VCE Stuff > VCE English Language
English Language essay submission and marking
Bri MT:
Had a quick look and annotation of this - I mainly focused on points to improve your phrasing because you seem to struggle most with this. In particular, some of your sentences are quite unwieldy and lack fluency. I would carefully consider which conjunctions you are using, and whether they accurately reflect the relationships that they describe.
Let me know if you would like further advice on this, and I hope this helps :)
link to feedback
Themethlover:
Thanks man, appreciate this immensely, and yea it helps a sh*t tonne
--- Quote from: miniturtle on September 15, 2018, 11:24:25 am ---Had a quick look and annotation of this - I mainly focused on points to improve your phrasing because you seem to struggle most with this. In particular, some of your sentences are quite unwieldy and lack fluency. I would carefully consider which conjunctions you are using, and whether they accurately reflect the relationships that they describe.
Let me know if you would like further advice on this, and I hope this helps :)
--- End quote ---
technodisney:
--- Quote from: psyxwar on September 04, 2013, 11:16:05 pm ---Hey so, I've had very little practice this year writing essays so I'm really rusty haha. Any constructive criticism is appreciated.
Topic: "Standard English" is an oxymoron. Discuss.
SpoilerThe very definition of Standard English is murky. As the author of The Oxford Companion to the English Language Tom McArthur puts it: "this widely used term... resists easy definition, but is used as if most educated people nonetheless know precisely what it refers to". Some see it as referring to 'good' or 'correct' English usage, others see it as the most formal and prestigious dialect of English; there is no real consensus amongst linguists. One would think that "Standard English" would refer to a linguistic standard with respect to elements like vocabulary and grammar. The simple fact that this is not the case suggests the very idea of having a standard English is impossible; after all, how can what which is not static be standardised?
English, like all languages enjoying widespread use today, is dynamic as a consequence of social and cultural change amongst its speakers. Its lexicon in particular has words added and removed at an astounding rate. Words that historically saw use with only a small group of people may receive recognition by the general public due to societal change. An example would be the influx of words brought into the mainstream lexicon by technological advances in recent years; the word e-mail (short for electronic mail) was once used only by the few with access to the Internet, but as Internet usage became more widespread the term gained traction. This highlights not only the dynamic nature of the English lexicon as a whole, but also the fact that it varies between individuals -- what one individual recognises as part of English may not be recognised by another. The phenomena of loan words further illustrates the dynamic nature of the English lexicon. As England colonised the new world, they discovered new objects for which there was not an equivalent term in English -- so, for the sake of convenience, they adopted foreign terms (eg. coffee).
The semantic meaning of pre-existing words is also in a constant state of change. Narrowing refers to a reduction in the contexts in which a word can appear; that is, its meaning becomes more specific. This happens commonly when a word has associations with taboo, be it through euphemism or due to an application of its original meaning to a taboo context. For example, 'seduce' once meant to lead astray but has since narrowed to a purely sexual sense. Words may also experience complete changes in meaning (semantic shift) -- as with 'gay', which has changed from meaning joyous to homosexual -- or more subtle changes in connotation. The vocabulary of the English language as a whole is never static and thus any attempt to create a standard in this regard is futile; the very nature of language makes this impossible.
The idea of a standard English becomes even more ridiculous when we consider its many individual dialects. Although the syntax of written English is relatively homogenous (generally following the subject-verb-object sentence structure), this is not necessarily the case with spoken English. For example, "you what, mate?" -- a colloquialism used by speakers in the United Kingdom that means "what did you say" -- does not conform to written English syntax. The different dialects each have their own unique nuances. The English spoken by 'bogans' -- a term unique to Australian English referring to individuals of an unsophisticated background -- differs markedly from the English that would be used in a formal business setting. They would be an obvious difference in regards to lexicon, pronunciation and perhaps even syntax. Profanity may have very different connotations depending on the speaker - the term 'c*nt' has become one of endearment amongst 'bogans', but in a business context would be seen as offensive and completely inappropriate.
