Hi, another question about language analysis.
I often find myself trying to analyse too many parts of a text, leading to my essay becoming somewhat convoluted and overall of a worse quality as I end up having to rush to finish. Does anyone have any tips on selecting parts to analyse (i.e., what to look for/prioritise in terms of particular techniques to enhance sophistication perhaps) and also any guidelines on (roughly) how many points/quotes/techniques should you be analysing per paragraph? I know some people prefer to write a large number of shorter paragraphs but I tend to write around 3 of a reasonable length, if anyone knows a good number of quotes/techniques to be implementing per paragraph just as a guide, that would be really helpful. I'm struggling with maintaining clarity in my pieces.
Thanks!
Someone please answer this as well. Also considering that last year, the Lang Analysis exam only consisted of a large article, a small comment and a cartoon and we may get something similar this year, how are we meant to actually do the integrated method for 3-4 body paragraphs when you have hardly anything to actually analyse about the comment and the article? How our school just forced us to do integrated for lang analysis without telling us how to use in situations like this.
Cheers!
Hello! It seems like some people are struggling with argument analysis essays. So I'm just going to say what worked for me - it might not work for everyone and some people may disagree but you could give it a shot.
In terms of sounding too convoluted, it would help to have a clear structure in mind. In my opinion, it would be best to do structure your paragraphs by argument, as this is the easiest way to show how argument is being developed. Once you have identified the argument in the article, and you want to go analyse it for techniques and stuff, it would be best to select main techniques that actually contribute to the argument. These are usually techniques that are focused on bigger idea stuff, and are not so focused on language. So for example, which would be better to analyse - that rhetorical question or that appeal to a sense of community? Probably the appeal right? Also note that techniques such as appeals are usually supported by a range of other smaller techniques (which are more focused on language) - for example an appeal to a sense of community is supported by inclusive language.
Sorry if this doesn't make sense, but here's an example of generally how I would structure my paragraph:
- Topic sentence: Argument
- I would recommend analyse about two main techniques that strengthen the argument (e.g appeal to fear)
- further analyse these main techniques through explanation and also show how this main idea (i.e appeal to fear) is sustained through smaller supporting techniques (e.g statistics and negative connotations)
In terms of doing an integrated approach, I would group the texts by argument. I'm not too sure how to explain it so I'll give an example:
Say Text A has three main arguments: the health benefits, economic benefits, social benefits
Text B is a comment that talks about the economic disadvantages
Text C is a satirical cartoon about the social benefits
In this case, I would structure my essay like this:
Paragraph 1: Text A - talking about health benefits
Paragraph 2: Text A and Text B - economic
Paragraph 3: Text A and Text C - social
Hope this helps!