[English] "Don’t blame me, blame Julia Gillard" language analysis

[Allygator]

Texts: On the waterfront, Ransom, A Street Car named Desire, The Shark Net

Hoping for 45+  



January essays:
Week 3: Language Analysis
Week 4: Language Analysis

[Allygator]

This is very late as my internet has been out for three weeks, but I thought I'd post it up anyway.

The increasing issue of deaths due to illegal immigrants traveling to Australia by boat has sparked much discussion and debate within the media. In Andrew Bolt’s opinion piece concerning the government’s role in this issue, he passionately accuses them that their weak laws on illegal immigration encourage foreigners to battle the dangerous seas leading to many lives being lost.

Bolt contends that the “pious” Leftists are completely avoiding the issue by claiming that it’s not the right time to deal with the problem. The bold first statement suggests that the fact that the Gillard Government isn’t to blame is set in stone and not to be questioned. But just after attempting to lure the reader into a false sense of security, Bolt fires of a row of rhetorical questions, persuading the reader to also question who is actually to blame. Andrew Bolt continues to seek to undermine the government’s credibility by honing in on the idea that “they lie” leading the reader to question the government’s credibility. Over ten separate times Bolt makes reference to the government avoiding the problem by claiming it’s not the right time to discuss the issue. This repetition increases the impact of his point in his attempt to convince the reader of how irresponsible the government is.

Furthermore, Bolt refers to the change in laws as “sugar” to immigrants and therefore “encouraging boat people to risk their lives”. The exaggeration in this statement positions the reader to view the government as tyrannical as they are purposely “tempting [people] into the boats”. The list of deaths of immigrants referred to is used to shock the reader and to heighten their understanding of how drastic and pressing the issue is. Bolt describes Gillard having “lured people on to seeking boats”. The imagery the author seeks to evoke through this phrase positions the reader to view Gillard as directly responsible for all these deaths and therefore the one to blame ultimately for the problem at hand.

Bolt continues to accuse the government, suggesting they are not willing to hold any responsibility and are instead attempting to shift the blame onto others. His quick run through of all the people the government is happy to blame aims to highlight their irrationality to the reader. In an attempt to evoke an emotive response, Bolt quotes Dennis Atkins who allegedly said, “We are all responsible for this event”. The inclusive language brings even the reader into the blame, potentially stimulating a passionate response to being pulled into the problem when the everyday person has little say in the issue. The concluding comment sarcastically and exaggeratedly suggests, “It’s always too soon to blame… Gillards weak laws”. The authors clear prohibitions of this encourages the reader to vehemently oppose the suggestion, so positioning them to accept Bolt’s contention.

Andrew Bolt’s condescending and passionate article forcefully places the blame of the deaths of illegal immigrants onto the government’s weak laws and highlights their unwillingness to accept the blame that they rightly deserve.

[chrisjb]

This is very late as my internet has been out for three weeks, but I thought I'd post it up anyway.

The increasing issue of deaths due to illegal immigrants I wouldn't use the phrase 'illegal immigrants', a bit too many negative connotations. But it's not major traveling to Australia by boat has sparked much discussion and debate within the media. In Andrew Bolt’s opinion piece concerning the government’s role in this issue, he passionately accuses them that their weak laws on illegal immigration encourage foreigners to battle the dangerous seas leading to many lives being lost.intro is good. Remember your target Audience though, and try not to use colourfull language

Bolt contends that the “pious” Leftists are completely avoiding the issue by claiming that it’s not the right time to deal with the problem. The bold first statement suggests that the fact that the Gillard Government isn’t to blame is set in stone and not to be questioned(in a sarcastic tone). But just after attempting to lure the reader into a false sense of securityI personaly wouldn't use this phrase. the "just after" and the "false sense of security" sound a bit too conversational, Bolt fires of a row of rhetorical questions, with the intention ofpersuading the reader to also question who is actually to blame. Andrew Bolt continues to seek to undermine the government’s credibility by honing in on the idea that “they lie” leading the reader to question the government’s credibilitygood. Over ten separate times Bolt makes reference to the government avoiding the problem by claiming it’s not the right time to discuss the issue. This repetition increases the impact of his point in his attempt to convince the reader of how irresponsible the government is.

Furthermore, Bolt refers to the change in lawspossibly this is me trying to impose my own oppinion, but I reckon teh laws have been around long enough to no longer be recognised as a 'change' as “sugar” to immigrants and therefore “encouraging boat people to risk their lives”. The exaggeration in this statement positions the reader to view the government as tyrannical as they are purposely “tempting [people] into the boats”.go deeper and link. The list of deaths of immigrants referred to is used to shock the reader and to heighten their understanding of how drastic and pressing the issue isI personaly don't think there's anything wrong with this sentence, but some people will say that you have listed a generic effect. Bolt describes Gillard having “lured people on to seeking boats”. The imagery the author seeks to evoke through this phrase positions the reader to view Gillard as directly responsible for all these deaths and therefore the one to blame ultimately for the problem at hand.

Bolt continues to accuse the government, suggesting they are not willing to hold any responsibility and are instead attempting to shift the blame onto othersgood. His quick run through of all the people the government is happy to blame aims to highlight their irrationality to the readergood (but include a quote). In an attempt to evoke an emotive response, Bolt quotes Dennis Atkins who allegedly said, “We are all responsible for this event”. The inclusive language brings even the reader into the blame, potentially stimulating a passionate response to being pulled into the problem when the everyday person has little say in the issue. The concluding comment sarcastically and exaggeratedly suggests, “It’s always too soon to blame… Gillard's weak laws”. The authors clear prohibitionsnot the right word imo of this encourages the reader to vehemently oppose the suggestion, so positioning them to accept Bolt’s contention.agian, I find nothing wrong with it- but many do- you shouldn't say something generic like 'position the reader to accept bolt's contention

Andrew Bolt’s condescending and passionate article forcefully places the blame of the deaths of illegal immigrants onto the government’s weak laws and highlights their unwillingness to accept the blame that they rightly deserve. good.

That was prety good. The one thing I noticed was that you seemed to skip from idea to idea. You would have one line introducing the technique, one line of analysis of that technique then BAM straight into the next one. Try to add at least another line of analysis (this will also make your explinations look less generic in some parts) and include some linking phrases to make the transition from the anlysis of one technique to the next not sound so choppy.

Here's a couple of examples of where you did that:

...The exaggeration in this statement positions the reader to view the government as tyrannical as they are purposely “tempting [people] into the boats”. The list of deaths of immigrants referred to is used to shock the reader...

...His quick run through of all the people the government is happy to blame aims to highlight their irrationality to the reader. In an attempt to evoke an emotive response, Bolt quotes Dennis Atkins who allegedly said...

Here you did it the way I think it should be done:

...persuading the reader to also question who is actually to blame. Andrew Bolt continues to seek to undermine the government’s credibility by honing in on the idea that “they lie”...

The bolded bit is the difference.