Compilation of Language Analysis Feedback

[Patches]

Thanks SugarMinted, I totally forgot I posted one here and I just saw your advice then.

I think you're probably a bit too set on long introductions; the chief assessor's advice is to have no more than two sentences, one explaining the context of the issue and the other the writer's stance. Parroting off the title (ugh), a few words on the audience or tone and the date of publication (has to be the most pointless) doesn't really seem necessary, since you'll be discussing them all in the body.

That is:
The issue of dogs becoming police officers is...
In this piece, so and so suggests

[Limista]

^ Okay I see. Yeah my conventional approach is totally unwarranted when it comes to the chief assessor I guess. Even though curiosity killed the cat  , just wondering if your teacher is the chief assessor or something? If not, how do you know this information?

[s.ay]

Just considering fishandchips' intro, I think the first line was intended to read 'In response to year 11 student Olympia Nelson's comments on sexuality in the media, Lee Burton..'
I could be totally wrong though!

[jeanweasley]

Just because I'm procrastinating, I'll try my hand at marking this.

Hi I would love any feedback on my piece because I know that I am not doing well.
On my last piece my teacher gave me a 3.
Please help I need to do much better than that!!



Here is the article

http://www.theage.com.au/comment/how-young-people-are-sucked-in-by-raunch-culture-20130827-2so9s.html


In response to year 11 student, Olympia Nelsoncomments on sexuality in the media, Lee Burton on the 28th of August discuss the “raunch culture” present is today’s society.don't know who's meant to be who. Is Nelson the student or the writer? Oh, I get it. Scrap the date and put this in brackets (28/08/12) at the end Burton uses ameasured and calm stance and her position as a media educator and researcher on the influence of pornography on young people, to position her intended audience of educators, young people and the media, that our community should have more education on the sexualised images in the media.Sort of unclear. I think you might be missing a word or a sentence here. It talks about the background and then launches on the influence. Those two parts don't quite connect A photograph published together with the opinion piece supports Burton’s view through the use of “The Pussycat Dolls” and their sexualised poses and outfits. Instead of a general comment on the photograph, I think this should be a separate paragraph. (My preference though).

Throughout her piece, Nothing is ever throughout.Lee Burton employs a measured rationality in an attempt to position the reader to acknowledge that “sexy pics” can be harmful to a child or teenagers' personal wellbeing. By stating that young people are “digitally adept” a positive image is created of young people, this attempts to soothe younger people into submission but also to allow other readersI think you need to specify the audience to link it more with your analysis to view young people as more than just irresponsible and immature children.  A sense of fear is evoked in the reader through the suggestion that “children as young a 12 are taking and distributing sexy images”use a semicolon if you have two sentences in the one so it doesn't hurt when reading or use a conjunction which positions the readers toquestion the values that the media is presenting and if this is something that parents what to continue for their children.what=want? phrase needs to be more complex. What do parents want their children to do or not? It's not really clear here. Utilising the emotive “graphic photos” and “poses that amount to pornography” the reader’s sense of values is appealed to. Rough sentence. Describe the photos and then link to analysis. Of course it's a persuasive piece anything can be appealed to so be specific and don't leave a sentence hanging. Explain how the sense of values make the reader feel/do/act.This characterising of the images allows the reader to gain an understanding of the magnitude of the situation. which is what? specify.The magnitude of the situation is again presented when Burton explains that young people are continually exposed to sexually explicit material through the “video games they pay, magazines they read and the movies” highlighting how widespread the issue is. The substantial  number of ways for children to view these images creates a sense of urgency in the reader to position them in favour of the writer's contention.

Towards the denouement of the piece, Burton puts forth her suggestion that education about the sexuality in the media will help children become more critical.  The writer aims to present herself in a positive light through her suggestion that it is “much better”, than the current state of affairs. Her suggestion is to “train teachers to help students analyse “raunch” culture”link this to her overall position and effect on the readers. Does her suggestion reflect the idea that the problem can be easily solved and if it does, doesn't this give her credibility in her position? Isn't she more believable, more compelling?. Don't start with when. It's an analysis everything has a 'when'. Jump into the sentence. Eg. Burton's explanation that yadadada...When Burton explains that this will be done by focusing of the “stories, symbols and stereotypes” the audience is presented with a measuredfind a synonym for this, you keep using this word solution, which aims to instil a sense of urgency into the reader that something needs to be done for future generations. The positive image of the writer is continued reinforced rather than continuedby explaining that the pictures that are sent can damage “their reputations, wellbeing and relationships”  this whichpresents the writer as caring and looking outtoo colloquial, find a better adjective for the younger generation. The writer is also positioned to question if this is something that they want for their children. By stating that “media and literacy is an essential skill” the reader is positioned to feel as if they would be benefitted if their children were to develop this skill. Through ending the piece by likening giving young people the knowledge about sexual images to “drug and alcohol education” a similarity is drawn as the population is aware of the harm that can come about if people are not education educatedabout drugs and sex. By appealing to the readers sense of safety, the writer aims to postionposition them in favour of her contention in regard to Australia's “raunch culture”.

