50 in English, available for queries :)

[brenden]

By the way guys, there's a text response essay that scored 20/20 up on vTextbook with commentary by a Premier's winner.

[smile+energy]

Yap, thanks Lauren

[Jono_CP]

Anyone know the difference between their, they're and there?

I use these frequently throughout my writing pieces and have no idea which type I should implement throughout my essay.

I have even observed Google and still fail to comprehend the technicalities!

Help would be much appreciated

[brenden]

They're is a contraction of they are.

There is referring to a place, the same as "here", except there is the opposite of here, so you put a t at the start.

Their is referring to someone else's possession, as in "heir" to the throne gets the throne when their relatives die, so it's their throne.

[Jono_CP]

They're is a contraction of they are.

There is referring to a place, the same as "here", except there is the opposite of here, so you put a t at the start.

Their is referring to someone else's possession, as in "heir" to the throne gets the throne when their relatives die, so it's their throne.

Oh!!! Makes sense, thank you very much!

[Jason12]

for language analysis do you recommend a random method (chronological) or more organised method (i.e. grouping by similar techniques or techniques that assist with one part of the writer's argument)

Also for context, is it better that the external example be related to the text? i.e. we are doing mind of a thief which is about aboriginals so should the external evidence be from another book/film/article/etc.  about aboriginals?

[literally lauren]

First page of this thread, the L.A. guide contains my recommended method, or search 'key players' and there should be a more detailed explanation.
Apologies if most of my responses involve referring people back to old posts, but often these questions have been answered in full more than once. I'll probably collate this thread properly and create some sort of index, (time permitting) since I can understand not wanting to wade through 20+ pages yourself.

With regards to Context, yes your examples will relate to the text, but it doesn't have to be so direct. It's the ideas that have to be relevant. So, Mind of a Thief --> Indigenous Oppression in Australia --> Rudd's Apology for the Stolen Generation --> Have things changed since? --> Wider racial intolerance and cultural oppression within Australian society --> this racist lady on a train and other similar incidents --> the psychology of race, Us vs. The Other --> History of race and categorisation --> phrenology (examining the physical shape of the brain) as a method of segregating and dehumanising (ie. African Americans have different shaped heads and are "therefore" further behind white/Anglosaxon culture)

So theoretically, I could talk about the role of phrenology and other pseudoscience in your context piece, because I've linked my ideas. I couldn't just jump into the discussion right away or try to justify it later; weave in and out of the text and your examples, drawing conclusions as you go.


edit: just realised that took me 10-15 minutes to get to that point, including all the other stuff I was typing, finding links etc. Even though this is a text I've never studied and the external evidence isn't stuff I've used before, the connections really are that simple, and ideally you'll get to the point where linking becomes as simple as scouring your mind for potential essay fodder.
No pressure if you're not there yet; god knows I certainly wasn't this time last year. But this is just another nail in the coffin for the essay-memorising-brigade. It's far more beneficial (and deceptively simple) to engage with the prompt and respond honestly, having acquired all this knowledge throughout the year than to simple regurgitate something that may have little to no relevance.
/rant

[90ATAR]

Hi Lauren,

How do you dissect prompts for Whose Reality, and how do you relate your text to it? My first whose reality SAC I just wrote a story because I was clueless and received 50% so I'm wanting to dig myself out of this hole.

e.g. A prompt that I could receive (there are six) on Friday week could be ‘‘Representations of past reality tell us more about how we wish to be seen than about what actually happened’’ and my text is Death of a Salesman. How should I go about dissecting this, let alone the other five?

I would probably do this for the following paragraphs, but I'm probably wrong;

1: I'd probably write one paragraph on the influence of hollywood.
2: One paragraph on existentialism

and now I'm lost

[literally lauren]

One of the most unhelpful things you can do in a context piece is to go into each paragraph with the mindset of: 'I'm going to write about Hollywood.'
Context is about ideas! The examples are helpful supporting evidence, but they are no substitute for ideas. Rather, a better approach might be: 'I'm going to write about how representations of the past can be constructed, misconstrued, or rewritten, and thus our present realities are a product with our interference with and interpretation of what actually happened.' Then you would link your ideas (as demonstrated in the above comment) in order to guide your discussion towards the Hollywood film industry and the ways in which "historically based" filmms tend to gloss over any wrongdoings on the heroes' side whilst making the opposition out to be pantomime villains. ie. instead of portraying a complex event from a multitude of angles, the story is reduced to 'goodies vs. baddies.'
(Apologies if this wasn't what you were going for, but this was the direction I took it in)

I'm not saying you shouldn't have some idea of what examples you can use (that's what all the practice essays are for) but you have to have a clear and concise contention as well, otherwise your piece will really lack focus.

