Keyed In Language Analysis Piece =D =D

[Blakhitman]

o actually...now I have an idea for how to make up a whole paragraph about the image. Just combine standalone effects of the image with comment about how the image supplements particular concepts that the writer talks about. In this way you can work your way through the article within the image pararaph without having to be stuck on the image for an entire paragraph =D

That's what I do (try to at least). I talk about how the certain aspect of the visual complements a certain technique or argument the author used.

[JVG]

This is what I wrote earlier this year:

The accompanying graphic acts to reinforce Voxi’s contention that technology will greatly improve the human condition. The digitally generated image of a human head is cast in shadow and juxtaposed onto a black background. The reader, noticing that the only source of light in the graphic originates from the silicon computer chip ‘implanted’ inside the figure’s head, is persuaded to understand that computer technology is a source of enlightenment that can improve our existence. The non-descript features of the figure position the reader to accept that the potential benefits of technology are universally available for all people regardless of gender, race or age. Thus, it becomes clear that the rejection of technological advancement would deny the human species needed intellectual illumination and cast it into a dark age. To the progressive and techno-savvy reader, their attitudes are reinforced as being positive, whilst those fearful of the implications of technology are typecast as being dangerous and detrimental to continued human progress. The silicon chip inside the figure’s head appears to be  a computer microprocessor, an integral part that conducts all the major operations within a personal computer. To the savvy reader the possibilities of advancement that come from the shown creation of a ‘supersapien’ species are limitless, as like computer processors, human cognitive power will grow infinitely. The placing of the chip, in the skull of the figure, convinces the reader to view the electronic addition as a simple upgrade of some hardware (the brain) that has become outdated. The scientific-nature of the graphic gives leverage to the author’s view that the combination of the digital and the human are a natural and logical next step. The flashes of binary code that surround the processor are constructed so that their direction of movement is ambiguous. The reader thus sees information, symbolised by computer binary language, being transmitted into and out of the head of the figure and understands that computer technology will allow individuals to actively engage in communicative process, rather than become passive consumers as some would worry.  The three levels of ‘binary squares’ grow in size as they are further away from the chip, indicating that technology will gift individuals with the ability to exponentially expand the amount of informative resources at their disposal. The eyes and mouth of the figure are both closed and it’s ears obscured, indicating to the reader that the use of currently normal means of communication have become outdated and thus superseded . Voxi’s audience understands that citizens of the digital age have advanced so much that current methods of exchanging information are primitive. An appeal is therefore made to the reader to adopt new technology as to do otherwise would risk their ability to communicate with others and participate in the world.

[kenhung123]

Hmm so when you have to describe the impact on readers you simply refer to them as readers and not the specific intended audience (younger generation in your view)

[Kotza]

^ i dont see why you cant?

i always say; This appeals to the (intended audience) who would feel ____ at this.

something like that would be fine.. wouldnt it?

[kenhung123]

I don't know if its better to be specific "This appeals to the younger readers..." or "This appears to the readers" every time I explain the effect.

Btw, do you think there is any significance in the structure of this article as a web page? If so, how would you discuss the persuasiveness of it?

[Kotza]

Well last years high scoring response included it.

However i dont think it matters all too much. My eng. teacher said not to, yet the one provided on the assessment report does it... so it wouldnt matter.

Although i think things like subheadings and larger fonts etc must be included... yet if the article had 4 paragraphs instead of 3 wouldnt change too much.

[lynt.br]

There's no prescribed amount that you need to write about an image. I always adopt a 'realistic' or 'reasonable' approach where the amount I write about each example is proportionate to its contribution to the writer's overall argument. I prefer to write about how readers will realistically respond to the article, rather than making up bs to fill space.

In this article, I didn't consider the main visual that significant. When I consider how much to write on each aspect of the article, I think about my personal response to the language. If something really emphasises the writer's arguments or really jumps out at me then I'll spend more time on it. In this case, I really didn't respond that much to the visual. I considered it more of a cosmetic addition designed to reiterate the technology theme of the journal and article. Consequently all my discussion on the visual was pretty much weaved in with the analysis of other more important areas of the text. I think I mentioned something about the chip in the brain and related that with the 'evolution of humankind' and 'homo super-sapien' examples.

I also spent some time discussing the visuals in the banner (the computerised interface etc.). Again this wasn't that important overall but it was a good way to distinguish an essay from the pack.

@JVG
I think your example goes too far in terms of discussing the visual. The analysis itself is great and it is written very well, however, a lot of it is highly unrealistic, both in terms of likely audience reactions and what you can writer under time constraints. At times it almost appears tongue-in-cheek, as though you are trying to exhaust absolutely everything there is about the visual when really it is only a minor aspect of the article. For example "The three levels of ‘binary squares’ grow in size as they are further away from the chip, indicating that technology will gift individuals with the ability to exponentially expand the amount of informative resources at their disposal." How many readers are actually going to be influenced by, or even consider the increasing size of the binary squares?

Hmm so when you have to describe the impact on readers you simply refer to them as readers and not the specific intended audience (younger generation in your view)

If the example you are analysing is specifically targeted at a certain audience group or is going to elicit a different emotional response from different groups then I think it is worth talking about that specific group. I think it makes your analysis more precise and shows greater insight into how language can have differing effects on certain readers. It's better then generalising the effect language will have on readers. In this article, I made a number of allusions to how Voxi was trying to establish rapport with younger readers and how the article deliberately appealed to the younger generation who are typically more curious, progressive and adventurous.

Btw, do you think there is any significance in the structure of this article as a web page? If so, how would you discuss the persuasiveness of it?

I don't think the article is 'structured' as a web page. I think it IS from a web page because it is an online article.The computerised interface, however, is deliberate.

I considered it worth discussing. I felt like the fact he was responding to a podcast by writing an online article was a testament to how technology is reshaping our lives. It shows how technology has opened new mediums of communication beyond the printed press. It also reinforces his argument that if you don't accept technology soon, you are going to be left behind.

Another thing you might want to mention is that the placement of the article in an online journal may be questionable. If the article aims to convince those who are intimidated or bewildered by new technology then it may not be so successful given anyone reading the article has already accepted technology to some extent. Including a short statement about this in your conclusion is a great way to sum up and shows some intelligent insight into the context of the article and its intended purpose.

[nex]

just to clarify, is it ok, in a piece like this, to talk about its layout and the visuals in the banner?

[lynt.br]

just to clarify, is it ok, in a piece like this, to talk about its layout and the visuals in the banner?

Definitely. They included it in the text for a reason. The computerised interface and reference to computer command (Ctrl Alt) suggests the intended readership are people familiar with or interested in computers/technology. Talking about the banner, the interface and the context of the article were great ways to distinguish yourself from the other students last year.

[kenhung123]

wow lynt. thanks a lot you gave some really good advice