Accompanying the article is a photo of the six singers “The Pussycat Dolls”  dressed in mini shorts and bare midriffs. This image highlights how celebrities, which young children and adults look up to dress up in a sexual manner.Do adults really look up to celebrities? I think the point of the article is aimed at parents and the media and persuading them to do something to eradicate the raunch culture in Aus. Just like in Burton articles the women have “hugely enlarged lips and breast and minimal clothing, posed with hands on hips” portraying how widespread this issue is.  and it being widespread means...? Link to an overall position of the writerNone of the women in the photo are overweight; in fact they are skinny reinforcing how important it is for children to be critical to what they se in the media. Explain significance and how the reader is affected

I don't think it's needed to say that the article and photograph does this and that because if someone where to look at your analysis and a date is provided, they can just look up the article themselves and they can see that a photograph is there so no need to mentionBoth Lee Burtons opinion piece and the photograph are designed to shock the reader and to leave them feeling as if education is needed to help rectify this situation. The opinion piece's rationality and suggestions present the issue as one that can be rectified  through learning how to critique these images on adds or music clips. The image gives the reader a visual picture of the scale of the issue showing how future generations will be affect if this trend is to continue. As indicated by these responses , the issue is certain to provoke further discussion due to its impact on the health of Australia’s children.

Overall

You have the hang of writing a language analysis. My only advice is to remove sentences where you clearly spell out everything for the reader such as telling the date or saying that an issue is widespread. Rather, focus on why something is presented the way it is and link it to the reaction of the reader. Because this article is targeted towards educating young people, I think it is important to mention the target audience of the piece and not just make a general statement about the 'reader' feeling a particular way. When possible, try to be specific about the target audience. Also, there needs to be more links made to the overall contention and the intended effect. Sometimes sentences are left the way they are without actually having a purpose. Each sentence of a language analysis needs to be useful. Remember to avoid colloquial descriptions - they don't add anything to your piece. Instead of general statements like, 'this is meant to do...' try varying your sentence structure and say that  'The reader's disgust at the evident sexualisation of women in the media is supported by the writer's condemnation of such images through x and y'. Begin with the intended effect and then link it with evidence and the writer's contention. Overall, it's a decent attempt but polishing is needed.

[Smiley_]

Thanks , I'm really trying to improve

[jeanweasley]

Thanks , I'm really trying to improve

You're welcome and if there are questions that need clarified regarding my feedback please PM or reply to me. Congrats thus far, you'll make it (:

[mikehepro]

English SAC trw ,  could anyone please give me some feedback on this practise? I know I need a LOT more practise hahah
Thanks
The 2 texts (photograh and the opinion piece by brown) was a part of the 2007 English exam.
Pg 14&15 on the PDF. (The second text wasn't used for this analysis)
http://www.vcaa.vic.edu.au/Documents/exams/english/2007english.pdf

Parenting styles plays a major role in the modern society, every parent wants their children to be as successful as possible, to have the opportunity to live a fulfilled life. In an opinion piece "overprotective parents stifle growth", in the 19 October 2014 issue of The Daily News, retired principal Jane Brown contends that today's parents "overprotect" their children and explores the consequences on the future of their children. Brown uses a reasoned and informative tone, primarily trying to appeal to the readers who are parents theirselves, but also readers that care about their children's well-beings. A photograph accompanied the opinion piece supports Brown's point of view, presenting children as fragile objects that's requires care.

Brown first argues that parents are "mollycoddling" their children. Brown,"as a professional" sees this problem as "perfectly clear", this adds credibility to her argument since she can draw up on her past experience as a principle. She presents that "overprotecting" leads to "defenseless young people" who are "unable to cope with future challenges". This alarms the reader about their welfare of their children, leading them to reconsider their style of parenting. By mentioning that "overprotective" parents often "provide a continuous taxi service","running little errands" and "even complete their children's homework." Brown attempt to place the reader thinking about their past experiences and recognizes that they are being "overprotective", linking them to the consequences such actions.

Brown also states that "overprotective" parenting creates incompetent children. She generalizes all "teenagers today", describes that they are all "incapable of making a decision on their own.","followers, not leaders." and" still reliant on their parents for their creature comforts." This negative portrayal of all teenagers are the direct results of "overprotective" parenting. This is an attempt at fear and encourages parents to review their parenting style. She also states that only by experiencing "real pain and deal with disappointment", they can "learn how to cope with life". Brown implies that children with "overprotective" parents are "mollycoddled" and often don't experiences these pain and failures which are needed for them to become "resilient adults".

Furthermore, Brown asserts that being "overprotective" destroys children's future. She once again emphasizes the consequences of such parenting, illustrating the long term damage such as "depriving them of the skills...in the future" and "they cannot possibly learn...a problem in youth." Appealing to the reader's common sense , she suggests that  children will be better at solving problems if they had the experience. At the same time, instills a sense of fear in the parents, cajoling the parents into thinking that their child will be unskilled and inexperienced. The loaded language "so afraid","hurt" and "abducted" appeals to the readers' parental instinct, resulting them to "refusing them to let...at least 14."  The intention of such action should be keeping the children away from harm, but based on Brown's research, "overprotective" parenting actually results "denied opportunities to meet friends", "becoming lonely and isolated". This research from Children's society leads the readers to see their error ,to reconsider their parenting methods, encourages them discontinue such actions and adopt a  more suitable method on controlling their children.

Brown then provides a solution on this issue. Based on the Children's society's findings, she proposes that by "allowing children freedom to play", it can helps children to "practice making...deal with conflict." This contrasts the consequences of "overprotective" and provides a better alternative to the parents, she entices the parents to switch to this method of parenting so their children do not become "depressed,overaggressive,antisocial and delinquent". Otherwise, they will "losing the ability go develop...fully functional adults". The "mountain of evidence" clearly appeal to the readers sense of fear and responsibility, linking them to the dire future of their children, they are more likely to adopt the alternative for their children's well beings.