With regards to dissecting the prompt, same advice as always: QUESTION EVERYTHING!
The ol' who-what-when-where-why from bygone primary school days actually has some bearing here, as it forces you to look at things from different angles. On a basic level:

• Who's representations of the past are we talking about (--> is there more than one? Are anyone's 'true' or objective?)
• What exactly do these representations tell us? And how?
• Why do we look to (representations of) past realities anyway? Can anything constructive/destructive come of this?
• When is consulting the past a necessity and when is it detrimental?
• How do we wish to be seen, and how can reflections of the past affect our present? (Good links to DoaS here)

but hopefully this can lead you onto bigger and more sophisticated questions:

• Are representations of the past purely our own constructions?
• Is how we wish to be seen something we can alter or influence?
• Do the differences between our idealised realities and the actual reality also tell us more about ourselves?

This might seem daunting, but start with the who-what-when-why-how if you need. Once you get yourself into a questioning mood, you'll probably find more sophisticated questions coming to you naturally, then you can ditch the framework and use whatever planning method you need.

And as usual, if you're stuck for examples, click the link in my sig and see if you can find an area of interest, or use one of these to spur you onto another.

[24bauer12]

Hi Lauren,
When conducting language analysis and examining the effect on the reader would it be superior to refer to the effect on the reader or the potential effect?For example would 1 or 2 be better
1.Thus, eliciting contempt and strong denunciation on the readers' behalf.
2.This may elicit contempt and strong denunciation on the readers' behalf.

[literally lauren]

My instinct is to say #1 even though it's a fragmented sentence :p
Be careful not to be too rigidly diagnostic though, so if you're ever unsure, or are commenting on the wide array of effects a technique can have, it might be wise to insert a little clause like 'maybe' or 'perhaps.'
On the other hand you don't want to sound like you're too apprehensive to commit to your analysis, so sometimes stronger assertions are better.
#1 definitely sounds like a standard L.A. excerpt; if your conclusion is sound and you're not just jumping from "the writer says __, thus eliciting contempt from readers" ie. you actually link your ideas and explain the effect rather than simply state it, then it's okay to be definitive.  In general I'd say stick to your instincts and be definitive wherever possible; hopefully that will also lend itself to you substantiating your analysis throughout

[Jono_CP]

Hey Lauren,

I was wondering whether you could potentially PM me your email (e.g. gmail, yahoo or whatever). I have taken photos of a particular text response of mine and have found your feedback to be invaluable and would love to acquire this again if possible.

I ask this, as I cannot upload 6 pages of my handwritten text response essay via ATARNotes, as this exceeds the quota size of a message.

I understand if you are unwilling to abide, I bear no umbrage.

Thank you

[archenemy]

Hi Lauren,

I was wondering if you could give me a quick run down on what exactly I need to write the body paragraphs of a text response piece? I know the general TEEL structure but....

I was also wondering if you know how much quoting must be done to substantiate arguments/points you bring up in the body para. My teacher says I'm not specific enough...

thanks
(sorry if this question is a bit broad...)   

[~V]

Hi Lauren,
is a blog post a good style to write an encountering conflict context piece? Also, do i express my opinion on things and make it kinda like an article??

[tcapote]

Hi Lauren,
Prior to my subject selection for year 12, i'm considering on picking up Lit. Though i love reading and find the subject interesting through friends, I'm going to be doing lit 3&4 without having done 1&2. I'm fairly strong in English (A - A+) however, i don't want to be picking up a subject that i'll struggle with during the year (since i'm unaware of the style of writing / topics)

With that in mind, can you please give me a few pointers on the subject itself? The difficulties, and comparison between that and english? And how you managed to do so well?