LANGUAGE ANALYSISGeneral Comments. Please note: This report has been based off analyses written on a Herald Sun opinion piece called, "Don't blame me, blame Julia Gillard".
Students were required to analyse the ways in which language and visual features were used in a Herald Sun opinion piece. Markers were required to critique these pieces of work, in accordance to the VCAA key descriptors outlined in the assesment criteria for VCE English. Each student's work was assessed by no fewer than 2 markers.
If your work remains unmarked at the moment, please let one of the essay moderators know, and they will allocate a marker to assess your work as soon as possible.
It is advised that, prior to submitting a piece of work, students organise time to proofread their own work extensively, and if possible, make as many adjustments as they can to their own piece of work. This will enable students to get into the headspace of an examiner, further develop their essay-writing skills and techniques and also refine their own phrasing, expression and grammar. Some members were able to write up a good copy of their language analysis and submitted this for further critique, on their own accord, which was good to see.
Specific Comments. Overall, students demonstrated a fairly strong understanding of what the task demanded from them. However, there were some common issues that were found in most of the essays. Some essays:
1. provided a mere listing of persuasive techniques
2. used generic intended effect statements
3. were not specific enough in terms of examples and evidence
4. had problems quoting parts of the opinion piece
5. attempted to analyse a cumulative impact but faltered (due to #2 above)
6. used more passive voice and less active voice
7. did not contextualise the issue well enoughThese issues will be discussed in further depth below. The extracts of student responses provided below are presented for illustrative and informative purposes only.
1. Essays that provided a mere listing of persuasive techniques.Some of the essays submitted this week provided a mere listing of persuasive techniques. Your job, in a language analysis, isn't to provide a 'shopping list' of persuasive techniques, but to explore the use of language explicitly through analytical skills. Conducting a 'word search' for techniques is by no means any indicator of analytical skills. Hence, it is encouraged that students
selectively draw upon specific parts of the text provided, and emphasise the intended effect and purpose on the back of these fewer techniques. Merely listing techniques and then attaching a generic impact statement on the end, and then repeating this 5 times in a paragraph, will only make your essay seem choppy and lacking in depth. For example, the extract below follows too much of a 'state the technique, state the effect then move on' kind of mentality (quotes have been removed to shorten the paragraph):
Bolt begins by resorting to rhetorical questioning aimed towards the Gillard Government ‘...’ immediately encouraging the reader to critically consider Bolt’s brutally clear point of view. Bolt then moves on to dispassionately accuse and attack the Gillard Government ‘…’ following with emotive imagery ‘…’ Using this amalgamation of language to his advantage, Bolt invokes a sense of outrage in the reader whilst possibly kindling an emotional response knowing children would have perished. ‘…’ Bolt uses repetition throughout his entire piece to subtly influence the reader to memorably ponder Bolt’s point of view. Bolt then shares the opinions of refugees '…’ appealing to the reader’s sense of sympathy by depicting the issue through the perspective of a refugee. Bolt lends considerable weight to his argument through the use of statistics ‘...’ Further use of emotive imagery ‘...’ paints a distressing picture in the readers mind while portraying the Gillard Government in a hostile manner.
2. Essays that used generic intended effect statementsStudents who used generic intended effect statements throughout their essay would have ended up with a superficial analysis that truly lacked depth. The use of general statements downplay the actual purpose of a language analysis, not only because they are not specific to the target audience, context and specifics of an article, but also because they add nothing to the analytical side of things. For the language analysis task, students need to demonstrate a perceptive, sophisticated understanding of why and how language is used the way it's used, as well as how particular parts of a text impact an audience. Using superficial lines to describe this impact will not serve this criterion justice. Students will know if their intended effect statement/s is too general when the statement can be transferred, fairly seamlessly, onto another analysis. So, ensure that you steer clear from statements such as these:
fundamentally forcing readers to side with Bolt’s contention
draws the reader’s attention to the severity of the issue
sways readers towards his contention and makes them agree with him on the issue of
3. Essays that were not specific enough in terms of examples and evidenceThis one was a killer for most, if not all, students this week. Students introduced the rhetorical questions in the opinion piece - 'But why?' and 'Before the next boat sinks, or after?' These rhetorical questions were introduced in the topic sentences of most students' body paragraphs. Let's take a look at this topic sentence:
Bolt begins his piece with a litany of rhetorical questions, ‘But why? And if not then, when? Before the next boat sinks or after?’