The photograph supports Brown's view. The young boy in the photo links to the metaphor in the article,"wrapping our young children in cotton wool." The boy, despite in the protection of cotton wool, is looking sad and vulnerable. It suggests to the reader that "overprotection" is damaging and creates vulnerable young people. The sign "Handle with care","is society raising a generation of sooks?" Implies that parents are treating children like an object, resulting "sooks" that are not capable with reality. The rhetorical question encourages self reflection from the parents, to choose the better option put forward by Brown. 



Both the opinion piece and the photograph presents a reasoned view on "overprotective" parenting.  Brown, using emotive language and statistics, appeals to the readers's fear on their children's well being, providing the readers with consequences of such parenting. Linking to the article, the photograph also provides an empowered image on the effect of "overprotective" parenting. They have encouraged the reader to concede that being "overprotective" is an ineffective way to control their children and there's better alternatives.   

[darvell]

This is too late for your sac but I'll give it a crack anyway. Bit rusty at LA just an FYI

Parenting styles plays a major role in the modern society,where every parent wants their children to be as successful as possibleand to have the opportunity to live a fulfilled life.Sentence was really long to read it ruined the flow haha In an the opinion piece "overprotective parents stifle growth", in the 19 October 2014 issue of The Daily News (The Daily News, 19/11/2013), retired principal Jane Brown contends try not to use contends, it makes it sound like you're trying to use a checklist to write an essay. Switch it up for something like asserts, highlights, argues - google lists of them and try and put more (I think they're called authorial verbs) of them in your essay that today's parents "overprotect" I personally will avoid quoting at all in the introduction because it won't give you any points at all and if you write the whole thing in your own words it shows a better understanding. Also be really careful that you're not quoting the contention, it might be seen as a flaw in understanding if you do so.their children and explores (good more words like that) the consequences on the future of their children. Brown uses a reasoned and informative toneAgain same deal as with contends. Blatently saying tone like that makes it sound like you're just sticking it in there so you can fill the checklist. I guess it breaks the flow? switch it up for something like approach, primarily trying to appeal to the readers I'd avoid appeal as well, trying to target? who are parents themselves, but also readers that care about their children's well-beings. The photograph accompanying the opinion seems unnecessary to me to restate that it's an opinion piece - also here give a brief description of the imagine and what it's ofpiece supports Brown's point of view, presenting children as fragile objects that's requires care. You can also say that the image complements the article (enhances)

Brown first argues that parents are "mollycoddling" their children.You've quoted the article and not explained what the effect of the word is. For this I want you to tell me what the connotations of the word are - what comes to mind when you hear it?, then I want you to tell me what Brown intends to do to the audience, does she make them want to feel outraged or fearful, what exactly is it? Tell me about how this technique either builds or strips her credibility. Its really good to pick up when an author wrecks themselves and point it out, I think it shows a really good understanding - so dont be afraid to do so! Brown,"as a professional" sees this problem as "perfectly clear", this adds credibility to her argument since she can draw up on her past experience as a principle.But why has she used those words?!?!? She presents that "overprotecting" leads to "defenseless young people" who are "unable to cope with future challenges". This alarms the reader about their welfare of their children, leading them to reconsider their style of parenting. By mentioning that "overprotective" parents often "provide a continuous taxi service","running little errands" and "even complete their children's homework." Brown attempt to place the reader thinking about their past experiences and recognizes that they are being "overprotective", linking them to the consequences such actions.
Ok this whole paragraph just kind of feels like a "fuck you" with evidence haha.
While you're getting your technique right, I'd suggest instead of quoting 3 or 4 things in a row, quote one thing explain all the things I wrote above ^^, then move on to the next thing. It's better to explain 4 words thoroughly than to hardly explain 20.

Brown also states that "overprotective" parenting creates incompetent children. She generalizes all "teenagers today", describes that they are all "incapable of making a decision on their own.","followers, not leaders." and" still reliant on their parents for their creature comforts." This negative portrayal of all teenagers are the direct results of "overprotective" parenting. This is an attempt at fear and encourages parents to review their parenting style. She also states that only by experiencing "real pain and deal with disappointment", they can "learn how to cope with life". Brown implies that children with "overprotective" parents are "mollycoddled" and often don't experiences these pain and failures which are needed for them to become "resilient adults".Same deal here. I think maybe you're just getting overwhelmed by trying to analyse like 4 words at once. Strip it back and I think you'll find it easier. Try and thoroughly explore each word trhat you quote - so quote carefully!

Furthermore, Brown asserts that being "overprotective" destroys children's future. She once again emphasizes the consequences of such parenting, illustrating the long term damage such as "depriving them of the skills...in the future" and "they cannot possibly learn...a problem in youth." try and avoid quoting really long chunks if you can, especially while you're getting your skills up to scratch. Just quote the key words that you think are the most powerful, at least while you're starting out. I'd limit quotes to 4 or 5 words, but typically I will quote one or two. Quoting huge chunks doesnt show understanding, its the analysis.Appealing to the reader's common sense  , Brownsuggests that  children will be better at solving problems if they had the experience. At the same time, instillsinga sense of fear in the parents, cajoling the parents into thinking that their child will be unskilled and inexperienced. The loaded language "so afraid","hurt" and "abducted" appeals aims to ....to the readers' parental instinct, resulting them to "refusing them to let...at least 14." Poor quoting I think. You can even type what the sentence is about and then quote "at least 14" - the idea behind the quote doesnt emerge cause it's so fragmented  The intention of such action should be keeping the children away from harm, but based on Brown's research, "overprotective" parenting actually results "denied opportunities to meet friends", "becoming lonely and isolated". Hang on here, aren't you analysing the article, not agreeing with it? Make sure you always include the reader in it!!This research from Children's society leads the readers to see their erroraims to persuade parents into .. x ,to reconsider their parenting methods, encourages them discontinue such actions and adopt a  more suitable method on controlling their children.

