people have noticed the ability of technology to facilitate real-time communication between people separated physically. Likewise, through emails and similar forms of communication, the interlocutors can respond at leisure, which is ideal for busy people and those living in different time zones to their friends. Thus, technology allows people to “expand the choice about where, when, how and with whom conversations take place”, according to Marie Jasinski’s Conversations – creating a space for learning and innovation. Also, technological communication’s written nature makes it more convenient for communicating large volumes of information than speech. Online, two people can have a conversation in which multiple topics are discussed at once through sending long chat messages to each other, something impossible in speech due to its fleeting nature. Thus, the freedom in being able to control various aspects of the conversation help to explain the popularity of technological communication.
   Another advantage of technological communication is its freedom of expression, which is unparalleled in speech. Freedom of expression arises online due to the ability to create multiple identities to remain anonymous and the general lack of impact to a person’s real-world image. This results in people voicing their opinions more openly and with less embellishment online, leading to online disputes over Youtube videos and religious and political arguments on Facebook photos. As the internet provides a place for people to voice their innermost thoughts and beliefs and to even meet like-minded people on places like forums, the internet is a valuable place for communication. Also, this freedom of expression means technological communication is a chief source of neologisms and creative word formation. Some of these are due to the character limit in texts and tweets, such as morphological concoctions like the rebus “m8”, the acronym “lol” and the abbreviation “tgif”, meaning “Thank God it’s Friday” incydk, or in case you didn’t know. Other morphological shortenings stem from the elision of several unnecessary letters, the absence of which does not impact the comprehensibility of the message. Such examples include “u” for “you”, “thx” for “thanks”, “cld” and “wld” for “could” and “would” and “pls” for “please”. The power of technological communication has even codified some of these neologisms, such as “lol” and “gg” which may be heard in spoken communication amongst friends now. Thus, both aspects of the freedom of expression granted by technological communication exemplify Nathan Rosenberg’s comment in The Age that it allows people to “say things they wouldn’t normally say”.
   Despite all of the advantages of technological communication, speech has unique qualities that enable it to coexist with technological communication as a viable form of communication. Regardless of all of the emoticons and facial expressions that technological communication has at its disposal, technological communication lacks the interpersonal interaction that is so crucial to speech. In speech, the interlocutors are able to more accurately gauge each other’s emotions through paralinguistic features like facial expressions and gestures and prosodic features like stress, pitch and intonation, features which can also communicate various shades of meaning like holding the floor and a participant’s reaction to an utterance and cannot be conveyed as accurately in technological communication. This is reflected in the fact that formal speeches are still given for important occasions to allow the orator to infuse the speech with their own emotions, such as Julia Gillard’s Condolence Speech regarding the Queensland floods in 2010-2011 or Kevin Rudd’s apology to the Aborigines in 2008. As these were presented in spoken form, they were perceived as more sincere, heartfelt and effective, characteristics deriving from the prosodic features of the speech, and demonstrated the emotional power of spoken communication. For this reason, spoken communication is also deemed to be more personal than other forms of communication. Relationship breakups, for instance, are preferably announced in person as it is more interactive and shows more respect than the technological alternatives, while if a family member is injured or killed, the police will generally not send a text message or email, but will instead make a personal visit to the family, which again indicates respect. Therefore, speech’s irreplaceable personal and emotional characteristics mean that it is able to coexist with technological communication.
   As technology becomes an ever-increasing part of people’s lives, the reliance on technological communication will increase due to its convenience and linguistic freedom. However, there are aspects of speech, such as its personal and emotive aspects, which cannot be replaced by technological communication. Thus, the community does not need to fear the replacing of speech by technology because the two modes of communication have separate purposes.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page