Is this allowed in Language Analysis?

[james207]

Any ways as to how I can improve my analysis would be greatly appreciated (its from the 2005 VCAA Exam),
Also, I was just wondering if we are allowed to give subtle opinions (such as statement in bold) in our language analysis?
THANKS!


The article, “The Write Stuff”, which was published in a popular magazine, compares and contrasts traditional “snail-mail” to technology-based “SMS” messages and e-cards. Through a humorous and witty piece of writing, the writer asserts that even in this era of “instant gratification”, we should take the time to write sincere and intimate letters to our loved ones.

The opening paragraph of the article displays the casual and informal tone of the article, whilst also setting up the writer’s opinion that “nothing really beats” receiving a traditional letter in the mail. The inclusion of a short and humorous jingle at the start of the article, invites the reader audience of tech-savvy teenagers and young adults to continue reading. Through an amusing scenario, which cleverly contrasts the effort taken to produce the beautiful hand-written valentine with the effort to send an e-card of a cheesy “dancing sheep”, the writer positions the reader to view technology-based valentines as somewhat corny and emotionally lacking.

Furthermore, the writer alienates those who may disagree with her opinion by labelling them as “illiterate” or having a “heart of stone”. This undermines anyone who believes that traditional letters are old-fashioned and thus strengthens the writer’s argument and influence over the reader.

The inclusion of lifestyle strategist Jan Hutchinson and social commentator Bob Montgomery, adds depth and credibility to the writer’s argument. Dr. Montgomery highlights the damaging effects “SMSing” has on attention span, communication and ultimately the effect it has on relationships. He also belittles those who are obsessed with mobile texting by stating that they have the “attention span of a gnat”. Whilst this may reinforce the writer’s argument, it also threatens to alienate the reader, as it could be viewed as offensive or distasteful. 

(Are we allowed to give subtle opinions such as this in language analysis?)

Furthermore, the writer appeals to our sense of individuality (and insecurity) by acknowledging the disappointment one feels when receiving an email which has also been “CCed to 23 others”. Hence the writer attempts to identify with, relate to and then influence her relatively insecure audience of adolescents.

Moreover, the writer insinuates that hand-written, intimate letters are essential in making a “relationship work”. Similarly, the writer describes letters as “perfect” for expressing real appreciation and that they can even be a “fertiliser” for a dwindling friendship. Through these sweeping statements, the writer is making a last ditch attempt in order to persuade the target audience that letters truly do affect relationships positively.

Finally, the writer concludes that letters can take relationships “to the next level”, thus reaffirming her stance that traditional letters are far more superior to a “SMS”.

[polky]

I would consider those comments appropriate.  They are good, even, as you are clearly stating the impact on the reader (alienating the reader) and how this is achieved (because the reader views the comments as offensive or distasteful).

[james207]

Thanks polky! 

Also how can I improve this analysis, any suggestions?

[costargh]

Those comments are acceptable. They are an interpretation of the text, and good ones at that.

[kendraaaaa]

Through a witty and humorous piece of writing

Use the word tone, instead.

[shinny]

For safety reasons, might be better to say it 'may' alienate readers. Other than that, it may also be better to analyse it for what it is on its own as well with regards to its intended purpose. You've kind of jumped straight to this personal interpretation, without analysing the intended purpose and effect as you normally would. But if you include what you've got there as well, I reckon it'd be good.

[teacher28]

(Are we allowed to give subtle opinions such as this in language analysis?)

This is a point I have often struggled with.

While your comments are perceptive I'm not sure that they come within the task's boundaries:

"...analysis of the ways in which language is used to present a point of view and to persuade readers".

I decided that this suggests you discuss what works rather than what doesn't... what do you  think?