Brown then provides a solution on this issue. Based on the Children's society's findings, she proposes that by "allowing children freedom to play", it can helps children to "practice making...deal with conflict." quote like this.  "practice deal[ing] with conflict" - see how it flows better when you edit it a bit. You can do that in the exam as long as you have the brackets in there.This iscontrasted to the consequences of "overprotective"quote what exactly you're talking about, what are the consequences that are contrasted? and provides a better alternative to the parents, she entices the parents to switch to this method of parenting so their children do not become "depressed,overaggressive,antisocial and delinquent". why is that a bad thing, explain to me why the parents dont want their kids to become depressed?? How does this aim to make them feel ect ect refer to what I was saying in the first paraOtherwise, they will "losing the ability go develop...fully functional adults". The "mountain of evidence" clearly appeal to the readers sense of fear and responsibility, linking them to the dire future of their children, they are more likely to adopt the alternative for their children's well beings.explain the otherwise by analysing the words you've quoted rather than quoting more :p

~description of image and how it aims to affect the reader here~The photograph supports Brown's view. The young boy in the photo links to the metaphor in the article,"wrapping our young children in cotton wool." The boy, despite in the protection of cotton wool, is looking sad and vulnerable. It suggests to the reader that "overprotection" is damaging and creates vulnerable young people.yeah more of stuff like tihs, good! The sign "Handle with care","is society raising a generation of sooks?" Implies that parents are treating children like an object, resulting "sooks" that are not capable with reality.why is this a problem, ect ect refer to 1st para again The rhetorical question encourages self reflection from the parents, to choose the better option put forward by Brown. Rhetorical questions are very shallow analysis I would avoid ever analysing them in the essay simply because you can write the exact same analysis for every single occurance of it. Try and get a bit more analysis out of the image - you should be able to write an entire paragraph on the image.


Both the opinion piece and the photograph presents a reasoned(pragmatic??) view on "overprotective" parenting.  Brown, using emotive language and statistics, appeals to the readers's fear Ok dont mention the actual "techniques" being used, instead here sort of like the introduction say what she believes kinda, her "mini contentions" on their children's well being, providing the readers with consequences of such parenting. Linking to the article, the photograph also provides an empowered image on the effect of "overprotective" parenting. They have encouraged the reader to concede that being "overprotective" is an ineffective way to control their children and there's better alternatives. You can analyse her writing a little bit here, esp if she screws up. Something like the article was very effective until the point where Brown contradicted herself and consequently lost the reader's trust.

Good luck!

[brenden]

(I think they're called authorial verbs)

I think I might have made that up to teach you. Not sure lelelelel.

[darvell]

This guuuuuuy

[tcstudent]

HI all, i decided even though my writing is below average and my vocabulary is very limited, i thought i might as well just post a piece in an attempt to get feedback..

Speech-http://lawcite.austlii.edu.au/au/journals/IndigLawB/2011/14.pdf

however my extract only goes upto the first page... it was the only one i could find on google that was similar to mine. My extract ends at ''As a consequence, we failed to see that what we were doing degraded all of us''


Australian launch of the international year for the world’s indigenous people

Debate has sparked over the current issue that we the Australian people have failed to realise what we have initiated between the white bread and indigenous people. As a consequence of failing to realise this, We the Australian people have created ‘’bad history, yet others never seem to realise how prevalent this issue is, as it has not been done to them, In the Speech ‘’Australian launch of the international year for the worlds indigenous people’’ by Prime Minister Paul Keating, at Redfern park on the 10th of December 1992, primarily expressing the need to bridge the gap between us Australian as our earlier settlers the indigenous people as we have created ‘’bad history’’. Furthermore Keating gloomy appeals to his Australian community to raise awareness about this significant issue.


Prime Minister Paul Keating begins by announcing to the general public that this ‘’celebration’’ will be a year of great ‘’significance’’. This celebration will give ‘’hope to the indigenous people’’, by emphasing this celebration as a ‘’great significant’ Keating appeals to his audience through inclusive techniques such as ‘’we’’ and ‘’you’’ in an attempt to make his audience feel concerned and responsible for ‘’failing’’ to give the aboriginal people a ‘’fair go’’, This serves as a reminder in an attempt to try and fix the issues we have caused, due to previous generations failure to imagine such experiences ‘’being done to them’’.



Furthermore Keating repetitively appeals to his community, he especially directs his speech at racial and prejudice individuals by directly stating ‘’we should be the land of fair go and the better chance’’ as ‘’we simply cannot sweep injustice aside’’. Complementing this approach, Keating undergoes a shift in tone to one of a more urgency in order to persuade his fellow republicans that we have failed to realise ‘’how seriously we mean these things’’. Through the use of further inclusive language, Keating similarly intends to gain the support of his audience by emphasing the idea ‘’we’’ have ‘’failed’’ in order to attempt the audience to fix these wrongdoings by showing ‘’care’’ and ‘’dignity’’. Furthermore Keating highlights through the use of statistical evidence ‘’where the first European settlers landed just a mile or two from Redfern’’ perhaps indicating that we Australians undermined the ‘’Aboriginal Australians’’ and intended to have the land for ourselves.