What this topic sentence does tell the marker, is that the paragraph will focus on rhetorical questions first. And that Bolt has used rhetorical questions. And that Bolt has used rhetorical questions right at the start of the piece. But what this topic sentence
doesn't tell the marker, is
what these rhetorical questions were referring to. What was Bolt making reference to when he asked 'But why?', and what is he waiting for when he says 'And if not then, when?' and from whom is he waiting for this? It is absolutely imperative that students be far more specific when giving examples. Whilst it's good to assume that the marker has a general idea of how the article has used language (and they do), it is better to be safe than sorry. Be specific at all times.
4. Essays that had problems quoting parts of the opinion pieceStudents also had major trouble with this. Most essays submitted this week contained chunks of quotes that had been thrown into the mix. VCAA has outlined that students must write 'well-substantiated' and 'controlled' essays, with fluency and excellent expression, to get the higher marks. By weaving pieces of evidence and quotes into the analysis, students can partially fulfill this key descriptor. Ensure that sentences read well, and that the quotes blend into the essay in a seamless fashion.
5. Essays that attempted to analyse a cumulative impact but faltered (due to #2 above)Let's take a look at this example below:
These anecdotes, when coupled with the emotive language used throughout the article such as ‘disgraceful’, ‘deaths’ and ‘scum’, and the various statistics provided, aim to create sympathy and compassion for the ‘victims’ of the tragedy.
Now, whilst this extract is an OK piece of analysis, it could do better. One of the dangers of analysing the cumulative effect of 2 or more techniques, in one sentence (or in close proximity in a paragraph) is that a generic intended effect statement is added onto the end, and the specific impact of one of the techniques is either neglected or forgotten. The above example does exactly this - 3 persuasive techniques are coupled into a sentence, and an attempt to analyse the combined effect of all 3, working in unison, is a generalised one. To avoid this fate, it is recommended that students analyse a quote and its impact, then pick out one or two words from this quote and analyse these further (words that carry connotations) and
then analyse how this whole quote and single word creates a massive impact when combined with other whole quote and single word combos. That is:
whole quote + single word = intended effect
(whole quote + single word) + (whole quote + single word) + (whole quote + single word) = massive cumulative effect
You can use this with techniques that are in close proximity in an article, or any other time you feel it necessary.
6. Essays that used more passive voice and less active voiceWhilst this is a fairly minor issue, students are encouraged to adopt more of an active voice in their essays. In using the active voice more often, an essay will appear more sustained, controlled, action-filled and full of impact. If students are having difficulty identifying the passive voice in their essays, it is recommended that they look out for the word "by" or verb forms of the word "be", such as "was" and "were". However, it is critical to note, also, that in some cases, it is a much better option to use the passive voice, as it is very effective when used in the right situation.
7. Essays that did not contextualise the issue well enoughThe context of any piece of writing is crucial to understanding how language is being used. The higher-scoring responses demonstrated an understanding of the context, and were therefore able to identity the specifics and intricacies of the tone/s, target audience, direction of the piece and arguments far more precisely. It is crucial that the context of any piece of writing is addressed or at least considered, as this will enable students to provide a perceptive understanding of the article - one of the VCAA criteria. In saying this, students also need to ensure that they do not go overboard with the contextualisation of the issue, and adhere to the specifics of the language analysis task, and that is to analyse the language.
I hope this is of some help to you all. Make sure you take up all the advice that has been given to you in your essay threads, and build up on this as you move onto Week 4. Thanks to everyone for being proactive in this subforum, helping with critiquing and being quick to submit essays. If you have anything to add, by all means, do so!
werdna. EXTRA COMMENTS. COURTESY OF SCHMALEX:Students need to avoid imposing their own opinions in their essays, and use more formal and less conversational language. Students need to be clear, concise, and stick to their message. A good way of doing this is to read it out loud. Does it sound right? Does it make sense? Are you deviating from the purpose of the essay (to explain the way that language is USED TO PERSUADE). People need to focus on clearly explaining the effect specific phrases and language devices are supposed to have on readers, and not just explaining the writer's contention and the issue. Contextualising the issue should only really take a couple of seconds. Also, stop trying to make your writing interesting. Don't try to engage your reader. Save this for your context piece. Your purpose is to analyse language, and nothing else. Don't entertain, just analyse.
Home
Help
Search
Login
