LiterallyLauren Practice English Language Analysis #1 Advice PLease

[Sanguinne]

Could someone correct this language analysis and provide me with advice.

In response to St Jude Academy reducing funding to the academic sector in favour of vocational learning, Armanno Eli, a year 11 student has written in the local school newsletter, Eli initially employing a casual tone as he recounts his past experiences, shifting later towards one of ridicule. Aimed towards on audience of students, teachers and parents, Eli seeks for the school administration to revoke their decision.
The phrase “SHEDucation” created by Eli plays on education and ‘Shed’ which refers to technical studies to human readers. Yet by following this with an exclamation mark and the connotations of ‘Shed’ with unwanted belongings serves to mock the type of education and its significance at St. Jude’s Academy. Visting terms such as “right?” and referring to his memory through “my”, Eli keeps it casual yet personal so readers are inclined towards believing that Eli is friendly and that he is passionate about the issue. Referring to the triple “R’s”, the audience a significant majority being students would have this memory resonate in them allowing to Eli builds rapport. Further continuing on his exploration of memories, they echo with the student readership causing them to associate themselves with Eli.
Eli’s tone changes from his plain casual tone towards a tone of enthusiasm through “I can’t wait”. Hence, Eli communicates his overwhelming excitement towards the students. However, parents upon reading this one prompted towards feeling astonishment towards Eli’s dedication which their child may or may not emulate. Claiming “balance is important”, Eli further portrays himself as reasonable and logical in preparation towards his ridicule. Suggesting the new system “confuses (him)”, Eli connotes a sense of irrationality behind the school’s administration. However, this is emphasised through “commanding us” which vilifies and demonises them so readers are likely to separate themselves from that decision, Eli then juxtaposes the “shed” and “classroom”, putting emphasis on “instead of”. This serves to undermine the authority and logic of the school, as readers have a preconceived notion of classrooms being inherently better to learn. Eli then appeals to the concern of students through explicitly stating, “Getting our fingers sawn off”, such a graphic visual instils fear into the readership, swaying them against. The image under the statement adds fuel to the emotional impact of Eli’s claim as it provides a visual representation. The lack of safety equipment apart from the safety glasses and the proximity of the hard towards the electronics equipment reinforce parent’s terror, further influencing them against vocational facilities. Parents may associate the man laughing behind the boy as a bully laughing at him due to not knowing “how to use it”, which ultimately may position them in opposition towards the decision.
Eli’s emphasis on inclusive language such as “we” and “our” build unity between him and readers and portrays the people in favour of his argument as large. Using exclusive language at the conclusion of the paragraph at the conclusion at the paragraph, “is that the kind of equation “you’d want …” Eli individually separates readers, forcing them to accept his opinion if they want to join the side portrayed to be greater. Hence, due to this inherent desire to join, readers are subjugated into agreement.
The letter from Bruce, a year 11 student argues the complete opposite of Eli, firmly believing that vocational students deserve this funding. Stating “what’s the point”, Bruce casually dismisses the importance of academies. Referring to Shakespeare as “poncey” and academics as a whole as “useless”, Bruce belittles it to compel readers that it does not deserve funding. Bruce also creates a dichotomy between it and being a tradie through calling vocational skills as “useful”, which ultimately undermines the position of academics.
In contrast, Victoria in a similar fashion argues like Bruce; albeit sharing the same viewpoint as Eli. Associating “vocational” with “nonsense”, Victoria contemptuously dismisses it as she adds notions of irrationality. Asserting students need a “traditional” education, Victoria appeals to parents stuck firm in their beliefs, unopen to change, inciting them to agree. Furthermore, she cements the notions of a lack of “important life skills” promised by vocational study, angering parents and students for wasting their time and education, swaying them to agreement.
Mrs Haywood, a history teacher, has the opinion that there should be equality. Writing her credentials, as a “history teacher”, Haywood instantly gains trust from her readers. Establishing a juxtaposition between “funding into one department” and “others floundering” she creates a warning to worry parents about the aspects of parents, and thus swaying them to agree.

[AmericanBeauty]

I'm not great at Language Analysis but I'll do my best to help you!!

In response to St Jude Academy reducing funding to the academic sector in favour of vocational learning, Armanno Eli, a year 11 student has written in the local school newsletter,really weird link here unless you meant to put a full stop Eli initially employing incorrect tense a casual tone as he recounts his past experiences, shifting later towards one of ridicule. Aimed towards an audience of students, teachers and parents, Eli seeks for the school administration to revoke their decision.

I understand what you're saying. Your tones should be a little more specific and better-suited, rather than a tone that would be on a generic list. You are lacking a bit of fluency in your writing mainly due to grammatical error which you can easily fix. I did this language analysis piece a while ago and I'm pretty sure a visual was included and you didn't include it. Reiterating the person who corrected my LA piece, why is the audience there listening to the speech, and there should be a greater link between the contention and the intended effect on the audience

I'll do the rest later. I just realised I haven't read this article properly, I only just looked at it. So I'm going to do it now then review yours:

The phrase “SHEDucation” created by Eli plays on education and ‘Shed’ which refers to technical studies to human readers. Yet by following this with an exclamation mark and the connotations of ‘Shed’ with unwanted belongings serves to mock the type of education and its significance at St. Jude’s Academy. Visting terms such as “right?” and referring to his memory through “my”, Eli keeps it casual yet personal so readers are inclined towards believing that Eli is friendly and that he is passionate about the issue. Referring to the triple “R’s”, the audience a significant majority being students would have this memory resonate in them allowing to Eli builds rapport. Further continuing on his exploration of memories, they echo with the student readership causing them to associate themselves with Eli.
Eli’s tone changes from his plain casual tone towards a tone of enthusiasm through “I can’t wait”. Hence, Eli communicates his overwhelming excitement towards the students. However, parents upon reading this one prompted towards feeling astonishment towards Eli’s dedication which their child may or may not emulate. Claiming “balance is important”, Eli further portrays himself as reasonable and logical in preparation towards his ridicule. Suggesting the new system “confuses (him)”, Eli connotes a sense of irrationality behind the school’s administration. However, this is emphasised through “commanding us” which vilifies and demonises them so readers are likely to separate themselves from that decision, Eli then juxtaposes the “shed” and “classroom”, putting emphasis on “instead of”. This serves to undermine the authority and logic of the school, as readers have a preconceived notion of classrooms being inherently better to learn. Eli then appeals to the concern of students through explicitly stating, “Getting our fingers sawn off”, such a graphic visual instils fear into the readership, swaying them against. The image under the statement adds fuel to the emotional impact of Eli’s claim as it provides a visual representation. The lack of safety equipment apart from the safety glasses and the proximity of the hard towards the electronics equipment reinforce parent’s terror, further influencing them against vocational facilities. Parents may associate the man laughing behind the boy as a bully laughing at him due to not knowing “how to use it”, which ultimately may position them in opposition towards the decision.
Eli’s emphasis on inclusive language such as “we” and “our” build unity between him and readers and portrays the people in favour of his argument as large. Using exclusive language at the conclusion of the paragraph at the conclusion at the paragraph, “is that the kind of equation “you’d want …” Eli individually separates readers, forcing them to accept his opinion if they want to join the side portrayed to be greater. Hence, due to this inherent desire to join, readers are subjugated into agreement.
The letter from Bruce, a year 11 student argues the complete opposite of Eli, firmly believing that vocational students deserve this funding. Stating “what’s the point”, Bruce casually dismisses the importance of academies. Referring to Shakespeare as “poncey” and academics as a whole as “useless”, Bruce belittles it to compel readers that it does not deserve funding. Bruce also creates a dichotomy between it and being a tradie through calling vocational skills as “useful”, which ultimately undermines the position of academics.
In contrast, Victoria in a similar fashion argues like Bruce; albeit sharing the same viewpoint as Eli. Associating “vocational” with “nonsense”, Victoria contemptuously dismisses it as she adds notions of irrationality. Asserting students need a “traditional” education, Victoria appeals to parents stuck firm in their beliefs, unopen to change, inciting them to agree. Furthermore, she cements the notions of a lack of “important life skills” promised by vocational study, angering parents and students for wasting their time and education, swaying them to agreement.
Mrs Haywood, a history teacher, has the opinion that there should be equality. Writing her credentials, as a “history teacher”, Haywood instantly gains trust from her readers. Establishing a juxtaposition between “funding into one department” and “others floundering” she creates a warning to worry parents about the aspects of parents, and thus swaying them to agree.

[MaiEmerald]

Haven't read the article but I'll give it a shot ^^

Won't do the intro because AmericanBeauty covered it pretty well. It's kind of a hot mess - you don't ever want a sentence that long with so many commas. It's just - not nice to read..

The phrase “SHEDucation” created by Eli plays on education and ‘Shed’ which refers to technical studies to human readers are there non-human readers?. Yet by following this with an exclamation mark and the connotations of ‘shed’ with unwanted belongings, it serves to mock the type of education and its significance at St. Jude’s Academy. Visting terms such as “right?” and referring to his memory through “my”, Eli keeps it casual yet personal so readers are inclined towards believing that Eli is friendly and that he is passionate about the issue I prefer 'personally involved with the issue' here. Referring to the triple “R’s”, the audience a significant majority being students would have this memory resonate in them allowing to Eli builds rapport. any additional information needs to be put in commas such as 'the audience, a significant majority being students, would ---'. Not having read the article, I'm not sure if it's supposed to be inferred - but how does being students allow them to remember the triple R's better? It's more the alliteration, is it not? Netherless, based on this I'd probably write something like 'As a significant majority of the audience are students, use of the triple "R's" (TBH this sentence is so hard to write - how is he building rapport with people by making a memory stand out to them) allows Eli to build rapport with the audience through alliteration.'Further continuing on his exploration of memories, they echo with the student readership causing them to associate themselves with Eli. Is this an article in a student news paper? tbh, I should have been able to pick that up earlier - generally you say what type of writing the piece is in the introduction. So um, you probably shouldn't use so much metaphorical language in an analysis - or in essays full stop. But due to not reading the article - I'd leave that first bit in so you could write it as 'Continuing his exploration of memories, Eli evokes empathy from the student readership..' But um, you know the layout of an analysis right? like, you probably want your lexical and your syntactical stuff in one or two paragrahs, your discourse in another, and another paragraph for whatever else you need lol sorry I've forgotten so much - but basically what I'm saying is. why are we talking about the continuation of memories after two lexical items?

Ok so I did one bit uh - might do some more if I've got time later. If you can send me the word doc I'd be a lot more willing to finish this