After listening to the speech the audience is left to feel embarrassed for the ‘’bad history’’ they have ‘’caused’’. Not only this but ‘’Australians should perhaps remind ourselves that Australia once reached out for us’’ ultimately impacting the public to feel ashamed for their behaviour. Similarly Keating’s belligerent tone when illustrating ‘’the problems which beset the first Australian, the people whom the most injustice has been done’’ highlights the ‘’impact’’ we have ‘’brought’’ Australia’’, such as ‘’we committed the murders’’, ‘’we brought the alcohol’’,  which possibly persuades the audience to feel uncomfortable with themselves, moreover through the use of inclusive techniques we are left to feel shocked to learn that ‘’we’’ have caused ‘’the bad history’’ and ‘’as a consequence, we have failed to see that, what we were doing degraded all of us’’.


Thank you.

[darvell]

First and foremost, just in reading your first sentence, DO NOT use inclusive language. This essay should be about the WRITER and the way they aim to influence the READER, not you. Avoid we, us, our ect ect. Debate has sparked over the current issue that we the Australian people have failed to realise what we have initiated between the white bread and indigenous people. As a consequence of failing to realise this, *The Author asserts that* We the Australian people have created bad history, yet others never seem to realise how prevalent this issue is, as it has not been done to them. In the Speech ‘’Australian launch of the international year for the worlds indigenous people’’ by Prime Minister Paul Keating, at Redfern park if this was a newspaper article instead of listing it like that I personally write (Newspaper X, Date) on the 10th of December 1992,  Keatingprimarily expressesing the need to bridge the gap between us Australian as our theearlier settlers the indigenous people as we have created ‘’bad history’’. Furthermore Keating gloomy appeals to his Australian community to raise awareness about this significant issue.
Okay for your intro:
-Opening Sentence (like the one you already have there but just take out the inclusive language
- Mention 3 or 4 or so of the author's sub view view points - by this I mean, if the author is arguing that Grapes are the very worst kind of fruits, the sub arguments might be something like: - Grapes are the food of the devil because they are purple. Grapes being round is a threat to the wellbeing of humanity Eating grapes is bad for the economy because it means we have less sultanas (I cant be bothered thinking of legit examples just roll with it) Mentioning a few of the authors main points in your intro shows a deeper understanding.
-If this were an article analysis at the end of your intro you would want to write a brief description of the image also.


Prime Minister Paul You've already referred to him by his full name at the beginning, so for the rest of the essay refer to him as "Keating" or if it were an article things like the author, the writer, he/she ect ect are also fine.Keating begins by announcing to the general public that this ‘’celebration’’ will be a year of great ‘’significance’’. This celebration will give ‘’hope to the indigenous people’’, by emphasing this celebration as a ‘’great significant’ Keating appeals to his audience through inclusive techniques such as ‘’we’’ and ‘’you’’ in an attempt to make his audience feel concerned and responsible for ‘’failing’’ to give the aboriginal people a ‘’fair go’’, This serves as a reminder in an attempt to try and fix the issues we have caused, due to previous generations failure to imagine such experiences ‘’being done to them’’.

For this I'm just gonna give you some general tips cause you've kind of got the same problem throughout this whole paragraph.
The MOST important thing is that you pick the best words to analyse and make sure you analyse the shit out of them, literally.
Don't worry about quoting quoting quoting, while you're getting the hang of it keep your quotes short and sweet and pick the most powerful words out.
I want you to analyse EACH WORD, (instead of taking the approach as above where you kind of quote 3 or 4 and then provide a sentence or so that kind of groups them all into one analysis. You have to remember, you're analysing the LANGUAGE.
For each word I want you to tell me:
-Any conntations that the word carries
- What the author is aiming to make the reader feel, think, ect ect
- HOW they do that (But reference the language not the technique - after all its the language that creates the technique amirite)
- Any other implications such word choice may have e.g building the readers credibility or diminishing it. Get creative and think about what effect things have on people, having different ideas to other people is definitely helpful when your teacher/examiner has probably read 20+ essays saying exactly the same thing.
(Make sure that you analyse the language itself and avoid saying explicitly things such as: Tone (swap for a word like approach), statistics, rhetorical question, contention, appeal to x, and any other of the techniques that you've been taught. Instead, QUOTE the technique itself and say how the quoted does the above

Furthermore Keating repetitively appeals to his community, he especially directs his speech at racial and prejudice individuals by directly stating ‘’we should be the land of fair go and the better chance’’ as ‘’we simply cannot sweep injustice aside’’. Complementing this approach, Keating undergoes a shift in tone to one of a more urgency in order to persuade his fellow republicans that we have failed to realise ‘’how seriously we mean these things’’. Through the use of further inclusive language, Keating similarly intends to gain the support of his audience by emphasing the idea ‘’we’’ have ‘’failed’’ in order to attempt the audience to fix these wrongdoings by showing ‘’care’’ and ‘’dignity’’. This is what I mean when I say you need to make sure you're explaining each word properly. You've quoted care and dignity and not explained the importance of the words or why he has used them. You need to do more of that Furthermore Keating highlights through the use of statistical evidence ‘’where the first European settlers landed just a mile or two from Redfern’’ perhaps indicating that we Australians undermined the ‘’Aboriginal Australians’’ and intended to have the land for ourselves.Make sure you focus on the language itself being used and reference that rather than quoting the technique and saying that it's a technique, eg for the above instead of saying it's the statistic that has the effect on the audience, quote the statistic and mention how such a huge number does x to audience


