VCE Stuff > AN’s Language Analysis Club

2017 AA Club - Week 6

<< < (5/5)

Anonymous:
I haven't done language analysis in ages, and my analysis is really poor. Anyway, how can I improve?

In response to sports reporter Sally Jenkins’ comment on the Ray Rice assault, Martin Kramer condemns the Flinstone labelling, defending Fred Flinstone’s name. Kramer contends that Flinstone is a respectable character and should not be mixed with the “reprehensible actions” of Rice. Kramer demonstrates his experience in watching Flinstone by insinuating that he is a fan of the “venerable show”. This grants him authority in his opinion of whether Rice should be labelled with “going all Flinstone” because he has the expertise to determine whether their characteristics match. The description of the show as “venerable” attempts to alienate the audience from Jenkin’s description and invites them to question whether her description is accurate. Further attributions of Fred being a husband who “loved and respected his wife”  and referred “to her as his queen” positions the audience to respect Fred, which only invites them to question whether Kramer’s brutality against his wife reflects the respect that Fred has for his. Kramer utilises vivid imagery of Fred wearing “out his feet” and working until “the whistle blew” to appeal to compassion of the audience. The audience is positioned to see Fred as a hard working husband, and so develops a sense of respect for him which Kramer says should not be affiliated with Rice’s attack. The attack is described as more savage and despicable than “a stereotype of cavemen behaviour” which positions the audience to further condemn the actions of Rice. Kramer concludes by quoting Fred’s iconic catch phrase of “yabba dabba” to humorously reinforce his argument that Fred Flinstone is a respectable character who should not be compared to the degenerative acts of Ray Rice.

clarke54321:

--- Quote from: Anonymous on August 18, 2017, 01:18:28 pm ---I haven't done language analysis in ages, and my analysis is really poor. Anyway, how can I improve?

In response to sports reporter Sally Jenkins’ comment on the Ray Rice assault, Martin Kramer condemns the Flinstone labelling, defending Fred Flinstone’s name. Kramer contends that Flinstone is a respectable character and should not be mixed perhaps find a more sophisticated verb- associated/affiliated?with the “reprehensible actions” of Rice. Kramer demonstrates his experience in watching Flinstonethe expression here is somewhat awkward. I understand what you're saying, but it is not entirely clear. by insinuatinginsinuate means to suggest something of an unpleasant kind. He's not embarrassed about being a fan. So maybe consider a verb like indicates/suggests that he is a fan of the “venerable show”. This grants him authority in his opinion of whether Rice should be labelled with “going all Flinstone” because he has the expertise to determine whether their characteristics matchgood explanation of evidence. How does this make the reader feel in turn? Go further with the idea of authority and what this means.. The description of the show as “venerable” attempts to alienate the audience from Jenkin’s description and invites them to question whether her description is accuratewhy does it do this? What are the connotations of the adjective 'venerable' that would provoke this reaction?. Further attributions of Fred being a husband who “loved and respected his wife”  and referred “to her as his queen” positions the audience to respect Fredwhy? What does this indicate about his character?, which only invites them to question whether Kramer’s brutality against his wife reflects the respect that Fred has for hisgood. Kramer utilises vivid imagery of Fred wearing “out his feet” and working until “the whistle blew” to appeal to compassion of the audienceto appeal to his audiences' sense of compassion. The audience is positioned to see Fred as a hard working husbandtry and make the link between the imagery and this idea of a hard-working husband more explicit., and so develops a sense of respect for him which Kramer says should not be affiliated with Rice’s attack. The attack is described as more savage and despicable than “a stereotype of cavemen behaviour” which positions the audience to further condemn the actions of Ricewhy? You must tease out the evidence before coming to a conclusion.. Kramer concludes by quoting Fred’s iconic catch phrase of “yabba dabba” to humorously reinforce his argument that Fred Flinstone is a respectable character who should not be compared to the degenerative acts of Ray Rice.

--- End quote ---

Well done! You have a clear understanding of persuasive devices and their technique on audiences. However, the intermediate step is lacking. That is, you identify the device but don't tease out/analyse the evidence enough to reach a well-justified conclusion of audience reaction. If you can work on this, your analysis will improve greatly. Keep up the great work!  :)

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[*] Previous page