A potential counterargument is that the language spoken in a formal setting should be the default simply because it is more refined than alternatives. The truth is that even if we were to pretend that the dialects of English exist in a dichotomy of "formal" and "informal", the idea of championing one variety over another is an undesirable one. Linguistic prescriptivism stunts creativity and prevents the creative use of language. Furthermore, it is not logical to make a dialect 'standard' simply because it is perceived as being the most formal; that is not the purpose of a standard.
"Standard English" is an oxymoron. Its heterogeneous nature means that no two dialects are the same, and that every dialect has its own distinct nuances and grammatical and lexical patterns. Furthermore, change in English as a collective is inevitable, be it in regards to its lexicon or the meanings of individual words. It is simply not possible to prescribe a standard to a language that is so diverse and dynamic.
--- End quote ---
I would just like to point out that I came to this thread looking for Essay Examples. I then found this, my teacher printed out this Essay and the feedback by @lzxnl on this essay and gave it to us as an example, he said he didn't write it but he found it on the internet and also he didn't give us a source.
Long story short I now know that my EngLang teacher is hiding on AN ahhhhh.I'm scared of him as is. 😬
trashedjade:
Hi :) Here is an essay on the topic ‘Language and identity are inextricably linked. How is this reflected in the current Australian identity? Refer to at least two subsystems in your response.’ (VCAA Question 2012) Just wondering if anyone is willing to have a look at it? It will be greatly greatly appreciated:D
Bruce Moore once stated that ‘of all markers of identity, language is by far the most important’, and in many ways this notion of linguistic identity is reflected in the current Australian context. The many Australian cultural values are shown through a variety of lexical choices. Furthermore, ethnolects and Australian English is an indication of Australia’s multicultural and national identity, shown through a range of syntactic and phonological features.
Slang is one of the means by which the Australian cultural identity is exemplified. Australia's laidback cultural context often allows for a lowered register to be employed, which can be seen through the informal terms of address such as ‘mate’ and ‘darl’, as well as swears such as ‘cunt’, ‘faggot’’ and ‘bastard’, used between close friends as terms of endearment while displaying the Australian values of fairplay and mateship. This is also exemplified through the use of morphological diminutives, created by the addition of suffixes ‘-o’, ‘-ie’ and ‘-y’. For example, terms such as ‘tradie’, ‘reffo’ and ‘postie’ are frequently used instead of ‘tradesman’, ‘refugee’ and ’postman’, reflecting the classless society in Australia where everyone is respected regardless of their socio-economic status. Nicknames are also commonplace within Australia’s sporting domain, evident when Geelong football player Gary Ablett was referred to with the hypocorism ‘Gaz’ in a 2018 Herald Sun article. Likewise, Collingwood football midfielder Adam Treloar also fondly referred to his teammates Jeremy Howe and Jordan De Goey as ‘Howie’ and ‘Jordy’, which carried semantic connotations of warmth and affection to easily reflect the Australian spirit. Similarly, the new prime minister Scott Morrison has recently referred to himself as ‘ScoMo’, in the signing off in an email to the Liberal Party. This use of a more informal moniker by a successful figure of authority bridges the gap with the wider population by expressing the egalitarian nature of Australian society. Hence, employment of such unique lexical features ‘fosters great national pride’ (Kate Burridge) by reflecting the laidback ‘no worries’ nature that Australians call their own.
Moreover, the influx in migration has given rise to a myriad of ethnolects to reflect Australia’s growing multicultural identity. The incorporation of lexical and syntactic features from the original ethnolect into mainstream Australian English unites second-generation Australians from different ethnic groups. For example, in the Arabic-speaking community, the lexeme ‘shoo’ is used for ‘what’s up?’, ‘yallah’ for ‘goodbye’ and ‘habib’ for ‘friend. Syntactically speaking, Greek-Australians often speak with a lack of determiners such as ‘the’ and ‘some’, heard if they were to say ‘Can I have cake?’ instead of ‘Can I have some cake?’. These usages allow each minority group to ‘express links with their heritage communities’ (Josh Clothier) while earning a badge of cultural membership. Furthermore, phonological features also function as in-group recognition devices. For instance, in many Asian ethnolects such as Chinese and Singaporean-English, phonological substitution of the voiced dental fricative /ð/ with the dental stops /n/ and /d/ is common, heard when the lexemes ‘that’ and ‘this’ are pronounced as ‘/nat/’ and ‘/dis/’. Likewise, frequent code-switching in the mandarin ethnolect, such as in the sentence ‘wah, you [are] so pretty lah’, reflects characteristics of the native language such as the use of exclamative particles ‘wah’ and ‘lah’, and a lack of copula verb ‘are’. When these features are used, especially by the ethnic minority, they are a ‘powerful symbol of group belonging’ (Kate Burridge) as it allows members to build ‘solidarity with [their] ethnic group’ (Anna Duszak), and hence, an identity within the Australian society.