After listening to the speech the audience is left to feel embarrassed for the ‘’bad history’’ they have ‘’caused’’. Not only this but ‘’Australians should perhaps remind ourselvesDont forget to mention that this is what KEATING asserts, argues, highlights, illustrates ect that Australia once reached out for us’’ ultimately impacting the public to feel ashamed for their behaviour. Similarly Keating’s belligerent tone when illustrating ‘’the problems which beset the first Australian, the people whom the most injustice has been done’’ highlights the ‘’impact’’ we have ‘’brought’’ Australia’’, such as ‘’we committed the murders’’, ‘’we brought the alcohol’’,  which possibly persuades the audience to feel uncomfortable with themselves, moreover through the use of inclusive techniques we are left to feel shocked to learn that ‘’we’’ have caused ‘’the bad history’’ and ‘’as a consequence, we have failed to see that, what we were doing degraded all of us’’.
Is this the conclusion? ^ I'm not sure :S
For the conclusion, instead of saying how the audience will feel after the speech and giving an overall analysis of techniques like that,
try and give some of the main points like I mentioned to do in the introduction, then mention how effective the techniques would be on the reader

e.g if the reader screws up and wrecks themselves, mention that the article was really convincing until the author wrecked himself and screwed his credibilty.

Also I know this isn't an article but if it were you'd also want to be able to write a whole paragraph on the image, the image is really important, dont even ignore it!

Goodluck with it sorry if this is a bit confusing, I thought general advice might be a bit easier for this one

[jeanweasley]

Hi, here's a piece I recently did.

Boxers in boxes, Danes in drains – Engageeducation.org.au


The growing number of pets amassing in animal welfare shelters has sparked criticism over the availability of pets for purchase in pet stores which are deemed to be the cause of the issue. In the article for Melbourne Weekend Magazine (‘Boxers in boxes, Danes in drains’, 29/01/13) the magazine negates the pet industry for their alleged connection with puppy mills and attempts to persuade animal activists as well as dog owners and would be dog owners to support their cause. Jan Robrane’s letter to the editor adopts the magazine’s contention and uses satire to contend that puppies born from puppy mill factories may potentially be discarded by their owners due to possible long term defects. In opposition to the issue, Nick Conan’s letter to the editor refutes the article’s claims and contends that would be pet owners shouldn’t have to pay expensive fees just for a dog and despite possible disabilities that a dog is still a dog.

The alliteration in the title ‘Boxers in boxes, Danes in drains’ immediately captures the reader’s attention, appealing to their sense of sympathy and concern as dog owners and animal activists are provoked to imagine a dog, especially a ‘boxer’ or a ‘dane’ in a position of harm and elicit a feel of disgust in the readers. Moreover, the subtle use of accusatory words such as ‘claim’ and ‘under threat’ to associate pet shop owners with the idea that they are the cause of pet neglect, positions the reader to view pet shop owners as well as the Australian Veterinary Association as vindictive and selfish. Moreover, the expert opinion of Save-A-Dog-Scheme’s Julia Rika, aims to convince readers that the issue of pet neglect stems from the problem of puppy mills. The use of the adjective ‘huge’ coupled with the phrase ‘under the radar of most Australians’ emphasises the gravity of the issue and prompts readers to consider the issue of puppy mills and pet neglect and convinces everyday Australians to be more aware of the issue, thus garnering their support for animal rights.

In addition, the image of a dog with a billowing stomach elicits readers’ sympathy as they are positioned to feel disgust about puppy mills. The slanted eyes of the dog directly looking at the reader acts as a personal connection which may provoke readers to also consider campaigning for animal rights. In effect, readers, especially new pet owners are encouraged to question the credibility of pet shops and their contribution to the issue of animal neglect and puppy mills due to Ruka’s conclusion that registered breeders don’t ‘condone…a method of sale’. In addition, the author refers to animal welfare organisations such as ‘RSPCA’ to contrast the response of pet industry organisations in regards to the issue and position readers to harbour negative feelings about these animal organisations that are responsible for protecting animal rights. Moreover, the inclusion of Pet Industry Association of Australia’s Joanne Sillince’s response reinforces readers’ support and prompts them to question the sense of action that these bodies really have. Sillince’s ‘scathing’ response acts to further the readers’ interest in the issue and support for the closure of puppy mills.

Sillince’s response that ‘an enquiry is unnecessary and would cost the government millions’ provokes the readers’ sense of justice and lead them to question the responsibility of these animal welfare bodies. Finally, the author acknowledges the opposition’s argument that the campaign has ‘nothing to do with closing pet shops’ to engage the readers’ support, as their interests in animal welfare appear genuine. Furthermore, the article’s conclusion acts as an insightful comment on the production of pets in pet stores and gives readers insight about the truth of puppy factories. Knox’s comment that pups ‘repeat the cycle’ and are ‘dumped in [their] shelters’ reinforces the cruelty of puppy factories.

The pun ‘Cruella DeMill’ employed by Robrane in her support of the magazine’s campaign for animal rights is a satirical comment on the operators of puppy mills employed to garner the readers’ attention on the issue and position them to accept Robrane’s stance. Just like the infamous villain in ‘101 Dalmatians’, readers are provoked to consider that the puppy mill business is abhorrent and evil just like ‘Cruella Devil’. The use of an anecdote recounting her story of her dog’s disability, ‘I failed to recognise Pongo’s disability until we tried to train him several months later’, is aimed at readers to understand the difficulties of owning a disabled dog and is also an example of the consequences to be had if dogs are purchased from unregistered breeders and pet stores. In addition, Robrane’s statement that she ‘would have been happy to pay extra for a puppy from a registered breeder’ positions potential animal owners to feel guilty about considering buying their pets at pet stores where prices might be cheaper whilst possibly not knowing the health or safety of their future pet.

Furthermore, Robrane’s evocative sentence that ‘puppy mills and backyard breeders should be shut down’ exhibits her anger and frustration on the issue and aims to motivate animal activists to campaign for the issue and invites new pet owners as well as potential owners to visit the website to make a difference. The use of the link ‘www.closepuppyfactories.org’ presents an easy solution to the problem and invites readers to consider that by going to the website, they are contributing to the eradication of puppy mills and therefore, reducing the chances of buying a defective pet and having to feel regretful for their situation and potentially having to suffer just like Robrane.

Conan’s letter to the editor, however, refutes the magazine and Robrane’s opinion by asserting that ‘a dog is a dog’, and aims to position the readers to feel that dogs whether disabled or defective is still a dog and also targets pet owners who feel that they have to put their pet up for adoption as irresponsible and disgraceful. Consequently, the exaggeration that buying from a registered breeder is like ‘pa[ying] an arm and leg’ aims to convince readers that paying for registered breeders is too expensive and unfair for a common Australian.

 The colloquial tone employed by Conan and his rhetorical question ‘why would I pay more than a day’s wage when I don’t have to’ influences the reader by positioning them to find alternative methods of purchasing their dogs. Conan aims to empower potential owners to consider that they don’t have to pay for a registered breeder to buy a dog to enjoy the comfort of having a pet. Additionally, Conan’s expressions that the issue ‘makes [him] roll his eyes’ and that the insinuation that pet stores are to blame for the number of pets amassing in shelters is a ‘steaming pile of dog poo’, positions the reader to question the reality of the issue and whether or not claims made by the magazine are truly representative of current situation. Also, Conan refers to animal organisations as ‘protestors’ and not ‘activists’ implies the idea that animal organisations are robbing the rights of pet stores to sell due to their extensive and damaging campaign; thus readers are positioned to feel that animal organisations oppose the pet industry and are using their campaign to fuel hatred and criticism for the industry.

The magazine’s use of evocative language and statistics aims to persuade the reader to criticise the operation of pet owners and their involvement with puppy mills. In the two responses to the article, Robrane supports the magazine’s stance and persuades similar minded people to campaign for animal rights and end the operation of puppy mills, encouraging potential pet owners to buy from registered breeders. However, Conan disputes the previous statements and questions the validity of the issue justifying that the number of pets amassing in animal shelters is really the fault of ‘negligent and ill prepared owners’, thereby positioning the reader to view that pet stores are at no fault at all. Whether pet stores are connected to the operation of puppy mills remains to be further explored on the oncoming weeks, however, criticism of the pet industry appears to be widespread and supported by animal organisations.

[darvell]

Hi, here's a piece I recently did.

Boxers in boxes, Danes in drains – Engageeducation.org.au


The growing number of pets amassing in animal welfare shelters has sparked criticism over the availability of pets for purchase in pet stores which are deemed to be the cause of the issue. In the article for Melbourne Weekend Magazine (‘Boxers in boxes, Danes in drains’, 29/01/13) the magazine negates the pet industry for their alleged connection with puppy mills and attempts to persuade animal activists as well as dog owners and would be dog owners to support their cause. Jan Robrane’s letter to the editor adopts the magazine’s contention and uses satire to contend that puppies born from puppy mill factories may potentially be discarded by their owners due to possible long term defects. In opposition to the issue, Nick Conan’s letter to the editor refutes the article’s claims and contends that would be pet owners shouldn’t have to pay expensive fees just for a dog and despite possible disabilities that a dog is still a dog.

The alliteration in the title ‘Boxers in boxes, Danes in drains’ immediately captures the reader’s attention, appealing to their sense of sympathy and concern as dog owners and animal activists are provoked to imagine a dog, especially a ‘boxer’ or a ‘dane’ in a position of harm and elicit a feel of disgust in the readers. Moreover, the subtle use of accusatory words such as ‘claim’ and ‘under threat’ to associate pet shop owners with the idea that they are the cause of pet neglect, positions the reader to view pet shop owners as well as the Australian Veterinary Association as vindictive and selfish. Moreover, the expert opinion of Save-A-Dog-Scheme’s Julia Rika, aims to convince readers that the issue of pet neglect stems from the problem of puppy mills. The use of the adjective ‘huge’ coupled with the phrase ‘under the radar of most Australians’ emphasises the gravity of the issue and prompts readers to consider the issue of puppy mills and pet neglect and convinces everyday Australians to be more aware of the issue, thus garnering their support for animal rights.