Additionally, Broad Australian English (BAE) is a language variety unique to Australia which plays an important role in creating a national identity. In particular, the values and features associated with the Broad Australian English (BAE) portrays Australia as a hospitable, easy-going nation. One such feature is the diphthongal nature of vowel sounds. This is evident when speakers pronounce the lexeme ‘mate’ closer to ‘might’, where the vowel /ʌɪ/ is pronounced as /eɪ/. Other characteristics include non-standard lexical and syntactic features, such as double negatives (‘I don’t know nothing’), plural forms (‘youse’) and the use of lexeme ‘me’ instead of ‘my’ (‘I left me keys in me car’). This is further observed when Shane Jacobson, the host of Big Little Shots (an Australian talent show) says ‘You’re a cool dude, aren’t ya?’ to one of the contestants, and ‘He’s gonna punch Austraya out’ in a recent season 2 episode. There, the lexeme /l/ is assimilated to /y/ in ‘Australia’, ‘going to’ is ellipted to ‘gonna’, and the slang ‘dude’ is used as an informal term of address to decrease social distance. This tendency to assimilate and elide lexemes portrays Shane Jacobson as a friendly, approachable ‘Aussie battler’ while appealing to a wide range of audience, further reflecting the values of mateship and ‘laidbackness’ of the Australian nation, and hence establishing a unique Australian identity.
The use of slang, ethnolects and accents to reflect the Australian identity shows that language is no doubt intertwined with our language. It will always be a mirror to Australia’s cultural, national and multicultural identity, as it is ‘a road map.. Of where its people came from and where they are going’ (Rita Mae Brown).
cdiamond:
--- Quote from: trashedjade on September 18, 2018, 10:29:44 am ---Hi :) Here is an essay on the topic ‘Language and identity are inextricably linked. How is this reflected in the current Australian identity? Refer to at least two subsystems in your response.’ (VCAA Question 2012) Just wondering if anyone is willing to have a look at it? It will be greatly greatly appreciated:D
Bruce Moore once stated that ‘of all markers of identity, language is by far the most important’, and in many ways this notion of linguistic identity is reflected in the current Australian context. The many Australian cultural values are shown through a variety of lexical choices. Furthermore, ethnolects and Australian English is an indication of Australia’s multicultural and national identity, shown through a range of syntactic and phonological features.
Slang is one of the means by which the Australian cultural identity is exemplified. Australia's laidback cultural context often allows for a lowered register to be employed, which can be seen through the informal terms of address such as ‘mate’ and ‘darl’, as well as swears such as ‘cunt’, ‘faggot’’ and ‘bastard’, used between close friends as terms of endearment while displaying the Australian values of fairplay and mateship. This is also exemplified through the use of morphological diminutives, created by the addition of suffixes ‘-o’, ‘-ie’ and ‘-y’. For example, terms such as ‘tradie’, ‘reffo’ and ‘postie’ are frequently used instead of ‘tradesman’, ‘refugee’ and ’postman’, reflecting the classless society in Australia where everyone is respected regardless of their socio-economic status. Nicknames are also commonplace within Australia’s sporting domain, evident when Geelong football player Gary Ablett was referred to with the hypocorism ‘Gaz’ in a 2018 Herald Sun article. Likewise, Collingwood football midfielder Adam Treloar also fondly referred to his teammates Jeremy Howe and Jordan De Goey as ‘Howie’ and ‘Jordy’, which carried semantic connotations of warmth and affection to easily reflect the Australian spirit. Similarly, the new prime minister Scott Morrison has recently referred to himself as ‘ScoMo’, in the signing off in an email to the Liberal Party. This use of a more informal moniker by a successful figure of authority bridges the gap with the wider population by expressing the egalitarian nature of Australian society. Hence, employment of such unique lexical features ‘fosters great national pride’ (Kate Burridge) by reflecting the laidback ‘no worries’ nature that Australians call their own.
Moreover, the influx in migration has given rise to a myriad of ethnolects to reflect Australia’s growing multicultural identity. The incorporation of lexical and syntactic features from the original ethnolect into mainstream Australian English unites second-generation Australians from different ethnic groups. For example, in the Arabic-speaking community, the lexeme ‘shoo’ is used for ‘what’s up?’, ‘yallah’ for ‘goodbye’ and ‘habib’ for ‘friend. Syntactically speaking, Greek-Australians often speak with a lack of determiners such as ‘the’ and ‘some’, heard if they were to say ‘Can I have cake?’ instead of ‘Can I have some cake?’. These usages allow each minority group to ‘express links with their heritage communities’ (Josh Clothier) while earning a badge of cultural membership. Furthermore, phonological features also function as in-group recognition devices. For instance, in many Asian ethnolects such as Chinese and Singaporean-English, phonological substitution of the voiced dental fricative /ð/ with the dental stops /n/ and /d/ is common, heard when the lexemes ‘that’ and ‘this’ are pronounced as ‘/nat/’ and ‘/dis/’. Likewise, frequent code-switching in the mandarin ethnolect, such as in the sentence ‘wah, you [are] so pretty lah’, reflects characteristics of the native language such as the use of exclamative particles ‘wah’ and ‘lah’, and a lack of copula verb ‘are’. When these features are used, especially by the ethnic minority, they are a ‘powerful symbol of group belonging’ (Kate Burridge) as it allows members to build ‘solidarity with [their] ethnic group’ (Anna Duszak), and hence, an identity within the Australian society.
Additionally, Broad Australian English (BAE) is a language variety unique to Australia which plays an important role in creating a national identity. In particular, the values and features associated with the Broad Australian English (BAE) portrays Australia as a hospitable, easy-going nation. One such feature is the diphthongal nature of vowel sounds. This is evident when speakers pronounce the lexeme ‘mate’ closer to ‘might’, where the vowel /ʌɪ/ is pronounced as /eɪ/. Other characteristics include non-standard lexical and syntactic features, such as double negatives (‘I don’t know nothing’), plural forms (‘youse’) and the use of lexeme ‘me’ instead of ‘my’ (‘I left me keys in me car’). This is further observed when Shane Jacobson, the host of Big Little Shots (an Australian talent show) says ‘You’re a cool dude, aren’t ya?’ to one of the contestants, and ‘He’s gonna punch Austraya out’ in a recent season 2 episode. There, the lexeme /l/ is assimilated to /y/ in ‘Australia’, ‘going to’ is ellipted to ‘gonna’, and the slang ‘dude’ is used as an informal term of address to decrease social distance. This tendency to assimilate and elide lexemes portrays Shane Jacobson as a friendly, approachable ‘Aussie battler’ while appealing to a wide range of audience, further reflecting the values of mateship and ‘laidbackness’ of the Australian nation, and hence establishing a unique Australian identity.
The use of slang, ethnolects and accents to reflect the Australian identity shows that language is no doubt intertwined with our language. It will always be a mirror to Australia’s cultural, national and multicultural identity, as it is ‘a road map.. Of where its people came from and where they are going’ (Rita Mae Brown).
--- End quote ---
Hi, I've had a quick look at your essay and it seems pretty good. I just have a few suggestions:
First paragraph: Australian values of mateship, solidarity, friendliness, etc. you imply it or mention it in passing but mentioning it directly in your paragraph will allow the marker to know you know your stuff without inferring. + through speaking slang, speakers share a linguistic camaraderie + shared history and understanding + mention in-group membership
Second paragraph: dual identity can be mentioned (particularly since migrants here can identify as both their nationality and australian through the use of certain lexemes of their language in their english sentences ) + honouring their heritage + mention Australia's identity of being multicultural and open to change (i see you mentioned singapore-english which is nice, because I'm Singaporean)
I can't give any feedback for the third one because I'm not well-equipped in knowledge of the accents but this is a pretty good essay, keep it up!
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version