In addition, the image of a dog with a billowing stomach elicits readers’ sympathy as they are positioned to feel disgust about puppy mills. The slanted eyes of the dog directly looking at the reader acts as a personal connection which may provoke readers to also consider campaigning for animal rights. In effect, readers, especially new pet owners are encouraged to question the credibility of pet shops and their contribution to the issue of animal neglect and puppy mills due to Ruka’s conclusion that registered breeders don’t ‘condone…a method of sale’. In addition, the author refers to animal welfare organisations such as ‘RSPCA’ to contrast the response of pet industry organisations in regards to the issue and position readers to harbour negative feelings about these animal organisations that are responsible for protecting animal rights. Moreover, the inclusion of Pet Industry Association of Australia’s Joanne Sillince’s response reinforces readers’ support and prompts them to question the sense of action that these bodies really have. Sillince’s ‘scathing’ response acts to further the readers’ interest in the issue and support for the closure of puppy mills.

Sillince’s response that ‘an enquiry is unnecessary and would cost the government millions’ provokes the readers’ sense of justice and lead them to question the responsibility of these animal welfare bodies. Finally, the author acknowledges the opposition’s argument that the campaign has ‘nothing to do with closing pet shops’ to engage the readers’ support, as their interests in animal welfare appear genuine. Furthermore, the article’s conclusion acts as an insightful comment on the production of pets in pet stores and gives readers insight about the truth of puppy factories. Knox’s comment that pups ‘repeat the cycle’ and are ‘dumped in [their] shelters’ reinforces the cruelty of puppy factories.

The pun ‘Cruella DeMill’ employed by Robrane in her support of the magazine’s campaign for animal rights is a satirical comment on the operators of puppy mills employed to garner the readers’ attention on the issue and position them to accept Robrane’s stance. Just like the infamous villain in ‘101 Dalmatians’, readers are provoked to consider that the puppy mill business is abhorrent and evil just like ‘Cruella Devil’. The use of an anecdote recounting her story of her dog’s disability, ‘I failed to recognise Pongo’s disability until we tried to train him several months later’, is aimed at readers to understand the difficulties of owning a disabled dog and is also an example of the consequences to be had if dogs are purchased from unregistered breeders and pet stores. In addition, Robrane’s statement that she ‘would have been happy to pay extra for a puppy from a registered breeder’ positions potential animal owners to feel guilty about considering buying their pets at pet stores where prices might be cheaper whilst possibly not knowing the health or safety of their future pet.

Furthermore, Robrane’s evocative sentence that ‘puppy mills and backyard breeders should be shut down’ exhibits her anger and frustration on the issue and aims to motivate animal activists to campaign for the issue and invites new pet owners as well as potential owners to visit the website to make a difference. The use of the link ‘www.closepuppyfactories.org’ presents an easy solution to the problem and invites readers to consider that by going to the website, they are contributing to the eradication of puppy mills and therefore, reducing the chances of buying a defective pet and having to feel regretful for their situation and potentially having to suffer just like Robrane.

Conan’s letter to the editor, however, refutes the magazine and Robrane’s opinion by asserting that ‘a dog is a dog’, and aims to position the readers to feel that dogs whether disabled or defective is still a dog and also targets pet owners who feel that they have to put their pet up for adoption as irresponsible and disgraceful. Consequently, the exaggeration that buying from a registered breeder is like ‘pa[ying] an arm and leg’ aims to convince readers that paying for registered breeders is too expensive and unfair for a common Australian.

 The colloquial tone employed by Conan and his rhetorical question ‘why would I pay more than a day’s wage when I don’t have to’ influences the reader by positioning them to find alternative methods of purchasing their dogs. Conan aims to empower potential owners to consider that they don’t have to pay for a registered breeder to buy a dog to enjoy the comfort of having a pet. Additionally, Conan’s expressions that the issue ‘makes [him] roll his eyes’ and that the insinuation that pet stores are to blame for the number of pets amassing in shelters is a ‘steaming pile of dog poo’, positions the reader to question the reality of the issue and whether or not claims made by the magazine are truly representative of current situation. Also, Conan refers to animal organisations as ‘protestors’ and not ‘activists’ implies the idea that animal organisations are robbing the rights of pet stores to sell due to their extensive and damaging campaign; thus readers are positioned to feel that animal organisations oppose the pet industry and are using their campaign to fuel hatred and criticism for the industry.

The magazine’s use of evocative language and statistics aims to persuade the reader to criticise the operation of pet owners and their involvement with puppy mills. In the two responses to the article, Robrane supports the magazine’s stance and persuades similar minded people to campaign for animal rights and end the operation of puppy mills, encouraging potential pet owners to buy from registered breeders. However, Conan disputes the previous statements and questions the validity of the issue justifying that the number of pets amassing in animal shelters is really the fault of ‘negligent and ill prepared owners’, thereby positioning the reader to view that pet stores are at no fault at all. Whether pet stores are connected to the operation of puppy mills remains to be further explored on the oncoming weeks, however, criticism of the pet industry appears to be widespread and supported by animal organisations.

Totally marked like half of this and then clicked the backspace and lost it all (HAPPENS WAY TOO OFTEN WOW)
-cries into 2045
Ill get back to this later when I'm not about to light myself on fire hahahaha

[jeanweasley]

Totally marked like half of this and then clicked the backspace and lost it all (HAPPENS WAY TOO OFTEN WOW)
-cries into 2045
Ill get back to this later when I'm not about to light myself on fire hahahaha

I feel sorry for you but hahahahahaha, that's too funny.